US air strikes: Should the action be extended?

Washington has warned the United Nations Security Council that its campaign against terrorism might not be restricted to Afghanistan and Osama Bin Laden's al-Qaeda group.

UN Secretary General, Kofi Annan, and the Security Council have given their backing to US-led strikes on Afghanistan.

The US ambassador to the UN, John Negroponte, said in a letter that his country's self-defence could require actions against other organisations and states.

Mr Negroponte's words are likely to cause concern in some Middle Eastern capitals, in case America widens its campaign to take in long-standing enemies such as Iraq.

Do you think the US should extend its military campaign to other states? Or should it confine itself to fighting the al-Qaeda group?

This debate is now closed. Read a selection of your comments below.

---

Your reaction

The world's nations have been passive for too long against these enemies.

Patrick, San Diego, USA

There is a false idea that the United States plans to launch military strikes against other countries without warning. President Bush has made the United States' position clear from the beginning; you are either with the terrorists or you are against them. If after diplomatic efforts have failed to produce anti-terrorism support from a nation, the United States and its allies has every right to defend themselves through pre-emptive military strikes. The world's nations have been passive for too long against these enemies. Withdrawing Western forces from the Middle East and abandoning any interest in the area is not a solution. To do that would be to give the 9/11 attacks and its perpetrators power to use those means to resolve any other problem it has with the West.

The United States and the United Kingdom have historically been drawn into conflicts, they have rarely caused them. Germany invaded several countries during WWII before the UK became involved. The USA was attacked by Japan before it became directly involved. Since then, the United Nations and NATO have attempted to keep political stability throughout the world. If the world does not take a firm stance against the 9/11 attacks and destroy the means for terrorist attacks, people will never be free from the fear of terrorism.
Patrick, San Diego, USA

With the advanced technology available to the Super Powers involved in the Alliance against Terrorism, why have they not sent in a 'crack ground force' to capture Bin Laden, choosing instead to bomb certain installations in the knowledge that innocent people will be injured, if not killed. September 11th will never be forgotten and should not go un-avenged however, this is tit for tat rather targeting the person ultimately responsible. Question: Are the 'Alliance' going to commence campaigns against other Terrorist Organisations on a World Wide Basis once Bin Laden has been brought to justice?
Michelle B, S Wales, U.K.

They must be removed and a diplomatic and democratic government instituted.

Fraser Andrew, Great Britain

I think that the strategic strikes against Afghanistan are the right thing to do. We must stand up for the defenceless people of Afghanistan who have suffered nearly 20 years of war and then more years under the dictatorship of the Taleban. They must be removed and a diplomatic and democratic government instituted.

"We shall pay any price, bare any burden, meet any hardship, support any friend, oppose any foe, to ensure the survival and the success of liberty" President John F Kennedy of the United States.
Fraser Andrew, Great Britain

Martin said, "The US are killing civilians - including UN workers, with apparent disregard for innocent lives. Tell me, who exactly are the terrorists now?" Answer me this, sir, what were those UN workers DOING there? All the other UN personnel had been evacuated and these people knew full well an attack was coming. Whose fault is it if they decided to stay in the direct line of fire? I'd submit they were partly to blame.
Harry, NYC, NY

The campaign shouldn't be extended - it should be extinguished! The US are killing civilians - including UN workers, with apparent disregard for innocent lives. Tell me, who exactly are the terrorists now?
Martin, England, UK

We need to finish what we have started in Afghanistan. But that's as far as we must go. Then we should hunt terrorist down - quietly. Too many nations live with the shadow of terrorism looming over their shoulder. Now so does the US. We tried to resolve this. The US played the "turn over bin Laden, please" game. That did not work. What other choices did we have? How long do we wait? Until thousands of your countrymen are cremated in the burning pile of rubble of a famous landmark?
Anine, USA

I think the action should stop immediately

Carl Wheldon, Surrey, UK

I think the action should stop immediately. The only way to prevent future terrorist acts is via humanitarian aid effort. The US and UK governments are committing terrorist acts and killing more civilians, while creating future martyrs. The paranoia induced security measures under consideration, seem to give a victory to those against freedom and justice.
Carl Wheldon, Surrey, UK

To declare a worldwide stance against terrorism is great but how can you suddenly decide to attack this country or that country because they may at one time or another have harboured terrorists? Where do you draw the line? A point that has been made is also that they need to take a good long look in their own backyard and Tony Blair might do well to think about where a vast amount of the funding for the IRA bombs on the English mainland has come from.
Neil, Sydney, Australia

