TSA WARNING: Commuters must be in Uniform

[John Pennekamp]

If you are actually interested about why the folks in the Middle East aren't exacly sending us Americans holiday cards, then check out Thomas Friedman's "The World is Flat." It is a book about globalization but it addresses at length the animosity between the Islamic societies of the Middle East and the West. He also wrote "From Beirut to Jerusalem," an oldie but a goodie. Written in the late 80's but very pertinate today.

Basically, they hate us because of what we have and the humiliation they feel for not being able to achieve what the west has achieved. Arabs and Persians have long memories... They used to be among the world's top societies. Now? They want what the west has, but don't want to give up the cultural rules are morays that are grounded in 11th century thought. Those attitudes and rules are not condusive to innovation and free market economies, necessary to progress in the modern world. The societies in the Middle East face an intractable delema: Give up the past for the sake of the future or give up the future for the sake of the past? All of my thoughts here are not so much my own, but gleaned from reading Friedman, Rushdie, et al. I happen to agree with them.

No, you're missed the point. That's the inane excuse that the warmongers use to justify our Mideast policy. "They hate us because they're jealous of our open society". B.S.

The real reason they hate us eludes to my comment about the events of 1945. In 1945, the UN, with the full support of the West (GB & the USA mostly), erased the nation of Palestine from the map, kicked the Palestinians out of their country, and created the nation of Israel in one of the most holy lands of the world. And we've been supporting this "land grab" both financially and militarily ever since.

I believe you can trace ALL of the terrorism of the 20th and 21st century to this event. It is the root of their hatred because in addition to the event itself, it set us up to be trespassers on the Holy Land for generations.

The question I have is not why they hate us. The question I have is, given what we know about the history fo the Middle East and it's political climate, what made the Bush administration think they could prance in and set up a constitutional democracy? After all, this area of the world has no history of democratic or humanist thought.

Are you serious? Bush is the most ignorant, arrogant president we have eve had in this nation. To make matters worse, he's surrounded himself with some of the most fervent warmongers of the Cold War era. Why WOULDN'T they think that? It's bad enough to be stupid, but to be stupid and arrogant is the most dangerous person of all. Add to that a stupid, arrogant person with unlimited military power, and you have the making of World War III, which we're in.

Meanwhile, we're now spending $12,000,000,000 per MONTH on the Iraq and Afghanistan war. That's more then Vietnam.

 

[LowlyPropCapt]

No, you're missed the point. That's the inane excuse that the warmongers use to justify our Mideast policy. "They hate us because they're jealous of our open society". B.S.

The real reason they hate us eludes to my comment about the events of 1945. In 1945, the UN, with the full support of the West (GB & the USA mostly), erased the nation of Palestine from the map, kicked the Palestinians out of their country, and created the nation of Israel in one of the most holy lands of the world. And we've been supporting this "land grab" both financially and militarily ever since.

I believe you can trace ALL of the terrorism of the 20th and 21st century to this event. It is the root of their hatred because in addition to the event itself, it set us up to be trespassers on the Holy Land for generations.



Are you serious? Bush is the most ignorant, arrogant president we have eve had in this nation. To make matters worse, he's surrounded himself with some of the most fervent warmongers of the Cold War era. Why WOULDN'T they think that? It's bad enough to be stupid, but to be stupid and arrogant is the most dangerous person of all. Add to that a stupid, arrogant person with unlimited military power, and you have the making of World War III, which we're in.

Meanwhile, we're now spending $12,000,000,000 per MONTH on the Iraq and Afghanistan war. That's more then Vietnam.

Actually, I believe you are missing the point. The creation of Israel from British Palestine in 1945 under U.N. auspices was understandably an injustice to many, a kneejerk reaction to the horror of the holocaust during WWII. Terrorism as it exists today, however, has it's roots much, much further back... All the way back to the 1800's when Arabia was known as the "Trucial States." The terrorism you refer to is simply a modern media age adaptation to a very old formula. The creation of Israel is simply another reason the fundementalists use to motivate militant groups. It is also worth noting that terrorism is a world wide phenomenon descriptive of a plethora of goals, methods and groups. Recall that a terrorist act in Europe began WWI (the assasination of Arch Duke Ferdinand).

The situation in the Middle East is very much the same as what happend to Germany post WWI. In a very tight nutshell, the Treaty of Versailles put a very tight noose around the German economy. Astrononmical inflation, little in the way of job opportunities and a well educated yet discontented population created the conditions ripe for the rise of national socialism (the Nazis) and all the evils that came with it. What did Hitler use to motivate the German population? The "historic inevitability of the rise of the German Aryan Empire" and the Jews and foriegners were to blame for Germany being held back.

