victor809 wrote:I would argue that we have seen very little actual success in waging this war (from any of the presidents... bush/obama/orange moron)...
there is no evidence it is "working" ... just that we are doing something.
Killing off a terrorist is counterproductive if the act of killing them off creates another.
Given the amount of time we have spent in this region, and the number of terrorists we have killed, it would suggest that our activities are somehow increasing their recruiting... otherwise they would have run out by now.
But heck... if we want to waste a bunch of money killing people, I'm not too upset. I just find it laughable when people are surprised that they are trying to kill us back.
Huh?? How are you measuring success?
How is it you know that the successor terrorist is as bad or worse than the one killed?
What's your recruiting data? Particularly as to numbers and quality?
I don't have suggestions about how to defend against terror any better than we are...though, I'm sure there's probably some simple, cheap improvements that can be made that would alienate the military industrial machine.
But, on the whole, I feel pretty safe. We probably have more people murdered in Chicago this week than killed by terrorists in the entire country over the last several years. I was opposed to US troops fighting in Syria and Iraq....and a lot of other places; but I won't argue that we're less safe because of it