Opinion
Terror can strike anywhere and must become universal priority
Looking for a print version?
Simply use your browser’s ‘Print’ command and a printer-friendly document will be generated automatically.
Also by Adam Smith:
- Runaway bride a case of desperation (May 5, 2005)
- Recent deaths not fodder for gun laws (March 15, 2005)
- Social Security in need of overhaul (March 10, 2005)
- Palestinian leaders need to stiffle terror (March 1, 2005)
- Iraqis make history, America vindicated (February 3, 2005)
Sharing tools:
E-mail this article:
While Americans sat in front of their televisions watching pundits sort through the rhetoric of the Republican Nation Convention, Russians watched an atrocity of seldom-reached proportions unfold before their eyes. The occupation of a school by Chechen terrorists left over 330 people dead and hundreds more wounded. The terrorists slaughtered adults and children alike in cold blood.
The school attack follows the previous week’s simultaneous jet bombings and a subway bombing — just some of the most recent acts in Russia’s struggle with terror. While the Russian attacks seem distant to America, we can’t forget that similar atrocities are becoming more and more common all around the globe and that even here in America, we are not impervious.
Russian President Vladimir Putin told the Russian people that since the fall of the USSR, Russia has become weak and that “weak people are beaten.” Putin went on to say, according to CNN, that “We must create a much more effective system of security. We must demand that our security forces act at a level appropriate to the level and scope of the new threats.” Putin is one hundred percent correct. The threat from Islamic fundamentalism is very real and it isn’t going away anytime soon. The way to defeat it, as Putin recognizes, is not to fight a “sensitive war,” but to beef up security to keep terrorists outside of your borders and to go on the offensive to eliminate them where they live.
The RNC has been attracting criticism from the left for seeming more like a 9/11 memorial than a convention. These criticisms couldn’t be more off base. The single most important issue in this election is terrorism and security. There are people out there who want Americans dead and appeasement is not an option for them. As Zell Miller said in his keynote address, “Like you, I believe that the next four years will determine what kind of world they will grow up in. And like you, I ask which leader is it today that has the vision, the willpower and, yes, the backbone to best protect my family? The clear answer to that question has placed me in this hall with you tonight.”
Terrorism is the issue this year. The economy, taxes, health care, civil unions, and abortion don’t really mean much to the people who died when the Twin Towers fell and they won’t mean much to the people who may fall victim to future terror attacks. John Kerry has said that if America is attacked, we will respond swiftly. That’s just not good enough. We have already been attacked and there are people out there actively trying to attack us again. We need an administration that recognizes this fact. The war on terror has just started and we are in it for the long haul.
As a result of the recent attacks in Russia, we will most likely have a new ally in this war. Putin finally recognizes what he should have recognized after the theater attack, that Russia, like the United States, is extremely vulnerable to massive terror attacks and that a new level and scope of security is necessary to meet the terror threat.
The Russian school massacre should serve as a reminder, not just to Americans, but also to people around the world that Islamic fundamentalist terror can strike anyone, anywhere, at any time, and the number one priority of every administration around the world needs to be the eradication of terrorist organizations and the regimes that support them. President Bush promises in his second term to continue doing everything in his power to achieve this goal. His opponent on the other hand promises to bring American troops home from Iraq. John Kerry is not the kind of leader this country needs. We need a president who is going to ensure that the next school to fall into the hands of terrorists is not on American soil. The consequences for perpetrating acts of terror need to outweigh the possible benefits. If John Kerry becomes president, this will not be the case. This year’s RNC may have had a tribute to 9/11, but that is what matters this year. This election is about who can protect us from terror, not who was a hero in Vietnam.
Adam Smith (asmith@badgerherald.com) is a senior majoring in economics and political science.
4 Comments | Leave a comment
Leave a comment
Herald Blogs
The Beat Goes On
Muckrakers
President’s Visit Marked a Speech to One of the Last Groups Not Critical of Him
Extra Points
Top Classified Ads (view all)
HOUSES FOR Fall 2010. All houses are on W Dayton or N Bassett. 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, or 8 bedrooms. All have parking. madisoncampusrentals.com
This is freakin' preposterous.
