I'm confused about the War on Terror

[phoenixy]

After 9/11, Bush made two statements:
1. "Terrorists hate America because America is a land of freedom and opportunity."
2. "We intend to attack the root causes of terrorism."

 

[Simon666]

One was false and he didn't do anything about two, except when you consider making two worse doing something about it.

 

[phoenixy]

One was false and he didn't do anything about two, except when you consider making two worse doing something about it.

dude, I hate to spell out sarcasm so please read it again so that you can figure out the real implication this time

 

[Simon666]

Dude, I met a lot of people who take that seriously. Believe me.

 

[studentx]

Bush is going to attack our freedom and opportunity..

 

[pelastration]

After 9/11, Bush made two statements:
1. ...
2. "We intend to attack the root causes of terrorism."

Result: Iraq Conflict Has Strengthened Al-Qaeda

A prestigious British research organization, the International Institute for Strategic Studies, has issued a report that asserts that the U.S.-led occupation of Iraq has actually strengthened the Al-Qaeda terrorist network, rather than weakened it. The report, titled "Strategic Survey 2003/2004," says the Iraq conflict has led to an accelerated recruitment to Al-Qaeda. And it says the ideal goal of the group is to use weapons of mass destruction.

Prague, 26 May 2004 (RFE/RL) -- The Al-Qaeda terrorist network has managed to fully reconstitute itself, and now has its sights set firmly on striking at the United States and the European allies. It has evolved new and effective methods of operation, and can be expected to pursue its aims, right up to the use of weapons of mass destruction.

That, at any rate, is the grim scenario depicted in a report just issued by the London-based International Institute for Strategic Studies (IISS) think tank.
"The impact on the American psyche, if you like to call it that, was just out of all proportion, so it wasn't so much a weapon of mass destruction as a 'weapon of mass disruption.'"

In an annual survey of the main strategic trends during the year, IISS experts say that until Al-Qaeda's bigger plans are ready, it will content itself with striking at "soft targets" in the United States, Europe, and Israel, and aiding the insurgency in Iraq.

...

The IISS blames the increased severity of the situation in part on the U.S.-led intervention in Iraq. It says Washington has failed to grasp that the 11 September 2001 terror attacks on New York and Washington were a violent reaction to American pre-eminence since the end of the Cold War.

It says the American-led military invasion and occupation of Iraq was designed to advance U.S. strategic and political interests in the Middle East. As such, it ran directly counter to Al-Qaeda's aim to purge the Muslim world of U.S. influence.

As the editor of the IISS strategic survey, Jonathan Stevenson, puts it: "[The war] has actually increased the U.S. military footprint in the Arab world and, of course, in the Muslim world generally, and certainly it was also intended to increase the United States' political influence there."

Accordingly, the survey says, the Iraq intervention was always likely in the short term to increase the motivation for terrorists and recruitment to Al-Qaeda.

http://www.rferl.org/featuresarticle/2004/5/702BB607-3D05-4E3C-9297-F52090E100B8.html

 

[phoenixy]

Dude, I met a lot of people who take that seriously. Believe me.

Arrgg, your friends are too dense.

Anyways, to ppl who don't understand, those two passages reflect the nature of the Patriot Act

 

[Simon666]

They're not my friends. I meant on other discussion forums like Pravda.

 

[pelastration]

After 9/11, Bush made two statements:
1. "Terrorists hate America because America is a land of freedom and opportunity."
2. ...

1. Such statement show the simplicity in logic and false postulates. This is just marketing for naive people.
2. Nobody is born as a terrorist. Terrorism is the result of a social, economic and political process, and the effect of personal experience or perception of a kind of injustice.
3.If you want to examine terrorism in a few one-liners you are not looking for objectivity or solutions, you are looking for confirmation of your standpoints, position or interest.
4. If you want to fight terrorism you have to tackle next to the effective aggression also handle the basic reasons of the malcontent or injustice. Even in USA you have since decades the controversies about the right of creating Militia against an injustice government.

(something goes wrong with the script of this post. I post further.

 

[pelastration]

5. Here an old 19/11/2001 BBC article. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/1552900.stm[/B]
(quote)...
Although there are many other issues, Washington's enabling alliance with Israel may be the biggest element in the Arab and Muslim anger, hatred and despair which are focused on America.

