Roots of Middle-Eastern Terrorism

[Dissident Dan]

Why do we have anti-West terrorism stemming from the Middle East? Why do they have hatred for Westerners?

I have heard the idea that it's becase they hate us for being great and successful and sugar and spice and are jealous to the point of nausea. I think that this is nothing but a simplistic, ego-serving excuse to not think critically about what's going on and perhaps come to conclusions that one won't like.

I think that there are many reasons, and not all Middle-Eastern, Arab, and Muslim terrorists have the same reasons. I think that the actions of the USA instigated much. I also think that the ridiculous propoganda broadcast on Muslim television and spewed forth in schools is a major causal factor. I don't think that a few sentences, or even a few paragraphs can do the complexity of the situation justice.

How about you?

 

[balkan]

well... i agree... but you're not going to convince anyone...

"everything is because they are evil"... it's that simple for many people and it is a convenient explanation that doesn't demand any introspectivity or responsibility from the people stating it, so they're going to stick with it no matter what...

 

[member 5645]

There's TONS of reasons, but the reasons for the US are the simplest of them all.

Reason for the USA:
Middle East, depending on the case right or wrong, Israel as A> an extension of USA B> Israel as a scapegoat for all of their problems C> Israel/USA (since they are one in the same in many minds) as an assualy on muslims/Islam.

Something that we do not see here, nor should we try to , is all action against any mainly muslim country is somehow an extension of the Palestinian/Israel conflict. I can't tell you the number of Arabs I have spoken with online that view the Iraq and Afghan wars as just an extension of the Israel/Palestine conflict, which in itself is used, right or wrong, as a war 'fought by all muslims' by proxy.

This is the basis for it.
There are many reasons,including transferance (sp?), that the middle east takes a poor look at our Allies.

 

[member 5645]

well... i agree... but you're not going to convince anyone...

"everything is because they are evil"... it's that simple for many people and it is a convenient explanation that doesn't demand any introspectivity or responsibility from the people stating it, so they're going to stick with it no matter what...

introspection is overratted, as morality is relative.
All information is readily available on issue, it's simply comes down to a moral issue. The ironic thing is that those who say "we are equal to them" (speaking of suicide bombers and the like, in an attempt to show our 'hypocrisy'), are actually saying "it's us or them", for at that point morality has been equaled and self preservation takes an even stronger hand.

 

[kat]

Why do we have anti-West terrorism stemming from the Middle East? Why do they have hatred for Westerners?

I have heard the idea that it's becase they hate us for being great and successful and sugar and spice and are jealous to the point of nausea. I think that this is nothing but a simplistic, ego-serving excuse to not think critically about what's going on and perhaps come to conclusions that one won't like.

I think that there are many reasons, and not all Middle-Eastern, Arab, and Muslim terrorists have the same reasons. I think that the actions of the USA instigated much. I also think that the ridiculous propoganda broadcast on Muslim television and spewed forth in schools is a major causal factor. I don't think that a few sentences, or even a few paragraphs can do the complexity of the situation justice.

How about you?

How does this play with Terrorism eminating from the same sources that's directed towards non-westerns? Maybe there's so much introspection and some are so busy flogging their own country men that they are missing the "whole picture".

 

[Adam]

Why do we have anti-West terrorism stemming from the Middle East? Why do they have hatred for Westerners?

No Middle Easterners I know hate "Westerners". (Please see https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=12028 about why that term is friggin stupid.)

I have heard the idea that it's becase they hate us for being great and successful and sugar and spice and are jealous to the point of nausea.

Change "great and successful" with "delusional". The rates of violent crimes are so high in the USA. So many homeless and hungry. So many wars started, countries invaded and bombed. So much economic power devoted to materialism and pointless frivolity. I'm reminded of the naked emperor riding through town showing off his new gear.

I think that there are many reasons, and not all Middle-Eastern, Arab, and Muslim terrorists have the same reasons.

Personally, I'm curious about the American terrorists. What are their reasons?

I think that the actions of the USA instigated much.

Yep. It's the constant economic and diplomatic influence, the occasional invasions, the regular bombing campaigns, the assumption that the USA has the right to simply lob a few Tomahawks into other nations...

I also think that the ridiculous propoganda broadcast on Muslim television and spewed forth in schools is a major causal factor.

Is it any more ridiculous than the ridiculous propaganda broadcast on USA television and spewed forth in schools there?

 

[Dissident Dan]

Change "great and successful" with "delusional". The rates of violent crimes are so high in the USA. So many homeless and hungry. So many wars started, countries invaded and bombed. So much economic power devoted to materialism and pointless frivolity. I'm reminded of the naked emperor riding through town showing off his new gear.

We are not discussing the quality of the state of USAmerican society. I was just mentioning the rational that many people use to explain terrorist actions. I do not agree with them at all.

Yep. It's the constant economic and diplomatic influence, the occasional invasions, the regular bombing campaigns, the assumption that the USA has the right to simply lob a few Tomahawks into other nations...

I think that you are mostly correct here. We have done many things that are legitimate grievances to people of other countries, Middle Eatern, Central American, South American, or otherwise. The problems of our actions are compounded by the coverage that many of these events receive in Islamic countries, which is done at a level of bias that makes the media bias here appear to have a pH of about 6.9.

Sometimes our actions are just wrong. Sometimes, they are just viewed negatively, and we are too naive to take into account the ways that our actions will be viewed. We have insolated ourselves, with no real idea of what people in the rest of the world are thinking.

Is it any more ridiculous than the ridiculous propaganda broadcast on USA television and spewed forth in schools there?

It's not even a question. On Palestinian TV, they regularly demonize Israelis as child-killers and what not. Our media does some amount of "us vs. them" rhetoric, but it's not nearly on the level that they have over there.

