1 readers online now  |  69 million page views

A constructive and non-violent solution to terrorism.

Reader comment on item: [Lee Harris on Why the U.S. is] Discarding War's Rules

Submitted by Victor Lipshutz (United States), Jul 24, 2003 at 16:22

It is virtually IMPOSSIBLE for the US, and perhaps even for the world, to "eliminate" them. What it would take is something so horrible that, in the final analysis, we would end up being no better than they are. Possibly even worse. I am appalled at the suggestion, because it is made, not in the heat of immediate anger (such as in moments following the attack on the WTC or Pearl Harbor), but offered up in the guise of sensible or justifiable national policy.

Bush isn't attempting to eliminate the Bigger Problem at all. He has squandered precious US lives and resources on achieving personal revenge. He and his disinformation apparatus are the ones primarily responsible for muddying the distinctions between Al Qaeda and Iraq, but we are also responsible for buying that fantasy.

Al Qaeda was born in the ashes of a cold war conflict between the US and Russia on the soil of Afghanistan, where we left the locals to fend for themselves after we achieved what we had set out to do there. It, and other extremist muslim initiatives, is funded directly or indirectly by oil money, derived from the west but funneled to corrupt governments and royals who we prop up with our political and economic support.

The fire of islamic extremist groups is only fanned by the Palestinian-Israeli conflict, as it is easily, although falsely, made the poster-issue between muslim arabs and non-muslims. It was merely a shrewd PR move by A.Q. to incorporate anti-Israel sentiment into their anti-west program.

So how to stop the spread of the disease? If they are such parasites on the fruits of others' cultural achievements and industrial productivity, how then can the rest of the world avoid becoming or continuing to be the host? IMHO, that would be a thinking person's basis for developing an approach to The Problem. Surely western civilization has the ability to create an intelligent and effective strategy that can be followed without scrapping what made us who we are in the first place.

As mentioned in your article, it is no coincidence that the troublesome Middle East is sitting on a major source of much of the world’s petroleum reserves, from which revenues fuel not only global boilers, but Middle East strife. We need only focus our attention on significantly reducing global dependency on oil, and the problem will be greatly diminished.

My fantasy solution is to divert the $billions being squandered fighting terrorism in all its forms, into a crash program to develop a petroleum-free global energy economy, by developing as many alternate energy solutions as practical, including nuclear, solar, wind, hydro, geothermal and ocean thermal, all of which can yield adequate energy to eliminate most, if not all the world's dependence on oil in less time than it will take to democratize Iraq to our liking.

For example, it is technically possible to launch a family of geosynchronous satellites, each consisting of a gigantic solar collector, perhaps miles in diameter, that would convert immense amounts of solar energy into a laser beam that would be continuously focused on Earth-bound energy receivers, that could be used to generate electricity or hydrogen fuel. Gyroscopes would be used to maintain aim of the laser beam on the receiver.

Another fantasy is to tap the vast thermal energy in the Earth’s oceans, using the principle of the heat pump, to generate electricity that can be used to produce hydrogen. This is known as Ocean Thermal Energy Conversion, or OTEC, (http://www.nrel.gov/otec/what.html) a little known ongoing endeavor. Adequate funding is all that is needed to move these efforts into the commercial arena.

There are, of course hundreds of other alternate energy possibilities that, in combination, could easily eliminate the need for fossil fuels altogether.

A collateral benefit of this effort would be the simultaneous elimination of air pollution and global warming and the creation of tens of thousands of new jobs.
Submitting....

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".

