One of the major issues separating left and right these days is how we should
deal with terrorism.

Generalizing terribly, people on the left side of the aisle believe that we
need to deal with the root causes of terrorism; that if the root causes
of terrorism are addressed and solved, then terrorism will no longer be as
important an issue for us, because terrorists will not hate us; therefore, they
will have no reason to attack us. To attach a label to this viewpoint, let me
call it "curing the disease."

Continuing to generalize, those on the right believe that the fight against
terrorism requires that we bring the battles to the terrorists and their
supporters where they live. We cannot wait for the threat from terrorists
and their supporters to become imminent, because then it will be too late;
Americans or citizens of our allies will have died in another horrific attack.
Therefore, we may need to bring down governments of countries that support
terror (and by the way, free the citizens from the despotic leadership of those
countries). If I may, let me label this viewpoint "treating the symptoms."

In my opinion, it is clear that to be effective in the long term requires
that both treating the symptoms and curing the disease.

If you don't treat the symptoms, the patient may just die before you can cure
the disease. If you don't ultimately cure the disease, the symptoms will
reappear at some later time, and you've got the same problem all over again.

Of course, the reality of terrorism is more complex than that, but for the
sake of this essay, the analogy suffices, so let me continue.

It's pretty clear that the U.S. government and our allies are treating the
symptoms of terrorism, both in Afghanistan and in Iraq. We are using military
force to actively seek out and destroy terrorists and their supporters. People
disagree on whether or not it is the right thing to do, or on how effective the
military is at this mission, or whether or not the cost is too high, both in
lives and dollars. The fact remains, however, that we are at least trying
to treat the symptoms.

Likewise, I think the U.S. and our allies are attempting to cure the disease.
However, I believe our attempts in Iraq have not met with as much success, so
far. Curing the terrorism disease is a much more difficult problem than treating
the symptoms. It's an imperfect analogy, but terrorism is like a cancer -
individual tumors can be removed, but the disease has metastasized, and new
tumors appear other places in the body. Curing the disease will take a long-term
commitment, and it will take a broad and deep approach.

Stretching the analogy even more, the most important part of finally curing
the disease is just starting, and that is to activate the immune system of Iraq,
and the rest of the Muslim world, to reject the cancer.

How do we do that?

We do it by winning the hearts and minds of the Iraqis, convincing them that
we're on their side; that we want for them "life, liberty, and the pursuit
of happiness" just as for ourselves. We must convince them that we want
them to be free to determine their own futures, that we want them individually
and as a nation to prosper, and that they are safe from tyranny, both from
without and from within their country. We convince them by doing what it takes
to make those things a reality.