 |
Better Than CNN / News Archives / The Opinion: September 5, 2007 |
Nic: Is it possible to win the war on terror?
Jimm: It's not possible. To win the war on terror is to become a terrorist.
Nic: Does that make sense though?
Jimm: Yeah. What? Of course it does. Come on.
Nic: Does it though? To win the war on terrorism is to become a terrorist? I mean...
Jimm: Because where does it stop? In order to "win" the "war," you'd have to eliminate every possible terrorist threat, and if they're a possible threat, and you eliminate them, you become a terrorist.
Nic: That's not terrorism though, is it? Eliminating a perceived threat to your own country?
Jimm: Eventually, it would become terrorism. Once all the major threats are eliminated, the "war" wouldn't be over, because we'd just become more nitpicky on what a terrorist is.
Nic: Yes. I was gonna say it's not possible because terrorism is an idea, and ideas are bulletproof.
Jimm: Here's how it goes: "In order to determine if we could 'win' the 'war' on terrorism, we first need to define what a terrorist is. I just ended a sentence with a preposition. Does that make me a terrorist?"
You know this is bullshit, right? Like, "what makes America the greatest country in the world?"
Death penalty.
Nic: But seriously, it's not possible. It's a war that can't be won. And we're spending millions of dollars a day on it.
Jimm: Yeah, you can't win it because you could always redefine "terrorist" and pick another person to label.
Nic: But do we stop fighting, at the expense of national security? Or does being the leader in the war on terrorism make us an even bigger terrorist target than we were before?
Jimm: I say, the right move is to be defensive, not offensive. The war in Iraq is not the war on terror.
Nic: I agree with your last statement. Instead of seeking out an enemy that cannot be conquered, we need to reevaluate our strategy and become more defensive. By focusing on being defensive against terrorism, our country can continue to focus on the goal of protecting American citizens with out having to risk the lives of thousands of American soldiers by seeking out terrorists around the globe. Which is a strategy that has so far only succeeded in increasing global terrorist attacks. Protecting our citizens and our country’s homeland effectively will prove to be a more efficient tool in defeating terrorism than going on the global offensive to seek out unknown and unending terrorist attackers.
Jimm: If we'd just shut up, we'd stop getting bombed.
Nic: But what about 9/11, Clinton didn't do anything and then you know what happened.
Well, he did spend a lot of money on anti-terrorist operations, but the U.S. wasn’t as much of a public authority on terrorism.
Jimm: Yeah I don't know. Here's what I say:
1. Get out of Iraq. (I know there are reasons not to get out of Iraq, but come on. Shit or get off the pot. And we've been shitting for a long time.)
2. Impeach Bush. PRESIDENT CHENEY BABY.
Nic: But Iraq is now terrorism central.
It's hilarious how Bush says that we can't leave Iraq because Iraq is a central piece in the war on terror, but before we invaded Iraq there weren't even terrorists there. Now al-Qaeda is swimming around waiting for us to leave.
Jimm: Bush: "Iraq is a central piece in the war on terror."
Terrorists: "Seriously? Let's go."
Nic: No kidding. "Yeah, we better get over there quick then."
Jimm: I am just glad I don't actually have any power to make decisions. Let's leave that to the Republicans.
|
by Nic Barnett |
©2007 Better Than CNN.