With one fell swoop, the display of terrorism that reached the soil of our country on 9/11 reawakened in me the kind of fiery proclivity that I possessed as a student of Social Studies all those years ago. The chagrin born in my heart upon comprehending the gravity of such problems as pollution, poverty, the Cold War, Domino Theory, depleting resources, and other scary information was rekindled at the news of the Twin Towers. Not in twenty years had I felt such feelings of consternation.

As much as I didn’t want to hear the truth of what occurred on that fateful day, I was comforted to have a leader in the Office of the President who understood what was necessary in the face of such danger. Our president has renounced terrorism and committed our country to fighting a war that will end it once and for all. Unfortunately, there are many (with their heads in the sand) who would believe that a different plan of action was and is called for in the War on Terror. There are many fallacies upon which they base their arguments.

The first fallacy has to do with Jihad (a holy war by Muslims against unbelievers). President Bush says this isn’t a war with Islam and that the Muslims among us are not to be held responsible for what has happened. It is comforting to imagine that there can be a line drawn between the terrorist fanatics and the great majority of Muslims around the world. But the reality is that all Muslims (not just extremists) divide the world into two camps: faithful and infidel. Our country is seen as the leader of the infidels by many in the Muslim world. By definition we are fighting a war of religion as well as a war against terror.

The second fallacy also has to do with the type of war we are fighting. “From the Christian perspective a just war is defensive, aimed at protecting the innocent against unjust aggression. It must be undertaken with the right intention of establishing a just peace, and a reasonable expectation that the means employed will be proportionate to the ends sought. A just war is a last resort, undertaken when it is reasonably determined that there are not alternative ways to resolve the conflict, and when there is a reasonable probability of success in achieving the aims of the war.” (In a Time of War by the editors of First Things) By this definition, we are fighting a “just war.” We are defending ourselves against those who are waging Jihad through acts of terror against our citizens. The best course of action against terrorism is to prevent it from happening.

We needed to eliminate weapons of mass destruction in Iraq because there was ample evidence linking Saddam Hussein to international terrorist networks that would use those weapons of mass destruction against us. Even if weapons of mass destruction are created from common household products, President Bush needed to draw the battle lines…those who aren’t with us are against us. It’s strikingly similar to the Jihad guidelines. President Bush has simply leveled the playing field. But there is a major difference. From the Christian perspective, a second-criterion for “just war” has to do with the conduct of the war; there must be no intentional killing of innocent civilians. Terrorism has everything to do with killing innocent civilians. We are most definitely justified in our war against terrorism.

Many of our citizens feel compelled to denigrate our foreign policy yet so many of them are ignorant of all the facts that have been considered before making policy decisions. They criticize and try to undermine President Bush’s course against terrorism but they do so with an inadequate understanding of whom we (as a country) really are and don’t take into account the complexities involved in a Jihad. How is it that so many can get it so wrong? How can I be so sure that President Bush can be doing his job correctly when he faces so much adversity?

Those who were against our troops going to Iraq have many arguments and quite frankly none are very compelling. The bottom line is they refuse to acknowledge the call to serve our country (with its risk of killing or of being killed). For example, what if the character Frodo from J.R.R.Tolkien’s literary trilogy Lord of the Rings, had refused his role in destroying the ring? What if the races of Dwarves, Elves and Man refused to acknowledge that they would all eventually be destroyed if they didn’t destroy Mordor? At the very least, there would not have been three excellent books and subsequent movies to watch at the IMAX. Ultimately, there wouldn’t have been a Shire to return to after all was said and done.

In the aftermath of 9/11 some of us are moved to wage a war with the way our citizens are being educated in the history and democratic principles of our country. This is because it is obvious that many of those screaming about our foreign policy are graduates of politically correct social studies curriculum taught by teachers who never studied much history themselves. There are problems in the way our social studies teachers are trained, in the content that fills our textbooks, and in the expectations held for students of social studies.

It should be inconceivable that many of our social studies teachers never studied much history and are dependent on lesson plans, textbooks, and instructional materials prepared by others. This makes them, and ultimately their pupils, vulnerable to manipulation by those who write and publish educational materials. And, because we have become a “politically correct” society, our social studies textbooks omit anything that could offend anybody. Subsequently, social studies textbooks are slanted to give only favorable impressions of Islam and to avoid any suggestion that its more radical adherents may pose a problem for the United States and free societies in general.

One would think that in the aftermath of 9/11 the expectations for teachers would be to explain why some bad people loathe freedom and seek to end democracy. Teachers should have a responsibility to explain why what America stands for is outrageous to those who would enslave minds, subjugate women, and kill those who differ from themselves. Students should want to preserve and defend our way of life. Students should understand how our forebears responded to previous attacks upon their country in particular and freedom in general? But in our “politically correct” society students are taught to be global citizens, and are not taught our common American culture and civic values which are grounded in the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution. Sadly, global citizenship has no universal set of values accepted worldwide. This is because a majority of states are "not free" or only "partly free" and are habitual human rights violators. This must be why so many occupants of those states would like to become United States citizens.

We’re fighting a war on terrorism. We are on the receiving end of a holy war, which makes our fight against religion. We are fighting a “just war” because it is defensive and because we would never deliberately hurt civilians during combat. Finally, we are fighting a war against the “political correctness” that has affected the quality of our educational materials and teachers because it doesn’t recognize the importance of presenting all sides of our history or how our unique experience defines us and gives us our common culture and values.

The Greeks thought any free man who failed to interest himself in his own present and future was an idiot. Some could argue those who try to influence public policy without a complete grasp of the issues are idiots. I know how I would categorize them. I guess we’ll see how many fit the category in November, 2004.

Nancy Salvato is a middle school teacher in Illinois and an independent contractor for Prism Educational Consulting. She is the Educational Liaison to IL Sen. Ray Soden and she works with national and local organizations furthering the cause of Civic Education. She is a columnist for American Daily, The Common Voice, GOP-USA, OpinionEditorials and The New Media Journal.us. Her writing has been recognized by the US Secretary of Education. She has been published in The Washington Times, The Washington Dispatch, Iconoclast, Free Republic Network & Townhall.com., as well as other nationally and internationally published media outlets.