Bill Press is a syndicated columnist and the co-host of CNN's Crossfire, which airs Monday-Friday at 7:30 p.m.

Bill Press: No blank check

By Bill Press, Tribune Media Services

WASHINGTON (Tribune Media Services) -- President Bush has pledged to do "whatever it takes" to retaliate for last week's terrorist attacks against the United States. And most members of Congress, if not most Americans, seem ready to hand over unlimited wartime powers.

Count me out.

As horrific as those mass murders were, they are no excuse for giving any president a blank check in military action, military spending, domestic security or domestic spending. In fact, there is no time when Americans must be more on guard to safeguard both our basic freedoms and strict guidelines on which actions are justified and which are not.

Of course, a military response to the outrages of September 11 is in order. These were acts of war. Retaliatory attacks are justified. But, even here, there should be no blank check. Targets must be carefully identified as connected to the World Trade Center and Pentagon massacres. And steps must be taken to minimize the loss of innocent civilian lives.

As King Abdullah of Jordan advised the New York Times's Thomas Friedman: "Make sure you respond in a way that punishes the real perpetrators, that brings justice, not revenge, because otherwise you will be going against your own ideals, and that is what the terrorists want most."

We must also be careful not to rush into a military operation we can't win and can't get out of. That includes a ground war in Afghanistan. We can't bomb them into the stone age, as some suggest. They're already living in the stone age. And if Russia couldn't win there on the ground, at the height of its military prowess, neither can we. It's another Vietnam in the making.

No blank check for an invasion of Afghanistan.

While the president is correct in stating that terrorists themselves are not the only targets -- we should also go after those countries which support and harbor terrorist organizations -- here, too, there are limits. As Secretary of State Colin Powell suggests, diplomatic and economic pressures are the most effective and most appropriate actions.

It would be absurd, as some have suggested, to embark on a campaign to overthrow the governments of every country in which some terrorist organization is located, a list that would include: Iran, Iraq, Egypt, Syria, Lebanon, Sudan, Libya and Pakistan, in addition to Afghanistan. And maybe Saudi Arabia.

No blank check for starting World War III: the United States vs. the Arab world.

And no blank check for assassinating foreign leaders, either. Once we have solid evidence linking Osama bin Laden to the Pentagon and WTC, he's fair game. So are other terrorist leaders known to be associated with him. But lifting the ban against assassination is nothing but an invitation for the United States to revert to the immorality of unleashing the CIA to attempt to kill or overthrow heads of state -- Guatemala's Jacobo Arbenz, Chile's Salvador Allende, Cuba's Fidel Castro -- just because we didn't like their brand of politics.

The same brakes must be applied to non-military issues as well. Some Republicans in Congress have already cited terrorism as justification for a new tax cut, drilling for oil in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge and total funding for missile defense. In other words, give George Bush a blank check for everything he had tried to get through Congress, but couldn't.

No way. Those were bad ideas before last week's attacks. They still are. Shame on them for trying to exploit the deaths of thousands of Americans to justify their own failed policies.

Destroying the environment will not stop Osama bin Laden. Nor will giving the richest Americans another tax cut. And will someone please explain how Star Wars would have prevented commercial airliners from crashing into the World Trade Center towers or the Pentagon? Some people can't accept facts. The tragic events of September 11 argue for junking missile defense, not funding it. It would provide no protection against a briefcase, Ryder truck or suicide bomber.

So, no matter how angry we are, it is still important to keep our perspective. There are still legitimate differences on the issues, and no one point of view is more patriotic than another. Even in wartime, there are limits to what a president can and should do.

Yes, this is a time for us to pull together. But this is no time to lose sight of what's right and what's wrong. As Americans, we stand united in saluting the flag. But we do not have to salute everything the president says or wants.