7 Ways to Stop Terrorism

How to Stop Terrorism: 7 Ways to Drain the Swamp

In the wake of the barbaric Paris terror attack, everyone is debating how to stop further terrorism.

Some say we need more war against Islamic countries … or more spying … or more crackdowns on our liberties.

But – despite what the talking heads may say – the methods for stopping future attacks are well known …

We’ve got to drain the swamp.

I. Stop Supporting the Dictators Who Fund Terrorists

Saudi Arabia is the world’s largest sponsor of radical Islamic terrorists.

The Saudis have backed ISIS and many other brutal terrorist groups.  According to sworn declarations from a 9/11 Commissioner and the Co-Chair of the Congressional Inquiry Into 9/11, the Saudi government backed the 9/11 hijackers (see section VII for details).

Saudi Arabia is the hotbed of the most radical Muslim terrorists in the world: the Salafis (both ISIS and Al Qaeda are Salafis).

And the Saudis – with U.S. support – back the radical “madrassas” in which Islamic radicalism was spread.

And yet the U.S. has been supporting the Saudis militarily, with NSA intelligence and in every other way possible for 70 years.

In addition, top American terrorism experts say that U.S. support for brutal and tyrannical countries in the Middle east – like Saudi Arabia – is one of the top motivators for Arab terrorists.

So if we stop supporting the House of Saud and other Arab tyrannies, we’ll get a two-fold reduction in terror:

(1) We’ll undermine the main terrorism supporters

And …

(2) We’ll take away one of the main motivations driving terrorists: our support for the most repressive, brutal Arab tyrannies

II. Stop Arming Terrorists

We’re arming the most violent terrorists in the Middle East, as part of a geopolitical strategy to overthrow leaders we don’t like (see section III for more details).   And see this, this, this, this and this.

Previously-leaked documents showed that the CIA warned Obama that funding extremist rebels doesn’t work … but Obama decided to fund the Syrian rebels anyway for cynical political gain.

Indeed, the French terrorists who just murdered the cartoonists in Paris apparently just returned from waging war against the Syrian government, where they may – directly or indirectly – have obtained U.S. weapons and training.

And – strangely – we’re overthrowing the more moderate Arabs who stabilized the region and denied jihadis a foothold.

If we want to stop terrorism, we need to stop supporting the terrorists.

III. Stop Imperial Conquests for Arab Oil

The U.S. has undertaken regime change against Arab leaders we don’t like for six decades. We overthrew the leader of Syria in 1949, Iran in 1953, Iraq twice, Afghanistan twice, Turkey, Libya … and other oil-rich countries.

Neoconservatives planned regime change throughout the Middle East and North Africa yet again in 1991.

Top American politicians admit that the Iraq oil was about oil, not stopping terrorism (documents from Britain show the same thing).    Much of the war on terror is really a fight for natural gas.  Or to force the last few hold-outs into dollars and private central banking.

And the U.S. military described terror attacks on the U.S. as a “small price to pay for being a superpower“:

A senior officer on the Joint Staff told State Department counter-terrorism director Sheehan he had heard terrorist strikes characterized more than once by colleagues as a “small price to pay for being a superpower”.

Security experts – including both conservatives and liberals – agree that waging war in the Middle East weakens national security and increases terrorism. See this, this, this, this, this, this, this and this.

For example, James K. Feldman – former professor of decision analysis and economics at the Air Force Institute of Technology and the School of Advanced Airpower Studies – and other experts say that foreign occupation is the main cause of terrorism. University of Chicago professor Robert A. Pape – who specializes in international security affairs – agrees.

We’ve fought the longest and most expensive wars in American history … but we’re less secure than before, and there are more terror attacks than ever.

Remember, Al Qaeda wasn’t even in Iraq until the U.S. invaded that country.

If we want to stop terrorism, we have to stop overthrowing Arab leaders and invading Arab countries to grab their oil.

