Terrorists Thank Germany

[ZeeGerman]

Now, are the Germans are starting to get the message?

What precisely is the message you think we do not get?

Zee

Still not sure what message we Germans haven't gotten yet (according to BPSCG that is)...

Zee

Well, I guess I'll have to do without an answer. Must be something too complex to put down in writing.

Whatever, I'm off to bed. Nightynight.

Zee

 

[DanishDynamite]

Well, I guess I'll have to do without an answer. Must be something too complex to put down in writing.

Whatever, I'm off to bed. Nightynight.

Zee

Sleep well. I suspect BPSCG had a knee-jerk reaction which he then felt was worthy of a post.

Forgive. He is a youngling, afterall.

 

[WildCat]

I see. Since all the factors you mention have been in play for at least 20 years, you therefore (presumably) feel that the huge increase in terrorism after the US invaded Iraq are of no significance. Right?

Please support the bolded part, be sure to start your timeline early enough to give an accurate result.

 

[BPSCG]

I see. Since all the factors you mention have been in play for at least 20 years, you therefore (presumably) feel that the huge increase in terrorism after the US invaded Iraq are of no significance. Right?

Could you please clarify what you mean by the highlighted words?

Huge increase where? Not in the U.S., that's for sure.
Huge increase in the rest of the world? Please supply:

1. The worldwide number of terrorist incidents related to Islamism, along with the number of deaths and estimate of dollar amounts of destruction in the three years immediately after the invasion, and;
2. The worldwide number of terrorist incidents related to Islamism, along with the number of deaths and estimate of dollar amounts of destruction in the three years immediately before the invasion.

Include cites.

If you can show me by a preponderance of the evidence that 1) is significantly greater than 2), then we can discuss your quoted point. Which, frankly, I'm not even sure I understand.

Otherwise, the premise of your quoted point has not been established, and is therefore not worth discussing.

ETA: Damn you, Wildcat!

 

[BPSCG]

Well, I guess I'll have to do without an answer. Must be something too complex to put down in writing.

Whatever, I'm off to bed. Nightynight.

Zee

Sorry, thought that with so many people on both the left and the right here giving you the answer, my addition would be superfluous. The last one before yours is Crossbow's, so I take the liberty of linking to it, unedited, so you might have to read it carefully two or three times to figure out exactly what he's saying. But he gets it right.

 

[Rob Lister]

Agreed. Crossbow got it right.

 

[Bob Klase]

Yeah, but the difference between us is, I don't believe all Muslims are fanatics trying to kill me personally.

Is there evidence that the 9-11 hijackers were personally trying to kill any of the 3000 people in the WTC on 9-11? Would the attack have been aborted if you'd been visiting one of the towers?

 

[Bob Klase]

So it would appear that there are a whole host of things that can inspire Islamist rage, to wit:

• Iraq invasion;
• Involvement in Lebanon;
• History of western interference in middle eastern affairs;
• Cartoons

Have I left anything out?

Ketchup? French Fries? Pork chops?

 

[ZeeGerman]

Sorry, thought that with so many people on both the left and the right here giving you the answer, my addition would be superfluous. The last one before yours is Crossbow's, so I take the liberty of linking to it, unedited, so you might have to read it carefully two or three times to figure out exactly what he's saying. But he gets it right.

I see, and I fully agree with Crossbow's post. What I don't see is why you think that we germans didn't get that yet as your post implies. Could you clarify?

Zee

 

[armageddonman]

I don't get it either. Would supporting or participating in the invasion of Iraq have prevented that Lebanese guy from trying to bomb a German train?

I really fail to see any connection.

 

[gumboot]

My own poor offerings...

But briefly my stance on Iraq...

1) I don't believe there is even a remote link between 9/11 and Iraq
2) I think the United Nations should have invaded Iraq and disposed of Saddam a long time ago
3) I don't think the US should leave until it is stable

Now, those are merely my personal opinions on those issues, from which to give you some background to my ideas... I'm not interested right now in discussing whether my stances above are "right" or "accurate" or "moral".

We all know terrorism existed before the US went on its world invasion tour. We all know the hatred that keeps terrorism burning is hatred of the west - not a reaction to specific events. We know that hatred is well and burning, and actions of the west will not make those people change their minds.
We also know these terrorists use whatever event is pertinent to "justify" their hatred.
A quick glance at Middle-East media will show when there's no event available they just make stuff up or return to historic events and emotional rhetoric.

So, to the claim that Iraq is fueling terrorists. (I purposefully leave out Afghanistan - the UN confirmed that it was the USA's Article 51 right to invade Afghanistan and get rid of the Taliban and Al Qaeda. I hope our small contribution helps)

There are two questions, it seems to me.
1) Is Iraq a strong enough "pertinent event" that it influences more non-Terrorists to become Terrorists than other pertinent events and general rhetoric that Terrorists use for recruitment?
2) Are those people being directly recruited due to Iraq carrying out Terrorism against the west OUTSIDE Iraq?

Now, I don't know the answer to either of these, and I suspect no one else does either. And they are important questions to answer.

But most of us are fairly smart, and can probably make conclusions as to what is likely (admitting that we could be GROSSLY incorrect).

If I may be as bold as to offer an unsupported answer to each question...

1) Yes, Iraq is spectacular enough that it could influence more people than otherwise. However, I don't think that increase would be significant, simply because their culture is one of blind hatred. If you buy into terrorism you really need to buy into their blind hatred of the west. Iraq justifies attacking the west, IMHO. I don't think it justifies blind hatred.

2) The stats show a drastic increase in global terrorism since 9/11, and especially since the invasion of Iraq. But it appears that the enormous majority are happening IN Iraq. It appears that most of the terrorism that Iraq fuels is LOCAL Terrorism. Indeed, Iraq appears to be drawing international terrorists to it - which means away from the west.

