But to advocate and engage in more mass destruction would be to lock us into the same cycle of viciousness, madness, and murder that has engulfed Israel the Middle East. To retaliate for the murder of innocents with the murder of more innocents is just as evil. And worse, it will only invite more terrorism, not prevent it.
To quote Bruce Shapiro: “Terrorists are made, not born.” I suggest you all read his article with an open mind.
Sure, the men who ordered, financed, planned and executed yesterday’s attacks are evil. They must be brought to justice. And hell, I don’t care if justice is administered by a judge, a sniper, or a mob of stone-throwing New Yorkers. But if our leaders try to apply a military solution to this problem and begin launching cruise missiles at cities, they’ll just make the problem worse. Please don’t encourage them!
Intelligence, espionage, and surgical precision are necessary and sufficient to demonstrate our might and our right. To declare war on an entire population will just drag us all into hell.
Somehow, I doubt that our government would simply start bombing civilians. I would hope they pick military targets, or places where their target is likely to be hiding. If civilians are hiding a terrorist, they are (not quite, but almost) as bad - May they all rot in hell.
Those who are innocent victims, if there have to be, will be mourned by all decent people.
Don’t you think that your comments represent a 21st century version of appeasement? This is a turning point for terrorism. Our response will decide if this becomes what history remembers as the most heinous terrorist act ever, or if this becomes a starting point for worse.
I agree that knee-jerk carpet bombing is not a good idea. However, the Talisban is complicit with Bin Ladan. If it is found that he is responsible for this attack, then not only did he commit an act of war, Afghanistan did as well, because they protect and to some extent, finance him. That requires military response.
World opinion is on America’s side on this issue right now. For some nations not so friendly to the U.S., that is only because they want no part of our anger over this, but the opinion is there. If we send a clear and decisive message to potential perpetrators of these acts that if you decide you need to kill 10,000 plus civilians in an attack, and you feel you must target a head of state, your organization will pay by having its existence wiped from the earth, and if any nations are complicit with these organizations, we will hold you responsible as accomplices. This kind of a message won’t end terrorism, but it will hopefully set a limit on its violence/mass murder.
Terrorist organizations, the ones who have the capabilities of these kinds of terrible attacks, typically have state sponsorship. The state responsible must pay the piper as well. That does not mean you bomb civilians to hell. That means government and military objectives. If you do not send the message to the states as well as the terrorists, then this is just the first in a series of even more heinous attack, and perhaps next time, maybe its a suitcase nuclear bomb, or biological act of terrorism. In that case, you may be in just as much danger of losing your life as someone in a high profile building. How do you think you’ll react then, as you become a victim of this? Will you still think that we should not hold the co-conspirators liable?