With Europe just about coming to terms with the terror attacks in Paris, in November 2015, in which 130 died. Europe was once again shaken at its core, as ISIS struck at the heart of Europe. This time Brussels was the target where, so far, 31 people have been killed and another 330 people injured. This latest attack has once again drawn World leaders to speak out in support of those attacked and to ensure that retribution would be dealt out to those responsible. We were told this retribution would be rapid and would put an end to terror in Europe and across the World.
Now if we start at the beginning, and as people of reasonable intelligence, we can say that ‘the end of terror across the World’ is not a realistic statement and it is merely spoken in the hope it would relax and satisfy the masses, with no real meaning or, more cynically, hope. So in a World in which we can all admit to ourselves that ‘terror attacks’ are a sad inevitability, why do we still long for such pointless and irrelevant statements of strength?
Amongst the numerous politicians and World leaders, all clamoring to have their voice heard and to be seen as the biggest enemy of ISIS, was the US Presidential candidates. As you would expect the candidates were desperate to make their impression on the World with wildly bold remarks. The candidates, as a whole did not disappoint on this front. With Trump crying outrage, and demanding retribution. He suggested we would start World War 3 to get back at ISIS and that he would shut all the borders to everyone, not just to Mexicans this time. Cruz similarly cried havoc demanding highly drastic revenge on ISIS and all Muslims, as he called for police to “patrol and secure Muslim neighborhoods” in order to prevent any further attacks! Oh and yes you are correct in thinking that is terrifying thing for a potential US president to say!
Then we’ll move onto the Democrats. The supposed frontrunner of the party, called Hillary Clinton was, in her credit, a lot more restrained in her response to the attacks and spoke out against the remarks of Trump and Cruz. However, Clinton was also able to suggest that these attacks were a clear signal that the US should increase its level of surveillance on its own citizens! And if that does not scare you as much as Cruz’s statement then you are yet to quite grasp what freedom is and what the US constitution is meant to protect.
Now we come to the only US presidential candidate to bring a message of peace and real restraint. Bernie Sanders spoke of his sorrow for the victims and those effected by the Brussels attacks. He was also the only candidate who seemed to be able to keep his morales and he had the mature oversight to remind us that “we are fighting terrorists not a religion”. Sanders was the only candidate to be able to hold on to his morales which he has laid out throughout the campaign and his political career. Unlike Cruz he did not invite hatred upon a group of innocent people. Unlike Trump he did not promote the bombing or mass murder of a largely innocent population. Unlike Clinton, he did not use ISIS as an excuse to further spy on his own citizens. Most importantly he was the only candidate who seemed interested in genuine peace.