Terror is the issue for people who can't take a stand on issues in a real or reasoned way. Terror is the fear tactic used by people who have no ideas of their own.
First of all, Putin created all the terrorism he's got for doing exactly what Bush is doing in Iraq.
He's trying to push around an traditionally Islamic state with his Western government and has DECIMATED Chechnya in the process.
This is not to say those school children deserved what they got. Of course they didn't. But Putin created the security situation they are in.
Bush has taken the biggest stick possible and poked the hornet's nest that is Iraq.
You, of course, are too blind to see anything beyond the rhetoric and are a dangerous contribution to our national dialogue.
The world (and you) are less safe because of Bush. Terror can strike anywhere at any time like a natural disaster.
But there's promoting it and provoking it and making it more likely, and all of those things are taking place under Bush.
No one has been worse for American security than our current Idiot-In-Chief.
Really.
This article is useless...
I agree with the writer, not the lib who thinks Putin got what he deserves because he did nothing. Bush is actively engaged in combatting terrorism and that's what people will vote on... A man who is concise and deliberate in his decisions to go after terrorists where they hide while hatching their next plots! The world is MORE safe because of Bush. The only "idiot" around these days are the Ted Kennedys and John Kerrys and libs like you who think everything is a hornet's nest!
The first anonymous coment could not be farther off base. Putin did not create the terrorists, and neither did the United States. There is no possible excuse or justification for such actions. It is an insult to the innocent children in Russia as wellas to everyones intelliggence ro even suggest it as a possibility. It is not the article that is useless, but your craven attitude and the craven comments of the leaders of the democratic party.
The first anonymous comment is a perfect example of the trendy liberal voice that has become, unfortunately, extremely present these days...Anonymous- you must think you're really "cool" and "tough" using phrases like "Idiot-In-Chief" right? I'll bet all your comrades gave you a nice pat on the back and cheered "bush must be stopped" as you posted that right? Well, good- I'm glad for you- you've found yourself a group of mindless friends in which you fit perfectly. Here's your problem- ready? (I'm going to actually give you examples of what your problem is ok? Rather than just telling you that you have a problem and calling you a bunch of stupid names without backing up my statements at all- I know you're not used to that so I hope it doesn't throw you off) 1) how 'bout an example tough guy? I haven't seen Bush literally "taking the biggest stick possible and poking the hornet's nest that is Iraq." so why don't you support your "idea" with a little evidence. try adding the phrase "for example..." to your vocabulary...but if i were you I wouldn't think too hard about that because you'll be amazed by how little you come up with. And don't worry- It's not just 'cause you're mindless and dimwitted- It's because your statement is untrue.
2) If however- you describe using force to resolve conflict with terrorists in order to defend our country as "taking the biggest stick possible and poking the hornet's nest that is Iraq." then yes, I guess you are right. my mistake. I guess you'd better clear up your wording.
3) "Terror is the issue for people who can't take a stand on issues in a real or reasoned way. Terror is the fear tactic used by people who have no ideas of their own." What exactly does that mean? Does it mean terrorism isn't a real issue? It's not an issue that should factor into this election? Terrorists don't threaten our country? Bush has just invented these imaginary terrorists that our imaginary troops have been in an imaginary war with just so that bush can scare the American people into voting for him??? Sorry, I'm more than a little confused. Perhaps you should think before you write and maybe your ideas will come out more clearly.
4) "Terror can strike anywhere at any time like a natural disaster." You've got to be kidding me right? Terrorism is like a natural disaster? So, since there is no preventing it and protecting ourselves we should just let it move on through? There was just a hurricane in Florida. THAT is a natural disaster. People's homes and lives were wrecked. Many people left Florida to escape the danger. I guess you think that the next time there is a terror attack in the US we should flee the danger right? Step aside so that the terrorists can move in on us right? I mean, if it's a natural disaster( meaning, by the way, caused or created by nature and not humans-hmmmm....) then there's no preventing it. Do I even need to go on here? Reading your post I don't know whether to laugh or cry...you make me sick...
Those are just a few of your issues- Im sure you have many more- Now see, I was able to give you several examples of stupid things you've doe and I've only read one post of yours- you have the president ENTIRE political career to look at and you can't think of one. Well- who's the idiot now?