Posted on 12/23/2004 11:49:11 AM PST by quidnunc
The worst book of the year is "Imperial Hubris" by Michael Scheuer, a former CIA analyst writing under the pseudonym of Anonymous. The reason it is the worst is that it contains the worst idea — that Muslim terrorists hate us more because of our policies than for what we are.
That idea is pernicious because it is patently false and because it leads directly to appeasement.
While it is true that Osama bin Laden and other Islamist terrorists have cited a laundry list of grievances against the United States as a justification for their actions, such complaints are merely perfunctory and serve as a smokescreen for vastly more open-ended goals. More to the point, they are issued for the purpose of enticing gullible liberals (like Scheuer) who seek an easy way out of confrontation.
Bin Laden, Abu Musab al-Zarqawi and the others who specialize in killing innocent men, women and children in the name of Allah may be ignorant of many aspects of both the West and Islam, but they already have demonstrated a remarkable understanding of the psychological vulnerabilities of Western liberalism. They recognize that cultures pervaded by the enlightened belief in reason and logic are uncomfortable facing existential enemies that wish to destroy them for no other reason than that they are their enemies and deserve to die.
The Western mind recoils at the prospect of waging war against a foe whose primary goal is to liquidate our civilization because acceptance of such a challenge requires us to recognize that much of what drives human beings is neither rational nor negotiable. To accept that Islamists wish to kill us because they hate us and everything we stand for would require an acceptance on our part of the need to kill them first, using whatever methods available.
Far better for the liberal mind to search for some exculpatory justifications for otherwise senseless acts of butchery and to try to identify some reasonable goals being pursued by those perpetrating them. Better to assume that, all appearances to the contrary, the terrorists essentially are rational chaps who have chosen somewhat harsh means to achieve more or less rational ends.
The idea that bin Laden wants certain things from us that are within our power to grant is so much more palatable than to accept that what he wants from us is our death.
Americans are profoundly uncomfortable with the idea of such unremitting hate (especially when directed at them) and naturally search for explanations where the street lamp shines most brightly; that is, upon various sins allegedly committed by Americans. Our difficulty with conceiving of hate as a motivation naturally blends with liberal guilt over Western power and a romanticized conception of Third World peoples as victims of Western imperialism to create the theory of blowback, the essential element of which is that we are now getting what we deserve.
So if the terrorists say they are beheading Americans on video because we support Israel or seeking to create a democratic government in Afghanistan, then by all means let us take them at their word and consider, as Scheuer recommends, altering those policies to terrorist satisfaction.
The mistake made is, of course, virtually identical to that made with respect to Adolf Hitler and stems from the belief that we can mitigate hate by acts of empathy expressed in the form of concessions (whether that which is conceded is called the Sudetenland or Israel and those being appeased with concessions are fascists of the Teutonic or Muslim variety).
But what if such appeasement only whets the appetite and encourages an upping of the ante? And what if it merely convinces our foes that their tactics are working and that we are weak and craven and vulnerable to increased pressure?
More important still, what if Islamic terrorists have far more open-ended objectives and seek to chase us out of the Middle East as but the first step toward a broader goal of an Islamist world? And what if that vision of Muslim conquest requires the destruction of all competing religious beliefs and the extermination of the infidels who subscribe to them, moderate Muslims along with Hindus, Buddhists and Christians?
No, far better to simply believe that we’ve done something bad to them and only need to figure out what it is and stop doing it.
Well, Quid, do you have a plan of action based on this article?
Do we need to turn Mecca into a sheet of radioactive glass to convince the mooseslimes that they are worshipping a false god?
Obviously, Michael Scheuer is totally unaware that the Muzzle-em ByeBull (the Koran) teaches that we are all considered sub-human monkeys and pigs !!!
oops... BuyBull
Sort of like the psychology of the battered wife. "If only I'd remembered he likes his steaks medium-rare... if only I hadn't made eye contact with the mailman where he could see... if only I'd worn what he told me to..."
Seems hardly anyone criticizing Sheuer has.
I don't see how you can combat a problem, win a war, unless you realize really what the enemy is up to and what he's about, and what motivates him. As long as we cling to these ideas that they're criminals and we can settle the issue with primarily the use of law enforcement in the court, and a very moderate application of military power, I see no reason for hope. I use an epigram there from Lincoln after the battle of Antietam where he said: "These people just don't realize we're in a bloody war and it's going to have to be fought out to the end", and that's about where we are. - Michael Scheuer
Furthermore, if Osama was about attacking people for who they were, rather than what they're doing, he'd be all over the Chinese, who are athiests, and therefore even worse to Muslim eyes than Christians.
No, no, no- only the Jews are monkeys and pigs. The rest of us are just lowly infidels who should be killed.
Nope, Osama hates us because we are "unbelievers" who are vastly more prosperous than Muslims are and our success is visible throughout the world. The biggest threat to Islam is the success on anything non-Islamic.
No, no, no- only the Jews are monkeys and pigs. The rest of us are just lowly infidels who should be killed.
=====
Hmmm... sounds like you are deliberately discriminating against liberals. The MPU (Monkey-Pig Union) will be on you're arse unless you publicly admit your error !!! ;-))
And the American people are only on the hit list by virtue of our policies in the region Osama considers the "Islamic sphere" which are interefering with the creation of a new Caliphate or whatever it's suppposed to be called.
Recall that Osama spent a large portion of his time fighting fellow Muslims in Afghanistan alongside the Taleban - he wasn't fighting them for who they were, but for what they were doing.
Our challenge is to kill Osama dead, and take out his organization in the most complete and expeditious manner possible. Misinterpreting the man and his motivations isn't in our interests - America could suffer another "Great Depression" tomorrow and it wouldn't change Osama's views of America one whit so long as we continued to oppose him in his aims.
When the fear of dying no longer obtains no act is unimaginable.
When the fear of dying no longer obtains no act is unimaginable.
the American people are only on the hit list by virtue of our policies in the region Osama considers the "Islamic sphere" which are interefering with the creation of a new Caliphate or whatever it's suppposed to be called.
His first goal is the unification of muslim fighters in the M.E., Saudi especially, and he works to create a wedge between U.S. and S.A, to bring down the Sauds, take over and then the old Caliphate stuff you mention.
But you miss the next part.
What was the goal of the old Caliphate? They were stopped short, but not very and not very long ago.
No, the bottom line is we got another facist world-domination wannabe in new robes.
They hate us cause we ain't Sharia.
Are you arware that the "Islamic shpere" includes Spain and parts of France? IIRC, the muslims who bin Laden fought were his enemies because they did not support the Taliban and were thus "apostate."
Islam, like Communism (it seems to me) is especialy harsh to those who have left the true fold.
As to the question of why they hate us (TM), I regurtitate this passage from Osama's statement of October, 2004:
O American people, I am speaking to tell you about the ideal way to avoid another Manhattan, about war and its causes and results.
Security is an important foundation of human life and free people do not squander their security, contrary to Bush's claims that we hate freedom.
It is known that those who hate freedom do not possess proud souls like those of the 19, may God rest their souls. We fought you because we are free and because we want freedom for our nation. When you squander our security we squander yours.
So not only is our side making the claim that they hate us because we're free, Osama's cribbing from the same book.
Suffice to say I don't believe either version.
As to Osama's chances of pulling off the united Muslim caliphate, I don't see it happening.
It's just a question of how much damage he's going to do until he and his organization are laid to rest.
deters?
Sounds like a plan. Dibs on pushing The Button!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.