War on Terror

For discussion purposes SeniorsCAN call upon the United States and Congress to declare the war on terror “ OVER.”

Osama Bin Ladin has been killed… The war is over.

 photo Blog_SCAN_war-terror_zps63537a49.png

We will never be able to kill all of his followers. For every one we do kill, renewed hatred of the U.S. increases as new leaderships emerge.

The killing of Al-Qaeda members or associates is not justified by their assumed connection to 9-11, or warranted by a recognized eminent threat to our national security.

The cost of this “WAR” to date has been a vast expenditure of our capital and resources not only in dollars, but also in lives lost or maimed. To continue making large expenditures, and putting our troops in harm’s way or putting civilians at risk is disproportionate to other needs both military and domestic.

Advertisements

7 responses

  1. Unfortunately killing Bin Laden has not ended Al-Quaeda. There are still those who would still want to bomb us and kill us. Freedom is not free. The will never be an end to war as long as two peoples disagree. Sad but true.

  2. Since there will most likely be terrorist in this world for a long time, then the “War on Terror” could go on indefinitely since it is a general term. The war on Germany and the war on Japan were not general so we could declare those wars over at some point. We have wars on poverty, crime, religion, drugs, etc., that we can never declare over since we will always have them.

    If there was on imminent threat to our national security and we destroyed or spoiled completely that threat, then we could declare that specific threat as being over – but not declaring that all threats in general are over. I don’t think that the word “war” should be used as a general term, but saved for specific military actions against a specific, identifiable enemy.

  3. Although Osama Bin Ladin is a face of terror, he does not personify terror. Actions by the United States to “influence” the behavior and ethic of foreign entities have promulgated a major reaction: causing Americans to live in terror (their brand of “influence”) from foreigners affected by our “help/control.”

    We have said that they are getting”freedom” whether they like it or not, and they had better like it or else (we stop economic aid, trade, etc.) Other factors, at least in the Middle East. include our unquestioning support of how Israelis treat Palestinians and our “convenient but temporary” support of tyrants who do our bidding.

    Although Bin Ladin is dead, there are many others willing to pick up the bloody standard and continue to make our lives as inconvenient and miserable as they perceive that we make theirs. So, no, the so-called “war” will not end, especially until we cease our “soft terror” on others

  4. In a free country with all our rights where do you draw the line. When people are hopelessly terrorized by either a bomb or poison letters do we look the other way and still maintain the attitude that “The War on Terror” is over. I think not. From the Bost\on Tea Party and throughout our journey for independance there are those who don’t hear the cry of freedom. However expensive as it may be, we as a free people should support at all costs our rights to fight those who would change what we have so successfully preserved and protected. Using the word War is what it is, a war.

  5. Christina Dulin-Geyer | Reply

    Terrorism is a state of mind. As long as we think “terror” there will be “terror”….on all levels. We….meaning all human beings on the planet….need to see each other as connected to each other….everything we (in the name of freedom) do to others, effects us directly in myriads of negative ways. It goes on and on.
    I know this sounds unrealistic…..but…..it is the only way to end the madness…. So, it is up to each individual to practice non-violence, love and compassion towards others, and support, in any way we can, organizations, opportunities and options for ending war of any kind, subjugation of others in the name of “democracy/freedom”, and move towards reconciliation with all peoples who have been harmed by the actions of the United States.

    1. When you say “unrealistic”, I agree in the near term, but hopefully we will see the younger generations, with their idealism, showing the way to change as we have seen happen with same sex marriage. Children are not born being haters or having ideologies. Hate needs to be taught through ideologies, fear, and just plain ignorance. We need to examine and understand our own ideologies, fears, and ignorance before we condemn others using our ideologies, fears, and ignorance.

  6. The FISA (Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act) court – what is it, how does it work, and what are the problems with it and possible solutions?
    The FISA court originally focused on approving government requests for wiretap orders. But during the past 6 years, after major legislative changes, it has become a sort of parallel Supreme Court and the ultimate arbiter of surveillance issues. The FISA court, for example, has given the National Security Agency (NSA) the power to collect a huge pond of “metadata” on Americans. FISA judges have also expanded the use in terrorism cases of the legal principle of the “special needs” doctrine (when intrusion is minimal and danger to the public overriding), carving out an exception to the Fourth Amendment’s requirement of a warrant for searches and seizures.
    There is no adversarial process, as the FISA court hears only one side of a request. Its findings are rarely made public. There are 11 FISA judges working in rotating shifts; all are appointed by the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court (currently Justice Roberts). Almost all of the government surveillance orders have been signed by a single judge. Ten of the FISA judges are Republican appointees to the lower federal courts. Last year, the FISA court signed approximately 1,800 orders; none of the requests from intelligence agencies were denied. (An appeal is possible in the discretion of the Chief Justice, who would appoint a single judge to review the matter.) Is the FISA court a post-9/11 rubber stamp?
    Suggestions for change: (1) Have each of the 9 Supreme Court justices take a turn making FISA court appointments to enhance ideological diversity and dissipate the enormous power vested in a single person. (2) Create subtle checks and balances and congressional oversight by sending a copy of all FISA decisions (or at least declassified summaries) to the House and Senate Intelligence Committees. (3) Declassify and make public a summary of some of the court’s decisions, creating a more informed public to instill confidence in the government’s national security efforts. (4) Other suggestions . . . . ?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: