Creating Terrorists, Why do we continue to do it?

[cpwill]

Make your case to historians then. Until you convince them, the record stands.

:lol: what do you think modern history is saying? as we move away from the need to provide ideological support for FDR, the community is able to objectively grade him, and within a reasonable degree more distance always helps (you know how they always say you have to wait 50 years to get a full "real" read on a President?) ohhhh but arthur schlessinger back in the 60's and 70's disagreed and thought he was wonderful :mrgreen: :roll: whatever. when you are capable of arguing that FDR somehow "lifted us out" of the Great Depression that lasted for basically his entire presidency, then i'll maybe take your claim seriously. until then, FDR myth destroyed once more


oooh! want me to do woodrow wilson?

 

[Catawba]

oooh! want me to do woodrow wilson?

You haven't made the case against FDR yet.

 

[justabubba]

i note that we have strayed FAR from the OP's topic, Creating Terrorists, Why do we continue to do it?, and into a discussion of new deal politics
to continue that derail, please note the following rebuttal, which is not my own (and to avoid being dinged again for not following the fair use provisions of the TOS, i shall offer only brief excerpts):

... But what does this study actually argue? And why do conservatives always bring it up? Well, to answer the last question first, they use it in their arguments because it’s pretty much all they have. The UCLA study is famous precisely because it is in a select few that have asserted FDR’s role in the Great Depression as that of villain rather than hero. ...

... The problem with the conservative argument and their use of the UCLA study to prove their point is that Cole and Ohanian point to a single policy as the cause for much of the stifled economic recovery, one that was only in existence for two years, the National Industrial Recovery Act (NIRA). ...

... basically, what the 2004 UCLA study concluded was that inflated prices and wages were the cause of the slowed recovery, and the NIRA which FDR signed into law was the cause of that inflation, resulting in a 60% weaker recovery. However, because NIRA was deemed unconstitutional by the Supreme Court two years after it was enacted, a repeat of this particular economic policy mistake by the Obama administration would be impossible. While NIRA may have been somewhat of a blunder in terms of New Deal solutions, it was but one of many policies instituted by FDR, and although Cole and Ohanian present a good case, the general consensus remains that New Deal policies by and large were successful.

[emphasis added by bubba]
Did FDR’s New Deal policies really prolong the Great Depression? Will Obama’s policies have a similar effect? Rebel

here is another more stinging rebuttal of the Harold L. Cole and Lee E. Ohanian assessment:
The New Deal and right-wing revisionism - The Boston Globe
i can't resist offering up this pointed excerpt from that conclusion:

... Unfortunately for conservatives, the evidence cuts against their conclusions. The rise in unemployment followed FDR's cutback in government spending in 1937. The resulting spike in unemployment prompted him to shift courses and expand spending again, whereupon unemployment again fell. ...

 

[Catawba]

ummm i hate to be the one to break it to you, but nowhere in that does that state that the Supreme Court shall determine what is and is not Constitutional .

Since you deny the Supreme Court is the Constitutionally designated body to make the final call on interpretations of the Constitution, whom do you believe is the Constitutional entity charged with that task, and your Constitutional reference to back it up?

 

[Catawba]

i note that we have strayed FAR from the OP's topic

Yeah, I apologize for that JB. They evidently gave up on trying to prove we have not aided the terrorists in their recruitment efforts.

 

[justabubba]

Yeah, I apologize for that JB. They evidently gave up on trying to prove we have not aided the terrorists in their recruitment efforts.

you were the OP. it was we who took off on a tangent
it took me some significant time before i would allow myself to acknowledge that our government could do wrong, especially when it did so knowingly
i had to be able to get past the perception that being critical of my government's actions was to be disloyal
i am now of a belief it is our responsibility, as American citizens, to point out the wrongs as we see them, so that they can be addressed
we all want the same thing ... that our country should remain great. it's how we attain that where some of us seem to differ

and my apologies to the international members for having to suffer thru that near jingoistic affirmation of civic duty

 

[ScummyD]

Yes

:lamo Thanks for proving my point.

Dred Scott v. Sandford - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

:lamo That bastion of credible and trustworthy information.

 

[Z3n]

Islamism and despots created these failed states. Their motivation to radicalize is theocratic indoctrination, they don't scream "neo-liberalism is bad" before they kill innocent civilians they scream Allah Akhbar.