 

[JohnDubYa]

We have invaded and bombed many countries over the past fifty years. The US has garnered a lot of hatred among people of many nations, right or wrong.

Given this argument, terrorists from countries all over the world would be attacking the US and her interests on a regular basis. But only in the Middle East is such hatred turned into freakish, unreasoned, mindless, cowardly violence.

So Adam, why isn't there a large aboriginal terrorist group in Australia? Why aren't they blowing up banks? They certainly have a gripe, do they not?

People will always have gripes against the US, no matter which side the US chooses. There will always be hatred of the US as long as it takes part in international issues. To think that the way to solve terrorism is to remove the reasons for hating us is pointless.

No, the fault lies 100% with the terrorists. They don't have to intentionally kill innocent people, but they do anyway.

 

[Adam]

It's not even a question. On Palestinian TV, they regularly demonize Israelis as child-killers and what not. Our media does some amount of "us vs. them" rhetoric, but it's not nearly on the level that they have over there.

Part one of an interesting article I found ages ago:

Israeli Textbooks and Children's Literature Promote Racism and Hatred Toward Palestinians and Arabs
Date:15/05/2001


Israeli school textbooks as well as children's storybooks, according to recent academic studies and surveys, portray
Palestinians and Arabs as "murderers," "rioters," "suspicious," and generally backward and unproductive. Direct delegitimization and negative stereotyping of Palestinians and Arabs are the rule rather than the exception in Israeli schoolbooks.

Professor Daniel Bar-Tal of Tel Aviv University studied 124 elementary, middle- and high school textbooks on grammar and Hebrew literature, history, geography and citizenship. Bar-Tal concluded that Israeli textbooks present the view that Jews are involved in a justified, even humanitarian, war against an Arab enemy that refuses to accept and acknowledge the existence and rights of Jews in Israel.

"The early textbooks tended to describe acts of Arabs as hostile, deviant, cruel, immoral, unfair, with the intention to hurt Jews and to annihilate the State of Israel. Within this frame of reference, Arabs were delegitimized by the use of such labels as 'robbers,' 'bloodthirsty,' and 'killers,'" said Professor Bar- Tal, adding that there has been little positive revision in the curriculum over the years.

Bar-Tal pointed out that Israeli textbooks continue to present Jews as industrious, brave and determined to cope with the difficulties of "improving the country in ways they believe the Arabs are incapable of."

Hebrew-language geography books from the 1950s through 1970s focused on the glory of Israel's ancient past and how the land was "neglected and destroyed" by the Arabs until the Jews returned from their forced exile and revived it "with the help of the Zionist movement."

"This attitude served to justify the return of the Jews, implying that they care enough about the country to turn the swamps and deserts into blossoming farmland; this effectively delegitimizes the Arab claim to the same land," Bar-Tal told the Washington Report. "The message was that the Palestinians were primitive and neglected the country and did not cultivate the land."

This message, continued Bar-Tal, was further emphasized in textbooks by the use of blatant negative stereotyping which featured Arabs as: "unenlightened, inferior, fatalistic, unproductive and apathetic." Further, according to the textbooks, the Arabs were "tribal, vengeful, exotic, poor, sick, dirty, noisy, colored" and "they burn, murder, destroy, and are easily inflamed."

Textbooks currently being used in the Israeli school system, says Bar-Tal, contain less direct denigration of Arabs but continue to stereotype them negatively when referring to them. He pointed out that Hebrew-as well as Arabic-language textbooks used in elementary and junior high schools contain very few references either to Arabs or to Arab-Jewish relations. The coordinator of a Palestinian NGO in Israel said that major historical events hardly get a mention either.

"When I was in high school 12 years ago, the date '1948' barely appeared in any textbooks except for a mention that there was a conflict, Palestinians refused to accept a U.N. solution and ran away instead," said Jamal Atamneh, coordinator of the Arab Education Committee in Support of Local Councils, a Haifa-based NGO. "Today the idea communicated to schoolchildren is basically the same: there are winners and losers in every conflict. When they teach about 'peace and co-existence,' it is to teach us how to get along with Jews."

Atamneh explained that textbooks used by the nearly one million Arab Israelis (one-fifth of Israel's population) are in Arabic but are written by and issued from the Israeli Ministry of Education, where Palestinians have no influence or input.

"Fewer than 1 percent of the jobs in the Education Ministry, not counting teachers, are held by Palestinians," Atamneh said. "For the past 15 years, not one new Palestinian academic has been placed in a high position in the ministry. There are no Palestinians involved in preparing the Arabic-language curriculum [and] obviously, there is no such thing as affirmative action in Israel."

In addition, there are no Arabic-language universities in Israel. Haifa University, Atamneh points out, has had a steady 20 percent Arab student population for the past 20 years. "How can that figure have remained the same after all these years when the population in the north [of Israel] has grown to over 50 percent Arab?"

 

[Adam]

Part two of an interesting article I found ages ago:

Answering his own question, Atamneh rattles off statistics that reflect excellent high school scores among Arab students which he contrasts to their subsequent lower-than-average performance in Hebrew-language college entrance exams given by the state.

"No major scholarships have ever been awarded to an Arab; there are no dorms for Arabs and no college-related jobs or financial aid programs. They justify this legal discrimination by the fact that we do not serve in the army. There are numerous blatant and official methods used to keep Palestinian Arabs out of the universities."

Absence of Palestinian Identity in Schoolbooks

Dr. Eli Podeh, lecturer in the Department of Islamic Studies and Middle East History at the Hebrew University in Jerusalem, says that while certain changes in Israeli textbooks are slowly being implemented, the discussion of Palestinian national and civil identity is never touched upon.

