What you are proposing is appeasement. Wait, I take that back. You haven’t proposed we do much of anything. Just understand their feelings, blah :rolleyes:, blah :rolleyes:, blah :rolleyes:.
But suggesting we change our foreign policy in any way is appeasement, by definition.
Well, I don’t see what eye-rolling and name-calling and gross overgeneralization brings to a thread that has become worthy of the GD forum. Some people are working very hard here to see each others’ points, address concerns, and explain their positions with more clarity–even though it is somewhat emotional.
Which makes me want to say piss off. 'Cept that’s not worthy of this thread either.
AAAAAARRRRRRRRGGGGGGGGGHHHHHHHH!
So WWII was caused, not by Hitler and his murderous Nazi thugs, but by how the poor German people were treated after WWI? What, did somebody hurt their feelings?
If America follows your example, we’d fall into the very same trap. Hitler, and Fascism, were just as bad as Osama and Militant Islam. The world weeps for what happened in the '30s and '40s. It will weep again if we allow their ilk to pull this shit again.
I’m gonna make one more stab at this, then probably bow out.
#1) I’m fine “understanding” as meaning: intelligence gathering. Learn everything about the fuckers who did this and the uber-fuckers who funded them. Then kill them all.
#2) I’m not fine with “understanding” as empathizing, putting myself in their shoes, trying to “understand what drove them to this”, “finding a solution so this doesn’t happpen again”.
There is no solution. That article here about Bin Laden’s motives in part says:
There. I now understand him and he’s an asshole I want dead. He “detests” me and I want him killed. There is no ground for compromise. None. Period. Finis.
I would really, really, really appreciate it if one of the “We need to understand so this doesn’t happen again!” advocates can tell me how my knowing that he detests me leads to anything other than all-out war with these extremists. What can I change about myself or my views that will lead to anything other than war? Stop being a Jew? Never. Lobby for removing support for moderate Arab governments? Never. Lobby for the USA to stop supporting the Israeli government? Never, especially since the minute we withdraw our support the entire Middle-East will go up in flames as an anti-Israeli pile-on begins)
So please, someone. Tell me where Mr. Bin Laden and his ilk and I go from here? He detests my existance and I, his. So now what?
Fenris
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by CrankyAsAnOldMan *
**
**
Name-calling? Where? If anyone is guilty of gross overgeneralization, it is those that say we need to worry about the terrorists feelings before we decide what to do.
Fenris has posted my feelings just as I have reached my breaking point with this thread.
I have watched Jodi struggle valiently only to have every point she makes completely whoosh over the heads of those with whom she debates. The breeze has messed up my hair and dried my eyeballs out.
I thought I summerized Bin Lauden’s position pretty well in my first post, but apparently I was using the invisible font again.
So as Fenris helpfully pointed out, fine, let’s understand him.
Bin Lauden wants the utter destruction of Israel. Do we all understand that? What exactly should we do so that he doesn’t get angry with our disagreeing with him? And no, telling the Israel to be nicer to the Palestinians will not go far enough in his mind. Nothing less than our utter condemnation of Israel with the promise to stand idly by while every man, woman, and child of Israel is slaughtered will be good enough. So exactly what good does this understanding bring?
Bin Lauden wants US troops out of Saudi Arabia so he has a freer hand with which to destablize that government and set up a radical fundamentalist government that will abuse its women, curtail all freedom of thought, and kill people who disagree by crushing their skulls with rocks. So should we comply and withdraw our troops? And the next time Mr. Lauden wants something from us, he’ll just murder a few thousand more US citizens because he knows that works.
So exactly what is the debate here?
I’m sensing a feeling here, that changing any part of the status quo vis-a-vis US foriegn policy prior to 9-11, would be playing into the hands of the terrorists.
And somehow, that seems to be translated into a refusal to change perspectives even if it is the right thing to do. Is this the case here? Is this reluctance to change bcoz of risk as being percieved to be giving in to the terrorists?