First off, its called Islam.

Despots more or less instated by the West to protect an anti-communist agenda that now has serious reprocussions as we are seeing, especially in the middle east.

Give me a ****ing break, living standards in Saudi Arabia for example are actually relatively high. Once again the latest Nigerian to try to off himself and hundreds of innocent civilians was a ****ing trust fund baby. Bin Laden himself is another trust fund baby. Poverty has absolutely **** all to do with it catch a clue.

Poverty has absolutely everything to do with it. Bin Laden is a trust fund baby because he is .001% of the population that is an heir to saudi arabian oil. I'm not saying its a cause for terrorism, but it does lead to the failure of state infrastructure. Ever wonder why rentier states mostly stay undeveloped?

When party elites and regional warlords like Afghanistani mujahedin groups control the natural resources and don't allow Afghanistan to have sound and effective governmental penetration of serious social issues like Sharia and agricultural political economics, that tends to be an indicator of a failed state.

Um ya and being exposed to teachers and clergy who teach that it's the greatest thing in the world to martyr ones self for an imaginary man in the sky since the cradle it tends to indoctrinate one to become a terrorists.

I'm not arguing this. That's a tu quoque fallacy. I merely stated that stating "indoctrination" is a facetious attempt to ad hom an opposing view.

You don't think it's bad to indoctrinate children from the cradle to the grave to kill innocent men, women, and children, is a bad thing?

You make it sound like more than the vast minority of practicing Muslims are fundamentalists. Xenophobia in the limelight.

pfft, ya patriotism is exactly on the same level of badness as teaching kids that it's a good thing to bring the whole of dar al-Harb into the fold of dar al-Islam through offensive Jihad. :roll: Try listening to yourself.

The mere fact that you try to discredit and argument by changing the tone of discourse tells me you don't understand the nature of my posit. Patriotism, or better stated identity nationalism, can be an example of so called "indoctrination". When one views the world through a U.S.-centric lens that tends to happen. Hitler's youth were "patriots", the "White man's burden" was widely adopted and accepted by nationalists and colonialists in western europe, et al.

 

[Agent Ferris]

First off, its called Islam.

Despots more or less instated by the West to protect an anti-communist agenda that now has serious reprocussions as we are seeing, especially in the middle east.

Name one that we instated sport?

Poverty has absolutely everything to do with it. Bin Laden is a trust fund baby because he is .001% of the population that is an heir to saudi arabian oil. I'm not saying its a cause for terrorism, but it does lead to the failure of state infrastructure. Ever wonder why rentier states mostly stay undeveloped?

Tell me sport which one of the 19 hijackers on 9-11 WASN'T a relatively well educated middle class kid? FYI the Fort Hood shooter was a dr. as were the London car bombers. The Nigerian was another ****ing trust fund baby.

Sir you know absolutely nothing about the typology of a terrorist. In fact psychological forensics puts the typology of the vast VAST majority of terrorists at middle class and well educated. Poverty has absolutely nothing to ****ing to do with it.

Get educated:

One of the best known, most comprehensive, and most often cited of these efforts is a profile developed by Russell and Miller (1977110) based on a compilation of published data regarding over 350 individual terrorist cadres and leaders across 18 different Palestinian, Japanese, German, Italian, Turkish, Irish, Spanish, Iranian, Argentina, Brazilian, and Uruguayan terrorist groups active during the 1966-1976 time span. The prototype derived from their composite described a young (22-25), unmarried male who is an urban resident, from a middle-upper class family, has some university education and probably held an extremist political philosophy.

http://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/208552.pdf

When party elites and regional warlords like Afghanistani mujahedin groups control the natural resources and don't allow Afghanistan to have sound and effective governmental penetration of serious social issues like Sharia and agricultural political economics, that tends to be an indicator of a failed state.

Um the Taliban along with the Soviets created the failed state of Afghanistan, and fyi the Taliban were made up of Islamist university students not a bunch of poor little street urchens.

I'm not arguing this. That's a tu quoque fallacy. I merely stated that stating "indoctrination" is a facetious attempt to ad hom an opposing view.

Um no it's not an ad hom at all when it is in fact true, it's not an opinion that these people indoctrinated from the cradle to the grave to hate and kill the infidel, it's a cold hard fact.

You make it sound like more than the vast minority of practicing Muslims are fundamentalists. Xenophobia in the limelight.

