Ending Suicide Terrorism By Dr. Ron Paul More than half of the American people now believe that the Iraqi war has made the U.S. less safe. This is a dramatic shift in sentiment from two years ago. Early support for the war reflected a hope for a safer America, and it was thought to be an appropriate response to the 9/11 attacks. The argument was that the enemy attacked us because of our freedom, our prosperity, and our way of life. It was further argued that it was important to engage the potential terrorists over there rather than here. Many bought this argument and supported the war. That is now changing. It is virtually impossible to stop determined suicide bombers. Understanding why they sacrifice themselves is crucial to ending what appears to be senseless and irrational. But there is an explanation. I, like many, have assumed that the driving force behind the suicide attacks was Islamic fundamentalism. Promise of instant entry into paradise as a reward for killing infidels seemed to explain the suicides, a concept that is foreign to our way of thinking. The world's expert on suicide terrorism has convinced me to rethink this simplistic explanation, that terrorism is merely an expression of religious extremism and resentment of a foreign culture. Robert Pape, author of Dying to Win, explains the strategic logic of suicide terrorism. Pape has collected a database of every suicide terrorist attack between 1980 and 2004, all 462 of them. His conclusions are enlightening and crucial to our understanding the true motivation behind the attacks against Western nations by Islamic terrorists. After his exhaustive study, Pape comes to some very important conclusions. Religious beliefs are less important than supposed. For instance, the Tamil Tigers in Sri Lanka, a Marxist secular group, are the world's leader in suicide terrorism . The largest Islamic fundamentalist countries have not been responsible for any suicide terrorist attack. None have come from Iran or the Sudan. Until the U.S. invasion of Iraq, Iraq never had a suicide terrorist attack in all of its history. Between 1995 and 2004, the al-Qaeda years, two-thirds of all attacks came from countries where the U.S. had troops stationed. Iraq's suicide missions today are carried out by Iraqi Sunnis and Saudis. Recall, 15 of the 19 participants in the 9/11 attacks were Saudis. The clincher is this: the strongest motivation, according to Pape, is not religion but rather a desire "to compel modern democracies to withdraw military forces from the territory the terrorists view as their homeland." The best news is that if stopping suicide terrorism is a goal we seek, a solution is available to us. Cease the occupation of foreign lands, and the suicide missions will cease. Between 1982 and 1986, there were 41 suicide terrorist attacks in Lebanon. Once the U.S., the French, and Israel withdrew their forces from Lebanon, there were no more attacks. The reason the attacks stop, according to Pape, is that the Osama bin Ladens of the world no longer can inspire potential suicide terrorists despite their continued fanatical religious beliefs. Pape is convinced after his extensive research that the longer and more extensive the occupation of Muslim territories, the greater the chance of more 9/11-type attacks on the U.S. He is convinced that the terrorists strategically are holding off hitting the U.S. at the present time in an effort to break up the coalition by hitting our European allies. He claims it is just a matter of time if our policies do not change. It is time for us to consider a strategic reassessment of our policy of foreign interventionism, occupation, and nation-building. It is in our national interest and in the interest of world peace to do so.
Very well written, and very informative. Ron Paul is a man who is truely starting to understand foreign policy and not just some cowboy looking to wrangle up some varmits lol.
Hardly going to work. And the solution is not something Ron Paul has written, he is simply quoting Robert Pape.
I like these two, http://www.ronpaullibrary.org/document.php?id=60 August 24, 1998 <==== Pre-9/11 "Wagging" imperialism as bad as the Dog Inconsistent foreign policy is part of the problem -------------------- http://www.ronpaullibrary.org/document.php?id=223 October 22, 2001 U.S. Armed Forces Should Protect American Soil You can read a ton of Dr. Paul's speeches here, http://www.ronpaullibrary.org And almost all radio interviews are archived here, http://www.ronpaulaudio.com You can find books by Dr. Paul here http://www.mises.org/store/search.aspx?Keywords=Paul, Ron and here, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ron_Paul#Books_authored
Ron Paul quotes Robert Pape on suicide terrorism, but he has had this exact same position for 30 years. Pape's study and field of expertise validate Dr. Paul's position.
Osama would love you tokeep thinking this. The more fire we throw at em the more cattle that osama can recruit effortlessly. Again your beliefs are inconsistent with the facts of our foreign policy for the last 30 years. Also you forgot to say that we funded these now al qaida terrorists when they were fighting the soviets. Again a belief based on no hard facts or understandng of the history of foreign policy. You dont fight terror with ignorance.
Osama would love if US follows Ron Paul's policy and practically hand him Iraq and Afghanistan to breed the next gen of terrorists. Islamic terrorism existed long before US invaded their land. US foreign policy has very little to do with the terrorism. AQ never had any help from US. US helped Northern Alliance. Taliban/AQ opposed Northern Alliance because they called it a puppet of US. Osama always hated US. I suggest you to take a loon at the events of Afghanistan prior to 9/11. Yes, you can't fight terrorism with ignorance.
