"You're either with us, or you're with the terrorists."

Okay, I hope that I don't need to tell you who I'm quoting.
Anyway, when I heard this, I wanted to yell in exasperation. Now, I have a blog, so here I go!
The faulty logic in this statement presupposes an issue in which there are only two possible positions. Two forces against which only one form of resistance is possible. I thought of a couple of examples to illustrate the absurdity of this frame of mind.
First off, let's visit the schoolyard. We've all been in a situation where two of our friends are fighting... usually over something stupid. Anyway, you always end up in the situation where one of them tries to force you to "choose sides." This is incredibly demeaning to both parties. It reduces a complex person and rich relationships to a single issue. You are asked to consider a person who is your friend to be nothing more than "the enemy of _________," and to filter all aspects of your relationship with them through this very narrow issue. It strips them of their identity as an individual, and discounts all of the history and common experiences that make up a real friendship. When you're in that situation, don't you want to say, "I'm not going to choose sides: you're both my friends, and you need to work this out between yourselves."
So, what am I saying? People should be friends with the US and with the terrorists? No... let me give you another example that illustrates my point better.
WWII. Hitler attacks Russia, breaking his promise to Stalin. Can you imagine Stalin saying, "If you're not with us, you're with Hitler"? Can you imagine a reasonable person completely detesting Hitler and his agenda, and wanting nothing more than to overthrow his leadership, defeat his armed forces, and liberate those under his oppression... but not being huge fans of Joe Stalin, either?
I mean, Stalin was not a good guy. But we had to defeat Hitler, so we went along with him, and sowed the seeds of the cold war and set the stage for repressive regimes and the loss of human rights for millions of people for decades to come.
That old philosophy of "the enemy of my enemy is my friend" has gotten us into trouble again and again: in Latin America, in the Middle East, in the cold war and continuing in those regions today, etc.
So, what do we do? Do we wave our flag because we're afraid to be accussed of "providing aid and comfort to the enemy"? Do we vote for W because he's the only force for good in a world of pure evil?
Guess what? I'm not going to give you an answer. I just want to let you know that it's okay for you to ask the question!

- "Be excellent to each other... and party on, dudes!"