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 6 of 11 FirstFirst ... 45678 ... LastLast
Results 51 to 60 of 107

Thread: "Islamic Terrorism" - Dependent or Independent?

  1. #51
    Meh...
    MSgt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Colorado
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 07:38 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    18,013

    Re: "Islamic Terrorism" - Dependent or Independent?

    Quote Originally Posted by Agnapostate View Post
    EDIT: I'm not necessarily asking what would happen if foreign policy approaches were changed now. Try to answer as though responding to the question of whether such terrorism would have been initiated in the first place if certain foreign policy had never existed in the first place.
    In the 1940s a man named Sayyid Qutb visited the U.S. He went on to author a books criticizing and demonizing the American culture. The Muslim Brotherhood, of which most terrorist are members or "former" members of, hold his teachings as truly inspirational and insightful as to what the enemy of Allah is.

    Now, let's consider something. When Israel was created, it was the Russians that voiced the loudest for its creation. And it was the Russians that went on to supply the Israelis the very weapons that saved them from the Arab onslaught through Checkoslovakia. The U.S. wanted Israel created with the understanding that no weapons were to flood the region. Yet, Sayyid Qutb chose America to be that demon on earth with expressed writings on our culture.

    When the Soviet Union invaded Afghanistan, who was there to save Muslims? When Muslims were being tormented and abused in Kuwait by other Muslims, who was there to save them? When Muslims were being slaughtered and starved to death by other Muslims in Somalia, who organized the international community? When nobody cared at all about the slaughter of Muslims in Bosnia, who was there to save them? Aren't the freest and most successful Muslims on the planet in the U.S.? Was it America that oppressed hundreds of Muslims in the Caucasus or was it the Soviets? Did America prescribe religious oppression throughout the ME? If Bin LAden's true pronblem is the existence of the House of Saud, it may be helpful to some to acknowledge that Saudi Arabia and Afghanistan were never colonized by Europeans. In other words, left to their own devices, they create their own failure.


    These terrorists use anything to legitimize their hatreds and resentments towards the U.S. But no Arab cares about the Shah of Iran and no Shia cares about Saudi Arabia. The Bashir's go unnoticed just as long as they slaughter non-Arabs and the terrorist organizations that slaughter non Sunni players are cheered for behind closed doors. The absolute worst enemy a Muslim ever had was another Muslim. Hell even Jordanians and Syrians managed to slaughter far more Palestinians than Israelis managed to kill in 60 years of conflict. It wasn't even America that ended the caliphate in the 1920s. Mulsim Turks did this all by themselves.

    Ultimately it all goes back to the American culture and what the sources of these organizations hold dear to their heart. Qutb chose America to represent all that is evil in this world. Exaggerated justifications merely give the world an earthly "understanding."

    MSgt
    Semper Fidelis
    USMC

  2. #52
    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?

    It would be the ultimate fantasy of the jingoists who support interventionist political regimes for only barbaric and irrational fanatics to rise in opposition to those regimes regardless of the foreign policy they engage in, but I'd appreciate more direct response to the aforementioned evidence of an obvious connection between AQ plotting and Israeli governmental action instead of abstract ruminations that unsurprisingly overlook the terrorism of figures like Begin, Shamir, and Sharon.

  3. #53
    Meh...
    MSgt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Colorado
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 07:38 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    18,013

    Re: "Islamic Terrorism" - Dependent or Independent?

    Quote Originally Posted by Laila View Post
    Only fools think the foreign policy of countries do not cause consequences and reactions and in many ways a backlash.

    US and many countries in Europe, especially UK in particular has ****ed around with the Middle East as if it is its own little playground to muck around with.

    YET, the grand daddy of them all has gone without recognition. Any reason why the Soviets can get away with oppressing and brutalizing hundreds of millions of Muslims in the Caucasus? Or get away with no reprisals over Afghanistan? Or for having a history of aggression against Iran?

    Was it the Russians who rushed to rescue Muslims in Bosnia? Or Kuwait? Or Somalia? Is it the Russians that strive to bring peace between Israelis and Palestinians decade after decade? Was it the Russians that backed the French and the British out of the Suez Canal War?

    The simple notion that American foriegn policy (which is entirely exaggerated) has more to do with our enemy targetting us than our culture (which is what their religious leaders continually point out) is stupid.

    MSgt
    Semper Fidelis
    USMC

  4. #54
    Disappointed Evolutionist
    Catawba's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Last Seen
    05-28-13 @ 08:15 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    27,254

    Re: "Islamic Terrorism" - Dependent or Independent?

    Quote Originally Posted by Agnapostate View Post
    Would the phenomenon commonly referred to as "Islamic terrorism" continue to be directed against U.S. targets at existing levels regardless of U.S. political regimes' foreign policy and support of the Israeli government due to an inherent hatred of civil rights/liberties, religious pluralism and relative secularism, and political freedoms on the part of certain Muslims?