It may have, that is not what I was referring to. So you believe that terrorists are bred, and not recruited. Does this require a terrorist Mommy and Daddy or does the Terrorist Stork drop off the Terrorist baby? Incorrect. US foreign policy has a lot to do with anti-american terrorism. You need to study Robert Pape. This is incorrect. The NA was supported by Russia, India, Turkey and Iran. I suggest you loon at some history. See my first response to you in this post. Terrorists are not born. They don't read the Quran and become terrorists. Bin Laden recruits the disaffected, the angry and the hopeless. He plays up America as the great Satan, and US foreign policy obliges by setting up camp in Saudi Arabia, supporting Saddam Hussein, The Shah, and the Saudi Princes, while giving money to all sides in the middle east, encouraging them to stay in a constant state of conflict. Until this is acknowledged, the only solution will be genocide, because people will continue to ignorantly believe that terrorists are "bred", not recruited.
They are both bred and recruited. You may not be aware, but In Afghanistan, they had madarsas, teaching 12-10 year olds about Jihad and Shahadat. If that's not breeding, I don't know what is. NA was supported by Russia and India, interesting, please provide a link (Not adding credible, as I feel you are not one of the conspiracy nuts) Yes they are not born, but when you start pouring poison in a 10 year old kid's mind, its just not recruiting.
"Islamic terrorism existed long before US invaded their land. US foreign policy has very little to do with the terrorism." Again your completely ignoring facts. Just please answer yes or no to this. Did we not destroy democracy in iran and help to foster an air of hatred by installing the puppet shah who was never popular and never elected to the position of leader in iran. YES OR NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO. Thi sis very easy to answer and impossible to twist the facts!!!! Once i can get an answer either way from you i can explain more. Will osama have fuel to use for recruiting new youngsters if all this hadnt happened and in other countries also? Probably not and most likely on a much smaller scale, and im sorry i have posted many times that we helped to fund much more than the northern alliance. If you want i can find the exact name of the specific group we funded that osama was part of. me and gtech had this debate and after i gathered all the facts he was silent. I have a feeling you will also not respond to these facts. But first of all a simple yes or no would be good enough to the first part of my question. I know the current leader of iran isnt popular and the current youth intellectual movement in iran hates him. but they also know what we did to iran before so its a double edge sword as to who they can trust isnt it?
So you're saying that people are programmed. That's a lot closer to recruitment than it is to breeding. I only took offense at breeding because it implies people are born to a certain disposition, and we've (as a society) overcome racist ideas like that a long time ago. Look up UFI or NA at Wikipedia.
If yes then how can you trust anything that is coming from either our government or the other side because if they did this before and we didnt find out about it until 30 years later than what is to stop them from fooling us again. Ron Paul understand this and this is why he is for non interventionism. He knows that our intelligence agencies and other governmental have gotten so big to the point that they can taint intelligence info and even the president can be fooled or now its vice versa as happened with the iraq war. Fool me once shame on you, fool me a million times shame on me.
Thank you for posting this! This clearly illustrates Ron Paul's significant lack of understanding, and his naive approach to dealing with real threats our country faces. If I had come across this myself, I would have posted it here, just to illustrate how far out this racist nut is!
LOL. The CIA agrees with him. The experts agree with him. The only people that don't agree with him, are war profiteers, CFR ideologues, neo-libs, neo-cons, and policy wonk chicken hawks.
The only REAL threat our country faces is from within. I would beg to argue that thinking and believing that some person who hates our "freedoms" and "democracy" wants to blow us up is naive. And BUSH has bet all on that myth. But judging by his approval rating I don't think its working.
Here goes gtech again with no facts, no explanations and just a blanket statement. Like we all have been saying, the american people are much smarter than this and when any new dp'ers see this thread they will see guerillas posts and then look at your blanket statements lololol.
Source please? Let's see if I can predict which ron paul supporter, ex-cia "expert" you are going to post? Wanna bet? I'd love to see CIA statement and the "experts." However, I've come to expect that when you make dishonest statements, you won't back them up. I wonder why you make so many? Jews? Sounds about like guerilla. "Hey, ron paul isn't a racist, and to prove it, we're going to blame it on the Jews!" Who would terrorists vote for? Ron Paul? This is accurate. Many of those "within" are right here, tearing America down every day, while promoting a racist candidate! You've confused me with yourself. While you don't appear to have any standards, I hold myself much higher than a blame America first ron paul supporter.
Gtech you calling Roan Paul a racist is uncalled for. And please do not try to sling mud on his good name. And those ridiculous sources that you keep pushing over here won't help you either. As far as the enemy within I stand corrected, you know very well who they are...to quote Guerilla "The only people that don't agree with him, are war profiteers, CFR ideologues, neo-libs, neo-cons, and policy wonk chicken hawks." Take your pick.