The General's Testimony

I watched part of General Petraeus' testimony to the Senate committee the other day. It occurred to me, just as it seems to have occurred to all of the media sources, that the General was answering direct questions from the next President. As I thought upon this and today's reading from Pillar, I tried to determine which presidential hopeful would be able to produce the best US counter terrorism policy and if I agree with Pillar. First, Pillar forces us all to prioritize. His test proposes that a good counter terrorism policy does not hurt other foreign policy goals. Obviously Pillar does not place international terrorism as his greatest foreign policy concern.
In class Prof. Payne talked about the personal perspective that Pillar brings into his argument. He stated that Pillar, who has professional dealt with other countries, was presenting a form of counter terrorism policy that would make his life easier. This really forces all of us to decide where we put counter terrorism on our own prioritized scale. Do we believe that terrorism is the greatest challenge or trial of our generation? Do we feel that state sponsored terrorism is a larger threat then isolation? Do we believe that fighting terrorism is more important then fighting genocides, or global warming, or civil rights violations? After we determine where we put terrorism on our prioritized list, we should really look at the candidates and their votes and platforms. Perhaps we can try to determine what personal perspectives may be driving their future policy decisions. Will be a Vietnam war vet change your positions? Will a diverse heritage including a Muslim father affect policy? Will a husband's presidency or experience as a CEO of Walmart affect policy? If these and other personal perspectives do influence policy does that make the candidate more attractive?
Perhaps this post seems far removed from the class. However, I would assume that we all took this class in hopes of establishing a good understanding of terrorism and counter terrorism. I do not think that is possible unless we evaluate our readings and any current politicians and policies using the tools we have learned in class; including looking at the author of policy and their personal perspectives. Voting is also one of the easiest ways we can contribute our opinion in a national discussion of terrorism and counter terrorism policy.