An Interesting Perspective

[Põdi]

quote:

---

Originally posted by aramike:

We have thousands of western troops in Europe and Japan alone.

How convienient.

[ 09-24-2001: Message edited by: aramike ]

---

No, really?

Your point being................?

My point was, as Kush pointed out later, is that we depend too much on Gulf oil and are shit-scared of losing it.

Think about it, a radical, anti-West government / dictatorship in one of the most oil-rich countries in the world. It really is scary.

or whatever smiley you choose to employ.

Addendum:

quote:

---

Nice dream, but you're right, not gonna happen any time soon

---

The thing is, oil is a finite resource, and until we make better use of an alternative (solar, wind, wave, hell even nuclear), we will always depend on the stability of the Middle East to supply our needs.

Notwithstanding the environmental consequences of fossil-fuels. That's another argument altogether.

[ 09-24-2001: Message edited by: Paddy Gregory ]

[Guest]

quote:

---

Think about it, a radical, anti-West government / dictatorship in one of the most oil-rich countries in the world. It really is scary.

---

One word, IRAQ, been there, done that, and it will not be allowed to happen again.

That is also why Bush wants to drill in Anwar, as well as other US oil reserve areas.

[Põdi]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Jaguar:

One word, IRAQ, been there, done that, and it will not be allowed to happen again.

---

And how, pray tell, can you guarantee that?

[aramike]

My point being (thinking it was obvious, considering that I quoted what I was responding to) that the fact that there are troops there indicates NOTHING.

[Guest]

quote:

---

And how, pray tell, can you guarantee that?

---

Northern and southern No fly zones, troops still stationed in Saudi Arabia, Destroying any offensive weapon that Saddam comes up with, fiber optic cabling for anti-aircraft batteries for one. No Saddam, whether he likes it or not will be contained.

ESPECIALLY now!! He cannot be allowed to continue the war that he started in 1990, and he will not be allowed to do so.

Bush is also going to start our inspections again, I can almost guarantee that as well. Clinton the whimp chickened out when Iraq booted them out. Bush is not Clinton, Thank the gods for that!! Bush will not put up with anything from Saddam, and he had better figure that out quick, or he and his country will become a target for our military AGAIN.

We know what happened the last time Saddam got our full attention. The whimpiest of all battles.

[Menchise]

quote:

---

The fact that it's false makes it false. I was just illustrating the fact that you ALWAYS see those in power as wrong, rather than attempt to see who is ACTUALLY wrong.

---

That's not a fact, it's an assumption. Questioning authority does not make me an anarchist.

quote:

---

Actually, their literacy rate is 94%.

http://beta.encarta.msn.com/find/Concise.a...575422&cid=8#p8

It is up from less than 3% in the 1960s. Obviously some things are changing there, for the better. Check that link for current facts.

---

OK, then. My statistics were out of date.

quote:

---

Actually, no. I assume NOTHING of no one, and derive my opinions from objective

facts.

---

I may assume a few things, but I don't ignore objective facts. Therefore, your statement that "there is no way the powerful can be good in my eyes" is not true.

quote:

---

If there is something that is powerful and popular that I see to be corrupt, I'll say it, hands down.

---

So will I.

quote:

---

But I don't justify murderers in any sense

---

Neither do I. I have said before that "the ends do not justify the means", but there is nothing wrong with pointing out what those "ends" are, and the "means" do not make the "ends" false.

quote:

---

Actually, they seem to point out an unfaltering pattern, which is why they are

employed.

---

Pointing out patterns in a debater's behaviour does not change the validity of a debater's opinions. Therefore, such points add nothing to a debate.

[aramike]

[Põdi]

quote:

---

Originally posted by aramike:

My point being (thinking it was obvious, considering that I quoted what I was responding to) that the fact that there are troops there indicates NOTHING.

---

You actually quoted my entire post

Think about the main point I was trying to make: a revolution in Saudi (be it Islamic , Communist or whatever) would be a seriously destabilising factor in Middle East politics, as well as buggering up the oil supply.

quote:

---

Northern and southern No fly zones, troops still stationed in Saudi Arabia, Destroying any offensive weapon that Saddam comes up with, fiber optic cabling for anti-aircraft batteries for one. No Saddam, whether he likes it or not will be contained.

ESPECIALLY now!! He cannot be allowed to continue the war that he started in 1990, and he will not be allowed to do so.

---

I meant if it were to happen in another country. I wasn't taling about Iraq.

