Excellent post. But watch out: The America-can-do-no-wrong warmongers who inhabit this forum rarely allow reason to interfere with their "patriotic" harangues. (I'm still trying to figure out how they equate patriotism with the bombardment of innocent civilians.)
The author of this article is correct: Our bombs have merely exascerbated anti-American hatred in the Muslim world. Bombs blowing up things (including innocent families) may satisfy our collective lust for revenge, but they do little to address the root causes of terrorism.
If the United States government is truly interested in fighting terrorism, it needs to start with a candid reappraisal of its own foreign policy.
- Un-PC
Nonsense. Our bombs have caused Muslims to celebrate and rejoice that the yoke of the Taliban has been lifted from them all across Northern Afghanistan. Islamic nations are now demanding to be included in the winning coalition, with Indonesia, Turkey, and Jordan all volunteering their soldiers for new anti-Taliban peacekeeping in Afghanistan.
Has hatred against America increased since our bombing started? Not in Islamic Pakistan. Demonstations against America have decreased in both size and temperment.
You aren't "un-pc", either. Your long-since debunked versions of moral relatism and pacifism combine to epitomize the tired old politically correct views of lazy, cowardly liberals throughout college campuses around the world.
Grow up. Act like an adult. Terrorists must be killed, not coddled with feel-good liberalism. Collateral civilian casualties are regrettable, but certainly shouldn't frighten us away from dispensing justice upon those who choose to attack us.
1. Taliban soldiers and leaders aren't "innocent civilians".
2. The U.S. is not intentionally killing civilians, in fact, we're going out of our way NOT to do so. If the Muslim world can't see and understand that, then that's their problem.
"If the United States government is truly interested in fighting terrorism, it needs to start with a candid reappraisal of its own foreign policy."
Hey, you wouldn't by any chance be that Saudi prince that offered Giuliani $10 million, along with a suggestion that the U.S. re-evaluate its foreign policy", would you?
For two months I've heard those of the liberal persuasion talk about "re-appraising our foreign policy" yet I've heard not a single suggestion as to what exactly is wrong with our foreign policy. Which parts of our foreign policy would you like to see changed? Please be specific. Also, do you think it's in our best interests to make blanket changes to our foreign (or domestic, for that matter) policies when foreign or domestic entities mass murder our fellow citizens? In other words, if I don't get the potholes fixed in front of my house, should I shoot my neighbor and claim, "This never would have happened if the city had a reasonable street repair policy"?
Look at WWII. The war against the Nazis certainly resulted in a great many French, Belgian, Dutch, and German citizens being killed by the dumb iron bombs we used back then. Yet, there is no residue of hate against the U.S. The people were intelligent enough to realize that some wars need to be fought, and that it is impossible to fight a war and guarantee that there will be no civilian casualties.
Even if we assume the initial point is correct, we must also assume that the entire population of Afghanistan hates the Taliban because of civilian deaths during the civil war. Thus, we should be extrememly popular for forcing the hated Taliban out of power. Right?
The weakness, as well as the strength of our system of government is that some are forced to risk life and limb to uphold the right of idiots to spout whatever comes into their minds no matter how absurd.
There has never been a war in history where innocent families have not suffered deprivation, injury and death.
As for addressing the root causes of terrorism being the proper purpose of war, it is so numbingly mindless that I am at a loss for words.
Some would obligate us to reason with carjackers and muggers?
What kind of immature mind would operate on such a naive level? It is frustratingly impossible to participate in a discussion with a mind so disassociated from reality.