Scheuer on London Attack
- Thread starter CBL4
- Start date
Mycroft
High Priest of Ed
- Joined
- Sep 10, 2003
- Messages
- 20,501
a_unique_person said:
Okay, so I'll change my phrasing to you agree OBL has no right to speak for Iraqis, Pakistanis or Palestinians.
Better?
I'm not trying to pick on you, I'm trying to understand you, but it's diffivult when you talk in these banal generalities and refuse to answer specific questions.
For example, what do you think OBL's "just cause" is?
How are we playing "wedge politics"?
Why do you claim our troops shouldn't have been in Saudi Arabia? Why? What's different about having troops there then having troops in Germany?
a_unique_person
Director of Hatcheries and Conditioning
So WTF are the troops doing in Germany?
Why doesn't Europe, seeing that the US is a vital trading partner, and in danger of being overrun by Xian fundies, station it's own troops around Washington?
The US obviously is incapable of taking care of itself, I think some French troops in a base down in Delware would be fine with me.
Why doesn't Europe, seeing that the US is a vital trading partner, and in danger of being overrun by Xian fundies, station it's own troops around Washington?
The US obviously is incapable of taking care of itself, I think some French troops in a base down in Delware would be fine with me.
a_unique_person
Director of Hatcheries and Conditioning
manny said:
They hate 'our' values being imposed on them, I think. A differnce to 'hating our values'. I don't think 'we' should impose values on others. But I believe in education allowing people to decide what values they want.
Mycroft
High Priest of Ed
- Joined
- Sep 10, 2003
- Messages
- 20,501
So we can train with our NATO partners. Why shouldn't they be in Germany? What does this have to do with our topic?
This looks like it's supposed to be an analogy of something, but what? Where are our troops positioned because someone looks like they might be overrun by something?
How does this anwer my questions?
Why do you assume it would be inherently offensive to have NATO troops in the US? I don't think it is.
Mycroft
High Priest of Ed
- Joined
- Sep 10, 2003
- Messages
- 20,501
a_unique_person said:
Who is "they?"
Arabs? Muslims? Terrorists? Anyone who's not a US citizen?
How are we "imposing" our values on anyone?
Through free trade? Exposure to our culture? Are we putting guns to their heads and forcing them to watch our hollywood movies and eat McDonalds?
How should we stop imposing our values? What was it we were doing that is incompatable with education and letting people decide what values they want?
a_unique_person
Director of Hatcheries and Conditioning
Mycroft said:
I just like the fact that someone reads a post of mine, and responds in a non abusive and considered manner.
Yes, Ireland is a complex issue. I made a statement on it, and I don't pretend to have all the answers. An informed discussion on the issue, and it's repurcussions, is going to result in a result that is not definite, and have conclusions that are qualified.
Ireland was interesting compared to, say Scotland. The Scots were taken over, subjugated, and caused to suffer to a great extent. They fought back, and nearly over ran England itself, in the process, causing much bloodshed.
Ireland, in contrast was not so easily subdued, and never accepted English rule. It fought back, and, when the IRA had won, accepted a partition, North and South. Some accepted this, others didn't. And so the 'Troubles' began.
Take this quote "They absolutely hate us for our values. They are correct, though, that we are trying to destroy them. We will destroy them."
I do wonder, what is to be destroyed. What would that involve. How many deaths would it take.
Education is a value. One which they oppose. In fact, "allowing people to decide what values they want" is a value which they oppose. You don't get it, do you? Al qaeda wants to impose Shari'a law and a new dark ages on a swath of the world which runs from the Philippines to southern Spain just to get started.a_unique_person said:
Mycroft
High Priest of Ed
- Joined
- Sep 10, 2003
- Messages
- 20,501
I'd like to understand where you're comming from, but it's so hard when you're so general and refuse to anser questions. For example, you still haven't said what OBL's "just cause" is. What is it?
And yet history is filled with examples of people who were defeated and weren't problems after. So what?
Do you assume it means Arabs? Muslims? ANyone who's not a US citizen?
If you wonder, why not ask?
a_unique_person
Director of Hatcheries and Conditioning
manny said:
It is a value that many Muslims support. It is those we need to get on with. Alqueda is an extremist group, that is numerically very small. Most Muslims don't want a Taliban type regime any more than you or I do, IHMO. But they don't want to feel their way of live is under threat any more than you or I do, IMHO.
Dunno where the French troops are. The Germans are in El Paso, TX and at Holloman AFB in New Mexico.a_unique_person said:
a_unique_person
Director of Hatcheries and Conditioning
manny said:
I am sure you will find a few Australians around those bases too. I am talking about a French base, one that is beyone US law, as the US has in other countries.