WTF are you talking about? Are you suggesting that every single Islamist isn't a fundamentalist? Oh fyi sport salafist Islam is in fact the most prevalent form of Islam being taught today, but don't take my word for it:

"We're not talking about a fringe cult here .... Salafist [fundamentalist] Islam is the dominant version of the religion and is taught in almost every Islamic university in the world. It is puritanical, extreme and does, yes, mean that women can be beaten, apostates killed and Jews called pigs and monkeys." -- Dr. Tawfik Hamid

The mere fact that you try to discredit and argument by changing the tone of discourse tells me you don't understand the nature of my posit. Patriotism, or better stated identity nationalism, can be an example of so called "indoctrination". When one views the world through a U.S.-centric lens that tends to happen. Hitler's youth were "patriots", the "White man's burden" was widely adopted and accepted by nationalists and colonialists in western europe, et al.

:roll: Hitler's youth were indoctrinated into a cult of personality much like Islamist youth are today, it's no secret that the founders of the modern Islamist movement; such as, Qutb and al-Banna and the Nazi Mufti had a ****ing hard on for Hitler.

 

[Catawba]

:lamo That bastion of credible and trustworthy information.

Degreez, site moderator -

"Wikipedia sources most assertions and factual claims. To say it is not a reliable source is fallacious and misleading."

Access : Internet encyclopaedias go head to head : Nature

[ame=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reliability_of_Wikipedia]Reliability of Wikipedia - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia[/ame]

 

[Agent Ferris]

Again, I am all for maintaining a defensive force.

Maintaining a solely defensive force will not maintain national security.

 

[justabubba]

Maintaining a solely defensive force will not maintain national security.

why won't it?

 

[Agent Ferris]

why won't it?

How in the hell does a defensive force defeat plotter half a world a way seeking to strike against U.S. citizens everywhere in the world?

 

[Catawba]

Maintaining a solely defensive force will not maintain national security.

Thanks for your opinion. IMO, an 9 year war against countries that never attacked us has not reduced the capacity of the radicals so I consider it a waste and not necessary for the defense of the US, and therefore outside the criteria outlined in the Constitution.

 

[Z3n]

Name one that we instated sport?

The shah of Iran?

Sir you know absolutely nothing about the typology of a terrorist. In fact psychological forensics puts the typology of the vast VAST majority of terrorists at middle class and well educated. Poverty has absolutely nothing to ****ing to do with it.

Bro I'm talking about failed states not terrorism.

Um the Taliban along with the Soviets created the failed state of Afghanistan, and fyi the Taliban were made up of Islamist university students not a bunch of poor little street urchens.

I'm pretty sure the U.S. funding the Mujahedin because they weren't "communists" was the major reason why the Taliban came into Qandahar in 1994, the arms they had were predominantly western because of the existential threat of communism.

The U.S. also sent books on how to be a jihadist to rural Afghanistani villages and schools.

How do I know? Oh I don't know, one of my professors works in the peace corps and took pictures of them

Um no it's not an ad hom at all when it is in fact true, it's not an opinion that these people indoctrinated from the cradle to the grave to hate and kill the infidel, it's a cold hard fact.

What are you even talking about lol. Jihad has absolutely nothing to do with killing infidels.... "get educated". Jihad - Definition and More from the Merriam-Webster Dictionary

I actually know muslims(i have two friends that i am very close friends with me and are pakistani immigrants) and jihad is taught as islamization of state and not as violent fundamentalism.

WTF are you talking about? Are you suggesting that every single Islamist isn't a fundamentalist? Oh fyi sport salafist Islam is in fact the most prevalent form of Islam being taught today, but don't take my word for it:

"We're not talking about a fringe cult here .... Salafist [fundamentalist] Islam is the dominant version of the religion and is taught in almost every Islamic university in the world. It is puritanical, extreme and does, yes, mean that women can be beaten, apostates killed and Jews called pigs and monkeys." -- Dr. Tawfik Hamid

Define "Islamist" for me. I stated that a small minority of Muslims are radicalized and the entire xenophobic reactionary culture romanticizes the conflict to extreme proportions.

That quote is most likely taken out of context and used anecdotally.

 

[Agent Ferris]

Thanks for your opinion. IMO, an 9 year war against countries that never attacked us has not reduced the capacity of the radicals so I consider it a waste and not necessary for the defense of the US, and therefore outside the criteria outlined in the Constitution.

