WI: War on Terrorism fights ALL forms of terrorism.

Ok, as we all know, The United States and Allies are at war with Terrorism. However it obvious that the only form of terrorism being targeted is Islamic Jihadist Terrorism (IE: Al-Queda, Taliban, Hezbolah etc.). Here is my WI.

How is it possible for the United States to take a (military) stance against ALL forms of terrorism. Both abroad and domestic. This includes Christian Terrorism (Abortion Bombers), Communist Terrorism , Eco Terrorism, ext.
 

Keenir

Banned
Ok, as we all know, The United States and Allies are at war with Terrorism. However it obvious that the only form of terrorism being targeted is Islamic Jihadist Terrorism (IE: Al-Queda, Taliban, Hezbolah etc.). Here is my WI.

How is it possible for the United States to take a (military) stance against ALL forms of terrorism. Both abroad and domestic. This includes Christian Terrorism (Abortion Bombers), Communist Terrorism , Eco Terrorism, ext.

weren't we already at war with those other forms? or are you claiming the FBI is lying about investigating them?
 
weren't we already at war with those other forms? or are you claiming the FBI is lying about investigating them?

Well that's just it. All that happens with the other forms is Investigations and accusations. The only form of Terrorism that The US is actually at war over is Islamic Jihadist Terrorism.
 
Ok, as we all know, The United States and Allies are at war with Terrorism. However it obvious that the only form of terrorism being targeted is Islamic Jihadist Terrorism (IE: Al-Queda, Taliban, Hezbolah etc.). Here is my WI.

How is it possible for the United States to take a (military) stance against ALL forms of terrorism. Both abroad and domestic. This includes Christian Terrorism (Abortion Bombers), Communist Terrorism , Eco Terrorism, ext.

I heard this exact argument from one of Australia's most respected crime reporters.

He threw in the IRA, and even Sinn Fein, into his conception of a 'zero tolerance' approach. This was back around 2002.

But the problem with that is it would destroy the work of the UK government's entire Norn Ireland policy of the Thatcher years and after (if Britain were to adopt a "we'll fight 'em all" approach, that is). And that policy was actively endorsed by Clinton, so it's not just a local concern.

Because, in it's purest form, TWOT as we know it precludes negotiations.

(The US relations with the Palestinian Authority since the election of Hamas in Gaza is a case in point.)
 
Well that's just it. All that happens with the other forms is Investigations and accusations. The only form of Terrorism that The US is actually at war over is Islamic Jihadist Terrorism.
How do you propose that the United States 'go to war' with, for example, 'Christian terrorists' blowing up US aortion clinincs?
 
National Guard and/or Army raiding Christian Terrorist strongholds within the USA. Kind of like Mexico's war on the drug cartells.
I see.

Well, for a start, there's going to have to be mor eof them, and they're going to have to do something particularly nasty to get attention on the level of the folks who engineered 9/11.

The US might not especially like certain groups, but there have to be priorities. I can't seem to recall any really high-casualty eco-terrorist acts, same with most other types of terrorism.

And the US certainly isn't going to go chasing down people like the IRA with the same vigor reserved for people that actually attack us.
 

Keenir

Banned
Well that's just it. All that happens with the other forms is Investigations and accusations. The only form of Terrorism that The US is actually at war over is Islamic Jihadist Terrorism.

uh-huh. read about the wackos the US has been fighting inside its borders. Waco wasn't alone, and few of them were by Jihadis.

National Guard and/or Army raiding Christian Terrorist strongholds within the USA. Kind of like Mexico's war on the drug cartells.

except that there aren't strongholds per se - there are churches where these folks attend, and there are people who kill abortion doctors...but that doesn't mean that they hole up in discrete populations.
 
Ok, as we all know, The United States and Allies are at war with Terrorism. However it obvious that the only form of terrorism being targeted is Islamic Jihadist Terrorism (IE: Al-Queda, Taliban, Hezbolah etc.). Here is my WI.

How is it possible for the United States to take a (military) stance against ALL forms of terrorism. Both abroad and domestic. This includes Christian Terrorism (Abortion Bombers), Communist Terrorism , Eco Terrorism, ext.

You'd have to have a different pres elected in 2000, one that doesn't single out Arab nationalist terrorism. (And that's what Al Qaeda is far more than Jihadist. Islam provides a means for organizing around, but the main motivations are political, not religious.)

Neither Gore nor Bush would have the kind of focus you're looking for. I don't see any reason Gore would go after any form of terrorism other than the one directly responsible for 9-11.

Also some of the forms you fear are not as dangerous on the same level. Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but last I checked the only fatalities eco "terrorists" (really, more like glorified vandals) had caused were to themselves, when two idiots blew themselves up with a bomb they were carrying. OK, some of the animals they "set free" die because they're domesticated and unable to live in the wild, but no humans. Perhaps if you count the Unabomber, but few people could really make head or tail of what he was supposedly trying to accomplish.

And outside of fading rebel groups in Colombia, Peru or India, I can't think of any Communist terrorists of concern.

Like others point out, how counterproductive would it be to go after the communties of abortion doctor killers, etc? We want police to catch the one(s) who did it, not punish every member of their church.
 

Nikephoros

Banned
You'd have to have a different pres elected in 2000, one that doesn't single out Arab nationalist terrorism. (And that's what Al Qaeda is far more than Jihadist. Islam provides a means for organizing around, but the main motivations are political, not religious.)

Well, most people use religion as cover for political ends. I can't think of a single Jihadist group that doesn't have political goals. Their just usually consider "Islamic terrorists" because they use religious rhetoric.
 
The Taliban has a physical presence and a place were war can be taken to them, how do you go to war with abortion terrorists; invade the deep south?
 

Nikephoros

Banned
The Taliban has a physical presence and a place were war can be taken to them, how do you go to war with abortion terrorists; invade the deep south?

I'll take that a step further. Al Qaeda in Iraq (Which really is a totally different organization. They just affiliate with Al Qaeda.) is in Iraq. We can take the war to them anywhere in Iraq. But they hide amongst the people. The only reason we could hurt them is because they were an organized group. Abortion clinic bombers aren't. )Neither are the eco terrorists--If they had a heirarchy, they'd have been stopped. But they're very nebulous, so their criminal activities happen at an extremely low rate. I'm much more worried about gangs.). If they were, it would be possible to hunt them down.
 
Well that's just it. All that happens with the other forms is Investigations and accusations. The only form of Terrorism that The US is actually at war over is Islamic Jihadist Terrorism.

Thats because Christian fundamenatlist and radical leftist terrorists are tiny and feeble compared to the Islamiic fundamentalist groups.
 
I very much dubt there are that many compounds that goes unraided for the lack of armed units, considerering the amount of SWAT forces in the US.

As for groups abroad, I'm under the impression that US forces are out fighting groups they designated terrorists at places where the local goverment are unable. This is mostly done with Special Forces and a smaller footprint. I posted a story about US supporting the hunt for Lord's Resistance Army in Africa, they trained Georgian forces to help them fight Checyen terrorists using Georgian territory (somewath ironic), I'm pretty sure they are active in Colombia and I somehow got the impression they where involved in Sri Lanka (or else, they delegated it to the Brittish?)

So what is missing?

Edit (Wiki of course)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Long_Range_Reconnaissance_Patrol_(Sri_Lanka)
 
Last edited:
Top