RE: Pardalis: "anti-semitic garbage"

[Oliver]

Okay, I'm checking the single points I'm not familiar with and may be considered as completely wrong.

Also I will post links to similar sources and timetables which may not be considered as "Anti-Zionistic", "Communistic" or "Nazionalsocialistic".

http://rwor.org/a/v23/1120-29/1125/timeline.htm

Here's the first one: Summing up Foreign Policies in the Middle East:
http://towardfreedom.com/home/content/view/981/60/

ETA: Another one about "America's 100 Years of Overthrow":
http://www.alternet.org/story/39416?page=3

ETA: CIA overthrowing the Mossadegh-Regime:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mohammed_Mossadegh

 

[Oliver]

This is also very interesting from a Terrorists POV in contrast to "Hate Western Freedoms":

Subsequently, as a result of cooperation between the U.S. government and several American oil companies, the United States replaced Great Britain as the chief Western power in the region.(5) In Iran and Saudi Arabia, American gains were British (and French) losses.(6) Originally, the dominant American oil interests had had limited access to Iraqi oil only (through the Iraq Petroleum Company, under the 1928 Red Line Agreement). In 1946, however, Standard Oil of New Jersey and Mobil Oil Corp., seeing the irresistible opportunities in Saudi Arabia, had the agreement voided.(7) When the awakening countries of the Middle East asserted control over their oil resources, the United States found ways to protect its access to the oil.

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

 

[RandFan]

You guys are funny - go on ...

Trust me, the pleasure is all on this side of the table.

 

[RandFan]

This is also very interesting from a Terrorists POV in contrast to "Hate Western Freedoms":

What conclusions do you draw from this and/or what conclusions do you think we should draw from it?

 

[RandFan]

Okay, I'm checking the single points I'm not familiar with and may be considered as completely wrong.

Also I will post links to similar sources and timetables which may not be considered as "Anti-Zionistic", "Communistic" or "Nazionalsocialistic".

http://rwor.org/a/v23/1120-29/1125/timeline.htm

Here's the first one: Summing up Foreign Policies in the Middle East:
http://towardfreedom.com/home/content/view/981/60/

ETA: Another one about "America's 100 Years of Overthrow":
http://www.alternet.org/story/39416?page=3

ETA: CIA overthrowing the Mossadegh-Regime:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mohammed_Mossadegh

Oliver, the interned is full of articles and opinions on every subject from every view point. Anyone with a handful of brain cells can cobble together links.

I've got an idea, instead of posting a bunch of links why don't you make an argument, pull quote from your links the data that supports the argument and help us out here. Demonstrate that you have an understanding of what the hell you are linking to.

 

[Oliver]

What conclusions do you draw from this and/or what conclusions do you think we should draw from it?

Well, that Foreign Policies makes Terrorists "happy" (motivated) - and therefore makes them prosper.

There is no solution to it because history isn't changeable. However, if the regional history shows one thing, it's that aggressive interventions end up in even more complicated conditions - including an increase of a threat against the west.

 

[Oliver]

*snip*

I've got an idea, instead of posting a bunch of links why don't you make an argument, pull quote from your links the data that supports the argument and help us out here. Demonstrate that you have an understanding of what the hell you are linking to.

I already did this - and got a Breach of Rule4 in return.
Anyway: I already posted my point, also in this thread.

 

[RandFan]

Well, that Foreign Policies makes Terrorists "happy" (motivated) - and therefore makes them prosper.

There is no solution to it because history isn't changeable. However, if the regional history shows one thing, it's that aggressive interventions end up in even more complicated conditions - including an increase of a threat against the west.

And when you apply skepticism and critical thinking? Is there any information or evidence that would tend to counter your conclusion? Can you draw any other conclusions or does this simply fit your world view and therefore it post hoc justifies that view?

ETA: Why should anyone care about this information?

 

[RandFan]

I already did this - and got a Breach of Rule4 in return.
Anyway: I already posted my point, also in this thread.