Airdrops of food to the Afghan people are virtually a waste of time and more of a publicity stunt by the governments concerned. The aid relief should be heavily concentrated on the border areas with Pakistan, Iran and the former communist states.
Phil T, Oman

I think that we should go and finish the job which means taking whatever means necessary. However,we should get our foreign policy straight and keep it focused.
Andre Daedone, Michigan, USA

Bring al-Qaeda to justice but don't commit violence against the population of another state

Julian Winn, UK

To extend the military strikes to other countries or groups requires the US and its coalition partners to provide evidence of wrongdoing. To continue to attack Afghanistan will require justification too. The al-Qaeda group has been identified as the offender. Bring them to justice but don't commit violence against the population of another state.
Julian Winn, UK

Yes! Let's destroy all the terrorists in Iraq, Palestine and while we're at it, the IRA, the KKK, neo-nazism and the extremists in Iran. Let not one terrorist try to tell me the US deserved what we got on September 11 when the terrorists themselves are uncompromising blasphemers.
Steve Stromberg, Sacramento, USA

If the US extends its strikes to hit other nations such as Iraq, then I think that the US has not learned a single line of the lesson from the past decade.
Chris George, Vienna, Austria

Bush needs to learn a few things from Ariel Sharon

Shankar, Detroit, USA

If the US is not tough on terrorists and those who support them, they will come back and attack us. The US needs to be prepared to go about this war against terrorism on its own. This coalition that Bush is starting is limiting what the US can do against terrorism. Bush needs to learn a few things from Ariel Sharon.
Shankar, Detroit, USA

I agree with the strikes, but the US should only attack the country or organisation that they believe is responsible. If they move on to other countries, such as Iraq, then the same will happen as in the gulf war. Other countries will drop out of the coalition, and the Americans will be made to look the bad guys again. Military force is the only way. Those people who don't agree with it, how do you think they can bring Osama Bin Laden to justice? By asking the Taleban to hand him over? I think they already did that.
Bri, Notts, UK

Think very, very carefully before action is extended to other countries. Despite the wonderful rhetoric from Blair and Bush, many Muslims are already seeing this as a religious attack. Extending action to other Muslim nations will cement their views, and they are ready for a Jihad. I can't agree with Garry from Frankfurt either. His memory seems short as I well remember a number of occasions where the terrorists from the IRA left their own land to reap death and destruction in the UK. Are they not terrorists also? Should the alliance not be targeting them to prove that this is not a religious persecution? Israel perhaps too? India and Pakistan?
Judy Hitchcock, Sydney, Australia

I am astounded by what Judy Hitchcock, Sydney, Australia has to say about bombing of India. I strongly object to her comments. India is the world's largest democracy and not a rogue nation trying to harbour or kill other citizens of the world. We are a peace-loving country and one of the biggest victims of terrorism. I strongly suggest that before you comment you check your knowledge of a particular country. Otherwise you will end up making ridiculous and highly objectionable statements.
Ann, India

They will have to bomb themselves

Muhammed Reza Tajri, London, England

I think it is fantastic that the USA are extending the war to all international terrorism. I assume this means that the USA is planning to bomb Israel, the world's biggest threat to peace. Israel, who have as their Prime Minister, a proven international war criminal. They will also have to bomb Ireland for harbouring the IRA. Last but not least, they will have to bomb themselves for their financial and military support of Israel, which has broken a number of international laws and UN resolutions. This is not merely a war on Islam after all!
Muhammed Reza Tajri, London, England

Do we still want war in this world? Can't we live in peace? The only thing that has happened due to wars is the loss of millions of lives, the destruction of economies, the splitting of nations and the destruction of property. It will happen again if the US extends its air strikes or attacks on Afghanistan. there will be havoc in this world and the US itself will suffer for what it does. We should learn to live in peace.
Anas, Bangalore,India

The USA should stop abandoning its allies after it has achieved its desired goals

Nazareth, Karachi (Pakistan)

No, I don't think the strikes should be extended to other regions or countries without attaining the consent of those countries. Further, the USA should stop abandoning its allies after it has achieved its desired goals, and it should have the sense to differentiate between a freedom movement and a terrorist organization.
Nazareth, Karachi (Pakistan)

