• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Should the West place troops on the ground to take out terrorists?

Should the West place troops on the ground to take out terrorists?

  • Yes

    Votes: 5 16.7%

  • No

    Votes: 22 73.3%

  • Not sure

    Votes: 3 10.0%
  • Total voters
    30
JANFU said:
That was the point I thought I was making. Killing a terrorist no issues- the problem we have seen in Yemen is that collateral damage leads to recruitment.
Problem is the family travels with them. Review the drone attacks in Yemen and Pakistan as an example. Causes more problems on average than problems solved
The US has spent a lot of money in Yemen which is going thru a civil war. Both sides trying to take power are in a long running conflict with AQ in Yemen.
Reason whey the West and the Sunni should provide training and weapons.
The underlying causes also need to be addressed. But that should not be a western problem. Leave it to Saudi, Qatar, UAE and such to pay for all training and weapons.
Trying to instil western values on a medevil society ain't gonna work.
Click to expand...

The point here isn't to kill them after they've already attacked, it's to prevent an attack in the first place. If we let them know that, should they attack, there will be severe consequences, define the consequences clearly and be willing to carry out the consequences, maybe we can prevent some of the attacks. We aren't going to instill western values but we certainly can instill some good old fashioned human fear into them.
 
Cephus said:
Oh, if you want to go back in history, you have to go back to post-WWI where the west simply drew a bunch of line son a map and declared this to be the Middle East. Then they took a bunch of ignorant Bedouin in Saudi Arabia, said they needed someone to negotiate with and declared them the ruling family. Yes, there have been tons of problem, lots of mistakes, but you can't go back and fix them, you have to live in the now. How do we solve these problems now. Be sure to let us all know your solutions without whining about how awful the past was, won't you?
Click to expand...

I understand your point. Problem is, there's no movers and shakers within the Islamic world today who remember those days just following WWI. On the other hand, there's MANY movers and shakers (among both Sunnis and Shi'a) who personally remember what we did in the 1950's.
 
Glen Contrarian said:
Um...which religion has killed the most people in the name of their god? Here's a hint: it's not Islam.
Click to expand...

All religions suck and given half a chance, turn to violence. That doesn't mean that the religion that is most dangerous *TODAY* isn't Islam.
 
apdst said:
So?.....
Click to expand...

So you don't approach every situation and every enemy the same way. Putting US troops on the ground against a nation state is completely different than a non-governmental organization that doesn't recognize borders. In fact, it's not even the infrastructure itself of one organization, it's an idea that has been used to recruit to organizations with different infrastructures at different times.
 
iliveonramen said:
So you don't approach every situation and every enemy the same way. Putting US troops on the ground against a nation state is completely different than a non-governmental organization that doesn't recognize borders. In fact, it's not even the infrastructure itself of one organization, it's an idea that has been used to recruit to organizations with different infrastructures at different times.
Click to expand...

The fundamentals of combat are the same, no matter who the enemy is. The objective is and will always be to destroy the enemy's will to wage war. The only way to do that is to, "cause more damage than the enemy, in the least amount of time".

The whole, " hearts and minds", thing is nothing more than a political catch phrase that has no value, tactically.
 
No, I don't think that the West should place troops on the ground to take out terrorists. Whether you send troops in or not there will always be terrorist groups, and why waste resources facing terrorists when you could be saving them for a much larger conflict.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom