Middle Eastern Politics: Terror Like a Beehive

[Ivan Seeking]

I have a long time friend who grew up in Iran. At about age 17 he escaped from Iran when he was tagged to be a spy for the government - these guys usually live about a week. He has been an American for over twenty years now and most of his family is here, but he still has family in Iran including his parents. This is what he told me this morning. This is how he explained the Middle East situation to his sons.

[quote approximate]Terrorism is like a beehive. It usually just sits there with bees swarming all around, and every now and then a bee may venture out and sting someone, but for the most part the bees stay near the hive. They have their own problems and bee politics to contend with.

If the bees are causing problems and you need to deal with them, walk around the hive carefully and maybe poke the hive gently with stick, but you want to keep the bees where they are. You want them contained in the hive.

Bush went after the hive with baseball bat.

Note that like many of us, he has never objected to our invasion of Afghanistan.

Then he said exactly what Tsu read to me last night from the Pulitzer prize winning author who exposed the Iraqi Prisoner abuse scandal:

Bush has no idea what he has done.

So, there's a statement from two Americans who understand the politics of the Middle East.

Edit: I almost forgot, he added: Bush is the first President [in his lifetime] who can't understand Middle Eastern politics; [expletives] [he] can't even remember the names.

 

[dekoi]

That first statement is extremely powerful. I am actually writing it down as I type.


Anyways, it is important to distinguish between a truly 'bad' President and one who has been transformed into being "bad". Most of the populace which "hates" Bush has had their reality constructed by the media, causing them to truly believe that he has caused tremendous crime. Many things in this world are politics -- we should not look past that. Think about Fahrenheit 9/11; how many fallible statements does Moore make in that movie? However, we continue to listen and believe Moore, as if he is our authority.


Do not mistake my statement; I myself do not like Bush as President, which is why i agree with the first quotation. However, my above statement relates to a wide range of subjects.

 

[wasteofo2]

That first statement is extremely powerful. I am actually writing it down as I type.


Anyways, it is important to distinguish between a truly 'bad' President and one who has been transformed into being "bad". Most of the populace which "hates" Bush has had their reality constructed by the media, causing them to truly believe that he has caused tremendous crime. Many things in this world are politics -- we should not look past that. Think about Fahrenheit 9/11; how many fallible statements does Moore make in that movie? However, we continue to listen and believe Moore, as if he is our authority.


Do not mistake my statement; I myself do not like Bush as President, which is why i agree with the first quotation. However, my above statement relates to a wide range of subjects.

Excuse me? I don't think anyone with any alnalytical ability would take Michael Moore, or the media, or anything 100% seriously. How exactly has the media over-exagerated Bush's failings and turned him into something he's not? If anything I'd say that the media hasn't nearly been critical enough of Bush's idiocy, cause frankly, it's unbelievable someone as stupid as him is President in the first place. Everyone knew he was an idiot before 9/11, but he was just a comical idiot, the kind of guy who makes up words like "misunderestimate" and can't eat a pretzel without choking, just a footnote in history, someone that history students would look back and laugh at and say "Wow, I can't BELIEVE he was President!". Now he's an idiot who thinks he's on a holy crusade from god, is doing everything 100% fine, all the ends justify all the means, and has no idea how much the whole world hates us because of him. Hell, he can't even acknowledge a single policy mistake he's made when asked.

 

[Tigers2B1]

Ivan Seeking --- He said "terrorism" is a beehive so don't bother the "beehive" ---- am I understanding you correctly?

 

[Tigers2B1]

And to avoid the obvious response -- yes I know you said you can "poke them" if there are issues with terrorists. (Not that I understand what "poking them" means or why it's OK to poke them.) It seems that what you're saying is that "terrorists" -- being "terrorists" really have the intention of commiting "terror," but just right now, well, they're busy with other matters ---- so, best not upset them. Is that your contention?

