The Olive Branch

"Some seem to believe that we should negotiate with terrorists and radicals, as if some ingenious argument will persuade them they have been wrong all along. We have heard this foolish delusion before," Bush said.

"As Nazi tanks crossed into Poland in 1939, an American senator declared: "Lord, if only I could have talked to Hitler, all of this might have been avoided." We have an obligation to call this what it is -- the false comfort of appeasement, which has been repeatedly discredited by history," he added.

Where do we begin? The president has obviously narrowed the field of options presented when confronting an enemy diplomatically. Reducing the world to black and white in classic Bush fashion, he asserts that the only possible outcome of diplomacy is that "they" win. Let's set aside the fundamental reasons for violent extremism for one second and simply dissect diplomatic relations in a general sense. When, in an American court, the accused is given proper representation and the right to defend his or herself the outcome hinges solely upon the strength of the defense in opposition to the argument presented against the defendant. In other words, the defendant can be found innocent, or guilty to varying degrees depending entirely upon the deliberation. We do not (often) kick down the doors of the accused and beat them mercilessly nor do we roll over and concede their innocence simply by allowing them to speak. What is it about listening that makes it a losers folly? When in this world, and this country founded on freedom did it become "game over" simply to hear an opposing argument? Does the acknowledgment of a conflicting belief intrinsically validate it?

Regarding terrorism: violent measures are often pursued by those who feel politically marginalized. If the "system" worked for disparate voices, means such as I.E.D's and suicide bombing would be impractical and unnecessary. This being the case, how is it a sound solution to marginalize on a global scale those who already feel cornered in their own community? We must not fall victim to the association of one with many. In other words, we must not say that because Osama Bin Laden is maniacally bent upon the destruction of the west that all terrorists and extremists are as well. Many are caught up in a power struggle, foolishly driven like pawns as a result of religious fanaticism (fancy that). Seeing the detrimental effects of poor western policies (harsh sanctions after Iraq's invasion of Kuwait which directly resulted in the deaths of 1,000,000 Iraqis), many who joined the call did so for the same reasons Americans enlisted after 9/11. This does not suffice to justify the inhumane tactics harnessed by terrorists, but serves as the source of resentment: the eye of the storm which we must understand in order to quell. In fact, the sanctions placed upon Iraq were done so with the exact black and white mentality being used to justify the current war. Hard headed power-plays by uncompromising money hoarders.

"A reaction might take place as a result of the US government's hitting Muslim civilians and executing more than 600,000 Muslim children in Iraq by preventing food and medicine from reaching them. So, the US is responsible for any reaction, because it extended its war against troops to civilians."

"As for their accusations of terrorizing the innocent, the children, and the women, these are in the category of 'accusing others with their own affliction in order to fool the masses.' The evidence overwhelmingly shows America and Israel killing the weaker men, women and children in the Muslim world and elsewhere. A few examples of this are seen in the recent Qana massacre in Lebanon, and the death of more than 600,000 Iraqi children because of the shortage of food and medicine which resulted from the boycotts and sanctions against the Muslim Iraqi people, also their withholding of arms from the Muslims of Bosnia-Herzegovina leaving them prey to the Christian Serbians who massacred and raped in a manner not seen in contemporary history. Not to forget the dropping of the H-bombs on cities with their entire populations of children, elderly, and women, on purpose, and in a premeditated manner as was the case with Hiroshima and Nagasaki."

"We do not mind establishing a long-term truce between us and you."

“We treat them in the same way. Those who kill our women and innocent, we kill their women and innocent, until they refrain.”

These quotes by Osama Bin Laden succinctly display the issues that terrorists have with America. While this does not at all rectify the atrocities committed by extremists, it is a concrete definition of the problem for which we must find the solution. While the events of 9/11 and the use of suicide bombers are both entirely unreasonable, the causes for such an angry and determined mindset are not at all. In fact, America would not be at a loss to shed the dark persona of it's past. I am not purposing a comprehensive solution. Honestly, we'd be hard pressed to know what one would entail without directly conversing with "the other." But mutual destruction is ensured should we continue to "douse violent flames with gasoline."