posted on October 17, 2001 10:41:39 AM newJune 21, 2001
"To all the Mujahedeen, your brothers in Palestine are waiting for you, it's time to penetrate America and Israel and hit them where it hurts most," bin Laden says.
I realize that June was several months ago. I'll try to find one from September 10th.
Barry
---
The opinions expressed above are for comparison purposes only. Your mileage may vary....
posted on October 17, 2001 11:08:24 AM new
Don't bother, Barry. First it was that Palestine was never invoked before 9-11, and that "this is a new cause for him." Then, a 1996 quote was, apparently, too old. A June 21, 2001 quote will probably be "too too."
posted on October 17, 2001 11:31:18 AM newfemme: I think you may be missing my point. I agree that what he did was heinous, and that he deserves to be dragged out into the street and shot like a dog [no offense, dog lovers].
But simply saying "he is a madman" to explain his actions, while comforting, doesn't help prevent future "madmen" from following in his steps.
Nobody here is condoning his actions or saying he was in any way justified. But neither were his acts the random deeds of a madman.
Right now, all over the world, there are millions of anti-American protesters up in arms against us. I'd love to think it's simply because they're all madmen suffering from a shared delusion and that nothing we have done could possibly be adding to their hatred of us. Common sense dictates, however, that we should consider what, if anything, we may have done [or are currently doing] to make a bad situation worse.
If Bin Laden were the only "madman" out there, all we would need to do is take him out and the story would be over. That's not the case, however, and if we don't want this to keep happening we have to be willing to look at ALL the reasons, not just the most comforting ones.
Barry
---
The opinions expressed above are for comparison purposes only. Your mileage may vary....
posted on October 17, 2001 11:45:36 AM new But simply saying "he is a madman" to explain his actions, while comforting, doesn't help prevent future "madmen" from following in his steps.
But, Barry, I believe you are missing my point.
There is nothing anyone can do to prevent a madman hell bent on destruction.
A madman will always conveniently justify his actions.
posted on October 17, 2001 11:55:44 AM newThere is nothing anyone can do to prevent a madman hell bent on destruction.
Well, in the first place, if that is true than why are we bothering to tighten up security at airports and the like? Taking a defeatest attitude just helps the bad guys win.
In the second place, I do get your point -- I just feel [and I've said this before] that Bin Laden and his fellow terrorists aren't necessarily "madmen" in the first place. Truly evil men, perhaps, or even extremely misguided fundamentalists to be extra charitable, but not insane, irrational people acting out against random targets for no apparent reason.
Another thing to consider, however, is that even if Bin Laden were just a "madman", the fact remains that he has a lot of followers and supporters. So, while there may be nothing whatsoever we can do to prevent Bin Laden from waging his war of terror, that doesn't mean we can't keep working to keep more people from joining his cause. In the world court of public opinion, America needs to be seen as "fighting the good fight", and not just in our own opinion. I'm sure that we're the "good" guys, and so are you. But if the rest of the world doesn't believe it, we are in deep doo-doo....
Barry
---
The opinions expressed above are for comparison purposes only. Your mileage may vary....
posted on October 17, 2001 12:12:44 PM new
I am not convinced that Bin Laden is about Islam at all. Maybe he is only about money and power and is using Islam to further his cause.
posted on October 17, 2001 12:19:49 PM newjt: You could very well be right [keep in mind that he already had tons of money before deciding to launch his campaign of terror, though].
To be honest, though, I'm less worried about Bin Laden, per se, than I am about all his supporters and followers. It's not Bin Laden ranting and raving that makes me nervous -- it's all the anti-American protesters in countries that were supposeldy on our side.
As I mentioned above, even if Bin Laden were an unreasonable madman and there were absolutely nothing we could do to prevent him from waging war against us, many of his followers have been duped into thinking that they are acting in the name of Allah, and to them it is about Islam.
Like the hydra of mythology, chopping off one of the heads of terrorism may not kill the beast. But if we can somehow chop off the body [or at least convince the body to leave us alone], the heads will become powerless.
Barry
---
The opinions expressed above are for comparison purposes only. Your mileage may vary....
posted on October 17, 2001 12:20:00 PM new
Isn't Bin Laden just peeved because he was kicked out of Arabia? A land he felt was becoming to Westernized? Isn't this the root of his hatred?
posted on October 17, 2001 12:47:51 PM new There is nothing anyone can do to prevent a madman hell bent on destruction.
Well, in the first place, if that is true than why are we bothering to tighten up security at airports and the like? Taking a defeatest attitude just helps the bad guys win.
Barry,
I was referring to U.S. foreign policy.
My fault for not being clear. Will try to do better.
I certainly hope no one else with whom I've been chatting for years, interpreted my post that way. A "defeatest attitude" is not part of my makeup.
Also, I did not even think about sane or insane when I referred to evildoers as madmen. Unclear, again.
I have no problem with exchanging the term "madmen" with evil men.
posted on October 17, 2001 12:49:18 PM new
"keep in mind that he already had tons of money before deciding to launch his campaign of terror"
Never seen this stop the greedy before. Seems to only feed the urge. When one has everything already, what's left but to rule the world?
