Roots of Middle-Eastern Terrorism

[JohnDubYa]

"One way to measure the U.S. foreign aid program's influence around the world is to examine the voting records of U.S. aid recipients in the United Nations (U.N.). Despite the many problems plaguing the U.N., it remains an international forum in which the United States seeks the cooperation of other countries in a variety of foreign policy matters. 3 A review by Heritage analysts of several years of voting records in the U.N. and U.S. foreign aid spending habits indicates that foreign aid has little impact, if any, on winning support among recipients for U.S. policy initiatives in the U.N. In fact, most recipients of U.S. foreign aid vote against the United States more often than they vote with it. "

http://www.heritage.org/Research/TradeandForeignAid/BG1186.cfm

In 1997 the second largest recipient of US foreign aid was Egypt ($2.1 billion), which subsequently voted against the US 66% of the time. The fourth largest recipient was Jordan, and they voted against us 67% of the time. We gave $144 million to India, and they voted against us 80% of the time.

So tell me again how the US will be more loved if we only gave these countries more money?

 

[JohnDubYa]

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.

Yet Arabs still send their students to study at our universities, exposing them more to Western culture. Why is that?

Arabs don't have to adopt our lifestyles. If they want to continue banning their women from driving, we're not stopping them.

We invaded Iraq because neighboring Muslim countries did little to stop Saddam Hussein from developing WMDs, invading nearby countries, and brutalizing his people. We didn't just choose Iraq by flipping a coin.

And none of this is any excuse to intentionally kill innocent people by flying planes into buildings.

By the way, Arab countries are every bit to blame as much as Isreal for the religious bigotry that has occurred.

 

[studentx]

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

I have, and there is no such Surah which describes what youre saying. There are some that come close, but they have a different meaning;

[2.62] Surely those who believe, and those who are Jews, and the Christians, and the Sabians, whoever believes in Allah and the Last day and does good, they shall have their reward from their Lord, and there is no fear for them, nor shall they grieve.

You should know however most muslims have never read the Quran but grew up and learned Islam from their brothers. You should also know today Islam is not merely the Quran. There are many Hadith and Sunnahs from the prophets life, some even contradicting the Quran yet muslims embrace them as well.

 

[devious_]

Yet Arabs still send their students to study at our universities, exposing them more to Western culture. Why is that?

Few Arabs do.

If they want to continue banning their women from driving, we're not stopping them.

Only Saudia Arabia does that, so that sentence doesn't make much sense.

We invaded Iraq because neighboring Muslim countries did little to stop Saddam Hussein from developing WMDs, invading nearby countries, and brutalizing his people. We didn't just choose Iraq by flipping a coin.

Why should they stop him from developing WMDs? The "West" obviously didn't stop Israel from doing so.

And none of this is any excuse to intentionally kill innocent people by flying planes into buildings.

To you, me, and probably the majority of the world, it isn't. To al-Qaeda and extremists, it is.

 

[devious_]

I have, and there is no such Surah which describes what youre saying. There are some that come close, but they have a different meaning;

Read Surah 109.

 

[studentx]

To you, me, and probably the majority of the world, it isn't. To al-Qaeda and extremists, it is.

It is, but its wrong isn't it? This the whole point. We all understand how terrorists believe they do right, but how many of us understand that even if they have very good reasons, it is wrong?

 

[devious_]

It is, but its wrong isn't it? This the whole point. We all understand how terrorists believe they do right, but how many of us understand that even if they have very good reasons, it is wrong?

It's wrong in so many aspects. It's even against Islam's teachings.

 

[studentx]

your right there its in there. Now if only the rest of the muslims knew it

 

[studentx]

It's wrong in so many aspects. It's even against Islam's teachings.

It is, but there arent many perfect muslims who live by the Quran. Many go by what the scholars tell them and have never read the Quran.
I think this is the way to solve the root of terrorism, with religious debate and point them to their own book.
I have seen many muslims simply say, these terrorists are no muslims. But they are, and moderate muslims must fight these false brothers between them before they can convert anyone else. Its not Islam what the west sees, its muslims

 

[devious_]

Its not Islam what the west sees, its muslims

That might just be the wisest thing I've ever heard. Well said!

 

[balkan]

So tell me again how the US will be more loved if we only gave these countries more money?

was anyone suggesting that? although it would be nice if the USA for once met their quota... it would show a bit of stature... kinda sad, when the richest country in the world can't pay the same amount as small scandinavian countrys...
yea... it really makes your piss boil that they won't agree with usa on every political issue, doesn't it? i mean it isn't called blackmail for nothing, right?
wait... i think we're reading the wrong book... it's called foreign aid.. and that's not the type of coorporation I'm talking about, that would be both illegal and goddamn immorral of those countrys... is that how you would've liked it?

