A New RULE: Combating Terrorism Nonviolently

The world has seen great changes since 9-11, great enough to get into the entire human history's hall of fame. Just comparing the world we know today with what we knew five years ago will shock any concerned mind, especially if you are in a developing country. Changes are there in all aspects, not only in politics. We now divert our attention to terrorism, as it has arisen in the past few years. Various countries have taken steps to increase security after attacks on the World Trade Center and the United States' Pentagon ignoring the fact that increases in security lead to decreases in fundamental rights of humanity.

Socio-Political changes are sweeping the globe and affecting economic systems at grass root levels. Every nation is in conflict with other and in a broader sense world peace is at stake. Many organizations including governments, law enforcement agencies, counterterrorism wings and task forces have established set of rules and methods to counter terrorism in an affective and legitimate way but none of them have been able to produce satisfactory results.

Terrorism is growing like child grows in mother's womb and new forms of terror have always been introduced by terrorists. As it is difficult to define terrorism it becomes impossible to outline one set of rules or methods to counter terrorism. Terrorism is a parasitic phenomenon also when network roots are found in organized crime. Abrupt Geopolitical changes, Bad Governance and Power-Vacuum create a fertile ground for corruption and organized crime. Terrorism sponsored by organized crime becomes difficult to counter and easy to illustrate.

Naturally speaking the probability of one man's actions is unlimited but the probability of motives behind these actions is comparably limited in this systematic world of occurrences. Nature created us, and we are forced to exist with the qualities that were imposed upon us. It is as if we were only semi-intelligent beings: intelligent only to the degree that we are aware of the fact that our actions are determined by the characteristics and the qualities that are inherent in us, and that we cannot go against them. If we are at the mercy of nature, then there is no predicting where this wild, unreasonable nature can lead us, constantly causing conflict between individuals and entire nations, who, like wild animals, are engaged in a vicious struggle of the instincts. Yet, subconsciously, we cannot reconcile the idea of ourselves on the one hand, and primitive beasts on the other.

With all understanding terrorists are humans driven by influential motives affecting their cognition and forming set of user defined rules and methods to make unlawful change in political, social, ethnic and religious levels. If humans are not part of any terrorist activity then concept of aliens and animals as terrorists would have been evolved.

An embarked strategy of reporting of unexpected behavior, patterns, or events that might signal an intensified or immediate terrorist threat has been implemented leaving a big question mark behind that what exactly should be recognized as important, reportable indicators and events that security and law-enforcement professionals need to know about. One can consider this as solution to combat terrorism in developed countries where infrastructure is strong enough to facilitate civilians or authorized personals to initiate instant alerts or messages. Some see democratization as a potentially successful counterterrorism strategy and by others as taking a backseat to the U.S.'s war on terrorism. The theory behind democratization as a counterterrorism strategy is that democratic institutions and procedures provide peaceful avenues for individuals to criticize government actions and, therefore, prevent the need to resort to violence. On the other hand, the severe repression indicative of non-democratic governments pushes moderate opposition and criticism underground and encourages the type of political extremism that leads to terrorism.

After 2001 measures has been taken to counter terrorism globally under the title "War against Terror". No doubt it's a great initiative but still is not promising a coherent and unified system to counter terrorism by non violent means. Killing a terrorist doesn't help solving the equation of terrorism rather it invites uninvited humans as terrorists. At present scenario best breed method is working at morality level and creating an international networked community rejecting terrorism and organized crime.

We need to encourage the use of non-violent means in order to express ourselves, whether here in our society or anywhere around the world. We need to go back to doing the right thing. For us as a society and as a world community not to stand up and do justice and bring those who have committed these atrocities and crimes against humanity, we will be failing the most fundamental rules of humankind, which is to allow the collective interest of the people to prevail and to allow the interest of the people to be protected, both as individuals and as a group.

