This is the opposite extreme of the fearmongering. It makes no sense to do nothing, really. You plug the obvious holes you can, you adjust over time to new tactics... that will prevent many deaths. That is worth it. the key is just to not get past the point of diminishing returns, where you prevent no more loss of life but keep spending billions. Hard to know where exactly that line is, but that doesn't mean you should just throw up your hands and give up either.

 

 

I would be curious where that line for people... How many people would like to have a society like Israel with M16s on most corners, 4 hour waits for plane trips, and searches done all of the time?

I would be curious where that line for people... How many people would like to have a society like Israel with M16s on most corners, 4 hour waits for plane trips, and searches done all of the time?

Its definitely an interesting discussion. Although Israel is under a much different level of threat than the US. Interesting side effect in Isreal - terrorism and bombings still occur regularly, but due to the police state, regular crime is very, very low.

 

Its definitely an interesting discussion. Although Israel is under a much different level of threat than the US. Interesting side effect in Isreal - terrorism and bombings still occur regularly, but due to the police state, regular crime is very, very low.

 

It isn't hard to see it being our future. Right now we are programed to worry about the huge attacks. As more and more of those avenues become too difficult for Al Qaeda to pull off, they will not just go away. The transition will be to smaller and smaller attacks more frequently. It is how it progresses. I honestly feel you are seeing that transition as we speak in this country.

We stop occupying their countries and we'll see less and less attacks.

We stop occupying their countries and we'll see less and less attacks.

 

I love that oft repeated myth.

I love that oft repeated myth.

HOW is it a myth?

 

they hate america because we're always concerning ourselves with their affairs - most recently, invading their countries and killing their people. you don't think they'd back off if we did?

 

Edited January 4, 201016 yr by Reddy

It's not a myth, it's just not usually explained very well by the people who bring it up because it's almost an abstract concept. They wouldn't exactly just call the whole thing off if we withdrew from all Muslim countries but that's really not helping either and it's cited virtually every day as one of the justifications for their "war" against us. Well that, and the oxymoron that is Israel-Palestine.

 

Me pointing this out doesn't mean I agree with them or think we are immoral or whatever. Only stating facts.

Edited January 4, 201016 yr by lostfan

We stop occupying their countries and we'll see less and less attacks.

We should just pull out of Yemen right now! And Saudi Arabia, where most of the 9-11 guys came from! That will do it!

We should just pull out of Yemen right now! And Saudi Arabia, where most of the 9-11 guys came from! That will do it!

I'm sure you'd be equally thrilled if Yemeni and Saudi soldiers were patrolling your neighborhood and every now and then one of your neighbors were killed as a civilian casualty.

It isn't hard to see it being our future. Right now we are programed to worry about the huge attacks. As more and more of those avenues become too difficult for Al Qaeda to pull off, they will not just go away. The transition will be to smaller and smaller attacks more frequently. It is how it progresses. I honestly feel you are seeing that transition as we speak in this country.

 

We will never be at that level. Israel is surrounded by, and economically intertwined with, multiple states who politically and literally want them dead. Geography and economics will not allow the US to have that level of security threats from Islamic Jihadists and the like. Just won't happen.

 

I love that oft repeated myth.

 

Myth? Its not a myth, its quite clearly the single largest contributing factor. We meddle. Of course, its not nearly as simple as saying "pull out of everywhere", any more than it is to say its a myth. Neither of those stances make much sense.

 

 

I'm sure you'd be equally thrilled if Yemeni and Saudi soldiers were patrolling your neighborhood and every now and then one of your neighbors were killed as a civilian casualty.

 

We're patrolling neighborhoods in Yemen and Saudi Arabia?

 

We will never be at that level. Israel is surrounded by, and economically intertwined with, multiple states who politically and literally want them dead. Geography and economics will not allow the US to have that level of security threats from Islamic Jihadists and the like. Just won't happen.

The problem is, of course, the catch-22...a big part of the reason why those states want Israel dead is how Israel behaves in trying to protect itself.

We're patrolling neighborhoods in Yemen and Saudi Arabia?

For a long time in Saudi Arabia, yes we were. That was one of Bin Laden's complaints prior to the 9/11 attacks; the U.S. left a large contingent of troops there after the gulf war. They pulled out at the start of the Iraq war when we found a new base to move them to.

I would be curious where that line for people... How many people would like to have a society like Israel with M16s on most corners, 4 hour waits for plane trips, and searches done all of the time?

