Thor on 3/5/2011 at 16:42

---

I like SPECTRE better.

Poor bin laden though. I actually am so not aware of the context on why he came to do all those mean things to americans in the first place. Maybe americans provoked his place. Ah, what do I know.

It would be sad though if such brats as Al-Q...whatever... got their hands on a nuke. Hmm, is this worth researching?

Renault on 3/5/2011 at 16:56

---

I think if any of these extremist groups were able to detonate a nuke, it would pretty much lead to a worldwide coalition/collective to hunt their ass down and eliminate them permanently.

Not that that would stop them from doing it, of course.

demagogue on 3/5/2011 at 17:50

---

The revealing statistic that stuck out to me is that 85% of Osama's victims have been local Muslims. I think a lot of Americans, on both sides ("they really hate us" & "we brought this on ourselves") BOTH are flattering themselves to think the US's actual policies or even existence as a concrete political system has much to do with this kind of extremism at all. They want to level violence against liberal democratic elements in their own culture first of all, and at most you might say the idea of America and the idea of American soldiers in the Middle East gets sucked into that preexisting domestic tension.

I mean, they invent their own mythology of America they lash out against (the conditions here in Afghanistan are really bad no thanks to you Manhattan CPAs), then we (or I should say "many Americans") invent a mythology of Islamic extremism to meet it (they must really hate us; as if they had any clue who "we" are, which I'm sure they don't) ... So it all gets completely derailed from reality.

I don't think these extremists have any real clue about American politics and are focused on their own local politics or very narrow concerns, which happen to use "American soldiers" for their own purposes. Trying to bump this up to some universal level is a mistake IMO.

Extreme Islamic politics as I understand it is mostly about things like "Who do we want on our local school board? I don't want my kids reading *those* books." (And goodness: if some US soldiers are in a neighboring country, there's no telling what my child might be forced to read.) Issues like that became intolerable for some sensitive Muslims, so (after killing a lot of liberal Muslims in their local area) they conspired to bring down the World Trade Center. Fucking great. If they were in a democratic system and could swallow the idea of pluralism they could have just written a fucking letter to the editor of their local newspaper or had a voting drive at their local supermarket. (I just mean to say, even if their rhetoric aspires to be about some global war, I think their actual mindset is very very narrow to the world directly around them.)

By the same token, I don't see why the Americans need to have some existential debate just to respond to passions ultimately grounded on things like local Afghan school board elections and their very narrow worldview & set of concerns. They should get their act together and figure that out for themselves. Our task should just be security for our own people, no more, no less (which should probably include "No gratuitous adventuring" don't get me wrong). I just think we're flattering (or deluding) ourselves to turn this into some epic existential debate about what America means to the world when it's really about very local concerns and "America" is just as much a meaningless slogan to them as terrorist has become for a lot of our local politics.

CCCToad on 3/5/2011 at 22:31

---

Allright, that post was a bit rambling, so addressing specifics is tough. The big mistake a lot of people are falling into is that evangelical-style black and white thinking: either its all good or all bad. As a result most of the posts are simply railing how either "we did nothing" or "they really shouldn't be blamed for wanting to kill us". Fortunately nobody's dumb enough to fall for the line that "they just hate our freedoms". If that was true, there would have been a sharp decrease in violence over the last decade.

Much of the resentment does come from religious reasons. Our military presence from the Cold War is a commonly and correctly cited issue. To them, having outsiders in their holy land is an intolerable offense. Other causes of resentment are economic. Corporate and (especially) Wall Street's interactions with the region are not far removed from the economic exploitation that characterized British banks and companies. There's a pretty long list of interventions, both military and otherwise, that mean our first impression has hardly been a good one. We have invaded Lebanon, used the CIA to plot numerous coups and assassinations in the region, given Israel a blank check, and dropped bombs on the majority of Islamic countries either covertly or overtly. Its bound to have made a few enemies along the way. While many of these actions are legitimate they tend to give locals an impression of the U.S. thats pretty similar to your typical "evil empire". They don't necessarily see the bigger picture between us and the Soviets.

Unfortunately we don't have a choice about continued involvement in the Middle East due to how dependant the US has become on the (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Petrodollar) Petrodollar. In other words, the US has long had an understanding with OPEC(thank you, Mr. Kissinger) that they will provide the majority of our oil in exchange for them selling oil only in Dollars. Its made OPEC rich, while we benefit by forcing the dollar as the de-facto currency for international trade.

The problem is Iran. Iran has long been working on (http://www.reuters.com/article/2008/04/30/iran-oil-currency-idUSBLA02024820080430) trading Oil in non-US currencies. If the rest of the 1st world countries were to be able to buy their energy needs in Euros or Yen, it has the potential to destroy the dollar's relevancy on the international scale. While international economics are far more complicated than this issue alone, it could put our currency on thin ice.

With a little poking around, you can find some stories that back up the assertion that Iran is the primary target.


(http://www.foxnews.com/on-air/on-the-record/transcript/kissinger-us-already-committed-libya-despite-obama039s-vow-get-out)

nickie on 4/5/2011 at 19:56

---

Yes well we are very confusing over here, it's true. I wouldn't have mentioned it but I am the misfit in an army family and they took exception! :D