If our enemy is "ideology driven" as Bush said, then you stop them by stopping the ideology. We can go on shooting terrorists, but how would that end terrorism if they are replaced at the same rate? Bush knows this. He and his cabal of war profiteers chose to "fight the war on terror" in this current manner NOT because it is the most effective, BUT BECAUSE IT IS THE MOST PROFITABLE. Endless war is a gravy train for them, with millions of dumb sheep in the US praising their "hard work". These Muslim schools appeal to the poor because they are free and often better than the State schools. They do not attend to become radicalized, but end up so. Bush threw $500 Billion down the Iraq rat hole, and accomplished what in regards to world terrorism? Just $10 Billion would have educated every child in Pakistan from K-12, schooled with the truth and not taught to hate, ending our problem in one generation. It is time to realize that BushCo is not fighting a war on terror, but a war on the US treasury, and that they are winning.

Let me try to rephrase your post in more palatable terms: --------------------------------------------------------- One potential method of combating terrorism (that has yet to be explored) would be to invest in education in the Middle East. Currently, children are being indoctrinated into a culture of hatred by religious schools, which parents often select because of the better education offered by religious schools than the state schools. We might find that we get considerably more "bang for our buck" by offering another, and hopefully a better choice, to potential terror recruits. ---------------------------------------------------------- Hmmm... I think you might have hit on something, MB. What would be entailed in the process of establishing non-sectarian schools that provide quality education to the young people of the middle east?

The State department started an initiative called MEPI, which unfortunately is nothing but a cover for Bush's failed Middle East democratization scheme. But it does have an education component that a decent President could make a seperate initiative, and make it a better funded priority. Instead of a few million dollars it needs to be a few billion, so it has a chance to actually be effective. http://mepi.state.gov/c10126.htm http://www.csmonitor.com/2003/0916/p07s01-woap.html

Even state schools would include heavy Muslim teachings. Islam incorporates laws and religion. When a country has its leader dismissing the holocaust and teaching anti-Semitic rhetoric it will trickle down in to every aspect of the school system. I know you mention Pakistan but the same would apply across the board. You essentially would need to ask for permission to dictate their curriculum.

Bush speech over, still not one single word about prevention. Not one idea outlined about stopping the next generation of radical muslims being taught to attack us. Maybe he is not really interested in stopping it.

Or maybe he understands that you can't stop it for as long as the Islamic world has no separation of church and state?

What he understands now is that you can't force democracy on them either. Getting those responsible for 911 is fine, but a western effort at nation-building in the Middle East is always doomed to fail. Radical Islam can be isolated from mainstream Islam and made to wither, but a frontal assault on their culture will only backfire. The misleaders: http://thinkprogress.org/the-architects-where-are-they-now/ The realistic path: http://www.topix.net/content/trb/0975309824371109175901527397231324703763

Sorry that dog won't walk, you cannot know what he understands or does not understand by what has been said to date.... it's impossible. Are you indicating that the Middle easterner is defective or mentally incompetent.. or maybe you are saying that the Middle Easterner is incapable of changing? I disagree with all 3 ideas. The problem with imposing an American type of democracy, or a British one for that matter, on the Iraqi is they don't fully understand it... but that doesn't mean they can't learn. They sure picked up on voting fast enough.

arrogance prevents people from seeing that most peoples are fully capable of becoming democratic. Pundits for years said Korea would never be democratic. !2million Iraqis voted despite terror threats. Palis have voted against the corruption of the PLO and Fatah. It can and does work in a variety of environments.

The Palis elected Hamas, and you see how that worked out. Lebanon worked for a short time only because Hezbollah had their own area where they were not under State control, and now look. The only place democracy works is in lands without competing tribes, like Indonesia, or in a government without a religious bias. There is 2000 years of history working against Sunni/Shiite cooperation, as well as the recent period of Sunni domination under Saddam. Our forces now in Iraq only add another complication to the process, seen as working with a government which favors one side. The links I gave speak for themselves.

Democracy has come to Lebanon, Palestinians, Iraq, Iran, most Central and South American countries, and many others. We may not like the results of elections there, but it's democracy all the same, worthy of support and encouragement, rather than shunning and starving them out. Democratization is the wave of the future. Hopefully the US and UK will restrain their suppport for Kingdoms and Dictatorships that oppress their own people. Where did most of the 911 hijackers and 311 come from?

Democracy is an idea and for as long as people have the freedom to think to themselves then they have the ability to embrace Communism, Socialism, and any other idea... including Democracy. The Iraqis have a great start at Democracy. Iraq is a country of almost 27 Million, which isn't bad because in 2003 the estimate was over 25 Million and people have been whining for almost 4 years about all the Iraqis dying. These people must breed like rabbits if the anti-war crowd is right. :) The age structure of the country is about 39.7% who are 14 and under, 3% who are 65 or older and about 57.3% who are from 15 - 64 years of age. This means that between 50% and 60 % of Iraqi is of voting age, tallying up to an approximation of about 14.8 million voters. Almost 13 Million Iraqis voted in the last election, despite the personal danger to them.. that means around 86% of the Iraqis eligible to vote did indeed vote. Now that is Democracy in action.

From the link I gave earlier of Kissinger: 'Iraq is not a nation in the historic sense,' he said, pointing to the ferocity of the conflicts among Kurds and Sunni and Shiite Arabs. 'The evolution of democracy usually has to go through a phase in which a nation [is] born. And by attempting to skip that process, our valid goals were distorted into what we are now seeing. 'In Iraq, he said, elections, the centerpiece of the administration's political strategy, merely sharpened sectarian differences. 'It [was] a mistake to think that you can gain legitimacy primarily through the electoral process,' he said.

Dont kid yourself! These people are NOT misunderstanding anything. They are not stupid, and they are sometimes smarter than we have been in dealing with them!