Monday, December 27, 2010

Eliminate terrorism? Get real.

Harry Browne, a libertarian thinker, wrote an article, "What can we do about terrorism?" published in In it he attacks conventional wisdom on terrorism. He starts the discussion by laying out seven ground rules for understanding terrorism: (1) No solution is going to be perfect; (2) The issue is not Muslim fundamentalists attacking America, it is Muslim fundamentalists defending themselves from American aggression in their countries; (3) Bombing does not defuse terrorism, it provokes it; (4) Because the war is not between the U.S. and another government, terrorism is a criminal matter, not a military one; (5) If you think we have a right to be in Iraq and Afghanistan, apply the Golden Rule and ask yourself how you would feel if a detachment of, say, Chinese troops were in your city and attacking Americans; (6) "Don't assume that just because the government has the legal authority to do something that it will actually succeed. So be careful what you ask for;" and (7) There is no possible way to eliminate terrorism in the world -- it has existed since Biblican times. These rules should be common sense, but our "state-run media" have brainwashed Americans to the contrary.

Mr. Browne then wrote that we have a choice between war and peace. If we choose war, we fuel the terrorists desire to attack us.  No one (that is not bribed by us) supports us in war. If we will risk peace, it is very likely that the death and destruction will end immediately.

He then suggests four principles that we should adopt and proposes a Constitutional amendment to implement them. The principles are: (1 & 2) Non-interference: no military action in other countries and no foreign aid; (3) Secure ourselves against attack by updating our missile and border defenses. Mr. Browne thinks that our Defense Department is incompetent to handle the task, and suggests that the feds should offer a $25 billion reward to the private contractor who can set up a competent defense system; (4) If we are threatened by a foreign ruler, target the ruler, say with a $100 million reward for his assassination (including by his wife and closest aides), sparing his people.

I'm not completely sure about that last one; but I am completely convinced that peace will serve our interests far better than war. And peace through strength will protect us far better than START treaties that give away the store.

No comments: