How can terrorism be stopped entirely?

Maybe we should use the same tactics we used in the War on Drugs. That problem has been solved.

Offer tax breaks for non-terrorism.

Take a few children out of high terrorism areas, drop a few nukes on the entire area, then put the children back there in the future to rebuild the society after they have been properly educated.

Terrorism cannot be stopped in my opinion. If there is a will there is a way, no matter how strict security is.

One thing I’ve always laughed about was the random bag searches that the police do within our own Subway System in NYC. I avoid them like the plague, and have only been searched once.

How does one circumvent this check? Doesn’t take a super spy to figure out. I walk in, I see them checking, I walk around them and enter through another entrance. Great security… the only people that get checked are the stupid tourists that don’t know better and the new yorkers too busy with their objective to see the cops hounding them down. I don’t feel much safer…

To combat terrorism is to make people more satisfied with their disagreements. And extremists is just that – extreme. It’ll be hard to placate these folks. Best to kill them off before they jeopardize society as a whole. Extremists can’t hold a debate, they will resort to violence to see their way come to light. And I think that’s pretty dangerous. Applies to Christian Right and the Anarchist rebels as much as terrorists elsewhere.

First we need to figure out how to stop bullying in schools.

How about the resistance against the Germans in Vichy France? Were they terrorists? What about Haitian slaves ousting the French in the 1780s? Were they terrorists?

And there it is: One person’s terrorist is another person’s freedom fighter. How are you ever going to get everyone on the same page, then? People who are passionate enough about their issue that they are willing to kill and die for it, they’re already beyond listening or believing any government.

We have to remember, these people aren’t causing havoc for the sake of it (though maybe a very few mentally disturbed people are), but because they believe they have a legitimate issue, no matter how kooky we might think it is. No, I don’t believe Islamists (note that I’m not saying Muslims) have the right to take over the world and run it by Sharia law, but, ultimately, they do. How would a government change the minds of people who believe their cause is the right one and get such people to stop what they’re doing?

get rid of Imperialism that ought to do it

I do not think there is an insane terrorist round every corner. We can never stop people from wanting to cause trouble because of there own twisted beliefs but these things we read in the media make us believe the problem is worse than it is.

A lot of people lose their income and their power if terrorism is stopped completely.

Gen Colin Powelll warns against a Terror Industrial Complex.

In addition, terrorism is a natural response to imperialism and conflict between armed forces of disparate size and sophistication.

If you can get the arms manufacturers to stop selling to both sides, then maybe, just maybe, a little ray of hope may shine on this world.

I think if religion was scientifically proven wrong and banned, majority of terrorist actions would go away.

Secondly, if the world globalized and distributed goods, and wealth equally so no one lived in poverty. No more countries, just earth.

And lastly an advanced technology that is able to run surveilance anywhere to disrupt the first inclenation of a terrorist cell forming.

Some investigation into the motives of those who are so disenchanted that they are willing to destroy themselves in order to make a point, wouldn’t go amiss.

Education, eradication of global poverty, secularisation of societies.

Perhaps if we stop usurping governments worldwide and helping murder the families of those overthrown, there would be less terrorists in the world.

by listening to people… and respecting them

Terrorism cannot be stopped in anything even remotely resembling a free society so long as people are willing to go to such extremes to draw attention to or defend their beliefs.

As to what my response would be? I don’t know. It largely depends on what you know about the group (assuming it’s not an individual act) that did it. Can they be effectively targeted? What are their motives? What is the public reaction to the event and their views of the group?

I tend to lean away from answering with force, but if, after understanding the background to the situation, I believed it was the correct answer, it would be overwhelming. I’d much rather understand why said group felt the need to attack and explore alternatives to address their concerns positively.

@talljasperman Huh?

The only way terrorism can be stopped is if people stoped trying to hurt one another and start trying to help one another.

Your creative tax dollars at work.

I particularly liked this comment:

Ever been in a NY subway? There are more backpacks than one could find at a boy scout convention. All NYPD is doing is providing more bodies in the event of an explosion (meaning the extra cops).

NY Post article of same story.

@ragingloli secularisation of society is discriminatory, perhaps of governments

Rename it.

The incidence of “Unlawful fear-inducing acts of violence” will rise dramatically, but at least there will be no more terrorism :)

I would broadcast videos about how terrorist recruit and why and what to do if you suspect a friend or terrorist activity. Plus offer rewards for real information. Gear this info to women. Then hopefully they will raise their sons not to be such douches and at least question orders like strap a bomb to your chest.
See, personally I would ask the guy giving the orders the following question. Whats wrong with your chest?

@dpworkin : I seriously roflmao’d. seriously.

wow.

@RandomMrdan : the nature of faith is apologetic. Proof is irrelevant.

We’re violent animals. there are, were, and will always be conflicts of interest, and many of them will be solved in a violent manner. It’s a facet of who and what we are. It’s not going anywhere.

@Fenris Countless wars have been waged in the name of religion though. And if wars were reduced, terrorism would decline. When you’re out numbered, and out gunned in a war, you’re only chance to win is through acts of terrorism in an attempt to destroy morale.

I’d even argue most wars are the result of religion.

Terrorism is all about whose side you are on.

Countless wars have been waged in the name of everything we don’t agree on enough to go to war. There’s no reducing war because war is a catastrophic difference in opinion, and everyone not being identical in thought and form is human. And terrorism isn’t a last-ditch desperation move, it’s an effective tool in information warfare.

The “enemy” (read: abstract construct that is a fundament of human behavior) isn’t outgunned, nor can they be outnumbered, because anyone on the roster is an ever-shifting line of people with chips on their shoulders, unstable ideologists, and anyone that can benefit in the moment from being an antagonistic entity in our scared, pampered eyes. This is war at its finest. All sides have ever-changing roster lists, ever-shifting motives, and ever-nebulous reasons why the multiple sides aren’t exactly the same.

@Fenris you mean to tell me, if Religion from the beginning of time was never found, and religion never came to be, there would be the exact amount of wars that were waged? I tend to think that if religion was not a factor at all, the amount of wars waged would be significantly less.

And the enemy can be outnumbered, what are you even talking about? Haven’t you ever heard of something like, “we out number the forces 2:1”? The opposing force in some cases is greater, less, or equal.

Fundamentalism seems to be rooted in a profound fear of annihilation. If ethnic or religious groups no longer feel that they are under attack, terrorism might be stopped almost entirely.

Is terrorism a word that is connected to a religious foundation?
When a “soldier” seeks past enemy lines and blows a building up. He is a spy, an infiltrator, a saboteur.

What defines the difference?

Because no matter what. And, what it is.
There will always be someone on the opposite side trying to take down the other opponent. Any way necessary.

No. I was also referring to political fundamentalism as another root cause for terrorism.

Reduced to the lowest level of understanding a fight…first ask yourself “IF” you did anything to warrent it?
Understanding goes a long way.
Understand the “Why” of things.
Then the solution will present itself..perhaps.