Quote Originally Posted by Dayuhan View Post
I'm curious... what action, exactly, would you consider "appropriate", and how would you expect it to "reduce the likelihood of Muslim terrorist attacks against the US"?
In general terms the US must come to grips with the fact that how others in general, and certainly those who live in the Middle East, perceive the US and US foreign policy far differently than the US government and US citizens view the same. That is not to say that either perception is accurate, or that one is better than the other, just to say that they are different. In this business, perceptions matter far more than facts. We need to understand that delta in perception. Agree or disagree, we need to understand and take it serious.

Next the US must shape, project, and nurture the perception that we are not for radical change, nor are we for the blind approval and sustainment of any particular government that we perceive as the best champion of US interests in that particular country. We similarly must not be for the promotion of US values and perceptions on democratic government that we have grown so fond of preaching as "universal" and the only "right" way to do things. Instead the US must simply go on record that we hold no corner on the market for good ideas on how to govern, but that for our own interests we believe that stability in the Middle East is important, and that the artificial stability of strongman regimes is proving to be an obsolete and failing model in the Middle East.

We should publicly encourage populaces to seek peaceful, but powerful (history shows that non-violent approaches to insurgency garner far more international support and are more successful) approaches to advance their concerns; while privately engaging governments to encourage them listen to their people's reasonable demands and to seriously consider the small changes that history shows can produce such dramatic effects in calming populaces in this stage of dissent.

Air strikes and public condemnations are not the best way to move these issues forward in a manner that also repairs public perceptions of the US in the process. Neither are invasions to change regimes, or train and equip programs that turn governmental thugs into more effective governmental thugs. We cling to the status quo for fear of the future. It is time for the US to rely less on the boldness of our military, and to seek instead bold efforts at private diplomacy.

The keys for the US are stability in the region and a repaired reputation. Any effort dedicated equally to both is better than any effort that ignores one for the other.