We need a "A Unified System to Combat Terrorism by non-violent means" basing on a new model of knowledge unification. The unification of knowledge has great implications in philosophy, and even psychology. "Textbooks" may not talk much about it, if they might do. Even in physics, which is a branch of knowledge with extreme importance, theoretical physicists seek a unified theory of universe, which they believe will be the ultimate theory explaining everything. Specifically in context of terrorism research concludes that, "When Unification Engine reduces and represents complex entity as simple entity in multidimensional knowledge forest, it formulates and factors out a common representation that maps directly abstract representation to its relationships. Entity represents type of organization, and motives behind actions represent the path to the entities (cross-links)."

Militarily, special Ops is the way to go in the asymmetrical warfare of the West vs Global Islamic Jihad. The enemy fights at the squad level or smaller, not battalion. Special ops excel at fighting at that level. They move fast, hit hard. They are our strongest, smartest, bravest soldiers.

Political digressions aside, militarily, this is a smart move.

Okay ABC, let's see if you can grasp this. Apparently, you're completely unaware of how people really feel in this country about what's going on. Most will say that they can't believe what's happening within our government, as well as stating there's a dire need for change. We're more concerned with petty countries and their citizens than we our with our own...hint,N.O. I ask them why don't we stand together so changes can be made for the better? They tell me that it doesn't matter because even when they express themselves their voices are not being heard. For the average person there's no sign of order or resoluteness as to where our country should be going...except for the reality that it's citizens are taking the brunt for all rash decisions being made by an inept President and his cabinet. If that doesn't spark memories of an ideal situation for revolution I'll step back and view this country, as well as its governing principles like a comic book.

Vietnam anyone?

The mess in Vietnam was caused by Washington's meddling in the affairs of commanders (who knew what the hell they're suppose to be doing -- getting the rats out). It got so bad they had to radio Washington and ask which hand they can wipe their butt with.

If that's returning again, Bush is but another Nixon.

Troops have to have leniency to accomplish their mission, not wait for orders while politicos count the cost in the polls. "Command and control" can turn out to be "Command and strangle" if abused and screwed up royally (like in Somalia).

SandyK

Ray
Unless you can articulate, please don't bother to comment with vague, sony playstation, comic book inspired messages.

Isnt it time to pull out of the Middle East, including Isreal, and let the various groups take care of each other (Kill each other off) since they are the best at doing it and not have the US to blame? Shouldnt we focus our attention at home and circle the wagons? Surely the hundreds of billions of dollars spent abroad would have better been spent on kindness abroad and at home. Now we are locked into militaristic spending just to cover our own asses! The Bush administration disgusts me.

I'll make this short, but not sweet...the CIC is nothing but a figure-head being guided by his Hitleresque cabinet. He's a megalomaniac that needs to be stopped in his tracks. There's a revolution brewing...the terrorist will soon be the majority of the American public.

Bush continues to state that we are making progress. What is bizzare about this statement it is not us who must believe or stand as judges of progress.

Until, Iraqis see real change in their lives and began to see American troops depart their country the insurgency will continue. Bush plays to his dwindling base by avoiding the connection between insurgency and US troop presence.

Bush seems to be totally unable to grasp that giving ideological speeches are not a replacement for sound logic. Perhaps,
he is insane: since, he keeps saying 'Stay the Course' in the face of public distrust of his policies as if he expects a different result.

Yes it is true that when the president speaks this is news; however, the media once had a role in society to be a watchdog of government activites. Today, most seem to not press for facts or details instead they seem to move from one fire to the next with no stated purpose except to turn profits.

Gen. Abazaid stated before Congress a few days ago that Iraq had not three ready batallions but one, Bush states today that there are 80 batallions fighting along side US troops. Meanwhile, the media yawns.

C'mon US media and do your job!!

Karl,
Your comment on being trained at the Depot in San Diego versus Paris Island is insightfully ignorant.
What is your arguement or basis for that statement?

The war on terror is a war on individuals.

As a US citizen...you are an individual...if you aren't a part of the problem.

The "war" is coming your way.

The pattern is established.

Think about it...

Regarding the issue of life experience. I went through basic training at the Marine Corps Recruit Depot in San Diego. I suppose if I had been trained at Paris Island, I would have been a much better Marine. Sorry about that.

Here are my rules:
1. If you attack the U.S. you have two choices: a. you can surrender b. you can die.

