# U.N. Report: U.S. War on Terror Radicalizes Arabs

**URL:** <https://boards.straightdope.com/t/u-n-report-u-s-war-on-terror-radicalizes-arabs/208578>\
**Category:** Great Debates\
**Created:** [October 20, 2003, 8:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/u-n-report-u-s-war-on-terror-radicalizes-arabs/208578 "2003-10-20T20:55:59Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 15\
**Page:** 5

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![PatriotX](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/c4cdca/32.png) [@PatriotX](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/PatriotX)\
**Post date:** [October 25, 2003, 3:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/u-n-report-u-s-war-on-terror-radicalizes-arabs/208578/81 "2003-10-25T15:57:43Z")

</div>

> [@](#):
>
> \*Originally posted by adaher \*  
> \*\*  
> If we did this to any other nation, it would be considered imperialism.  
> \*\*

How do you figure?

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Earl\_of\_Sandwhich](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/91b2a8/32.png) [@Earl\_of\_Sandwhich](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Earl_of_Sandwhich)\
**Post date:** [October 25, 2003, 3:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/u-n-report-u-s-war-on-terror-radicalizes-arabs/208578/82 "2003-10-25T15:58:04Z")

</div>

> [@](#):
>
> \*Originally posted by adaher \*  
> \*\*\*\ ***Helping overthrow democratically elected governments in Iran and Chile was a strange way of expressing America’s unconditional support for democracy.**
> 
> Neither government was a democracy at the time we overthrew them. Both were in the process of ignoring their own constitutions. Which was causing unrest, which led to coups. Coups that we supported, but could not have been carried out without indiginous support.  
> \*\*

Mossadegh of Iran and Allende of Chile most certainly led democratic governments, until the C.I.A. got involved.  
Shortly before the coup that ended in his death, Allende’s party had actually gained seats in Parliament.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Rashak\_Mani](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/ea666f/32.png) [@Rashak\_Mani](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rashak_Mani)\
**Post date:** [October 25, 2003, 4:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/u-n-report-u-s-war-on-terror-radicalizes-arabs/208578/83 "2003-10-25T16:11:35Z")

</div>

> [@](#):
>
> \*Originally posted by Earl of Sandwhich \*  
> \*\*Mossadegh of Iran and Allende of Chile most certainly led democratic governments, until the C.I.A. got involved.  
> Shortly before the coup that ended in his death, Allende’s party had actually gained seats in Parliament. \*\*

```
Unless your definition of Democracy varies according to what is interesting or not to the USA... seems that the word "Dictatorship" is also flexible with the same criteria.
```

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![PatriotX](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/c4cdca/32.png) [@PatriotX](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/PatriotX)\
**Post date:** [October 25, 2003, 6:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/u-n-report-u-s-war-on-terror-radicalizes-arabs/208578/84 "2003-10-25T18:47:28Z")

</div>

> [@](#):
>
> \*Originally posted by adaher \*  
> \*\*  
> If we did this to any other nation, it would be considered imperialism.  
> \*\*

Actually, we’ve recently done something just like this to a number of nations.

> [@](#):
>
> \*\*[U.S. to Cut More Aid to Global Court’s Backers in 2004\*\*](http://ipsnews.net/interna.asp?idnews=20417)
> 
> Countries that refuse to exempt U.S. citizens and soldiers from the jurisdiction of the new International Criminal Court (ICC) could lose almost 90 million dollars in military aid from the United States in fiscal year 2004, which begins Wednesday.
> 
> The administration of U.S. President George W. Bush on Jul. 1 cut some 30 million dollars in military aid to 32 friendly countries – most of them democracies – because they refused to sign deals with Washington.
> 
> Among them were…democracies…some of which have contributed troops to bolster the U.S.-led occupation in Iraq. Brazil, Costa Rica, Peru, Venezuela, Ecuador, South Africa, and a number of other Latin American and African countries, were also on the list.

Second, is concern over it being seen as imperialism a sufficient objection to prevent whatever’s in our national interests from being done?

> [@](#):
>
> \*Originally posted by adaher \*  
> \*\*  
> I haven’t read it all, but it does make perfect sense from a diplomatic perspective. What I’ve read so far that is.
> 
> But I don’t think many of us disagree on the diplomatic aspect. It’s the military/strategic aspect that is exciting so much disagreement.  
> \*\*

Consider it in the context of the International Institute for Strategic annual report, the 2003-2004 edition of the “British-based think-tank’s annual bible for defense analysts”, The Military Balance that I brought up earlier.