I was just thinking about something aramike said earlier about Israel being surrounded by enemies hell bent on the destruction of the State of Israel. Israel's main neighbours are Egypt, Jordan, Lebanon and Syria. Of those, Egypt and Jordan are Western allies and although they may not be on exactly friendly terms with Israel, they are hardly aggressive. Southern Lebanon is controlled mainly be Israeli-backed Phalangist militia (who incidentally murdered and raped over 1700 Palestinian refugess at Shabra and Shatila in 1982 and the West called for 'restraint'). Only Syria remains outwardly hostile to Israel, and even then relations have improved over the last decade or so.

[aramike]

quote:

---

You actually quoted my entire post

---

Heh, I suppose I did.

[Menchise]

OK. My arguments have been rebutted quite well so far.

So, could someone tell me their opinion on why there is so much anti-American sentiment in the Middle East, including millions of Pakistanis who are calling Bin Ladin a "great man"?

So far, the only explanations that I recall at the moment are the statements made by Bush and Blair at the start of the crisis, which, in my opinion (if that still means anything ), are best described as "hot air".

[Põdi]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Menchise:

OK. My arguments have been rebutted quite well so far.

So, could someone tell me their opinion on why there is so much anti-American sentiment in the Middle East, including millions of Pakistanis who are calling Bin Ladin a "great man"?

So far, the only explanations that I recall at the moment are the statements made by Bush and Blair at the start of the crisis, which, in my opinion (if that still means anything ), are best described as "hot air".

---

1. Oil

2. Israel / Palestine

[Menchise]

Can you be more specific?

[ 09-25-2001: Message edited by: Menchise ]

[aramike]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Menchise:

OK. My arguments have been rebutted quite well so far.

So, could someone tell me their opinion on why there is so much anti-American sentiment in the Middle East, including millions of Pakistanis who are calling Bin Ladin a "great man"?

So far, the only explanations that I recall at the moment are the statements made by Bush and Blair at the start of the crisis, which, in my opinion (if that still means anything ), are best described as "hot air".

---

Well, the primary reason is truly religion. If you read up on many of those nations, you'll see that most have "arabization" programs in place. Many of the citizen-leaders don't want ANYONE around that is not muslim in faith. The governments aren't the problem in this regard -- the people are, due to the attraction of militant factions (which can be easily correlated to the following of the Islam religious teachings by decent spin doctors). As a result of this, many factional-type militant governments have popped up, such as the Taliban. In that part of the world, religion is the greatest driving force so those who play to people's desire to practice faith are the ones who are heard. Unfortunately, the militants are the ones who scream loudest.

Those militants, as a result, are HIGHLY anti-Jew in their sentiments. They do not want anyone in the area that does not share their faith, which is why Isreal must be well-armed.

As for what Bush and Blair have said, those are highly factual statements. Research it for yourself, if you don't believe me. Middle-eastern terrorism is mostly based upon religious virtues, and they preach racial cleansing. That is not an Islamic teaching, that is a teaching that comes from extremist interpretations.

Oil has little to do with ANYTHING in the area, as there are relatively few nations that actually produce any. OPEC isn't governed by most of the mid-east. Oil was just brought to light due to the Gulf War conflict.

[Põdi]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Menchise:

Can you be more specific?

[ 09-25-2001: Message edited by: Menchise ]

---

1. Oil

The West wants to protect the oil supply from Saudi, Kuwait etc. The presence of troops since the Gulf war helps maintain the stability and hence the supply and it is to the presence of these troops which many Middle East radicals object. Bin Laden has openly stated this.

2. Israel / Palestine

Whether you sympathise with the Israelis, the Palestinians or neither, that fact of the matter is that many Muslims object to the US' support of Israel, or at least lack of any condemnation. Remember, Sharon (or was it Tracy ?) was Israeli Minister of Defense when they went into Lebanon. I think that sticks in the throats of many who support the Palestinians.

These are just my OPINIONS of course, but that's what you asked for.

For the record, I fully support military action against the terrorists responsible, albeit a more subversive, counter-terrorist type operation rather than a large scale ground war, which many have ruled aout anyway.

You know what I think will happen? British and American special forces aid the Afghan opposition in strikes against the Taliban AND Bin Laden's camps. Once the Taliban militia has been sufficiently undermined, a larger scale action by the opposition, still supported by and large by the west (and Russia, beleive it or not) eventually leads to the Taliban being defeated and Bin Laden being captured or killed. The new Afghan government then 'requests' American / British troops to aid in peace-keeping etc. This will have the desired effect wihout the need for an invasion. The west could then claim to be helping a fledgling government find it's feet. Any action against the Taliban will have the support of Tehran, amazingly. Relations between Iran and the UK have already started improving.