When did you pull qoute from the links you just posted? I don't think you are getting what I'm putting down. It doesn't make a bit of difference that you made past arguments. What premises should we take from your links? How do those premises support your proposition?

In other words, throwing up a bunch of links to counter the fact that you posted a link to a very questionable website isn't exactly good form.

 

[Oliver]

And when you apply skepticism and critical thinking? Is there any information or evidence that would tend to counter your conclusion? Can you draw any other conclusions or does this simply fit your world view and therefore it post hoc justifies that view?

Well, you didn't get the point I made, which is:

"They hate and attack us for our Freedoms" - is a HOAX.
The list actually portrays a much better and logical explanation.
(That's why I posted it in the first place, you know?)

 

[RandFan]

Well, you didn't get the point I made, which is:

"They hate and attack us for our Freedoms" - is a HOAX.

I got your point. I don't see A.) how this makes that point. B.) Why we should find it compelling if it did.

The list actually portrays a much better and logical explanation.

Really? How so?

 

[RandFan]

Oliver,

In the Root Of All Evil, Dawkins interviews a Muslim man who states plainly that unless we (westerners) change our ways (this includes covering up our women) then we will be attacked.

For the record, I don't believe such a complex problem as terrorism is based simply on the fact that Muslims hate our freedoms. Nor is it as simple as American foreign policy. It is in fact a combination of many things not the least of which is religion. Watch the video. You might find it enlightening.

 

[Oliver]

Oliver,

In the Root Of All Evil, Dawkins interviews a man who states plainly that unless we (westerners) change our ways (this includes covering up our women) then we will be attacked.

For the record, I don't believe such a complex problem as terrorism is based on the fact that Muslims hate our freedoms. Nor is it as simple as American foreign policy. It is in fact a combination of many things.

Terrorism is mostly based on a very view, often even one purpose or motive. Wrong?

What's so complex about that? (Besides understanding the motive)

Well, I honestly like Prof. Dawkins and his movie. What were the other "Western Ways" the radical "Opinion" meant we have to change?

 

[RandFan]

Terrorism is mostly based on a very view, often even one purpose or motive. Wrong?

Yes, very wrong.

What's so complex about that? (Besides understanding the motive)

Motive. Human behavior is seldom simple. In fact, that is a mark of our species. We exhibit the most complex behaviors and the most complex set of variables drive those behaviors. A single individual can have many conscious and even subconscious motives. Couple this to a very large, diverse and dynamic group of Muslims (Sunni, Shia) with many different issues and you get a very, very complex problem.

Well, I honestly like Prof. Dawkins and his movie. What were the other "Western Ways" the radical "Opinion" meant we have to change?

Our behaviors. We drink, consume pornography, don't worship, we are infidels.

 

[Oliver]

Yes, very wrong.

Motive. Human behavior is seldom simple. In fact, that is a mark of our species. We exhibit the most complex behaviors and the most complex set of variables drive those behaviors. A single individual can have many conscious and even subconscious motives. Couple this to a very large, diverse and dynamic group of Muslims (Sunni, *****) with many different issues and you get a very, very complex problem.

I don't refuse the underlying character and breeding - which may be the reason why you think this is so complex. Nevertheless, the motive and goal aren't that complex.

Ever heard of a case in which a murderer (as comprehensible example) had plenty of motives or goals? Rarely, isn't it?

Our behaviors. We drink, consume pornography, don't worship, we are infidels.

This might be annoying to radical religion people of all kinds, but a motive to kill others? Nah, you really think that's a general driving force?

 

[RandFan]

Oliver, something you are missing is the degree of propaganda fed to Muslims by their political and religious leaders. Why do they refer to America as "The Great Satan"? The rhetoric makes no sense from a simple political viewpoint. Satan is religious in nature and suggests sin, wickedness, or, in a word, disobedient to god's law. What makes us disobedient? Our freedom.

The next question you need to ask is why? Why do the political and religious leaders use this rhetoric? Because it serves a purpose. It provides a narrative and gives meaning to the lives of people who might otherwise take issue with the leaders.

