|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Is the US Winning 'The War on Terror'? |
| Yes |
|
35% |
[ 6 ] |
| No |
|
52% |
[ 9 ] |
| Unsure - Please explain why you are unsure |
|
11% |
[ 2 ] |
|
| Total Votes : 17 |
|
| Author |
Message |
Ya-ta Boy
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
Location: Established in 1994
|
 Posted: Fri Jun 24, 2005 2:52 am Post subject: |
 |
|
| I don't have my Greek history books handy so I can't give names and dates. Sorry. But in one of them, Pausanias, I think recorded that someone said to a Spartan king (Agesilaus?) something like: "Don't fight your enemies too often. They will learn how to fight". Years later, after the Theban Joy Boys...er, Sacred Band, annihilated the Spartan army, he came back to the same person and said, "Ha. I told you so." Same phenomenon goes on in any war. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee
Joined: 25 May 2003
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 24, 2005 5:24 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| Is the occupation there, making it better? I do not think it is. Just like after the Soviets pulled out, the tribal wars will return and once again, all the efforts of the occupying forces, all the lives lost - will go to waste. As for Iraq, who can tell, a parallel may be drawn with Iran, in some respects. I hope that it will become the seed for a more democratic Middle East, however, I have my doubts. |
What are things like outside the Sunni triangle? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Alias
Joined: 24 Jan 2003
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 24, 2005 5:34 am Post subject: |
|
|
| At least half of Americans believe that the invasion of Iraq was a mistake. So it is no longer just "liberal hippies" who are opposed to the war. Now normal Americans are questioning the logic to invade. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ya-ta Boy
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
Location: Established in 1994
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 24, 2005 7:21 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| Now normal Americans |
Mr. Alias,
I don't want to nit pick, but is that the best phrase you could come up with? It seems somehow...infelicitous. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bucheon bum
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 24, 2005 8:57 am Post subject: |
|
|
| mithridates wrote: |
| One reason for that is because it doesn't take Saudi Arabia weeks to get through critical documents written in Arabic. |
Nor does it take the US that amount of time; no, it takes the United States YEARS to get through those documents. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bucheon bum
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 24, 2005 9:03 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Kuros wrote: |
| Wangja wrote: |
| Kuros wrote: |
| I'm voting yes, on no other criterion than how many successful major terrorist attacks have occurred in the United States since 9-11. |
How many were there before? |
I hope this doesn't come off as rude, but I don't expect non-American arm-chair generals to fully appreciate the vulnerability of the homefront. I have a 100 criticisms of the Bush administration itself, but some things are just difficult, whether or not its Bush handling the situation or someone else. Afghanistan has always been a mess. Always. Iraq was a thug's paradise when Saddam was in power, its just the big fish has been pulled out of the pond.
But, when it comes down to it, once again, how many terrorist attacks have occurred inside the US since 9-11? Discounting ELF, its a very low figure. The war on terror may be a stupid and in some ways insidious name, but I can appreciate the lack of it in the US. |
It's called "odds." In my lifetime, there have been two attacks: one homegrown, the other abroad. So let's see, 2 in 26 years. Therefore, it is more likely than not that there would be no terrorist attack the past 4 years.
Now tell me this: what has Bush done, in your opinion, to make this country safer? What has he done to prevent terrorist attacks in the USA?
I can come up with one: the invasion of Iraq. The one benefit of that is all those nut fundamentalists are so focused on Iraq and so determined to see the USA "fail" there that they aren't putting much effort into attacking the USA.
On the flipside, the invasion of Iraq might lead to future attacks on US soil. How? Well all these guys are meeting each other in Iraq and bound to make lifelong partnerships with each other. They're gaining experience and improving their tactics. Once we pull out of Iraq, they'll no doubt focus on the "great satan" again. Well unless we decide to invade Syria  . |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mithridates
Joined: 03 Mar 2003
Location: President's office, Korean Space Agency
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 24, 2005 9:39 am Post subject: |
|
|
Hm, is the US winning the war on terrorists? Let's check:
| Quote: |
According to the National Center for Education Statistics, out of 2 million college graduates in 2004, only 17 earned bachelor��s or advanced degrees in Arabic. Only 206 earned degrees in Chinese, the world��s most popular language.
��Academia is not producing enough of the right kind of linguists fast enough,�� said an FBI official. ��And we simply cannot wait for the education system to catch up.�� |
So just hire Arabs, right?
| Quote: |
Getting new employees a security clearance is another hurdle.
��We require, for all our full-time positions and even some of our contract positions, that people have the ability to obtain a security clearance, and that��s become extremely difficult for those who are naturalized American citizens,�� Spraque said. ��That limits your pool to a large extent.�� |
And lastly:
| Quote: |
| Kevin Hendzel, a spokesman for the American Translators Association, estimates it will take intelligence agencies between 10 and 15 years to catch up in translating tons of materials recovered from Iraq and Afghanistan. ��As a society, we pay a huge price for not being competent in foreign languages. This is particularly true in the national security area where the people who want to do us harm do not speak English,�� he said. |
If the criteria for winning the war on terrorism is letting OBL slip away, keeping mideast oil-based regimes rich, spending more on a war in Iraq than the Korean War (inflation factored in too) and having the most casualties since the Vietnam War plus a budget deficit on top of tax cuts for the rich, a severe dearth of intelligence only made up by hiring more Arabs to translate the documents and sit waiting with fingers crossed that they stay loyal and that the translations are accurate, then yes the US is winning. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bucheon bum
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 24, 2005 12:27 pm Post subject: |
|
|
When I applied to the CIA, it was depressing to see the lack of diversity in the applicant pool. Out of the 100 I was with at an info session, there were 2 south asian males, about 3-4 east asian women (no men), and no more than 10 hispanics. No blacks. The rest were white people, most of whom were male.
