View Poll Results: Is "Islamic Terrorism" Dependent on or Independent of U.S. Foreign Policy?

Voters
51. You may not vote on this poll
  • Dependent. Such terrorism would likely not exist if U.S. foreign policy were different.

    25 49.02%
  • Independent. Islamic terrorism would exist at current levels regardless.

    26 50.98%
Page 4 of 11 FirstFirst ... 23456 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 107

Thread: "Islamic Terrorism" - Dependent or Independent?

  1. #31
    Student LowRevs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Downeast in NC
    Last Seen
    07-12-12 @ 04:52 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    272

    Re: "Islamic Terrorism" - Dependent or Independent?

    Ridiculous hypothetical. Anyone can have an opinion but no-one can provide any logical proof of either position.
    I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it.--Thomas Jefferson

  2. #32
    Sage
    Cephus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    CA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:36 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    29,751

    Re: "Islamic Terrorism" - Dependent or Independent?

    Quote Originally Posted by Dav View Post
    Oil.
    Which is exactly why so many of them are mad at us, we've screwed over the Middle East for decades so we can drive all over the place. Sorry, not a really good reason, especially when we have so many untapped oil reserves of our own.
    There is nothing demonstrably true that religion can provide the world that cannot be achieved more rationally through entirely secular means.

    Blog me! YouTube me! VidMe me!

  3. #33
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Between Hollywood and Compton.
    Last Seen
    11-25-09 @ 12:02 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    5,497

    Re: "Islamic Terrorism" - Dependent or Independent?

    Quote Originally Posted by Arcana XV View Post
    Well, let me put it this way...

    When was the last time Islamic terrorists threatened to blow up anything in Switzerland?

    Of course a country's foreign policy matters greatly.
    There's more to consider than that. We could also consider an inclination to establish repressive cultural mores that seems more prevalent among Muslims than others, which accounts for the disgruntlement about Arab immigration in Europe. We saw violent outbursts after the Pope's comments about Mohamed and a Danish newspaper's depiction of him, after all. But on the other hand, much of this is disorganized domestic violence not indicative of any wider plot or conspiracy and isn't necessarily far different from the violent outbursts that we see from the fundamentalist Christian population here in their bombings of abortion clinics and similar acts, to say nothing of their similar desire for repressive cultural mores.

    Quote Originally Posted by Agent Ferris View Post
    Islamic terrorism is just the current for of Islamic Supremacist Imperialism so why shouldn't we bring up previous wars of aggression initiated by Islamic Imperialists? Anyway how about the Muslim pirate attacks against U.S. shipping off the African coast which led to the Barbary wars?

    I think that Islamic terrorism has less to do with our foreign policy than it does with the foreign policy of the Islamists IE expansionism through offensive Jihad.
    This claim is of dubious veracity. There exists a common misconception that "Islamic terrorism" exists solely to punish the U.S. for its secularism and liberal democratic "values," but it seems more accurate to note that a more likely motive is anger regarding specific perceived encroachments by U.S. political regimes in terms of support for the Israeli government. I've previously commented on the perspective offered in Osama bin Laden's first fatwa (I'm aware that he does not have the authority to issue fatwas), Declaration of War against the Americans Occupying the Land of the Two Holy Places. Issued in 1996, it identified the Al-Aqsa Mosque as an Islamic holy site that was allegedly being defiled by Israeli sovereignty over the area. Moreover, the reality of his intent was covered in Marc Perelman's Bin Laden Aimed To Link Plot to Israel.

    In an interim staff report released last week, the presidential commission investigating the September 11, 2001, attacks shed new light on the role of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict in Al Qaeda’s worldview.

    The disclosures seem to weaken Israeli claims that the issue was only a secondary priority for Osama bin Laden, and they could rekindle the debate about whether U.S. support for Israel is hindering national security.

    In a 20-page report titled “Outline of the 9-11 Plot,” the commission, which is to issue a final report at the end of July, describes bin Laden’s willingness to time the attacks against America with two visits by Prime Minister Sharon, one in Jerusalem and one in Washington.

    The report claims that Khalid Sheikh Mohamed, or KSM, the alleged mastermind of the attacks who was arrested in March 2003 in Pakistan, told his U.S. captors that bin Laden “wanted to punish the United States for supporting Israel.”

