What do they want? A restoration of at least a pan-Arab [URL=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caliphate]caliphate[/URL] across all the orignal territories under the first caliphate. Its arguable that al-Quaeda and others will not be appeased until a pan-global caliphate is created.
So, the topic of negotiation is removal of western theologies, principles, and institutions from all middle eastern, north African, and southern Europe to be replaced by the Muslim Caliphate and Shari'a law.
ahh, Anlakshok makes the right suggestion, find out why they hate us.
Its realitivly simple to do. There was a man, an egyptian, His name was Sayyid Qutb. He lived in america for about three years. During this time he wrote many letters. He was disillusioned by what he saw in the United States, part of it was the endemic racisism. If he had come to the US now that part of his comdemnation of the US, but other parts remain.
A perfect example occured from his own writings on his trip to america aboard a passenger liner. From his first encounter with a "tall think and half naked young girl who asked if it was okay for her to be his guest in his room, and when he responded that his room was equipped with only one bed, the girl replied a single bed can hold two people" appalled he closed the door in her face, "I heard her fall on the wooden floor outside and realized that she was drunk, I instantly thanked god for defeating my temptation and allowing me to stick to my morals"
He writes diatrabe after diatrabe about the openess of american sexuality at the time.. yes, the openess of american sexuality, in 1950!! in fact its one of his major hotbutons. He sees the information in the Kinsey report as the biggest sign of the complete corruptedness of the United States and the danger it presents to the islamic world. Loose women, homosexuality run rampent, divorces out of control. Worse yet, the destruction of the notion that the soul itself had endless value, and that one should not debase ones soul.
Why is the writings of one repressed Egyptian important?he himself became a martyr against the egyptian goverment. but most importanlty he wrote the [I]Ma'alim fi al-Tariq[/I] known in english as Milestones. This is the seminal work guiding the Jhyadist movement today. It was this book that started Osama Binladen on the path he is on today.
Anlashoks wonderfull line of "dont give me that ridiculous 'They hate our freedom' bullshit" is especially telling. Its telling of the fact that the left is not willing to read the words of our opponents and take them at face falue. Here are comments from the Ayatolla Khomeini shortly after taking power.
"Yes we are reactionaries, and you are enlightened intellectuals: you intellectuals do not want us to go back 1,400 years." "you who want freedom, freedom for everything, the freedom of parties, you who want all the freedoms, you inteccectuals, freedom that will corrupt our youth, freedom that will pave the way for the oppressor, freedom that will drag our nation to the bottom"
another Khomeni comment
"Islam says: whatever good there is exists thanks to the sword and the shadow of the sword! People cannot be made obedient except with the sword! The sword is the key to paradise, which can be only opened for holy warriors!"
BinLaden once ordered his younger brothers to never associate with a close friend of theirs after he showed up with a porn mag to one of their little gatherings. If you send them Paris Hilton, ironicly enough you might end up making more Jyhadists then just dropping a bomb on them. One of Qutbs biggest complaints is about the mixing of the sexes for god sakes!
[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Tyvar [/i]
[B]If you send them Paris Hilton, ironicly enough you might end up making more Jyhadists then just dropping a bomb on them. [/B][/QUOTE]
But then we wouldnt have to deal with her, so i'm ok with that.
Meh, there's more to it than that. We've been screwing around with their politics for decades now. We preach the right to freedom and self-determination, but clandestinely work for overthrowing people we don't like, even to the point of assassination. We support governemnts that are as anti-freedom as you can get as long as it is profitable for us to do so. The hypocrisy involved is stunning.
Most people in that region could not care less what we do over here, except when it interferes in their lives. Then what we do here is held up as an example of our inherent "evil" and used to recruit others to fight against us.
It's much more due to our messing around with their internal politics than who's boffing whom across an ocean from them.
Either way, however, there is no real dialogue here. We're not doing anything to try to make the situation better. Rice flat-out lied when she said they were at least as aggressive as Clinton when it came to anti-terrorism. Until 9/11, the whole thing was not even on a back burner, but dumped in a tupperware dish and stuck under the leftover pizza box in the fridge. Show me [b]any[/b] example of [b]any[/b] action taken by the Bush II administration to act against terrorists before 9/11.