"Passages from 'experts' about the existence of a Palestinian identity were introduced, but in general it appeared that the
textbook authors were not eager to adopt it," said Dr. Podeh, adding that "the connection between Palestinians in Israel and Arabs in Arab countries is not discussed. Especially evident is the lack of a discussion on the orientation of Palestinians to the [occupied] territories.
"While new textbooks attempt to correct some of the earlier distortions, these books as well contain overt and covert fabrications," said Dr. Podeh. "The establishment has preferred-or felt itself forced-to encourage the cover-up and condemn the perplexity."

One Israeli public high school student told the Washington Report that the contents of the schoolbooks and the viewpoints expressed by some teachers indeed have a lasting negative effect on youngsters' attitudes toward Palestinians.

"Our books basically tell us that everything the Jews do is fine and legitimate and Arabs are wrong and violent and are trying to exterminate us," said Daniel Banvolegyi, a 17-year-old high school student in Jerusalem.

"We are accustomed to hearing the same thing, only one side of the story. They teach us that Israel became a state in 1948 and that the Arabs started a war. They don't mention what happened to the Arabs-they never mention anything about refugees or Arabs having to leave their towns and homes," said Banvolegyi.

Banvolegyi, who will be a high school senior this fall, and then will be drafted into the Israeli army next summer, said he argues with his friends about what he regards as racism in the textbooks and on the part of the teachers. He pointed out a worrisome example of how damaging the textbooks and prevailing attitudes can be.

"One kid told me he was angry because of something he read or discussed in school and that he felt like punching the first Arab he saw," said Banvolegyi. "Instead of teaching tolerance and reconciliation, the books and some teachers' attitudes are increasing hatred for Arabs."

Banvolegyi spoke about his schoolmates who, he says, "are dying to go into combat and kill Arabs. I try to talk to them but they say I don't care about this country. But I do care and that's why I tell them peace and justice are the only ways to work things out."

Racist Israeli Upbringing

Considering what the schools have to offer, both Banvolegyi and Atamneh agree that the oral tradition is one of the few ways to get the story straight.

"Unfortunately Israeli children's books are not an option for promoting equality in this society," said Atamneh, citing a book
written by Israeli writer/researcher Adir Cohen called An Ugly Face in the Mirror.

Cohen's book is a study of the nature of children's upbringing in Israel, concentrating on how the historical establishment sees and portrays Arab Palestinians as well as how Jewish Israeli children perceive Palestinians. One section of the book was based on the results of a survey taken of a group of 4th to 6th grade Jewish students at a school in Haifa. The pupils were asked five questions about their attitude toward Arabs, how they recognize them and how they relate to them. The results were as shocking as they were disturbing:

Seventy five percent of the children described the "Arab" as a murderer, one who kidnaps children, a criminal and a terrorist. Eighty percent said they saw the Arab as someone dirty with a terrifying face. Ninety percent of the students stated they believe that Palestinians have no rights whatsoever to the land in Israel or Palestine

Cohen also researched 1,700 Israeli children's books published after 1967. He found that 520 of the books contained humiliating, negative descriptions of Palestinians. He also took pains to break down the descriptions:

Sixty six percent of the 520 books refer to Arabs as violent; 52 percent as evil; 37 percent as liars; 31 percent as greedy; 28 percent as two-faced; 27 percent as traitors, etc.

Cohen points out that the authors of these children's books effectively instill hatred toward Arabs by means of stripping them of their human nature and classifying them in another category. In a sampling of 86 books, Cohen counted the following descriptions used to dehumanize Arabs: Murderer was used 21 times; snake, 6 times; dirty, 9 times; vicious animal, 17 times; bloodthirsty, 21 times; warmonger, 17 times; killer, 13 times; believer in myths, 9 times; and a camel's hump, 2 times.

Cohen's study concludes that such descriptions of Arabs are part and parcel of convictions and a culture rampant in Hebrew literature and history books. He writes that Israeli authors and writers confess to deliberately portraying the Arab character in this way, particularly to their younger audience, in order to influence their outlook early on so as to prepare them to deal with Arabs.

"So you can see that if you grew up reading or studying from these books, you'd never know anything else," said Atamneh.

"But in the case of Palestinians, we grow up 500 meters away from what used to be a town or village and is now a Jewish settlement. Our parents and grandparents tell us all about it; endlessly they talk about it. It's the only way."

Maureen Meehan is a free-lance journalist who covers the West Bank and Jerusalem.

 

[Adam]

Given this argument, terrorists from countries all over the world would be attacking the US and her interests on a regular basis. But only in the Middle East is such hatred turned into freakish, unreasoned, mindless, cowardly violence.

1) Why do you call it unreasoned?

2) Why do you call it mindless?

3) Why do you call it cowardly?

4) Actually it happens around the world.

So Adam, why isn't there a large aboriginal terrorist group in Australia? Why aren't they blowing up banks? They certainly have a gripe, do they not?

Because we in Australia do not roam around blowing up their towns, killing civilians by the thousands, and chanting about it on TV so everyone feels warm and fuzzy about their patriotism. Yes, it certainly happened in the past. Australia has some very nasty history. But we, unlike some, grew out of it.

No, the fault lies 100% with the terrorists. They don't have to intentionally kill innocent people, but they do anyway.

No, the fault likes 100% with the USA government and military. They don't have to intentionally kill innocent people, but they do anyway.

 

[loseyourname]

We have invaded and bombed many countries over the past fifty years. The US has garnered a lot of hatred among people of many nations, right or wrong.

Given this argument, terrorists from countries all over the world would be attacking the US and her interests on a regular basis. But only in the Middle East is such hatred turned into freakish, unreasoned, mindless, cowardly violence.

So Adam, why isn't there a large aboriginal terrorist group in Australia? Why aren't they blowing up banks? They certainly have a gripe, do they not?