There have already been reports of SAS units and Taliban militia exchaning fire, but I'm not sure if that has been substantiated or not.

It's surprising how many turn of events have changed course since the attack:

Open condemnation from Iran and Syria

Russia agreeing to a) support any action and to supply the Northern Alliance (didn't they used to fight them)

Kazakhstan and Ukraine allowing US forces to deploy

Amongst others.

I really think some good will come of this horrible tragedy (you may call me Pollyanna, but not Shirley).

Addendum:

Jesus aramike have you been up all night?

[ 09-25-2001: Message edited by: Paddy Gregory ]

[aramike]

quote:

---

Addendum:

Jesus aramike have you been up all night?

---

LOL! Yeah, I have work to do, a sick little girl, and an extremely exhausted wife. No rest for the weary.

[Põdi]

quote:

---

Originally posted by aramike:

LOL! Yeah, I have work to do, a sick little girl, and an extremely exhausted wife. No rest for the weary.

---

You poor sod. I know EXACTLY how you feel! Been there, done that.

[Menchise]

OK, three opinions have been given. It's question time.

quote:

---

Well, the primary reason is truly religion. If you read up on many of those nations, you'll see that most have "arabization" programs in place. Many of the citizen-leaders don't want ANYONE around that is not muslim in faith. The governments aren't the problem in this regard -- the people are, due to the attraction of militant factions (which can be easily correlated to the following of the Islam religious teachings by decent spin doctors). As a result of this, many factional-type militant governments have popped up, such as the Taliban. In that part of the world, religion is the greatest driving force so those who play to people's desire to practice faith are the ones who are heard. Unfortunately, the militants are the ones who scream loudest.

Those militants, as a result, are HIGHLY anti-Jew in their sentiments. They do not want anyone in the area that does not share their faith, which is why Isreal must be well-armed.

---

So you're saying that the anti-American sentiment is driven by fascist militants using their interpretation of a religion and a campaign of anti-Semitism as a uniting factor to increase their power, and they're after America because they support Israel (just clearing things up at the moment)?

quote:

---

Oil has little to do with ANYTHING in the area, as there are relatively few nations

that actually produce any.

---

Hmm...there's Kuwait, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Iran (I think)...am I missing any?

Anyway, while there are relatively few countries that produce it in the region, the amount that they produce overall is higher than in any other region in the world.

quote:

---

The West wants to protect the oil supply from Saudi, Kuwait etc. The presence of troops since the Gulf war helps maintain the stability and hence the supply and it is to the presence of these troops which many Middle East radicals object. Bin Laden has openly stated this.

---

Bin Laden does have an issue with US troops in Saudi Arabia. Has he explained why?

quote:

---

Whether you sympathise with the Israelis, the Palestinians or neither, that fact of the matter is that many Muslims object to the US' support of Israel, or at least lack of any condemnation. Remember, Sharon (or was it Tracy ?) was Israeli Minister of Defense when they went into Lebanon. I think that sticks in the throats of many who support the Palestinians.

---

This is the most common opinion that I hear about, but it doesn't really make sense to me in the current context. Why would Bin Laden mastermind an attack like this over the Israel-Palestine issue when he's not involved in the conflict (at least I don't think he is)? If this was the driving issue, then the act of terrorism would have come from Palestinian renegades (ie people who do not support Arafat's diplomatic approach).

[ 09-25-2001: Message edited by: Menchise ]

[Kush]

Oh, and quickly, yes those of us in the West (not just America) have done many things to countries in the middle east that are un-just.

Just off the top of my head

a) It was the refusal to accept jewish immigrants after the second world war by those of us in the West (soley based in pure anti-semetism) that precipitated the need for isreal.

For this reason, the British displaced the paletinians.

c) The US funded and supported wars and military acts between Afghanistan and USSR, and Iran Iraq.

d) During the gulf war, civilian targets WERE hit. Even the American military admits that it happened. And although it was not intentional, it happened.

We in the west have been responsible for some of the violence and hardship in that part of the world. (And not just America, many nations are cuplable.) So it should not be any surprise that there are those in the middle east who have a just cause to resent those of us in the west. (And not just America either.)

