Colombia is a country that has been suffering a severe civil war, with rebels allied to the drug trade that now control a large section of the country. This article focuses on the fact that the European allies of the US, although united and willing to back the U.S., insist on a response that is fair, based on consensus, and intelligently thought-out rather rather than being disproportionate and excessive. The article specifies that the both France and Spain are not supportive of the idea of lumping together the terrorist groups and the countries that harbor them (as Bush did in an early speech). The article also quotes those who don't want Europe to respond to a barbarous act by committing another barbarous act (the indiscriminate attack on a people). In addition, the article cites those who are against a repetition of a "media show" that occurred with Clinton's bombing of Sudan and Afganistan in retaliation for the bombs that went off in Kenya and Tanzania; this media display served no purpose.

Question to Consider

• Do you think a country that suffers from prolonged terrorism and is in the midst of a complex civil war that has lasted decades, would be more or less inclined to favor a strong military response based on retaliation and vengeance? In Colombia leftist terrorists and rightist paramilitary groups kidnap, hijack, bomb, and threaten virtually every day. How do you think that situation affects the citizens' perspectives on huge acts of terrorism? Could it affect the level of sympathy and understanding of the victims?

Back to communications