There's one other issue that you'd likely bring up if it was the other thread; how many jobs would that cost in terms of tourist and business dollars that are suddenly less able to flow. (don't have an answer, but it should be a consideration here; you make travel from overseas more difficult and you cost American jobs)

For a long time in Saudi Arabia, yes we were. That was one of Bin Laden's complaints prior to the 9/11 attacks; the U.S. left a large contingent of troops there after the gulf war. They pulled out at the start of the Iraq war when we found a new base to move them to.

 

Having a base in Saudi Arabia and "patrolling the streets" of Saudi Arabia are two different things entirely.

There are plenty of countries who have no invaded others, who are victims of terrorist attacks.

There are plenty of countries who have no invaded others, who are victims of terrorist attacks.

The correlation between incidents of terrorism and military occupations is shockingly strong.

Having a base in Saudi Arabia and "patrolling the streets" of Saudi Arabia are two different things entirely.

The U.S. was doing more than just resting on bases when they had forces there.

The correlation between incidents of terrorism and military occupations is shockingly strong.

 

It also means that apologizing and leaving won't solve the problems.

It also means that apologizing and leaving won't solve the problems.

Actually...it does strongly suggest that leaving does solve the problem.

For a long time in Saudi Arabia, yes we were. That was one of Bin Laden's complaints prior to the 9/11 attacks; the U.S. left a large contingent of troops there after the gulf war. They pulled out at the start of the Iraq war when we found a new base to move them to.

 

 

Having a base in a country is a lot different than patrolling the streets of a country. This did not happen. If it did , show us some evidence.

Actually...it does strongly suggest that leaving does solve the problem.

 

There is zero chance that actually happens.

I would be curious where that line for people... How many people would like to have a society like Israel with M16s on most corners, 4 hour waits for plane trips, and searches done all of the time?

 

Traveling in Mexico, their interior checkpoints have military with automatic weapons checking documents. Most Americans feel less safe when seeing that. Most Mexicans, who have grown up with that sight, hardly notice.

 

It isn't hard to see it being our future. Right now we are programed to worry about the huge attacks. As more and more of those avenues become too difficult for Al Qaeda to pull off, they will not just go away. The transition will be to smaller and smaller attacks more frequently. It is how it progresses. I honestly feel you are seeing that transition as we speak in this country.

 

Which is kind of what I was mentioning before. Most Americans do not fly, and even the ones that do, it may only be a once or twice a year thing. What happens when small bombs start going off in grocery stores? There is an obvious reason why we here a "bomb went off in a crowded market". People need to shop for food. Terror is the goal, and the terrorists believe that Americans are basically selfish and self absorbed. Cause us enough annoyance or pain and we'll sell out an ally, pull our Troops from a base, etc. And perhaps they are correct.

Having a base in a country is a lot different than patrolling the streets of a country. This did not happen. If it did , show us some evidence.

They didn't have enough forces there to "Patrol the streets" (only 5,000-10,000) but the U.S. did get involved in training Saudi military and police forces, a little bit in law enforcement, the U.S. maintained the air surveillance over southern Iraq from Saudi Arabia, and the presence of U.S. forces was a strong statement of support of the government of the House of Saud as well.

There's one other issue that you'd likely bring up if it was the other thread; how many jobs would that cost in terms of tourist and business dollars that are suddenly less able to flow. (don't have an answer, but it should be a consideration here; you make travel from overseas more difficult and you cost American jobs)

 

That all goes back to how much is a life actually worth. Where is your point of diminishing returns? You can also get into the how many freedoms are you willing to give up argument, or are you willing to accept that people will die because our rights give us a wide berth.

Having a base in a country is a lot different than patrolling the streets of a country. This did not happen. If it did , show us some evidence.

 

Here is where we have bases

 

Before we get into specifics, at most bases, the soldiers are allowed to leave the base, so their presence is felt in the surrounding areas. I imagine having a large group of foreign soldiers in your neighborhood could be an issue. Also, in the interest if good will, they do conduct humanitarian missions and offer other aid to the local government. It is the "other aid" that sometimes results in ill will with local residents.

 

We also have situations where out military has behaved badly while on official training missions. Ten years ago we had the Cavalese cable car disaster when Air Force pilots, f***ing around, buzzed an aerial tram and caused the deaths of 20 people. So here is evidence that military training goes beyond the base. That certainly would feel like patrolling local neighborhoods.

 

We've had several cases of US soldiers raping local women and children. Okanawa is the one I remember the best.

 

To keep US soldiers in line, the military police are often times sent outside the base. This may also give the appearance of "patrolling foreign streets".