Fighting Terror As Police Action

11:50 pm EST April 24th, 2007 | Terrorism | 10 Comments

I know John Kerry got killed by the Republican attack machine for suggesting it in 2004, but doesn’t it seem like attacking terrorism like a crime – that is finding the perpetrators and their funders, arresting them and their networks via the FBI, CIA, and Homeland Security in concert with international agencies like Interpol – seem to do a lot better good at fighting terrorism than invading the wrong country? This includes arrests in the London bombings and the millenium bombs attempt, and even Zacarias Moussaoui for the 9/11 attack.

For instance.

Four men pleaded not guilty Tuesday to charges that they plotted to recruit and train terrorists to attack U.S. and allied troops overseas.

Zubair A. Ahmed, Mohammad Zaki Amawi, Marwan Othman El-Hindi and Wassim I. Mazloum are accused of conspiring to kill or maim people outside the United States, including military personnel in Iraq.

A fifth man, Khaleel Ahmed, 26, pleaded not guilty to similar charges last month. He and Zubair Ahmed, 27, are cousins from Illinois. Amawi, El-Hindi and Mazloum live in Ohio. All are U.S. citizens except Mazloum, who came to the U.S. legally from Lebanon.

I would also note that the one non-U.S. citizen here came to America legally and not across, as Lou Dobbs would say, our “broken borders”.

Related Posts

  • No Related Post
«
»

10 Responses to “Fighting Terror As Police Action”

  1. pedromd07 says:
    April 25, 2007 at 1:30 am

    5 years…no successful attack in the US

    Maybe you could, you know, leave defending this country to those of us that don’t get $400 dollar haircuts eh?

    But yea, thanks for your opinion

  2. Oliver Willis says:
    April 25, 2007 at 1:39 am

    Do you just have an “idiot” macro on your keyboard to type out these things? Because otherwise, you’re wasting a lot of time away from your patients, fake doctor.

  3. Dugger says:
    April 25, 2007 at 8:05 am

    Actually, as I understand it both sides would use both the police and military functions. It gets down to emphasis and primary responsibility.

    I like the military emphasis option

  4. midderpidge says:
    April 25, 2007 at 9:33 am

    I think we can find more productive uses for our military in the war on terror than turning countries that don’t support anti-US terrorism into states that do.

  5. SpiderJ says:
    April 25, 2007 at 10:05 am

    Using the full force of the military to fight small cells of terrorists is like using a chainsaw to perform a triple bypass.

  6. Dugger says:
    April 25, 2007 at 10:17 am

    spider

    We are certainly not using ‘the full force’ of the US military.

  7. Duros62 says:
    April 25, 2007 at 12:28 pm

    I like the military emphasis option

    Why am I not surprised at all?

    I’m starting to think Pedro is a Dr. like Michael Savage is a “Doctor.”

  8. SpiderJ says:
    April 25, 2007 at 1:47 pm

    No, but the point of the “surge” is that we need to use closer to the full force.

  9. midderpidge says:
    April 25, 2007 at 3:43 pm

    Doesn’t the Bush adminstration have like a .000 average in prosecuting terrorist cases? I think that explains their dislike for the law enforcement aspect of fighting terrorism.

  10. fd10801 says:
    April 26, 2007 at 3:20 pm

    Yeah, that’s it!

    Put Osama’s picture up in the Post Office, and send the Dog after him