Mark Fiore: Ready and able, so why wait?

In the days following the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks on the United States, President Bush and his administration relentlessly declared, "We are at war." Every time a politician found himself on television, either Republican or Democrat, he spoke of "acts of war." In his speech to Congress and the nation, the president himself used the term 12 times, at one point rousingly declaring, "Freedom and fear are at war."

No longer is the American public hearing that powerful three-letter word. With the administration distancing itself from that stance, the United States has also started down a precarious road of delay. The White House has committed to taking military action against terrorists, and American citizens fully support that strategy, yet a larger question looms: When will justified retaliation occur?

The longer the United States waits, the less likely the nation will prevail in its mission. As a matter of military strategy, the United States is already losing precious time. Reports circulate daily that Afghanistan is preparing for a "holy war." Just last week the Taliban, Afghanistan's ruling government, reportedly sent some 300,000 soldiers to defend the Afghan borders. One can be sure that the Taliban is fortifying the nation in many other ways in an effort to protect the country from inevitable military strikes.

At the same time, the Taliban appears to be playing games with the United States, one day declaring that it will never turn over Osama bin Laden, and the next day announcing, oops, it no longer knows where he is hiding. As recent reports indicate, the Taliban knows the whereabouts of bin Laden -- its leaders have been aiding in his concealment as well.

All this while the White House continues to go slow and steady. True, the administration must be adequately prepared to launch a military assault before actually carrying it out. Disaster could result from implementing a plan not fully developed. However, an equally large disaster could result from prolonging the inevitable.

The United States is the greatest military power in the world, and it has begun flexing those muscles these past three weeks. Thousands of troops have been called up, ships have been moved into place and bombers and fighter planes have been sent throughout the world.

With this military might, it seems doubtful that much more delay is necessary. Combine that with the ample evidence that bin Laden and his terrorist network committed the Sept. 11 atrocities, and Americans nationwide should be demanding prompt action. Even if the White House is not sure of bin Laden's location, initial strikes at the heart of Afghanistan's primitive military and political infrastructure are more than justified and long overdue.

Indeed, without action soon, Americans may begin to grow impatient. The media has already become skeptical. Last week, The New York Times ran an article with the pessimistic headline, "Issue now: Does U.S. have a plan?" And as more time passes and the focus shifts away from the tragedy of Sept. 11, critics have begun asking more probing questions of the administration, putting the White House on the defensive.

That skepticism has even seeped onto Capitol Hill, where Democrats have begun questioning several requests made by the Justice Department; requests that Democrats argue infringe on individuals' civil liberties. Some Republicans, meanwhile, have started speaking out against government subsidies for industries directly affected by the terrorist attacks.

Internationally, the time necessary to build a coalition has given allies and potential allies, many of whom have long resisted American policies, the opportunity to doubt whether to remain committed to the American pact. Such fair-weather countries as Pakistan, Egypt and Saudi Arabia are just a few of those that have wavered on their involvement.

The United States must not turn soft in its war on terrorism. The nation has already seen the sad consequences of such a foreign policy. In the Persian Gulf War 10 years ago, the United States was within days of capturing or killing Saddam Hussein, but instead pulled out. Had the United States carried out its mission, one of the world's great terrorist regimes would have come to an end. That same regime has now possibly been linked to the Sept. 11 attacks.

The nation's half-hearted approach to terrorism continued well after the Gulf War. Indeed, the earlier bombing of the World Trade Center, the U.S. embassy bombings in Africa. and the attack on the USS Cole all went virtually unanswered.

The presumed mastermind behind those attacks: bin Laden. Perhaps the nation should learn from its past mistakes. The target is clear. The military is ready. The consequences of delay are high. The time to act is now.

Mark Fiore is a third-year Law School student and a 1999 College graduate from Spring Park, Minn.

Please note All comments are eligible for publication in The Daily Pennsylvanian.