As I comb the Malaysian media looking for real thoughts o­n the war, I cannot help but be disappointed by obviously uncritical thinking of anti-war sentiments in everything that I have read so far.

One of the most missed points that has not been critically discussed here is why the war o­n Iraq is a war against terrorism, for fear that any expression less than anti-war would be viewed as anti-Muslim. The truth is a bit more complex and the war o­n Iraq is a part of a new anti-terrorism policy by the US ever since Sept 11, 2001.

The truth is that Iraq and Afghanistan has o­ne key similarity the desire to harm the US especially within its border. While Afghanistan and al-Qaeda was the most immediate threat within US borders and Iraq is arguably not capable of doing so under UN sanctions, what the Bush administration is doing is sending a signal that capability is no longer an acceptable yardstick to the US.

What the Bush administration is doing is to tell governments all over the world that as far as terrorism is concerned, even the mere intention to harm the US especially within its borders is enough of a justification for action.

No o­ne doubts that, like al-Qaeda, Saddam Hussein intends to attack the US if given free reign. In his speech after Sept 11, 2001, George W Bush made it clear: "Either you are with us or against us." The message to all governments, especially the so-called 'Axis of Evil;, is simply that it will not accept anything less than complete and committed anti-terror movement by all governments.

The war o­n Iraq is an ideological o­ne. The Bush administration, by going to war, is reinforcing its new post-Sept 11 doctrine of a new standard of behaviour and thinking for all governments that no matter their differences with the US, they cannot even think of physically harming the US.

It is as much a message to allies like Saudi Arabia and Turkey as it is to North Korea, Iran, Syria, Libya, and even Indonesia and Malaysia. The US is saying to all this countries that they must seek and destroy all elements that can physically harm the US.

What most of us politically-repressed Malaysians don't understand is that the Americans value their freedom above their own lives. It is fundamental to the founding of their nation and their very definition of being American.

Ever since Sept 11, Americans have had to sacrifice some freedom because of the fear of terrorism. Hence when the Bush administration takes a leadership role in defining new standards of behavior for governments of the world to protect and regain those freedoms, they support it.

Contrary to what the media shows of anti-war protesters, at least 65 percent of Americans support the war in Iraq. To them, the war o­n Iraq is an ideological battle for their freedom at home. It is self-defence in that it is a defence of their home and their way of life.

I think Iraq is a logical choice of target after Afghanistan in the war against terrorism. Since the US cannot attack all the countries that have not been 100 percent committed to the war against terrorism (as that would be too costly, among other reasons), it must first seek to define what unacceptable behaviour is in this war.

Afghanistan was the most immediate and capable threat to the US, while Iraq was probably o­ne of the least capable threats; but ideologically both intend to harm the US. So to those countries that think it can harbour terrorist sympathisers, the war o­n Iraq is a direct message to them.

Those terrorists that attacked the US are to be blamed for the lack of tolerance by the US and the Bush administration. Tolerance by the US in the past, of terrorism in other countries, was a luxury - not a right given to countries that harbour ill-intention towards the US.

During World War II and the Cold War, the US behaved in the same manner - it stayed out of the conflicts until these reached its shores. The US entered World War II after Pearl Harbor and it embarked o­n anti-communism o­nly after communists showed up in the US. Each time, the US sets new standards of behaviour by using force where it deemed necessary. The war o­n terrorism and war o­n Iraq is no different and consistent with history.

I am not for war but the fact is that the war o­n Iraq is a watershed event and a follow-up from Sept 11 and we as a predominantly Muslim country have to realise our own place in it. While it is our right and obligation to protest anti-Muslim sentiments, we must also realise that what is happening is a new challenge to our conduct and policies.

Anti-Americanism is no longer tolerated as defending Muslim and Islam. In fact, it's a sign of terrorist sympathy and sentiments. We in Malaysia and the modern Muslims have better understand this and have a response.