People will always have gripes against the US, no matter which side the US chooses. There will always be hatred of the US as long as it takes part in international issues. To think that the way to solve terrorism is to remove the reasons for hating us is pointless.

No, the fault lies 100% with the terrorists. They don't have to intentionally kill innocent people, but they do anyway.

I'd like to respond to this. I'm largely Cherokee, and if anyone has a grievance against the United States, it is me and my people. The Cherokee nation did absolutely everything asked of it by the US government, even going so far as to adopt democracy and American culture, and was still brutally displaced and many of its people murdered. The oppression suffered for many years is far worse than anything the US has evey imposed on any other people.

But I am not vengeful. I do not feel that an act of revenge is ever the right thing to do. I also do not feel that killing innocent people - with no military objective - is ever the right thing to do. The only think I truly hate about this country is the fear that is instilled in us by the government and by media. As far as I'm concerned, both John Ashcroft and John Stossel are the antichrist. Fear is never a healthy thing, and terror is never the right way to invoke action. Regardless of US involvement in the middle east, no organization has any right to attack civilian targets of no military value in a nation that is not at war.

As for the Arabic hatred of the US seen in the middle east, there is one reason for it, and all other reasons stem from this. The state of Israel would not exist right now were it not for a last-second endorsement from Harry Truman and the continued support of the United States.

 

[JohnDubYa]

Because we in Australia do not roam around blowing up their towns, killing civilians by the thousands, and chanting about it on TV so everyone feels warm and fuzzy about their patriotism.

Terrorist attacks against the US by Islamic fundamentalists goes back before we attacked Iraq. Why did we bomb Libya?

Yes, it certainly happened in the past. Australia has some very nasty history. But we, unlike some, grew out of it.

So aborigines live like everyone else in Australia? Or do many of them live in conditions much like in Palestine? If anything, Australia has treated its aborigines far far worse than the US has treated Arabs. Do you agree?

Read the following and tell us that this shouldn't provide aborigines with reason to terrorize the non-aboriginal population (using your logic):

_____________

Aboriginal Children in Australia

Health

Aborigines make up less than one percent of the total population in Australia. On every index, Aborigines fare worse than other Australians. Most Aboriginal families face health problems due to a lack of health care. They are at disadvantage in health standards, life expectancy, and infant mortality. Health risks and lack of proper health care place Aboriginal children at extreme risk for many diseases. In 1996, eighty percent of the children affected with pneumonia were Aborigine (Antonios 1997). Four times as many Aborigines have diabetes as compared to statistics of non-indigenous Australians. Maltrunition is also common among Aborigines. The government supports Aboriginal medical services in all states since such poor health standards exist in the culture. Nonindigenous health is also a relevant issue in Australia.

Living Conditions

Another factor affecting Aboriginal children are poor living conditions. Thirteen percent of these families do not have running water and thirty four percent of Aboriginal communities water supply is below the standard set by the government (Antonios 1997; Human Rights Commision 1997). On average, Aboriginal people have twice as many people dwelling and almost three times the number of people per room as other Australians (Brown 1980). A child living in these conditions grows up in less than adequate, overcrowded housing, where family pressures are great.

Physical

Neither the state and its policies, nor the non-Aboriginal community, provide a positive environment for Aboriginal children (Brown 1980). Conflict with White institutional authority and police authority is a part of Aboriginal life. Attitudes toward police are less positive among Aboriginal children (Rigby & Black 1993). However, Aboriginal children attending rural schools expressed more positive attitudes toward parents and other forms of authority.

Education

With the poverty and the absence of bare necessities that Aboriginal children face daily, it is no surprise that educational standards are extremely low. Thirty three percent of Aboriginal children complete schooling compared to the national average of seventy seven percent (Antonios 1997; Australian Bureau of Statistics). As a result of little or no education, thirty eight percent of indigenous people are unemployed and their income in sixty eight percent of the total population (Antonios 1997; Socialist Party of Australia 1995). The lack of opportunity for many Aboriginal children in the job market may lead to a life of crime.

http://www.tulane.edu/~rouxbee/kids98/australia5.html
_________________________

Gee, the US is such a bad, bad country. We should be more like Australia.

 

[Entropy]

No, the fault likes 100% with the USA government and military. They don't have to intentionally kill innocent people, but they do anyway.

Very true. This is why I'm a pacifist. I think if we just leaved the Middle East alone a lot of terrorist wouldn't bother us anymore. We can't fix these problems by trying to kill everyone we think is a bad guy because there will always be bad guys.

I don't think we shouldn't try to help nations. I just don't think we should help them through murdering others.

 

[Adam]

Terrorist attacks against the US by Islamic fundamentalists goes back before we attacked Iraq. Why did we bomb Libya?

Good question. Why did you?

So aborigines live like everyone else in Australia? Or do many of them live in conditions much like in Palestine? If anything, Australia has treated its aborigines far far worse than the US has treated Arabs. Do you agree?

In our past, Australia has done to its aborigines basically what the USA did to its American indians. Very similar. In fact, it was only a few decades ago that they got the right to vote and be recognised as citizens. However, the Australian government does not fly over areas inhabitated mainly by aborigines and bomb the hell out of them.

The average living conditions for aborigines here is lower than for caucasians, but higher than my own personal conditions, in all the areas mentioned in a government survey I saw recently. As I believe I have mentioned previously, I live a somewhat Spartan life.

Read the following and tell us that this shouldn't provide aborigines with reason to terrorize the non-aboriginal population (using your logic):

Please outline in point form your idea of logic, because so far you're just not making sense.

 

[studentx]

I think the reason is the media. The west has an obsession with finding their own flaws and showing them to the world, often exaggerated.
This probably isn't the reason why Islamic terror began against the US, but the reason why it isn't being fought properly.
Many see the flaws, focus on them and not on terrorism. You can't get rid of the terrorists by fixing the flaws, the media won't show your improvements but only the flaws, and there are and always will be flaws.

