It’s a whole different perspective on the issue than anything I’ve heard before, and pretty damn frightening if true.
This shouldn’t come as a shock, should it? Who seriously believes the terrorists hate us because we’re just so darn free?
Thousands of people believe that.
(Truth is, millions do, but is too depressing to say…)
The point he’s making is not so much that the terrorists hate us, but that everyday, “man on the street” Muslims worldwide dislike US policies, and tacitly support the actions of Al Queda, not because they are confused or misled about US policy intentions by Bin Laden, but rather because they have a very clear grasp of the operational impact US policies, and Bin Laden is focusing on that reality.
Seems millions also believe that the US is trying to systematically destroy the muslim world…and this is a justification for attacking US citizens. Interesting what people will believe. So, why is it cool that appearently Muslims believe what they believe (making it true?) but dippy that millions believe an equally dippy (and overly simplistic) “they hate us because of our freedom!”??
As with anything, there is a kernel of truth in both ‘beliefs’, but its a pretty small kernel, and both stances are almost cartoon like in their simplifications. I’m just trying to understand why one position is ok, while the other is ridiculed…when both are caracatures of reality…
-XT
Cite? I don’t believe that Muslims think this and I’ve never seen any evidence that they do.
OTOH, I constantly hear alarmist rhetoric from Americans that Muslims want to destroy us because they (for some never expalined reason) “hate freedom.”
True enough, but you have to ask yourself WHY the average man in the street in the Muslim world ‘dislikes’ US policies…and how much of US policy they really understand. I challenge the statement that the average man in the Muslim world (hell, in ANY country outside of the US…god, I’ll go further and say the average AMERICAN for that matter) has a CLUE about the US intentions and operational tactics of US policy in the ME.
Its total bullshit that ObL has such a grasp and knows the ‘truth’. He’s created a self fulfilling prophesy here for gods sake. He kicked the US in the nuts and woke an angry bear that lashed out. He did it in such a way that it lashed out in the ME. Then he sits back and says “See! Look, the Americans are trying to destroy our way of life! They are trying to take over our oil, destroy our self rule and our way of life!” And of course our government was stupid enough to fall for it in Iraq and play right into his hands. But to say that this was the US policy BEFORE 9/11 is nuts. Or are you saying this was the way things were under Clinton?? He was the president for the previous 8 years as I recall…
Think about US policy BEFORE 9/11. We were fairly indifferent to the region on a national scale. After the first gulf war we pretty much left the region alone for the most part. Oh, sure, the neocons were interested in expanding US influence in the ME, but their view was a VERY niche view, and there is no way they could have done what they did before 9/11. Prior to the war the US was indifferent for the most part to the Palistinian question…we were vaguely for peace there, but really we didn’t give a major shit one way or the other. We supported Israel but that was because they were one of the few allies in the region. Without 9/11 the US would never have invaded Afghanistan, let alone Iraq.
As to the oil issue…name an industrial nation that ISN’T concerned about oil and the region because of it. Of COURSE the US is concerned…doesn’t take a rocket scientist to see that. As to the US forcing OPEC to keep prices low so we get cheap oil…I’d like to see some evidence of that. If Ossam knows, then it shouldn’t be hard to find.
-XT
I agree, sort of.
I strongly doubt that the average man on the street in most Middle Eastern countries has a “Very clear grasp” of American policies, simply because they have very limited access to news sources that aren’t controlled by government or religious institutions. It would be like Americans only ever getting news from “George Bush Weekly: Republican heroics” and “The Christian News”. Anyone who only heard what the government and the church wants to tell them would end up with a hatred of foreigners, especially Middle Easterners, as deep as the average MidEastern muslim’s is of America.
Did you read the OP by chance??? I’m exaggerating the position for effect, but perhaps you’d like to take a stab at reading what the OP posted?
-XT
Well… if the authour is to be believed it’s not really a “What’s true for you, is true for you, and what’s true for me, is true for me” psychobabble game. The key point is that the author, a CIA analyst with 2 decades of experience in this field, is saying that Bin Laden is focusing the Islamic world on the realities of the actual impact of US policies WRT the Palestinians (among other things), and that the US is the one tap dancing about wanting to be an honest broker between Israel and the Palestinians.
