Many people question, “can one win or lose a war against an idea?” After further discussion in class about this question, I believe a nation can certainly lose a war against an idea, and they most certainly cannot win a war against an idea. As the character V, in the movie “V for Vendetta,” powerfully puts it, “ideas are bulletproof” (viewer discretion advised http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-A7FG_QKUfU). There is no arguing with this statement. When a nation wages war against another country driven by a concept, that nation is doomed to lose. Practically, that nation can constitute the war as a victory if they have “out lived” the other side. However, they have not truly won - even if that is what the numbers and pictures show. The idea still lives on.
In my opinion, the “War on Terror” is the United States’ war against an idea. Now, while many people believed and still believe that the U.S. has probable cause to be in Afghanistan or Iraq, this is irrelevant. While it seemed that there was a good reason to wage war because of the September 11th attacks and the supposed weapons of mass destruction, I think this war is now baseless. The country has classified its war as a concept – the “War on Terror.” While our country may be fighting to eradicate terrorism, or more easily, to assuage terrorism, in theory the idea of terrorism will always be present and prominent. By way of the media, the idea of “terrorism” will always be written in our history books. Therefore, because of modern technology, we can never win the “War on Terror.”
The United States could try and constitute a form of victory. Yes. They have lost fewer men. Yes. They have done more damage to a country than thought possible. Yet, they have failed to truly and successfully implement democracy in a broken country. While they definitely cannot win the “War on Terror”, they also cannot spread their own idea of democracy founded by an everlasting support. This is not to say that they should not try to share democratic ideals. However, they should not rely on democracy as a reason to wage war, and much less the notion to defeat terrorism.
Furthermore, idea is not cause. In Homer’s “The Iliad,” the Achaeans and Trojans fight not over ideas, but over different causes. While the root of the war is because of a foolish cause, the fight over Helen, it still has a tangible purpose. Whereas the “War on Terror” initially had cause, it has grown to be a war over an idea. Because of this message, “ideas are bulletproof,” I think the United States is much better served fighting terrorism through diplomacy and peaceful efforts.
While it may be nice to think that the U.S. can overcome terrorism on the battlefield, the idea of terrorism will always outlast bullets and bombs. Although at first glance war may appear the most effective method to defeating an idea, it is only temporary and quickly fleeting. Eventually, the idea takes a backseat to the fighting and, the whole purpose of war is lost. A nation cannot win a war against an idea. It must resort to more methodical approaches to defeat an idea. With war, logic is thrown out the window, and the idea still remains.
