All talk, no action

(September 12, 2001 11:08 a.m. EDT) - On the radio Wednesday morning, a professor of conflict resolution was bemoaning the emphasis of President Bush and others on getting revenge for the terrorist acts committed against the United States.

Instead, he said, we should begin a "national conversation" about why some people of other lands do not care for us, and he showed where he was coming from by proffering one possible answer - the fact that this country supplies so many weapons that are used for unjust purposes.

This professor has it wrong. While the United States has certainly made its share of mistakes in its conduct of international affairs, and while it can and should be faulted for them, the ways to make our enemies love us are far different from what this professor has in mind. First of all, we would have to give up our wealth. Then we would have to abandon the cultural values that have come our way through western civilization. Finally, we would have to disengage from the world. We would have to become isolationist.

It is the economic success of the United States as much as anything that causes some of those in poorer lands to envy and even to despise us. Many of them face daily hunger while, by comparison, we live in opulence. But contrary to the Marxist myth, our wealth does not come from exploitation; it emerges from a system of free exchange and rewards for initiative and from social discipline and rule of law.

And contrary to what even some of this country's liberal politicians say, that wealth does not harm the rest of the world. If America were impoverished, the rest of the world would be worse off materially, not better off. Any economist worth the academic degree he brandishes can tell you that our wealth makes others wealthier, just as our economic system would serve them much better than charity if they would adopt it.

This country's culture - our openness, our embrace of individualism and disdain for self-important authority, our pluralism, our relatively high degree of tolerance for all sorts of differences, our secularism in civic affairs, our pragmatism, our joy in liberty - is anathema to many whose own understandings are more monolithic and less yielding.

There is a cultural divide in this world, one far exceeding any large divisions within our own society. Some of those from a more traditionalist background will never forgive us our modernity. They will never grasp our democracy. The only thing that would make them happy would be for us to give up such values.

Americans could be less noticed in this world, of course. That would entail taking on fewer responsibilities for securing peace and stability. Perhaps those Palestinians who cheered the awful deaths in the United States on Tuesday would have restrained themselves if we had been less involved in trying to broker a resolution of their struggle with the Israelis. Ours has been a humane effort there, however - one aimed at serving the welfare of both Palestinians and Israelis. If the United States retreated from international involvement, downtrodden peoples would suffer more, not less. Owing to circumstances we cannot possibly control, downtrodden people will not always see it that way.

This professor who was on the radio - and who was sounding very, very superior to those of us whose comprehension of conflict is not as "professional" as his - appears to have a few lessons himself to learn about his subject area. The terrorists who plowed their planes into buildings were not acting rationally in response to legitimate grievances. They were irrational fanatics. Correcting any mistakes in U.S. policy will not dissolve their hatred, as important as it obviously is to correct any policies that truly are mistaken, for the very existence of this great nation of ours is what in the final analysis offends them.

Although it may not work to try punishing suicidal terrorists into respect for ordinary human decency, aggressive steps can stop them before they act - infiltration of their organizations, for instance. And the government can take military action that will end the support crucial to their operations. It would be little short of imbecilic and simply invite more terrorism if this country were to run around trying to find how it was that specific practices of ours caused their evil.

Jay Ambrose is director of editorial policy for Scripps Howard News Service. Contact him at ambrosej@shns.com.

I am sick to death about all this TALK and NO ACTION!!! We KNOW who did this now, we know the country or countries that support these monsters and while we may not know exactly where they are, I'm sure we have the capability of finding out. EVERY minute the President waits, he looks weaker and weaker in the eyes of Americans.

I know there are those on this site that will argue for restraint but all to often restraint turns into NO ACTION AT ALL! I commend the FBI and other law enforcement for their efforts thus far and that should continue BUT ITS NOT ENOUGH! We need to STRIKE these monsters where they live. We need to understand that if we don't, IT WILL HAPPEN AGAIN!

There is no advantage in being the winner of the Miss Congeniality award of Nations.If you go all way back to the Greek and Roman Empires, all great nations only achieve security by making other nations fear the consequences of attacking them. It has always been fear, it has never been love that was the major factor in peace. Fear and desire are the only tow national emotions. Others desire for what you have, and fear of what whill happen if they attack are the two major factors in foreign policy.

For all of history, the poor have always wanted what the rich have. As long as the superpower is strong and able to lashout to destory its attackers, the attackers are few. Small nations pledge obiedience to the conquering power and bend to its will.

Once the super power is seen to be weakening, smaller nations atack. If the superpower continues to weaken eventually it is conquered. I submit the Rise and Fall of the Roman empire as exhibit 1. Human nature has never changed. Even the rolls never change. Only the actors that play the parts change.

If we destroy our attacker, the damage done to our strength by "Bill Clinton and the Baby Boomers Love in Act" may be overcome. But if it is not, we are as doomed as the Romans.

"Can't we just talk?" is synonomous with "Can't we just surrender?"

What We as Americans Can Do
1) Pray
2) Give blood and whatever else the Red Cross calls for.
3) Support our military and law enforcement.
4) Put aside political differences and UNITE,
no matter what we think of what President Bush
should or shouldn't do, say or not say.
4a)Save the political discussions until AFTER the crisis is handled.

HUNT DOWN AND
EXECUTE THOSE RESPONSIBLE!

UNITED WE STAND, DIVIDED WE FALL
God Bless America!

