"WAR" ON TERROR


"Everything” is said to have “changed” on 9/11 because:

a. it was easier to say that than figure out what actually changed and act accordingly;

b. if only a few things changed, like our appreciation for better airport, seaport and border security, a former draft-dodger calling himself the “war president” would have looked goofy;

c. trusting a president who trusted his gut wouldn’t have made sense in any world that any of us had ever inhabited before; or

d. the “everything” that “changed” could also be said to include the reasons for the legal limitations-on-what-presidents-can-do that were so unconstitutional and dangerous.


The idea of a “war on terror” remains a good one because:

a. our high-tech army is so fearsome that the President’s mere declaration of a war on terror has scared most of the terrorists silly;

b. the best way to separate terrorists from their supporters is to clear supporters out of their cities and reduce their cities to rubble;

c. we’ve put all evil regimes on notice that, if they defy us, we’ll invade and be welcomed with open arms and flowers; or

d. since terror will never be defeated, we’ll always be at war, and violations of legal limitations-on-what-presidents-can-do are easier to justify when the country is at least rhetorically at war.