People from western nations are more likely to blame their own leaders. Yes we bought the axis of evil rhetoric for awhile but it didn't last long. Bush's ratings are in the toilet. Such tactics work better under tyrants like Chavez and Ahmadinejad.

 

[RandFan]

I don't refuse the underlying character and breeding - which may be the reason why you think this is so complex. Nevertheless, the motive and goal aren't that complex.

Yes, they are very complex. Simply stating that they aren't won't change the facts. Many, many variables are at work including religion and intolerance.

Ever heard of a case in which a murderer (as comprehensible example) had plenty of motives or goals? Rarely, isn't it?

?

This might be annoying to radical religion people of all kinds, but a motive to kill others? Nah, you really think that's a general driving force?

Of course it is. Not the single driving force but a very important one. Religion, as Dawkins states is the biggest culprit. In fact, there is no single defining force. It is a complex dynamic of religion, intolerance, bigotry, ignorance, misunderstanding, foreign policy, economic status, etc.. And not all of those variables are the same or in equal parts for all of the people. The single most common thread is religion.

 

[Oliver]

Oliver, something you are missing is the degree of propaganda fed to Muslims by their political and religious leaders. Why do they refer to America as "The Great Satan"? The rhetoric makes no sense from a simple political viewpoint. Satan is religious in nature and suggests sin, wickedness, or, in a word, disobedient to god's law. What makes us disobedient? Our freedom.

The next question you need to ask is why? Why do the political and religious leaders use this rhetoric? Because it serves a purpose. It provides a narrative and gives meaning to the lives of people who might otherwise take issue with the leaders.

People from western nations are more likely to blame their own leaders. Yes we bought the axis of evil rhetoric for awhile but it didn't last long. Bush's ratings are in the toilet. Such tactics work better under tyrants like Chavez and Ahmadinejad.

Concerning the "Great Satan" - because Americas actions, not freedoms.
Did you ever mind to read anything from their statements?

Or are you someone who refuses to understand and thinks: "Let the army do the job"? Well, that's no solution in light of the history of western military interventions in the Middle East.

http://counterterrorismblog.org/2006/04/zawahiri_tape_transcript_to_th.php

 

[RandFan]

Concerning the "Great Satan" - because Americas actions, not freedoms.

Depends on what you mean by actions. If you mean consuming porn, letting our women dress in what the determine is like whores and not worshiping allah then I would agree. We are free to so act.

Did you ever mind to read anything from their statements?

HAVE YOU?

Great Satan.

Sayyid Qutb came to the United States to receive an education, but while he was there, he was mortified by the American lifestyle because he believed it to be excessively sinful and sexually promiscuous.

The Great Satan.

Iranian leaders have characterized the United States as the Great Satan--an evil corruptor that pollutes society and destroys personal morality.

Dude, if you are going to make such a simple point to counter don't you think you should take a moment and check it out yourself using google? It took me seconds to come up with a number of quotes.

Or are you someone who refuses to understand and thinks: "Let the army do the job"? Well, that's no solution in light of the history of western military interventions in the Middle East.

? Huh?

I seriously think you need to look in the mirror.

 

[Oliver]

Depends on what you mean by actions. If you mean consuming porn, letting our women dress in what the determine is like whores and not worshiping allah then I would agree. We are free to so act.

HAVE YOU?

Of course I do. Why do you think do I laugh about "They hate our Freedoms"?

Jebuz, why is this subforum called politics?
Give it a try:

My second message is to the American people who are drowning in illusions. I tell you that Bush and his gangs are shedding your blood and wasting your money in frustrated adventures. The lion of Islam, Sheikh Osama bin Laden, offered you a decent exit from your dilemma, but your leaders, who are keen to accumulate wealth, insist on throwing you in battles and killing your souls in Iraq and Afghanistan and, God willing, on your own land."Your leaders responded that they do not negotiate with terrorists and that they are winning in their war on terrorism. I tell them, O' liars and greedy war merchants, who is pulling out of Iraq and Afghanistan, you or us?

Source: http://edition.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/asiapcf/01/30/zawahiri.transcript/index.html