If you would stop and consider things, you would note that around the world virtually nobody has any serious problems with anybody unless there is Islamic involvement. While Islam might be among the world's great religions, the Islamic culture it has spawned is inhumane and uncivilized. In the first millennium, the people of the present Middle East and the North of Africa were in the bulwark of civilization. Their science, literature and civilization was renowned. Then came Islam-- and then has come nothing of consequence ever since except incivility. You can sit at your computer right now and name a score of places where Islamic people abuse their neighbors today. You probably can name no place where there is an Islamic majority or even close where they do not. You probably can not sit at your computer and type in one contribution made by Islamic people to any art, science, or humanity other than terrorism. This culture has chosen to be at war with the United States. We have no choice but to make war on them. Fortunately, if we destroy every place on earth where Islam is concentrated, we will do no harm to the fabric of civilization in any particular way. We will clear away a fair amount of riff-raff which gets in the way of things, but we will lose nothing whatsoever right now, nor does Islamic society show even a glimmer of promise of being in any way useful to the future of mankind. So we have a fine confluence of factors: on the one hand we have a culture that wants to fight us, and on the other, we have one whose annihilation would be good for humankind.

The apologists are out in force already. I just heard tonight on NPR many self-styled academic "experts" who were weighing in along with some very liberal religious leaders (let's forgive them , the clerics said). Their combined message was similar to those in the posted article: let's hold off, cool down and not retaliate against the perpetrators or the countries that supported them. In other words, let's just try to learn about these poor Muslims, try to understand their culture and find ways to get along with them. (Barf!)

Even worse, a radio talk show host was talking to a guy in the People's City of Seattle. The caller said he was stunned to hear another friend celebrate the destruction of what he said were "the twin towers of Capitalism" while feeling some regret about the human losses! I was sickened to hear this, but then remembered that many boomers and their children have been or are still being indoctrinated by marxist professors.

It is time to speak frankly with ALL the grisly details so that we may
comprehend the enormity of this atrocity. That "stuff" you saw flying out of the "downwind" side
of the towers as the planes hit them is the true testament of the message the perp's wanted to send.

That stuff consisted of the following:
(please feel free to add to the list)

plane parts
body parts
glass
file cabinets
computers
fax machines
family photos
carpeting
desks
chairs (yes, just like the ones at OKC)
mops and buckets
post-it notes
baseball league photos and schedules(soccer leagues too)
printed e-mail jokes stuck on the lunch room fridge
car keys
plane tickets for the next day
a note on the copier that it was in need of toner
a baseball that was signed by Mark McGuire
an electric bill that was late(which was going to be taken care of at lunch)
divorce papers that needed to be signed
wedding announcements to be mailed
subway tokens
a plant that was moved closer to the window
a football pool sign-up sheet
the coffee pot that would always clog
a kid's report card

I feel guilty because I am praying for the souls of the perpetrators' to be sentenced
to ETERNAL DAMNATION.
I don't think that is the Christian way.
I'm sorry.

No, he just doesn't look like Clinton. And thank G-d he's not as knee-jerk prone as you appear to be.

Ok, fair enough but let me ask you how much time needs to elapse before its no longer a "knee-jerk" reaction? A week? A month? Six months? How long do you think Americans will have the resolve to act? For that matter, how long before the Congressional "unity" is gone? We now know who did this and I'm sure we know, or can find out, where these monsters are hiding. So.... just how long are YOU willing to wait or don't you think we should respond at all?

Revenge is a dish best served cold. I suspect the US strikes will be widespread, massive, and with a dash of Yankee Ingenuity. Time in ON our side, surprise is ON our side, and FEAR is now on their side.

I hope the response is "widespread" and "massive", as you put it. I would prefer, however sooner rather than later.

Bush is a different animal. When he said there will be no distinction between the criminals and those who support them, he meant it (He has a habit of meaning what he says--again, unlike Clinton).

Afganistan will be a very different country when we finish with them. The current ruling party will be out of power when this is all over. Bush is laying the groundwork for that now, including informing the Russians that they will not be complaining about our actions.

It's easy to fire off a few missles at some tents in the desert or blow up an aspirin factory and pretend you have done something. That's Clinton's style, and all he really did was make Bin Laden a folk hero in the Raghead nations.
Bush is a different animal. When he said there will be no distinction between the criminals and those who support them, he meant it (He has a habit of meaning what he says--again, unlike Clinton).

Please tell me Afganistan will be flatter when we are through. A few craters for emphasis would be cool too.

Ok, fair enough but let me ask you how much time needs to elapse before its no longer a "knee-jerk" reaction?

As soon as we're ready... Not even a rapid-response SEAL team could have been briefed, transported into place, waiting for a window of opportunity, then taken action within 24 hours, even if we *did* know exactly where Bin Laden is right now -- and you can bet he's deep in hiding at the moment. And if we want to take out even more of his organization and supporters than just him alone, it'll take a hell of a lot longer to get ready (*especially* including the time needed to think through all of our options to choose the very best one, and the time needed to gather the full information on who, what, when, and where for all of our targets).

Any action taken before we're truly ready to be as effective as we can possibly be, any action taken just because we're too damned impatient that we can't stand to "do something, anything" RIGHT NOW, is knee-jerk action, in the literal sense. It's reflexive, it's unthinking, it's not done rationally and with all due consideration.

Those folks are calling for a proportional response, not just the assassination of a few men. 20,000 of our innocents are dead. Afghanistan has protected bin Laden from extradition after WTC attack #1, after the embassy bombings, and after the attack on the USS Cole. A proportional response would include bin Laden AND 20,000+ Afghan Muslims, preferably as militant as possible, and as pro-Taliban as possible... but not a total pre-requisite.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.