Don’t be fooled – terrorists will exploit our insecurities about Iraq

Don’t be stupid. Please, I’m begging you.

The war should start by the end of this month. In… Don’t be stupid. Please, I’m begging you.

The war should start by the end of this month. In six to nine months, we should witness another large-scale terrorist attack – not Sept. 11, 2001, big, but significant nonetheless. At that time, a whole lotta people are gonna run around with their hands flailing about, preaching, “This is just retaliation for attacking Iraq. Blah, blah, destabilized the region, blah, inciting terrorism, blah, blah, we only have ourselves to blame!”

Please, don’t be one of them. These people abide to a school of thought far too common in today’s political discourse, a school of thought I have diagnosed as Devoid of Understanding of Motive or Background, for any given event.

The attack hasn’t come, but will, precisely because al Qaeda knows how many of these people there are in America.

The attack will come, polls will circulate, CNN will report that a dramatic majority of Americans feel we wouldn’t have been attacked if it weren’t for invading Iraq. In the minds of the undecided, popular opinion will dictate truth, protesters will march and it will all be flawed because the majority of the people involved are DUMB.

The media has painted terrorists as hotheaded fanatics driven by rage and hate every moment of their days, hell-bent on wreaking havoc at every possible moment. I give them more credit than that.

Any underground, worldwide network capable of creating ties with the leaders of nations and organizing massive attacks in different corners of the globe has to be calculating and pragmatic, at least at the upper levels of power. So it makes more sense to think of an attack after we invade as a calculated and timed move to instill an association between military action and terrorism than it does to think of it as infuriated retaliation.

What’s the difference? They both mean we get attacked because we invaded Iraq. The difference lies in the “what if” implications of both ideas. To see a new attack as infuriated retaliation implies that if we didn’t invade we’d have been safe, that we are the antagonists in this whole war on terror and that if we kept to ourselves nothing would have ever happened. Which may be true, but you’d have to roll the timeline back pretty far, 1923 at least.

To see a new attack as calculated, however, implies that ultimately, they would have attacked anyway. An attack while we’re in Iraq may be better for them, but war in the region isn’t necessary to provoke them.

Speaking of the region, all that “destabilize the region” talk will probably end up being false, too. True, different areas of Iraq have their tensions, but we faced a similar problem in Serbia after Kosovo and while the area still isn’t exactly a tourist hot-spot, it is better off than before we arrived. Afghanistan most certainly is.

That’s what I mean by the understanding of background part. In this case there’s also background to refute our capabilities of appointing new rulers for countries such as Iran, Nicaragua and Chile. But the more recent examples, as well as Japan and Germany after World War II, are better parallels to a post-war Iraq. When we supported dictators or left instability, in the past, we could get away with it because no one was watching. That, just as it wasn’t after World War II, won’t be an option in this case. The world will watch and judge, and for the legitimacy of our nation in the international community we’ll be forced to do our best to be honest.

So after the next attack, or in regard to any event really, don’t form an opinion – let alone voice it – if you’re DUMB. More and more respected news stations – less so in print media – are beginning to resemble a high school current events class preaching fears and ideas, seemingly completely unaware that all of this is more complicated than the last few weeks, and that we’ve faced nearly all of these situation before.

I know, it is tempting to reiterate. But I’m begging you, please.

Questions, comments, insights or suggestions? Send an e-mail to