I'm worried about the inflationary using of the term "war" by the administration. It' was a criminal act (out of any proportion, of course), and it should be called and treated like that. Somehow, it's a recognition of the terrorists and the acceptance of bin Ladins
(or other terrorists) "declaration of war". By this logic, these criminals are raised to the status of military fighters (even if they were "war criminals" now). That's adopting the language of those criminals and terrorist. All in all, highly inappropriate IMHO.
Boris, thanks for your comments. I have found it remarkable the gestures of support that Americans have witnessed from countries all the world. Its very gratifying at a time that has to be one of the worst in our history.
As for the use of the term, war, I think its not meant in the traditional definition of the word...the amassing of an army, navy and air force and then proceeding to attack a designated enemy. Rather, I think the use of the word, war, is the only word that best reflects the anger that I and many other Americans feel over this crime. There is a very strong need for retribution, and while there will not be a true declaration of war, it will be done in a warlike manner...meaning that it will be motivated by a very strong and powerful commitment to bring down the people who are responsible.
And make no mistake this need for retribution is not just an American thing. Its for all of us who live in societies that move freely and are peace loving. I hope the current show of unity from these same societies does not break down into an argument over semantics.
ted |
