Maybe I’m just a cynic, or maybe my job has made me too aware of the workings of the American political machine, but honestly: people who think it’s possible for the US to avoid some kind of war or military attack somewhere in the world–likely Afghanistan at this point–strike me as patently naive. To be sure, in large part I agree with the level-headed and indisputably wise reactions some folks have had to these events, and I think lots of Americans see things similarly; I think the majority would rather see some sort of surgical strike to take out particular individuals rather than a full-scale war on an entire nation that, in theory, had nothing directly to do with this week’s events. I mean, even my family–the bulk of whom are gun-toting Republicans from Mississippi, and therefore, my sounding board when I want to get a sense of popular American sentiment–understand it’s a difficult situation we’re in, with massively complex political ramifications. There are no simple solutions, and no matter what sort of military action we take, it can never begin to get to the root of the problem of anti-American sentiment abroad.
Nevertheless, we all know something will have to be done. It won’t be done simply as an act of vengeance–though that’s in there, too–but more importantly, as a political gesture. To save face with the world and with constituents across the country (note the single voice of dissent in Congress’ overwhelmingly multi-partisan decision to authorize the use of force—a vote, essentially, of 518-to-1), our nation’s leaders have to retaliate. Let’s just hope they do it quickly, effectively, and with the full cooperation of the international community.
Unfortunately, I’m pretty cynical about that, too.
I wonder what Al Gore’s thinking right about now.
sturtle [dot] com 