Re: "extermination".
Kill all who seek to kill us?
Aye, only seems practical... weakness not being much of a survival tactic.
But 'exterminate'???????? That word seems to edge appreciably closer to the concept of genocide --- which can reasonably be perceived as an extremely COUNTER-PRODUCTIVE tactic.
But, if the word 'exterminate' is merely your colorful term for 'kill' (and not actually connoting genocide or mass murder of noncombatants...) then, I would suggest that you need to get busy clarifying just WHO you are suggesting be exterminated....
For fighting insurgencies, combatting guerilla wars, is a complex undertaking --- best approached in a comprehensive manner.
(For example: the matter of public relations and the future recruitment appeal of the opposition. It would serve little purpose to 'exterminate' ONE --- to use your term --- while spurring the fallen fighter's replacement with THREE....)
Re: "We are surrounded by 'polite' enemies on a daily basis".
Aye, again. And, I'd venture that several of them could potentially pose even more serious long-term threats to the US then the current few misbegotten bands calling for Theocracy and 'that old time religion' (Wa'habbist style)....
Re: "terrorism".
It's a TACTIC, not a group, not a movement. It's been used (regrettably) down through all of history. A tactic's use may be opposed (in this case: must be opposed and sanctioned), but it has no particular ideology.
Re: "War on Terror" (W.O.T.)
(An unfortunate misnomer. 'Terror' is an EMOTION. 'Terrorism' is a military tactic sometimes used by small groups at a severe force disadvantage. Emotions cannot be 'fought' with wars... unless perhaps, Paxil or something like it is the 'weapon'. :) |