 

[Dissident Dan]

I think the reason is the media. The west has an obsession with finding their own flaws and showing them to the world, often exaggerated.

Are you living in the same world that I am? Here in the U.S.A., we like to toot our own horns incessantly. We even find a way to do it in examining terrorist attacks. We don't acknowledge how our own foreign policies have screwed things up. How many USAmericans do you know who know that we deposed a democratically-elected government in Chile and replaced it with a dictator?

I'm not trying to just rag on the USA here, but we overlook our own shortcomings. Whenever something bad happens, people here think that the fault must lie entirely on other people. The greatest admission of fault that I've seen is the "intelligence failures" being focused on in the 9-11 congressional investigation. Before that, it was how screwed up the 2000 elections were. Before that, it was how our president could possibly think to get a blow job in the White House. Every time you hear or read an analysis of what makes terrorists tick, people say that it's because their religion's that way or because they hate us because we're so good. It's ridiculous. There's no asking if perhaps we should change our foreign policy to not aggravate foreign people.

 

[kat]

It's ridiculous. There's no asking if perhaps we should change our foreign policy to not aggravate foreign people.

I'm not sure it's any more ridiculous then claiming that it's our foriegn policy while neglecting to question why they are also terrorizing other countries who's foreign policies are not parallel with ours. It'd be nice to make an excercise of comparisions between outher countries who have terrorist attacks and their foriegn policies.

 

[pelastration]

Are you living in the same world that I am? Here in the U.S.A., we like to toot our own horns incessantly. We even find a way to do it in examining terrorist attacks. We don't acknowledge how our own foreign policies have screwed things up. How many USAmericans do you know who know that we deposed a democratically-elected government in Chile and replaced it with a dictator?

I'm not trying to just rag on the USA here, but we overlook our own shortcomings. Whenever something bad happens, people here think that the fault must lie entirely on other people. The greatest admission of fault that I've seen is the "intelligence failures" being focused on in the 9-11 congressional investigation. Before that, it was how screwed up the 2000 elections were. Before that, it was how our president could possibly think to get a blow job in the White House. Every time you hear or read an analysis of what makes terrorists tick, people say that it's because their religion's that way or because they hate us because we're so good. It's ridiculous. There's no asking if perhaps we should change our foreign policy to not aggravate foreign people.

Good post.
Another point is that US seems to have a James Bond 007-type of license to kill of all who are doing something against US-interests. When others react in a similar way that's easily called terrorism.

 

[JohnDubYa]

Are you living in the same world that I am? Here in the U.S.A., we like to toot our own horns incessantly. We even find a way to do it in examining terrorist attacks. We don't acknowledge how our own foreign policies have screwed things up. How many USAmericans do you know who know that we deposed a democratically-elected government in Chile and replaced it with a dictator?

Well, *I* knew. And you knew. And there is a commission right now to make the documents regarding the Pinochet ordeal publically accessible. That wouldn't happen in a lot of countries. That probably wouldn't happen in most.

We probably have a larger percentage of our population trashing our own country than any other country.

We now know the Swiss bankrolled the Nazis during WWII. Where are the posts by Swiss condemning the actions of their own country?

The Japanese government has never acknowledged the atrocities they committed during WWII.

What about the British? How many Brits in here acknowledge their role in the Middle East mess?

How many Australians come in here and belabor their own country over its treatment of aborigines?

The United States gets bashed all over for its role in Viet Nam, but Australia is hardly ever mentioned. They fought there too.

By and large, the only country that gets bashed is America, and mostly by Americans. So this idea that Americans sweep their problems under the rug is hogwash. We have a free press that has no problem with printing stories harmful to the US.

 

[Dissident Dan]

You and I both know that at least 80% of USAmericans don't know who Pinochet is.

This thread is not about trying to win points for countries. It is not about bashing particular countries. At least where I live, you get dirty looks for saying disparaging things about "America". Please don't try to give the impression that the USA is filled with antipatriots.

My point is not that the USA is bad or that everything is the USA's fault. My point is just that people fail to recognize that our foreign policies have had negative repurcussions. In this thread, we are talking about the repercussions known as terrorism. I do NOT claim that it is all the USA's fault, but trying to say that we are 100% or even 90% innocent victims is false and will do nothing to diminish the problems.

-----------------------------------------------------------------

Adam,

Yeah, the dehumanizing crap exists on both sides. In both cases, it perpetuates the violence. Such ethnocentric indoctrination must be rooted out wherever it exists-Palestinian, Jewish, or other.

I don't believe that it is a wise policy to take a side and defend kneejerkingly. Personally, I do not have a belief that either side is the "good side" or the "bad side". I do not care to make a judgment on which side is "better".

-----------------------------------------------

I think that it would be a wise strategy to change the policies of the USA, France, Britain, etc. to be less hawkish and opportunistic, put a lot of pressure on schools, textbook publishers and writers, and television in the Middle East to be more tolerant, and provide nonpaternal, developmental aid to poorer countries to help them be self-sustaining and prosperous, which would allow us to look like the good guys.

Violence has a tendency to perpetuate violence. When young people see violence in the streets, and then they have master propogandists taking advantage of the anger that these situations evoke, you have a dangerous situation. Western foreign policy blunders and misdeeds, current eye-for-an-eye violence, radical and intolerant propoganda, and religious fundamentalism all mix together to create the problem that we call terrorism.

 

[loseyourname]

This thread is not about trying to win points for countries. It is not about bashing particular countries. At least where I live, you get dirty looks for saying disparaging things about "America". Please don't try to give the impression that the USA is filled with antipatriots.

Where in Florida do you live? I happen to live in a really rich, mostly republican neighborhood, but most of the LA area is filled with these "antipatriots."

