A New Set of Rules is needed

Submitted by Iris Hicks (United States), Jul 22, 2003 at 10:28

This article is terrific. It helps to explain why both the Republicans who are known for being rule bound to a fault and the Democrats who are known for championing the rights of those with unearned power to a fault are missing the mark on knowing what to do about the terrorist threat. I have thought for some time that there has been confusion between the rules of war, the rules of law and the non rules of the terrorists. The terroritsts are disciplined but they feel no constraints from the rules of law or the rules of war. I also think that for the United States and the coalition of the willing to enter into the fray of "no rules " is misguided. We will be seen as just reacting emotionally and contary to any of our principles and our credibility as a democracy under the rules of law will be shredded. I believe that a new set of rules for terrorism needs to be established. We need to be seen as responding within a set of restraints that can be explained and embraced by the American people and yet many of these rules will be defined to meet the unconventional tactics of the terrorists. I would hope that level heads would use their time and energy developing these new rules instead of thrashing each other over the "literal" undermining of 16 words and the crying over the "suffering" of the terrorists who blow up children.

---

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".