|
|
|
Community Coordinator, newsobserver.com and triangle.com
|
|
|
Yes
Doug,
Indeed.
"War" time often galvanizes people into such a supposed unity against a
supposedly easily identifiable enemy that they not only tolerate such
erosions, but encourage them.
The Taliban had originally been
at least verbally open (how much sincere tehy were is another issue) to
turning Osama bin Laden over to an Islamic court, but the U.S. said no.
The U.S. wants to be both police and judge on a geopolitical scale.
Imagine if that were the case in the courts you and I might be subject
to. The police officer who claims you are the murder gets to determine
your guilt or innocence and decide on your punishment.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Not only that. The Taliban also stated that they would be willing to
turn Osama bin Laden over to the US if they were presented with
evidence linking him to terrorist attacks (not even being specific
which terrorist attacks!). Unfortunately the US chose to show its
uncommunicative , undemocratic, suppressive, ignorant, bullish,
imperialistic attitude. The attitude that got it into trouble in the
first place.
It's
not the 'western civilisation' that is under attack, it is that US
attitude. When islamic culture is endangered by 'westernism', it's
clear that fundamentalist extremists will rise.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I wonder where we would be now in this regard if the US would have elected Ralph Nader rather than this behind the Bush guy.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Director of Education, WCI
|
|
|
Actually, that is a Taliban lie
Chris writes:
"Not
only that. The Taliban also stated that they would be willing to turn
Osama bin Laden over to the US if they were presented with evidence
linking him to terrorist attacks (not even being specific which
terrorist attacks!). Unfortunately the US chose to show its
uncommunicative , undemocratic, suppressive, ignorant, bullish,
imperialistic attitude. The attitude that got it into trouble in the
first place."
It's actually been well
documented that the Taliban were just using delaying tactics by
suggesting they were willing to turn over bin Laden if they were
presented with evidence.
It has come out recently that the U.S. had been negotiating in perfectly good faith for several
years
now to get bin Laden turned over. Ever since the African embassy
bombings. The U.S. even had Taliban people visit Washington. The
Taliban did not negotiate in good faith at all. It was all lies.
Say what you will about the U.S., with regards to this particular situation I believe the U.S. is very much in the right.
Let's not fall sway to anti-American propoganda just for the sake of cutting down the U.S.
And
it very much is civilization under attack. Any people who would hijack
commercial jet-liners and crash them into office buildings really do
give up any right to consideration of any kind. Those are not people to
be "negotiated" with. They are barbarians.
doug
If you are not part of the solution you are part of the precipitate.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
...the U.S. had been negotiating in perfectly good faith for several years...
I'm
happy to hear that - that's good news. However, it's actually besides
the point I wanted to make. In regards to what I'm blabing about, it's
the perception only that matters. If the Taliban say 'we want to
negotiate' and the US say 'No, do what we said or we'll nuke you' (just
kidding of course, but you know what I mean), it sends a (possibly even
badly translated) message to the members of that other culture, that
will fuel extremism.
Let's not fall sway to anti-American propoganda just for the sake of cutting down the U.S.
Just
for the record: I love the US. When the USA were formed at the end of
the 18th century, its principal of the sovereign individual was
inspired by Switzerland and the Swiss constitution of 1848 was inspired
by the US constitution. To me, the USA are our only true sister
republic. However

That doesn't mean that US foreign policies didn't develope their flaws.
The
US seems to have a hard time communicating with other cultures. Other
cultures misunderstand the US attitude as imperialistic (and you can
add all those other adjectives I used above).
It's 'westernism' that led to these attacks - not 'western civilisation'.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Smash forehead on keyboard to continue....
|
|
|
Do what we say or we will start bombing...
We should have said, 'Do what we say and the bombing will stop
maybe'. The Taliban and these terrorist groups believed, wrongly, that
the US would be indecisive and weak when faced with mass murder.
"It's 'westernism' that led to these attacks.. "
Terror is not about culture or religion or even westernism, it's
about power. The ability of a few to control the actions of the many.
The only possible answer to terrorism is eradication of the terrorist.
The Taliban and Al Quaid forfeited the right to discuss terms of
compliance when the first terrorist took over the first airplane.
There were many other methods available to these people to fight
westernism. They choose war and now we must all pay the price. They
choose how the fight started; we will choose how the fight ends.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Yes, you don't (and one shouldn't) negotiate with terrorists. But the
terrorists are not the problem, they are a symptom. A symptom of the
problem caused by the 'westernism' attitude. It's just unfortunate that
we have to direct energy towards dealing with symptoms like that, when
all it would come down to at the end is just a question of attitude
towards other cultures.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Director of Education, WCI
|
|
|
Chris wrote:
"Yes,
you don't (and one shouldn't) negotiate with terrorists. But the
terrorists are not the problem, they are a symptom. A symptom of the
problem caused by the 'westernism' attitude."
That seems to mysteriously turn events on its head. The problem
is
the terrorists. Your statement implies that these are people of reason.
All evidence suggests they are not interested in civilized solutions,
they are interested in wreaking chaos and destroying civilization as
part of their religious war.
No foreign policy of the U.S. would satisfy them short of the complete abandonment of Israel and self-destruction.
We are not talking about people succeptible to diplomatic niceties, Chris.
doug
If you are not part of the solution you are part of the precipitate.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
That seems to mysteriously turn events on its head. The problem is the terrorists.
No,
it's a symptom. The problem is how a qualified minority of the 'other
culture' perceives the US attitude. Of course, there would always be a
small fraction of extremists. But if they couldn't build on a qualified
minority that misunderstands the US then they would remain passive.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Director of Education, WCI
|
|
|
If terrorists hijacking jetliners and crashing them into office
buildings is not the problem but merely the "symptom" of the problem
that what, pray tell, do you imagine the cure to be?
doug
If you are not part of the solution you are part of the precipitate.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Director of Community Development, WCI
|
|
|
I think Chris has a point...
While
it's certainly true that there's no excusing terrorism or the kind of
lack of moral compass that makes flying an airplane into an office
building like a cruise missle an acceptable or even honorable thing to
do, don't you wonder WHY the folks who did it felt so angry and
desperate that they were willing to suicide to get their point across?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
don't you wonder WHY the folks who did it felt so
angry and desperate that they were willing to suicide to get their
point across?
Because they were insane psychopaths?
If there's anything "wrong" with secular humanism, it's this urge to value every opinion, even the clearly lunatic.
Now,
if your question is, "why were there Palestineans cheering in the
streets afterward," that's a valid question. If your question is, "why
are we so quick to ignore that half the world is happy to believe that
the attacks were perpetrated by Israel," likewise.
But if you want to understand why killers kill? Sorry, it's enough to say -- lunatic. Evil. Take your pick.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|