But I agree that with or without Bin Laden now and forward, he has lit the match that will consume everything in it's path. If he can disable a few countries though terrorism (biological, chemical, fear, chaos) then he can ultimately rule the world, dead OR alive. There are countries, even powerful ones, who will swing and back whomever is in power. It has for a long time been the US but that could change. I don't trust some of those claiming they are backing us.
posted on October 17, 2001 12:51:19 PM new
And I certianly don't think he is a "madman". I think he is educated and calculating.
He is playing a game of high stakes with two teams and we are all his pawns. World domination (or destruction) is his prize.
[ edited by jt on Oct 17, 2001 12:56 PM ]
posted on October 17, 2001 12:56:22 PM new
Femme -
I don't think he wants to rule the world himself, but sees himself as more of a godsend that will clear the path for his type of Islam and its followers in the 'new world' he has created. A living martyr.
I think we'll be OK as long as he doesn't have a country backing him.
posted on October 17, 2001 12:56:37 PM newfemme: I did not even think about sane or insane when I referred to evildoers as mad
Believe me, I wasn't purposely trying to misinterpret your words. Many other people around here have referred to the terrorists as "madmen" and have ALSO said that they are insane and irrational [which is, of course, the definition of "mad"].
Regardless, my point remains the same. Even if there's nothing to be done, foreign policy wise, to prevent people like Bin Laden, there's still a lot that can be done to stop his followers and supporters -- those people who aren't madmen or evildoers, but have simply allowed themselves to be duped into believing that WE are evil.
Bin Laden is a demagogue of the worst sort, but he only has power as long as enough people believe what he says. And as long as our foreign policy lends credence to what he says, he will continue to gain followers. I'm not saying that all our foreign policy is misguided, or even that we could actually change enough of it to alleviate the situation without comprising our own sense of morality. But I do think it's a valid topic of discussion, and that's the point of this thread.
Barry
---
The opinions expressed above are for comparison purposes only. Your mileage may vary....
[spelling...]
[ edited by godzillatemple on Oct 17, 2001 12:57 PM ]
posted on October 17, 2001 12:56:58 PM new
Bin Laden and all like thinking Muslims wish to topple all Mideastern Governments and rulers in time. The attack on tourists in Egypt by the Muslim Brotherhood was an attempt to cripple the tourist industry and create more difficulties for the government. In time secular Iraq would be unacceptable to Fundamentalist thinking as well as the Saudi family , the King of Jordan etc etc. Once we remove ourselves from the region, he probably figures Islam is free to control the rest of the world and the glory days before the Mongol sacking of Bagdad will return. The Palestinian issue is nothing more than sucker bait to unite the middleastern world at this time.
buyhigh
posted on October 17, 2001 12:59:16 PM new
If he disables America and England, who WILL be backing him (his cause)? China? Russia? They might not like him but they would like to have some tasty pie.
added (his cause) which could be world domination.
[ edited by jt on Oct 17, 2001 01:00 PM ]
posted on October 17, 2001 01:16:29 PM new
Hi Barry...
How in the world do you propose to convince the Arab "street" that we infidels are good and righteous...and everything they've been taught...the people they trust and revere...are wrong? While American infidels are "rich" and they, the followers of the "true faith," are abysmally poor?
I don't think plying them with food and money will do anything but encourage them to hate us all the more. Seems to work that way.
If you're just talking about making friends of their regimes, that's another matter. We know most governments are for sale...though the coin varies.
I hope we don't lose every vestige of our principles, and betray those to whom we've pledged our loyalty, simply to take an easy way out of this mess.
posted on October 17, 2001 01:25:23 PM new
Barry, what would you like to see happen? The U.S. will never withdraw from Israel, so I don't know what else could be done to appease them.
(spelling)
[ edited by kraftdinner on Oct 17, 2001 01:35 PM ]
posted on October 17, 2001 01:29:59 PM new
Forgot to mention - Am sure the Central Asian republics are no doubt on the list for conversion to Fundemental Islam and control. ( Taliban style) Doubt that Russia would appreciate that since some like Kazakstan ally themselves with Russsia. Then there is Asia - Indonesia- which has a history of Muslims attacking other groups. Add Malaysia and eventual worldwide domination is a goal to be worked for.
buyhigh
posted on October 17, 2001 02:01:34 PM new
Don't victimize Barry for raising the question. He hasn't proposed that he has any solution.
The US is now talking to the people of Afganistan through a radio DJ type, telling them that we aren't really that bad for bombing them because we don't mean to hurt them. The message makes it clear to all of the displaced refugees and grieving buryers of family that we're only after Bin Laden.
