What can/will/should the world do to prevent terrorism?

Mevater

Sun, Nov 15 2015, 10:07 am

PinkFridge wrote:

Not sure about the answer to your thread title, but in answer to this post, if I were a betting person I might say, Too little too late.

What a depressing and scary thought that the world at large may have to live at PEACE with civilians forever living in a state of WAR, with no solution in sight.

morah

Sun, Nov 15 2015, 10:27 am

They can start by closing the borders to Syrian refugees. But there's still the problem of all the radical Muslims who are already there. Europe is reaping what they've sown over the last 20 years of open borders and multiculturalism (except, of course, when it came to the Jews. Even after the war, they merely tolerated us, but still hated us). It may indeed be too little too late.

etky

Sun, Nov 15 2015, 11:09 am

morah wrote:

Probably is. The viper already in the bosom is rearing its head.
So sad that hundreds of innocents had to die because of leaders' reluctance to call a spade a spade, acknowledge the enemy and their goals for what they really are and take the appropriate requisite measures against them.

morah

Sun, Nov 15 2015, 11:18 am

etky wrote:

It was always someone else's problem, or else just the fault of the Jews for daring to have their own country. Now the chickens have come home to roost. Will Europe face the test or continue their denial? I'm not optimistic.

ora_43

Sun, Nov 15 2015, 1:46 pm

I don't think western countries should close their borders to Muslim refugees. I do think that many countries (including countries in the Middle East) need to do a lot more to prevent incitement to terrorism within their borders, including by being careful who they let in, more resources toward immigrant absorption, more focus on teaching tolerance in schools (even if that means making it legally mandatory), and harsher laws against incitement.

We also need to clarify to ourselves why terrorism is wrong. I don't think any country "deserves" terrorism for not condemning terrorism elsewhere chv"s, but I do think that countries whose leaders justify terrorism as a tactic against Israel, or turn a blind eye to support for terrorism in Saudi Arabia, etc, are going to be way less effective at preventing terrorism.

Other than that I agree with 5*mom. Terrorism is a tactic; the main way to deal with terrorism is to go after the enemy choosing that tactic.

gold21

Sun, Nov 15 2015, 2:28 pm

Drop the politically correct manner that's prevalent today across the western world. Identify the enemy. Profile. For ex, why are car rental companies allowed to limit rentals under the age of 25? Isn't that discrimination, as there are many adults in their early 20s who are responsible drivers? Rental companies protect themselves regardless. Countries don't have a choice if they want to remain safe- profiling is important.

Crack down on radical preachers, mosques, schools- I was taught that there are limits on freedom of speech- for ex, it's illegal to yell "Fire" in a crowded movie theater (unless there's a fire!) Preaching violence and hatred of your host country should be treated as criminal behavior.

seeker

Sun, Nov 15 2015, 2:40 pm

World leaders need to stop being afraid of moral values. Everyone is so worried about insulting others and moral equivalency, that they lose sight of the fact that yes there IS such a thing as right and wrong in the world. Take off the white gloves and lose the feel-good fuzzies. Make no apologies for spying on people who may be dangerous, punishing people who support evil - No you don't get freedom of speech for incitement, it is not OK to "just have your own opinion" when it's that wrong.

And for the love of all that is good and holy in this world, put your money where your mouth is. Terror-supporting organizations and countries are laughing all the way to the bank. Don't trust the foxes to provide the humanitarian aid to the henhouse. Whatever the interests our politicians are trying to promote by engaging with terror-supporting governments, I'm sure they will be better off without them ultimately.

pond user

Sun, Nov 15 2015, 2:46 pm

ora_43 wrote:

Hello? We should be kept open to Muslim 'refugees?' We only arrived at this point BECAUSE of them. There is no way to differentiate between a real refugee and an Isis threat. On that note. Close the doors until we can tell the difference.
I live in Europe thank you. I'll bet you do not.

ora_43

Sun, Nov 15 2015, 4:19 pm

pond user wrote:

No, I live in Israel. We have a large Muslim minority, constant terrorist threats from all sides, and Muslim refugees here too. I'm aware of the problems.

But there are less extreme ways to deal with the problem - background checks, more policing of the community, or even discriminatory criteria that still allow many people in (for example, Israel accepts Palestinian requests for citizenship only in a certain age range - something like, no women ages 18-35 or men ages 18-40). And Europe needs new citizens.

ETA - I think maybe we're defining "close the borders" differently? I do think it's reasonable for countries to say they've hit their limit on immigrant absorption, and to insist that refugee problems be dealt with elsewhere when possible. I just don't think turning away refugees is necessary, or effective, as a response to terrorism. Letting people in does make it easier for them to carry out attacks, but OTOH, turning them away doesn't mean they disappear, and radicalization is often a much bigger problem in their countries of origin.