In student circles of discussion, my liberal, devil’s advocacy is countered by claims that I am an idealist and that this is a time for realists. My combatants proclaim that the injustices endured by our nation make it an indisputable necessity for a military response, and I agree. I want to see the individual’s responsible brought to justice, but more importantly, I want to see our country act with the objectives and foresight of securing national security and the well being of our citizens.

As I sit down to write this column, military action has begun and the American public seems supportive. The problem is that Americans are caught in this net of realism, a “this needs to be done” philosophy. You can not be a realist if you do not have the knowledge to understand the reality of the circumstances. The reality is that America has pledged war on a new enemy. It is not a concrete place or person, but an idea. How will military action quench the wells of jealousy, poverty, religious fanaticism and most importantly, resentment toward the United States that combine to form the enemy we know as terrorism?

I am not qualified to give such an important answer, but Jerrold Post is. Post, a former psychological profiler for the CIA, appears in The Boston Phoenix, Oct. 5-11, voicing his educated opinion that grew from years of studying the psychological foundation for terrorism. Post notes that terrorists are vulnerable people because, “feelings of despair over economic conditions … and totalitarian regimes” make them easily impressionable to the fanaticism of leaders such as Osama bin Laden. Moreover, Post notes that in reality the efforts against terrorism are “… not a military struggle in many ways” when these factors are properly acknowledged as the foundation of the problem.

For Americans, the hardest aspect of terrorism to accept is its deep-rooted ties to worldwide hatred of our nation. Economically and culturally, America is seen as an invader of sorts and is met with skepticism in every foreign land.

“Americans should reflect on why they are so hated by so many people in the world. The United States has generated so much violence to protect its economic interests, and now it is reaping what it has sowed.” Who said this: A) Saddam Hussein, B) A leader of the Islamic Jihad terrorist organization, C) the Taliban, or D) a Catholic bishop of southern Mexico named Felipe Arizmendi Esquivel? Reflecting not just personal feelings, but the national sentiment of our southern neighbors, Arizmendi Esquivel’s statement should make us all pause.

So what does this all mean? If you want to be a realist, then you must understand that it is very possible America is really making a mistake. Osama bin Laden must be brought to justice. However, it is foolish and extremely harmful to the public’s fragile psyche to perpetuate the belief that bin Laden’s death or capture will have any long lasting affect on worldwide terrorism. To protect against further attacks we must eliminate the pawns used in them, because without his followers bin Laden is merely a fanatical millionaire hiding in Afghanistan.

The military action taken so far seems to be the foundation for a long-term campaign that may involve ground troops as early as this week. We have already seen the destruction of airfields, aircraft and communication centers.

Sadly, it is illogical to believe that our military could accomplish such massive achievements. In fact, it is more probable that military campaigns could be detrimental to the war on terrorism. Unavoidable civilian casualties and prolonged military action will inevitably create hostility toward our cause. Is our military objective to protect our citizens or to provoke our enemies? It is a fine line that we are choosing to walk, and the probability that we fall and lose our sense of direction is large. By destroying countries that are already drowning in poverty, technological deficiency and overall economic deterioration we will be fueling the anti-American sentiments that lead to terrorist attacks. Children will grow up in bombed out shacks, and when they have fully emerged as young adults they will be taken to the next bin Laden, who will provide a wonderful plan to get revenge on that awful country named America.

America is still smarting from its wounds, and to say that in theory we are partially responsible for what has happened only adds salt to injuries that we ultimately want to heal. But this is the reality. Not some hippie, pacifist, flower-power reality, but a reality supported by anti-terrorist war analysts, psychologists and anyone with the sense to look deep enough into the current state of affairs. So for all you realists out there, who think you see an enemy in Osama bin Laden and the Taliban, rest assured that ignorance is a sad product of short-sightedness. Bin Laden is merely the catalyst, the leader, the charisma that is needed to perpetuate any ideology whether it be virtuous or vicious. You take the leader away, another will take its place; you remove the ideology altogether and the leader will be isolated – the movement will collapse. Americans must understand that to achieve this latter objective, our national pride and power will be of no use, unless we can rely equally on our wisdom and pragmatism to change our image abroad.