Yahoo! News - Web Site Shows Apparent Beheading Tape
The nastiness is only going to bring out more violence on both sides. I still think that it will get uglier before it gets better. I think that it is going to require overwhelming force to stop this behavior.
3 comments:
How does increasing attacks on the part of US forces(or their puppets) deter terrorists from abducting another victim to slice their head off like a hot loaf? It only makes them more angry. These terrorists don't even care about their own lives, they exist solely to inflict damage onto their enemies.
Zarqawi, leader of the iraqi AQ division, is the prime example of how ruthless these terrorists are. He is afraid of no one and he remains watching and waiting to kidnap his next victim and prepare bombing attacks.
His pretty smart in doing so. After he kidnapped a guy from the fillipines he demanded the fillipine forces to retreat, otherwise he would await beheading. The fillipine forces left and the hostage was freed.
This means the terrorists keep their word. They do this to exert pressure on countries to break their alliance with the US. To rupture the ties and isolate the position of the US so that they are an easier target.
Zarqawi is a quicker learner than bush. He knows you can't wage war alone, and that alliances are more than crucial will you not end up clueless lost and wounded in the burning desert of iraq.
Military force cannot deal with this threat. The military is designed to defend the country from hostile states. These terrorists don't represent any state. They come from different corners of the world and are alligned by faith and their desire to destroy the US. An army cannot deal with such a threat. It will only infect public emotions in the country under attack and make people symphatize with terrorists.
Zeruel
I am in partial agreement. I think that this requires a combination of force and diplomacy. The force demonstrates that you will not allow terror to determine the future.
You do that by making it clear that those who protect terrorists pay and by wiping out the terrorists. It is not totally impossible to do.
The Iraqis are still waiting to see who is going to win. If you can demonstrate that you are going to be the victor, they will rally to your side. Their greatest fear now is to pick the loser and then get their asses "kicked" afterwards by the winner.
Is that really so? i doubt it. It seems iraq is too much divided to stand behind one absolute authority. The shiites have their ayatollahs al-sadr and al-sistani, the kurds have the leaders of the PUK and KDP, the soenies have their loyalty to the former ba'ath party, and they all demand their piece of the cake. But whoever is in charge is bound to summon hostility from opposition groups. As long as a country is so fragmented by historic and tribal differences, a stable country with a solid government seems like a dream only bush still believes in.
I always thought would end with dire consequences. Terrorists are not stopped by attacking states who 'harbor' them. Saudi-arabia and pakistan have the biggest reservoir of terrorists, but both these countries enjoy the active support of the US despite that these regimes are equally as brutal as the former regime of saddam.
And saudi-arabia and pakistan also know that terrorists cannot be defused by partially accepting their presence, the attacks in riyad indicate that and so does the assassination attempts on the life of pervez musharraf. Terrorists are in it for the big prize, to overthrow these regimes and change it with islamist governance. Weapon programs will be adopted by extremists and this time the bush and his henchmen will truely be soaking in their seats because their nightmare has come true.
It's impossible to change things for the better by invading a country. Europe knows this after a century of warfare and it seems the US is also gonna learn it the hard way.
The only thing countries can do to defend themselves from terrorists are strict immigration regulations and government access to private data.
Post a Comment