> [@](#):
>
> [**The Military Balance Press Conference**](http://www.iiss.org/showdocument.php?docID=270)  
> _Remarks by  
> Dr John Chipman  
> Director, The International Institute for Strategic Studies_
> 
> Since the US…deprived al-Qaeda of a central base, the military dimension of counter-terrorism has diminished. Transnational terrorists are…clandestinely **dispersed among perhaps 100 countries, and present few concentrated targets amenable to military measures**. Law-enforcement and _intelligence cooperation_ is…paramount. … **military counter-terrorism is generally limited to technical intelligence gathering; precautionary special-operations deployments; first response and civil defence; and, _exceptionally_, counterinsurgency in Iraq.**

This addresses the martial aspect.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![PatriotX](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/c4cdca/32.png) [@PatriotX](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/PatriotX)\
**Post date:** [October 25, 2003, 6:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/u-n-report-u-s-war-on-terror-radicalizes-arabs/208578/85 "2003-10-25T18:59:11Z")

</div>

**adaher** ,  
Does the fact that we’ve cut off the funds for a number of democracies mean that we’ve “abandoned” these countries, or our “unconditional support” for democracies world-wide?

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\
**Post date:** [October 26, 2003, 3:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/u-n-report-u-s-war-on-terror-radicalizes-arabs/208578/86 "2003-10-26T03:00:49Z")

</div>

\*\*How do you figure?  
\*\*

Whenever we get another country to do something we want that they would not do on our own, accusations of “bullying” and “imperialism” get thrown around.

Now, as for Allende and Mossadegh, they were elected fairly and democratically. The US didn’t get involved in coup attempts until they started throwing out their own constitutions. As I said, there is no way the coups would have happened if not for substantial native support.

\*\*Does the fact that we’ve cut off the funds for a number of democracies mean that we’ve “abandoned” these countries, or our “unconditional support” for democracies world-wide?  
\*\*

Are we also funding their enemies?

If we cut off funding for the entire Middle East, that wouldn’t be abandoning Israel. In fact, it would be giving them an edge. Israel is much stronger than its neighbors economically.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Ale](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/f19dbf/32.png) [@Ale](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ale)\
**Post date:** [October 26, 2003, 3:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/u-n-report-u-s-war-on-terror-radicalizes-arabs/208578/87 "2003-10-26T03:41:22Z")

</div>

OOOOK, so, is there any polling around showing what, actually, really, and factually the average ME native thinks about the USA, terrorism, and all the matters being discused and elaborated, mostly in thin air around here?

I´m honestly asking for cites about that.

If not the debate seems to degenerate into rethorical marshes like “the terrorists hate us for our freedom”, and equivallent sound bites from the opposite side of the argument.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\
**Post date:** [October 26, 2003, 4:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/u-n-report-u-s-war-on-terror-radicalizes-arabs/208578/88 "2003-10-26T04:41:41Z")

</div>

THere was a Pew report survey that showed opinions of the US going negative. That’s about all the hard evidence there is.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Ale](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/f19dbf/32.png) [@Ale](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ale)\
**Post date:** [October 26, 2003, 4:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/u-n-report-u-s-war-on-terror-radicalizes-arabs/208578/89 "2003-10-26T04:55:40Z")

</div>

> [@](#):
>
> \*Originally posted by adaher \*  
> \*\*THere was a Pew report survey that showed opinions of the US going negative. That’s about all the hard evidence there is. \*\*

Could it be [THIS ONE](http://people-press.org/reports/display.php3?ReportID=165) ?

