Here we go again, with Pakistan claiming its airstrikes were a “response to recent terrorist attacks against innocent people.” Take a look at the corporate media like CNN and The New York Times, and what do we find? A careful framing that portrays Pakistan as the beleaguered victim trying to fight back against the horrific evil of terrorism—without diving into the complexities or the history that got us here.

Why aren’t these major networks asking the hard questions? Like what kind of “innocent” people are we talking about? Are these military operations justified in the context of Pakistan’s own history of fostering extremist elements? The New York Times loves to paint a narrative that fits a sweet storybook ending without truly analyzing why we keep seeing this cycle of violence. It’s all too neat and convenient.

Then we have Fox News, which absolutely relishes any chance to be “tough on terror.” Watch them gloss over the nuances in favor of a good ol’ red-meat headline. They’ll champion those airstrikes without questioning whether they might inflame the situation further—classic fear-mongering, disguised as patriotism. It’s all surface-level hype, where they conveniently ignore the responsibly critical discourse needed in these conversations.

Look, it’s easy to rally behind the idea of retaliatory strikes against terror, but we’ve seen this movie before—intervention leads to more chaos and an endless cycle of violence. Until we have honest, multifaceted discussions about the root causes and not just the symptoms, we’re merely playing chess with human lives.