Today's Poll: Should the War on Terror come to an end?

it's a rather difficult question to answer with a "yes or no"
Yes - the war on terror should come to an end.
should we stop trying to fight terrorist or anybody else intent to do us harm? no
should the U.S. use drones to kill U.S. citizens, probably not, but maybe sometimes.
should the terrorist stop trying to kill Americans well, yeah, but will they? probably not.
should the U.S. get out of Afganistan - I think so
should the U.S. get out of Iraq - I think so......

my point is - it's early on a Friday and I haven't finished my coffee yet - and it is difficult to answer this question by a simple "yes" or "no"
have a good day! :)

I agree Gary, as long as there those willing to attack our interests in the name of a cause (religious or otherwise), then the war on terror remains an unavoidable consequence. The ultimate goal of terrorists is not the aquisition of territory, goods, people, or the evangelization of inhabitants. The ultimate goal of terrorists is the elimination of those who don't believe as they do. Peace cannot be made with groups bent on our elimination.

This really isn't even a valid question anymore. I think that the "War on Terror" probably should continue until it is finished, but this current pResidential administration has required that the true identifier of the real perpetrators, Islam, cannot actually be mentioned. (That's what happens when a war against Moslems is supposedly being led by a Moslem...) A four-year old could figure this out, but tens of millions of Americans have had the wool pulled over their eyes:
They don't really understand what (who) their 'mass-ignorance' has placed in charge. The majority of people supporting this Administration can only do so through a failure to have researched it... This is why I have to call them "low-information voters", as there cannot really be any other way of looking at it. (It's not a 'political party' thing, as the main-stream GOP is simply the other side of the same coin... They are ALL working towards the same ends: They all want to have all of the power consolidated amongst a few select people...
Our Republic, (it is NOT a democracy, contrary to that which your handlers are telling you) is in EXACTLY the state in which they want it to be in- They have legislated us into this near-collapse situation.
If you believe that the Obamao administration is doing ANYTHING to preserve your liberty, I have some PRIME beachfront property to sell you in Henderson. GREAT price, so send me a check or some cash!

Seems to me the "War on Terror" has been as successful as the "War on Drugs" Alot of meaningless battles, arrests and hollow victories to keep the participants busy. But we are just as safe and have just about the same amounts of incidents as the 20 years before each of these "wars" started.

While I am not usually glib about 9/11 due to my seeing NYC's involvement first hand. Come on people how long have "the terrorists" tried to take down the world trade centers before 9/11? I can recall at least 3 attempts. They were gonna succeed eventually. The real heroes of this war on terror are those who have honestly tried to make a difference, from those brave souls who died in that field in Shanksville PA to the enlisted men who die and get maimed daily trying to make this world and our place in it safer. (I give no respect to the politicians and their military marionettes who's strings they pull to give these men their orders.) No words can describe the honors those grunts who try to do what is right and put their lifes and honor and duty, above even their families to preserve our way of life and protect us.

Sorry for the rant. Memorial day weekend and memories tend to get to me this time of the year.

As long as there is Jihad..A holy war as some call it..There will never be an end to terrorism..So there will always be a war on terror..The point that needs debating is how we fight it..Giving up our own personal freedoms is not the correct way to do it..

The very first war that we fought as a nation was with Muslim nations, as was the third, They were called the Barbary Wars, While the general perception is that these wars were against pirates, they were actually against Muslim nations who sponsored piracy. The Muslims then would raid commercial shipping and besides plundering the stores would enslave the passengers and crew, demanding huge ransoms for any of their return. In one instance the Imirs asked $1 million for the return of US Merchant sailors [Roughly 10% of our entire federal budget at the time.

In March 1785, Thomas Jefferson and John Adams went to London to negotiate with Tripoli's envoy, Ambassador Sidi Haji Abdrahaman (or Sidi Haji Abdul Rahman Adja). Upon inquiring "concerning the ground of the pretensions to make war upon nations who had done them no injury", the ambassador replied:

"It was written in their Koran, that all nations which had not acknowledged the Prophet were sinners, whom it was the right and duty of the faithful to plunder and enslave; and that every mussulman who was slain in this warfare was sure to go to paradise. He said, also, that the man who was the first to board a vessel had one slave over and above his share, and that when they sprang to the deck of an enemy's ship, every sailor held a dagger in each hand and a third in his mouth; which usually struck such terror into the foe that they cried out for quarter at once"

In 1804, the situation became untenable and then US President Thomas Jefferson reactivated the US Navy and US Marine Corps and set to end the State Sponsored Piracy once and for all. A small team of marines led by Lt Presley O'Bannon raided the City of Tripoli [The shores of Tripoli from the Marine corps hymn] and forced the Sultans to enter a treaty, a treaty that they broke n 1816 precipitating a second war. It was because of the first Barabary war that the US Navy and US Marine Corps became permanent full time branches of the armed forces.

The point is that we think of terrorism as something new and of the 20th and 21st century, but that is far from the truth, Jihad has been wage against all western civilization since the Moore's and Ottoman's and RADICALIZED MUSLIM's have existed through out our history, and NOT as a result of our interventions REAL or PERCEIVED. It really has absolutely nothing to do with our current foreign policy, it is from centuries of religious fanaticism, and not solely against Israel, Muslims have warred with aand attempted to enslave their infidels for centuries.

We can bring an end to a current war, but it is a myth to believe that it just won't be replaced by another war, usually only a few years after.

Is it time to scale back our war footing, Yes, but it won't be the end, just a pause. Just assuming that the War On Terror is over because we say so is naïve. We still need to be vigilante and call a spade a spade whether the threat is born overseas or from a home grown source. It won't completely end simply by willing it away.

Yes, it is time to reduce our war footing, but do not fool yourself that it will be over for good, because wars again will come and some of those sorry to say will again be with radicalized Muslims as have been for several hundred years.

The validity of the American 'War on Terror' is essentially argued by perspective, ultimately, semantics. The proponents of intervention in foreign countries employ the word, 'terror,' to modulate domestic support for such intervention. It is a buzz word that evokes an emotional response. Acts of 'terrorism' committed within American borders have been perpetrated (almost exclusively) by citizens of this nation whose contact with foreign agents is mostly non-existent. The Fraunces Tavern, TWA/La Guardia terminal, Oklahoma City and Atlanta Olympics bombings had nothing to do with foreign interests. However, the lens Americans are convinced to peer through contrives a fallacious understanding that 'terror' is seeded on foreign shores and cultivated here.

Bringing our 'War on Terror' to countries in the Middle East cannot and will never end acts of terrorism. If anything, killing Iraqis, Afghanis and Pakistanis will breed more hatred and distrust of American motives. These interventions in the Middle East have reasons- none of which are relative to domestic terrorism. They are based on the notion that American security depends on dominance of regions retaining reserves of gas and petroleum. They are based on profits earned by companies provisioning and supporting military expeditions.

The rest is hogwash.