The problems of the global war on terror - Politics | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

Ongoing wars and conflict resolution, international agreements or lack thereof. Nationhood, secessionist movements, national 'home' government versus internationalist trends and globalisation.

Moderator: PoFo Political Circus Mods

Forum rules: No one line posts please.
Statistics tells us that the results of a fifteen-year-long war on terror are not great. The number of victims of acts of terror grew ninefold between 2000 and 2014 – from 3,329 to 32,685 people. In 2014, acts of terror were committed in 123 out of 162 countries. Their number grew more than sevenfold – from 1,980 in 2001 to 14,786 in 2015.

Why have the terrorists become more active since the world started fighting them?

First of all, the US went to war in Afghanistan and Iraq without a clear plan of action. And if the global community supported the Afghanistan operation as a just retaliation for the 9/11 events, then the Iraq operation (started under false pretenses) virtually crushed the international anti-terrorist coalition and split the previously united NATO. France and Germany were against the operation, and Washington was forced to coin a new phrase and call it “the coalition of the willing.” Today, acts of terror are being committed non-stop in Afghanistan and Iraq, their victims number in hundreds of thousands, not to mention the fact that American taxpayers paid trillions of dollars for the military campaigns which brought no tangible positive result.

Second, the US made a colossal mistake: instead of focusing on fighting Islamist groups, Washington and its allies began a parallel war on secular regimes first in Iraq and then in Syria. In both cases, the power vacuum was quickly filled up by terrorists who later united in the “Islamic State” (IS), and the national armies of Iraq and Syria cannot defeat it. Even the “Arab spring,” intended to become the triumph of democracy in the Arab world, bore fruit that was dubious at best. In Egypt, democratic elections brought into power Mohammed Morsi, a member of the radical Muslim Brotherhood; subsequently, Morsi was overthrown in a military coup. After the murder of Muammar Gaddafi, Lybia has gone into a half-life state and is plagued by unceasing internenice wars. In Yemen, the conflict between the authorities and Islamists has been going on for several years already. In fact, none of the operations carried out or initiated by the US in the last fifteen years can be called a success bringing freedom and prosperity. Moreover, the Islamist threat ‘mutated,” it became more diverse, and it spilled into new countries and regions.

Third, none of the problems underlying the spread of terrorism has been solved. The countries of the Muslim world still feel excluded from the global processes. The number of Muslims supporting ISIS is on the rise. Surveys conducted in Arab countries’ capitals in late 2014 – early 2015 showed that 8.5 million people were active supporters of IS, and another 42 million (out of 370 million in 11 Arab countries) viewed its activity in a positive light. Fifteen years of antiterrorist campaign not only failed to improve the US relations with Muslim countries, they in fact led to the deterioration of those relations because of near-sighted policies which led to highly dubious results.

Fourth, having started the “war on terror” without setting itself clear tasks and a precise definition of criteria for judging success, the US overestimated its capabilities. In fact, today we can state that Islamist terrorists succeeded in drawing the US into a long-term confrontation, a classical asymmetrical conflict where the strong opponent cannot achieve a military victory. Now the US is forced to play by others’ rules, without any prospects of gaining a quick victory, and it clearly undermines the US leadership. The American society is tired of the endless war on terror. The voices of isolationists sound louder and louder; they insist on limiting the US interference into global affairs. In particular, the US presidential candidate Donald Trump voices such ideas; he could be called a representative of a non-systemic opposition to the US political elite which has dominated since the end of the Cold war and has drawn the US into a series of exhausting conflicts. Apparently, even if Mr. Trump does not become President (both Hillary Clinton, the Democratic candidate, and the most conservative part of the Republic establishment are in the way), isolationist moods in the US will grow.
"the US went to war in Afghanistan and Iraq without a clear plan of action."

False. The original W sellout plan was to invade Iraq, Iran, and Afghan, which is what master ISRAEL wanted.

What was missing was a US reason to invade any of those three, since none had anything to do with 911.

" none of the problems underlying the spread of terrorism has been solved."

And none will until we actually diagnose the "terror" correctly and figure out ISRAEL did 911 and most of the rest of it.

One big clue. You mention Gaddafi, terrorist behind Pan Am 103, then "ally" in "war on (Islamic) Terror," complete with a CIA branch office in Libya which waterboarded lies for Cheney to use on TV to sell the Iraq Treason....

HERE is the TRUTH about Gaddafi, one which the ISRAELI MEDIA publishes, but our media CENSORS.... ... aims-aide/ ... wish-Woman ... ael-451214

Gaddafi was JEWISH. Now our CIA branch office there makes more sense, as so were TENET, RUMSFELD, and most of the other 911 Traitors...

Pan Am 103 was an act of Jewish terror that murdered Americans, as was 911, the Marines in Lebanon 1983 (a false flag attempt to manipulate a US war with Hezbo), JFK, the USS Liberty etc...

The first step to ending terror is to correctly assess who did it.
Election 2020 Trump[…]

1] I didn't mean to imply that the US Gov. would […]

Well, first, assuming that all homeless are unint[…]

So you said 4 trillion (out of a 2 trillion bill) […]