Billy Beck’s post about the true justification for Iraq gets it just right.

It made me recall what I posted to several forums on the morning of September 11, 2001 in response to the immediate and prevalent drivel about “bringing those responsible to justice.” And so I’ll play it once again, below:

> Please help our Leaders find the ones responsible for this attack.

Of course, this is not the time for heated debate, but it may be time to rethink the standard doctrine for dealing with terrorism–a doctrine that has focused upon primarily prosecuting individuals for crimes involving several hundred deaths at most.

As we see today, there is no more way to defend against massive, coordinated terrorism than there is the impact of a nuclear bomb. The nuclear doctrine that has proven to work thus far is mutually assured destruction (MAD). That is, the guarantee that costs equal to or greater than those imposed upon us will be imposed upon the aggressors in terms of property and civilian casualties.

Recall the sort of religious-like fervor that permeated the Japanese mind during WWII and what it eventually took to break that spirit and establish a secular, democratic government. Make no mistake–what we did by defeating and then occupying Japan and Germany was no less than the eradication of an aspect of their social culture, particularly with the drone-like Japanese.

We are dealing with a social culture that to a large extent raises its young to believe that it is glorious to sacrifice one’s life in aggression against others who hold different religious beliefs. This is a far cry from raising youngsters to believe that there is glory in sacrificing one’s life in defense against aggression. In witnessing news reports this morning, seeing people in Islamic countries celebrating and dancing in the streets, I think that it is at least worth discussing the possibility that there is something about this culture in general that is overtly threatening to the rest of the world and may need to be dealt with on that scale.