Five Reasons the War on Terrorism Will Never Be Won With Foreign Invasions

Osama bin Laden and all al-Qaida leadership that aided in the 9/11 attacks should be vanquished. We can also protect our homeland from the next terrorist attack. But none of this requires America to invade a single foreign nation, and here are the five reasons why.

1. America is at risk of more terrorist attacks - but not just from the Middle East According to a recent NYPD report, the greatest terrorist threat to United States citizens now comes from our own people - homegrown terrorists. This is not news to anyone who is aware of how different the terrorist threat is from any other enemy we've faced. John Robb, in his excellent book Brave New War, outlines the myriad ways that any dedicated homicide-minded individual can bypass America's woefully inadequate homeland security and exploit technology to wreak havoc on a massive scale:

"We have entered the age of the faceless, agile enemy. From London to Madrid to Nigeria to Russia, stateless terrorist groups have emerged to score blow after blow against us. Driven by cultural fragmentation, schooled in the most sophisticated technologies, and fueled by transnational crime...terrorists have developed the ability to fight nation-states strategically - without weapons of mass destruction. This new method is called systems disruption, a simple way of attacking the critical networks (electricity, oil, gas, water, communications, and transportation) that underpin modern life."

Depraved desires for maniacal violence and the ability to carry them out are not confined to the foreign world or a single country. It's highly unfortunate that such an obvious fact is so dangerously transcended by American neoconservatives. To spend massive resources on an invasion of a single country and render our military incapable of responding to another threat - all while domestic terrorism grows in danger - is a manifestly asinine policy at best and national suicide at worst. Protecting our nation against terrorism -fourth generation warfare - requires developing decentralized resistance and dynamic local law enforcement. There is no "fighting them over there so they don't attack us here". They're already here. It's about protecting us now.

2. Democracy doesn't stop terrorism, policemen do

The President tells us we must invade Iraq because democracy will stop terrorism. But to think that democratic government does anything but express the views of its subjects is a delusion. Even while great democracies help to sideline radical views, they by no means eliminate the occasional expression of sadistic savagery. Timothy McVeigh and the Unabomber were American. The 9/11 hijackers planned their attacks in Germany. Angry inner city youths recently went on a pyromaniacal crusade in France. Britain's 7/7 bombers were Britons. It's uncomfortable, but the free speech and tolerance that democracy offers can even be a boon to terrorists, allowing them to communicate more openly, practice their faith more openly, and freely associate.

By contrast, brutal dictators are usually quite effective at crushing terrorists. Authoritarian governments are remarkably adept at obliterating any perceived threats to their power, and the threat of terrorism is no different. The Middle East is saturated with iron fist regimes that cleverly market their brutal anti-terrorist activities both as necessary for both public safety and for the Will of Allah. Shining examples of this principle are Saudi Arabia, a backward and repressed Islamic society that actively condemns Islamic terrorists as apostate and is a regime regarded as an ally in the War on Terror; and Syria, a nation that unleashed tanks and bulldozers on its own cities in order to root out the Muslim Brotherhood.

Stopping terrorism has nothing to do with democracy, and everything to do with law enforcement.

3. Invasion doesn't work

While terrorist leaders who aided in 9/11 are a defined and finite enemy, terrorists themselves are not. As the greatest political commentator in American history, the late William F. Buckley, Jr., wrote, "Individual terrorists were only yesterday engaged in ordinary occupations, shocking friends and family when they struck as terrorists." Indeed. One cannot invade Iraq to root out potential terrorists any more than one can invade America to root out potential terrorists. One can only protect against the inevitable strike.

While American special forces should pursue bin Laden and his henchmen with all deliberate speed, traditional nation-state warfare is utterly incapable of fighting terrorism. As Mr. Robb says in Brave New War, "From a security perspective, the most disturbing aspect of 9/11 wasn't the horrible destruction, but that the men who attacked us on that day didn't even factor the opposition of the U.S. military into their planning. Despite tens of trillions of dollars spent on defense over the last decades, this military force proved ineffectual as a deterrent at the point when we needed it most."

