Why the "War on Terror" is Wrong

"We are fighting them over there so we don't have to fight them here".

This is the mantra of the folks who still believe there can be a "war on terror". Let me start by stating just how immoral that little motto is-to fight our battles on other people's lands, spilling much more of their blood in the process, is one of the most immoral concepts I can think of. Unfortunately, every single bit of the various justifications and rationalizations for this so-called "war" are flawed to the core. They are especially flawed when applied to Iraq, the so-called front line of the "war on terror" according to the right.

First of all, it is impossible to kill all terrorists. Yes folks, contrary to what Sean Hannity might be telling you, it is absolutely, one hundred percent impossible to do so. Not only is it impossible, but for every terrorist killed, a potential new terrorist is born in the form of that dead terrorists brother, sister, mother, father, barber, etc. Oh yes, also contrary to your Hannitized teachings, terrorists are not some otherworldly form of evil, cultivated in test tubes in Osama Bin Laden and Michael Moore's evil laboratories, they too have families and friends who might be just a bit peeved at the death of their loved one, and might even have the nerve to mourn-the nerve of those ingrates! So, in short, while it is appropriate to hunt down-and if they choose a blaze of glory, to kill terrorists-it is naïve to think we can eradicate them completely.

Secondly, even if we could kill away our terrorist problems, waging all out war in order to do so is another sure fire way to create an abundance of new terrorists. The invasion and occupation of Iraq is the perfect example of this. Even the most conservative estimates of civilian deaths in Iraq number in the 30,000 + range; other studies suggest 100,000 +. Lets assume the number lies somewhere in between. Lets also factor in the thousands of people wrongly imprisoned in Iraq, as well as those who have been tortured. Well, just who do you think Iraqi's will ultimately blame for these things? You might be thinking Al Franken, and understandably so. While that is a very good guess, I'm thinking that the US occupation forces are receiving most of the blame, which in turn translates to blaming the American people. Applying the premise of my last paragraph to the above situation, at whose door do you think the newly spawned terrorist sons and daughters of slain and tortured Iraqi civilians might come knocking? No, not Ted Kennedy-another good guess. In fact, their anger and frustration, whether legitimate or not, will most likely be directed at Americans or American interests.

Unfortunately, their anger cannot be quelled by a shiny new democracy, western style or otherwise, because that boat set sail long ago. Democracy cannot be forced on people through the gun of an Abrams tank. Even if this were possible, democracy was never really the intention of the Bush cabal. In fact, despite all the hoopla over "ink stained fingers", the Bush cabal opposed elections in Iraq until being forced to allow them by Grand Ayatollah Ali Al-Sistani and his protestors. The true intention from the beginning was to install Ahmed Chalabi, Pentagon darling boy and part time Iranian lackey, Chalabi, or whoever, would have served as the pro-American lap dog of the White House, serving no other purpose than that of furthering the Bush cabals laisse-faire experiment in Iraq. From day one of the occupation the table was set for war profiteering corporations to plunder all they could in Iraq, and little has been rebuilt to this day. All the while, capable Iraqis remain unemployed while American truck drivers are paid $100,00 per year. Not only are they unemployed, but their homes are randomly sacked by American soldiers searching for insurgents; they are shot to death at checkpoints; blown up at the market; thrown in prison and tortured for minor crimes, or sometimes no crime at all. Under these circumstances, does it surprise anyone that the insurgency is so strong?

You might be asking yourselves-shouldn't the Iraqi's be thanking us for these wonderful gifts of freedom? Well not really. I think it is much more likely that many are considering a life as a terrorist, or at least sympathy for terrorist tactics.

So, if we cannot bomb our way to a terrorist free life through all out war - i.e. the "war on terror"-how are we to handle the trumped up threat of terrorism? Well my opinion, for what its worth, is that in order to lessen the threat of terrorism, we must set a good example. For instance, we shouldn't illegally invade and occupy other countries. We probably shouldn't arrest innocent people without stating charges, then sending them to other countries to be tortured. If they truly are terrorists, we should try them in legitimate courts of law, not the kangaroo court military tribunals of the Bush cabal. Lets see-we should probably let our "president" know that he has sworn an oath to uphold and abide by the Constitution, not the other way around-there are no kings in America. Ceasing our support of dictatorial regimes in the Middle East and elsewhere would probably help, as this is a major source of angst toward America. Helping to HONESTlY broker a lasting two state solution to the Israeli/Palestinian conflict, although diffcult, would work wonders. In general, we should foster good will in the Middle East, while simultaneously pursuing terrorists through cooperation with law enforcement across the globe, until the above mentioned solutions begin to bear fruit by marginalizing extremists. One more thing-we should probably fucking find Osama Bin Laden!!! That one was for you Greg.

Now hold on, before you run to your radio's for some comforting words from O'Lielly and block head Hannity, or to stick needles in your Hillary Clinton voodoo doll-ask your self this; If some foreign nation, take your pick, were to decide to invade and occupy the United States because they falsely claimed George Dubya Bush to be a threat to their security, wouldn't you resist? Wouldn't you resist even more vigorously if their promises of better days were hollow? Wouldn't you be pissed if they bombed your town to eliminate the resistance, destroying all infrastructure and industry, and then left you unemployed while they shipped in their own people to "rebuild"? Wouldn't you want to kill some of those bastards if they killed your family and friends, threw you in prison and tortured you? Of course you would!! This is America-we can't even tolerate being around each other, let alone a foreign occupier.