Terrorists in Jail

One area of argument in the ‘war on terror’ is that terrorists should be prosecuted as common criminals. To do otherwise is to give them a status that they do not deserve. Not to mention the risk incurred by placing them in facilities outside of the law.

The other side of the argument is that prison is a breeding ground for rebellion in all cultures. To place terrorists into the prison population is to run the risk of spreading the ‘religion’ that they believe so strongly in. They don’t carry their arms openly, do not wear uniforms yet use military weapons and tactics to prey on civilians, have no official government support. This argument believes that terrorists are similar to pirates. In past years, pirates were hung. Today, this is not really accepted, so interrogation and separation from society for the rest of their lives seems a more humane way of dealing with them. Besides, useful information may be obtained through means that would not be available to use on civilian prisoners. (I do not necessarily agree.)

One thing that is not commonly known: During World War II, Japanese soldiers were taught to give no quarter. They would kill themselves before being captured. It would be the height of dishonor to be captured. As a result, the United States captured few Japanese soldiers. Usually, they were captured because they had been knocked unconscious. Because they had received no training in prisoner’s rights, they did not know that all they had to say was name, rank and serial number. So it was not uncommon to obtain vital information that saved some of our men’s lives. Terrorists probably have better education in this regard. Have you noticed that the terrorist organizations are not screaming about their prisoners? I suspect that at least part of the reason is that it is so dishonorable. Because they do not have government support, their position is unknown. Giving them civil protections would change this equation drastically.

Osama bin Lauden’s mistake

Osama made a mistake on 9/11/01. He hit us too soon. He really should have waited. I sent an e-mail to the White House (Yea, like it will really make much difference) where I pointed out that if the attack on Washington D.C. on 9/11/01 had been with a nuclear device, our government would have been decapitated. Both houses of Congress were in session, as was the Supreme Court of the U.S. The military of this country reports to the civilian government, so it stands to reason the most, if not all of the top ‘Brass’ was in D.C that day as well. After all, at that level military officers are almost as political as they are generals. The military would have survived in better shape. The organization is designed to run even if portions are destroyed. It would have still been injured. I believe that this is the reason why the Bush administration developed that ‘shadow’ government that we used to hear about. This was a concept from the 1950’s with a modern twist. With the telecommunications of today, key elements of the government do not have to be physically present to conduct the business of the country. In at least one way, the threat of nuclear war is actually much higher today than during the worst days of the Soviet Union. Not because of the number of weapons, but because of the likelihood of use of them if they ever become available to the other side.

The Soviet Union was not interested in suicide. In 1963, it was the Russians who turned their ships around to avoid a nuclear confrontation. Granted, the war that could have resulted could arguably have ended human life on this planet. The war today probably will not, even if terrorists were able to successfully deploy multiple nuclear weapons. Talk about a punitive war. I would expect retaliation from us in this event. No such thing as ‘innocent’ civilians when we discuss this type of warfare. In any case, it will be far more difficult for terrorists to attempt a strike like 9/11/01 with nuclear weapons now that we have been alerted. Surprise has always been a major ingredient in successful military attacks. They will most likely have to use some other method.

Defining Islamic terrorists.

One of the largest problems with fighting terrorists is determining who they are. Just as importantly, who supports them? Maybe it would help to be more specific when defining terrorist. In reference to Islamic terrorists, most if not all appear to be deeply religious. ‘Koran bangers’ if you will. Many speak of jihad. In Jihad, you can kill the ones who are not Muslim. (Supposed to avoid killing women and children.) You may also kill those who have left Islam. (Apostates) You must honor all truces. You must kill ‘occupiers’ of Muslim lands. They view the world as being in the House of Islam or the House of War.

Jihad is an important part of Islam. Pulling its teeth would gut Islam enough to trigger any war. An additional problem is that Jihad is not the only concept that Islam must change. The main reason that people become soldiers is to protect the way of life that they understand. This is a large part of the reason why it appears that we are creating ‘new’ terrorists. Another way of looking at it: The vast majority of Germans and Japanese were good people in 1944. The fact was that the way of life that they knew had to change. Concerning Islam, the United States is demanding that they change. NOW.

The strategic problem is that this change must occur as soon as possible. The threat of WMD only becomes more likely as time passes. Historically, wars have increased the speed of these types of changes. The U.S. Civil War is an excellent example of how this type of change is increased by warfare. Changes were occurring long before Lee's surrender, although the aftermath triggered even more rapid changes.

Arab culture

Arab culture is very private. By western standards, easily offended. In these ways, it resembles the culture of Japan prior to the 1950’s. Both had been relatively isolated from much of the rest of the world for many centuries. (Japan more so) After oil was discovered in the Middle East, Arabs began to travel more. Early experiences during the 1940’s and 1950’s left Arabs who had visited the U.S. shocked by our decadence and lack of morality. Some of these individuals became openly hostile to the west in general and the United States specifically. This trend has been gaining strength ever since. The actions by the United States over the last 50 or more years is relatively unimportant to the Arab world compared to what the United States IS. What we represent. This applies to Israel as well. Believing another culture to be far inferior in ideology can lead to serious underestimation of the opponent’s strength and determination. This can also lead to overconfidence regarding your own military ability. This is what occurred with Japan. The Arab-Israeli wars can be seen to demonstrate this as well.

HAMAS

One key factor in the war is the election of Hamas. How the Palestinians handle Hamas will help determine the course of the war. True democracy demands elections held on some type of regular basis. Eventually, Hamas would then be defeated at the polls. How will they adjust? Will they go quietly? This is a critical campaign in the Civil War that is taking place throughout Islam. The issues at stake for Islam are:

1) The penalty for leaving Islam is death.
2) Moral obligation to kill occupiers of Muslim land.
3) Tribute
4) Challenging Islamic electoral policy of ‘One man (Men only) one vote, once’.
5) Honor killings
6) The entire concept of ‘Jihad’.

These issues being decided in our favor will bring real, permanent, positive changes for all sides. (Exception: Fundamentalist Islamists)

Suicide attack

Repeated suicide attack was seen for only the first time in of all recorded history in the 1940’s. Japan resorted to this tactic after it was obvious that they were losing badly. Many suicide attacks had been seen prior to that point. However, the intention was that they were not to be repeated. After the defeat of the carrier air groups in the ‘Marianas Turkey shoot’, Japan began to organize suicide groups. The air force is most commonly remembered. However, it took many other forms as well. Among other things, suicide ships and torpedoes were built. Aircraft and other weapons were built to be expendable and cheap to make. "Human bombs" were organized to strap explosives to themselves. The intent was to jump under a tank or into another U.S. position to blow it up. They were given minimal training. For example, the experienced pilots escorted the Kamikaze pilots to the target. This way, the attackers would have protection and reports would be available with the results of the attack. Many missed the target. Japan would run out of attackers from time to time. The supply of aircraft, pilots and men would be used up until they could be replenished.

From the point of view of the U.S., we were faced with a problem: How do you defeat them? Defensively, it was obvious that you must physically blow them apart before they reach you. Preemption took the form of attacks with the objective to destroy the ability to launch new attacks. For example, attacking the air bases that the Kamikazes used to take off from. We did not know the exact bases, so we attacked them all. We attempted to destroy ALL aircraft in the area. This worked fairly well. We also placed more expendable assets in the way. We would place escort ships along the route to our fleet. These ships would be able to defend themselves. Inexperienced pilots would attack them instead of more important targets. This is an important factor as to why we lost so many escort ships in the Okinawa campaign.

The scary part about this is that it took nuclear weapons to put a decisive end to it.

Islam and terrorism

Many people believe that all religions have an element of ‘extremists’. Like the ‘bible bangers’ that most people whom I have spoken with have run into. Although most do not become violent, some do support more extreme ideas and public figures that promote more extreme viewpoints. Islam has 1.1 billion people. A common belief is that only a small minority of Muslims supports the extreme ideas in Islam. I disagree, to a certain extent.

Was the overwhelming election of Hamas a surprise? I have believed for a long time (15+ years) that if elections were held in other countries of the Islamic world, many would see similar results. Why? One key reason is because Hamas believes in many of the ‘authentic’ laws of Islam. While the vast majority of Muslims do not want Osama Bin Lauden running their country, they support much of the ideology that he acts upon. Islamic law is hostile and incompatible with the legal system of the United States. It makes sense that the U.S. is seen as being hostile to Islam.

In 1944, the vast majority of Germans and Japanese were good people. Yet they fought for evil. Robert E. Lee did not like owing slaves. He found them difficult to manage and motivate. He fought for evil, and he fought very well and honorably. Can you think of a worse cause to fight and risk your life for?

I am not trying to say that we should go over there and start killing everyone. I am saying that we can expect resistance from good people who honestly believe that their way of life is good. Any number of them can be expected to become violent. We are asking them to change that way of life. I have studied the biographies of thousands of soldiers. By far, the vast majority cites as the original reason that they undertook the life of a soldier was to protect their way of life. This is one of the reasons so many that did not own slaves fought for slavery. I can understand. It will be over my dead body before anyone will send my kids to an Islamic school. We can expect them to feel the same way. One of the ways that extreme Islam can be reduced to a level that is more common with the rest of the world is to change the educational systems. The changing of the educational systems in Japan from 1945 to present is largely responsible for the long-term change in attitudes away from militarism and suicide attack.