Comments on: Ten steps to winning the War on Terror

By: Chou

Chou — Mon, 21 May 2007 11:16:07 +0000

“The way I see it, you are a proponent of turning the United State into a capitalist Soviet Union… propaganda, religious persecution, the works.”

What’s wrong with that? I fully support all of Efty’s measures because in America, if you intend to live there, you should assimilate or get le f*** out.
Please note that comments on New School Politics are not reflective of the website’s opinions or policies. Thank you.

By: Arthus Erea

Arthus Erea — Sun, 29 Apr 2007 16:51:54 +0000

Basically, you’re saying we should not allow one group to practice their religion… that is completely against the foundation of our country. The pilgrims came here to practice religious freedom and that is one of the guiding principals of our country. So long as you follow the state laws, there should be nothing keeping you from practicing your religion.

The way I see it, you are a proponent of turning the United State into a capitalist Soviet Union… propaganda, religious persecution, the works.

By: Eftychis

Eftychis — Mon, 16 Apr 2007 21:57:22 +0000

Iacopo, great response, this is the kind of stuff I would like to see more often on this website. I do not want to respond to what you said in too much length now because I plan on posting explanations about my reasoning or support for my posistions. The most obvious is that Sharia law does not exist in the United States, but Muslims can choose to live by it if they want, there is nothing banning people from following it. I am suggesting that it should be a criminal offense to follow it in the future, which would pursuade people who want to follow its teachings not to enter the United States in the first place. Take Great Britain for example, there Sharia law is thriving within Islamic communities and of course while the British government does not support it, they do little to oppose it. My hope is that the same situation does not occur in the United States and we should work with the Muslim community here to at least prohibit some of its offensive and awful acts such as honor killings. Also, something such as scanning all of our cargo sounds like a difficult task, but it is possible. Take Hong Kong for instance, they have been scanning all of their imported and exported goods for the last decade, how is it that the British and Chinese can accomplish that in one of their cities, but the most powerful nation on earth cannot at least secure our most valuable ports of entry? I will update my post when I am not compelled by the nice weather here in Antigua.

By: iacopo

iacopo — Sun, 15 Apr 2007 04:37:43 +0000

Although some of your ideas are shall we say, interesting, they are not new ones, and many in fact, have already been implemented. These ideas have been shown not to work. The United States has been pouring millions of dollars into alternative media sources for the Islamic world. However, these programs are unsuccessful because they cannot compete with media companies such as Al-Jazeera.
We do pressure Qatar’s Al-Jazeera to be pro-American, however the fact is that Al-Jazeera is trying to appeal to a generally anti-american audience. Middle Easterners will not watch a news program that does not criticize American policies. This is analogous to if there were a news program in the United States supporting Islamic Terrorism: no one would watch it. Governed by the laws of business, this is exactly what news corporations in the United States of America do, such as NBC, CNN, and especially Fox News. The United States needs Qatar more than Qatar needs America. China would be very willing to buy any extra Oil and Gas that Qatar is not able to sell to the United States.
I agree with you that we should start to talk with nations such as Iran and Syria, but The United States will not be able to sway the entire nation of Iran into being pro-American. The larger picture is that the world hates the United States’ foreign policy, and this worldwide view cannot be ameliorated simply by an influx of corporations into rogue nations. Promoting capitalism will not on its own be able to change the hearts and minds of the people. There are many countries in which capitalism exists, yet these countries still have an unfavorable view of The United States. Sometimes, it is necessary that the United States first respect the sovereignty of a nation and its legitimacy to govern, maybe then will relations start to warm up. The United States cannot tell nations what to do, The US must convince and persuade them that it will be to their interest, in this case Iran, to change policies. If the people of Iran have a more favorable view of the United States, then yes, maybe the theocracy in Iran may loosen its grip on power. The reason for the rise of this theocracy was due to the United States meddling in its affairs. “Covert Action” as you put it, would only move popular support in those countries against us. Although the people of Iran might want more social freedoms, maybe they don’t want to be “westernized.” It is safe to say that if the US imposes its policies and ideas on other nations, history will repeat itself.
And yes, two nations that both have Mcdonald’s can have war with each other: take Argentina and Great Britain, or the 40,000 Indian lives lost during strife with Pakistan. All these countries have countless Mcdonald’s franchises.
Having a single-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is a problem in its own. This would not promote peace either, the only viable solution is to have a seperate, autonomous Palestinian state alongside and Israeli State. No sizable number of Israelis or Palestinians support a single state solution, and thus it is only wishful thinking. Peace has not been attained for over 50 years, it is naive to say it can be solved to easily.
Shari’a law does not exist in the United States.
In the end, many of these possible reforms will never be implemented because of too many competing interests and the catastrophic results that these “reforms” would incur.

