Given that there are people here that have the answers to everything...

[warrior queen]

.... What's the solution to stopping radical suicide bombers?
It's fast becoming apparent that all the preventative measures so far are failing dismally, and fanatical men and women are still getting into soft target areas and causing maximum havoc.

So what can be done to prevent or deter them?
More security measures? And if so, what?
Close all borders? What about those already there?
Immediate restrictions on all ingredients that can be used to manufacture explosives? How would that be enforced?

Are YOU comfortable with the idea of travel these days? Second guessing your attendence at a major sporting/arts event?
Have you changed your plans to avoid areas you think might be targeted?

My Aunt was due to fly to Turkey today. She has cancelled her travel plans and is reconsidering any future ones.
It seems a completely insurmountable issue.

 

[hobbit.]

.... What's the solution to stopping radical suicide bombers?
It's fast becoming apparent that all the preventative measures so far are failing dismally, and fanatical men and women are still getting into soft target areas and causing maximum havoc.

So what can be done to prevent or deter them?
More security measures? And if so, what?
Close all borders? What about those already there?
Immediate restrictions on all ingredients that can be used to manufacture explosives? How would that be enforced?

Are YOU comfortable with the idea of travel these days? Second guessing your attendence at a major sporting/arts event?
Have you changed your plans to avoid areas you think might be targeted?

My Aunt was due to fly to Turkey today. She has cancelled her travel plans and is reconsidering any future ones.
It seems a completely insurmountable issue.

ban all borders and travel.

consider the King Herod appraoch (with added gender equality and racial diversity)

 

[Lancecastor]

The actual risk of being blown up is effectively zero.

You are more likely to be run over by a bus while being struck by lightning.

All this terror shit is designed to create fear.

So the answer is... Stop being afraid.

Like GWB said after 9/11... The best thing you can do is take that trip to disneyworld.

 

[phrodeau]

Japan used suicide bombers. It took nuclear weapons to get them to stop.

 

[warrior queen]

I'd say the 'spread fear' part of this is working. People are afraid of certain places and activities now....
It's one thing to say go about your activities, and quite another after you or your loved ones have been caught up in an attack.
So back to my original question - what's the solution?

 

[barefootgirl69]

The actual risk of being blown up is effectively zero.

You are more likely to be run over by a bus while being struck by lightning.

All this terror shit is designed to create fear.

So the answer is... Stop being afraid.

Like GWB said after 9/11... The best thing you can do is take that trip to disneyworld.

I agree. It's probably safer now, right after an attack, when everyone is watching. If you let fear dictate what you do in your life, the terrorists have won.

 

[Que]

It might help a little if the news media did not endlessly glorify these acts. The perpetrators names should never be published. The news should deliberately underreport fatalities; should report every attempt as a failure.

None of that will happen of course.

The probably false, closeted homosexual angle was kind of nifty.

 

[warrior queen]

Japan used suicide bombers. It took nuclear weapons to get them to stop.

That would likely stop any new radicals coming from those targeted areas.
What about the ones already living in other countries?

 

[Lancecastor]

I agree. It's probably safer now, right after an attack, when everyone is watching. If you let fear dictate what you do in your life, the terrorists have won.

Plus... I forgot the most imprtant bit... don't live in or visit the middle east, europe, mexico, south america, southeast asia, or the usa.

 

[Que]

President Obama's policy of drone strikes at weddings for the maximum familial collateral damage is a bit extreme but probably not a horrible idea on its merits.

 

[barefootgirl69]

Plus... I forgot the most imprtant bit... don't live in or visit the middle east, europe, mexico, south america, southeast asia, or the usa.

Lmao... so I can still go to Australia!!! Yay!

 

[NOIRTRASH]

The cure is simple.

Hitler put the Gestapo where trouble was likely. I'd do the same and racially profile the bastards, and take the captures to a secluded spot for a brief scare. Follow ragheads around and make them nervous.

like this

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nftF-g48UYA

 

[Lancecastor]

Lmao... so I can still go to Australia!!! Yay!

Mind the abo's.

 

[Hard_Rom]

It is not fast becoming apparent. Anarchist bombers of the early late 19th and early 20th century and IRA bombers have shown that almost any level of security can be penetrated. Or you just bypass it and go for indefensible targets like pubs and shopping centers. Increased security means you end up living in a police state with concentration camps for even suspected radicals.

Military actions do not solve the problem. The Irish conflict required a political solution and is still not perfect. Nuking Hiroshima convinced the political apparatus of Imperial Japan to quit. Not really a military victory like the Russians having to fight right to Hitler's bunker door.

People are not prepared to pay the price to effect change. Stop supporting non-democratic countries. That leads to hardships for innocents within that country, their government just sells it's oil/ cheap goods to some other non-democratic country, boycott that country and our prices sky rocket. Some goods may not be available anymore.

Stop buying Saudi oil and they just sell it to China. Boycott China and they call in their debt markers.
Buy only from democratic nations and prices sky rocket.

No simple solution.

Afghans do not use suicide bombers. It's not in their culture. But a car bomb is. Fortify airports and the IRA bombed a Birmingham pub.

Political solutions are needed. War is just politics by other means.

How about skin tight body suits for all as legislated clothing. With fat people subject to search in case it is a fat suit.

An Arab prince was killed when a militant had the bomb in his guts.

 

[sr71plt]

A lot of this is being prevented already. You just mostly hear about what manages to happen. One true thing that Bush the Lesser said is that "We have to win every time; the terrorists only have to win once."