[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by AnlaShok [/i]
[B]Meh, there's more to it than that. We've been screwing around with their politics for decades now. We preach the right to freedom and self-determination, but clandestinely work for overthrowing people we don't like, even to the point of assassination. We support governemnts that are as anti-freedom as you can get as long as it is profitable for us to do so. The hypocrisy involved is stunning.[/B][/QUOTE]
Too true, and this has been going on for a long time..
[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by AnlaShok [/i]
[B]Meh, there's more to it than that.[/B][/QUOTE]
Where are you getting that from? That's not what is espoused by any of the radical Islamist groups.
You may be projecting your [i]own[/i] bias against past western aggressions onto [i]their[/i] motivations. While its noble to address past wrongs and try not to make the same mistakes, seeking to address the wrong problem will not solve anything.
[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by bobo [/i]
[B]Where are you getting that from? That's not what is espoused by any of the radical Islamist groups.
You may be projecting your [i]own[/i] bias against past western aggressions onto [i]their[/i] motivations. While its noble to address past wrongs and try not to make the same mistakes, seeking to address the wrong problem will not solve anything. [/B][/QUOTE] Obviously this is just a stupid cultural problem.
The economic situation in many of these countries has nothing to do with it. No sirree!
Also in related news, legal residents US residents, don't count on having [url=http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-oe-ackerman28sep28,0,2039999.story?coll=la-news-comment-opinions][i]Habeas Corpus[/i][/url] anymore.
[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by AnlaShok [/i]
[B]Meh, there's more to it than that. We've been screwing around with their politics for decades now. We preach the right to freedom and self-determination, but clandestinely work for overthrowing people we don't like, even to the point of assassination. We support governemnts that are as anti-freedom as you can get as long as it is profitable for us to do so. The hypocrisy involved is stunning.
Most people in that region could not care less what we do over here, except when it interferes in their lives. Then what we do here is held up as an example of our inherent "evil" and used to recruit others to fight against us.
It's much more due to our messing around with their internal politics than who's boffing whom across an ocean from them.
Either way, however, there is no real dialogue here. We're not doing anything to try to make the situation better. Rice flat-out lied when she said they were at least as aggressive as Clinton when it came to anti-terrorism. Until 9/11, the whole thing was not even on a back burner, but dumped in a tupperware dish and stuck under the leftover pizza box in the fridge. Show me [b]any[/b] example of [b]any[/b] action taken by the Bush II administration to act against terrorists before 9/11. [/B][/QUOTE]
Anlashok now your the one going out and parroting the dogma of the left without basis in fact. Qutb started his works and beliefs way even before ARAMCO was started, hell back when the brits were the colonial masters of the region.
Much of whats going on isnt just backlashes of americans meddiling in politics, its a backlash against modernity and its notions of politics ITSELF.
Zawahiri has at timed openly oposed the Muslim Brotherhood because of its idea for a pan islamic goverment that is at least somewhat modern, in a book called [I]Bitter Harvest[/I] he attacks the brotherhood and declairs them [I]takfir[/I] or apostate, he demands that they publicly renounce "constitutions and man-made laws, democracy, elections and parliament"
Whats ironic is many of the islamic orginizations consider each other to not be "true muslims" once they run out of jews, christians, hindus, budists and athiests to kill, they will turn on each other pretty quick.
As for the lack of Bush II response, well
considering he had been in office for 232 days, and due to democractic intransience had only managed to get half a cabinet appointed, and the heads of both the CIA and FBI were clinton men, and as everybody knows Tenant kept his job even after 9/11, primarily because Alec station of the CIA was the only goverment group that had been seriously tracking Al Queda from early on, and amazingly enough even with ye old Clarke running around Alec Station had ONE FBI agent on hand Clarkes comments aside early on the only person in the FBI who seemed to give a damn was John O neil. As for the FBI, Mueller was on day three of director when the attacks happend. Can you see why things may be pretty messed up?