 

[Adam]

Give the public someone to fear and hate.

Again, the USA has done this remarkably well. As in the novel 1984 by George Orwell, they even change their supposed enemy every now and then, depending on their desires and foreign trade requirements, and even then it continues to work just fine. For a while it might be Iran, then suddenly they support Iran and bomb Iraq; for a while it's the USSR, then it's China and North Korea. Who's next? An interesting point is not just that this policy has been so successful in the USA, but the slight twist applied by that nation's governing bodies. They combine a long-term enemy of immense power with a short-term enemy of negligable power. The long-term enemy of great power provides the USA with a socio-political background of on-going fear and suspicion, against which they may easily paint themselves as the "good guys". That long-term foe must remain in place for the good of the USA's self-congratulatory publicity, and to justify such things as military spending and intrusion into the sovereignty of other nations. The short-term foes of lesser power, such as Iraq and Somalia, provide an opportunity for the USA to flex its military muscle now and again, thus demonstrating their power to other nations and reassuring their own public, contributing to the self-congratulatory publicity already in place due to the long-term supposed struggle. And of course there is what some have called the "military-industrial complex", which is nothing more than a bit of quid pro quo between large defence contractors and elected representatives; contractors contribute money to electoral campaigns, and when that representative is in office, he or she assigns government contracts to the companies which supported him or her; and then, as a new representative is in office, he or she bombs some foreign nation to demonstrate their own resolve and to provide a reason for their military spending.

What we have is a state declaring in indefinite war against an indefinite enemy for an indefinite duration, with indefinite objectives. The perfect backdrop for affecting changes at home and overseas, for those doing it.

Then allegations without evidence against a small, limited power (Iraq), and a limited war.

Obviously targeting Islamic nations and groups will cause polarisation around the world.

Overall, this is a deliberate polarisation of the world which does what? Increases tensions, raises the likelihood of aggression, and gives more excuse for the actions causing the polarisation, thus it is a vicious (although intended) circle.

 

[JohnDubYa]

You and I both know that at least 80% of USAmericans don't know who Pinochet is.

They probably don't know who Dick Cheney is either. :)

This thread is not about trying to win points for countries. It is not about bashing particular countries. At least where I live, you get dirty looks for saying disparaging things about "America". Please don't try to give the impression that the USA is filled with antipatriots.

If you go into any country and start bashing it, you are going to get dirty looks. Care to name one if you disagree?

Everything is relative. When you complain about Americans, it is understood that you are comparing Americans to people from other countries, and that we are somehow deficient in the comparison.

ALL countries tend to be forgiving of their own mistakes. In this regard, the US is no worse than others, and in most cases is far better. So why bash the US in this regard?

When you own a Chevy, you tend to talk up Chevies. That is basic human nature. But by and large Americans own up to their countries own sordid pasts in many regards. That is not true of most countries, even the European countries.

My point is not that the USA is bad or that everything is the USA's fault. My point is just that people fail to recognize that our foreign policies have had negative repurcussions.

I think people would be more willing to talk about the foreign policy if it wasn't for the terrorist actions. My feeling is that I am always willing to hear the complaints of the downtrodden and, in many cases, desire the US to intervene in their behalf... UNTIL they start supporting terrorist activity. At that point they can forget my sympathy.

And I think a lot of Americans feel as I do. By "understanding" their plight, you are giving terrorists all the excuse they need to commit more terror. To them, their acts of violence got them notice and sympathy for their cause. To me, this is a very bad way of dealing with terrorists. In fact, this is why they engage in terrorist activities in the first place.

 

[JohnDubYa]

I think that it would be a wise strategy to change the policies of the USA, France, Britain, etc. to be less hawkish and opportunistic...

What are the details? Do you support Isreal in its fight against terrorists. And if not, how do you make the policy change without letting the terrorists think that their violent actions caused your change in sympathy?

put a lot of pressure on schools, textbook publishers and writers, and television in the Middle East to be more tolerant

I wish you luck. Any pressure you apply will be translated by fundamentalists as the US trying to force Western values (and religion) on the Islamic community.

You can't win this way. They have no interest in making the US look good. And there is no action you can take (other than throwing Israel to the wolves) that will not be spun into anti-US propaganda.

and provide nonpaternal, developmental aid to poorer countries to help them be self-sustaining and prosperous, which would allow us to look like the good guys.

Don't we already do that more than any country in the world? Do we get thanked for it at all?

 

[studentx]

Are you living in the same world that I am? Here in the U.S.A., we like to toot our own horns incessantly. We even find a way to do it in examining terrorist attacks. We don't acknowledge how our own foreign policies have screwed things up. How many USAmericans do you know who know that we deposed a democratically-elected government in Chile and replaced it with a dictator?

I'm not trying to just rag on the USA here, but we overlook our own shortcomings. Whenever something bad happens, people here think that the fault must lie entirely on other people. The greatest admission of fault that I've seen is the "intelligence failures" being focused on in the 9-11 congressional investigation. Before that, it was how screwed up the 2000 elections were. Before that, it was how our president could possibly think to get a blow job in the White House. Every time you hear or read an analysis of what makes terrorists tick, people say that it's because their religion's that way or because they hate us because we're so good. It's ridiculous. There's no asking if perhaps we should change our foreign policy to not aggravate foreign people.

I wasnt just talking about the dirty wars you have thought, or the screwed up elections. I am talking about other things as well, the American way of life. Sex crimes, adultering, mtv (non cloaked women on there!). Do you know anything about Islam?