If that doesn't sound familiar, you haven't been paying attention. Whether it is Pan-Arab Secular Ba'athism or Islamic theocratic rule by force, the message and conditions are no different than that sold to the German people in Mein Kampf. Only the players are different. When you have an educated populace (most members of these terrorist groups have at least a secondary education, if not a college one) with little opportunity and lots of discontent, you have the conditions set for radicalism. All it takes is a charasmatic cleric or politcal leader to step up to the mic. This is especially true in todays world of instant news and communication. If you think that the Arab/Persian world does not feel humiliation for being so behind the west, than you are unfortunately out of touch. The rallying around the cause of Palestine or the "invaders in the holy land" is not the disease, but only an effect of much deeper sociopolitical ills.

As for your remarks regarding my thoughts about Bush wanting to remake the Middle East, I think my thoughts were pretty self explainatory and the question was actually rhetorical in nature. My opinion on that subject should be obvious and stand on it's own merits.

I'm enjoying the debate, by the way. If you are going to use history to support your opinions, you need to try and go further back in your cause and effect chain. Don't you think much of this discontent in the Middle East could really be due to how the European powers carved up the world post WWI (Treaty of Orleans, I believe?)? After all, all of the countries were created as puppet governments for the sake of political expediency, not based on the actual will of any of the peoples living in those places. It is hard to blame the U.S., when Wilson tried to save us from all of this by advising against the Treaty of Versailles and supporting the concept of the League of Nations.

 

[John Pennekamp]

I'm enjoying the debate, by the way. If you are going to use history to support your opinions, you need to try and go further back in your cause and effect chain. Don't you think much of this discontent in the Middle East could really be due to how the European powers carved up the world post WWI (Treaty of Orleans, I believe?)? After all, all of the countries were created as puppet governments for the sake of political expediency, not based on the actual will of any of the peoples living in those places. It is hard to blame the U.S., when Wilson tried to save us from all of this by advising against the Treaty of Versailles and supporting the concept of the League of Nations.

Agreed with the above.

As for the rest of it, we'll have to agree to disagree, but thanks for a well thought out and executed response, regardless.

 

[acaTerry]

I believe you can trace ALL of the terrorism of the 20th and 21st century to this event. It is the root of their hatred because in addition to the event itself, it set us up to be trespassers on the Holy Land for generations.

Ehhhh...the Jews and the Arabs have been fighting since Moses led them out of Egypt.

 

[LowlyPropCapt]

John P:

Thanks. Respect doesn't mean consensus. This has been a nice break from the usual "my dad can beat up your dad and Mesa sucks" banter on FI. Not saying that isn't fun... Or true!

:beer:

Ehhhh...the Jews and the Arabs have been fighting since Moses led them out of Egypt.

One small problem with that. Egyptians are not Arab.

Don't be so fast to draw the line at religion or ethnicity. There are Arab Jews, Jewish Palestinians, Christian Palestinians, Israeli Christians, Coptic Christians who support the Pan-Arab Ba'athist regime in Syria, even a funny little sect called the Druse. There are lots of other sects too... It isn't as simple as the press tries to make it appear.

Other than the medieval wars of conquest (the crusades and the Moorish invasion of the Iberian Peninsula) Christians, Jews and Muslims got along reasonably well for much of history. Mohammed himself is said to have been hidden in a Christian monestary during his time. All of these groups used to consider each other "people of the book" stemming from one common Ancestor, Abraham (and his sons Isaac and Ishmael).

It is still my assertion that the real problems did not begin in the modern age until religion was hijacked and mass marketed for narrower political gains.

 

[Fred Rogers]

John P:

Thanks. Respect doesn't mean consensus. This has been a nice break from the usual "my dad can beat up your dad and Mesa sucks" banter on FI. Not saying that isn't fun... Or true!

:beer:

I'll second that! (don't forget GoJets though, they suck too)

It is still my assertion that the real problems did not begin in the modern age until religion was hijacked and mass marketed for narrower political gains.

I think the cure for the problem lies within the cause. You have a group of people who have been dealt a bad hand in life. Frustrated with their inablity to get out of the situation, they are prayed upon by opportunists (religion hijackers) with an agenda.

I believe the solution is to help the general populace improve their situation. This is impossible to do with war, agressive action, or the military. This is a lesson we need to learn before we get into another conflict with Iran. They have a large populace which is at the very least, indifferent to the US. Let's see what happens with economic sanctions and broad spectrum threats. While we throw our weight around to make ourselves feel powerful, we will alienate any segment of the Iranian population which has a favorable view of us, and infuriate those that dislike us. Add a power hungry / fanatacal Iranian leadership and you've got yourself a mess.

Arrogance has no place in foreign policy.

 

[doug_or]

4$$, 4$$, t1tty t1tt1es, 4$$ and t1tt1es.
4$$, 4$$, t1tty t1tt1es, 4$$ and t1tt1es.
4$$, 4$$, t1tty t1tt1es, 4$$ and t1tt1es.
4$$, 4$$, t1tty t1tt1es, 4$$ and t1tt1es.
4$$, 4$$, t1tty t1tt1es, 4$$ and t1tt1es.