I'd like to propose something I've considered for a long time. I believe Iraq is a positive for the west. I believe it draws away terrorists. Al Qaeda was born out of a war against the USSR in Afghanistan. Since then Osama's mujahedeen have flocked like moths to a flame to every major conflict involving muslims. The Balkans. Somalia. And so forth.

They want to destroy the west, but they can't resist the temptation of western armed forces running in amok in Muslim lands. So instead of hitting more soft targets - civilians - they go after our very STRONGEST targets. And the thing is, they cannot defeat our armed forces. I don't think these terrorists could defeat the US Armed Forces (let alone all western armed forces) in a million years. Their damage is pitiful. How many US troops lost in Iraq now? And how many did the US lose scrapping over the tiny island of Iwo Jima?

The armed forces are a wall. If we put them out somewhere that will incite terrorists to attack, it distracts them from their real target - our civilians.

It appears to be working.

Now. It means a horrible taks for our armed forces. It means putting them out there to be hit, not to liberate countries, or bring democracy, or even to secure resources. The entire war is a decoy. But it means they are protecting the nation with their lives, and that is their job.

I think the west should be honest about this. Acknowledge what is really going on. Forget moral justifications for invasions. Admit that what the armed forces are doing is far greater. This is "forward defense" at its finest.

If the west pull their military out of these high profile places, the hatred won't go. Worse, our withdrawal will inspire them. They will think they actually CAN beat us. And they'll come looking for blood. In our cities.

But that is only my opinion. I could be grossly wrong.

-Andrew

 

[NeilC]

So BPSCG et al - what you are saying is that UK and US foreign policy for the last 60 years has had no effect on terrorism and that the Muslims are purely and simply out to get the West simply because of the way we live in our own countries? That eating pork alone is enough?

Does that not sound a little laughable to you?

Israel, palestine, Iran, Iraq, Gulf War, the Shah, the Suez, Lebanon, promises broken in Afghanistan etc - none of that has a thing to do with it? It's just a matter of loony arabs trying to take over the rational and ethical west?

Read this: http://www.cato.org/pubs/pas/pa-159.html

I hate the terrorists. I despise Islam full stop. If the whole middle east was nuked tomorrow I wouldn't shed a tead. But even I'm not stupid enough to think there are no rational factors at the base of all this.

 

[.13.]

So BPSCG et al - what you are saying is that UK and US foreign policy for the last 60 years has had no effect on terrorism and that the Muslims are purely and simply out to get the West simply because of the way we live in our own countries? That eating pork alone is enough?

Does that not sound a little laughable to you?

As it has been said the terrorists don't seem to need much of an excuse to do what they do. For example: http://www.metimes.com/articles/normal.php?StoryID=20060606-021622-6003r

 

[NeilC]

No they don't "seem" to need an excuse. But in reality they do. They have real reasons for what they do. They can only exist in a climate of suspicion and dislike of the USA and it's allies. And that wider dislike has been driven by US policy.

Merely writing off islamic feelings as insanity doesn't get us anywhere.

Did you read the link I provided? Do you not think that any of that interferance might have anything to do with the situation we are in today?

 

[BPSCG]

No they don't "seem" to need an excuse. But in reality they do. They have real reasons for what they do. They can only exist in a climate of suspicion and dislike of the USA and it's allies. And that wider dislike has been driven by US policy.

Merely writing off islamic feelings as insanity doesn't get us anywhere.

Did you read the link I provided? Do you not think that any of that interferance might have anything to do with the situation we are in today?

Which brings us back to the OP...

The word "Germany" appears once, in a minor footnote, in the article you cite in your link.

Let us accept, momentarily and for the sake of the argument, the premise that Islamist rage at the U.S. and its allies is justified by past misdeeds of the U.S. and its allies. What crimes against Islam does the historical record show Germany committed, to deserve this latest attempt at mass murder?

 

[Mephisto]

Is there evidence that the 9-11 hijackers were personally trying to kill any of the 3000 people in the WTC on 9-11? Would the attack have been aborted if you'd been visiting one of the towers?

You'll have to ask BPSCG for that answer. He believe that the 9/11 attacks were aimed at him personally. His belief stems from the character Yosarian's paranoia in Joseph Heller's ANTI-WAR book, Catch-22.

 

[BPSCG]

I see, and I fully agree with Crossbow's post. What I don't see is why you think that we germans didn't get that yet as your post implies. Could you clarify?

If you indeed get it, then I was mistaken, and I apologize.

 

[BPSCG]

You'll have to ask BPSCG for that answer. He believe that the 9/11 attacks were aimed at him personally. His belief stems from the character Yosarian's paranoia in Joseph Heller's ANTI-WAR book, Catch-22.

Paranoia = unjustifiable delusion that others are out to harm one.

Yossarian was not delusional. People were trying to kill him.

 

[.13.]

No they don't "seem" to need an excuse. But in reality they do. They have real reasons for what they do. They can only exist in a climate of suspicion and dislike of the USA and it's allies. And that wider dislike has been driven by US policy.

Merely writing off islamic feelings as insanity doesn't get us anywhere.

Did you read the link I provided? Do you not think that any of that interferance might have anything to do with the situation we are in today?

I didn't read your link. I'm just saying that those guys don't seem to need much of an excuse. Or what connections should I draw between killing falafel vendors and imperialism?

I think BPSCG asked a good question in post #95.

 

[a_unique_person]

When you're done with your straw man, can I borrow him? We have crows in our backyard and they're eating the tomatoes.

First of all, take back your strawman.