| CIA | The Left | Limits of Force |
| Blowback | Islam | Terrorism's Roots |
| Strategic Background | American Society | Beyond Afghanistan |
| War and Politics | Afghan Politics |
 |
Bernard Lewis (1990) analyzed anti-Western attitudes in the Islamic world |
|
Ahmad Rashid (2000) worried about the strategic dilemmas facing the US in Central Asia |
|
William Vollmann (2000) looked at the Taliban's support in Afghanistan |
|
The Economist (1994) on Islam and the West |
|
The Weekly Standard (1998) on the terrorist threat to the US |
|
Benjamin Soskis addresses previous US support for the Taliban |
|
Seymour Hersh analyzes the relationship between Saudi Arabia and the terrorists |
|
The Economist wonders what would follow a Taliban-led Afghanistan |
|
Jonathan Steele on the complicated nature of Afghan politics |
|
Frederick Kagan urges a more comprehensive approach to south Asian postwar politics |
|
Stephen Schwarz on the Uzbek "alliance" |
|
James Ridgeway on the fragile nature of the Pakistani alliance |
|
Michael Rubin on the political situation in Afghanistan |
|
Mahnaz Ispahani on the domestic difficulties of Pakistan's regime |
|
Ken Silverstein on the checkered history of Pakistan's intelligence agency |
|
Uli Schmetzer doubts the ability of the Northern Alliance to lead a post-Taliban Afghanistan |
|
An array of left-wing intellectuals cast doubt on the military option |
|
The Nation celebrates the peace movement |
|
Mark Steyn attacks the response of the "dead-eyed zombies of the peace movement" |
|
Charles Deemer similarly criticizes former allies in the peace movement |
|
Christopher Hitchens and Noam Chomsky debate the left's response to the crisis |
|
Howard Zinn criticizes American leaders for advocating revenge |
|
Ian Buruma denounces Western intellectuals for not condemning Islamic violations of human rights |
|
Jonah Goldberg attacks the intellectual response to the conflict |
|
John Nichols predicts a growing opposition to the conflict |
|
Julian Manyon doubts that using force will accomplish US goals |
|
Stanley Hoffman questions the thesis that the war will change US foreign policy |
|
Michael Gordon on the fragile relationship between force and diplomacy |
|
Mother Jones wonders where in Afghanistan the US could effectively bomb |
|
Philip Wilcox expresses doubts that using force will successfully rebuff terrorism |
|
Mark Helprin calls for targeting weapons of mass destruction in the campaign against terrorism |
|
Thomas Henriksen attacks the "Blowback myth" |
|
Peter Beinart on the same topic--from a different ideological perspective |
|
Ken Silverstein looks at how US support for the mujahadeen in the 1980s is coming back to haunt policymakers |
|
Dilip Hiro more pointedly examines the cost of the "US victory" in 1980s Afghanistan |
|
Tony Blankley challenges the decoupling of Islamic intellectual currents from the terrorist acts |
|
Sylvain Ephimenco's open letter to Muslims in Holland |
|
The Economist urges Muslims to speak up against terrorism |
|
David Brooks addresses the "closing" of the Islamic mind |
|
Steven Schwarz calls for a broader American view of Islam |
|
Islamic scholars distinguish the attacks from Palestinian terrorism |
|
Walter Laqueur sees the development of an Islamic fascism, as does Christopher Hitchens |
|
Andrew Sullivan contends "this is a religious war" |
|
Rod Dreher advocates a more skeptical view of Islam |
|
Edward Said denounces viewing the conflict as a clash of civilizations |
|
The Atlantic on previous attempts to explain terrorism |
|
Robert Kaplan on earlier US responses to terrorism |
|
Richard Garwin on the nature of modern terrorism |
|
Thomas L. Friedman on the same topic |
|
Peter Maass on the Islam of the suicide bombers |
|
Fouad Ajami on modernity, tradition, Islam, and the terrorists |
|
Martin Wolf attributes the attacks to the economic failure of Islam |
|
Helle Bering alleges an intelligence failure by the CIA |
|
David Corn--from a different ideological perspective--reaches the same conclusion |
|
New York Times on the missed intelligence by the CIA |
|
Add The Economist to the CIA's critics in the battle against terror |
|
Andrew Roberts contends that "political correctness" explained the CIA's lack of diligence |
|
Loch Johnson points to the agency's dearth of . . . professors! |
|
Reuel Marc Gerecht, a former CIA operative, predicted that the CIA would not stop bin Laden |
|
Seymour Hersh reports on the CIA's difficulties in the post-Cold War era |
|
Timothy Noah wonders at Hersh's change of heart on the CIA |
|
Bobby Inman places the CIA's shortcomings in a historical context |
|
Stanley Hoffman advocates waging the war in a manner consistent with American ideals |
|
Philip Heymann on preserving civil liberties in the battle against terrorism |
|
Richard Goldstein worries about conformity developing in the wake of the attacks |
|
Dahlia Lithwick on the international response to terrorism |
|
Michael Kinsley on the dilemmas of defining terrorism in a free society |
|
Jeffrey Rosen challenges the wisdom of the administration's anti-terrorism bill |
|
St. Paul Pioneer-Press examines the dilemma between national security and reporting the war |
|
as does the New York Times |
|
The Economist looks at terror in Colombia |
|
The Wall Street Journal worries about Iraqi involvement in terror attacks |
|
Michael Barone asks whether the conflict will increase the federal government's power |
|
Ronald Brownstein addresses the issue more circumspectly |
|
The Hotline detects a revival of the politics of virtue |