"Teacherjh" wrote:
Realistially? None.
[snip]
Think of it this way. You are being attacked. You have a gun.
What do you do with it? Shoot the attacker? (Oh, the attacker
is a bacterium and it's been multplying in your system for a
while now)
Well put. There is no effective defense against determined terrorists
who have worldwide support, short of a massive security clampdown at
home affecting every phase of life. Every inhabitant of the country
would have to be intimately available to the government security
apparatus, perhaps via imbedded micro chips or similar technology.
Border security would need a colossal budget. Anything short of that
(invading other countries, putting TFRs around football stadiums, hiring
more airport security, etc.), is vain political window dressing.
We are in a religious war. We didn't choose it, but we've got it.
These barbarians cannot be appeased, even should we be so foolish as to
try. They don't want peace, they want power: they want hegemony over
the entire Muslim world, including enclaves like Chechnya and Kashmir;
they want the total exclusion of Western cultural influence from every
Islamic country.
As you said, there is no realistic, i.e. practical, way to defeat these
murdering fanatics. We will keep hunting them down and killing them,
but there will always be plenty of eager replacements in the pipeline.
This is going to be a very ugly period in history. The spokesman
claiming responsibility for the Spanish bombings said "You love life, we
love death." That pretty neatly sums up the two sides in this war. In
such a struggle, the side that loves life is at a tactical disadvantage.
--
Dan
C172RG at BFM
(remove pants to reply by email)
|