It was dreadful. Throughout the history, terrorism itself has been nothing rare. But never has there been a mass murder like 9-11. Since than, the priority of foreign and security policy has changed, as commonly understood.
There are numerous issues to be resolved in order to curb this sort of organized terrorism. Above all, I would like to mention that emotional gaps between Americans and people from the rest pf the world still remains. This is one of the underlying reasons for the rift between the United States and its allies in the war on terror.
But remember. Americans are not the only victims of 9-11. People from 100 countries were killed in the attack. Of course, allies must be willing to make steadfast commitment to fight against rogues. People should bear it in mind that 9-11 is a global concern.
5 comments:
Most Americans do realize that they are not the only victims. We are in a better position to understand their emotions now. The big difference between us and other countries affected by this scourge is, most Americans are openly advocating for a more proactive approach, as opposed to the status quo of reaction.
The countries that are in the best position to help us, are the ones that continue to advocate reaction. They have been fooled into believing that this can be beaten by treating this as a law enforcement issue.
You have only seen the beginning Shah. I wish I was wrong, but I know that I am not.
Whether Americans, Europeans, Japanese, or any other nations, terrorism and nuclear proliferations are serious threats. The United States and some allies like Britain are strong enough to take proactive approaches, while others are not. This causes some perception gaps.
Spain has withdrawn from Iraq with a single bomb attack. Japan relies almost entirely on the United States in dealing with North Korean nuclear threats.
Strong nations need a little patience, and weak nations must step up to play more active roles.
Shah,
Spain's response to the Madrid bombings gave terrorists even more conviction that they could, with one spectacular attack, accomplish their goal. As I recall, the Islamist terrorist leaders perceived that they can exert power and can promote their own agenda. Of course, the UK took a different stance--the right one, I think--when the UK stood firm. Appeasement is dangerous.
I agree with you that the proactive approach is important. Terrorists and all who desire to subject others prey on the weak or on those perceived to be weak. Those who believe in freedom need to be proactive and strong to combat the many threats.
The history of the world is filled with the struggle of which we speak.
Also, terrorists make use of negative reports. For example, the media tend to mention rampant attacks in Iraq. But many aspects are improving.
Andrew,
>The West needs to find a balance between force and diplomacy; neither can be successful by itself.
That's right. I am not a simple-minded warmonger. As you mention, hatred to the West in Iraq and Afghanistan is a serious problem. But early withdrawal without accomplishing sufficient results will pose further danger to the world.
Post a Comment