If it was just about economics, why are there so many Saudis taking up jyhad? even if they dont work they get the equivilent of 40,000 bucks a year at least from oil revenue, they are a fairly prosperous bunch, so why are so many turning to radical islam? What we are seeing is a flat out rejection of materalism. You should read the recruting tracks comming out of Iraq and Afghanistan, which speaks of and describes actual miracles happening, and that the laws of western science are just straw in the wind before the faith of the righteous.
And the actual amount of meddling weve done in the middle eastern nations (compared to say south and latin america) is fairly mild. Yeah we were tied up in Iran pretty bad, but the rest of the region has been other peoples spheres. Egypt had been at one time a soviet client state, Syria always was, Libya, Morocco, ditto the French had proclaimed Algeria as their backyard even after it declared independance.
While you can say that groups like Hezbulla and Hamas are the result of american support of Israel, how does this apply to other groups like the muslim brothers? or some of the saudi groups which predate americas position on the world stage? Salafist groups run by the same ideology and a fairly straight order of succession have been running around butchering people since before the "dawn" of american imperialism in the Spanish American war.
I think the things that even people like Scheuer and his book are overlooking, is the actual consitant stream of criticism over time. Even if the US withdraws all forces from the middle east, cuts off support to Israel and other nations, hell even if we removed the entire jewish population of Israel and gave em Florida, The complaints would continue.
The thing is that Scheuer and others dont want to admit is that the US would have to take several actions it CAN NOT TAKE, and the Islamicists will not concede these points such as:
1. The return of Spain and Portugal to Islamic control under Islamacist regiemes (and thus the implementation of Sharia there)
2. Break of US diplomatic relations with Russia, end of economic ties with that nation in order to put pressure on Russia to abandon all territories with muslim inhabitants
3. Breaking of diplomatic and economic ties with India and even forcing india to ruled by an islamic regieme
4. Breaking of diplomatic and economic Ties with China till china abandons Xijhuan provice.
the continued existance of any of the these complaints is sufficent grounds to continue an anti american Jyhad. However all 4 of them are points that the US goverment can NOT capitulate on.
In one way your right, the current problem is the result of US foreign policies, but they are policies in many cases the US has not only the right, but in the case of Spain and Portugal the duty (under our NATO obligation) to maintain!
Comments
So, the topic of negotiation is removal of western theologies, principles, and institutions from all middle eastern, north African, and southern Europe to be replaced by the Muslim Caliphate and Shari'a law.
Let the compromise begin.
Its realitivly simple to do. There was a man, an egyptian, His name was Sayyid Qutb. He lived in america for about three years. During this time he wrote many letters. He was disillusioned by what he saw in the United States, part of it was the endemic racisism. If he had come to the US now that part of his comdemnation of the US, but other parts remain.
A perfect example occured from his own writings on his trip to america aboard a passenger liner. From his first encounter with a "tall think and half naked young girl who asked if it was okay for her to be his guest in his room, and when he responded that his room was equipped with only one bed, the girl replied a single bed can hold two people" appalled he closed the door in her face, "I heard her fall on the wooden floor outside and realized that she was drunk, I instantly thanked god for defeating my temptation and allowing me to stick to my morals"
He writes diatrabe after diatrabe about the openess of american sexuality at the time.. yes, the openess of american sexuality, in 1950!! in fact its one of his major hotbutons. He sees the information in the Kinsey report as the biggest sign of the complete corruptedness of the United States and the danger it presents to the islamic world. Loose women, homosexuality run rampent, divorces out of control. Worse yet, the destruction of the notion that the soul itself had endless value, and that one should not debase ones soul.
Why is the writings of one repressed Egyptian important?he himself became a martyr against the egyptian goverment. but most importanlty he wrote the [I]Ma'alim fi al-Tariq[/I] known in english as Milestones. This is the seminal work guiding the Jhyadist movement today. It was this book that started Osama Binladen on the path he is on today.
