Initially, I believed we should strike at the terrorist with full, terrible wrath. We should strike fear into the hearts of any who would consider harming US citizens.

Having thought about this, however, I now see this could be counterproductive.

We need to consider the existence of legitimate grievances by those who commited this act. There is every possibility they were, in fact, driven to this deed by the laws and policies of the United States.

It is not inappropriate to ask, "Could this event have been avoided if the United States gave due consideration to dissenting points of view?" Nor would it be inappropriate in the future to better consider the positions and reasoning of people who disagree with current policy.

And who better to provide insight into the United States' policy than those who must live under it every day?

Perhaps it is time for the United States to step back from the status quo, take a deep breath, and rethink things. There is a famous saying I would like to paraphrase -- "Insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results."

When we calmly and rationally consider the demands of the so-called "lead terrorist", we see that he may actually have some valid points. Certainly, few could dispute his accuracy in historical events.

As reasoning human beings, we can separate the methods from the goals. While we are right to condemn certain methods, we must consider the possibility the goals themselves are correct. Indeed, adopting the goals may bring about less bloodshed in the future.