 

[tumor]

Bush is or is not an idiot,but he is usefull idiot.
Long after his presidency we will read in the history books that war in the M.East was his idea, yeah right!

 

[Ivan Seeking]

Ivan Seeking --- He said "terrorism" is a beehive so don't bother the "beehive" ---- am I understanding you correctly?

Did you read the post? He said, if you need to deal with terrorism you have to be smart about it. Bush has never been smart about. That was his point. Of course, we could just nuke the Middle East, but assuming we don't we need skilled diplomacy and a big hammer; not just a hammer. Anyone can bang on things and make a mess.

Neither Tsu or I have ever seen Fahrenheit 911. Assumptions made are very telling.

 

[Tigers2B1]

Did you read the post? He said, if you need to deal with terrorism you have to be smart about it. Bush has never been smart about. That was his point.

Ivan Seeking -

I'm just trying to understand your friend's point. Seriously. I really don’t understand what his point is yet.

How does he suggest you be "smart about it" – since these "terrorists" have, as yet unrealized, intentions of doing harm to us? He says to "poke them." Exactly what does that mean – did he tell you? And to work with the bee analogy used by your friend ----did he tell you, after explaining what "poke them" means, why "the hive" wouldn’t display the 'hive-mind' and attack en mass once "bee politics" have been resolved?

So again, I ask the question -- It seems that what you're saying is that "terrorists" -- being "terrorists" really have the intention of committing "terror," but just right now, well, they're busy with other matters ---- so, best not upset them. Is that your contention?

 

[Ivan Seeking]

Based on my understanding of his opinions...

...we might start with only attacking the attacker when attacked. Next, we might try building alliances. The beehive is not Iraq, it is the entire Middle East. The ramifications of our actions will destablize the region tremendously for decades to come; especially if and when we leave. It is not that we took him out, it is how we did it. There were other ways to manage Saddam.

Because of Bush's never ending list of lies, everyone keeps forgetting

Saddam did not attack us!

How does this look to a young Middle Eastern man or woman who is told that we are the evil ones? It was just us against Islam, of course. Now it makes perfect sense to an impressionable, angry young Muslim.

The reference to Fahrenheit 911 was in response to dekoi.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

To continue the metaphor, invading Afghanistan was poking the nest with a stick. We had every right.

 

[studentx]

America is the hive, it was attacked with a baseball bat. What America does now is just a natural response, i mean theyre bees, the terrorists should have known better right? Bush and America, theyre bees, totally out of the equation of blame.
And whatever America does, its just bee stings! Iraq is just a bee that ventured out a bit, they usually stay close to the hive.

And remember,
BUSH did not attack the terrorists before 911!

 

[russ_watters]

If you go after the beehive with a big can of raid insead of poking it with a stick, you'll solve the problem completely.

 

[studentx]

But then you destroy the honey russ. And that sweet smell

 

[NateTG]

Somewhat off topic

I was thinking about terrorism in the US on Wednesday, and was reflecting on the fact that most of the terrorist events that have taken place in the US are from domestic sources - like the Oaklahoma City federal building, Anthrax by mail, the Weathermen, the KKK, or the Unabomber. Similarly, the terrorist events in Russia are generally related to the Russia-Chechnya issue, terrorism in Israel primarily has to do with the Palestinian issues, or the terrorism in England that has to do with problems in Ireland. Terrorism is typically a local or domestic phenomenon, and, moreover, terrorist organizations are typically formed in response to a particular issue.

Al Quaeda is unusual in that it's cause is not so narrowly defined. Instead of being about the interaction between two specific players, it was ostensibly formed as a reaction to 'Western' influence in the Middle East, and not just the Soviet Union in Afghanistan, Israel in Palestine (or vice versa), or the US in Saudi Arabia. Moreover, Al Quaeda has shown more logistical and political sophistication that most terrorist organizations.

