sexual underpinnings of sept. 11

[Tamerlane]

*Originally posted by RedFury *

“As long as we’re in agreement that the actual terrorist threat, as opposed to the larger propaganda threat, is limited to a few fringe groups”

Indeed, we agree. But would you also be ready to concede that he longer and deeper this crisis gets, the more likely some of those groups currently ‘sympathetic’ to the cause would find justification for ermmm…“further involvement?” That’s what concerns me.

Further radicalization and the spread of a “Holy War” against the U.S. and its allies? Well, that’s certainly what ObL was ( and I imagine, is ) hoping for. The danger exists, yes. But I haven’t seen any signs that this process is seriously underway. There has been a great deal of distress over the attacks in Afghanistan, but there aren’t seen many signs that ObL’s ideology is gaining wide credence across the larger Muslim world. Indeed even some other pre-existing terrorist organizations, such as some of the Lebanese and Palestinian groups, are being careful to distance themselves from ObL’s ranting.

I agree that this is something to watch out for and attempt to pre-empt with counter-propaganda and careful political maneouvering. But I’m not convinced it is inevitable, or even likely. Rather, it’s one of a constellation of possibilities. My best guess is, is that some ( as has happened in Pakistan ) will be motivated to take up arms, but it will continue to be a small minority of most societies, unless some HUGE blunder is committed ( say if ObL hid out in Mecca and we decided to bomb it ).

I do think moving on Iraq, without clear evidence of involvement in this disaster, would be a propaganda mistake.

Well put, but for the sake of devil’s advocacy, have we done this? IOW, are we now, more than at any point in history, closer to reducing our differences? Or is Huntington the new Nostradamus and we’re heading right into the ultimate clash of civilizations?

Huntington? Is that the fellow under discussion in another thread, the one that labels “Islam” as a singular civilization?

If so, I think he’s an idiot ( or to be a little more charitable, misinformed ) and give little credence to his mutterings ( not too big on Nostradamus either, to be honest - not a widely accepted authority on this board ).

And I wonder, as much as I hate them, are there any cites that would back you up in your convictions? Haven’t the death tolls through conflict actually risen in the past century?

They’ve risen enormously with population and modern methods of warfare and extermination. And I have no cites ( at least at the moment ). At this point it is less GD, than IMHO.

Europe is certainly more secure than it has been. Latin America, with certain exceptions, seems more secure. Asia is a mixed bag, but I see glimmers of hope. Sub-Saharan Africa is a horrible mess, but we do have some progress in the south, however painful. The Middle-East continues to be troubled.

But I just have a sense that the expansion of communication in the last couple of decades and some political developments are a step in the right direction. I think people are just a little less ignorant of other societies than they were 50 years ago. And I don’t see the world as any bloodier than it was in the seventies. Rather less, in some respects ( and in some areas ). And the end ( or at least winding down ) of the Cold War and its associated proxy struggles can only be a good thing.

I continue to remain guardedly optimistic. But I can’t back my statement up any better at the moment, though I’ll think some more on it.

• Tamerlane

[Truth_Seeker]

*Originally posted by Tamerlane *

**I agree that this is something to watch out for and attempt to pre-empt with counter-propaganda and careful political maneouvering.
**

I generally agree with you except that I think anti-Americanism and Muslim extremism, especially in the Arab world, has very complex roots which are not entirely, or perhaps even mostly, America’s fault.

In many countries, anti-americanism has been allowed to flourish and even encouraged by governments who are now realizing they have made a pact with the devil. The Saudis are exhibit #1. In return for social “peace” they have given free reign to Wahabianism (sp?) and turned a blind eye to anti-western sentiment. Having sown the wind over the last thirty years, or so, they now find they are reaping the whirl-wind. An appalling number of links in the terrorist chain lead straight back to our very good friends, the Saudis.

Pakistan, though not an Arab country, is exhibit #2. Wild-eyed Islamic radicals are handy tools in Kashmir and Afganistan but not so handy when they start popping up on the streets of Islamabad.

The point is that many countries have tolerated Islamic radicalism in a variety of forms in order to promote their own agendas. Now they’re starting to realize that it’s getting out of hand and they’ve got to do something about it.

Consider this quote:

**Nihilism as a mere philosophical indulgence may prove socially quite harmless. But what we are witnessing in the world today is an active form of nihilism in social and political realms that threatens the very fabric of human existence. [It] assumes various names, and it is tragic and unfortunate that some of those names bear a resemblance to religiosity and some proclaim spirituality

Vicious terrorists who concoct weapons out of religion are superficial literalists clinging to simplistic ideas. They are utterly incapable of understanding that, perhaps inadvertently, they are turning religion into the handmaiden of the most decadent ideologies. While terrorists purport to be serving the cause of religion and accuse all those who disagree with them of heresy and sacrilege, they are serving the very ideologies they condemn…

The role of religious scholars has now become even more crucial, and their responsibility ever more significant. Christian thinkers in the 19th century put forward the idea that religion should be seen as a vehicle for social solidarity. Now that the world is on the edge of chaos…the notion of Christian solidarity should prove helpful in calling for peace and security. In the holy Koran, human beings are invited to join their efforts in , and means solidarity, which can be translated into co-operation to do good. We should all co-operate in the cause of doing good.
**

Very wise and very perceptive. Radical Islamic fundamentalism is a greater threat to the religion it claims to espouse than it is to the West. It is in everyone’s interest, not just the West’s to eliminate it. And that must start, and probably end, with men and women of good will speaking out against Radical Islamic fundamentalism in their own societies. It’s not something we can do succesfully by ourselves from the outside.

The quote, by the way, came from Muhammad Khatami. It’s true that he is quite moderate but he is also the President of Iran. And I think he nailed it.

[RedFury]

Tamerlane,

I certainly don’t hold Nostradamus in high regard, if anything, I used his name metaphorically for all soothsayers. OTOH, I confess to not having read your thread on Samuel Huntington, but I think it folly to so offhandedly dismiss his pronouncements as “charitably misinformed” If anything, I can see how his book can incite debate, from his definition of civilization as the “the broadest level of cultural identity of an individual, ethnic group or nation,” to his broad interpretation of Islam.

But regardless of where you fall on the debate, surely you can’t be suggesting that those that don’t agree with you join the ranks of the misinformed. Not when that last chapter of said book is still being written as we speak.

[Tamerlane]

*Originally posted by RedFury *
OTOH, I confess to not having read your thread on Samuel Huntington, but I think it folly to so offhandedly dismiss his pronouncements as “charitably misinformed” If anything, I can see how his book can incite debate, from his definition of civilization as the “the broadest level of cultural identity of an individual, ethnic group or nation,” to his broad interpretation of Islam.

Yeah, those are things that get me. To the point where I have hard time taking his arguments seriously. However I should own up to the fact that I have NOT read his book in its entirety, only excerpts. Which I suppose weakens my argument considerably. But what I have seen of it, didn’t impress me.

Here’s the thread where it came up:
http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?threadid=94431

Note that this is a looong, rambling thread. The Huntington stuff stats with a post from Dave Stewart citing him down near the bottom of page three, I think.

But regardless of where you fall on the debate, surely you can’t be suggesting that those that don’t agree with you join the ranks of the misinformed.

Not at all, not at all. Only some of them . In this case I just don’t care much for Huntington’s particular analysis ( what I’ve seen of it ).

• Tamerlane