    This is why, according to KSM, bin Laden asked him to conduct the attacks “as early as mid-2000” in response to the outcry prompted by the visit of then-opposition leader Sharon to the Temple Mount in Jerusalem, the report states. Even though the Al Qaeda hijackers had barely arrived in the United States to take flight lessons, the Saudi renegade allegedly argued that it would be enough if they smashed planes to the ground without hitting specific targets. The report claims that KSM talked him out of the plan.

    Bin Laden, however, reportedly asked him again a year later to hasten the preparations of the plot when he learned that Sharon, now prime minister, would visit the White House in June or July 2001, according to the report.

    Once again KSM convinced him to wait, and the group eventually settled on September 11 after further debates about targets and timing, debunking the assumption that the details of the operation were planned long in advance.

    In addition to bin Laden’s reported interest in linking the attacks to Israel, the report also sheds light on the worldview of Al Qaeda operatives and its sympathizers.

    It noted that Mohammed Atta, the Egyptian ringleader of the plot, chose the second week of September to ensure that Congress, “the perceived source of U.S. policy in support of Israel” would be in session. Atta, who lived in Germany with several other hijackers, “denounced what he described as a global Jewish movement centered in New York City which, he claimed, controlled the financial world and the media.”

    In a chilling detail, the report also mentions that KSM indicated that Mullah Omar, the former Taliban leader in Afghanistan, “opposed [Al Qaeda’s plan to attack] the United States for ideological reasons but permitted attacks against Jewish targets.”

    “Bin Laden, on the other hand, reportedly argued that attacks against the United States needed to be carried out immediately to support the insurgency in the Israeli-occupied territories and to protest the presence of U.S. military forces in Saudi Arabia,” according to the report.
    Moreover, he wished to accelerate the attacks twice, both in response to what he considered "provocative" actions by Sharon. I wouldn't claim that he didn't oppose Western "decadence," but his opposition would not have been characterized by such a violent backlash had he not regarded the existence of financial and military support as an imposition of that decadence. As has been previously noted, he did not choose to attack the significantly more "decadent" Sweden or the Netherlands, for instance.

    This reality is certainly confirmed by opinion polling of the Arab populace on the matter. Zogby International's Impressions of America 2004: A Six-Nation Survey (go to page 90), summarizes this well, noting that "[w]hen asked whether their overall attitude toward the US was shaped by their feelings about American values or US policies, in all six countries, an overwhelming percentage of respondents indicated that policy played a more important role."

    Quote Originally Posted by Dav View Post
    The only way we can prevent any form of hostility towards the U.S. is if we were completely isolationist, which isn't going to happen.
    That's decidedly incorrect, but your words make it clear that you realize that at least some degree of interventionism is to blame regardless. Thanks.

    Quote Originally Posted by Apocalypse View Post
    One should remember though, that the situation described in the second 'case' is really irrelevant, as once again, an empire such as the US cannot be an isolationist, that's just not possible.
    You do the same. You're aware that much of this terrorism is inspired by hostility towards the foreign policy of U.S. political regimes abroad, so you attempt to excuse this by claiming that avoidance of this is an impossibility, and that if it was not provoked by your preferred policy (unmitigated and unconditional support for Israeli political regimes), it would be provoked by another source. This is also of dubious veracity.

    Quote Originally Posted by LowRevs View Post
    Ridiculous hypothetical. Anyone can have an opinion but no-one can provide any logical proof of either position.
    Clear and unambiguous evidence of a powerful motivation for the most extensive terrorist attack that occurred constitutes logical proof of my position, I suspect.

  4. #34
    Advisor Regicollis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Denmark
    Last Seen
    12-09-10 @ 11:35 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    318

    Re: "Islamic Terrorism" - Dependent or Independent?

    If one study the last 100 years of western policies towards the Islamic world on would understand why Muslims have every right to be angry at us. Western nations have supported sanguinary regimes in the Middle East and helped them quell every political opposition. The impossibility of political resistance against imperialism made room for the rather nasty religious resistance known as Islamic terrorism.

    Imagine what would have happened if we had let Muslims decide their own matters instead of putting brutal puppet regimes in place to crush every movement towards social justice.
    The poor complain; they always do
    But that’s just idle chatter
    Our system brings reward to all
    At least all those who matter.

  5. #35
    DEATH TO ANTARCTICA!!!
    Apocalypse's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Israel
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:30 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    17,188

    Re: "Islamic Terrorism" - Dependent or Independent?

