"We are united in our resolve to confront and defeat this terrorism."

My sincerest condolences to the people of Britian in the wake of the multiple bombings in London this morning. I'm in absolute agreement with British Prime Minister Tony Blair who calls the terrorists who perpetrated this horrendous act, cowards.

That being said, I take issue with his declaration that terrorism will be defeated as I do with the other world leaders who have said the same thing. Terrorism cannot be defeated. It has no home state, no single sponsor, no consistent ideology. There simply is no single target, no enemy to fight. None of the leaders want to admit this, of course, but it's no less true.

But aren't leaders that say this just shooting for a high goal? I'm all for lofty goals, but not ridiculously unachievable goals. To promise to end terrorism is to give hope for a utopia that is most likely unachievable, certainly in our lifetimes. People have to live with the fact that safety is an illusion, not a given.

The best that can be hoped for it to alleviate the conditions and target the causes of terrorism - poverty, extreme religion, and unbridled aggression. The terrorists have reasons they become terrorists, and it's not just because they like to kill and it's certainly not because they resent our freedom.

Londoners have been used to bomb attacks in the past, from the IRA. Everytime there'd be an attack, Britain would crackdown on Northern Ireland. The crackdown would result in more bombings, not less. Eventually, the British realized they had to negotiate with the political arm of the IRA to find out what would stop the attacks.

I'm not suggesting for a minute that we should do this with al-Qaeda. What I am suggesting is that we be honest about why there are so many extremist groups hate Westerners. They maybe we can have an open discussion about whether our foreign policies are worth this carnage.