What this attack should make evident is that any co-operation/support/aid to terrorist organizations like the Taleban by the US/CIA like they did during the whole Soviet thing, is a very bad idea.
Pakistan openly provides support to terrorist organizations operating in Kashmir. Supporting Pakistan on this should be a bad idea.
A lot of funding for the terror-driven conflict in Ireland comes from the US. Allowing this kinda activity is a bad idea.
Supplying arms and providing support to totalitarian regimes in the Middle-East just so that u can get a steady supply of oil, is a bad idea.
If you think the US shouldn't change any of the above or atleast reconsider them, for risk of being percieved as giving in to terrorists, Then it is yet another tragedy in addition to the enormous loss of life we have already seen.
The Taleban do not represent Afghanistan. By that measure, Do not destroy Afghanistan for the sake of the Taleban.
I do support retaliation. However I do not support unilateral retaliation. There is a Northern Alliance still functioning in Afghanistan. There is also a Council of Islamic nations. There's also the United Nations. The US has no need to go it alone since it already has the support of the permanent 5 of the UN Security council.
If the United States shows trust and courage to share the evidence and course of action with the Islamic council and the UN, It will generate tremendous goodwill for the US in the future. It will also help in isolating the Taleban and Osama plus generating valuable intelligence to plan surgical strikes.
For the record, I don’t give a rat’s ass about “understanding” bin Laden. I ain’t him I’m talking about. I’m talking about wanting to know why our country and culture is so loathed and distrusted by an entire region. I realize that in his “They” Fenris made it abundantly clear that he meant the terrorists and Bin Laden and his ilk. But some of us were talking more broadly than that.
But since sarcasm is now in fashion…
Never mind me, I wouldn’t want all the “wooshing” to dry your eyes out. Give us an ounce of fucking credit wouldja? So when people are posting ideas you like, they are valiantly trying to make themselves understood. But when people post an opposing view, they’re just blindly posting stupid pointless shit that doesn’t “get” what the thread is about? I don’t see wooshing going on. I see people using different interpretations and arguing fine points. On both sides. What’s the problem with that?
Jesus, can’t we respect each other? The enemy are those fucking nutjob terrorists. Not me and the people like me, even if you do think we’re too fucking stupid to apprehend the English language to your satisfaction.
{i]grumble grumble*
Jodi, Fenris: Trust me. Evacuate.
There are people operating here from premises they’re not going to move off of. National security, unfortunately, doesn’t seem to be one of them.
As Cranky has pointed out, the people who will be taking action here aren’t thinking like this. (Thankfully, I will add.)
**
What if “why” is, because they want a jihad? And what if, to that end, they continually slaughter us in grander and more horrific ways, until we give them one?
Cranky,
Just because I believe that you are not getting Jodi’s point does not mean that I have a lack of respect for you or that I think you or the others are less than bright. It simply means that I don’t think you are getting her point in this instance. Brillant deductions may well be easily within your grasp on a great deal of topics, I was only commenting on this thread not your the entire span of your board existence. You are a well respected poster and I really have no desire to be on your shit list. And if I ever do get on your shit list, I want it to be for something more important than my thought that we are talking past each other. Perhaps it will be for my lack of table manners. But I simply can’t convince myself that I have to put down my knife and then switch my fork to my other hand before taking a bite. It’s horribly inefficient.
It was not clear to me that you were talking on a wider spectrum of terrorists than Bin Lauden. If you want to attribute some of my eye dryness to your post going over my head so be it.
I believe our country and culture is loathed by an entire region for a multitude of reasons.
We do not hold the same things they hold to be true. We do not believe in thier religious beliefs and therefore we are infidels not to be trusted.
We are powerful.
We support Israel.
What they are told about us isn’t always true. To provide a unifying factors, many of their leaders simply make up wrongs committed against them by the US. Today I found a whole list of quotes misattributed to our leaders.