Another historical fact counseling against foreign invasion is that no foreign power has ever vanquished a domestic guerrilla rebellion. The most powerful force in the world is a people willing to sacrifice themselves to expel a foreign occupier from their homeland. This helps explain why there was no such thing as al-Qaida in Iraq until America invaded it.

No people should understand the foolishness of foreign occupation more than Americans. Despite living under the freest country in the world in 1776 (Great Britain, providers of natural liberty, the Magna Carta, democratic government and a robust legal system), we still threw off the yoke of foreign power, and rightly so. Our very existence is a testament to the lesson that a people will always fight to expel a foreign presence, no matter how benevolent the imperialist motives.

4. Winning hearts and minds requires living people

Islamofascism is a hideous, benighted, destructive and blasphemous ideology that must be thoroughly denounced by intellectuals around the world. However, reckless American military intervention stands in the way of winning this crucial battle of ideas for several reasons.

First, it diverts world attention from Islamofascist brutality and focuses it on American belligerence. In a world largely of media censorship and ignorant public opinion, it is too easy for Islamofascists to play the victim when American tanks are rolling through their side streets. As we are forced to stoop to their level - fighting amongst civilians, villages and homes - we lose the moral high ground.

Second, American culture is remarkably adept at forging positive opinions of our country through peace and commerce. It was recently reported that as American products finally entered Iraq, locals happily flocked to buy the high quality items, even while they cursed our military occupation. We can make people love America without resorting to force.

Third, moderate Islamic scholars must publicly condemn Islamofascism. But America has recently denied visas (ostensibly for security reasons) to moderate Islamic scholars who happen (for good reason) to vigorously oppose U.S. foreign policy. We must face the fact that many of our allies in the War of Ideas are those who oppose our current prosecution of the War on Terror, and embrace the criticism for pursuit of the greater victory.

5. Yes, they hate our freedom - but they kill us for being over there

One need only consult Osama bin Laden's declaration of war on the United States to find out why he is trying to kill us. Or, if you want it from an intelligent American instead of a murderous lunatic, ask former senior CIA analyst and head of the agency's bin Laden unit, Michael Scheuer. The jihad has nothing to do with our freedoms and has everything to do with our military interventions in the Middle East. Al-Qaida gains financial support, moral justification and willing recruits to kill Americans by arguing that American military presence in the Middle East is interfering with their ability to implement Islamofascism in the Arabian peninsula. News Flash: Islamofascists don't want to rule America; they want to rule Mesopotamia.

Of course, a radical adjustment in American foreign policy will not stop radical Islamofascists from despising the West any more than eight hundred McDonalds haven't stopped the French from hating us. But the point isn't to make them like us; it's to starve the jihad of resources and support. The only way to do that is to stop legitimizing the Islamofascist narrative of an oppressed people suffering under American military occupation.

Recognizing America's foreign policy mistakes is not letting the terrorists win. It is simply an intelligent recognition of reality and our own limitations. We all love this country and desire to remain safe. We do not criticize our nation's foreign policy lightly, nor do we doubt the patriotic sincerity of those who believe otherwise. We only seek to learn from history and ensure that unlike Rome, France, and Great Britain, our glorious empire will not buckle under the weight of ill-advised imperial ventures.

The author of The American Evolution, Matt Harrison is the founder and executive director of The Prometheus Institute, Los Angeles, CA, a nonprofit public policy institute. He has authored more than 200 articles and has been a guest on several talk radio shows and a guest blogger for CNN.

Three reasons why what religious Crisis always occurs in Nigeria

Religious crisis in Nigeria dates to the early 1970s and to date still persist. The ancient city of Kano is known for the pyramid of peanuts in the 1980s, it is one of the most volatile spot where there have been religious crisis in Nigeria. At that time, a man named Gideon Akaluka created a provocative gesture when he tore the Holy Koran in public. The Islamic fundamentalist instantly declared a fatwa on him and were a step further, when they burst into the prison and took away Gideon Akaluka. His head was cut off and they marched in the streets of Kano. This singular Act instigated a religious revolt that claimed the lives of many Christians and Muslims.

What may be responsible for the continuous religious crisis in Nigeria, especially in the northern part of the country?