 

[balkan]

It is, but there arent many perfect muslims who live by the Quran. Many go by what the scholars tell them and have never read the Quran.
I think this is the way to solve the root of terrorism, with religious debate and point them to their own book.
I have seen many muslims simply say, these terrorists are no muslims. But they are, and moderate muslims must fight these false brothers between them before they can convert anyone else. Its not Islam what the west sees, its muslims

now that, i can agree with...

 

[member 5645]

was anyone suggesting that? although it would be nice if the USA for once met their quota... it would show a bit of stature... kinda sad, when the richest country in the world can't pay the same amount as small scandinavian countrys...
yea... it really makes your piss boil that they won't agree with usa on every political issue, doesn't it? i mean it isn't called blackmail for nothing, right?
wait... i think we're reading the wrong book... it's called foreign aid.. and that's not the type of coorporation I'm talking about, that would be both illegal and goddamn immorral of those countrys... is that how you would've liked it?

You better be talking perecentage compared to GDP, which in that case you can stop the slimey manner of debating and just flat out say that, instead of "as much as small scandanavian countrys".

Secondly, we give the most money in the world to aid. And if you include aid outside of just humanitarian we give more percentage than anyone as well. However, the pacifist crowd will argue that money for assistance to other economies isn't aide when we see it as a business investment, despite having the exact same ramifications as giving food money to poor countries.

 

[balkan]

1) You better be talking perecentage compared to GDP, which in that case you can stop the slimey manner of debating and just flat out say that, instead of "as much as small scandanavian countrys".

Secondly, we give the most money in the world to aid. And if you include aid outside of just humanitarian we give more percentage than anyone as well. However, the pacifist crowd will argue that money for assistance to other economies isn't aide when we see it as a business investment, despite having the exact same ramifications as giving food money to poor countries.

1) i already had already talked about percentages at that point... but once again, you people are making me repeat myself: compared to GDP...

2) ehh? i would like to hear some more about this... are you talking about outsourcing or about columbia type trade deals?

 

[JohnDubYa]

was anyone suggesting that?

Yes. read the following:

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.

This directly suggests that giving money to foreign countries makes them like us more, does it not?

And I have shown that ideal to be false. We give billions to Egypt and Jordan, and I don't see any love being thrown our way in return.

 

[Dissident Dan]

"...A review by Heritage analysts of several years of voting records in the U.N. and U.S. foreign aid spending habits indicates that foreign aid has little impact, if any, on winning support among recipients for U.S. policy initiatives in the U.N. In fact, most recipients of U.S. foreign aid vote against the United States more often than they vote with it. "

http://www.heritage.org/Research/TradeandForeignAid/BG1186.cfm

In 1997 the second largest recipient of US foreign aid was Egypt ($2.1 billion), which subsequently voted against the US 66% of the time. The fourth largest recipient was Jordan, and they voted against us 67% of the time. We gave $144 million to India, and they voted against us 80% of the time.

So tell me again how the US will be more loved if we only gave these countries more money?

Firstly, voting against us isn't necessarily a sign of hatred. That said, ther is a lot of animosity in these countries against us. Of course, you can't just view aid as if it exists in a vaccuum. You can't give money to Egypt and Jordan and bomb neighboring Islamic countries and expect them to love you. All the beliefs that were laid out in the excerpt that I quoted and the beliefs expressed by devious_ counter aid. They see the invasion of Iraq, the sanctions against Iraq, the support of Israel (which they view to be oppressive against Muslims and Arabs), and the puppeteering of some of the Arab governments as major problems. Giving them $2 billion isn't going to make up for that. I think that a whole paradigm change is necessary.

Also, monetary aid is definitely a large component of what I suggestd, but it has to be put to good use, and when it is obviously beneficial, we need to have our name visibily attached to it.

 

[JohnDubYa]

Firstly, voting against us isn't necessarily a sign of hatred. That said, ther is a lot of animosity in these countries against us.

But it sure doesn't stop them from taking our money, does it? Sounds like they are playing us for suckers.

Of course, you can't just view aid as if it exists in a vaccuum. You can't give money to Egypt and Jordan and bomb neighboring Islamic countries and expect them to love you.

If they don't appreciate $2 billion, then why are we giving them $2 billion?

All the beliefs that were laid out in the excerpt that I quoted and the beliefs expressed by devious_ counter aid. They see the invasion of Iraq, the sanctions against Iraq, the support of Israel (which they view to be oppressive against Muslims and Arabs), and the puppeteering of some of the Arab governments as major problems. Giving them $2 billion isn't going to make up for that.