They don’t understand us anymore than we understand them.
Gaaah, you’re right. It wasn’t name calling. It was derisive labeling (“pseudo-philosophers”, etc). My bad. My crappy temper making me too impatient to post with precision. Apologies for that particular accusation.
I’m going to do something I know I’m going to regret later; I’m going to throw my two cents into this thread. And I’m going to do this while low on sleep; a double sin in debating.
I really shouldn’t try.
Osama bin Laden is a lunatic.
Period.
Finito.
End of story.
There’s no point in trying to understand him or his grievances or what not. He hates the United States, Europe, the ENTIRE WESTERN WORLD. He is out for the destruction of our way of life.
That I think is pretty much established.
However, we also know that he is too much of a chickenshit to face that western world he so despises head on, by either attacking us himself or doing it out in the open, like every other military leader.
No, he gives out lunch money to the angry young men throughout the Arab world and convinces them that they are doing the godly thing, by Allah.
This is the question I think Cranky et. al. are trying to explain is the one to ask. “How is it that these young people are even receptive enough to Laden’s message that they could potentially die for his cause?”
Because to you, me, everyone else in the ol’ US of A, as well as to Europe, Russia, China, Japan and else where in the west, ObL is a fucking lunitac.
A ravinous, bloodthirsty, cruelhearted, evil madman.
However, to enough people within the Islamic world, ObL is Jesus. Otherwise sane people are willing to sacrifice their lives to the demented cause of Osama.
Why?
Sterling North: Yeah, that was pretty much my point, thanks 
. I could care less what Osama bin Laden’s motivations are ( well, I suppose that I care, but only in a dry, analytical, history-geek sense - Not in a practical, “this will help us” sense ). Or those of his fanatical cadres. I do care what the motivations of most of the other people are in that region, that some of them are occasionally vulnerable to those siren call of terrorism.
I am not interested in compromising our values. I am interested in perhaps changing their perceptions. Again, I’m not referring to terrorists. One cannot profitably argue with a terrorist. But most people in thay part of the world ( any part of the world ), are not terrorists. The eradication of ignorance is a wonderful thing and there is a lot of it in that region.
Jodi: Well speaking only for myself, the “why?” of “why discuss motivation” is not of any use short-term. You’re quite right. In the short term it gives us little advantage, with the possible exception of strategic arguments to help leverage countries like Pakistan.
I am interested in the long-term question. And I don’t see where examining the long-term is an impediment to accomplishing short-term goals. One can do both, IMHO.
Do you people understand what “changing our foreign policy” really means? Or foreign policy conflicts with the terrorists because they want a second genocide of the jewish people and we don’t. I suppose we could compromise…only have them kill half of all the jews. But guess what? They don’t want to compromise.
Don’t you get it? We cannot compromise with people who want us dead! They don’t hate us because of our poor foreign policy decisions. They hate us because of our GOOD foreign policy decisions. The more moral our foreign policy is, the more they will hate us. Yes, the US deals with dictators in the middle east. Guess what? Every single country in the middle east is a dictatorship! We cannot avoid dealing with dictators.
The only way to stop the terrorist attacks is to stand aside while Israel is annihilated, withdraw our troops to US soil, stop producing blasphemous movies, books, TV shows, magazines and websites, stop all international trade, give away our wealth, and become an islamic dictatorship.
I suppose we could compromise on some of those issues. But should we? Perhaps we should abandon freedom of religion? Start a pogrom against the jews? Maybe they’d stop attacking us if we just did a few of those things. We wouldn’t have to do all of them.
Y’know what is really behind all this second guessing? It is a form of psychological denial. If these attacks were somehow our fault, we would then have the power to stop them. If only I didn’t make my husband mad, he’d stop hitting me. It is too scary to imagine that there’s nothing we can do to make these people like us. We have the idea that everyone is willing to compromise, all we have to do is put ourselves in their shoes and we can work out some sort of deal.
