In this essay I will be writing about the pros and cons of using military force against terrorism, and discussing what is the necessary action to take in dealing with world terrorists. I will be reviewing two sides to this argument. Benjamin Netanyahu is for war on terrorism, and Bill Christison is against it.
Netanyahu explains how terrorists are only as dangerous as the states that support them. Without support, state terrorism would fall apart, because there would be no one there to supply or protect the terrorists. He also points out that 9/11 was an encouragement to all terrorist networks. " The success of terrorists in one part of the terror network emboldens terrorists throughout the network." The main theory that he explains is that terrorism is encouraged to install a form of Islam as a dominant power in the world, and to succeed they must destroy the enemy. He states that Islamic militants pursue and irrational ideology with no regard for human life. They will do whatever it takes to complete their objective, and that's the problem. Netanyahu says that we must destroy the whole terrorist network, no part must remain, or else it will rebuild and attack again. An example is, Bin Laden has moved from Saudi Arabia to Afghanistan and to Sudan. If they are not destroyed they will find somewhere else and begin to rebuild a new terrorist network.
For Bill Christison, waging a war will only encourage terrorists" strikes against us. The reason why the U.S. is hated is because of the global influence we have on other nations. The U.S. tends to try to make other countries govern like themselves, like the U.S. is the ideal country to take after. He explains what he think are the root causes of terrorism. The U.S. gets richer while other countries get poorer; this establishes hatred on the U.S. as well. The bombing campaigns kill the enemy as well as other innocent people. Our troops just lingering around in Saudi Arabia irritates them as well as other countries.