<< Terrorism is a method, it is not an entity.>>
I disagree.
I feel this is a very important point on which we should come to some sort of an understanding, because if we cannot define the enemy, we have no chance of prevailing.
In an ideal “rational” world, yes, it may be merely a “method”. In the world of humans, were so many are principally driven by passions and various – often bizarre – archetypes, terrorism is very much of an entity as well.
I don't understand what you mean here. Can you clarify?
Of course we are in the world of humans. And still, terrorism is a method. In fact, it is the only method available to the little guys who fight the big guys. Freedom fighters against dictatorships. Revolutionaries against the monarchy. Islamists against the "great devil America".
Going after the method is not rational. You cannot kill a method. There will always be some people who will take it up. You can, however, find and exterminate the groups of people who are taking up terrorism to fight you. You can dry their supply lines, discourage their supporters, even get them on your own side by showing how their lives will be better on this side of the fence.
One of the few points I credit Bush with is this idea of calling "terrorism" the enemy ("War against terrorism" and all that). He did that to avoid calling Islamists the enemy. |