    Quote Originally Posted by Agnapostate View Post
    You do the same. You're aware that much of this terrorism is inspired by hostility towards the foreign policy of U.S. political regimes abroad, so you attempt to excuse this by claiming that avoidance of this is an impossibility, and that if it was not provoked by your preferred policy (unmitigated and unconditional support for Israeli political regimes), it would be provoked by another source. This is also of dubious veracity.
    I have no preferred US foreign policy.
    The US is not expressing unconditional support for Israel (Objection to settlements).

    Now that we've separated the right from wrong:
    Terrorism is not rational.
    Terrorists are not rational people.
    Islamic Terrorists, specifically, do not embrace rationality.

    If one expects them to react to specific moves and policies in a predicted way, he is taking in mind that they are rational.

    Islamic terrorists might "react" to anything.
    Whether it's the US alliance with Israel or the US involvement in Iraq or simply one individual offending their prophet.
    That is unpredicted, that is irrational, that is independent.
    "The darkest places in hell are reserved for those who maintain their neutrality in times of moral crisis."

    Dante Alighieri

  6. #36
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Between Hollywood and Compton.
    Last Seen
    11-25-09 @ 12:02 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    5,497

    Re: "Islamic Terrorism" - Dependent or Independent?

    Quote Originally Posted by Apocalypse View Post
    I have no preferred US foreign policy.
    The US is not expressing unconditional support for Israel (Objection to settlements).
    I can only laugh at the idea that stated objection to settlement construction without any active suspension of financial aid to that political regime constitutes anything substantive. If the rightists here didn't support that regime unconditionally themselves, they'd constantly mock that as another example of the administration's apathy and ineffectiveness.

    Quote Originally Posted by Apocalypse View Post
    Islamic terrorists might "react" to anything.
    Whether it's the US alliance with Israel or the US involvement in Iraq or simply one individual offending their prophet.
    That is unpredicted, that is irrational, that is independent.
    Let's try not to make wild assertions. We can see quite clearly what the motivation I'm speaking of was, so there's no use in trying to claim that any random action could have triggered this campaign.

  7. #37
    DEATH TO ANTARCTICA!!!
    Apocalypse's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Israel
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:30 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    17,188

    Re: "Islamic Terrorism" - Dependent or Independent?

    Quote Originally Posted by Agnapostate View Post
    I can only laugh at the idea that stated objection to settlement construction without any active suspension of financial aid to that political regime constitutes anything substantive. If the rightists here didn't support that regime unconditionally themselves, they'd constantly mock that as another example of the administration's apathy and ineffectiveness.
    How are you able to declare unconditional support when there is a stated diversion is beyond me.
    Or wait, I'll use your words, I can only laugh at this idea.
    Har har har.
    Let's try not to make wild assertions. We can see quite clearly what the motivation I'm speaking of was, so there's no use in trying to claim that any random action could have triggered this campaign.
    'We' is a collective term.
    "The darkest places in hell are reserved for those who maintain their neutrality in times of moral crisis."

    Dante Alighieri

  8. #38
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Between Hollywood and Compton.
    Last Seen
    11-25-09 @ 12:02 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    5,497

    Re: "Islamic Terrorism" - Dependent or Independent?

    Quote Originally Posted by Apocalypse View Post
    How are you able to declare unconditional support when there is a stated diversion is beyond me.
    Or wait, I'll use your words, I can only laugh at this idea.
    Har har har.
    'We' is a collective term.
    Again, failure to incorporate a relevant argument into your post, though you did manage to include your standard lack of spacing. Silly Billy.

  9. #39
    DEATH TO ANTARCTICA!!!
    Apocalypse's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Israel
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:30 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    17,188

    Re: "Islamic Terrorism" - Dependent or Independent?

    Quote Originally Posted by Agnapostate View Post
    Again, failure to incorporate a relevant argument into your post, though you did manage to include your standard lack of spacing. Silly Billy.
    Would you approve my post if it had















    spacing in it?
    "The darkest places in hell are reserved for those who maintain their neutrality in times of moral crisis."

    Dante Alighieri

  10. #40
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Between Hollywood and Compton.
    Last Seen
    11-25-09 @ 12:02 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    5,497

    Re: "Islamic Terrorism" - Dependent or Independent?

    Nah. Arguments might help, though.

Page 4 of 11 FirstFirst ... 23456 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •