Now granted, blowing somebody up could be seen by some as a very simple, very visceral, very appealing approach to problem solving.

But I think it’s more important to save blowing somebody up for the really, really important things.  Like, say, Nazis trying to take over the world, killing millions of people in the process.  Blow ‘em up, I say!  If there is just moral cause, combined with grave danger, I have no problem justifying a lot of blowing up.

When I look at the world today, I don’t see anything nearly as pressing as impending Nazi world domination.  Is there anything left in the world that’s so important that it requires blowing people up?  (Or, conversely, shooting them?)  Some people think so.  I do not.

That, of course, is easy for me to say, in my middle-class, Western world kind of way.  I’m not facing the truly life-threatening struggles that so many people around the world seem to be dealing with on a daily basis.

I guess, then, my goal is to convince those people that hey, you really don’t have to blow something or someone up to get our attention.  Why don’t we all just calm down a bit, and discuss our differences like adults?  There must be common ground somewhere, for we all share common roots.  (I believe it to be a proto-chimp hominid called "Ooola" by his fellow tribesmembers, several million years ago.  Others say "Adam" and "Eve."  Regardless, it seems pretty clear to me that we’re all in this whole Earth thing together.)

Here’s the part that I’m having a hard time expressing, so bear with me if you think I’ve lost my marbles.  This gets a little free form, so hang tight.

There’s a little part of me that thinks, maybe if we, the U.S., would just pay a little more attention to what’s going on in the world, we’d understand why some people want to blow us up.  It’s no fun being the "person" that everyone hates.  But it’s even less fun knowing that there are people out there who really, really hate us, and we’re doing nothing to change that perception.

Then again, there comes the basic philosophic battle pitting the immovable object against the irresistible force.  The U.S. wants to spread democracy (and good old U.S. dollars) everywhere, where other countries have a distinctly different agenda.  China, let’s say, or Iraq.  Their governments are, apparently, not interested in democracy.

Wouldn’t all parties be better off with a "live and let live" policy?  Especially when it comes to China, how about something along the lines of, "Okay, we think communism is lame, and you treat many of your dissidents like crap.  We’ll just leave you alone for a while.  Think it over.  If you think you can make your system work, good luck to you.  We’ll just be over here prospering.  Keep us posted."

(Sure, this philosophy is a little "taking my ball and going home"-ish.  Maybe I’ve got it all wrong.  Like I said, I’m improvising here.)

Does China want to take over the world?  Are Muslims insistent in creating an all-Muslim world?  There’s no room for "live and let live" in the Koran?  In the writings of Marx?

It seems to me that the countries of the West have become slaves to the potential market of one billion Chinese citizens.  Granted, that’s a lot of Happy Meals.  So far, "engagement" seems to be going relatively well, if you're able to ignore the human rights situation.  (That's one mother of an "if," by the way.)  At least China isn’t sponsoring groups of people who’d like to blow us up.  No, they’re doing things the American way -- buying influence!  Who says they don’t have room to expand the definition of Communism?   I’m pretty sure it doesn’t include a call to gain access to the President and Congress of the U.S. through financial donations.

But when you talk about people who hate the U.S., I mean really hate the U.S., you’ve got to look to the Middle East.  Sorry, I know that’s liable to ruffle a few P.C. feathers,  that’s just the way it is.  (I mean, Finland doesn’t refer to us as "The Great Satan.")

Side note:  I’m not stupid enough to blame everyone from the Middle East for the actions of some people who are from there.  You shouldn’t be either.  For the purposes of making this column manageable, there have been some gross oversimplifications and generalizations.  I didn’t want this to turn into a thesis, so again, bear with me.  When we’re talking about people who hate us the Middle East, we’re talking about the one tenth of one percent who probably feel active hatred toward the U.S.  Unfortunately, they’re the ones who always seem to have access to explosives.  (Beirut, Saudi Arabia, etc.)

But, you might be saying, our society needs oil from the Middle East.  Does that mean we need to convert everyone to our way of thinking?  Do we need to butt in so much?  How about easing off a little bit in the region?  Israel’s fifty years old now, and not going away anytime soon.  They can defend themselves.  Let’s ease off a little, and see if tensions in the region calm a bit.  (We’ve tried everything else.)

We, the United States (and I do realize how presumptuous it is for me to write on behalf of the entire country, but hey, it’s my column), have an interest in world peace.  We have an interest in protecting our allies.  We have an interest in ensuring a prosperous America continues to thrive.  Maybe, just maybe, anything above and beyond that should be none of our business.

So should we turn a blind eye to injustice around the world?  Well, it’s the role of "World Cop" that got us where we are in the first place.  The American moral ideal is lovely in theory.  It just seems to cause a lot of resentment around the world.

If people want help, we should provide it.  We shouldn’t shoehorn a peace agreement in to place against the wishes of warring parties.  Can we "solve" the problems in the former Yugoslavia, or the Middle East?  No, we can’t.  The people living there, however, can.  If they want to.  If they really, really want to, more than anything else in the world, I believe they can.  It’s going to involve sitting down, talking, and a great deal more compromise than anyone has ever considered.

I have faith in the human animal.  I think we prefer a state of peace, to a state of war.  Just ask any mother.  Hold a newborn.  Hug your family.  Then think about going out and killing your enemy.  It just doesn’t add up, does it?

I’m not proposing a form of xenophobia.  I just think (and here's a mighty big jump in logic, I know) that if we weren’t so darn overbearing on the world stage, maybe, maybe, maybe a dozen foreign service employees would have returned from Africa alive.  Maybe a couple hundred Africans would still be able to go home to their families.  Maybe a couple thousand wounded people wouldn’t have live the rest of their lives with the horror they witnessed scarred in their eyes forever.

There’s got to be a better way.  Let’s save blowing people up for the really big stuff.  I think we can figure out solutions to most of the problems that face us today.  Then again, I am perhaps overly optimistic in this regard.

But I’m willing to bet a lot of other people are, as well.