Someone said to me “You people on the left, you have no solutions, only accusations.” In a way, it’s true. It’s a difference in philosophy. All of the right’s “solutions” are just escalations of violence. Rather than drop a bomb in response to a bomb and blow a few more innocent people up, why is it so wrong to try to change attitudes, to change cultures to frown on the dropping of any future bombs?
Tell me! Why is it so much better to simply drop a bomb in response, to which the response will be (yet another) bomb, and so on? Of course the right says “What makes you think they will ever stop dropping bombs?” Maybe, maybe not. I like to think so. In the end, isn’t it better to pray for peace than to continue to make war, paying tepid lipservice to peace only as an afterthought?
Note that I’m not complaining about defensible borders… But right now, the US is well beyond her borders, as is Israel. That’s not defense, that’s offense. Condoleeza Rice, one of Bush’s top advisors, was on Meet the Press yesterday. Anybody catch what she said when asked about the War on Terror? “The best defense is a good offense.” And yet at the same time we claim that the nations and peoples of the middle east are making unfounded accusations when they talk about American aggression.
That’s the problem with the right wing. There is no chance for peace — a pre-emptive offense leaves no room for it. The best defense is a good offense. Indeed. That’s a football strategy, not an ideology to be toying with when bombs, guns, tanks, planes and perhaps even nukes are involved.