Difference between revisions of "Talk:Disempowering Terrorists"
| Line 41: | Line 41: | ||
---- | ---- | ||
| + | |||
| + | I think the only terrorists this approach is likely to Disempower are the fairly well educated, fairly well off, which is the minority of the terrorists. | ||
| + | |||
| + | The poor and disenfranchised are going to laugh in your face when you tell them they are going to fail. Their lives are so horrid that the only way out they can see is to earn rewards in the next life, and get there a little early. Since you cannot prove beyond a reasonable doubt that they're wrong, you're not going to convince them. | ||
Revision as of 17:03, 13 August 2007
Please let me hear from you on these ideas.
We are almost certainly about to change the political party in power in America. Our efforts to disempowering the terrorists may change radically. Out of box ideas like buy-in could save our nation. New approaches are desperately needed now.
--Jriley 19:24, 10 August 2007 (UTC)
- I have some problems with this article.
- My main problem is that while the title leads the reader to believe the article will address the subject of disempowering terrorists, the article doesn't actually address this topic at all. So the title is misleading.
- My other problem, which is related to the above, is that as it stands the article is a fairly good essay on buy-in. I think it might be better to merge this article with the Buy-In_Explained article and have a subsection on disempowering terrorists.
- The paragraph on disempowering terrorists doesn't actually explain how buy-in can be used to disempower them, only how buy-in is, perhaps, used to recruit and empower them.
- To be honest, I am quite uncomfortable discussing the subject at all, but I suppose it needs to be addressed. I'm also really unsure about whether this is a suitable forum for the discussion of such topics. I would prefer to keep our subject matter specific to returning to, and settling/colonizing the Moon and this subject does not fit that description. It also crosses into other areas that are politically and militarily sensitive.
- -- Mdelaney 15:24, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
Terrorism and returning to the Moon
If this article does not up set you, you simply have not been paying attention to our present reality.
One of the main reasons we do not now have an aggressive Return to the Moon program is the extremely high cost of the War on Terror. Not only are most of the available funds being used up but we are running up high debts what will last for decades.
NASA is being cut back and the number of young people hired and trained is falling off. The period between the retirement of the Shuttle and the first lunar flights will particularly dangerous to our space fairing capabilities.
For our return to the Moon, this war is the elephant in the pallor. If we do not address this problem, we are not going.
An alternative to an endless war must be found. Understanding buy-in to enable disempowerment of terrorist is one possible path. It is one that can be understood and supported by technically trained people. It can be our contribution to this effort. And it is very, very cheap.
Why this approach has a good chance of working is a little more technically and socially complicated. I will take the action item to write up an implementation section for this article next week.
--Jriley 21:21, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
I think the only terrorists this approach is likely to Disempower are the fairly well educated, fairly well off, which is the minority of the terrorists.
The poor and disenfranchised are going to laugh in your face when you tell them they are going to fail. Their lives are so horrid that the only way out they can see is to earn rewards in the next life, and get there a little early. Since you cannot prove beyond a reasonable doubt that they're wrong, you're not going to convince them.