No wonder our intelligence sucks. Not saying us white guys can't do the job right (we definitly can) but rather important to have diversity when it comes to spying. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ya-ta Boy
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
Location: Established in 1994
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 24, 2005 12:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
The rest were white people, most of whom were male.
|
Please tell me that the women, few though they were, were hot. If not, my 007 fantasies will go directly out the window. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
wannago
Joined: 16 Apr 2004
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 24, 2005 12:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| bignate wrote: |
But, what it also comes down to, is that all this time that an attack is not being perpetrated, one is being planned. And since the events of 9-11, terrorists everywhere have seen that bigger is better. In order to hurt America - there needs to be a spectacular event - and of all those that are being planned, for their cause, they only need to succeed with one. Those fighting against the occupation in Iraq are only becoming better and more knowledgable about insurgencies and how the US battles an insurgency. They are learning about how to attack infrastructures and how to become better at terrorizing a populous.
As you mentioned before, it is such a difficult thing.... |
I think you and others are leaving out another point. The U.S. military is also learning. Learning how to fight this insurgency kind of war. It isn't just the insurgents that are learning, it's also the military. If you think the U.S. military isn't adapting then you don't give them enough credit. It's better they learn on foreign soil than on American soil, yes? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TheUrbanMyth
Joined: 28 Jan 2003
Location: Retired
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 24, 2005 8:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| wannago wrote: |
| bignate wrote: |
But, what it also comes down to, is that all this time that an attack is not being perpetrated, one is being planned. And since the events of 9-11, terrorists everywhere have seen that bigger is better. In order to hurt America - there needs to be a spectacular event - and of all those that are being planned, for their cause, they only need to succeed with one. Those fighting against the occupation in Iraq are only becoming better and more knowledgable about insurgencies and how the US battles an insurgency. They are learning about how to attack infrastructures and how to become better at terrorizing a populous.
As you mentioned before, it is such a difficult thing.... |
I think you and others are leaving out another point. The U.S. military is also learning. Learning how to fight this insurgency kind of war. It isn't just the insurgents that are learning, it's also the military. If you think the U.S. military isn't adapting then you don't give them enough credit. It's better they learn on foreign soil than on American soil, yes? |
Not only that, but another point. The U.S. is often critizised for breeding more insurgents and terrorists (the Iraq war). Well, when those planes crashed into the Twin Towers, Iraq had not been invaded yet. There have been terrorists for a long time. They were there before Bush and will be there after him. Better to kill as many of them as we can in Iraq before they take the war to our soil. And they will as OBL proved. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
some waygug-in
Joined: 25 Jan 2003
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 25, 2005 12:28 am Post subject: |
|
|
I think a lot of you people are fooling yourselves if you think the war in Iraq is going to "prevent" future terrorist attacks in America. If anything, it��s going to create a mindset to plan more and more 9/11 style attacks.
You can bet that if and when the next one happens, a lot of people will be a lot less sympathetic towards America. They will be saying, serves you right. You brought it on yourselves.
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kuros
Joined: 27 Apr 2004
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 25, 2005 1:36 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Bucheon Bum wrote: |
It's called "odds." In my lifetime, there have been two attacks: one homegrown, the other abroad. So let's see, 2 in 26 years. Therefore, it is more likely than not that there would be no terrorist attack the past 4 years.
Now tell me this: what has Bush done, in your opinion, to make this country safer? What has he done to prevent terrorist attacks in the USA? |
I don't know about your odds. I think that after that spectacular attack on American soil, Islamic extremism looks far more attractive. I mean, is that not how the 9-11 commission explained that OBL was willing to limit his targets so to hit sooner and more quickly? So that Islamicists waiting in the wings might be enthralled by Al Qaeda.
Unfortunately, since none of us have the appropriate security clearance, we do not know for sure how many possible attacks inside the US there would be, or how many have been thwarted. But we do know that chemical/biological/nuclear materials and technology are far easier to acquire today than during the Cold War. We also know that the threat of NGOs has skyrocketed since the fall of the Berlin Wall. Before that, almost every terrorist operation had state support, and therefore a possible return address for retaliation.
So I don't know about your odds. Here are some odds for you. By 2050, the United States will suffer a major nuclear attack. I hope I am so wrong on that. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bucheon bum
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 25, 2005 1:41 am Post subject: |
|
|
so there is nothing you can come up with that Bush has done? You don't think he's secured the borders? Made it harder to sneak in nukes or some other WMD?
Yes, perhaps we've stopped something covertly, but there must be some overt thing Bush has done to make us safer. Or has he? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kuros
Joined: 27 Apr 2004
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 25, 2005 1:47 am Post subject: |
|
|
Hrmmmm. Nope. Nothing besides what you might have said about Iraq. All he can really do is let the agencies do their jobs. And the Patriot Act reformed a lot of loopholes and problems, but I can't really give that one to Bush so much as to Congress (and the bill still needs revision, including a new goddamned name).
Edit: It just hit me. It is hard to say right now whether Bush's so-called War on Terror is failing or succeeding. We shall see in years to come, but I believe right now is probably too early for proper analysis, especially for people outside of the intelligence community. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
