When we get a democratically elected terrorist organization, just what is the correct reaction? It is particularly ironic, since the United States has been proclaiming that democracy in the middle east is a virtual panacea that will lead to peace.

I'm not sure just what can be done though. It is quite a dilemma, particularly since the balance of power is so lopsided. The Palestinians have no significant military, but they are quite willing to engage in terrorist activity to further their cause, although they don't limit themselves to such activity.

If a significantly large group that is disenfranchised manages to find a political voice, they need to be addressed. The Palestinians have just elected a terrorist group. Will the Palestinians be satisfied with peaceful co-existence? Will Hamas?

I tend to doubt it. When people have very little, they tend to cling to philosophical doctrines, or religious ones. Articles of faith. Faith is more powerful when life is difficult. Probably why Americans are so fast and loose with their own faiths. Zealots and fanatics are notoriously difficult to reason with, and often reason simply isn't possible. Clearly people that are willing to blow themselves up basically just to make a point aren't terribly reasonable by most folks standards. Still, people are willing to die for things, and if a large enough voting block agrees with that sort of logic, it seems inevitable that you will have a society that is willing to elect terrorists to office.

The problem with that is that isolating such a regime can simply bolster resolve, because their group's suffering can act as a bonding factor. Not only that, such resolve is likely to breed militancy. In the past militancy was basically enough to wage a war, but because of the way technology has tranformed the battlefield, war is clearly no longer an option. Terrorrism is quickly replacing war, and it should be no surprise. The fact may be that war was an escape valve in the past, but when the United States gets drawn into a conflict, traditional warfare is so clearly a losing proposition. So now the question becomes, just how much violence is considered an acceptable level of violence, primarily when it comes to the United States.

Clearly the Twin Towers was too much.

The biggest trump card is the nuclear Djinni. At some point it seems inevitable that a nuclear or biological terrorrist event will occur.

The ironic thing here though is that we may have finally reached a point in human history where war really is obsolete. Now all we have to do is figure out a way to deal with the repercussions of that fact.

At least kids today aren't worrying about the world ending in a Nuclear Armaggedon.