A start would be get serious on financial support for antiterrorism and the gun control measures (which would include cutting back on the manufacturing of assault weapons--especially for public sales. The United States is the largest producer and distributor or arms in the world and sells them to anyone forking over the money. So, we're more than a little two-faced on that issue).

In the wake of the shooting down of the Republican two-faced witch hunt on Benghazi yesterday (there were twenty attacks on U.S. Embassies during Bush the Lesser's administration, sixty Americans killed in these attacks, and zero congressional investigation of them), an interviewed Republican senator admitted that the Republican-control Congress dumped requests for beefing up of embassy protections and that he himself voted against the requests.

The bottom line, though, is that it's a new, more dangerous world--with much of the rest of the world having been in danger long before it hit the United States--and, as Bush the Lesser said, "We have to win every time; the terrorists only have to win once."

We can add more security to embassies, but we'll never make them attack proof. That's the nature of missions abroad; they've been hostage to the hosts countries and the local political climate since the beginning of diplomatic time. Those representing us abroad know that--they know they are on the far edges of any protection they could have. The Benghazi consulate was wiped away before any American forces possibly could have gotten to it. Going after the Obama administration on Benghazi was a crass and cowardly political attack--especially in view of the Bush administration's record on protecting embassies and the Republican Congress' record on provide support for embassy security.

If any element of the U.S. government should be fingered for Benghazi, it was the CIA, not the White House or the State Department. Although it did it for good reason (the White House and State are sieves on leaking information), the CIA had operations coming out of that consulate that neither State nor the White House were fully aware of. (That's why the ambassador was there--he was trying to find out what more was going on from the Benghazi consulate that he'd been told about). And what was going on heightened the consulate as a terrorist target.

Where to start? Well, the major reality is that you actually have to start, and the Republic-controlled Congress is refusing to do that. So, you start by either forcing a brain and heart on those already in Congress or putting people in Congress (it could be new Republicans) who will actually make a start. Then I'd start on the supply, on wiping organized terrorism out where it is located, and, yes, maybe increase U.S. mission protection--but the increasing protection issue is pretty much a wishful thinking, fig leaf approach based on people's misconception that it can be done--because, of course, America can do anything it wants to do.

 

[oggbashan]

Post #3 is part of the answer.

In most countries you are more likely to be killed by a drunk driver than by a terrorist.

The other answer is to build bridges with Muslim communities so that they do not produce people attracted to martyrdom. That is difficult when many Nato countries, and Russia, are seen to be killing 'innocents' in their bombing campaigns.

We are losing the propaganda war. While we continue to lose, the terrorists encourage more people to become terrorists.

 

[Bad_Doggie]

Rational thought and Atheism......and diminished power/influence of the House of Saud.

Woof!

 

[warrior queen]

For those that think politics is the answer.... don't you think it's a little late for that?
Political compromise isn't going to change the thoughts/actions of those that have already been radicalized, nor will it prevent any future attacks by people already in other countries who may be planning them.

 

[sr71plt]

Who knows? Most of the politics we have had on it hasn't been applied to the actual problems.

So, are you just going to complain about it?

 

[Liar]

.... What's the solution to stopping radical suicide bombers?

Make radicalism irrelevant.

Moderate suicide bombers are few and far between.

 

[warrior queen]

Who knows? Most of the politics we have had on it hasn't been applied to the actual problems.

So, are you just going to complain about it?

I didn't think I was complaining!
I'm looking for what people think might work as a solution. There doesn't appear to be an effective one suggested so far....
Opening the conversation seems a lot better than sitting back and waiting to see who/where gets targeted next.

 

[Hard_Rom]

For those that think politics is the answer.... don't you think it's a little late for that?
Political compromise isn't going to change the thoughts/actions of those that have already been radicalized, nor will it prevent any future attacks by people already in other countries who may be planning them.

Go ahead bomb the whole bloody lot back to the stone age. I doubt that will stop those already radicalized or in another country either. Round them up or any you suspect and put them in 'preventative detention'. And another generation will grow up with a real reason to hate us.

How about a crescent symbol sewn onto their clothes to identify any possible radicals?

 

[sr71plt]

I didn't think I was complaining!
I'm looking for what people think might work as a solution. There doesn't appear to be an effective one suggested so far....
Opening the conversation seems a lot better than sitting back and waiting to see who/where gets targeted next.

I gave it a shot--which is more than you've done, isn't it? I think my suggestions are sound for starters. The Republicans haven't hardly started and on Benghazi, they were a major contributor to the lessened security before there was a problem--and had a bigger problem of their own with U.S. embassy attacks and deaths of Americans before Benghazi. So, the Republicans could start by not being two-faced and by not just sitting on their hands. I think that contributes more to a solution than anything I've seen you mention.

I'll wait to make any further suggestions until you've made your first one.

 

[Liar]

For those that think politics is the answer.... don't you think it's a little late for that?

It's a long term project. But just because it takes a while, doesn't mean we shouldn't start.

You can prevent landslides by planting trees. The last 30 or so years, we've been starting forest fires. Maybe not do that?

 

[snugglestruggle]

You have to strike at the root cause, which in this case is Islam. People keep saying Islam is a peaceful religion, if that's true an awful lot of mayhem is being done in it's name.

Three things need to happen.

1) The grand Poohbah's of Islam get together and denounce committing any violence in Islam's name, then they have to edit the Quran and get rid of all that slay the infidel crap in the name of Islam.
2) Execute Order 66, arrest the purveyors of violence, those that preach/incite violence in the name of Islam. Then behead them and all their spawn.
3) Execute those of commit acts of violence in the name of Islam.

Of course none of this will happen because the Jihadi's are just useful pawns in a bigger monopoly game for control of the world. So let the mayhem continue.