So there's going to be lots of commentary about Bush's State of the Union address tonight, but there was one comment that came at the end of the speech that shocked and appalled me: he in effect said that the US has been drawn into "an ideological conflict" (read: the War on Terror�) that "we did nothing to provoke".
Excuse me? Just what have you been smoking tonight, Mr. President? We've done plenty to provoke the radical Islamists in the past 50 years. It's just that you haven't been paying attention to the complaints and arguments. (Note that I'm not saying the terrorists are justified in their methods in the slightest, but I do recognize that they have some � some � legitimate grievances.)
This is quite possibly the most disturbing part of tonight's speeches: the fact that his commentary shows that the President still, after four and a half years, shows little to no understanding of the underlying causes of the conflict, or of the reasons why there are people out there who hate America.
*sigh*
Posted by Shakaar (Member # 1782) on :
*ponders* I think I somewhat disagree, though I would have to ask you to outline just what the US did to provoke 9/11. What really could we have done differently, stand completely aside, in which case you probably would have had the genocide of the Israeli people in the Seven Days war if we had not armed them- After that we were in for a penny and in for a pound.
There is no way to reconcile our differences- there never really was, they wish for the complete destruction of a state and its people, they will accept nothing less, and they have done things to try and bring this about, and Israel and the US has done things to make that more difficult, which in turn creates many of what I feel you consider legitimate grievances. If they had true justifiable grievances they could have proven them to the world in a manner other than blowing up planes, taking and murdering hostages.
I don�t know- They may have had legitimate grievances, but the manner in which they have �protested� them have not been legitimate-
*L* Now I�m no supporter of the current administration� I thought Afghanistan was an appropriate action- I wish we could have devoted much more to their country- I think when we enter into nation building; we should only do so when we can devote enough resources into it that they have a strong economy, trade, and a government that protects its people. I think Iraq was a mistake.
Things the stuck out to me in Bush�s speech were how he wanted to strengthen our educational system and provide more money for Science and Math- when he recently cut Pell Grants. He mentioned keeping the tax cuts- and he has been the only President not to raise taxes to pay for a war- it�s just reckless, it�s like pondering you should buy a Porsche all-the-while pondering you�d like to work a part-time job to pay for it. There seems to be no push behind his thoughts on getting us away from oil. I do feel we need to build more nuclear power, along with other types of energy production plants. Bush mentioned Iran, Palestine, and nations in the region, addressing their people mostly to ask them to embrace liberty and democracy- Many of them recently had democratic elections- and the results were very anti-US.
Posted by AndrewR (Member # 44) on :
Fundamentalists aren't going to back down in their zealot beliefs when their 'enemy' acknowledges their arguments. That goes for all fundamentalists. At the same time you can be fundamentalist all you like - but there is no condoning terror.
Posted by Neutrino 123 (Member # 1327) on :
The Islamic fundementalist extremeists probably do have some legitimate grievances, but even if the legitimate ones were acted upon and corrected, most extremeists would still continue (though it would mean creation of signifigantly fewer extremists). On the other hand, many Islamic people, including the general population have illegitimate grievances too. There was alot of crap involving Denmark and Norway when some company published some images of Mohammed. An example of legitimate grievances does include Isreal, in my opinion. I am not, of course, talking about preventing their destruction in the 1973 conflict, but rather the more recent situation. The U.S. gives several billion dollars in military credit to Isreal, but stood aside when Isreal formed the settlements in Palestine. Isreal's security issue with respect to the sourrounding states, is, to say the least, very good, so this military credit is completely unnecessary. However, it still would make great leverage to get Isreal to support an independant Palestine without making them look weak in the eyes of the people in the area (not that this would make much difference, since they are not weak at all). I'm not sure if this is true, but I actually heard about Isreal requesting in the 90s that the U.S. use the military credit for leverage, so they would have a good political excuse to pull out of Palestine.
Posted by AndrewR (Member # 44) on :
quote:Originally posted by Neutrino 123: On the other hand, many Islamic people, including the general population have illegitimate grievances too. There was alot of crap involving Denmark and Norway when some company published some images of Mohammed.
I saw a link to an article about that but I haven't read about it yet but, what about all the jokes and stuff that involve Jesus? It's become the thing to do - I'm not saying have less jokes I'm saying - maybe some Islamic people should get more of a sense of humour? Or everyone just stick to their own corners and not say anything about anyone else's selected diety be it tree, goa'uld, Q or heavenly being.
