I can see that you and others are upset at Ike's comments and can even understand why that is so. I may have my disagreements with him on other issues but I have to say that I understand where Ike is coming from regarding this.
Let me offer you another perspective but before I do so, I would like to say unequivocally that, as an American and as a human being, I condemn what happened. I have literally wept at the eye-witness accounts of passengers on the planes calling their loved ones to say farewell. I have been pained by the sight of relatives looking for loved ones amidst the rubble of the WTC.
Now for the perspective that I would like to ask you and others to consider: the Islamic fundamentalist movement is a powerful force in a number of Muslim countries. Several of the so called moderate Arab and other Muslim countries are not all that stable and there are fundamentalist movements in all of these countries. I am referring to nations like Egypt, Jordan, Saudi Arabia and even Pakistan. The US and the free world cannot afford to see these nations go through the upheaval of having fundamentalist regimes, as exists today in Afghanistan, come to the forefront and take power. The effect of something such as this occurring would be devastating to the strategic interests of the US. Keep in mind that you are dealing with a good portion of the world's oil supplies coming from that part of the world.
I do not envy the position that Bush is in - he has to take action but cannot unleash the type of force that would cause the Muslim world to turn against the US. When Powell talks about the response being on several fronts such as military, diplomatic, economic, etc it is based on an understanding of these dynamics. I am so relieved that people like Powell are there to advise Bush at this time. No one doubts that the US has the means and the will to deal a devastating blow to Afghanistan and other such refuges of terrorists. But what one does not need is the type of action that will lead to the birth of more Bin Ladens'.
Pakistan is also in an unenviable position. It has a strong fundamentalist movement which is simmering and members of that movement are sympathetic to Bin Laden. Even the armed forces have significant elements who are known to be kindly disposed to Bin Laden. I don't care for Musharaff but if he were replaced by some of these extreme elements, it could be a disaster. Remember that Pakistan is a nuclear power; do we want a fundamentalist regime similar to that in Afghanistan heading up that country with nuclear weapons at its disposal?
Don't forget what happened in Iran after the Shah was overthrown and Khomenei took power. It has taken close to 20 years for an element of moderation to have any influence in that country.
How many people in the West even heard of Bin Laden ten years ago? This is a man who was placed under house arrest in his own country (Saudi Arabia) and when he fled he fought the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan using US resources to do so although he did not consider the US any better than the Soviets since he viewed both as imperialists. But he made the US his prime target after the war with Iraq when they did not withdraw completely but sought to maintain a presence in that region - even if it was with the agreement of the host countries. He viewed it as the occupation of infidels in the holiest regions of Islam. Bin Laden has said that he is dealing with a snake and that the head of the snake is the US and the body is various Arab countries that he considers to be puppets of the US.
I can understand our desire for revenge and to make sure those responsible for this heinous crime are brought to justice. After all, Israel has been dealing with similar attacks for decades, without pulling punches, and the attacks coninue and, if anything, have become more deadly. Let us just make sure that in achieving that end, we don't create an even bigger problem for us than exists right now.
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
