Beta

Slashdot: News for Nerds

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

The war on terror

gerardrj (207690) writes | about 10 years ago

User Journal 0

How will it end? There are three main potential outcomes:

1. The U.S manages through force, embargoes/boycotts, and coercion to make all other nations think the way we do and implements what we allow to pass for "democracy".

2. The U.S. spends years or decades fighting the "war" only to realize there is no way to win and gives up.

3. The other 95% of the world population gets tired of our bullying and declares war on the U.S. World: 6,416,735,872 US: 293,694,626.

How will it end? There are three main potential outcomes:

1. The U.S manages through force, embargoes/boycotts, and coercion to make all other nations think the way we do and implements what we allow to pass for "democracy".

2. The U.S. spends years or decades fighting the "war" only to realize there is no way to win and gives up.

3. The other 95% of the world population gets tired of our bullying and declares war on the U.S. World: 6,416,735,872 US: 293,694,626.

"Terrorism" has been with us since the beginning of civilization as we know it. Terrorism has no fixed definition; like love it is in the eye of the beholder. The United States Military has policies and procedures for "low level urban combat", the definition for which matches the U.S. Justice Department's definition of terrorism.

The U.S. has proven with the "drug war" that you can not win a war when you are funding both sides, and this is just what is happening in the war or terrorism. The U.S. keeps sending money, weapons, technology and training to states who a decade later decide they've had enough and turn on us. We trained, funded and armed Osama. We funded, trained and armed Hussein. We funded, trained and armed a large number of entities who later turned on us.

On an even larger note, history has proven that no-one can inflict their will on the world or even a region for an extended period of time. It didn't work for the Mongrels, it didn't work for the Egyptions, it didn't work for the Romans, it didn't work for the British, it didn't work for the Nazis. Will it work for the U.S?

So, my open questions are these:
Given the dismal failures in the past to "rule the world", and the extreme minority that the U.S. population, how does the U.S. plan to spread it's views on a world that could exist quite nicely without us?
As the minority population, isn't forcing our views on the majority population diametrically opposed to the basic idea of democracy which is "majority rules"?

cancel ×

0 comments

Check for New Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...