Anlashoks wonderfull line of "dont give me that ridiculous 'They hate our freedom' bullshit" is especially telling. Its telling of the fact that the left is not willing to read the words of our opponents and take them at face falue. Here are comments from the Ayatolla Khomeini shortly after taking power.
"Yes we are reactionaries, and you are enlightened intellectuals: you intellectuals do not want us to go back 1,400 years." "you who want freedom, freedom for everything, the freedom of parties, you who want all the freedoms, you inteccectuals, freedom that will corrupt our youth, freedom that will pave the way for the oppressor, freedom that will drag our nation to the bottom"
another Khomeni comment
"Islam says: whatever good there is exists thanks to the sword and the shadow of the sword! People cannot be made obedient except with the sword! The sword is the key to paradise, which can be only opened for holy warriors!"
BinLaden once ordered his younger brothers to never associate with a close friend of theirs after he showed up with a porn mag to one of their little gatherings. If you send them Paris Hilton, ironicly enough you might end up making more Jyhadists then just dropping a bomb on them. One of Qutbs biggest complaints is about the mixing of the sexes for god sakes!
[B]If you send them Paris Hilton, ironicly enough you might end up making more Jyhadists then just dropping a bomb on them. [/B][/QUOTE]
But then we wouldnt have to deal with her, so i'm ok with that.
Most people in that region could not care less what we do over here, except when it interferes in their lives. Then what we do here is held up as an example of our inherent "evil" and used to recruit others to fight against us.
It's much more due to our messing around with their internal politics than who's boffing whom across an ocean from them.
Either way, however, there is no real dialogue here. We're not doing anything to try to make the situation better. Rice flat-out lied when she said they were at least as aggressive as Clinton when it came to anti-terrorism. Until 9/11, the whole thing was not even on a back burner, but dumped in a tupperware dish and stuck under the leftover pizza box in the fridge. Show me [b]any[/b] example of [b]any[/b] action taken by the Bush II administration to act against terrorists before 9/11.
[B]Meh, there's more to it than that. We've been screwing around with their politics for decades now. We preach the right to freedom and self-determination, but clandestinely work for overthrowing people we don't like, even to the point of assassination. We support governemnts that are as anti-freedom as you can get as long as it is profitable for us to do so. The hypocrisy involved is stunning.[/B][/QUOTE]
Too true, and this has been going on for a long time..
[B]Meh, there's more to it than that.[/B][/QUOTE]
Where are you getting that from? That's not what is espoused by any of the radical Islamist groups.
You may be projecting your [i]own[/i] bias against past western aggressions onto [i]their[/i] motivations. While its noble to address past wrongs and try not to make the same mistakes, seeking to address the wrong problem will not solve anything.
[B]Where are you getting that from? That's not what is espoused by any of the radical Islamist groups.
You may be projecting your [i]own[/i] bias against past western aggressions onto [i]their[/i] motivations. While its noble to address past wrongs and try not to make the same mistakes, seeking to address the wrong problem will not solve anything. [/B][/QUOTE] Obviously this is just a stupid cultural problem.
The economic situation in many of these countries has nothing to do with it. No sirree!
Also in related news, legal residents US residents, don't count on having [url=http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-oe-ackerman28sep28,0,2039999.story?coll=la-news-comment-opinions][i]Habeas Corpus[/i][/url] anymore.
[B]Meh, there's more to it than that. We've been screwing around with their politics for decades now. We preach the right to freedom and self-determination, but clandestinely work for overthrowing people we don't like, even to the point of assassination. We support governemnts that are as anti-freedom as you can get as long as it is profitable for us to do so. The hypocrisy involved is stunning.
Most people in that region could not care less what we do over here, except when it interferes in their lives. Then what we do here is held up as an example of our inherent "evil" and used to recruit others to fight against us.
It's much more due to our messing around with their internal politics than who's boffing whom across an ocean from them.
