Terrorism and the Angry American

The whole " Kill 'em All" approach ain't workin'.

The problem with the war on terror is the way we are fighting. GW and his cronies are taking the fight to Mohammed, and I believe that on some level, they do mean to win. This is the wrong approach.
Ronald Reagan knew how to fight terrorism. You squash it like a bug. We shouldn't have troops on the ground in terrorist country. We should drop lots of really expensive bombs. First, the world sees the action as dismissive to a point. A long distance death sentence has a definate psychological advantage. Second, the folks at home don't get addled every time the "Terror Alert" hits mauve or puce or whatever color it is these days, because the troops aren't overseas pissing off the natives. Let's face it, the troops are Angry Americans, and really can't be taken anywhere. Finally, it just seems less likely to end with soldiers being called "baby-killer" and being spit on in the streets. After all, Angry America is Fickle America's twin.

I remember when Libya was a training ground for terrorism. I also remember how we made that end. I realize that bombing Afghanistan back to the stone age is redundant, but hey, somebody somewhere would have been impressed.

I do not mean to downplay the events of 9/11, but if we had bombed the crap out of every country know to support or harbor members of Al Quaida, maybe we could have spent a little more time actually analyzing intelligence in order to seek out and destroy Bin Laden and his crew.

I guess what I'm trying to say is that it is time to bring our troops home for awhile. We need to deal with internal problems. If anyone attacks, threatens, or looks at us wrong, we should drop a few thousand pounds of TNT on them and go on about our business.