So the bombings in America legitimise attacks on other states who harbour terrorists such as Syria and Iran, Libya, Iraq and the Sudan. Are these countries populated by terrorists and no one else? Does the whole of the Middle East have to pay for the attacks perpetrated by one group? Two wrongs do not make a right - the killing of innocent people in America does not make it OK to kill innocent Afghans or anybody else in the search for revenge. Justice should be sought in the courts and the answer to terrorism lies in improved defence and improved intelligence.
Susan Brockett, Darlington, UK

War has never solved a problem in world history; it only aggravates things. Terrorism is bad no doubt, but we should find the root causes of these evils and try to eradicate them. Western powers, as eager as they are to flex their muscles, do not realize that thousand of civilians will be killed in this act of war-mongering. We appeal to the USA and its western allies to halt and understand this process of war.
Abul Hasnat, Bangalore, India

They may even trigger a Third World War

Robert A Khin, Burma

Military attacks on nations just to wipe out terrorists are themselves acts of terrorism. They may even trigger a Third World War. So for the sake of our children and grandchildren, think first before you act.
Robert A Khin, Burma

Getting Ben Laden and leaving the network would be like getting Hitler and leaving his generals. In horror movies, a snake is chopped into 12 pieces to kill it, but it turns into 12 snakes. I think every last person should be hunted down and made accountable for their actions.
Greta, TEXAS, USA

Al-Qaeda has said that there are thousands of angry young men who want to die for Islam. That can easily be arranged. The US will keep fighting to defend itself, regardless of what the rest of the world says.
Robert, US

This is a war that will take many years and unfortunately include other countries. Do terrorists only live in one place? The main difference between the US-led coalition and the terrorists is that we attack military targets and they target the innocent!
Terry, New York, USA

America is "King of Jungle"

Tahir Farooqi, Lahore, Pakistan

America is "King of Jungle" so it will decide itself whether to extend its terrorist attack on other states as well. Do you really think the US will take into consideration the suggestions that we make? The present attack on Afghanistan is proof that they won't. America alone is its own plaintiff, advocate and judge, so who can advise or suggest to the superpower what should it do.
Tahir Farooqi, Lahore, Pakistan

In response to J Rockett and all others who prattle on about attacking the IRA and ETA. What do you suggest, bombing Northern Ireland and Spain? The difference in these cases is too obvious for the brainless to work out. The countries where these organisations operate are the target countries themselves. The Spanish state doesn't actually sponsor or harbour ETA. They are stuck with them.
Garry, Frankfurt, Germany

It's a matter of survival

Michael Entill, UK

Islamic terrorism is on the march. It is targeting the West and attacks have been getting more frequent and more severe. It must be stopped before it gets hold of nuclear weapons. If these means the West has to extend the current war, then so be it. This is not a choice; it's a matter of survival.
Michael Entill, UK

For a campaign that's supposed to be "not against Islam", how many of the new proposed targets would be Islamic? But I suppose this makes perfect sense to people who can say they are friends of the people of the very country they are bombing.
Martin, England, UK

These attacks most certainly should not be continued in any way beyond attempting to bring Osama Bin Laden to justice. All that can come from wider action is more hatred and this will push moderate Muslims towards extremist groups. We run the risk of destabilising more countries as Muslim extremists could take the popular support to gain government. Pakistan has a nuclear arsenal, imagine if they fell into the hands of fundamentalists. The only way forward is by peaceful means, because violence simply breeds more violence.
Shaihan Malik, Cambridge, UK

I cannot believe the naiveté of people. Afghanistan was told to hand Bin Laden over. This took more than a week of negotiations and "talks" etc. The Afghans had no regard for their own civilians let alone anyone else. The terrorists are worse than animals and need to be found and destroyed. At the expense of innocent people? Unfortunately, yes.
Lesley, Horsham, UK

Any country that supports terrorism in another country should be targeted

John, France

Any country that supports terrorism in another country should be targeted and their terrorists brought to justice. The rulers of Afghanistan were given this option but chose not to accept the offer.
John, France

I do not think these anti-attack comments are helpful. They add more fuel to the fire of these terrorists who long to cause division in the world. What must be clearly understood is that you cannot reason with a terrorist. As with a school bully, you must take a stand as a group with them. You cannot negotiate with them, you cannot compromise with them and you cannot appease their supporters. They have a set agenda and will not stop until they have reached their goal. The only way to deal with terrorists who are determined to destroy innocent lives without regard for themselves is through a strong show of force - through intelligence, world cooperation and military power. Unfortunately, like dealing with a bully, those are the only things that can penetrate their rhetoric.
Gretchen D'Costa, Washington DC, USA

