posted on September 17, 2001 07:29:14 AM new
The suggestion we would be safe if we come home and stopped buying the oil is false. These conflicts predate oil use.
If we converted to a strict form of Islam and put our woman under the viel that might appease them.
posted on September 17, 2001 07:39:31 AM new
Yeah, wait a minute--Barry, you mean it's not real?
James,
I did alter my statement above somewhat to reflect that it may be that the primary resentment of this or these groups is American presence in the middle east, and I'm afraid that at this moment I don't have sufficient time left before I've got to leave the house to even read your post much less respond to it.
I do know that this is not a fifty year old issue. It stems from the 11th century crusades in it's basis. But it is a fifty year old, or even a ten yyear old set of resentments which has brought the matter to a head.
My points are mainly that the actions of the muslim radicals now so very much in the news are self preservative in aim even though by their own manifesto they do counsel the killing of Americans wherever they might have the opportunity to do so. I base some of this on this proposed resolution: http://www.fas.org/irp/world/para/docs/980223-fatwa.htm
which I think makes it clear that the first interest of these groups is the preservation of Islamic ideology in the face of oppresion, and not to take over the world, this country, or perhaps even Israel. Note the first signatory name.
posted on September 17, 2001 08:00:02 AM new
We are all focused on the "Middle Eastern" terrorist groups but many have made comments we need to go and wipe out all terrorist. Every country has factions/groups that could/should be tagged "terrorist". They are cancers which grow in all nations. Even here in America.
Look at what happened when our government acted against the Branch Dividians in Texas. Look at the various attitudes that were immediately displayed right here in this country and to a certain extend still are. Some said the government was right some said the government was wrong. In the end, I believe our government lost the "popularity" poll. Why????? Had they been "foreign" or held religious views so different from our own as to be seemingly alien, would there have been as much protest?????
Then you have the fruitcakes in the Oklahoma bombing that claimed it was because of what the government had done to that group. Their "protest". There will always be zealots with a cause to champion and a protest to make......
If we are indeed to start cleaning out the "viper's pits", we probably wouldn't have to go too far to start hunting.
If the NY and DC tragedies had been carried out by a group that didn't happen to be originally from the Middle East but were from say Ireland, Britian, France, Germany, Russia, Denmark, Australia.....I think you get the picture, would we be ready to go and attack those countries to "vaporize" them?
If we are going to declare war on terrorist, shouldn't it be all terrorist and not just a select group of terrorist? If we only go after terrorist that have wronged or attacked us, then we are saying perhaps it's not so much terrorism we oppose, only those groups that dare come against America or only those that are so culturally different as to be incomprehensible to us?
posted on September 17, 2001 08:12:11 AM new
Everyone keeps referring to past political history and pointing to this or that error WE made. I submit it all doesn't matter one bit. When these crazies like the Taliban talk they are not concerned about making Afghanistan pure. They refer to us (free world) as a virus keeping THEM from reaching nirvana. It doesn't matter if we never had another thing to do with the middle east.
We have no concept of people (since Hitler that is ) that would go to any lengths against their own people to promote their own agendas. You have pictures of starving Iraqi babies on TV because Hussein spends his reduced income due to sanctions on weapons instead of his people. How does a western mind deal with that???
The only question we have is to face is how to protect ourselves from these countries. Since they cannot be dealt with as rational world leaders wanting the same thing for their people as the rest of civilization, the only recourse left is force.
posted on September 17, 2001 09:10:49 AM new
No force is necessary.
We should do like krs suggested and just take ourselves and any interests we have in the region and abandon them. Then all will be well. The power vaccum will then be filled by those wonderful people that promote and support our destruction.
According to krs, all these good people want is to be left alone. Once they develop the power and infrastructure for nuclear and bio weapons and intercontinental delivery, America would never be a target.
Place your bets. What are the odds that if we remove our presence and influence from the region, we've heard the last of attacks on America ? Will you bet your and your childrens lives ?
OR:
Use military force to retard or completely destroy their ability to carry out any destructive acts. Will it soothe their motivations to attack us ? Nope. But it will buy us time towards a resolution without having to negotiate with nuclear armed terrorists.
krs- Your attitude towards not accepting that states are supporting and behind these acts in naive, and exactly how our enemies wish us to perceive the situation.
The initial investigation has traced nearly $5 million dollars transfered from Iraq to bin Laden.
The state "leaders" profusely condeming these terrorist acts are now wondering if we will uncover how much support they have sent bin Laden and other FTOs in the region.
The FTOs are an unofficial foreign policy arm of these states.
Our "moral" inability to militarily prosecute these associations is exactly how they want it to work.
If you're interested in which states, Sen.McCain ran down the list the other night.
However, I'm willing to wait for the evidence to come in, rather than basing our responce on the rants of their religious leaders and citizens. So far we have Iraq and Afghanistan implicated. I can speculate that Pakistan, Libya, Syria, Iran, and the PLO will be implicated too. The angst and ashen look on Arafat's face wasn't due to our losses, but from wondering if the tracks were covered up well enough leading to his organization.
posted on September 17, 2001 01:04:41 PM newJames: I'm sure you are sincere in your beliefs as to why the terrorists really hate us so much and want to see us dead. And, as I said before, you may even be right. But I have seen and read enough to know that your views are not universally shared, and I can only hope that your pessimistic world view is not the correct one.
Is it possible that the current conflict is simply the culmination of a thousand years of antipathy by all [or a majority] Islamic people towards Western civilization? I suppose, although that is truly a terrifying concept that, in my opinion, doesn't give us much hope for survival, let alone world peace. But I think it's also possible that the current conflict really only has its significant roots in events of the last 40-50 years. Sure, the thousand-year-old struggle has probably served to inflame and justify the resentment toward us, but I don't think it would have necessarily escalated to its current level if it weren't for some other factors.
Some possible alternative reasons why these attacks were launched against us:
posted on September 17, 2001 03:10:34 PM new
James,
Now I've read you, and your points are well taken. I think that Barry also has offered some factors which affect on all of this cannot be denied.
But I think that there are two salient points missing. Those are, one, that however powerful any particular tyrant may become the nature of the region's politics would not allow for a long reign if it were unacceptable. It is the most complex arena in the world with alliances and resentments which date back farther than most of us can imagine. There has always been a balance enforced by the independent nature of the involved tribes, and it is still at work today. Power that is good for all is encouraged but power for the sake of an individual domination of all is not. The other factor is a more recent one. Hate the west, or us, however much they will or do there is no denying their need of us. Without the market that the west provides, what are these middle eastern entities but wandering beduins consumed with infighting and local intrique, taken with squabbling over sand.
Radical Islamic hatred of the United States is a variable that can go up or down. The commitment of the "enemy" to killing us isn't now anywhere near its theoretical maximum, and it may never reach zero. So one of our main jobs, for years and probably for decades, is to manage that variable. As we proceed on the various fronts we must now proceed on—including the military front—we have to keep radical Islamic hatred as low as possible.
Just more food for thought...
Barry
---
The opinions expressed above are for comparison purposes only. Your mileage may vary....
