Wild West Revisited

by Richard Trotsky

And so it begins, we now have representatives from different police departments urging residents to go out and buy firearms so that if there is another terrorist attack they can engage the perpetrators of the attack.  I firmly believe that they have not thoroughly thought out these statements and the ramifications that could possibly come from them. That sounds like a plan of sheer genius, thousands of individuals who have never owned a firearm(and most likely never even fired one) in possession of one being prompted to actively engage individuals who may have had significant training with them. Yes, that makes perfect sense to me.

Statements such as these will serve as nothing more than fuel for conservative hate groups who are reveling in the dramatic increase in Islamophobia. They needn’t stoke the bellows, the forge of intolerance is still quite hot. I truly wished that people who make statements like these knew how to play chess, then perhaps they would try and preempt all possible outcomes. In a country that has an estimated 300 million guns in the possession of the population, and the highest number of violent crimes involving guns, somehow I don’t think that’s going to solve the problem.

I found this information to be even more alarming, the population of the United States comprises 4.33% of the global population, yet, 42% of all civilian owned guns exist in the US. Our civilian population has more firearms than many developed countries military’s (a link to give you some perspective http://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2015/10/2/9439435/americas-gun-violence-statistics). How was I ever so blind that the solution to combating domestic terrorism was simply by getting more guns into the hands of the people? I’m simply astounded at the mental astuteness of these individuals in regard to the complex social issues that we face, surely they’ll lead us to a new age of enlightenment, or perhaps just complete fascist control.

Furthermore, they tout these statements as proactive solutions to a growing terrorist threat, however, they are merely reactionary convulsions to an issue that was created directly by foreign policy decisions. Let’s be frank, the US has a long standing track record of either directly or indirectly toppling governments it sees as “uncooperative”, “hostile”, “aggressive”, or “unfavorable” and shortly thereafter instituting governments, or supporting governments that are more “friendly” to them.

We have witnessed firsthand the instability that follows, this merely allows terrorist elements to flourish. This type foreign policy is exactly what organizations like ISIS are hoping for. The nation becomes destabilized, and therefore is unable to stunt the progression of terrorist elements. These organizations then have the freedom to advance into nations due to the inability of the government to mount any form of significant counteroffensive against them.

The only logical solution to this dilemma is actually twofold. Firstly, a drastic change in foreign policy. We must cease our interference with the governments of foreign nations, where there is stability, we must not create instability. This in no way means that oppressive dictatorships should have a blind eye turned toward them, but there must be a method developed that will facilitate the development of a people’s government that would not jeopardize stability. We cannot simply supply resistance groups as this method has actually resulted in significant amounts of weapons falling into the control of terrorist organizations, as there is limited control of how these are distributed.

Secondly, the manner of engagement of these organizations must also change. Presently this is being facilitated through airstrikes that are precipitated by primarily western friendly governments. Yes, ordinance has become significantly more advanced and precise, yet it still is imperfect however. This equates to the use of any civilian deaths or casualties as propaganda for recruiting campaigns. This is exploited by terrorist organizations who use this as a declaration that the governments involved in the offensives are simply waging a war against Muslims, hence furthering growth of the organizations.

If there is to be any progression to be made against these organizations, they must be spurned by Muslim countries. The voices of moderate Muslims must be raised against the barbarism that these organizations propagate, the religious leaders must begin actively denouncing the methods and ideology espoused by them. Until this begins to occur, I fear that this epidemic will only continue to flourish.