Comments on: Brave New War – Review and Interview http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/brave_new_war_-_review_and_interview/ Online Journal of Politics and Foreign Affairs Fri, 27 Nov 2009 04:13:18 -0600 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.5 hourly 1 By: Wayne http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/brave_new_war_-_review_and_interview/comment-page-1/#comment-127625 Wayne Wed, 23 May 2007 22:24:56 +0000 http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/2007/05/brave_new_war_-_review_and_interview/#comment-127625 James You both made some valid points. I especially agreed that much of the Homeland security spending has been an especially waste of money and more of a feel good deal than anything else. Some of the conclusions I disagree with. Can we stop all terrorism? No. Can we stop all wars, poverty, murder, etc? No. However, we can limit them. The question is how to limit them within reason. I have my ideas on how to best to do that but will try to stay on subject. Side note, the terrorist I will be referring to is the Islamic terrorist that most think of when talking about terrorist today. Terrorist today are not trying for a significant economic impact but for press. Yes taking out a major refinery has economical impact but they tried to destroy it for the headlines more than anything else. The MSM is giving the terrorist what they need most, propaganda. Yes if we accept these things and not play them up or spend a great deal of feel good money, it would hurt the terrorist cause. As in any counter-insurgency, one most be careful not to overact. For security agencies to ignore these threats would cause great harm to our country. To not gather Intel, go after their infrastructure (much of which does exist although not in the traditional state sense), personnel, training camps, and state sponsorship would allow them to get stronger. At some point they would be able to take significant swipe at our infrastructure and possibly overthrow our government. Small-unorganized unit can cause damage but seldom cause significant damage. Only when they are allowed to flourish do they cause great harm. Like the Britains in WWII, we must learn how to continue on even with the bombing but we must continue the fight and not raise the white flag. James
You both made some valid points. I especially agreed that much of the Homeland security spending has been an especially waste of money and more of a feel good deal than anything else. Some of the conclusions I disagree with. Can we stop all terrorism? No. Can we stop all wars, poverty, murder, etc? No. However, we can limit them.

The question is how to limit them within reason. I have my ideas on how to best to do that but will try to stay on subject. Side note, the terrorist I will be referring to is the Islamic terrorist that most think of when talking about terrorist today.

Terrorist today are not trying for a significant economic impact but for press. Yes taking out a major refinery has economical impact but they tried to destroy it for the headlines more than anything else. The MSM is giving the terrorist what they need most, propaganda. Yes if we accept these things and not play them up or spend a great deal of feel good money, it would hurt the terrorist cause. As in any counter-insurgency, one most be careful not to overact.

For security agencies to ignore these threats would cause great harm to our country. To not gather Intel, go after their infrastructure (much of which does exist although not in the traditional state sense), personnel, training camps, and state sponsorship would allow them to get stronger. At some point they would be able to take significant swipe at our infrastructure and possibly overthrow our government.

Small-unorganized unit can cause damage but seldom cause significant damage. Only when they are allowed to flourish do they cause great harm. Like the Britains in WWII, we must learn how to continue on even with the bombing but we must continue the fight and not raise the white flag.

]]>