[ 09-25-2001: Message edited by: Kush ]

[ 09-25-2001: Message edited by: Kush ]

[Guest]

[Menchise]

quote:

---

Ossama is angry because he considers us infidels and our military is on Holy land,

Saudi Arabia, and he wants us gone.

Doesn't matter to him that we were A: invited there during the gulf war, and B: have remained there to add a little stability to the region.

Ossama wants the Royal family in Saudi Arabia killed and an Islamic regime installed, with us there, he can't do that.

This is why he has declared Jihad, He wants us out of the middle East so that he can have a free hand.

---

That doesn't explain why so many people support him, especially the millions of people in Pakistan who are not Saudis.

quote:

---

I think that this articel hits it right on the head. Read it please...

Hatred for the US? Evil is as Evil does

---

Server error.

[Kush]

I should only post here when I'm not rushed.

My point is there are people all over the middle east who believe they have just cause to be angry at Western involvement in middle east affairs. Whether I believe them to be justified is another matter, but one this is true, the west (and yes, Russia) has played a major role in the affairs of that region, particularly since the end of the second world war.

a) and I don't care what anyone tells you, the reason we in the west did not take in as many jewish immigrants as we could have after the war is anti-semitism, pure and simple. It's sad, it's awful, but it is true. Talk to any jewish person who survived and tried to enter England, Canada, the US, France, you name it. And I am very sad to say that Canada took in fewer than any other country. We knew. By July 1947 the war was well over, the nuremburg trials were in october of 46. By the time the Exodus set to sea, it was very clear to the Jewish people that they were a nation without a country.

The situation was made all the more difficult for the British by attacks from the Irgun. In July of 1946, they blew up the southwest wing of the king David hotel, killing more than one hundred people.

And on the other side of the coin, much earlier, back in 1945 Egypt, Syria, Iraq and Lebanon formed the Arab League and declared that any attempt to create a Jewish state would be an act of war.

But there was little else the British, or the newly founded UN could do.

On Aug 31st, 1947, the UN made a decision that would ultimately start us on the journey we are on right now. The UN declared that Palestine would be partitioned, and the state of Isreal would come into existence.

Of course the Arab League felt betrayed, and enraged they attacked Jewish settlements in the Negev. The Jewish press critisized the British for not removing the Arab Legion from Palestine. And... well you get the picture.

Now, as far as I'm concerned, the creation of Isreal is a good thing. But the way it was created has caused much bloodshed on all sides. And there are those who are part of the Arab world who take exception to certain actions in the past by Britain, Isreal, and the US. And regardless of whether or not they are justified in their anger, we must recognize that the creation of Isreal was a very very bloody, tumultuous affair, creating anger on all sides. If Isreal and the Arab nations are ever EVER going to find peace, it will have to come from recognizing past actions from all sides, asking for and giving forgivness from all sides, and working together to forge a new future, from all sides. That was my point.

I don't have time to rebut point c) (damn, why do I do this.) but suffice it to say, I'm not an apologist. Far from it. I do think however that simple sloganeering and emotions that have run high over the past little while have clouded over the fact that many in the middle east have at times been our allies. That there are many different kinds of Islam, and that each country's relationship to each other, and the west's relationship to those countries are complex, more complex than simply saying "What the hell do those people have to complain about, we've done nothing to them!"

I want to make it CRYSTAL clear that nothing any country in the west has ever done will ever justify terrorism. Nothing justifies terrorism. I'm simply pointing out how some non terrorist Arab peoples may feel a little conflicted about us in the West.

[Guest]

OK Kush, I get the picture, and understand what you are saying now. Yes, the middle East is a COMPLEX situation, and I am afraid that diplomacy has run it's course.

All we can do is hope and pray that Bush does the right things in the right order, but if anyone can do it, HE CAN!!

The Nobel peace prize people have declared that if Bush can resolve this situation without starting WWIII he will get the prize hands down... Clinton is probably Fuming!! LOL

This is going to be LONG, and it is going to be Bloody, but be assured that we have grown ups in the white house now that will do whatever is humanly possible to make sure that A: the war will be fought in such a way that as few innocents as possible are caught in the crossfire. B: that those responsible will be the ones aimed for C: in the meantime the security of the western world will be strengthened so that terrorist attacks will be few and far between. and D: that the war will be fought in such a way that it will not escalate into another world war.

Now just hope to goodness that this is indeed what happens.

And yes, I am feeling rather mellow tonight, BCM has gone gold and I'm feeling pretty good about MY life right now!!

[ 09-25-2001: Message edited by: Jaguar ]

[Kush]

Heh, me too!