But a compromise requires two parties who are willing to compromise. And in this situation neither side is willing. They want us dead. We don’t want to be dead. I don’t see how a deal can be worked out that leaves both parties satisfied. Sometimes in this world, no compromise is possible.
Let myself, once again, clarify my position. I am not in any way opposed to “all-out war with these extremists.” I am not a pacifist. As I said above, my concerns about motivation are a lot more focused on the guy selling fruit at a stand somewhere in Peshawar. The terrorists can go hang for all I care. With any luck, they will.
I firmly believe most of the hatred and mistrust is rooted only precariously in facts and much more in distortion and ignorance. These can be beaten. We will obviously never have a perfect harmony of opinion between every country on the glode. But we can strive to reduce unthinking antipathy between different peoples. And perhaps while we’re at it, improve material conditions here and there .
Lemur866,
Exactly my point. Terrorism is a non-negotiable issue. India, Isreal, Sri-Lanka, Ireland and now the US have long been victims of this most abhorrent form of politics.
There can be no compromises on this. And to ensure this, The US will have to reconsider some of its foreign policies. Refer my earlier post and you will see why its necessary.The Taliban just declared a Jyhad on the US.
Isn’t this argument moot now? As has already been said, there are enough followers in places besides Afganastan of ObL and the Taliban who are ready to die for their cause.
Exactly what that sick fuck wanted.
I really want to add to this discussion, but so many good points have made from both sides…
But I do think that the reason why people hate us is largely irrelevant…Simple truth is, people will always hate us, just by virtue of what we are, the last remaining superpower…If we rush into a conflict with guns blazing, people will hate us for being aggressive and forcing our will on others…If we do nothing while wars rage, people will hate us for letting people die and not caring about the world…Anything in between will be too much for some and not enough for others…
But, if you must have a reason, how about this? We are an inferior people who are better off than we should be and refuse to behave as such…
Nonsense, only a small (but vocal) minority of Arabs feel this way.
Again, nonsense.
Again nonsense.
The vast majority in the middle east couldn’t care less what sort of life we lead at home. “All politics is local”. These people aren’t looking across the ocean and saying to themselves “Those infidels are doing bad things and I must destroy them”. These people are reacting to their own environment. And they see things in their own environment that convince them that we are evil.
We can do something about that WITHOUT giving up any of our freedoms.
Again nonsense. You just really don’t know what the fuck you are talking about do you? Do you really want to believe that there’s no solution but the extermination of either Arabs or ourselves?
Look, there are problems in the middle east. Nasty, horrendous problems and we can’t solve all, or even most of them. But the hatred and distorted version of Islam that creates suicide bombers is not the norm among these people. It’s an abberation.
We need to distroy every person currently infected with this abberation. AND we need to understand where this abberation comes from and destroy it’s source.
Either that, or 10 years from now we get to do it all over again.
**
Matt, the more I thought about your post last night, the more it bothered me.
I am thinking very, very clearly and the implication that those who disagree with you are only “reacting” or not “thinking clearly” is condescending and offensive. Please believe me when I say: I have put thought into my opinion. I am being coldly rational. I have to. My fellow Jews and I are some of the prime targets of these murderers.
I’d like to know how much reason, reflection, memory, consideration, and doubt you’ve put into trying to understand Fred Phelps and his evil “God Hates Fags” organization? How much into trying to understand the radical Militia (like McVeigh) types? How much into neo-Nazis? How 'bout abortion clinic bombers? The KKK?
Why are the people I discussed in the OP (not all Arabs or Muslims!) any different, except they’re more powerful and more effective? How many peace marches have you gone to supporting a measured response to Fred Phelps’s “antics”, abortion clinic bombings or KKK lynchings?
I don’t need to wallow in pigshit to realize that pigs stink and I don’t need to delve into Bin Laden’s troubled psyche (beyond what’s needed for intelligence-gathering) to see the need to destroy him and his organization.
Fenris