Through all the mourning, chaos, soul-searching, fear and discussion of the past week, one question emerges larger than all others. What do we do?
We must minimize the effectiveness of this attack and we must prevent anything like it from happening again.
To minimize the effectiveness of this horrific act, we must strengthen those things which the mass murderers sought to harm: the victims, the economy and our quality of life.
Donate money. It's the fastest and most flexible help one can send. Contact the Red Cross or the City of New York to find out where money is most needed, and give what you can. The disaster-management professionals will appreciate it more than random packages of food, clothing or equipment.
Prevent a recession. The economy will bounce back. We all know it. Show confidence in that fact by investing and not running. Your confidence will pay off handsomely in 6-12 months. Don't be irresponsible and spend or invest money you can't afford, but don't get frightened and hide your money under the bed either. Invest what you can, don't cancel travel plans, and go shopping for a few of those items you were holding off on.
Don't repress individual freedoms. Greater restrictions on individual movements or communications will do exactly nothing to prevent a group of people who are willing to die from taking over an aircraft. Neither will they help us catch the perpetrators. Tightening personal freedoms gives the attackers a big victory. They will have moved our society backwards, closer to the police states of the 20th century.
Now we come to the question of prevention. How do we prevent such atrocities in the future? Here, the answer lies in human behavior. Humans are ingenious. Very, very ingenious. We will never be able to prevent a group from doing such things if they want to. But we can make it so that few groups are interested in mass murder as a tactic.
Right away, we have to bring those responsible to justice. That does two things: it prevents these maniacs from murdering more people, and it makes such crimes less attractive to other potential perpetrators.
Bringing them to justice requires a great deal of investigative work, as we build an ironclad case before the world. If our case is strong enough, as it can be if we bring to bear all the legal, investigative and prosecutorial expertise we have in this nation, then none will be able to support the murderers. Even the Taliban, the demon du jour, has said they will turn over their guest to an Islamic court if the evidence is persuasive.
The entire world -- not just our friends -- has expressed abhorrence at the slaughters of 9/11. If these acts are clearly linked to individuals, those individuals will have literally nowhere to hide. Further, few people will support a criminal organization of their own free will. Criminalizing those responsible erodes the support systems for groups which conduct terror attacks.
We must not go to war. Before you denounce me as unpatriotic or soft, hear me out. Military action will be tactically, morally, behaviorally, and fiscally ineffective or counterproductive.
War is ineffective. Guerilla tactics have never been defeated by a military response. The American revolutionary war, all five of the past wars in Afghanistan, the war in Vietnam, the war inside Israel today...the list is endless. One can only end a guerilla war by bringing the guerillas to the negotiating table and addressing the issues which drive their cause.
War is immoral. If we kill innocents -- which military action will do -- we are not morally superior to these murderers. If America is the land of justice, how can we avenge the actions of the guilty by slaughtering the innocent? The citizens of Kabul, now fleeing for their lives, are no more a part of the Trade Center murders than New Yorkers have been a part of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. In fact, many of them do not support the current Afghan regime.
War justifies these crimes. Finally, going to war inherently recognizes the hijackings and mass murders as acts of war, which are on a much higher moral plane than crime. When Germany killed millions of Russian soldiers during World War II, that was war. The Holocaust was crime. The individuals behind the events of 9/11 are criminals, not soldiers.
War helps the murderers. No matter where a military action takes place, it acts as a recruitment drive for these butchers. Need an example? Notice how the entire nation of America is roused to action when our New York and Washington, D.C. citizens suffered. This is a human response, not a uniquely American one. We will create many new terrorist cells if we attack and kill innocents abroad.
War is not cost-effective. Military action costs a tremendous amount of money. And as noted above, it can't win this kind of conflict. Already our Social Security system is at risk: the "lock box" so frequently discussed can be opened with either of two keys: national emergency or war. Why should we worsen the damage they have done? Are we going to let these murdering bastards kill our future too?
The way to remove this murderous cause, root and branch, is to use the same methods we have employed here in America to keep factional differences from becoming blood feuds. Support the rule of law, due process, and basic freedoms (speech, press and religion) abroad. Vigorously. Make our financial and political backing contingent on the institution and protection of these essentials.
These murders were the acts of a group which felt silenced and oppressed. As long as people around the world are powerless and speechless, they will become desperate -- some murderously so. Let them speak, bring them to the table, and you remove the cause of their desperation. Oppress and demonize them, and you heighten that desperation.
Freedom of speech is a powerful weapon against the desperate, for many reasons. Control of information is necessary to indoctrinate fanatics, and the freer the flow of information, the harder this indoctrination becomes. Negotiation is stifled when speech is stifled, and conflict resolution is impossible without negotiation. Repression exacerbates conflict, leading to a cycle of death and injustice.
It has been said that this was an attack on freedom. Balderdash. Those evil maniacs were acting against a people whom they saw as oppressors. Tuesday's murders were an attack on government policy.
We need to change what America stands for. America must no longer stand for corporate profits, for blind loyalty to oppressive governments, for short-sightedness, for having the biggest guns, for "my way or the highway." America must stand for freedom, for tolerance, for generosity and for justice. Not American-style nationalism, but American-style freedoms for all. Not imposition of American goals, but liberty to pursue individual goals.
Think about it. Some human beings burn American flags in the streets of Amman, while others erect Lady Liberty and rally around her in Tiananmen Square. The first group resents our government. The second reveres our way of life. Which do you stand for?