Adultering is an absolute evil to muslims. They would rather have the entire region annihilated than live in a society of adulterers. Same goes for MTV.
All the crimes you committed in other lands arent necessarily crimes against Islam, but your way of life is. If America was an Islamic land with muslim lifestyle, the middle east wouldn't care what dirty wars you fight and Iraq would have embraced you. This conflict with terrorists IS religious and should be dealt with in that way,

My point is not that the USA is bad or that everything is the USA's fault. My point is just that people fail to recognize that our foreign policies have had negative repurcussions.

Didnt Iraqs foreign policy also have negative repurcussions for Iraq? Didnt Spains foreign policy have negative repurcussions?
What if terrorists attack Holland, then Hollands foreign policy also has negative repurcussions.
Fighting terrorism makes you a target for terrorists, and fighting terrorism does have negative repurcussions but doesn't mean the foreign policy is wrong. So terrorism has increased, is this Americas fault? Its the terrorists fault ,they have no excuse to kill innocent people.

 

[balkan]

No, the fault likes 100% with the USA government and military. They don't have to intentionally kill innocent people, but they do anyway.

arhh... a 100% migth be a little too strong... definitely there are faults on both sides, but not 100% in any case...
Your 100% are just as far out as johndubyas 100%...

there are legitimally people in those countrys who program the grieveant people into becoming terrorists... there are also islamic extremists (like there are christian extremists) who think it's all about the other side being of another religion...

 

[Adam]

arhh... a 100% migth be a little too strong... definitely there are faults on both sides, but not 100% in any case...
Your 100% are just as far out as johndubyas 100%...

That was sort of my point.

 

[balkan]

That was sort of my point.

sorry, m8... but it came off as if you meant it... be carefull

 

[Dissident Dan]

Everything is relative. When you complain about Americans, it is understood that you are comparing Americans to people from other countries, and that we are somehow deficient in the comparison.

ALL countries tend to be forgiving of their own mistakes. In this regard, the US is no worse than others, and in most cases is far better. So why bash the US in this regard?

Please don't be defensive, and please don't try to make this discussion about me. As I said, I am not trying to bash the USA. I am just trying to point out to all those that think that we are holy-holy and the fault likes 100% with the Muslims that we have our share of problems and fault, as well. That is why I am talking about shortcomings of US foreign policy. The foreign policy of Lithuania appears to be irrelevant at this point. I also know nothing of it, so I cannot speak about it.

As I said, other Western countries such as Britain also share blame. Germany's actions that instigated and continued WW2 obviously have an effect on the current situation. Before that, the French's insistence on reparations led to Germany's actions, so their foreign policy shares blame, too. Of course, those are OLD foreign policies; I'm sure that they've changed since then. I would speak more on their modern foreign policy, but I am not too knowledgeable on that.

And I think a lot of Americans feel as I do. By "understanding" their plight, you are giving terrorists all the excuse they need to commit more terror. To them, their acts of violence got them notice and sympathy for their cause. To me, this is a very bad way of dealing with terrorists. In fact, this is why they engage in terrorist activities in the first place.

Understanding is a mental process. Terrorists are not telepathic. Now, I'm not saying to say that we should go out and say that all terrorist actions that we think that their actions are justified. If you think that I am saying such, you are wrong. It is hard to defeat this enemy unless you understand it. You have to know what their motivations, recruitment tools, histories, etc. are. By understanding what people in the Middle East are thinking and why, we are less apt to dehumanize them. Right now, we have both sides dehumanizing the other and saying that the other wants us dead, which evokes lashing out on both sides. This is an untenable situation. It is not a solution. By recognizing the positive qualities and hardships of other people from whom the terrorists spring, we are less apt to ridiculously-simplistic, self-serving analyses that just perpetuate violence.

We should recognize that there are problems with Western foreign policy that are not helping the situation. By acknowledging that we need to make some changes and actually making changes that provide benefits for Westerners, Muslims, and Jews, we can improve our image and reduce hostility.

Adultering is an absolute evil to muslims. They would rather have the entire region annihilated than live in a society of adulterers. Same goes for MTV.
All the crimes you committed in other lands arent necessarily crimes against Islam, but your way of life is. If America was an Islamic land with muslim lifestyle, the middle east wouldn't care what dirty wars you fight and Iraq would have embraced you. This conflict with terrorists IS religious and should be dealt with in that way,

I know that there are people who say this. But very few people would use this as a reason to hate the United States. I bet that even the people who use that societal rhetoric became haters for other reasons--in other words, it's just used as fuel on the already-burning fire.

This is the type of simplistic analysis that I am admonishing against. It is not simply a clash of cultures or religions. There is an interesting excerpt in the book, Why Do People Hate America? that I will post soon to provide some insight into why people are angry with us.

 

[balkan]

Adultering is an absolute evil to muslims. They would rather have the entire region annihilated than live in a society of adulterers. Same goes for MTV.
All the crimes you committed in other lands arent necessarily crimes against Islam, but your way of life is. If America was an Islamic land with muslim lifestyle, the middle east wouldn't care what dirty wars you fight and Iraq would have embraced you. This conflict with terrorists IS religious and should be dealt with in that way,

you should go read the koran... unlike our holy book they have a saying: "your religion for you, my religion for me"

What are the details? Do you support Isreal in its fight against terrorists. And if not, how do you make the policy change without letting the terrorists think that their violent actions caused your change in sympathy?

This is easy: help them kill and enprison the terrorists...
At the same time:
Make Israel stop bombing buildings and places filled with other innocent people (trying to kill single individuals with missiles in a crowd full of refular people is not the way to resolve any problem.), in the process of doing it.
Make israel accept the creation of a palestinian state... once in a while they pull seven settlements out of the palestinian areas, but not long after, 20 new ones are set up...

1) Don't we already do that more than any country in the world? 2) Do we get thanked for it at all?

1) no... not compared to USA's GNP...
2) yes, you do get thanked for it, and receive coorporation from most of those countrys aswell... to add, many of those countrys are required to change their policies in order to get the money at all...
PLUS:
USA receives financial aid from other countrys as well, but i don't see anyone thanking them...