Submit a comment on this item

<< Previous Comment      Next Comment >>

Reader comments (79) on this item

Title Commenter Date Thread
Not neccessary to know enemy [72 words]Joy BoothJan 21, 2004 02:1413454
The News from Iraq [270 words]Matt PrasteinAug 30, 2003 02:4410925
Hits the Nail on the Head [40 words]RonIAug 22, 2003 14:1710728
Know thy enemies!!! [95 words]kaderAug 21, 2003 15:1710710
Why discarding the rules is a bad strategy [211 words]Jacob FisherAug 11, 2003 08:1210503
Breaking the Rules [52 words]Elizabeth CooteAug 6, 2003 12:5210461
Thank you [15 words]Joel MorrisAug 2, 2003 16:5410419
Discarding War's Rules dated 22 July, 2003 [188 words]S.C.PandaJul 31, 2003 06:0410362
Realities [183 words]Bernard LangdonJul 30, 2003 23:1910357
maybe we need to rethink a war on terrorism [461 words]Peter HerzJul 29, 2003 01:5410287
Proportionate Response? [38 words]FRANCIS HARTIGANJul 28, 2003 16:3010278
New policy's success reflected in eliminating Hussein brothers. [49 words]FRANK G ZAVISCAJul 27, 2003 19:0810265
Right on Point [28 words]Pat LavinJul 26, 2003 22:1310257
Gratitude and Concern [268 words]Timothy Schiff, Ph.D.Jul 26, 2003 19:3910256
Great article! Is there a link to the Harris column? [28 words]TishJul 26, 2003 13:4710254
The New Rule Book says, "Let's play to win" [363 words]RPaineJul 25, 2003 23:1010243
This article is prescient [64 words]RowenaJul 25, 2003 15:3310241
Thank God [46 words]Ralph MaggioniJul 25, 2003 10:3410238
GREAT article! Now I see why CAIR and AMC don't like you... [233 words]Roddy McClainJul 24, 2003 22:4510231
Response vs perceived potential [353 words]Hector RodriguezJul 24, 2003 22:4310230
Amazement [12 words]Lee NaranjoJul 24, 2003 22:2410229
Wisdom Par Excellence [74 words]M&JJul 24, 2003 21:4510228
Morally Commendable [119 words]Michoel ZeldisJul 24, 2003 18:4810225
I couldn't have said it better! [66 words]T'yomaJul 24, 2003 17:3810221
2A constructive and non-violent solution to terrorism. [647 words]Victor LipshutzJul 24, 2003 16:2210219
Don't bring a knive to a gun fight!! [113 words]David J. BastyrJul 24, 2003 15:2610217
Common Sense And Intelligence [56 words]Heywood JablomiJul 24, 2003 13:1910212
Changing rules of warfare ... (let's include China) [483 words]Chuck IngersonJul 24, 2003 12:4710210
as usual, you are right. [64 words]jeann wardJul 24, 2003 11:2810206
Moral Relativism [99 words]Stephen BermanJul 24, 2003 09:5910203
They aren't the Nazis or the Japs [120 words]Glenn KlotzJul 24, 2003 09:0210201
Afghan Veteran weighs in [205 words]MAJJul 24, 2003 08:5710200
Rules of War [387 words]W. DuPree MooreJul 24, 2003 06:1110193
In Our Interests [254 words]Arlinda DeAngelisJul 23, 2003 18:3910186
Well Done! [87 words]Jon AlvarezJul 23, 2003 16:2610183
The Cold War had an effect too. [133 words]Carey E. StronachJul 23, 2003 12:3510181
Whose rules? [236 words]Michael ElvinJul 23, 2003 12:1110180
To win we must be prepared to sink below their level. [162 words]GRAHAM RAEL-BROOKJul 23, 2003 11:3310177
unilateral US action in middle east [231 words]mark urbanJul 23, 2003 10:2810175
Harris [50 words]MarkJul 23, 2003 10:0110174
Impose a double standard [43 words]YehudaJul 23, 2003 06:5110170
Taking the Gloves Off! [281 words]TerrallJul 23, 2003 06:3110169
It is getting too rigid [338 words]Alain Jean-MairetJul 23, 2003 03:2610167