I agree. But this thread is about al Qaeda. Juan Cole asserted that it is not a hatred of our values which al Qaeda hates and that al Qaeda believes we are out to destroy them. I disagreed with the first part and agreed with the second.a_unique_person said:
There is literally no dispute about the second part, I assume. We are out to destroy al Qaeda and you agree with that goal, yes? (For the record, please answer that question -- I would like you on the record about that.) So what statement "just fills you with utter despair?" That al Qaeda hates our values? Or that Israel will always exist?
a_unique_person
Director of Hatcheries and Conditioning
manny said:
For crying out load, are you going to pull a "Skeptic" on me. The thought of Israel existing does no fill me with despair. The thought that there will never be peace does.
The notion that fills me with despair is that there is a military solution to everything. If you kill enough people, then your problem is solved.
a_unique_person said:
You would like to believe that it "is a value that many Muslims support." but you really have no idea, do you?
Why not catalog the supportive comments/ speeches by moslems (outside of western countries) that morn the dead of suicide bombers, 9/11 and now London? Recall when Bush took a day to comment on the tsunami? How was he characterized? Would you extend this characterization to our moslem friends?
Seems to me that based on evidence, there is no reason to suggest that a majority of moslem leaders support anything other than death.
No, that's not possible, because you said it in direct reaction to my post. And I didn't say that there is a military solution to everything. I said (well, intimated, and I say now) that there is a military solution to al Qaeda. We're going to destroy them, AUP. We're going to kill them.a_unique_person said:
So OK. We've established on the record that the thought of Israel existing does not fill you with despair. That's good. That leaves only two things in my post which could possible fill you with despair, unless you were referring to something I didn't say.
One of those things is that al Qaeda hates us for our values. This is a subject on which reasonable people might disagree, but it hardly seems like the kind of thing which would fill one with despair.
The other is that we are trying to destroy al Qaeda. For the record, do you agree with the strategy to destroy al Qaeda by killing or capturing them?
Eh. As regards prominent foreign Muslim clerics and heads of state I think you have a point. But I think the available evidence is that the regular day-to-day working-stiff Muslim wants freedom of choice and education. My evidence is the turnout in the Iraqi and Afghan elections, the rush to schools (particularly in Afghanistan, where the education infrastructure had essentially been destroyed), the lines outside of Iraqi police stations of people trying to get a job bringing stability to the country.Ed said:
Islam has a Catholic problem, but writ 10,000 times as large. The increasingly traditionalist clergy is becoming out of step with the increasingly secular laity. There are exceptions of course -- Saudi Arabia comes to mind, as do parts of Pakistan and Egypt and possibly Syria. Remember that many Muslims currently live in Islamic-dominated democracies in relative peace, including in some of the poorest places in the world like Bengladesh.
The Fool said:
I said "almost never", because I find that when I say "never", I wind up either having to retract somewhat ("Well, yes, in THAT situation, then blah blah blah"), or defend myself from a bunch of straw-man arguments.
There are always exceptions to every rule. Which is why I never use the words "always", "every", and "never". Um...wait a minute...
Yes, I think you and I might agree somewhat. My post was directed at AUP, as his view seems to be to change policies in response to behavior that is not justified. I wasn't quite sure if that was the position he was taking, which is why I was looking for clarification.
I know quite a few people with that view. I even know a total 100% pacifist who doesn't even think we should have gone to war against the Nazis. He believes the only acceptable response is a peaceful change of policies, to make everyone happy. I personally consider that view to be delusional.
I think this is biggest point that Scheuer misses. Young Arabs are in a system where they are poor and powerless which leads to rebellion. Unfortunately, OBL's religious views are seem by many of them as their only hope. The west supports the tyrants. Communism is a dismal failure. The only viable opposition in the Arab world is in the mosques. The extremist are the only one who are providing charity and hope for the poor. Many terrorist organization are both evil, mass murdering groups and effective religious charities.
OBL takes advantage of this and plays the crusader card very effectively. We support the Arab tyrants because of our thirst for oil but OBL says it is to steal Arab riches. We invaded Afghanistan because of 9/11 but OBL says it is because the Taliban was a real Muslim government. We support Israel because it is a democracy (and other reasons) but OBL says it is an invasion of Arab land.
OBL is wrong in every case but he has a plausible argument. The poor are attracted to him because no one else seems to stand up for them. His vision of an Islamic caliphate is absurd and would be incredibly oppressive but what alternative do the oppressed Muslims see?
To give them hope, they must see alternatives. Turkey and Iraq need to become beacons of freedom and prosperity. Unfortunately, Bush has been incompetent in Iraq and the EU is giving Turkey the cold shoulder.
We need to force tyrants to be give up their power. We pay for their armies and secret police. We have the leverage but we are too scared of higher oil prices to act.
We need to help NGOs provide for education and charity to the poor. We need to be seen as fighter for freedom and wealth not as oppressors.
CBL