The only expansion of this campaign should be an investigation into the involvement of the CIA and the US government with the supply of weapons and money to the Taleban or its founders, and the general covert operations and meddling in the Middle East. This new investigation should also question how it is not a threat to democracy that countries are basically being forced or coerced into this coalition.
Rachel Gordon, USA

The allied attacks must stop now. Otherwise it might well result in WW3 soon, with other Muslim countries joining in. This will almost certainly include those who at the moment appear to support the US, only doing so under heavy diplomatic pressure. Pakistan is a prime example. There the military regime might soon be toppled by an angry public.
Anna, London, UK

This campaign should be conducted one step at a time otherwise the coalition will overstretch its resources

Richard B, UK

This campaign should be conducted one step at a time otherwise the coalition will overstretch its resources. I believe it should be widened and in time will be. The Afghans want rid of the Taleban terrorists. After all they've been through they deserve better and hopefully they'll get it.
Richard B, UK

I would have preferred if the air strikes were directed against Iraq and Saddam in the first place as I feel it is just as much to blame for the recent terrorist atrocities.
Vickie Lynn Reeves, Indianapolis, USA

The US has been waiting for this opportunity to go after Bin Laden for a long time. What seemed to be a legitimate cause is turning out to be a major screw up, turning the whole Arab world against it. This will be a virtual certainty if they attack Iraq.
Alexis Morphis, Nicosia, Cyprus

America seems to be using this conflict to settle old scores

Joseph Parkinson, Manchester, UK

America seems to be using this conflict to settle old scores which is ironic seeing as they are fighting against the very people they previously armed - the Taleban and possibly Iraq. The Middle East will react badly if the war on terrorism turns into a war on Islamic countries because there are a lot of holes in Bush's mission for "freedom".
Joseph Parkinson, Manchester, UK

Of course they should be extended. Saddam needs to be taken out so we can lift the sanctions and let the Iraqis get on with their lives.
Thom, USA

Most definitely, the US and the rest of the world should take the war against terrorism beyond the borders of Afghanistan and into any nation that harbours terrorists. To do otherwise is to embolden these evildoers to take further action against any nation that calls itself free. I am sorry that it has taken such a tragic event to make people understand what has long been self-evident. To any people in the UK that suggest doing anything less, ask yourselves how would you feel if this attack had been in London?
Michael Lohman, Washington DC, USA

Absolutely not. This is a revenge attack that has been sold to the general public by biased uninformative news. This will only cause worldwide fear and uncertainty.
Mary, Reading, UK

I think that the US should keep boxing clever. To expand the bombing at this or at a stage in the medium term would be a mistake. The action taken so far was to be expected and therefore doesn't look gung-ho or over the top. If anything, there is a large measure of proportionality in it. Keep fighting terrorism in all ways but the big productions should be kept to a minimum.
Andrew Cover, London, UK

The US should extend its campaign against other states and I would like to see Israel targeted as they are not entirely immune to terrorism themselves. Let's see whether the US dares to fight stronger opponents in fighting global terrorism.
Mazran Bin Amad, Singapore

The US must pursue whatever reasonable course of action it deems necessary to protect its citizens from terrorism. If this means attacking military and terrorist targets in other states then so be it.
Dan Berwick, Bristol, UK

We do not have a blood lust revenge mentality but we will not sit by and let our people be targeted

Frank, USA

We in the US are not celebrating in the streets when we hear that civilians have been killed. We do not say they deserved it for whatever ignorant reason. Neither do we say it was God's will. We do not have a blood lust revenge mentality but we will not however sit by and let our people be targeted. Therefore our direct enemies are these fundamentalist terrorists who openly want to destroy America. Wherever they are they will eventually be hunted down. If a country wants to stand in our way, I pity them.
Frank, USA

It is unfortunate that these sub-human terrorists upped the stakes by attacking and killing many Americans on our soil. However, it should be known that when the US is provoked, it will unleash a terrible wrath upon anybody that threatens its security. The US was ready to go toe to toe with the Soviets during the Cuban missile crisis, and we all know where that nearly led. The US should, and will track down any threat and it certainly has the means to do it.
Chris, Boston, USA

