Saddam still appears to be defying the order. The credibility and relevancy of the U. It was a long war with tremendous fiscal and human cost. What drives someone to want to kill large numbers of his fellow human beings?
Yet there is hope that democracy will continue to grow and eventually flourish in this war-ravaged country.
The good news is that the Taliban regime which gave valuable safe haven to Osama was swiftly overthrown. Saddam could torch oil fields, leading to even higher oil prices, world recession, and an environmental disaster.
Saddam is connected with terrorists and may supply them with weapons of mass destruction. The current disagreement involves essentially how Saddam should be disarmed--by force or by continued U. Saddam continues to fire on U. Retaliatory strikes from Al Qaeda, Hamas, and other terrorists could occur.
Paul Dear Paul Yes, the death of Osama bin Laden would be of no great significance; the one thing the war against terrorism has achieved is to make Osama bin Laden and what he represents the mainstream in most Arab states.
What brings a person to that point? He had recently criticized a number of heavy-handed raids in a fiery sermon. Married with three children and an Imam at a Washington mosque, he was ambitious and had become something of a media superstar.
However, the current belated but welcome efforts to rejuvenate a meaningful Israeli-Palestinian peace process are a sign that western leaders are becoming more aware that the search for a military solution to such problems only leads to more deaths of the innocent on both sides. A Boer general once said: Drone strikes had been used by the military in conventional theaters of war like Afghanistan and Iraq, and later became key to a CIA-led program in Pakistan as the Bush presidency was winding down.
Until we do that we will continue to be hated. Weapons of mass destruction could be launched at Israel or other allies. Saddam is a major threat to stability of the Middle East.
I also believe that the US, the UK and other democracies should not suspend basic human rights and the rule of law in the name of fighting terrorism. I am one of those people who have an allergy to the CIA and the like: You are correct in claiming that the hearts and minds campaign against terrorism has been neglected, but it is not by itself sufficient.
His fear of being discredited before his conservative followers was the greatest influence in his decision to leave, Mr. There is no simple military or political solution. Our smart bombs and dumb tactics will only provoke the same.The administration has continuously avoided the rhetoric and policies of the Global War on Terror, and American interests and lives have paid the price.
1) Democracy feeds terrorism. One of the most frequently cited cons of the "War on Terror" is the exorbitant cost of it, both human and financial, while supporters will often point to individual triumphs, such as the death of Osama bin Laden, as pros. Individual operations in the war against terrorism also have their pros and.
Because this has been a long, costly, unpopular war and there has been no decidedly positive outcome, pros are difficult to ascertain, but perhaps America's single best action in the Iraq war was the removal of a ruthless dictator.
Jul 21, · 1.
what are some pros that have/could come out of the war on terror? 2. what are some cons that have/could come out of the ar on terror?Status: Resolved. Since the World Trade Center attacks of Sep. 11, and the subsequent "War on Terror," the United States has used unmanned aerial vehicles (aka drones) to kill suspected terrorists in Pakistan, Afghanistan, Yemen, Somalia, and other countries.
ultimedescente.com debuts its 50th issue website, http. Please support us by taking a moment to turn off Adblock on ultimedescente.com ‘War against terrorism’: weighing up the pros and cons.
June 16, “War on Terrorism” is a very misleading.Download