|
|||
The disappearance of those demonstrations over the last few weeks shows that the war against him in Afghanistan has not enhanced bin Laden's mystique - as many confidently claimed it would. On the contrary, it has diminished it. "The West"? You bet; those heavy Italian bombers and French carrier-based planes sure did make a difference. Who is this "West" of which you speak? How about "The United States (with a bit of help from the UK)"? But actually, when you read the next paragraph his reason for using that term becomes clear: The defeat of terrorism depends on the West having the courage and commitment to follow to its conclusion the war on the people who perpetrate terrorism, and on the states who support and shield them. Deterrence works. Nothing else does. His reason for using the term is because he's addressing the war-wary in Europe to convince them that they should support it. If he refers to "The United States" then he makes it clear that their own governments and militaries weren't really involved. But he's trying to get them to think of themselves as already part of the effort, and to become more supportive in future. So he's trying to give them conceptual cover to avoid thinking about how wrong they were up to this point. "We" won the war in Afghanistan by military power and "we" need to keep doing so in future to win other places. (discuss) |