<Pine.LNX.4.10.10109150926100.25850-100000@server.aeiveos.com>
Subject: Re: TERRORISM: Seriousness and potential strategies
Date: Thu, 27 Sep 2001 17:08:49 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.3018.1300
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.3018.1300
Sender: owner-extropians@extropy.org
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: extropians@extropy.org
> > > > > "For over seven years the United States has been occupying the
lands of
> > > > > Islam in the holiest of places, the Arabian peninsula,
plundering
its riches,
> > > > > dictating to its rulers, humiliating its people, terrorizing
its
neighbours,
> > > > > and turning its bases in the peninsula into a spearhead
through
which to
> > > > > fight the neighbouring Muslim peoples . . . ."
> > > >
> > > > > Bin Laden called upon Muslims to fight against the United
States
and its
> > > > > people "in accordance with the words of Almighty God." (19)
> > > > So, for people on the list who would argue moderation, one has
to
> > > > recognize that "war" has been declared on us.
> > > For those who would argue immoderation, one has to recognize _why_
> > > "war" has been declared on us.
> > Blah blah. By the same logic, we should have been moderate with
Japan,
> > since they claimed they were only 'defending' themselves against the
> > trade embargo we had imposed on them prior to Dec 7th, and we should
> > have been 'moderate' with the Nazis, since they claimed that they
were
> > only regaining territory that had been taken from them unjustly in
the
> > Versailles treaty, and were, according to them, dealing with
'criminal'
> > elements (jews and communists) that had contributed to Germany's
defeat.
> >
> > See what happens to open minded people? Their brains fall out.
> See what happens to close minded people? They draw highly inaccurate
> parallels and get somewhat insulting of those who think differently.
It
> obviously is quite important to recognize what it is that we do that
> provokes terrorists activities and a great deal of hate toward this
> country. Some of it is for our virtues, true enough. But more than
> a little is also for our faults, especially faults of policy and of
> action.
I agree. IMHO, this is essentially a war about American foreign policy
rather than Western civilisation. And whether this attack was motivated
by
the interventionist foreign policy of the US or not, the US should not
be
intervening all over the globe. I think that is the cause of much hatred
directed at the US. For example, in the 1950's the US and British secret
services engineered the overthrow of the popularly supported prime
minister
of Iran, installed and enabled the Shah, who brutalized his subjects.
When
they finally overthrew him arround 1980, they attatcked the US embassy
and
took hostages. They didn't attatck and take hostages from other western
nations. They were angry at us for past actions.
Some estimate that the Gulf War and subsequent embargo have killed 1
million
Iraquis, most of them civilians. How's that for "collateral damage?"
In 1998 President Clinton, on the day that the evening news would have
led
with the story of deposition being taken in the White House intern
matter,
ordered the launch of cruise misiles that destroyed a medical facility
in
the Sudan. It has been estimated that the lack of medical supplies
because
of that attack resulted in 10,000 deaths. Subsequent review of the
evidence
that was used to justify that attack reveals it to be woefully
inadequate.
So much so that many have concluded that the attack was either launched
to
help bury the news of the Presidents private affairs, or represents a
use of
force that was so unjustified as to call into question the decision
making
powers of that chief executive. How convienient for Presidents who need
some
media event are these disposable corners of the third world to lob
cruise
misiles into.
How could anyone be mad at the US?
> I personally find it quite disturbing when Bush said that other
> countries are either with us and by implicaiton with our policies in
> our "war on terrorism" or are with the terrorists. That is a very
> dangerous and blatantly false dichotomy. One can be very much
> against terrorism and still not believe the planned and proposed
> actions are reasonable and not back them. The same is true of
> nations. Just because we have been hurt badly is not an excuse for
> polarizing the world into "for US" and "against US".
Well said. I heard they changed the new marketing slogan to Operation
Infinite Arrogance.
Pat Fallon
pfallon@ptd.net
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Fri Oct 12 2001 - 14:40:58 MDT