IV. Stop Mass Surveillance

Top security experts agree that mass surveillance makes us MORE vulnerable to terrorists.

V.  Stop Torture

Top terrorism and interrogation experts agree that torture creates more terrorists.

Indeed, the leaders of ISIS were motivated by U.S. torture.

Once again, we have a very current example:  Paris terrorist Cherif Kouchi told a court in 2005 that he wasn’t radical until he learned about U.S. torture at Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq.

If we want to stop creating new terrorists, we have to stop torturing … permanently.

VI.  Stop Drone Assassinations of Innocent Civilians

Top CIA officers say that drone strikes increase terrorism (and see this).

The CIA – the agency in charge of drone strikes – even told Obama that drone kills can increase terrorism.

If we want to stop creating new terrorists, we have to stop the drone strikes.

VII. Stop Covering Up 9/11

Government officials agree that 9/11 was state-sponsored terrorism … they just disagree on which state was responsible.

Because 9/11 was the largest terror attack on the U.S. in history – and all of our national security strategies are based on 9/11 – we can’t stop terror until we get to the bottom of what really happened, and which state was behind it.

Many high-level American officials – including military leaders, intelligence officials and 9/11 commissioners – are dissatisfied with the 9/11 investigations to date.

The Co-Chair of the congressional investigation into 9/11 – Bob Graham – and 9/11 Commissioner and former Senator Bob Kerrey are calling for either a “permanent 9/11 commission” or a new 9/11 investigation to get to the bottom of it.

The Co-Chair of the Congressional Inquiry into 9/11 and former Head of the Senate Intelligence Committee (Bob Graham) said that the Paris terror attack, ISIS, and other terrorist developments are a result of failing to stand up to Saudi Arabia and declassify the 9/11 investigation’s report about Saudi involvement in 9/11:

The 9/11 chairs, Ron Paul, and numerous other American politicians have called for declassification, as well.

Again, others have different ideas about who was behind 9/11. But until we get to the bottom of it, terror attacks will continue.

Stop Throwing Bodies In the River

Defenders of current government policy say: “we have to do something to stop terrorists!”

Yes, we do …

But we must also stop doing the 7 things above which increase terrorism.  We have to stop “throwing new bodies in the river.”

But the powers-that-be don’t want to change course … they gain tremendous power and influence through our current war on terror strategies.

For example, the military-complex grows rich through war … so endless war is a feature – not a bug – of our foreign policy.

Torture was about building a false justification for war.

Mass surveillance is about economic and diplomatic advantage and crushing dissent.

Supporting the most radical Muslim leaders is about oil and power … “a small price to pay” to try to dominate the world.

A leading advisor to the U.S. military – the Rand Corporation – released a study in 2008 called “How Terrorist Groups End: Lessons for Countering al Qa’ida“.  The report confirms what experts have been saying for years: the war on terror is actually weakening national security (see this, this and this).

As a press release about the study states:

“Terrorists should be perceived and described as criminals, not holy warriors, and our analysis suggests that there is no battlefield solution to terrorism.”

We, the People, have to stand up and demand that our power-hungry leaders stop doing the things which give them more power … but are guaranteed to increase terrorism against us, the civilian population.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

What's been said:

Discussions found on the web:
  1. intlacct commented on Jan 16

    Changing policies with regard to Palestine should have been number 1 or 2. Not a mention? Wow.

