Page 6 The Lion’s Eye November 9, 2001 ¢O00DINIioN ¢6¢ America is a terrorist - An editorial By ERIC MAYER Staff writer AT Editors note: The opinions stated are not those held by the Lion's Eye and its staff as a whole. The measures taken by the United States' gov- ernment in reaction to the terrorist activities of the past two months have been nationalistic and militaristic. The military strikes and other deployed forces against Afghanistan serve as a counterpoint to the enhanced patri- - otism and nationalistic justification purveyed by a large majority of governmental sources that defend such violent resolutions. Since these supposed resolutions began, sev- eral publications and authors have pointed out the philo- sophical discrepancies in the United States’ government's actions, significant degrees of human and financial resources have been expended, and little to no progress has been made in stopping the threat of terrorism. By contrast, a peaceful reaction to terrorism is more philo- sophically consistent, less costly to human and financial resources, and more effective in its long-term remedial processes than the United States' currently nationalistic and militaristic procedures. : As defined by the United States’ Army manual, terrorism is "the calculated use of violence or the threat of - violence to attain political or religious ideological goals through intimidation, coercion, or instilling fear." The United States' military attack against Afghanistan fits this definition more conclusively than the "terrorist" acts of September 11. In the United States’ case, the political and ideological goals are far more clear and declared than the vague and assumed objectives of the plane hijackers. Such twisted logic and guesswork as this are no foundries for war. It can be asserted by the several comments and claims by that of the Taliban and of other Middle-Eastern states that the primary motivation behind the September 11 attacks is anger towards the present "bullying" attitude of US foreign policy. Prince Alwaleed bin Talal of Saudi Arabia suggested that the US "re-examine its policies in the Middle East and adopt a more balanced stance towards the Palestinian cause" to resolve the terrorist threat. True to form, the United States rebuked the Saudi prince and refused his monetary gift, describing his comments as "part of the problem" in the Middle East. However, as several remarks by noted psychologist Noam Chomsky defend, the Saudi prince is correct in stressing the severity of US foreign policy as a causal factor. An act as severe and wide reaching as Sept. 11 does not stem from blind hatred or ignorance, but rather a timed effort to drag down the "bully." If the United States continues to act towards other impoverished nations as it does now, the behavior will not stop. These "terrorist" actions may be stemmed temporarily by military setbacks or the loss of a symbol (Osama Bin Laden), but the mindset that begets this behavior will stay the same. This ultimatum brings with it an argument of casualties and expenditure. With each day of attacks in Afghanistan, far more civilians die than do terrorists. On the other side of the Atlantic, subversive counter-attacks with anthrax occur with more frequency and severity “every day. Such a dramatic expenditure of human and monetary resources would lead one to expect that the result would be synchronous with the effort. However, this is not the case in our "war on terrorism" - few long- term changes will result from the attacks. The govern- ment seems to believe that a loss of human and military resources in opposing forces will destroy the ideological and political premises on which these resources act. History has shown this belief to be incorrect. For exam- ple: economic sanctions have not altered the tide of anti- American sentiment in Iraq; rather, they have strength- ened it. Though the absence of a revered figurehead such as Saddam Hussein could curb such sentiments, it should be made clear that the destruction of a figurehead is only an option in a war against a couhtry, not a war against sub- version. In the war against terrorism, Osama Bin Laden is our new Saddam. continued on page 7 Staff writer Meredith Becker asked Penn State Delco students: | If a photograph of one part of your body were to be used in an advertisement, which part would you want to be used and for what product or service? "My eyes for Lasik Eye surgery." -Dave Park, Soph. IST Major "The entire package for an escort service." - Mike Giordano Junior IST Major "My Hands for a Jewlery Ad." -Alex Gehman Soph. Comm. Major "My hair for Pantene Shampoo and conditioner." -Ivena John Junior IST Major "My "guns" for a body building gym." -Thang Nguyen Junior IST Major "MY face for skin care products, maybe Neutrogena...’ -Terry Samah Soph. Nursing Major
Significant historical Pennsylvania newspapers