You are to be commended for the clarity and sanity of your editorial. While the President seems to be getting support for the attack on Libya, there are Americans who disagree and whose voices should be heard.
I agree with your questions. How thoroughly has this violent act been considered? What will be the consequences? What further violence will it breed? What will be the ultimate result? Certainly not a cessation of terrorism.
And how right you are. It is so much simpler to “hit out”; “diplomatic and political ingenuity” is a far more difficult procedure. It demands a sense of history, a basic understanding of the problem (not only Kadafi) a rational weighing of the consequences of an act. A sincere desire to thoroughly explore alternate possibilities.
This is not to deny the problem, or the seriousness of the present situation, or the national frustration of terrorist acts against this country. It is to plead for a new approach.
It is time to set aside weapons as an answer to international differences. This nation earned the respect of the world when we were an economic power. As a debtor nation with a fearsome array of weaponry we are no longer the moral arbiter. When only three countries, Israel, Canada and Britain, supported the Libyan action, one should question how we are now considered.