By: Eftychis

Eftychis — Sun, 15 Apr 2007 03:59:23 +0000

In addition, in response to the idea that the 11th step should be winning the war on terror, I would like to say that the war on terror will never and can never be one. A good analogy could be the phrase in the Decloration of Independence that gives Americans the right to the “pursuite of happiness.” It is not possible to guarantee happiness, but the government can give people the right to pursue it. Our government can not do anything to rid the war of all terrorists, there will always be terrorist attacks. But there are ways that we can make our lives and our nation more secure so that we can defend against the primary threat of Islamic terrorism which as a movement can be combated and defeated.

And also, you said that we are tying to promote capitalism, I do not think that allowing the Iraqi govermnent to nationalize their oil corporations is a good way to promote capitalism.

By: Eftychis

Eftychis — Sun, 15 Apr 2007 03:53:53 +0000

I am in the process of explaining how to go about with these steps. In response to Elizabeth, if you look at how the Bush administration is conducting foreign policy it is isolating our enemies. Iran and Syria are responsible for horrible atrocities all over the world, but by refusing even to acknowledge the state of Iran we push them further towards isolationism, which allows the radical members of their governments to gain power. There is a lot more that the US could be doing. For instance, can someone explain to me how when we are one of Qatar’s biggest natural gas and oil consumer why do we not pressure the government into making the content of state owned Al-Jazeera more pro-American?
On a second note, considering that I am probably the only person here who read the Iraq study group report (please correct me if I am not) I can say that the Baker-Hamilton commission provided strong evidence to increase relations with the “rogue” nations of the middle east. It is important to remember that a vast majority of the Iranian population (whose biggest demographic is under the age of 30) is pro American. The recent release of the British sailors and the de-escalation initiated by the Iranian government was done to gain the support of this younger population that is traditionally hostile to the ayatollah. My point here is that if we recognized the Iranian government and began formal relations with them it would make it easier for US corporations to gain a foothold in the country. Once the country is more open to outside western influences radical Islamic leaders will have a harder time gaining control over the population. As Thomas Friedman says, “No two nations with McDonalds have ever waged war because they both have McDonalds.” Imagine it as the opposite policy of what we did with the Soviet Union. Instead of isolating them to the point of bankruptcy, open them up so that their culture begins to assimilate into western culture and so that they’re economy becomes more reliant on our own.

By: iacopo

iacopo — Sat, 14 Apr 2007 22:49:15 +0000

Step 11: Everyone should just hold hands.

By: Simmons

Simmons — Sat, 14 Apr 2007 21:10:59 +0000

Those are all GREAT ideas, but you haven’t yet stated how to achieve them. Maybe the next post you were talking about will go in to more detail?

By: Elizabeth

Elizabeth — Wed, 11 Apr 2007 23:37:05 +0000

Efty, you might as well say “step 11: Win the war on terror.” Half of these steps are battles within themselves. What would the US have to sacrifice in order to maintain a working alliance of that sort with the EU, which already is upset at the US for its proactive stance on terror? And don’t you think that the Administration is already trying to “open rogue states” to capitalism and western values? How successful have we been so far?

Elizabeth

By: Maria

Maria — Tue, 10 Apr 2007 01:57:18 +0000

Shari Law — you weak suggestion of eliminating Shari Law is too shallow of an argument. I suggest you rule out any religious rules, including all religion doctrine unsupported by federal law.

Pro-American television is nothing else on TV. American is differences, diversity and opinions.

Print - wasting paper.