Both Iraq and Afghanistan committed numerous acts of war against the U.S.. So basically you're completely FOS and/or know absolutely nothing about what you're talking about.

 

[Catawba]

Both Iraq and Afghanistan committed numerous acts of war against the U.S.. So basically you're completely FOS and/or know absolutely nothing about what you're talking about.

What resources did they bring to bear on us that represented a threat to the most powerful nation on the planet?

 

[Agent Ferris]

The shah of Iran?

We didn't install him. We aided in reinstalling him. It was a counter coup not a coup.

Bro I'm talking about failed states not terrorism.

Um you claimed poverty was a root cause of terrorism when in fact it has **** all to do with the typology of a terrorist and the fact of the matter is that the exact inverse is true, most terrorists are middle class and well educated.

I'm pretty sure the U.S. funding the Mujahedin because they weren't "communists" was the major reason why the Taliban came into Qandahar in 1994, the arms they had were predominantly western because of the existential threat of communism.

We never funded the Taliban, it didn't even exist yet. We never funded the foreign jihadists either we funded the indigenous mujahadeen; such as, Ahmad Shah Massoud who actually went on to lead the Taliban's principal adversary the Northern Alliance.

The U.S. also sent books on how to be a jihadist to rural Afghanistani villages and schools.

How do I know? Oh I don't know, one of my professors works in the peace corps and took pictures of them

:Roll: Show me one of these books which taught Islamist indoctrination rather than simply guerilla warfare.

What are you even talking about lol. Jihad has absolutely nothing to do with killing infidels.... "get educated". Jihad - Definition and More from the Merriam-Webster Dictionary

Ya holy war has absolutely nothing to do with killing infidels. :roll: Good god you just pwned yourself sport.

I actually know muslims(i have two friends that i am very close friends with me and are pakistani immigrants) and jihad is taught as islamization of state and not as violent fundamentalism.

Bull****.

Define "Islamist" for me.

Any radical Muslim.

I stated that a small minority of Muslims are radicalized and the entire xenophobic reactionary culture romanticizes the conflict to extreme proportions.

Well once again you don't know what you're talking about, Salafist Islam is the dominant form of Islam today.

That quote is most likely taken out of context and used anecdotally.

You don't know who the hell you're talking about, you don't know what the hell you're talking about, Dr. Tawfik Hamid is an anti-Islamist advocate for moderate Islamic reformation.

 

[Z3n]

no, the CIA and MI6 went to the capital and staged a military coup to remove Mossadeq who wanted to nationalize anglo-iranian oil.

I think if you took a theology class you wouldn't be so paranoid.

 

[Agent Ferris]

What resources did they bring to bear on us that represented a threat to the most powerful nation on the planet?

So let me get this straight you don't believe the murder of U.S. citizens by national and subnational actors constitute attacks? What is your definition of an attack sir?

 

[justabubba]

How in the hell does a defensive force defeat plotter half a world a way seeking to strike against U.S. citizens everywhere in the world?

we let the authorities deal with it
so, you think our citizens in china are unsafe only because we have no military bases in that nation?

 

[Catawba]

So let me get this straight you don't believe the murder of U.S. citizens by national and subnational actors constitute attacks? What is your definition of an attack sir?

Which Afghans or Iraqis killed US citizens?

 

[Agent Ferris]

no, the CIA and MI6 went to the capital and staged a military coup to remove Mossadeq who wanted to nationalize anglo-iranian oil.

Um no following the coup enacted by Mossadeq in which he dissolved parliament through a fraudulent referendum in which he garnered a 99.9% yay vote after which he granted himself indefinite emergency powers the CIA and MI6 aided the Shah and his allies in a counter coup against the tyrant Mossadeq.

I think if you took a theology class you wouldn't be so paranoid.

I've taken two. I'm an atheist. Religion in all forms is abhorrent to me but the death cult of Wahhab is especially repugnant.

 

[Z3n]

Mohammad Mosaddeq (premier of Iran) -- Britannica Online Encyclopedia

I don't see any of this staged election malarky

 

[Agent Ferris]

Mohammad Mosaddeq (premier of Iran) -- Britannica Online Encyclopedia

I don't see any of this staged election malarky

Well you need to seriously get educated and get your history from an actual history book.