James,
Without discussion, I think that you are completely wrong about the guy. He is using his historical breadth of knowledge to create a cause which is supported in the fundamentalist religious understanding of Muslims, and doing it very adroitly, but his own motivations are completely modern, and his tune has been about the same since 1990. He's a monster for what he has done (if he did it), a leader, and now he is doomed, but he isn't a madman without control of his senses driven by some psychedelic vision of past glory recovered. He's an actor similar to Hitler who knows how to touch the people's belief in their former greatness and give them hope of their reinstatement, even though they may never have been all that great. There have been several of these sorts, some good, some bad.
posted on October 17, 2001 02:47:02 PM new
krs - You dispute the fact that in it's day -before Baghdad was sacked, the Moslem world was the center of learning, wealth and influence? I say comparative to the rest of the world ( Including China) it was. Even Timbuctuu was a learning center.
buyhigh
posted on October 17, 2001 03:09:14 PM new
I wasn't critising Barry krs. I just wanted to know his (and everyone else's) views on other ways to deal with terrorism if their (the terrorists) big hang-up is the fact the U.S. is in Israel.
posted on October 17, 2001 03:26:45 PM new"You dispute the fact that in it's day -before Baghdad was sacked, the Moslem world was the center of learning, wealth and influence?"
What are you talking about?? I didn't dispute anything.....except James.
posted on October 17, 2001 03:36:20 PM new
Boy, I go away for just a couple of hours, and everybody starts talking about me behind my back....
To all: I never said I had any solutions. In fact, I specifically said I didn't have any solutions. But that doesn't mean that there are no solutions or that we shouldn't look for them. The first step in finding a solution is to acknowledge the possibility that there actually is a problem, though.
However [and knowing full well that my suggestions are probably deeply flawed and will be soundly shot full of holes by you folks], here are some ideas I have:
1. We should not abandon Israel, any more than we should abandon any of our allies. However, we need to be willing to publicly criticize Israel and even withdraw our aid and support if they do not treat the Palestinians fairly and justly. I support Israel and rankle when anybody refers to it as a "terrorist state", but at the same time I acknowledge that they have sometimes [often] gone too far in their dealings with Palestine. Otherwise, we will continue to be viewed as hypocrites, and justly so in my opinion.
2. We need to make sure that the aid we provide to various countries under oppressive regimes actually gets to the people instead of just the governments. Similarly, we need to find a better way of dealing with dictators and terrorist regimes other than cutting off supplies and starving the poplace. The leaders don't care if their people starve, and starving people are too weak to lead an uprising.
3. We need to stop letting our oil interests determine which countries we aid and when. We need to stop making friends with terrorist regimes that can give us the best price per barrel, and stop abandoning countries which can't provide us with oil. At the same time, if we do step in to intervene in a bad situation, we need to make sure that the resulting government is stable and non-oppressive instead of just letting an even worse set of butchers take charge.
Would these ideas have any effect? Are they even feasible? Beats me. I'm no statesman, and I don't see a career as a diplomat anywhere in my immediate future. But the fact remains that the U.S. is very unpopular with a lot of people [not governments] in the world, and unless we plan to bomb them ALL into submission, we simply HAVE to find other solutions that work.
Barry
---
The opinions expressed above are for comparison purposes only. Your mileage may vary....
[typos...]
[ edited by godzillatemple on Oct 17, 2001 04:14 PM ]
posted on October 17, 2001 04:05:45 PM new
That was well put Barry. One thing that I don't understand, is what the reason is for a government to starve its people. What's the gain? Does anybody know?
posted on October 17, 2001 04:12:23 PM newwhat the reason is for a government to starve its people
Errrr... possibly to keep them too weak to revolt? Or maybe it's to spend the money on palaces, private jets and harems instead of on food? Maybe to provide an incentive for soldiers to join your army ["sign up and you and your family get food"]?
Barry
---
The opinions expressed above are for comparison purposes only. Your mileage may vary....
posted on October 17, 2001 04:24:51 PM newIn the world court of public opinion, America needs to be seen as "fighting the good fight", and not just in our own opinion. I'm sure that we're the "good" guys, and so are you. But if the rest of the world doesn't believe it, we are in deep doo-doo....
I agree. That's why I get a little more nervous when every night in a row for the past week I have seen expert after expert on CNN and other newschannels flatly state that we are losing the war of propaganda.
Afghanistan keeps beaming photos of maimed children and enraged mad-dog protesters in the streets to the world ... Meanwhile, here you can't even see a replay of the jets crashing into the World Trade Center on any channel. It's like all news services agreed never to show it again -- yet the footage of those planes slamming into the buildings is the purest and most powerful explanation we have to justify the actions we are now taking.
By removing those images from the world view, we have allowed other countries around the world to conveniently forget what was done to us. The reality of planes ramming the Trade Center has become an abstract concept. We need to refresh the world's memory -- and fast -- regarding the heinousness of this crime. Hell, I'd also show footage of all the corpses from the Trade Center and the Pentagon laid out for the world to see.
Show them the crime, and perhaps they will be more likely to understand the punishment.
But for some stupid reason probably having to do with "good taste" and "sensitivity," we're making it simple for the world to overlook why we're in this war. We're letting them forget who drew first blood, and failing to help them make the connection in their religion-addled minds that this is retribution, and that they wouldn't be suffering now if their beloved murderer/hero hadn't committed this atrocity.
Unless we do something soon, the opposition will just keep showing how horrible we are, while we take the high road and continue to lose support.