Except the stats were from 1997, after we invaded Iraq with their support and applied sanctions to Iraq with their support.

Looks like we didn't get much bang for the buck.

 

[balkan]

But it sure doesn't stop them from taking our money, does it? Sounds like they are playing us for suckers.

If they don't appreciate $2 billion, then why are we giving them $2 billion?

Except the stats were from 1997, after we invaded Iraq with their support and applied sanctions to Iraq with their support.

Looks like we didn't get much bang for the buck.

what the **** does those votes have to do with anything? it's not a bribe! it's an aid! it is supposed to be for non-personal interests! you didn't proove **** that they hate the usa, you just proved that they are capable of thinking on their own... way to go...
and it's funny, how your government seems to disagree with you:
http://www.voanews.com/article.cfm?objectID=AB760623-D902-4C23-9242676D009F57B5&title=Continued%20US%20Aid%20to%20Egypt%20%27No%20Surprise%27%20to%20Analyst&catOID=45C9C78D-88AD-11D4-A57200A0CC5EE46C&categoryname=Mideast
note how 2/3'rd of the aid is military and not financial also...

 

[russ_watters]

Ironic how the same fact, stated two different ways has vastly different implications:

-The United States gives more money than any other country in foreign aid.
-The United States gives less money than most other countries in foreign aid (per capita).

Of course, people who give the second version of the fact usually leave out the part in parethases, changing the meaning of the sentence...

 

[balkan]

Ironic how the same fact, stated two different ways has vastly different implications:

-The United States gives more money than any other country in foreign aid.
-The United States gives less money than most other countries in foreign aid (per capita).

Of course, people who give the second version of the fact usually leave out the part in parethases, changing the meaning of the sentence...

i really don't see the irony, as it is a matter of percentages...

 

[JohnDubYa]

what the **** does those votes have to do with anything? it's not a bribe! it's an aid!

It was stated that such aid (or whatever you choose to call it) would help make them like us. If they really do like us, they have a strange way of displaying it.

 

[Dissident Dan]

You can like people and disagree with them.

Anyway, I would like to bring attention these previous posts:

https://www.physicsforums.com/showpost.php?p=260058&postcount=32

https://www.physicsforums.com/showpost.php?p=260078&postcount=34

I think that they provide insight into why Arab Muslims are angry with the USA. I am not making any claims as to whether or not their anger is justified or that their appraisals of the situations are correct, but I think that it is necessary to see and appreciate what their gripes are in order to resolve conflict.

 

[JohnDubYa]

I was watching Al Jazeera last Sunday, and they had rap videos from Dubai. They are almost identical to those they show in the States. Same hand gestures, postures, camera-mugging... everything. And the lyrics sounded the same, even though they were in Arabic. (Although I can't imagine what the lyrics would be, as my wife wasn't there to translate.)

I guess that's our fault too. Heh.

 

[kat]

I have a hard time figuring out which portions of the first post are direct quotes of the waiter and which are comments from Toeinsing. Either way, one of them have their facts screwed up. If it's Toeinsing, he then he's distorting the reasons for the waiters response. If it's the waiter who is making the fact and figure statements, I would say he's the victim of propaganda.

 

[balkan]

I was watching Al Jazeera last Sunday, and they had rap videos from Dubai. They are almost identical to those they show in the States. Same hand gestures, postures, camera-mugging... everything. And the lyrics sounded the same, even though they were in Arabic. (Although I can't imagine what the lyrics would be, as my wife wasn't there to translate.)

I guess that's our fault too. Heh.

you bastards! now you've done it!

 

[Dissident Dan]

I have a hard time figuring out which portions of the first post are direct quotes of the waiter and which are comments from Toeinsing. Either way, one of them have their facts screwed up. If it's Toeinsing, he then he's distorting the reasons for the waiters response. If it's the waiter who is making the fact and figure statements, I would say he's the victim of propaganda.

Unless it was in quotation marks, it wasn't a direct quote. Most of it is Toensing's paraphrasing of what the waiter said (Toensing may have taken the liberty of elaborating with specific statistics; I am not sure). Of course, when the book reads, "A UNICEF study in 1999 backed him up," Toensing is the one speaking.

Which facts are screwed up?

I think that they definitely are victims of propoganda over there (especially in Palestine and Jerusalem), as I have mentioned in previous posts. I think that that is something that we should be aware of, both to try to diminish it and to try to predict how things will be spun. We should also acknowledge that not everything that we have done has had the best effects. I also think that not everything we've done has been done with good intentions.