No, the military campaign should stop. Enough innocent people have been killed already. The terrorists should be brought to justice, tried and sentenced under the law. The UN should gather up all its resources to do this. If the US and the UK carry on with this campaign, they are no better than the terrorists.
Jacky, UK

The Americans want to target Iraq next because they "sponsor terrorism". Are they going to base that on the same invisible evidence of undeniable proof? Sounds more like a score settling exercise due to the US's inability to get rid of Saddam last time round. Is the US going to attack the IRA and they countries harbouring them or will it realise it will be attacking itself?
Andy, UK

Blair and Bush must demonstrate that this is a war against global terrorism not Islam. Therefore why not also attack a white Christian terrorist organisation to clearly demonstrate to Muslims that what they say they mean. Attack the IRA manpower and infrastructure as well. The IRA, ETA, Red Brigade and many other terrorist organisations are being ignored in this "global" campaign. Is it because they are not Muslim, or because voters in the West could be affected?
J Rockett, Portsmouth, England

What precisely would further action achieve?

Ian Jones, London, UK

It would be extremely dangerous if US military action was extended to other countries. They have no obvious mission objectives in Afghanistan as it is. What precisely would further action achieve? Where on earth would it end, and how likely would it be that other countries would interpret it as militaristic American imperialism? Bin Laden would have predicted retaliatory strikes when he planned the WTC attack. Escalating this war against other Islamic countries would be exactly what he wants. One billion soldiers after all.
Ian Jones, London, UK

Yes! Most definitely action should be extended to all those who cultivate cocaine and marijuana and have killed millions of youths the world over. Some of these are in the Western hemisphere. Also it should be extended to punish those who hold foreign land by the force of arms such as the Turkish troops which occupy 37.5% of my country and who have killed 4,500 Cypriots rendering 200,000 of its inhabitants refugees in their own country and are refusing to this day to tell us where the 1620 missing persons are. Added up these innocent people make up almost the same number as those lost in the horrible holocaust of the twin towers.
John Taliotis, Pafos, Cyprus

I think the War on Terrorism should be lead by the UN, not the USA. But as the USA are leading the war, they should fight against terrorism wherever it is and should not restrict themselves to a single group. The war on terrorism should also stamp out right-wing extremist groups like the BNP, which is the sort of group that leads to terrorism. Not all the efforts should involve bombing, just when there is no option, as in the case in Afghanistan, where the national army is protecting the terrorists.
Oliver Grabowski, Birmingham, England

After seeing the picture of the little girl with her foot blown off in the attacks I think the answer is obvious. We are killing, maiming and terrorising innocent people. This makes us as bad as the terrorists.
Steve Whelan, Liverpool, England

Yes, I think the US should extend its military campaign to other states: Israel.
Zelig, London, England

We in the US are not celebrating the action that is currently underway in Afghanistan

Lee Michaud, Boston, MA, USA

We in the US are not celebrating the action that is currently underway in Afghanistan. We are saddened by the necessity of the mission. To extend this action to targets outside of Afghanistan is not acceptable at this time. To be successful, campaigns against any other country must first be taken with the agreement of the coalition. Americans understand that we live an ocean apart from the perspectives of the European nations and must respect their viewpoints on the issues before taking such action.
Lee Michaud, Boston, MA, USA

The US should extend its campaign to any other states that threaten the rest of the world. All people have a right to not live under a tyrannical regime and we have the right to not have to live in fear of these 'rogue states'.
Graham Hughes, Liverpool, UK

Yes the US should extend its campaign to include Israeli forces and government, Russian forces in Chechnya, Turkish forces in Kurdistan, and its own forces in the Gulf for the holocaust against Iraqi civilians. But I'm day-dreaming, as the above are the so called "goodies" of the civilised world. Good luck with WW3.
Sam, UK/Egypt

US air strikes should be extended to Britain, France, Germany and the United States, who all harboured members of Bin Laden's al-Qaeda terrorist network who took part in the September 11th attacks.
paul warwick, London UK

All terrorist organisations should be brought to justice. However, why should innocent people die because of the crimes of others? Military instead of judicial justice gives the impression that the West is barbaric, not civilized, and can only fuel more hatred and violence on both sides. Extending the war to different countries, will, unfortunately, give credence to those who want to start a Jihad.
Fara Kahir, Glasgow