Let’s save money by ending the war on terror
A new Global Terrorism Index this week showed that terrorism went up from 2002 to 2007 – largely because of the conflicts in Afghanistan/Pakistan and Iraq — but has declined ever since. And the part of the world with the fewest incidents is North America. It could be our vigilance that is keeping terror attacks at bay. But it is also worth noting, as we observe the vast apparatus of searches and screening, that the Transportation Security Administration’s assistant administrator for global strategies has admitted that those expensive and cumbersome whole-body scanners have not resulted in the arrest of a single suspected terrorist. Not one.
Of course there are real threats out there, from sources including new branches of al-Qaeda and other such groups. And of course they will have to be battled, and those terrorists should be captured or killed. But we have done this before, and we can do so in the future under more normal circumstances. It will mean that the administration will have to be more careful — and perhaps have more congressional involvement — for certain actions, such as drone strikes. It might mean it will have to charge some of the people held at Guantanamo and try them in military or civilian courts.
In any event, it is a good idea that the United States find a way to conduct its anti-terrorism campaigns within a more normal legal framework, rather than rely on blanket wartime authority granted in a panic after Sept. 11.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Why doesn’t the government forcibly convert all of us into the dark-age death cult of islam, then the 12th imam will emerge from his well and lead the world into a new “golden age”?
Or a new dark ages of brutal repression, murder, slavery, goat herding and subsistence farming, but isn’t that the same thing?
Rebar on December 7, 2012 at 9:49 PM
Oh, sure. And I can save lots of money by not paying any of my bills. Let’s see how that works out after a few months.
UltimateBob on December 7, 2012 at 9:50 PM
… and another supporter of terrorism speaks.
Warner Todd Huston on December 7, 2012 at 9:52 PM
Ending wars is always a good idea. The problem is getting our enemies to stop fighting too.
backwoods conservative on December 7, 2012 at 9:52 PM
How about we just stop nation building and see how it goes for a while.
WeekendAtBernankes on December 7, 2012 at 9:55 PM
FZ is a perverse result of our immigration system.
He’s here and he’s a straight up Islamofascist mouthpiece with a show on CNN…
CorporatePiggy on December 7, 2012 at 9:56 PM
Taqiyya and Zakaria remain a mere syllable shy of rhyming.
viking01 on December 7, 2012 at 9:56 PM
Not going to read the article. But I bet they don’t recommend stopping TSA feel ups and pat downs.
No.. we’ll just stop searching for terrorists over there. But we all know we have to keep watching the terrorists over here… like Vets, NRA members and those blasted pro-lifers.
JellyToast on December 7, 2012 at 10:01 PM
Christopher Stevens could not be reached for comment.
Jim Treacher on December 7, 2012 at 10:03 PM
We can end the war on terror. But the terror will not end the war on us.
thebrokenrattle on December 7, 2012 at 10:07 PM
Let’s end the War on Poverty. Trillions wasted on humans that have no respect for their own humanity. When the prospect of facing an abyss of failure and pain is removed from your existence and replaced with nameless/faceless bureaucrats that can mete out comfort to you pain-free, you are no longer human.
tom daschle concerned on December 7, 2012 at 10:09 PM
So we should subject things to bureaucracies and lawyers that are inclined to do nothing and spare terrorists under the guise of human rights, or they’re misunderstood, etc.
No thanks. The beauty of the bin Laden raid was that bin Laden was killed quickly. Justice was meted out without idiotic paper-pushers obstructing every last thing on dopey legal technicalities.
Stoic Patriot on December 7, 2012 at 10:12 PM
I for one can’t see how this could go wrong.
DeathtotheSwiss on December 7, 2012 at 10:12 PM
How about we actually start a war on terror? We know where they are = kill them.
They kill one American = we kill 5 of them. Any of them. Active or simply non violent supporters. Kill them. Facilities, training areas, Mosques..destroy them.
Duh.
I can dream can’t I?
