How does the US Left propose to deal with terrorism?
===========
This is merely a sketch and has many gaps I'm sure.
In brief, anti-terrorist actions must be de-militarized and work hand-in-hand with a changed (as in, non-aggression and exploitation based) US foreign policy.
...
Terrorism is a criminal activity -- extreme and usually politically motivated but criminal nonetheless since innocents are killed and injured (by contrast, engaging only armed groups, as Hezbollah is said to have done in Lebanon against Isreali forces in the 1980s can be considered asymentrical warfare). Like other criminal activities, terrorism must be dealt with primarily through policing.
Real policing (as opposed to bullying) requires precise information to be effective since only a small portion of any given population is committing crimes and the police can not (should not) be watching the entire populace.
How do you identify and deal with criminals without harming the innocent? You build credibility with ordinary people, many of whom have the information you need. How do you build credibility? By demonstrating your intent to not harm them and only apprehend (and, if necessary, in the course of an unavoidable shootout for example, kill) the actual perpetrators of terrorism. Of course, the background to this would be a democratically determined and controlled policing system.
The United States, as you know, claims to target only terrorists but, since it militarized what should be understood as an international policing matter has only succeeded in alienating multitudes who might have been willing to help.
In an earlier post, I told the story of how, during my childhood, the police abused many males when fewer than ten were involved in a crime spree. Consequently, what should have been a straightforward police operation of finding the actual perpetrators of a series of crimes became a difficult time for everyone. No one was willing, after being abused, to help the police even though they desired to see the arrest of the criminals who should have been the sole target of police attention.
How much less are people in Afghanistan and Iraq (not to mention those in neighboring countries who've observed American conduct) willing to help after being not merely harassed but killed, maimed and humilated. Without the help of ordinary people, the force multiplier of police intelligence, anti-terrorist efforts will fail.
How do you prevent future terrorist attacks?
The reality is that complete security is a fantasy. For some time, even if the US were to change its foreign policy in intelligent and humane ways overnight, there would be terrorism directed against it. So an ongoing -- global -- investigation and interception effort would be required even under the best of circumstances.
Of course, we won't get the best of circumstances so present anti-terrorism efforts are in a double-bind: on the one hand there is the actual threat of terrorism but, on the other hand the actions taken to prevent terrorism only serve to increase the likelihood.
The only way to break this closed loop is by changing the actions you can control - your own.
Much more can be said about this and I hope others, more knowledgeble, will contribute to the thread.
.d.