    EDIT: I'm not necessarily asking what would happen if foreign policy approaches were changed now. Try to answer as though responding to the question of whether such terrorism would have been initiated in the first place if certain foreign policy had never existed in the first place.
    The Rand Corporation has determined that terrorism has grown worldwide due to our foreign policy. That goes along with common sense - If you kill people and blow up peoples countries that never attacked us, it does nothing but provide fuel for the terrorist's recruiting efforts.

    They have no need to create propaganda against us. We create our own enemies.
    Treat the earth well: it was not given to you by your parents, it was loaned to you by your children. We do not inherit the Earth from our Ancestors, we borrow it from our Children. ~ Ancient American Indian Proverb

  5. #55
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Ventura California
    Last Seen
    11-15-11 @ 11:17 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    8,706

    Re: "Islamic Terrorism" - Dependent or Independent?

    Quote Originally Posted by Agnapostate View Post
    Would the phenomenon commonly referred to as "Islamic terrorism" continue to be directed against U.S. targets at existing levels regardless of U.S. political regimes' foreign policy and support of the Israeli government due to an inherent hatred of civil rights/liberties, religious pluralism and relative secularism, and political freedoms on the part of certain Muslims?

    EDIT: I'm not necessarily asking what would happen if foreign policy approaches were changed now. Try to answer as though responding to the question of whether such terrorism would have been initiated in the first place if certain foreign policy had never existed in the first place.
    I am amused by the notion that terrorism could be the result of US policy based on the historic FACTS.

    Now perhaps if you claimed that the UN's creation of the State of Israel sparked much of the terrorism we are seeing in the Middle East; you might be getting luke warm.

    But then, in order to believe that we would also have to discard history and pretend that terrorism only began in the 1940's. This of course would require the willful suspension of common sense and the historic past.

  6. #56
    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 Truth Detector View Post
    Now perhaps if you claimed that the UN's creation of the State of Israel sparked much of the terrorism we are seeing in the Middle East; you might be getting luke warm.
    That would be incorrect, as the Irgun's activities predated the creation of Israel. However, I'm looking for a response to this post:

    Quote Originally Posted by Agnapostate View Post
    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."
    Feel free to provide one.

  7. #57
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Ventura California
    Last Seen
    11-15-11 @ 11:17 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    8,706

    Re: "Islamic Terrorism" - Dependent or Independent?

    Quote Originally Posted by Agnapostate View Post
    That would be incorrect, as the Irgun's activities predated the creation of Israel. However, I'm looking for a response to this post:

    Feel free to provide one.
    I find the purpose of your point elusive; I expressed exactly what you are expressing, that it is the Israeli question and the creation of the State of Israel that has much more to do with ME terrorism than anything the US has done.

    I pay little or no attention to the statements and claims made by someone like Osama Bin Laden or an organization like Al Qaeda whose sole existence requires lies, distortions and violence to survive, other than to take their threats serious, as they would make whatever farcical claims they can to support their murderous agenda that is based on lies.

    So help me out and try to express clearly what your point is or how your comments differ that much from mine?

  8. #58
    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 Truth Detector View Post
    I find the purpose of your point elusive; I expressed exactly what you are expressing, that it is the Israeli question and the creation of the State of Israel that has much more to do with ME terrorism than anything the US has done.
    Incorrect; I was referring to specific action on the part of that regime (try to pay attention and note OBL's desire to accelerate the timetable in response to Sharon's actions). Your commentary is therefore of little relevance.

  9. #59
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Past the edge of the universe, through the singularity, and out the other side.
    Last Seen
    09-01-10 @ 05:23 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    4,324

    Re: "Islamic Terrorism" - Dependent or Independent?

    Quote Originally Posted by Laila View Post
    Only fools think the foreign policy of countries do not cause consequences and reactions and in many ways a backlash.

    US and many countries in Europe, especially UK in particular has ****ed around with the Middle East as if it is its own little playground to muck around with.
    And the ME has ****ed around in the West, the East, the North and the South, but I don't see Christian, Buddhist, Hindu, Zoroastrian, etc etc waging holy war against Muslims do you? This is not about the foreign policy of the west it is about the foreign policy of Islamist supremacist expansionist imperialist and their goal to bring the entire world of dar al-Harb into the fold of dar al-Islam through offensive Jihad.

  10. #60
    DEATH TO ANTARCTICA!!!
    Apocalypse's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Israel
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 05:51 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    17,205

    Re: "Islamic Terrorism" - Dependent or Independent?

    Quote Originally Posted by Bodhisattva View Post
    Everything not only might, but DOES react to anything and everything else. And if you consider rationality in terms of predictability, then I simply don't know what to say other than this line of thought is obviously false. One not being able to predict another's reaction in no way makes the other's reaction irrational.
    Irrationality is measured by logic and logic alone.
    While predictability does not imply on rationality, irrationality implies on unpredictability by logic acceptance.

    Now I feel like Agna with all of those big words thrown around.
    "The darkest places in hell are reserved for those who maintain their neutrality in times of moral crisis."

    Dante Alighieri

Page 6 of 11 FirstFirst ... 45678 ... 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
  •