can't agree with you more [263 words]Laura MaizelsJul 23, 2003 02:2910166
Islamist Fantasists [466 words]Peter J. HerzJul 23, 2003 01:3010164
Western Restraint or Liberal Fear [197 words]Josh FarstJul 23, 2003 01:2310163
Pipes' Analysis Right On Target [82 words]Sheila PickerillJul 23, 2003 00:3210159
Bravo Mr Harris [27 words]Molly KafesJul 22, 2003 20:5310149
rediscovering common sense [140 words]leleneJul 22, 2003 20:3510148
Two-thirds on target [92 words]Gary SiegelJul 22, 2003 20:0410147
Thanks for another fabulous column! [75 words]Louis CastellanoJul 22, 2003 19:3910146
Well this is LONG overdue.......... [86 words]Ciaran PalmerJul 22, 2003 19:0910144
Discarding war's rules [317 words]Vijay DandapaniJul 22, 2003 16:4610142
If only... [152 words]Michael LeibowitzJul 22, 2003 16:1410141
About time [38 words]Charles GatesJul 22, 2003 16:0310140
Why the U.S. is discarding war's rules [41 words]michael gibbonsJul 22, 2003 15:0510139
A very insightful article [54 words]BRIAN TAYLORJul 22, 2003 14:5710137
Lee Harris' Article [32 words]Paul KaplanJul 22, 2003 14:5610136
Half-measures [220 words]Joseph GrossmanJul 22, 2003 14:5210135
Excellent [12 words]John BacileJul 22, 2003 14:2710134
The governments vs the governed [96 words]Richard GayJul 22, 2003 13:4210133
Hear! Hear! [484 words]MarkJul 22, 2003 13:1410132
It's about time someone said this. [66 words]Reuven AaronJul 22, 2003 13:1010131
Hitting the nail on the head [40 words]PauloJul 22, 2003 13:0910130
Wonderful! [40 words]Dr. Herbert NevyasJul 22, 2003 12:5810129
This guy is great [29 words]Ken BesigJul 22, 2003 12:5010128
Right on! [187 words]Joe FitzgeraldJul 22, 2003 11:5710127
Walks, Talks and Quacks [74 words]Margaret DoddererJul 22, 2003 11:4610126
Militant Islam [293 words]john GrahamJul 22, 2003 11:3310124
Lack of Standards [277 words]Giulio BattistonJul 22, 2003 11:1510123
It sounds good, but… [147 words]Alain Jean-MairetJul 22, 2003 10:5310122
Re: Assured destruction [235 words]Cas BalickiJul 22, 2003 10:4910121
Harris article - discarding war rules [64 words]Gene LambsonJul 22, 2003 10:4410120
War rules [19 words]Sally HerbertJul 22, 2003 10:3310118
A New Set of Rules is needed [247 words]Iris HicksJul 22, 2003 10:2810117
best by test [75 words]B.R BradshawJul 22, 2003 10:2110116
why the u.s. is discarding war rules [22 words]beni t. deanJul 22, 2003 09:5210113
A fight to the finish [37 words]Melvin A. FechterJul 22, 2003 09:2110111
Sequelae to preemption [48 words]Alan E. GellerJul 22, 2003 09:0010110

Comment on this item

Mark my comment as a response to A constructive and non-violent solution to terrorism. by Victor Lipshutz

Email me if someone replies to my comment

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".

See recent outstanding comments.

Follow Daniel Pipes

Facebook   Twitter   RSS   Join Mailing List

ADVERTISEMENTS

eXTReMe Tracker

All materials by Daniel Pipes on this site: © 1968-2020 Daniel Pipes. daniel.pipes@gmail.com and @DanielPipes

Support Daniel Pipes' work with a tax-deductible donation to the Middle East Forum.Daniel J. Pipes

(The MEF is a publicly supported, nonprofit organization under section 501(c)3 of the Internal Revenue Code.

Contributions are tax deductible to the full extent allowed by law. Tax-ID 23-774-9796, approved Apr. 27, 1998.

For more information, view our IRS letter of determination.)