Resolved: The United States should fight the war on terror until Al-Qaeda is eliminated.

Dear Sir: Thank you for beginning this debate. This is also my first time on this website, and I'm looking forward to hearing your arguments. I will show that the Negative should win because it is impossible for the Affirmative to meet the terms of its own resolution. Terrorism, by Osama bin Laden or any other figures, in Afghanistan, India, or anywhere else, cannot be eradicated through warfare. The United States' war on terror is an unwinnable war. This is because a) the inherent nature of terrorism and b) the specific geopolitical context in which the war on terror must operate. A)Contention A: Terrorism, generally defined as attacks on civilians to inspire fear in governments or communities, cannot be defeated in a military war both practically speaking and ideologically. a.Subpoint A: From a purely practical perspective, the US can't get rid of Al Qaeda in Afghanistan because Al Qaeda and other terrorist organizations use asymmetrical warfare. I.e., since they wouldn't stand a chance directly against US infantry or tanks and it don't have the manpower or multibillion dollar war machine of the US, they strike in unexpected ways. There's no bases, no boundaries to fight, Al Qaeda members live in everyday communities. Tactically, routing out terrorists essentially requires bulldozing entire cities (resulting in extreme civilian casualties, which I will come back to.) Terrorist structures, including Al Qaeda, are generally decentralized, so removing one person like Osama bin Laden doesn't achieve the Affirmative's purpose. b.Subpoint B: This brings me to my second point: Terrorism cannot be defeated via warfare because it is ideologically motivated by victimhood, therefore it is perpetuated by the violence of a dominant world-power like the United States. Terrorism thrives on the narrative of imperial powers (historically the West) coming into to other countries (historically non-white, non-English speaking countries) and taking over. The United States is doing exactly that. Millions of people have been displaced, injured, and killed over the course of the war, most of them civilians. Hospitals, schools, homes, national treasures and cultural artifacts have been destroyed without a thought. The war on Afghanistan has been the single most effective recruitment tool for Al Qaeda in the last thirty years. This is known as the "blowback" effect by the CIA. The more violence and destruction for which the United States is responsible, the more terrorism will result. B)Contention B: Along those lines, the United States will not win the war on terror in Afghanistan or defeat Al Qaeda because it will never have popular support, in Afghanistan or from the rest of the Middle East. It's common knowledge that the United States funneled money into weapons and training for the mujahedeen in the 1970s so they could eject the Soviets. When the Soviets pulled out, the United States left a war-torn country with more guns than schools and an extreme political power vacuum eventually filled by the Taliban and reactionary religious groups. It hasn't escaped their notice that the United States could have cared less about the Afghan population, and this is the key to the United States' unpopularity in the region and around the world: our hypocrisy. We support dictatorships when it's convenient for us, and wrap ourselves in the rhetoric of freedom when we want to take out governments (often democratically elected: Chile, Iran, Haiti… etc etc) that aren't advancing our interests. In the Middle East, we support governments that imprison and abuse their own people in Saudia Arabia, Pakistan, and India, which hardly lends credibility to our case. Most importantly, the United States supports Israel's occupation of Palestine. The details of which are the topic for another debate, but it's undeniable that huge portions of the Arabic-speaking and Muslim worlds view this in a negative light. Reactionary Islamist movements are fueled by the United States' heavy handed, unilateral interventions around the world. In summary, the Affirmative cannot meet the terms of its own case, because in your terms there is no way to "keep fighting until we get rid of these people." It's impossible, and to continue to pursue it means more and more loss of innocent life and deserved badwill towards the United States. How do we win against Al-Qaeda? Fierce, unrelenting, even when it's difficult consistency in the pursuit of justice. Spending a fraction of what we spend on cluster bombs on economic development, public education, healthcare in the United States or abroad. Supporting the non-profits and other civil society groups that argue for freedom of speech and women's rights in Afghanistan with funding and protection. Calling out our allies when they violate human rights. I urge a Negative vote. If we want to live in a fairer, safer world, we need to start by ending the violence and destruction in Afghanistan that comes back and harms more innocent people through terrorism. Thank you.