Mimzey on December 7, 2012 at 10:13 PM
What he really meant to say.
UltimateBob on December 7, 2012 at 10:17 PM
A dozen or so of well targeted AGM-129′s should do the trick!
dmann on December 7, 2012 at 10:27 PM
While we’re at it, why not end the War on Profit by the IRS, the War on Literacy by the Department of Education, and the War on Energy being waged by the Department of Energy and the EPA?
Left Coast Right Mind on December 7, 2012 at 10:32 PM
A lot of Americans have convinced themselves that terrorism never really existed in the first place. It was just a big boogeyman made up by Bush. So, no more Bush = no more terrorism. We are about to re-live the 90s where a series of attacks went unanswered and culminated in 911. This time they may have nukes.
BDavis on December 7, 2012 at 10:33 PM
Yes, unfortunately.
CorporatePiggy on December 7, 2012 at 10:38 PM
Beat me to it.
LegendHasIt on December 7, 2012 at 10:47 PM
I agree, it needs to end, particularly the parts going on in the homeland. Of course it will not. The government gained power, and it will never cede it back to the people.
astonerii on December 7, 2012 at 10:49 PM
The problem being that the war on terror is a war against our freedom.
astonerii on December 7, 2012 at 10:50 PM
End the war on terror? Hell, when are we going to start it?
I agree with the basic principle that we’re wasting a lot of money on military and other supposed “security” activities that are gaining us nothing. The TSA, which he references, is an utter joke and he’s right about the full body porno scanners being absolutely useless at enhancing our security. And we are doing a heck of a lot of nation building and putting troops at places all around the world that have nothing to do with maintaining our national security interest.
Where I disagree with him is his basic premise that we should just bring our military home and hope that the bad guys see how nice we are and leave us alone. No, we need a war on terror. But we need a real war on terror. A war fought the way we used to fight back when we wanted to win wars. Think World War I and World War II. Not Vietnam and beyond. Think a military who’s sole job is to kill people and break things, not to try and institute liberty and justice for all around the world.
When 9/11 happened, it warranted a military response. But the kind of military response it warranted was sweeping into Afghanistan and leveling the place with the kind of overwhelming force only the United States can project, and with such effectiveness that the terrorists around the world would be quaking in their boots.
If we’re going to fight wars, let’s fight them. Anything less is not fair to our troops.
Shump on December 7, 2012 at 10:55 PM
Look at all the money France saved back in 1940!
Alberta_Patriot on December 7, 2012 at 10:57 PM
Ending the unwinnable Bush occupations =/= ending the war on terror entirely. The one we HAVE to do. The other we cannot.
But if we do, I advocate surrendering in the war on drugs at the same time. Two for the price of one.
MelonCollie on December 7, 2012 at 11:02 PM
If only we could have our own Arab Spring right here in America.
Kenosha Kid on December 8, 2012 at 12:28 AM
ProfShadow on December 8, 2012 at 7:55 AM
‘
End the War on Terror?
I thought it was over! I haven’t heard anything about it since Obama was elected
cntrlfrk on December 8, 2012 at 8:46 AM
In the past didn’t we actually have an end goal in mind on war such as winning it as quickly as possible? Since Korea we seem to be content running multi-year holding actions and not actually winning anything. Is war now the ultimate extension of a participation trophies where the enemy is left essentially intact?
/geez
roy_batty on December 8, 2012 at 9:31 AM
I say we let the next terror attack happen only if it occurs at his house.
Voter from WA State on December 8, 2012 at 10:14 AM
If I knew of an attack happening on a solid-blue city, I’d try to warn conservatives and libertarians away while not saying something liberals would believe – maybe say a welfare riot is imminent? – and otherwise keep my mouth buttoned.
The only thing that can jumpstart our interest in the WOT is a kick in the @$$ that makes 9/11 look like a schoolyard brawl.
MelonCollie on December 8, 2012 at 3:23 PM