Here is what I understand:
Usama bin Ladin is not dead.
Usama bin Ladin is not in a U.S. prison.
Lots of other people are dead or in jail but not Usama bin Ladin. The conclusion I have drawn from this evidence is that the war on terror is a failure. I think somebody had to say it, and so I just did.

Well some thing does not seem right in all this. Also I think Jim is wrong as the Fr. already knew that the country had been lost before we started the fight in Vietnam. Hard to win the cities when the village is already lost. Jo

Huh?
SOCOM doesn't has no "area of operations" and in this plan (according to you) only has the responsibility to "synchronize" operations whereas Regional Combatant Commanders 'own' the land. This doesn't change anything, regional Combatant Commanders STILL control all operations inside their area of responsibility.
Karl, you left something out - please go back, do more research, and tell us the REST of the story...

Before our Pentagon was bombed we were buying anthrax vaccine from the enemy. We arrested every executive of Istratex for supplying the Pentagon with 750,000 defective Chem/bio suits. We arrested 32 of 36 people that were working on computer software for the Whitehouse & FBI. 636 soldiers lived their final moments after being hit in Humvees with no armor. The Sec.of the Army, Thomas White came into $12.5 million from Enron before traveling to Seattle & Florida (on Army Jets) to sell multi-million dollar homes before he resigned in disgrace. Mr.Roche, Secretary of the Air Force was fast asleep as dozens of female cadets were raped in our United States of America Air Force Training Academy. Commandants Krulac and Jones were absolutely content to kill several dozen bright young Marine pilots with the V 22 helicopter in pursuit of a $47 Billion dollar contract. We watched China implement fiber optics communications in Iraq & Cuba before our EP-3 was knocked out of the sky by China in early 2001. Being totally unable to monitor fiber optics, we claim a total intelligence failure - as China held our crew and airplane long enough to prove to Saddam that he could, hide, bury or move W.M.D.
without the U.S. being aware.
THE POINT IS; Today's Government and military leaders couldn't slap their own ass. When hundreds of thousands of ENEMY
dropped their weapons and walked away---we
should have gathered them up and started a march towards Kuwait. If we had a plan, if we had a brain, we would have added troops to march combatants south to a major prison camp. We would have solved Iraq's
problems in six weeks, releasing 1,000 peaceful prisoners per week. By incarcerating the Republican Guard, providing food/water, religous functions,and decent treatment the former Saddam grunts would have looked forward to going home to begin a new life.(in a new country, new way of life)

Today's "Leaders" in any capacity will not get a second opportunity to get it right the first time.

The only difference between the Iraq Warand the Vietnam War is that we killed 56,000 more soldiers in Vietnam before our government sold our effort down the river.
Communists took over all of South Vietnam within one month of our soldiers being pulled out.

Seems we've learned nothing, but the final moments of each and every fatally wounded soldier, remains dead cold final.

It is the cereal industry: Expensive, fancy packaging without substance and the big sell.

The War on Terror is like the War on Drugs. No definable goal. You can't win anything without a defineable goal. The team captains will end up with a highly political role with everyone pointing fingers and heading for the exits with the next FUBAR

Has Karl established the validity of his questions?

Willis - the majority of insurgents in Iraq are precisly those who have been directly affected by U.S. bombs, bullets and bull----. It's pretty safe to say that almost no one in Iraq is better off today than they were before the invasion.

This isn't post-WWII Germany or Japan. Not even remotely. We are the aggressor here. Had "liberation" been the agenda from the jump we would have had plans and resources in place to rebuild what we destroyed from day 1. Instead, we brought contractors, foreign investors and troops in to the U.S. occupied Green Zone for party time for the first 6 months while Iraqi citizens had no water or electricity, had to live in sewage, rubble and a destabilized security environment. Not to mention depleted uranium's use in an urban environment!

Iraqi civil society wasn't on DoD's screen and the State Department was shuffled off stage and into the audience. No - this has not been a humanitarian mission despite the rhetoric we'd like to feed ourselves to justify our actions. The facts just don't support it.

