I'm optimistic that the whole thing will settle terrorism down more than it encourages it.
To start with, there's the point that Hussein supports terrorism directly.
But bigger than that is the idea that we are keeping the west-vs-Islam conflict at center stage, not ignoring it hoping it will go away. And we are taking it to their shores to keep it off ours.
The conflict has been bubbling under for, like, centuries and it's the conflicts that take the longest to cook that scare me the most.
To think of it another way, Kim Jung Il and N Korea is the end game of eastern Communism, of trivial little states being propped up by big friendly commie powers as long as they were useful. Everybody knows it can't go on, everybody knows these states can't support themselves, and it's just a matter of time until their heads of state croak and are replaced by more reasonable people. Nobody [who matters] thinks it might be a noble, working social experiment anymore. The game could play out poorly, even resulting in the unthinkable vaporization of a city or two. But then it's over, because Il and many of his unfortunate followers would be vaporized in turn, and nobody would say it didn't have to happen.
The middle east, though, could be the MIDDLE game of something that started before the years had four digits in them.
Many people say that Bush is only using the flames of 9/11 to get public support for this conflict. Sure, that's possible. .. even probable. But what kind of public support would there be if there was another attack?
Can you imagine there being public support for an invasion of Afghanistan on September 10th? Of course not. The public outcry would be enormous, even though at that time it would have been the Right Thing To Do.
Can you imagine there NOT being another 9/11 if we lacked that same resolve on September 12th?
Geez, I know this is a rambling post... sorry. There are just so many thoughts rambling through my brain at this point, and a lot of them just need an opportunity to get out...
|