The instant-gratification approach doesn't work very well in international relations. It takes planning and patience, neither of which are known strengths of the US in general, and of this Administration in particular.

I don't think that we, as a nation and as a culture, have done enough to reach the Arabs and non-Arab Muslims who don't consider a criminal mastermind to be their spokesman. Now we're paying attention, of course, but in a kind of schitzoid way that holds out the palm in one hand and the blackjack in the other, and uses them both at the same time. Teddy Roosevelt said, "Speak softly and carry a big stick." This Administration's take on it is, "Yell so you can be heard over the gunfire." What good will has been gathered overseas can be laid almost entirely at the feet of individual groups of Americans, both military and civilian, who go there and do good works -- in the case of military groups, often on their own and in their free time. Unfortunately, nation building is not this Administration's forte.

It would be nice if Americans learned that foreign languages are important. If more Americans could speak more than English (and not just Arabic, but all sorts of Asian languages), we would have a clue what people in other nations are saying. In order to speak a language, one must have teachers, infrastructure in human form. Yet we have had garbage floating around the US for years that not only discourages the idea of language instruction as a student requirement, but that actively campaigns for English Only in many of our institutions. How dumb.

I think that bin Laden knows he has hit some very hot buttons in the Muslim world with his manifesto. I think the threats of extermination with which he concludes them are manifestations of his own megalomania mixed with a little "olde fashioned" melodrama. One haggles in Arab markets, even in the marketplace of ideas. It's not unusual to find the first price quoted to be unreasonably high. He plays to two audiences. Our outrage is palpable, and plays right into his hands. His other audience, his home audience, only sees that we reject everything out of hand, without the proviso that we will not negotiate with a murderer. They see only that we will not negotiate. "With anyone" is understood. This should be corrected.

I love the new financial agreement concerning African debt. (I hope it has legs.) Many Africans are Muslims. Good for Tony Blair, for putting a little pressure on George. Heaven knows that the Blair government has not been thanked by the British people for its involvement in Iraq. If Blair can use his political suffering to pressure our leadership into debt forgiveness, you know what? That is a direct response to two of the complaints on bin Laden's list: the one about usury and the one about supporting crap governments for strategic reasons. But the paramount point to remember here is, the complaints don't originate with bin Laden. They existed long before he collected them. Bin Laden's unique contribution to the list of complaints was the death threats. We can accept the validity of the complaints without dignifying bin Laden. Blair has shown us how.

I don't think we need to negotiate with a criminal. I do think we need to pay more attention, and give more respect to, an ancient culture and a proud religion. People want to believe in a future for their children that doesn't involve burying them.

I don't think that reasonable Arabs really expect us to abandon the Israelis. At the same time, the people living in the Levant have been angry for generations. It will take some time to defuse that. But notice what's happening in Palestine since Arafat's demise. Notice that Sharon doesn't automatically get the White Housekeeping Seal of Approval for everything anymore. Notice that Netanyahu is unhappy. This is a good sign.

I don't think that we can effectively train Iraqi security forces, which will be a long, drawn-out process undoing many years of neglect and corruption, and avoid the collapse of our own national infrastructure without reversing the ruinous tax cuts that are now supposed to be "permanent", whatever that means in politics.

I don't think that running record deficits and having our national finances supported by the Bank of Japan and the People's Bank of China is a good long-term plan, or even a good short-term plan. Our ability to lead, not to mention our real national security, depends on our economic stability, not on God's desire for George Bush to be President, no matter what he thinks. And every time I think of retirement funds and the stock market together, I think of 1929.

And last (and I can do nothing about this but complain because it's done, but it makes me so mad), how dare our fearless leader lead us into Iraq without a plan to rebuild the country? So help me, if I hear the Marshall Plan referenced favorably one more time in the same paragraph with Iraq, I may vomit. George Marshall started working on a plan to rebuild Germany in 1942, long before it was obvious we would even win the war. I think that our George has had too many things handed to him. Otherwise he would know that it takes a lot of hard work with real planning, real logistics, real supplies and real money to rebuild a country. "So let it be written -- so let it be done" only works in the movies.

I know I haven't addressed every single point that Tom has stated. But it's a start.