Bill Whittle has captured the essence of the argument that is polarizing America. Read this excerpt and the full article and see which side you are on.
We both look at this:
And we both want to make sure that it – or worse – does not happen again.
We don’t want it to happen again.
We want to deter it from happening again.
And all of this rage and fury and spitting and tearing up of signs, all of these insults and spinmeisters and forgeries and all the rest, seem to come down to the fact that about half the country thinks you deter this sort of thing by being nice, while the other half thinks you deter this by being mean.
What do you think?
Do we deter terrorism by being nice, or by being mean?
I think we handle terrorism only by standing firm and bringing terrorists to justice, not by appeasing them.
Read the full article on Eject! Eject! Eject! and decide for yourselves.
All we need is love. Love is all we need.
Posted by: Peter | Oct 10, 2004 at 12:46 PM
Interesting! I think we should listen to our children{or young people} and look into their eyes. Then we should look into our hearts, pray and hope our vote is the right one. I never thought 9-11 would happen. I hope it{or something more sinister} never happens again. I wish I could look into the future. My vote in November will be the hardest vote I have ever made.... One day I think one way, the next day I think another way. One thing is for sure, I am a solid "undecided" voter. Thanks for your posted notes to ponder on.
Posted by: Sallie | Oct 10, 2004 at 01:41 PM
Rather than nice or mean, why not "smart" – we've got to be much smarter than we've been so far to defeat terrorists.
Posted by: Myke | Oct 11, 2004 at 10:06 AM
There's a corresponding theme to life in general in this whole argument. I'm struggling with it myself. Nice gets me nowhere, mean gets me...well, I'm never consciously mean because I don't care for mean people myself. So I don't know. I dearly wish I did know. It's one of life's huge dilemmsas I think.
Posted by: Carrie | Oct 14, 2004 at 09:52 PM
I like the part on Eject^3 that goes:
"We want to deter it from happening again."
So, somehow the magic pixie is going to waive her wand and deter those bad men from smashing a plane into a building again.
Hmm. These are crazy/angry men who plan on DYING anyway. Explain to me how you can "deter" them from not doing it?
It is the playground bully way of beating up everyone who looks like a bad person, even if she is not even responsible for the heinous act?
Maybe it is the "rogue nation" way of sending in covert operatives, proping up corrupt governments, supporting countries who invade others and then set up settlements, and generally meddling in the affairs of others?
I agree with Myke's answer - the only response that has even a chanse is the sane, rational one, not the "you scared me and now I'm going to kill anyone who looks like you" one. Perhaps understanding why these people are angry is the first step along the way.
Posted by: Bry | Oct 16, 2004 at 05:53 PM
'Do we deter terrorism by being nice, or by being mean?' - we do not deter meanness by being mean, no way... I remember reading this somewhere - fighting for peace is like having sex for your virginity :) irrelevant but you get the point!
Posted by: Charu | Oct 17, 2004 at 12:57 AM