A quick skim over it, doesn´t seem to give the kind of information I was looking for.  
Perhaps tomorrow I´ll read it in detail, by now it´s time to hit the sack.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\
**Post date:** [October 26, 2003, 5:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/u-n-report-u-s-war-on-terror-radicalizes-arabs/208578/90 "2003-10-26T05:34:30Z")

</div>

No, it’s not EXACTLY what you’re looking for, but it’s the only evidence there is that isn’t purely anecdotal.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Rashak\_Mani](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/ea666f/32.png) [@Rashak\_Mani](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rashak_Mani)\
**Post date:** [October 26, 2003, 11:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/u-n-report-u-s-war-on-terror-radicalizes-arabs/208578/91 "2003-10-26T11:20:23Z")

</div>

> [@](#):
>
> \*Originally posted by adaher \*  
> \*\* Now, as for Allende and Mossadegh, they were elected fairly and democratically. The US didn’t get involved in coup attempts until they started throwing out their own constitutions. As I said, there is no way the coups would have happened if not for substantial native support. \*\*

Wow… you guys can justify anything…

Now lets say Gore somehow took over the US govt since he had the majority of the votes. Lets say that the 48% that voted for Bush managed a military coup aided by Mexico soon after… wouldn’t that be a substantial native support too ? Even thou 52% said otherwise ?

```
So it BS. Most democracies have very close call elections with winner taking at best 60%-65%... most close to 50's. (Bush below 50) So a "substantial" and vocal minority can get there way due to US support ? That is not how democracies work.
```

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\
**Post date:** [October 26, 2003, 11:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/u-n-report-u-s-war-on-terror-radicalizes-arabs/208578/92 "2003-10-26T11:58:48Z")

</div>

That’s not comparable.

Let’s say Bush started ordering troops to fire on demonstrators. Then he orders the seizure of all American oil assets and transfers them to Haliburton. No Congressional approval, no court action, he just decrees it. There is a good chance he may cancel elections.

THAT would then be comparable. And a significant number of Americans would support a coup under those circumstances. Possibly a majority.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Earl\_of\_Sandwhich](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/91b2a8/32.png) [@Earl\_of\_Sandwhich](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Earl_of_Sandwhich)\
**Post date:** [October 26, 2003, 3:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/u-n-report-u-s-war-on-terror-radicalizes-arabs/208578/93 "2003-10-26T15:36:54Z")

</div>

You are right about Mossadegh making some questionable decisions, adaher, but he hardly threw out the constsition.  
If the C.I.A. went in to defend democracy, as you seem to be claiming, why were Mossadegh and Allende replaced with thugs? Did the Shah and General Pinochet bring democracy to their respective nations?

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Bouncer](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/9d8465/32.png) [@Bouncer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bouncer)\
**Post date:** [October 26, 2003, 6:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/u-n-report-u-s-war-on-terror-radicalizes-arabs/208578/94 "2003-10-26T18:55:20Z")

</div>

“If the C.I.A. went in to defend democracy, as you seem to be claiming, why were Mossadegh and Allende replaced with thugs? Did the Shah and General Pinochet bring democracy to their respective nations?” - Earl of Sandwhich

Nope, but they brought in anti-communist stable governments. Which was in the strategic interests of the US during the cold war, when we and the USSR (remember them, the guys with something lover 20000 nuclear weapons? Yeah, them.) were using countries as chess pieces in a battle for world domination.

It was done this way because BOTH sides wanted to avoid a direct confrontation which would’ve destroyed europe and possibly the human race. It wasn’t about what was “right” or “wrong”. If you think so then I encourage you to re-read USSR treatment of client states. It was about winning. Socialistic one party states versus democratic multi-party states.

Do I argue the ends justify the means, well, sometimes they do boys and girls. Not always, not everywhere, but sometimes they do. More to the point the US achieved it’s goals of regional stability and curbing socialist expansion.

Pinochet and the Shah were undemocratic despots. OTOH, there was no significant soviet presence in either country nor anything that could be described as a strong relationship with the USSR.

That was the goal.

Regards,  
-Bouncer-

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Rashak\_Mani](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/ea666f/32.png) [@Rashak\_Mani](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rashak_Mani)\
**Post date:** [October 26, 2003, 8:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/u-n-report-u-s-war-on-terror-radicalizes-arabs/208578/95 "2003-10-26T20:42:11Z")

</div>

> [@](#):
>
> \*Originally posted by Bouncer \*  
> \*\* It was about winning. Socialistic one party states versus democratic multi-party states.
> 
> That was the goal. Regards, -Bouncer- \*\*

True it was the cold war… which kind of justifies some of it. Still your “democratic multi-party states” hardly describes Chile, Iran and most South Americans. In fact the US itself which is more bi-party… 🙂 So change yoru text to:

“…versus rich democratic and poor right wing dictatorships”.

[Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/u-n-report-u-s-war-on-terror-radicalizes-arabs/208578.md?page=4)