Posted by bX (Member # 419) on :
Just so we're all clear. Israel was carved out of Palestine by the Alliance powers post WWI & WWII. Which isn't to say that there wasn't an historic claim or that they arbitrarily decided on the seat of the holy land or anything. Just that prior to the establishment of the Israeli state, it wasn't exactly uninhabited. Which isn't even getting into the whole crusades thing. And so their grievances are to a scale... And again totally not agreeing with the radical Islamist method of response, just trying to place the issue in some historical/geo-social context. They have good reason to be angry. US actions in the region of late have done nothing to diminish this.
Posted by AndrewR (Member # 44) on :
I wonder how different history would have been if they went with using Madagascar as the site for "Israel". It probably wouldn't have been called "Israel". Posted by FawnDoo (Member # 1421) on :
quote:Originally posted by AndrewR: I wonder how different history would have been if they went with using Madagascar as the site for "Israel". It probably wouldn't have been called "Israel".
And the movie with the animals would probably have been a lot less fun to watch.
Posted by Lee (Member # 393) on :
Zing!
Posted by The Ginger Beacon (Member # 1585) on :
As far as I know, Israel was formed partly because of terrorism.
When the UK was given control of Palestine, there was a steady influx of Jewish imigrants from Eastern Europe, Russia and later Germany. Part of the aggreement that resulted in the British administering Palestine said something about leading to the enventual creation of an Jewish homeland. This was in the twenties.
This, and the fact that the immigrants wer buying up all the land, got the local Arab population's backs up.
In the lead up to the second world war, many Jews tried to emmigrate to Palestine, but Britain enventualy put a stop to this by putting in place quatas for Jewish immigration to the area, and most of the Jews fleeing Nazi persecution were rounded up and put into detainment camps, or displaced person camps as they were knwon after the war.
So this, and a number of other things lead to the Jewish population disliking the British rule.
After WW two, and an Arab uprising (which was put down with the traditional British 'shoot at them until they are all dead' tactics of the 1940's), and a series of terrorist attacks from both the Jewish and Arab populations, Britain eventualy got fed up and left, saying "Bollocks to the lot of you, we're leaving, so just blow each other up from now on".
Which they promptly did for the next 60 years.
Posted by Da_bang80 (Member # 528) on :
"Britain eventualy got fed up and left, saying "Bollocks to the lot of you, we're leaving, so just blow each other up from now on".
Which they promptly did for the next 60 years."
That's what they get for engaging in Imperialism. I guess in a way you could say that the U.S. is flying the Imperialist flag as well. Using military force to occupy foreign countries and all that.
Posted by FawnDoo (Member # 1421) on :
quote:Originally posted by Da_bang80: That's what they get for engaging in Imperialism.
Well to be fair to the old place it was all the rage at the time, like big moustaches and, later on, flares.
America is being accused of imperialism a lot just now: I've heard the phrase "cultural imperialism" used now and again. Not too sure if I buy into it: I think the world we've got today is the way it is for a lot of complex reasons, not just because of the actions of one country.
Posted by Cartman (Member # 256) on :
The world we've got today is the way it is mostly because one country disliked red much more than it disliked any other color and because other countries liked drawing lines on maps with rulers where they hadn't drawn anything before.
Posted by Sol System (Member # 30) on :
I seem to recall Cold War antipathies being a two-way street.
Posted by Cartman (Member # 256) on :
Yes, but with different amounts of traffic in both directions. (I'm sure someone will call me on the overall congestion rate.)
Besides, it was an over-simplification.
Posted by Da_bang80 (Member # 528) on :
Now it seems That Mr. President wants another $120 billion for the war. Which brings the total up to nearly a half trillion. Imagine what that money could do if it was put toward housing the homeless or helping the poor. I'm not even going to post what I want to do to him cuz the CIA and the Secret Service would hunt me down.
Posted by The Ginger Beacon (Member # 1585) on :
You've said too much. I'll make a distraction, while you run for it!
Posted by Wraith (Member # 779) on :
quote:Originally posted by Da_bang80: That's what they get for engaging in Imperialism. I guess in a way you could say that the U.S. is flying the Imperialist flag as well. Using military force to occupy foreign countries and all that.
Actually, that's what you get for promising the same land to two different groups in an attempt to get allies and support against the Ottoman Empire in WW1 and then trying to fudge the issue by taking a League of Nations mandate on the place.
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
Also consider that during the Cold War, the local mid-eastern powers were far happier to have American fingers in their cultural affairs than those of the Soviets. Now the Soviets are all gone and the only remainig "outsiders" are the U.S. Aside from all the foolishness we've actually engaged in, there's the old standby of "blame someone besides ourselves for our troubles" that politicians have engaged in forever to maintain power.