For them, Israel is a terrorist, gangster state which has usurped Palestinian land and water, demolished Palestinian homes, and stopped at nothing in pursuit of its interests and enemies, including torture, murder and pioneering the use of the car bomb in the region.
...
(end of quote)

 

[pelastration]

6. Next to that the prime Al Qaeda religious motivation was the presence of US bases in Saudi Arabia. http://www.newsday.com/news/opinion...,0,4266725.story?coll=ny-viewpoints-headlines

Saudis May Seek U.S. Exit - Friday, January 18, 2002
Military Presence Seen as Political Liability in Arab World

http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/w...ode=&contentId=A64536-2002Jan17&notFound=true

(Quote)Saudi Arabia's rulers are increasingly uncomfortable with the U.S. military presence in their country and may soon ask that it end, according to several Saudi sources. Such a decision would deprive the United States of regular use of the Prince Sultan Air Base http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/facility/prince-sultan.htm , from which American power has been projected into the gulf region and beyond for more than a decade.
...
Sen. Carl M. Levin (D-Mich.), chairman of the Armed Services Committee, said this week that the United States should consider moving its forces out of the kingdom. "We need a base in that region, but it seems to me we should find a place that is more hospitable. . . . I don't think they want us to stay there."
"The Saudis actually think somehow they are doing us a favor by having us be there helping to defend them," he added.(end of quote)
---
http://thescotsman.scotsman.com/international.cfm?id=491562003 (Wed 30 Apr 2003)
(Quote): But the US troop presence on Saudi soil, home to Islam’s two holiest cites of Mecca and Medina, was a rallying cry for bin Laden and Muslim extremists and an embarrassment for the Saudi royal family. (end of quote)

I fear that the Najaf shrines growing damage may cause much more emotions, if not stopped.

 

[pelastration]

7. What about the Right of self-defense and the Right of Revolution? Look what happens in USA on the right to bear weapons. This is significant. I refer to: http://usinfo.state.gov/products/pubs/rightsof/arms.htm .

American Law Institute, Model Penal Code and Commentaries(1985) : A man may repel by force in defense of his person, habitation, or property, against one or many who manifestly intend . . . to commit a known felony on either. In such a case he is not obliged to retreat, but may pursue his adversary until he finds himself out of danger; and if, in a conflict between them, he happens to kill, such killing is justifiable. The right of self-defense in cases of this kind is founded on the law of nature; and is not, nor can be, superseded by any law of society.

*The Right of Revolution: As a nation born out of a revolution against its lawful king, and whose people are taught from infancy that eternal vigilance is the price of liberty, the argument that the Second Amendment supports a right of revolution is not without attraction. More than a century ago, Lord Acton declared that "power tends to corrupt and absolute power corrupts absolutely," and the men who wrote the Constitution and the Bill of Rights understood that concept perfectly, even if they had not heard of Acton's exact words. Any government, even a democratic one, tends to accumulate power, and in doing so will fight off any attempt to diminish that power. An unarmed citizenry will be unable to preserve its liberties when confronted by the powers of the government; an armed citizenry can and will resist, as did the colonists in 1776.

Today, the vast majority of the American people rely on the accepted methods of democracy to both influence and to limit government — the ballot box, political interest groups, a free press, and the courts. Very few Americans approve or sympathize with fringe groups who have declared the U. S. government a tyranny that must be resisted by force of arms. In fact, the only time in our history under the Constitution when citizens rebelled on a large scale was the Civil War, and very few will argue today that the South had a right of revolution. Indeed, the Constitution specifically gives the federal government the right and the power to suppress insurrections. (end of quote).

8. So what happens if you are in front of "alien occupiers"? The question remains: What is a terrorist?
Is it (?):
(1) a lunatic,
(2) a person claiming his 'right of revolution' against a government of tyranny,
(3) a desperate person which sees no way of normal self-defense.
And another questions: Has he the right to choose his own weapons? (ie. has he the right to make tunnels to get weapons? Has he the right to use road bombs? Or must he accept the traditional war-game in which his opponents have the supremacy of gun power? )

9. IMO we have to look and "hear" seriously to the arguments of people which claim injustice. If we notice that we cause injustice we have to change our attitude, even if this goes against our own visual (and hidden) agenda. Killing is killing. Stealing is stealing. Lies are lies. Human rights are fundamental rights.
At the same time we should try to give them better conditions of life.
I believe that - almost everyone - wants a normal life with as less as possible aggression. I don't believe someone goes Kamikaze for fun, but by frustration.

If you wear spectacles with red glasses if am sure you will see everything with a red glance. You will interpret everything that way. Even a white flower will have from your view that red glance.