I am amazed at the frequency of attacks which occur throughout the Middle East and elsewhere. In response to the recent bombing in Pakistan Deputy Spokesman for the Department of State, Tom Casey was quick (see the State Department website--http://www.state.gov/r/pa/prs/dpb/2008/jan/99118.htm) to mark this particular incident as an act of terrorism reinforcing the idea that while terrorism is difficult to define we know it when we see it. An article regarding the bombing can be found at http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/11/world/asia/11pakistan.html?ref=world
Interestingly enough, very little was said regarding this during "act of terrorism" during the press briefing as it immediately moved on to another subject. Much more was said referring to Kenya and the conflict which started after the questioned election results and continues to unfold there. Apparently we've gotten to the point that terrorism is expected and, while tragic, inevitable. I personally don't want to live in such a world and do not consider terrorist attacks/ suicide bombings as unstoppable (however, there is no doubt that it is very difficult to stop)--Most of this is probably because I am an optimist. Of course the US State Department doesn't consider terrorism unpreventable, but there is clearly no surprise at the occurence, nor at the repeated suicide bombings in Pakistan and Iraq (insurgency or terrorism--you decide). You might think that such a method of attack would lead to a shortage of terrorists, but they keep coming.
1 comment:
I think you brought up an interesting point about American perspective. We have allowed ourselves to get back into the bubble we were in before 9/11 in some respects. If a suicide bomb or other act of terror were to happen tomorrow in Chicago do you think we would take a five minute blurb in a press conference and move on? Better yet would we accept it as a fact of life as the Protestant inhabitants of Northern Ireland in the 90's, or how we expect Israel to take the rocket attacks from outside its borders without retaliation. (If Mexico lobbed missiles at the US I think we would have to add a few more stars to the flag before it was over...)
If we in the United States received multiple attacks within a short period of time we would respond with attacks on the group to perpetrate it, the country they originated from (if they didn't allow us to go in and get them ourselves) and be elevated almost to a police state in our own nation.
This response would be considered rational by our people, and actually probably be expected in response to a series of attacks, yet we have allies around the world who we expect to just take it and move on, chastising them when they do what we would not hesitate to do, such as Israel's spring invasion of Hezbola territory. Why do we hold the world to a standard of acceptance but we ourselves expect absolute protection?
Post a Comment