Quote:
|
Originally Posted by cthulu23
I would argue that we've badly damaged our global credibility and steeply worsened our position in the Middle East. We certainly provided lots of fodder for Islamic extremists as we have confirmed all of their rantings about American imperialism.
What's the best way to deal with terrorist states? There are no easy answers, but sanctions or engagement with moderates within those countries probably wouldn't cause as much global angst.
|
I disagree. I think the threat of a US invasion of rogue states/sponsors of terrorism is now much more credible. I know that's not what you mean, but I'm 100% certain the worlds leaders now know US foreign policy is different after 9/11.
I doubt the extremists really care about Iraq. It's just an excuse to them. They would have used Afghanistan if Iraq wasn't there.
I don't give a crap about global angst when it comes to state sponsors of terror. Sanctions and engagement is not any way to deal with terrorist states. There is only one way: the Afghanistan way. If you are a state sponser of terrorism then you don't get a state anymore. Period.
State sponsors of terror can not be allowed to exist. I believe there is pretty much global agreement on THAT point.