Intolerance

The birth of the movement Pentecostal in Nigeria in the early 1980s came with some negative effects in Northern Nigeria. They weren't careful enough respect for the culture and the religion of Muslims, but rather was about winning souls and preaching the word of God with zeal and fearlessness. The churches traditional - Anglican, Baptist, Methodist and Catholics were a little tactical in their religious activities, and there lived amicably between its Muslim counterpart. The arrival of the Pentecostal movement changed the whole Assembly however, as Muslims upset its aggressive approach to evangelism and prayers. The tension created soon led to a religious crisis. On the other hand, Muslims were not willing to respect the opinion of the other. They felt Christians want to christianize his Muslim brothers and were ready to resist with his blood.

Economic issues

In the northern part of Nigeria, Christians are economically backward as Muslims have taken all the available business openings. This has created much tension between Christians and his Muslim counterpart. The distribution of wealth is uneven, because it favours Muslims over Christians. This has given rise to continuous clashes between these two religious main entities, as they try to gain importance in the scheme of things. The anger and bitterness of being deceived remains a primary factor in the minds of Christians.

Policy

This is also a factor that has warmed the system already loaded between Christians and Muslims. It is a fact that some notable politicians know they have sponsored some Muslims wrong in the creation of disturbance which soon degenerated into a massive war between the two bodies that lead to the deaths of innocent souls. These politicians have used the crisis to score cheap political points, insisting that the security situation in those places, called a State of emergency. This was the exact state of Plateau stage more than one year ago. A curfew was imposed in the State, and Christians fled their homes for fear of being attacked by the aggrieved Muslims. It was so serious that the Federal Government had to deploy the army to maintain order and peace.
The issue of religious violence has always been a periodic decimal in the history of Nigeria, but the Government has continuously paid lip service to find a lasting solution to this important issue. He has always called for tolerance, peace and unity among all religious groups, but the situation has not changed significantly.

Sadjere Clement is an author, a motivational speaker and an expert in sales / marketing information product. It came via phone at + 2348052790262
He is the owner of http://www.grelohi.com a Web site free article directory

Five reasons to wear a Burka - why burqas transmit advantages to their carriers

Burqas have recently received controversial attention in the press, with France even proposing to ban them.

In the non-Muslim world, the term burka is used to refer to the suit of full body covering to the bearer of the head to toe, leaving only the exposed hands and eyes. However, when Muslims use the term, generally refer to the part that covers the hair instead of the veil.

This article will use the popular definition of non-Muslim burka.

The advantages of burqa

Wearing a burqa can command more seriousness, respect and authority. Wife of my friend always carries one when they attend important meetings, such as parents at night or when I find its owner. In their culture, wearing a burqa in a meeting you will get better results and more respect, that wearing normal Western attire. I guess similar to the way satisfy male workers city that everyone has to carry and ties, although ties have been show to hinder the flow of blood to the brain.
Historically, the style of burqa dress originated in tribes deserts, where worked as a mask of sand. Also, the style of dress was used by men and women, making them difficult to know separate. This was useful during the tribal incursions, as it made it more difficult for raiders to take women of childbearing for child. While raids are not really part of modern life, wearing a mask it is useful in many situations. Many people don't like the smell of the London underground, a burka could help mask the odor of his delicate nostrils. Similarly, a burka could help mask the odor of unhealthy fellow passengers.
Muslims can not wear burqas experience a different culture. A white Finnish journalist decided to make a completed full black abaya dress with veil, in order to experience a day in the life of a carrier of burka. He received much more respect for Muslims, with many strangers welcome you on the street. Also helped her to feel more at peace, and the cosmetologists and stylists of hair that usually harassed you with sales pitches ignored you.
It is very easy of don burka and they are often used as an alternative to the veil (hijab). Therefore, Muslim Ladies often wear them when they are in a bind.
Carriers of burka in warmer climates can drive cars with the Windows down. Some even carry them while driving convertibles.

Final words

I've now shown some of the reasons why women may choose to wear a Burka. With the reasons from the views of professional women, busy women, children and even concerned parents.

To learn more about burqas, read 10 advantages of carrying a Burka in The Agama Islam section of Cheapskatemate.com.

Imran Patel has studied religion in order to understand the thoughts and ideas of his Muslim friends. He is a great writer and focuses on religion, food, and statistics.