The author is saying quite specificaly that the Muslims are not stupid, and see through this rhetorical shuffle when they look at how US policies are being implemented.
Well, there is al Jazeera. No relgious affiliations, and though it is supported by Amir al Thani of Qatar, it doesn’t go easy on royal governments either. Al Arabiya is controlled by a conglomerate of various investors of various nationalities, including Saudis and Lebanese. There’s Radio Sawa, the Arabic service of Voice of America, and the BBC World Service broadcasts in Arabic.
Apart from that, one could always try to triangulate the various biased media sources, pick up an international TV channel via satellite, or go on the web.
Are we reading the same thread? I don’t see anything remotely similar to “the US is trying to systematically destroy the muslim world” in this OP.
Yes, I read the O and there is nothing in which suggests that “…millions believe the US is systematically trying to destroy the Muslim world.” I call bullshit. A (correct) belief that the US is out to screw them for their oil, or to prevent (with no justification) the Palestinians from ever getting a state is not the same as a belief that the US wants to physically destroy the Muslim world.
That’s what bugs me about evaluating the Muslim world’s attitudes towards the US. Any resentment or hostility at all gets simplified into “they hate the ‘Great Satan’ and they want us to die.”
In the cited interview Anonymous said {paraphrased in places} - The US is occupying Iraq and, in bin Laden’s view, Saudi Arabia, and the Israelis are occupying Jerusalem. These are the three holiest places to Muslims. (In order to get his exact phraseology you’ll have to read the cite in the OP.)
So it seems to me that bin Laden has a prima facie case with appeal to Muslims that the US is waging war on Islaam since we are the occupier in two places and the major sopporter of the occupier in the third.
A very interesting perspective Anon presented. ( Of course he isn’t really anonymous. The interviewer provides several oblique references that would make Mr Anon traceable- 9-11 testimony, position in the CIA and comments about him from other sources. )
As I read it, he sees the US as not having any choice but war if we maintain our current policies. He then goes on to say that it’s hard to debate these policies because they deal with Israel or higher gas prices.
He seems to say it’s time to get bloodthirsty if we’re not going to change our policies.
He seems very certain that there’s another, larger on the US attack coming. This country’d go apeshit if that happens. We were just getting to where I thought I could see the light at the end of the apeshit tunnel.
What? I have a great problem believing that this guy is an expert on Islamist terrorists when he drops clangers like this. There is no religious significance for either Sunnis or Shi’a in Iraq itself. There are some sites within Iraq that are significant to the Shi’a alone (Ali’s tomb in Najaf, the tomb of Husayn’s body in Karbala), but they’re sure not fans of the state itself.
I’d post a list of qualifying Dopers, but I think the mods would frown on it as constituting a “personal attack.” 
This site just below lists a few. The top tier places are Jerusalem in Israel, Mecca and Medina, both in Saudi Arabia, and Iraq comes in at or near the the top of the second tier category. Making an argument for Iraq as the third most sacred country is hardly a stretch or far fetched, especially for Shia Moslems. .
This site in Iraq is also pretty seriously regarded for Shia Moslems
The Shrine of the Imam Ali Ibn Abi Talib in Najaf, one of the two holiest places in Shia Islam.
[QUOTE=astro]
This site just below lists a few. The top tier places are Jerusalem in Israel, Mecca and Medina, both in Saudi Arabia, and Iraq comes in at or near the the top of the second tier category. Making an argument for Iraq as the third most sacred country is hardly a stretch or far fetched, especially for Shia Moslems. .
QUOTE]
or second most sacred Islamic country.
I know all this, Astro, and I mentioned that there are important Shia shrines in that country. I even mentioned the tomb of Ali, in your second link.
None of this takes away from my thesis:
- That Iraq itself is in no way sacred to Muslims. (The country itself has only been around for a century.)
- That there’s nothing much in Iraq that’s sacred to Sunnis.
- That therefore the statement “Iraq, however, for both Sunnis and Shias, is the second holiest place in the Islamic world” is incorrect and unlikely to be made by an expert.
I was leaving Mecca, Medina, and Jerusalem out of the equation, but since you mention them, they’d be 1, 2 and 3 of the holiest sites for Sunni Muslims, if you can make up such a ranking. Anonymous’s description of Iraq as the “second holiest place” is therefore even more wrong.