Slashdot Mirror
Through all the mourning, chaos, soul-searching, fear and discussion of the past week, one question emerges larger than all others. What do we do?
We must minimize the effectiveness of this attack and we must prevent anything like it from happening again.
To minimize the effectiveness of this horrific act, we must strengthen those things which the mass murderers sought to harm: the victims, the economy and our quality of life.
Donate money. It's the fastest and most flexible help one can send. Contact the Red Cross or the City of New York to find out where money is most needed, and give what you can. The disaster-management professionals will appreciate it more than random packages of food, clothing or equipment.
Prevent a recession. The economy will bounce back. We all know it. Show confidence in that fact by investing and not running. Your confidence will pay off handsomely in 6-12 months. Don't be irresponsible and spend or invest money you can't afford, but don't get frightened and hide your money under the bed either. Invest what you can, don't cancel travel plans, and go shopping for a few of those items you were holding off on.
Don't repress individual freedoms. Greater restrictions on individual movements or communications will do exactly nothing to prevent a group of people who are willing to die from taking over an aircraft. Neither will they help us catch the perpetrators. Tightening personal freedoms gives the attackers a big victory. They will have moved our society backwards, closer to the police states of the 20th century.
Now we come to the question of prevention. How do we prevent such atrocities in the future? Here, the answer lies in human behavior. Humans are ingenious. Very, very ingenious. We will never be able to prevent a group from doing such things if they want to. But we can make it so that few groups are interested in mass murder as a tactic.
Right away, we have to bring those responsible to justice. That does two things: it prevents these maniacs from murdering more people, and it makes such crimes less attractive to other potential perpetrators.
Bringing them to justice requires a great deal of investigative work, as we build an ironclad case before the world. If our case is strong enough, as it can be if we bring to bear all the legal, investigative and prosecutorial expertise we have in this nation, then none will be able to support the murderers. Even the Taliban, the demon du jour, has said they will turn over their guest to an Islamic court if the evidence is persuasive.
The entire world -- not just our friends -- has expressed abhorrence at the slaughters of 9/11. If these acts are clearly linked to individuals, those individuals will have literally nowhere to hide. Further, few people will support a criminal organization of their own free will. Criminalizing those responsible erodes the support systems for groups which conduct terror attacks.
We must not go to war. Before you denounce me as unpatriotic or soft, hear me out. Military action will be tactically, morally, behaviorally, and fiscally ineffective or counterproductive.
War is ineffective. Guerilla tactics have never been defeated by a military response. The American revolutionary war, all five of the past wars in Afghanistan, the war in Vietnam, the war inside Israel today...the list is endless. One can only end a guerilla war by bringing the guerillas to the negotiating table and addressing the issues which drive their cause.
War is immoral. If we kill innocents -- which military action will do -- we are not morally superior to these murderers. If America is the land of justice, how can we avenge the actions of the guilty by slaughtering the innocent? The citizens of Kabul, now fleeing for their lives, are no more a part of the Trade Center murders than New Yorkers have been a part of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. In fact, many of them do not support the current Afghan regime.
War justifies these crimes. Finally, going to war inherently recognizes the hijackings and mass murders as acts of war, which are on a much higher moral plane than crime. When Germany killed millions of Russian soldiers during World War II, that was war. The Holocaust was crime. The individuals behind the events of 9/11 are criminals, not soldiers.
War helps the murderers. No matter where a military action takes place, it acts as a recruitment drive for these butchers. Need an example? Notice how the entire nation of America is roused to action when our New York and Washington, D.C. citizens suffered. This is a human response, not a uniquely American one. We will create many new terrorist cells if we attack and kill innocents abroad.
War is not cost-effective. Military action costs a tremendous amount of money. And as noted above, it can't win this kind of conflict. Already our Social Security system is at risk: the "lock box" so frequently discussed can be opened with either of two keys: national emergency or war. Why should we worsen the damage they have done? Are we going to let these murdering bastards kill our future too?
The way to remove this murderous cause, root and branch, is to use the same methods we have employed here in America to keep factional differences from becoming blood feuds. Support the rule of law, due process, and basic freedoms (speech, press and religion) abroad. Vigorously. Make our financial and political backing contingent on the institution and protection of these essentials.
These murders were the acts of a group which felt silenced and oppressed. As long as people around the world are powerless and speechless, they will become desperate -- some murderously so. Let them speak, bring them to the table, and you remove the cause of their desperation. Oppress and demonize them, and you heighten that desperation.
Freedom of speech is a powerful weapon against the desperate, for many reasons. Control of information is necessary to indoctrinate fanatics, and the freer the flow of information, the harder this indoctrination becomes. Negotiation is stifled when speech is stifled, and conflict resolution is impossible without negotiation. Repression exacerbates conflict, leading to a cycle of death and injustice.
It has been said that this was an attack on freedom. Balderdash. Those evil maniacs were acting against a people whom they saw as oppressors. Tuesday's murders were an attack on government policy.
We need to change what America stands for. America must no longer stand for corporate profits, for blind loyalty to oppressive governments, for short-sightedness, for having the biggest guns, for "my way or the highway." America must stand for freedom, for tolerance, for generosity and for justice. Not American-style nationalism, but American-style freedoms for all. Not imposition of American goals, but liberty to pursue individual goals.
Think about it. Some human beings burn American flags in the streets of Amman, while others erect Lady Liberty and rally around her in Tiananmen Square. The first group resents our government. The second reveres our way of life. Which do you stand for?
Kyle Brink