Would it not be the greatest show of mercy by the world’s superpower to pursue the currently wanted and presumably known terrorists, via diplomatic means and say the use of economic sanctions?
What use can there be in a war between Islam and Christianity? Where will Old Testament eye for and eye, tooth for a tooth cruise missile(s) for a hijacked and suicide crashing of a jet aircraft?
Personally, I have seen with people in Northern Ireland who have been on the receiving end of appalling atrocities (all be it on a smaller scale), over time learn to forgive, not forget but forgive and negotiate for the sake of peace.
(My most sincere condolences go out to the families of the victims of the United States tragedy)
For the sake of the safety of this nation one would have to suppose that mercy would be beneficial and hopefully stop future acts of violence.
I have no evidence for this but my gut reaction is that Osama bin Laden and his cronies (or whoever committed the WTC terrorism) would laugh their asses off if the US just sat back and decided to persue a non-aggressive policy. I would bet money that they would attack again in such an instance since I caanot see them all of a sudden changing their minds because the US was somehow very cool about the whole situation.
They will probably try to attack again anyway but by going after them with force we have some chance at putting a crimp in their activities.
BTW, who said anything about Muslim vs. Christianity? Assuming it’s Bin Laden, he doesn’t speak for most muslims, and if anything religious, it’s probably a war on Jews.
Leamas, mercy is a nice thought, but pointless. It just sends a message to anyone that this is acceptable and we won’t do jack about it. How does that help anyone? Justice, justice, shall thou pursue. While it’s not desirable to overreact and begin WWIII, neither is it desirable to sit back and let innocents be murdered.
Re: economic sanctions. I was a big supporter of economic sanctions during the Gulf War. I was wrong. Economic sanctions simply can’t do the job that needs to be done in this kind of situation.
In the case of Afghanistan, economic sanctions would be totally ineffective. The country is already desparately poor and economically isolated; you can’t cut off trade with someone you don’t trade with in the first place. (Which is why US efforts have been sensibly aimed at Pakistan, one of Afghanistan’s few trading and diplomatic partners.)
In the case of countries like Iraq, the economic sanctions affect the wrong people. The sanctions against Iraq affected millions of civilians, but there’s no evidence that it had a serious impact on Saddam and his cronies. The elite’s grip on power is still firm, and they can always smuggle in enough goods to assure their own comfort.
While there may yet be ways to solve the terrorism problem without war, I do not see how it can be solved without the serious and credible threat of war. There’s no reason for governments who harbor terrorists to change their ways unless they face an imminent threat to their own power and personal safety.
Anyway, I think what can be done besides trying to
capture bin Laden, which will apparently have to be
forceably, is for Americans to try to get to know their
neighbors.
In my mind, that is a moral and productive thing to do.
The fact is, more terrorists are already in the United
States. One non-aggressive thing we can do that might
save lives is to get to know everyone around us.
If we look less like nameless cattle, if we make a clear
distinction that we are not against Islam, or Arabs, so that
even one of these terrorists has a change of heart, we will
have saved lives and helped win this war against
terrorists.