That said, I think that many of the problems associated with Iraq have much more to do with how the US went to war, and has prosecuted the war and its aftermath than with the fact that the US invaded Iraq per se, and, moreover, that much of the US policy and Bushco rhetoric has played to Al Quaeda's strengths. Furthermore, it seems like the US military is "double plus ungood" as a a
"liberation" army; the British forces seem to be doing much better.

The comparison of Vichy Iraq and a provoked beehive is probably appropriate, but I don't think it's really a good description of terrorism in general. Moreover, comparing the situation in Iraq to a beehive doesn't really provide for any good suggestions on how to resolve the crisis there.

 

[tumor]

America is the hive, it was attacked with a baseball bat. What America does now is just a natural response, i mean theyre bees, the terrorists should have known better right? Bush and America, theyre bees, totally out of the equation of blame.
And whatever America does, its just bee stings! Iraq is just a bee that ventured out a bit, they usually stay close to the hive.

And remember,
BUSH did not attack the terrorists before 911!

What America and "coalition of willing" did they went with a sledghammer after bees.That is what idiots do.
America could have achieved much, much more with diplomacy,embargos and covert operations a"la mossad.
But I gues sheeps in USA ,Canada,UK,Australia need daily dose of real time blood and gore sitting in front TV and fattenning themselfs on s*** foods.

By the way what you mean Iraq ventured to far ?(what a BS!)
Iraq was contained and militairly so weak that even boy scouts would win over Iraqis.

 

[omin]

Terrorists today in the most signficant physical context today is soley the defense of a people being brutalized by American leadership.

 

[daveed]

What America does now is just a natural response, i mean theyre bees, the terrorists should have known better right?

but then you say

Iraq is just a bee that ventured out a bit,

and then

BUSH did not attack the terrorists before 911!

IRAQ DOES NOT MEAN THE TERRORISTS. you don't go invading people like that

 

[tumor]

Terrorists today in the most signficant physical context today is soley the defense of a people being brutalized by American leadership.

You mean of course brutalized by us western world.
Even "peacfull" Canadians have Iraqi blood on their hands.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

If you go after the beehive with a big can of raid insead of poking it with a stick, you'll solve the problem completely.

So you want more wars. Whom shall we attack next?

Should we have a reason to attack...whomever, or do we just want to create more hate?

 

[Ivan Seeking]

America is the hive, it was attacked with a baseball bat. What America does now is just a natural response, i mean theyre bees, the terrorists should have known better right? Bush and America, theyre bees, totally out of the equation of blame.
And whatever America does, its just bee stings! Iraq is just a bee that ventured out a bit, they usually stay close to the hive.

And remember,
BUSH did not attack the terrorists before 911!

So, you still believe Saddam attacked us? Granted, Bush and Cheney continue this lie but in fact we now know better. You see, this is where the repetition of lie becomes a truth. By telling us the same Bush lie over and over again, people like yourself get the facts mixed up. There is no significant connection between Saddams Iraq and 911. This is what the new generation of terrorists will wave like a flag: We attacked Iraq for no reason.

 

[studentx]

Where did i say Saddam attacked us? I said Bush didnt attack the terrorists before 911.
The lie you believe is that Iraq is a mess because of the US. Iraq is a mess because of the carbombs. Carbombs can make any country a mess, there is no cure.
If carbombs started going off daily in Afghanistan, you would probably get angry at the US for having invaded that country.

I believe you put no blame whatsoever on terrorists, because they are the invisible enemy. You just see them as bees responding naturally, and the US is to blame because they should have known that terrorism is a beehive. DOH

 

[daveed]

that doesn't even make sense. you just called iraq the bee that ventured out, and the US's invasion valid.

what are you talking about. it is because we invaded without proper reason that people are so pissed off at us.

 

[tumor]

So you want more wars. Whom shall we attack next?

Should we have a reason to attack...whomever, or do we just want to create more hate?

Winter is coming, what we going to do for entertainment?

 

[studentx]

that doesn't even make sense. you just called iraq the bee that ventured out, and the US's invasion valid.

what are you talking about. it is because we invaded without proper reason that people are so pissed off at us.

