http://www.georgesoros.com/excerpt-waronterror

George Soros on the War on Terror:

The 9/11 terrorist attack required a strong response; but the response chosen by the Bush administration carried the United States into a fantasy land created by a misrepresentation of reality. What is worse, people still do not recognize the phantasmagoric element in the War on Terror.

In my interpretation, the War on Terror is a false metaphor. It has been used by the Bush administration to further its own objectives, but those objectives are opposed to the principles of open society and harmful to the national interest.

In reality, terrorists are best dealt with by methods other than waging war. War, by its very nature, claims innocent victims. When it is waged against terrorists who keep themselves hidden, the chances of creating innocent victims are even greater. We find terrorism abhorrent because it kills or maims innocent people to further a political cause. The war on terror evokes a similar response from those who are its victims as the terrorist attacks on 9/11 evoked in us. As a consequence, there are many more people willing to risk their lives to attack Americans today than there were on September 11, 2001.

The fact that waging war on terror sounds so obvious and natural makes it all the more dangerous.

What makes the war on terror a false metaphor is that it is taken literally. Terror is an abstraction. One cannot wage war on an abstraction. We have the means to destroy any target as long as we can identify it, but terrorists rarely provide an identifiable target. When we declare war, we must find a target; but the target we choose is unlikely to be the right one.

We have killed more innocent civilians in Iraq than the terrorists killed on 9/11. In addition to killing, we have also humiliated and tortured many Iraqis. By creating innocent victims, we have advanced the terrorists’ cause. They can now depict us as the terrorists and enlist the support of their countrymen, just as President Bush has enlisted ours. We find this difficult to understand because we cannot envision ourselves as terrorists.

Yet, that is exactly how we appear to many Iraqis.

The Bush administration and its imitators—many foreign governments have been eager to follow its lead—insist that a state cannot commit acts of terror. That contention must be challenged.

The War on Terror is about consequences. The Taliban in Afghanistan supported Al Qaeda, it cost them their whole country and it was handed off to their enemies. Iraq supported terror, funneling money to Palestinian Terrorists, it cost Saddam his country and it was handed off to his enemies. Mohmar Khadaffi did not want to be next.

__________________

Liberal-a person who has his cake, eats his cake, and complains that other people don't have cake, and believes that you should donate your cake to them

The War on Terror is fought using the wrong concept and tools. You cannot defeat terrorism with using a conventional industrialize army. Besides a War on Terror is a War on Ideology. How are you going to have a War on Ideaology????

Terrorism should be fought using Special Forces, Internationa Law Enforcement and a stern centralized international judicial/prosecutorial process and methods.

Terrorism needs support, money and sponsorship. If you make the price of supporting terror too high, it withers and dies from lack of support.

Why do you think we have not been attacked on American soil again? Because of the stellar job Homeland Security is doing? No. It is because the reciprocity for such an action will be REAL Shock and Awe and they know it.

__________________

Liberal-a person who has his cake, eats his cake, and complains that other people don't have cake, and believes that you should donate your cake to them

Terrorist attack when you least expect them too. The 1st time America was hit in 93 and we were not hit again until 01; eight years later.

With our porus opened unmanned southern and northeren borders and non-enforced immigration policies and laws since 911, you can best believe "sleeper terrorist cells" are already here in America.

The theory of "We are killing and fighting terrorist over there--so we don't have to fight them over here (U.S.), is mis-leading and total bullshit denial.

The Shock-N-Awe used in Iraq killed more innocent Iraqis than it killed terrorist. Using Shock-N-Awe to kill terrorist is about as effective as getting rid of a roach infestation using 22-caliber bullets. Wrong concept and Wrong Tool.

Nothing comes out of killing "just terrorists." You want to kill those who would harbor and support terrorists. If a man wants to harbor terrorists in his home, his family should be a target.

__________________

Liberal-a person who has his cake, eats his cake, and complains that other people don't have cake, and believes that you should donate your cake to them

Was it Ideology that hit whe WTC towers, blew a hole in the USS Cole, The train attack in Madrid, and etc?
http://www.militantislammonitor.org/article/id/810
And if you think that is a biased site
http://www.number-10.gov.uk/output/Page7930.asp

__________________
People should not be afraid of their governments. Governments should be afraid of their people.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vp92vkXcC0w

George Soros has some great philanthropic endeavours underway. However, this piece is more of his continuing agenda to smear or undermine President Bush. Of course, that is his right. For those of you unfamiliar with Mr. Soros, here are a few excerpts from a Washington Post article that ran in 2003...

===========================================

George Soros, one of the world's richest men, has given away nearly $5 billion to promote democracy in the former Soviet bloc, Africa and Asia. Now he has a new project: defeating President Bush.

"It is the central focus of my life," Soros said, his blue eyes settled on an unseen target. The 2004 presidential race, he said in an interview, is "a matter of life and death."

In giving $15.5 million to the effort to defeat President Bush, George Soros has filled a gap in Democratic Party finances.

...

Soros, who has financed efforts to promote open societies in more than 50 countries around the world, is bringing the fight home, he said. On Monday, he and a partner committed up to $5 million to MoveOn.org, a liberal activist group, bringing to $15.5 million the total of his personal contributions to oust Bush.

Overnight, Soros, 74, has become the major financial player of the left. He has elicited cries of foul play from the right. And with a tight nod, he pledged: "If necessary, I would give more money."

"America, under Bush, is a danger to the world," Soros said. Then he smiled: "And I'm willing to put my money where my mouth is."

...

His campaign began last summer with the help of Morton H. Halperin, a liberal think tank veteran. Soros invited Democratic strategists to his house in Southampton, Long Island, including Clinton chief of staff John D. Podesta, Jeremy Rosner, Robert Boorstin and Carl Pope.

They discussed the coming election. Standing on the back deck, the evening sun angling into their eyes, Soros took aside Steve Rosenthal, CEO of the liberal activist group America Coming Together (ACT), and Ellen Malcolm, its president. They were proposing to mobilize voters in 17 battleground states. Soros told them he would give ACT $10 million.

========================================

This article can be found at:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A24179-2003Nov10?language=printer

For more info on George Soros, go to:
www.georgesoros.com

or

www.soros.org

Rastman,

You are exactly correct. And I would add cooperation/security building to your list of methods for defeating terrorism. Help weaker nations by training them to govern and police themselves. And the less overt, direct US action the better. People, in general, don't want Americans blatantly dropping bombs in their country. And, in the end, you may create more terrorist than you started with. Training other countries to police austere and ungoverned areas inside their borders is a far better idea.

Guys like Scoody and others don't seem to understand this. When presented with a new problem, people often refer back to old solutions for the answers. I understand this. But, fighting the war on terrorism is so different from what we have done in the past, different skills, goals, advantages and disadvantages.

Iraq is NOT the way to fight this war.