I've been laughing for weeks over the growing "cartoon scandal"- the US Defense Department yesterday tried their own version by sending a condemning letter to a Washington newspaper for it's cartoon showing a quadruple amputee being told by Rumsfeld that he's not paralized, he's now "battle hardened".
The Muslim world needs to grow the fuck up a little with the cartoon thing- it was pointed out last night on a PBS round-table discussion, that while it is disresepectful, it's no more so than the countless anti-semetic cartoons that run every day in all the major arab newspapers.
Posted by AndrewR (Member # 44) on :
And as I said before - no one bats an eye-lid when there are anti-christian or jesus-as-the-butt-of-the-joke jokes.
Oh and if "they" do not like Western influence or western culture... why don't they get rid of all modern accessories... Cars, TV's, CDs, computers, electricity, modern medicine etc.
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
Because we'd kick their asses easily then.
It's not technology they abhor- only the (supposed) decadent western lifestyles that employ it.
Cell phones, machine guns and computers are fine: but only in service to Allah. Or something- not suprisingly, porn is a big underground hit in the middle east- so much so that Iran censors (or attempts to) every E-Mail and of course, the punishment for spreading such horrible sexuality is....you guessed it: Death.
America is to blame, naturally: we invented porn, and in fact sexy, slutty women in general. Damn us! Damn us to the hell of sexy, slutty women!
Posted by Da_bang80 (Member # 528) on :
I thought the French invented sexy, slutty women...
My cold war knowledge isn't as complete as I'd like it to be. I'm more interested in ww2 era history. I saw a special on the History channel many years ago about one time during the Cold War where the US and Russia came within 2 minutes of nuclear war. Something about a U2 spyplane or something. that and I believe it was the basis of the Iron Maiden song "2 Minutes to Midnight" is all I remember. If anyone has any info on that particular moment in history I'd like to know more.
Posted by B.J. (Member # 858) on :
I thought we came a hell of a lot closer to a shooting war during the Cuban Missile Crisis. But I'm not a history expert, not did I live through it, so I'll let someone else fill in the details.
And the French invented *hairy*, slutty women.
B.J.
Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :
Post-Cold-War, there was an incident (in 1995) where the US and Norway launched a rocket to study the Arctic. The message that they sent to Russia saying "don't worry, it's not a missile" got lost, and Yeltsin was minutes away from launching the nukes when someone noticed the rocket was headed out to sea.
On the subject of the cartoons, you can see them here. The news reports I've seen have all refused to show them. I'm guessing the typed text all over the chalkboard one is commentary added by the people running that site.
Posted by Cartman (Member # 256) on :
"America is to blame, naturally: we invented porn..."
No, you just made an industry out of it.
(As for decadent lifestyles, the number of Paris Hiltons still > the number of Brunei Sultans.)
Posted by AndrewR (Member # 44) on :
I watched a different documentary about a Russian Army officer who avoided the annhilation of Earth when a faulty missile detection alarm went off... he used his judgement and ignored it. Luckily he was right.
The incident was sweapt under the rug and he was eventually discharged for not following orders or some such thing. I think this was in 1983. In 1991 or 1992 - after the fall of the Soviet Union when stories like this could emerge - he was given some prize/award/honour by an international group for helping to avert nuclear war.
I can't remember his name. D'oh. Someone here will know.
Posted by Topher (Member # 71) on :
I remember that incident. Sadly I don't remember his name.
Posted by Cartman (Member # 256) on :
quote:Originally posted by Cartman: "America is to blame, naturally: we invented porn..."
No, you just made an industry out of it.
(As for decadent lifestyles, the number of Paris Hiltons still > the number of Brunei Sultans.)
Well, at least we're industrious.
I've seen both of those "oh fuck, the world almmost ended" specials. Makes me certain that such close calls happened even more frequently and were never brought to light.
Posted by TheWoozle (Member # 929) on :
I've heard that the whole Islamic vs western dispute really started with the Crusades and went downhill from there.
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
Er.....sorta. There was a big span of hundreds of years where the two cultures mostly left well enough alone.
Even during the heyday of British Colonialism, western encroachment was never a big issue with the Muslim world- both because the "colonized" were non-muslims (for the most part) and because they did not have the huge monetary rescources (from oil) for expand their sphere of influence.
Or mabye everyone was just a lot less crazy back then. Posted by Wraith (Member # 779) on :
quote:Originally posted by TheWoozle: I've heard that the whole Islamic vs western dispute really started with the Crusades and went downhill from there.
Even before that really; it started when Muslim expansion ran up against the Byzantine Empire. The Byzantines eventually requested help from the western church and then the crusades were launched.
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)