With Iraq, i meant the war in Iraq.
The beehive analogy calls 911 a bee sting. In the same way you could call the war in Iraq a bee sting and America the hive.

 

[daveed]

the invasion of afghanistan was the response to 911
as has been reiterated countless times, iraq had nothing to do with 911. the war in iraq has no plausible foundation.

 

[studentx]

the invasion of afghanistan was the response to 911
as has been reiterated countless times, iraq had nothing to do with 911.

As has been reiterated countless times, i know Iraq wasnt behind 911.

the war in iraq has no plausible foundation.

That is a matter of opinion, and not what i was discussing.

If 911 is a bee sting, then we can call anything a bee sting, including the war in Iraq, and we can call anything the hive. This means the baseball bat is never a valid option.
The best action for the insurgents is not to use the baseball bat on the hive (the US) like they are doing now, but poke them. They are not handling the situation appropriately and deserve what's coming to them.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

They will remember Abu-Ghraib

http://www.guardian.co.uk/gall/0,8542,1211872,00.html

 

[studentx]

How do you know?

 

[kat]

They will remember Abu-Ghraib

http://www.guardian.co.uk/gall/0,8542,1211872,00.html

Yes, but probably less for what you'd like them to remember it for then what they've been experiencing for the last several decades.

The Horrors of Abu Ghraib
A report on the human cost of Saddam’s
policies by the Foreign & Commonwealth Office
**Warning:Graphic**
http://www.benadorassociates.com/article/6086

 

[tumor]

Yes, but probably less for what you'd like them to remember it for then what they've been experiencing for the last several decades.

The Horrors of Abu Ghraib
A report on the human cost of Saddam’s
policies by the Foreign & Commonwealth Office
**Warning:Graphic**
http://www.benadorassociates.com/article/6086

Worst is that USA supported Saddam and other brutal regimes( murderous Iran's shah)in the region.
Where were you then?

 

[kat]

Worst is that USA supported Saddam and other brutal regimes( murderous Iran's shah)in the region.
Where were you then?

I think that about that time I was heavily involved in fighting apartheid and wondering when the state dept would figure out that the enemy of our enemies weren't our friends. Where were you?

 

[kat]

tumor- BTW funding or supporting other countries who then engage in genocide as you have dis-engaged or are disengaging does NOT defer their guilt or the need for action.

 

[tumor]

USA/UK activelly supports murderous regimes,it is not like we did not knew what Shah of Iran , Pinochet or Saddam did.We sold and gave them equipment,cash everything they wanted(receipts are still somwhere in Saddam's archives in Iraq for US bio weapons ).
Why Saddam is not brought to the Hague and be tried there? very simple,because he would spill the beans about US dirty deals.
Man! I wish some huge asteroid would smash this ****ing planet to pieces!

 

[Burnsys]

USA/UK activelly supports murderous regimes,it is not like we did not knew what Shah of Iran , Pinochet or Saddam did.We sold and gave them equipment,cash everything they wanted(receipts are still somwhere in Saddam's archives in Iraq for US bio weapons ).
Why Saddam is not brought to the Hague and be tried there? very simple,because he would spill the beans about US dirty deals.
Man! I wish some huge asteroid would smash this ****ing planet to pieces!

I am from argentina,.. and in the 70's an US backed military coup overtrown democraticaly elected government in argentina... 30.000 died or disapeared... just to name one of many actions like this...

 

[selfAdjoint]

I am from argentina,.. and in the 70's an US backed military coup overtrown democraticaly elected government in argentina... 30.000 died or disapeared... just to name one of many actions like this...

Absolutely. And next door in Chile the US promoted an overthrow of Allende's elected government and its replacement with Pinochet, with equally horrifying tolls of disappeareds.

It is said that Henry Kissinger is afraid to go to Europe, lest he be arrested as an International Criminal.