    • Mr.Tuxedo commented on Jan 16

      I have a problem with premise #1. If you weaken the monarchy, don’t you effectually facilitate the people of that country to weaken or topple a fragile monarchy? Saudi’s are being challenged internally by a populace that is paid for compliance. Getting Saudi Arabia to change is pretty ethnocentric, especially as it relates to their belief that God and state are inextricably bound. Both countries have hegemonic features, ours is through global governance and hyperpower, while Saudi Arabia’s is a regional one.
      Islamic countries have more in group members and less out group members as compared with the Western world. As Saudi’s look around at the Arab regime changes, don’t expect the monarchy to be dragged kicking and screaming into our Western 21st century so willingly. Allowing women to drive alone is like medieval dental extraction to them. Some countries “cultural lag” move differently. Islamic countries have embraced the technological mechanisms of material culture, but not the non material social part. China functions this way as well.
      Tom Friedman’s million muslim march seems a plea more than a reach, but George Friedman’s article “War Between Two Worlds” helps frame how cultures evolved to present day state.
      To Intlacct’s point, Palestine and the settlements and the great land grab in Israel are other issues that cannot go unaddressed when discussing mitigating terrorism.
      The most unsolvable issue is finding meaningful work and a mondialist sense of purpose for such a large part of the world’s poorest and most vulnerable countries.

  2. Herman Frank commented on Jan 16

    I can only recommend all to read “What Terrorists Want” by Louise Richardson (Random House,239 pp.) She offers a curiously bloodless account of terrorists and terrorism, stripping away the particularities of each unique case of terrorism and finding the fundamental commonalities across all cases of terrorism. So what do terrorists want? While each terrorist group has its own specific policy agenda–the establishment of a national homeland, say, or an Islamic caliphate–each also seeks fundamentally the Three Rs: revenge, renown, and reaction.
    The second half of Richardson’s book focuses on counterterrorism. She bleakly asserts that the U.S. “war on terror,” as currently configured, is unwinnable and that U.S. policy since September 11, 2001, has only made things worse. In her view, our profound fear of another attack–possibly a biological, chemical, or nuclear one–led directly, and illogically, to the ill-considered war in Iraq. And by casting the overall conflict as a good-versus-evil showdown, the Bush administration has not only given the terrorists the recognition and status they seek, but has also set for itself an entirely impossible task. How exactly do you rid the world of evil? You can’t, of course. Therefore, you lose.
    Richardson’s policy recommendations are cogent and sophisticated and turn on a key lesson learned by other states that have faced terrorist threats of their own: deny the terrorists what they want–namely, renown and reaction from us–and treat them simply as if they were criminals. Forget all the talk of war and evil. Infiltrate the terrorists’ ranks, get to know what they are really about, try to separate them from their supportive communities, and get all the help from our allies that we can. In short, beef up our on-the-ground intelligence dramatically so that we can know our enemies better–and, ultimately, defeat them, or at least contain them, far more effectively.

  3. Singmaster commented on Jan 16

    Ditto intlacct.
    If disaffected youths have decent jobs with promising futures, they won’t be inclined to blow up themselves and others. Jobs.

    • Winchupuata commented on Jan 17

      There are millions and millions of disaffected youths everywhere in the world, in Europe, South America, Africa, Asia and even North America with no jobs and no promising futures and none of them are blowing themselves up, there’s much more to it then just lack of jobs.

  4. NoKidding commented on Jan 16

    I agree with all the generalizations. I think most can be lumped into a military isolationism. Some associate isolationism with weakness without considering benefits, primarily the miles between “us” and “them”. I don’t think “their” worldview is broad enough to care much about “us” if we stop reminding them “we’re” here.

    “They” don’t attack Canada . Why bother attacking Canada? That’s my point.
    “They” don’t attack Japan. World’s third largest economy.
    If “we” weren’t policing, “they” would expand by violence? IMO “they’ve” demonstrated inability to stop destroying “themselves first.
    Israel? Much less “our” problem than their own and nearer neighbors.

    Also, you’ve got Afganistan lumped in with oil conquests. if I googled right, their economy generates more export revenue from edible nuts.

  5. rfk commented on Jan 16

    Would it have been cheaper to supply the citizens of all the countries that have been bombed with iPad or like devices and unlimited wireless so that they could see how rest of the world lives and how life could be better for themselves. Perhaps all the creative energies unleashed would dwarf the tyranny and violence they have endured. We not may see significant change unless it’s generated from the ground up.

Posted Under