This may be off topic, but if the troops are fighting in America, and we were to 'pull out', where do we send them?
Except that people should care about the schools being built, because in the long run education could very well be the best antidote to the brand of extremist fundamentalism which is endemic to that part of the world. I'm all for building schools, anywhere in the world. But I agree that it is not going to be in the news, because it is not the type of information which brings ratings.
I should have better sense than to get into this, but apparently I don't... It seems someone should raise the subject of modern battlefield medicine here, as they seem to be saving the lives of a great many who would have been mortally wounded in earlier conflicts. At least I have the impression that the wounded/killed ratio this time is much higher than historical norms? georgeplmr? anyone? I'm not sure just how to weight this in assessing as peculiar a concept as "safest wars" but it must count somehow?
Trick question. Lets say the South was to pull out. But wait...isn't the fact that they pulled out what started the whole damn war to begin with?
More education is always good but not sure how much of an antidote it would be. After all, when people on these boards try to talk about eliminating poverty in these countries as a means toward stamping out terrorism, they are often countered with...."most of the 9/11 terrorists were middle class or better." Similarly.....most of the 9/11 terrorists were fairly well educated also. Anyway....sorry for the non-sequitar....carry on.
Well, I guess your point, if I may be so presumptuous, is that some posters here pick and choose the "hooray, schools!" angle for their own convenience. If you were to apply the same argument to the domestic side, the right wing brigade will call you out for being a criminal-coddling marxist.
I am not an expert in terrorism, but I think that these particular cases were exceptions, because the terrorist leaders had to search for educated candidates due to the complexity of their mission. I am not saying that education will solve the problem 100 percent, but my guess is that an educated society is less likely to breed suicide bombers. I think that most of the suicide bombers have little education other than whatever their brainwashing religious leaders put in their head. Obviously, I am being speculative, but I believe that one reason we don't see more 9/11 type attacks is because most suicidal volunteers will be people who lack the educational level needed to pull off a proyect of that magnitude.
It's the media's fault that Chivas USA is in last place. Stop focusing on the bad news and let them do their job.
I think there's a distinction to be made between people who support terrorist groups and the actual terrorists. Terrorist groups enjoy the support they do because there is an underclass. Of course, the actual people who conduct terrorism tend to be, oh let's just say, crazy and know no socioeconomic boundaries. [horrible analogy alert!] I kinda liken them to upper middle class kids who end up doing non-profit work. They have nothing to gain financially from helping the poor or the powerless. But it's the sense of duty that drives them. It's not so much that education is the antidote to breeding terrorists, but that education and a viable middle class minimize the motivation for terrorism. That's probably true. And I don't think they feel the need to pull off something like that again. Plus, the terrorists get much better ROI now that US troops are in Iraq.
I suppose there is always that risk. An education will help people see the errors of extreme fundamentalism, but it might just turn them all into Marxists. There's always the danger that students will turn from the opiate of the masses to the opiate of the inteligentzia.