The question is ... is this appropriate?
someone might say it's appropriate... because they're viewing from their angle. someone says it's definitely a failure... simply because they're viewing from another angle.
for me? i would say, it's somehow appropriate, but... there are better ways for the fight. The war take away lives, but not radicalism. Why does people become a terrorist? What is the reason behind? What is the first clause of radicalism? Can we tackle the problem from the first clause instead of commencing a battle as the resort?take a look on this http://www.time.com/time/specials/2007/article/0,28804,1720049_1720050_1722062,00.html and you would know why i do say so.
on the other hand, the nations signed Kyoto Protocol for a decade. does the problem be resolved? Or, does the problem be alleviated?
indeed, the climate is even worse and the globe is hotter than a decade ago. What are the nations doing? Are they really pushing the Protocol hardly to everyone in their country? Perhaps.. the great idea by great people can alleviate the problem ... http://www.time.com/time/specials/2007/article/0,28804,1720049_1720050_1721653,00.html