Terrorism, by nature, cannot be defeated with battlefield weaponry, massive logistical operations and large troop presence. Moving away from conventional war strategy is absolutely imperative - a no brainer. Moving SOCOM into the lead makes perfect sense from a military standpoint. But the larger questions have yet to be raised:

What makes us think that Special Ops will be effective in defeating terrorism rather than fueling it?
Will U.S. clandestine operations, beyond the scrutiny of oversight, translate into death squads, political assassinations, mafia-type state-sponsored terrorism perpetrated by the U.S. on a global scale?
How does the building of training bases and prisons (to be directed by, and in part run by, SOCOM) in North Africa, the Middle East and SE Asia serve to encourage international cooperation rather than international resentment and backlash?

USSOCOM, in partnership with USSTRATCOM, is by definition the world's secret police force. It's the manifestation of an age-old vision totalitarian regimes in less technologically advanced times have only dreamed of. But this vision, like those in the past, still fails to take into consideration the reality of how the human spirit responds to political repression, economic oppression and military aggression.

USSOCOM will be no more successful in ensuring Western security than the gestapo was in securing WWII Germany's. It's the same model that has failed over and over in the past.

The only way to resolve conflict is through either 1) anniliation (and we are talking billions of people here) or 2) finding ways to share power and resources so that people have adequate living conditions and a say in how they are governed and the policies that effect their lives. USSOCOM is designed for but one of those options and given the scope of its tasking, it will have to be given real power, money and freedom to accomplish it's mission. Personally, I'm not looking forward to it.

Charles, our terrorism problem is largely NOT with the "survivors of times we blew things up". (How come there weren't huge numbers of German and Japanese terrorists after WW2?) Most of the terrorists who came after us in the 1990s and in 9/11 came from countries where we'd never blown anything up (Saudi Arabia, Egypt). Some of them were Afghan veterans, but if they were mad at the people who blew them up, they should have gone after Russia, not us. As for Iraq today, they're not mad because we're blowing things up so much as because we're simply there.

Karl seems to be totally in the dark.Maybe it's the metal in his head or maybe it's his lack of life experiences.
Since the freaky, bar crowd doesn't have an interest in serving, or a clue, a smaller more effective military is paramount.
If you were a special operations soldier, who would you want running the war on terror, a commander who understands your mission,or someone who understands beach assaults and artillery.

Karl, that's my read of it.

The military is great at blowing things up and killing people.

It is not very good at avoiding the creation of a very large and angry group of survivors in the process of doing what it does so well.

This is one reason we have civilian oversight, avoid assigning the military law enforcement duties, and otherwise misusing their very valuable talents.

Charles of MercuryRising
www.phoenixwoman.blogspot.com

Good idea, but let's see how it is managed, and -more important- how much political muscle will be behind it for enough time for it to be fruitful.

It takes unconventional forces to fight an asymmetrical threat. It's a simple fact. Giving SOCOM ultimate responsibility is a viable solution. But SOCOM must coordinate with the intelligence community for counterterrorism operations to be successful. Remember that the GWOT is a new dig for us. We won't get everything right right away. We've got to build and develop and adapt. This is a move in the right direction.

This strikes me as one of those documents the precise meaning of which will be worked out over a period of years.

SOCOM is given clear jurisdiction over training and planning. As to actually carrying out operations, "prioritizing and synchronizing" operations (No. 3) is a pretty broad rubric; command and control in support of regional commands (No. 4) could be interpreted in several different ways; preparation of the environment (No. 6) could mean anything. The evident product of fierce bureaucratic negotiaiton, this document will be the basis for further rounds of negotiation as the GWOT proceeds.

It reminds me of a line from Jonathan Edwards's song, Sunshine:

How much does it cost?
I'll buy it!
The time is all we've lost
I'll try it!

Except it appears as though there ain't no sunshine whatsoever in the dark and cloudy mind of the current Commander in Chief.

Speaking here from pretty much complete ignorance; doesn't that kind of turn things upside down and inside out? I mean, isn't Delta supposed to be a smaller but more elite and independent group of specialists in a sea of green military conventialism? By putting the non-conformists in charge of everything, isn't Bush risking even more chaos and confusion in our military organizations than already exists? In other words, isn't this just another bad idea from a Commmander in Chief with an established track record of bad ideas and poor policy decisions?