Why America lost the war on terror.

It is over, really. Our policy goals in the middle east, based on the stated goals of PNAC, are in shambles.

Beyond the obvious, that one cannot establish victory conditions over an abstract noun, other equally
dubious assumptions fated T.W.A.T. to failure.

Lack of mission discipline. The world's unconditional support rested on the following proposition-
That the mission was tightly constrained to bring 'evil doers' to a justice of sorts.

That being the restriction, certain requirements would be inescapable.

1. Much of the action would be focused on Saudi nationals, and official response and action would be required by those nations
whose religious fanatics executed the plot.

2. Innocent parties (here defined not in absolute terms, but as actors with no culpability for 9-11) would have nothing to fear.

3. That actions would ensure the security of, rather than the economic position of the United States.

When it became obvious that the strategic arc did not meet these requirements, the winning coalition created by his father never materialized
with boots on the ground in Iraq.

At that point, there was no winning the war on an abstract noun.

And I still do not believe that anyone knows what "win" would look like.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

Here in America a terrorist isnt just a certain group of people, it is who the government wants it to be. Because of a bill passed in 2007, six people, AMERICAN PEOPLE, have been arrested as "terrorists". They didnt plot to kill key figures of the government, or fly a plane into a couple buildings, all they did was radically support animal rights. Thats right. Now speaking out and fighting for animal rights (freeing animals from test labs, even drawing with chalk, pretty much anything that goes against a corperation that does animal testing) is considered terrorism and is treated as such. There was never any intention of ending terrorism. All the government needed was a flimsy pretense to start a war. Terrorism is just a buzzword, just like communist was in the 50's. No more.
Another problem with the troops in this war is that the officers don't keep enough disipline. Ever seen that picture with the naked middle eastern men in a pyramid and a man and a woman soldier standing behind them, smiling at the camera? yea thats just one example of how sick our own troops are and how little disipline the officers give.

3. That actions would ensure the security of, rather than the economic position of the United States.

yea like when a country attacks us we defend ourselfs, not going on a wild goose chase across the middle east. I think there is enough violence there without us.

And I dont see why we were so upset about 9/11. WE ARMED WHO IS NOW AL-KEIDA. And not suprisingly practically everyone who we have used has turned against us. Know who Fedel Castro is? We didnt like who was in power in cuba so we found this wierd little guy who we thought we could use to get cuba as an ally. Now there is an embargo which has lasted for quite a while.

so how could you defeat terror by war(remember minus minus is plus and similar is the case, terror and terror is more terror)

If the United States wanted to win its "war on terror" it would have to stop actively participating in terrorism. The War on Terror is nothing more than a War of Terror.

We has such a global outpouring of good will after 9-11, and totally wasted it. We had such unity, and Bush wasted it. Our energy after such a tragedy could have been harvested to tackle our energy issues, our military misadventures, or basic economic security.

The last 8 years sicken me.

...throughout the world 19th Century style. An architecture of terminology has been sewn into a thin ideological tissue, "the war on terror," mythology created out of whole cloth, that only undereducated Americans or corporatists could believe. We are a nation state not a homeland. The adoption of this phony ideology by the defense industry and its corporate lobbyists is meant to support offensive military operations whenever and wherever desired and to rationalize the institution of an oppressive police state at home.