The problem with big revenge
By
Dana Grayson
On Friday September 14, Congress passed legislation giving President
Bush "the authority to use all necessary and appropriate force" against any
nation, organization, or person it decides is responsible in planning or
carrying out the terrorist attacks on New York and Washington D.C.
Intended to deter future terrorist acts, the legislation gives all
decision-making power to one man who is angry and looking to appease the
rightfully upset people of the U.S.
But Americans needs to step back from their anger and desires for
revenge. Such impulses can only lead to more deaths. The pain and suffering
that Americans are currently enduring will not be overcome easily, but
violent retaliation is not the answer. Instead, Americans need to
understand why these attacks were made in the first place, even if that
means considering ways the U.S. may have contributed to the despicable acts
of September 11.
Its difficult to see things through the eyes of "the enemy." But
Americans should not forget that it was the United States that violently
attacked Palestinians in support of Israel, funded Israels missile attack
on Lebanon in 1996, launched missile attacks on Afghanistan following the
bombing of U.S. embassies in Nairobi and Dar es Salaam in 1998. Though
these actions may seem justified -- whether as acts in support of Israel or
in retaliation for violence against the U.S. -- they also led to further
loss of civilian life. And with those many deaths came a deep resentment
towards America.
One of the reasons why the United States is concerned with the Middle
East is due to oil. However, if America were to shift some of the time and
money usually spent on defense to research into alternative sources of
energy, perhaps America wouldnt have so much at stake in the Middle East.
Terrorism has plagued the world for centuries and shows no signs of
abatement despite attempts to fight back with military action. There may
not be a definitive solution to the problem of terrorism, but it is not
wise to fuel the anger of terrorists by committing further violent
atrocities against whomever the US determines to be "the enemy." Instead,
the U.S. and its allies should try to understand the systematic causes of
terrorism, and consider making changes in its foreign policy, which in the
past has often led the U.S. to support nations under dictatorships which
are just as terrible as those it is fighting against. The U.S. needs to
strive towards a foreign policy that will cultivate the growth of real
democracies instead of supporting nations who are willing to resort to the
same types of violence that it condemns. While this concept may seem highly
idealistic in todays world, it is perhaps more idealistic to think that
America can end terrorism and violence through violence.
So before the United States decides to get its big revenge and destroy
a country, one that is a fraction of Americas size and full of innocent
people who just happen to be of the same race and religion as a group of
terrorists, Americans should consider what their country will be like if
they have to fight a war on their own turf in an age where they have enough
power to blow up the world six times over. Americans should not seek
revenge. What we need is a non-violent solution.
Dana Grayson is an NYU senior majoring in journalism
|