 

[Dissident Dan]

From Why Do People Hate America?:

Chris Toensing, the highly respected editor of the Middle East Report, describes a 1998 encounter with a waiter whom he met in the quiet Egyptian port of Suez. "As I sipped tea in his cafe", writes Toensing,

he pulled up a chair to chat, as Egyptians often do to welcome strangers. Not long into our amiable repartee, he looked me in the eye. "Now, I want to as you a blunt question", he said. "Why do you Americans hate us?" I raised my eyebrows, so he explained what he meant and, in doing so, provided some insights into why others hate us.

Numerous United Nations resolutions clearly define Israel's occupations of the West Bank, Gaza Strip, and East Jerusalem as illegal. Yet Israel receives 40 percent of all US foreign aid, more the [sic] United States' annual foreign aid total, more than $3.5 billion annually in recent years, roughly $500 per Israeli citizen. (The average Egyptian wil ear $656 this year). Israel uses all of this aid money to buld new settlements on Palestinian land and to buy US-made warplanes and helicopter gunships. "Why do Americans support Israel when Israel represses Arabs?" the waiter asked. He went on: Evidence clearly shows the US-led economic sanctions on Iraq punish Iraqi civilians while hardly touching Sadam Hussein's regime. A UNICEF study in 1999 backed him up, saying that 500,000 children under age 5 would be alive today if sanctions did not exist. SUrely Iraqi children are not enemies of international peace and security, the waiter expostulated, even if their ruler is a brutal dictator. The United States presses for continued sanctions because Hussein is flouting United United Nations resolutions, but stands by Israel when it has flouted UN Resolution 242 (which urges Israel to withdraw from land occupied in the 1967 War) for over 30 yeras. Arabs and Muslims suffer from these and other US policies.

The only logic the young Egyptian could see was that American was pursuing a worldwide war against Islam, in which the victims were overwhelmingly Muslim. America is a democracy, he concluded, so Americans must hate Muslims to endorse this war.

Toesing suggest to the young Egyptian that while his premises may be correct, his conclusion is false. The United States may be a democracy, but Americans do not have much input on US foreign policy, the do not choose the allies and adversaries of their governmetn. Americans do not vote of foreign aid agenda, there are no referenda on whether Israel should or should not be supported in all cases or whether the US government should veto this or that UN resolution. Americans have a fundamental sense of fairness, says Toensing, but they rarely have accurate information about the effect of their country's foreign polices [sic (this "sic" was inserted by me, Dan, unlike the other one)]. So, to what use, the young Egyptian could legitimately have asked, do you put your democracy and freedom?

Now, before anyone starts assuming anything about me, let me make somethign clear. I am not advocating any particular actions or making any judgment with regard to foreign policy in this post. My opinion is not stated or implied in this post. I am merely relaying information that provides a view to what people in the Middle East think.

 

[Dissident Dan]

Don't we already do that more than any country in the world? Do we get thanked for it at all?

Actually, we provide a much smaller percent of our GDP to foreign aid than all Western European countries, Canada, Australia, and Japan.

http://www.its.caltech.edu/~kai/foreignaid.html

http://www.newsbatch.com/globalization.htm

In the United States economic development aid is provided increasingly as loans through the Agency for International Development and the Export-Import Bank, which finances the export of U.S. capital goods and agricultural products. A large proportion of U.S. aid goes to Israel, Egypt, and developing countries. In 1998, U.S. foreign aid amounted to $14.1 billion (less than 1% of the federal budget) and the share of the gross domestic product (GDP) for foreign aid has decreased significantly during the past decade. . In comparison with other developed countries, U.S. foreign aid has much lower priority. There is very little public support for an increase in foreign aid. In Congress, Democrats are more likely than Republicans to support proposals to increase foreign aid.

http://www.cepr.net/Economic_Reporting_Review/Apr_1_02.htm

These articles discuss U.S foreign aid and trade policy in the
context of President Bush's visit to the summit on development in
Monterrey, Mexico and several other nations in Latin America. The
article by Bumiller refers to a commitment by President Bush to
increase foreign aid by 50 percent as of 2006. The inflation-adjusted
increase, which is a more meaningful number, is approximately 36
percent. Since much of the discussion of foreign aid has focused on
shares of GDP, it is worth noting that under the Bush proposal, the
share of U.S. GDP devoted to foreign aid would rise from
approximately 0.1 percent in 2002 to 0.12 percent in 2006, as is
noted in the Weiner article.

 

[devious_]

Okay... I'm an American Muslim living in the Middle-East, so I thought I'd say something.

Here are a few of the main reasons that cause many Middle-Easterners to dislike the West:
1. Support of Israel and Zionism (read: blindly supporting an enemy of Islam)
2. Cultural invasions (read: implementing anti-Islamic cultural innovations into the Arab/Islamic world, like revealing clothing, premarital sex, 'slutty' song videos, etc.)
3. Military invasions (read: invading countries, like Iraq and Afghanistan, and killing thousands of Muslims)
4. Control over Arabic governments (eg: using Kuwait, Qatar, Saudia Arabia(?) and Jordan(?) as launch pads and military bases for the recent attack on Iraq). Many Arabs think of the 'Arab leaders' as cowards and traitors. Perhaps this is something not many Westerners know of, but it does exists.

NOT because:
1. "They hate our way of life."
2. "They hate our freedom."
3. "They are jealous of our success."
4. "They are uncivilized and/or evil."

Just my two cents.

 

[JohnDubYa]

Originally Posted by JohnDubYa
Adultering is an absolute evil to muslims. They would rather have the entire region annihilated than live in a society of adulterers...

Balkan, please get your quotations straightened out. I never wrote the above.