[rhombus]

Thomas Jefferson deployed troops to far-off lands to fight Islamic pirates who attacked American trading vessels and kidnapped and enslaved the Americans on board. He didn't invade Morocco, Algeria, etc., to attempt to "bring democracy" to them (he'd actually cringe at that term) as a response to a sincle act of terrorism followed by Islamist finger-waving. It's not just the sophistication of weaponry that was different in those times.

I agree that Jefferson did not want to "bring democracy" to the Islamic pirates. However, there were indeed some land invasions and of course your reference to a single act of terrorism is short sighted as there have been many, many acts of terrorism. Surely you've seen the lists posted on FR. Jefferson also didn't waste time trying to show there was no connection between this pirate and that pirate.

[Freedom_no_exceptions]

your reference to a single act of terrorism is short sighted as there have been many, many acts of terrorism. Surely you've seen the lists posted on FR. Jefferson also didn't waste time trying to show there was no connection between this pirate and that pirate.

I agree there were many acts of terrorism -- and I blame prior administrations (primarily Clinton's) for not responding appropriately and possibly preventing 9/11. It is, however, 9/11 to which the "global war on terror" is being fought as a response, as acknowledged by several pro-war commenters on FR. Finally, I'm not a student of the Barbary Wars, but Jefferson clearly did not launch a "global war on piracy" on a promise to attract all of the world's pirates to one place, wipe them out, and bring to the world a pirate-free utopia.