Friday, September 20, 2024

Take a peek behind the curtain and test drive the NEW StateNews.com today!

War for peace?

U.S. must use diplomacy, other methods, but only military action can rid world of terrorism

Much of the U.S. population is crying for war in response to last week’s terrorist attacks on New York and Washington.

President Bush has called up thousands of reserve soldiers, preparing for what many believe will be a massive strike against terrorist organizations and the nations that harbor them.

America is out for blood.

There is talk of unleashing our military might - on the ground and in the air - against Afghanistan, the reported haven for suspected terrorist Osama bin Laden. There is also talk of rescinding the 1976 executive order from the Ford administration forbidding U.S.-sponsored assassinations, allowing the United States and its allies to target specific individuals.

And while talk of war continues, some Americans are calling for a peaceful resolution to this conflict. They want no further bloodshed on either side.

But make no mistake, the United States was attacked. We were on the receiving end of an incredibly violent and brutal strike which most likely will be repeated without swift action. There can be no peace while terrorism threatens society.

This is not to say that we will or should go out and decimate every bit of land these terrorists touch. Often the lands they inhabit are so blasted and desolate our own bombings will do little more than break up the rubble already there, grim reminders of previous skirmishes and times of combat.

It cannot be an eye-for-an-eye approach. We must use our vast diplomatic resources to do what we can with the nations that will listen. It is possible much can be accomplished by the force of our words - not the strength of our arms.

But terrorists do not respond to diplomacy. They do not respond to offers of economic aid or promises to help feed their people.

Nor have they responded to conventional warfare. Terrorists do not have valuable land holdings, stately capitals or high-value targets that our troops can bomb or march into and conquer. They lurk in the shadows, they value secrecy, and that is what our own forces will have to do to be able to compete.

We’ve bombed bin Laden’s training camps before with little success.

The United States is preparing for a campaign unlike anything we have ever seen, because most of it probably will never be seen. It won’t be a straightforward war. U.S. officials have said we need to be sneaky, low-down and dirty, just like the terrorists we’re hunting.

We are fortunate President Bush has surrounded himself with advisers who are experienced and level-headed. They will not strike back for the simple knee-jerk response of striking back, and they will make sure the loss of innocent lives is kept at a minimum.

But that doesn’t mean we should hold back if the need arises.

And that’s important, because we need to be able to handle this situation both diplomatically and militaristically. The terrorists we are dealing with will not respond to simple diplomacy when their ultimate goal is to see our way of life ended.

We must show we are not afraid to push back when pushed. We need to show those who would instill fear and terror into our country that it will not be tolerated.

We might not have to do it violently, but we don’t and certainly shouldn’t have to do it gently.

Discussion

Share and discuss “War for peace?” on social media.