Is it possible that the end game of decentralized terror strategy demands counter terrorist activities pursue peace, coalition work and better disaster planning? To elimate terrorism nations must abandon war, war machines and unilateral action? Would the world be brave enough to try that as the logical response?
It is a crazy position catch-22 that terror may best be combated with peace, disengagement and stability BUT disengagement is the demand of the terror operatives meaning that as we "combat terrorism" we give them their demands and therefore likely inspire more terrorism.
This is not crazy talk of a peace activist. This is in the Armed Forces Journal by a Lt. Col in the Army and retired Special Forces Officer.
We must have the courage and the bravery to fight terrorism not with extra power to the state to kill and torture but with the wisdom to deescalate fighting and police work.
Link: ARMED FORCES JOURNAL - What if there is no terrorist network? - August 2007.
a superficial or simplistic understanding of the intricately complex global Islamic extremist revolution arguably lies at the heart of our uneven performance thus far in the war on terrorism. Sun Tzu's warning about knowing one's enemy rings ominously as we continue to appear grotesquely unfamiliar with the nature of our adversaries and their ongoing metamorphosis while simultaneously demonstrating confusion about our own roles and optimal organizational configuration.
