In this corner, we have the neo-cons in charge of the Bush administration, who seem to believe that all of the world’s problems can be solved by simply killing more people:
““This is not an enemy that can be ignored, or negotiated with, or appeased,’’ [Vice President Dick Cheney] said. “And every retreat by civilized nations is an invitation to further violence against us. Men who despise freedom will attack freedom in any part of the world, and so responsible nations have a duty to stay on the offensive, together, to remove this threat.”"
In the other corner, we have Gandhi and Martin Luther King, as articulated by David Cortright:
“A nonviolent approach should not be confused with appeasement or a defeatist justification of terrorist crimes. The point is not to excuse criminal acts but to learn why they occur and use this knowledge to prevent future attacks. A nonviolent strategy seeks to reduce the appeal of militants’ extremist methods by addressing legitimate grievances and providing channels of political engagement for those who sympathize with the declared political aims. A two-step response is essential: determined law enforcement pressure against terrorist criminals, and active engagement with affected communities to resolve underlying injustices. Ethicist Michael Walzer wrote, counterterrorism “must be aimed systematically at the terrorists themselves, never at the people for whom the terrorists claim to be acting.” Military attacks against potential sympathizers are counterproductive and tend to drive third parties toward militancy. Lawful police action is by its nature more discriminating and is more effective politically because it minimizes predictable backlash effects.”
We’ve tried the Bush way for the past six years. And it’s only managed to make the world a far more dangerous place for all of us. Isn’t it time we discarded the failed militarism of the American Right to try a new approach? After all, it was Jesus who called us to love our enemies and lay down our swords - a message which seems a lot closer to that of Gandhi and King than to that of Rumsfeld, Cheney, and Bush.