Either way, however, there is no real dialogue here. We're not doing anything to try to make the situation better. Rice flat-out lied when she said they were at least as aggressive as Clinton when it came to anti-terrorism. Until 9/11, the whole thing was not even on a back burner, but dumped in a tupperware dish and stuck under the leftover pizza box in the fridge. Show me [b]any[/b] example of [b]any[/b] action taken by the Bush II administration to act against terrorists before 9/11. [/B][/QUOTE]
Anlashok now your the one going out and parroting the dogma of the left without basis in fact. Qutb started his works and beliefs way even before ARAMCO was started, hell back when the brits were the colonial masters of the region.
Much of whats going on isnt just backlashes of americans meddiling in politics, its a backlash against modernity and its notions of politics ITSELF.
Zawahiri has at timed openly oposed the Muslim Brotherhood because of its idea for a pan islamic goverment that is at least somewhat modern, in a book called [I]Bitter Harvest[/I] he attacks the brotherhood and declairs them [I]takfir[/I] or apostate, he demands that they publicly renounce "constitutions and man-made laws, democracy, elections and parliament"
Whats ironic is many of the islamic orginizations consider each other to not be "true muslims" once they run out of jews, christians, hindus, budists and athiests to kill, they will turn on each other pretty quick.
As for the lack of Bush II response, well
considering he had been in office for 232 days, and due to democractic intransience had only managed to get half a cabinet appointed, and the heads of both the CIA and FBI were clinton men, and as everybody knows Tenant kept his job even after 9/11, primarily because Alec station of the CIA was the only goverment group that had been seriously tracking Al Queda from early on, and amazingly enough even with ye old Clarke running around Alec Station had ONE FBI agent on hand Clarkes comments aside early on the only person in the FBI who seemed to give a damn was John O neil. As for the FBI, Mueller was on day three of director when the attacks happend. Can you see why things may be pretty messed up?
If it was just about economics, why are there so many Saudis taking up jyhad? even if they dont work they get the equivilent of 40,000 bucks a year at least from oil revenue, they are a fairly prosperous bunch, so why are so many turning to radical islam? What we are seeing is a flat out rejection of materalism. You should read the recruting tracks comming out of Iraq and Afghanistan, which speaks of and describes actual miracles happening, and that the laws of western science are just straw in the wind before the faith of the righteous.
And the actual amount of meddling weve done in the middle eastern nations (compared to say south and latin america) is fairly mild. Yeah we were tied up in Iran pretty bad, but the rest of the region has been other peoples spheres. Egypt had been at one time a soviet client state, Syria always was, Libya, Morocco, ditto the French had proclaimed Algeria as their backyard even after it declared independance.
While you can say that groups like Hezbulla and Hamas are the result of american support of Israel, how does this apply to other groups like the muslim brothers? or some of the saudi groups which predate americas position on the world stage? Salafist groups run by the same ideology and a fairly straight order of succession have been running around butchering people since before the "dawn" of american imperialism in the Spanish American war.
I think the things that even people like Scheuer and his book are overlooking, is the actual consitant stream of criticism over time. Even if the US withdraws all forces from the middle east, cuts off support to Israel and other nations, hell even if we removed the entire jewish population of Israel and gave em Florida, The complaints would continue.
The thing is that Scheuer and others dont want to admit is that the US would have to take several actions it CAN NOT TAKE, and the Islamicists will not concede these points such as:
1. The return of Spain and Portugal to Islamic control under Islamacist regiemes (and thus the implementation of Sharia there)
2. Break of US diplomatic relations with Russia, end of economic ties with that nation in order to put pressure on Russia to abandon all territories with muslim inhabitants
3. Breaking of diplomatic and economic ties with India and even forcing india to ruled by an islamic regieme
4. Breaking of diplomatic and economic Ties with China till china abandons Xijhuan provice.
the continued existance of any of the these complaints is sufficent grounds to continue an anti american Jyhad. However all 4 of them are points that the US goverment can NOT capitulate on.
In one way your right, the current problem is the result of US foreign policies, but they are policies in many cases the US has not only the right, but in the case of Spain and Portugal the duty (under our NATO obligation) to maintain!