Western Surrender, The Strategic FAILURE in the “War On Terror”

America and its allies have been fighting its War of Terror…I mean “War on Terror” for almost a decade and half. I’m gonna take the notion of the “War on Terror” seriously for a second and assume its not mostly for certain people‘s enrichment and look at it strategically.

Advanced countries that suffer terrorist attacks very rarely are fighting to ensure that Islamic motivated terrorist attacks do not hit their civilians*.

Now they are fighting Terrorists, as in somebody who wishes to invoke “terror” to achieve a political objective.

So in the “War on Terror” Jihadists are using terror as a tactic to achieve their strategic aims.

Terrorism is a tactic that has several purposes which can include but is not limited to killing innocent civilians(showing that you will), damage infrastructure(showing that you can), create a sense of fear in the population(that eats at their moral) and to create a sense of loss which can be a symbol like the Twin Towers or the loss of love ones. There are some countries where terrorist attacks are so bad that the average person has probably lost someone they know to a terrorist attack.

So when you are a collection of countries that value “freedom” and are fighting a “War on Terror” it would make sense to not do things that advance the strategic aims of the enemy. Like say canceling large annual events like Brussels canceling of their annual New Years fire works display. Something that advances the sense of fear and continues to wear at the morale of the populace.

Tactically it is stupid because if the “enemy” wished to do a terrorist attack they would have an easy time making a list of crowded places.

Strategically it is stupid because it advances the cause of the “enemy.”

 

*In my opinion it’s more about economic infrastructure, but let’s go with what the politicians say.