Posted on 09/13/2001 6:33:57 AM PDT by getoffmylawn
Nearly two days after the horrific suicide attacks on civilian workers in New York and Washington, it has become painfully clear that most Americans simply don't get it. From the president to passersby on the streets, the message seems to be the same: this is an inexplicable assault on freedom and democracy, which must be answered with overwhelming force - just as soon as someone can construct a credible account of who was actually responsible.
Shock, rage and grief there has been aplenty. But any glimmer of recognition of why people might have been driven to carry out such atrocities, sacrificing their own lives in the process - or why the United States is hated with such bitterness, not only in Arab and Muslim countries, but across the developing world - seems almost entirely absent. Perhaps it is too much to hope that, as rescue workers struggle to pull firefighters from the rubble, any but a small minority might make the connection between what has been visited upon them and what their government has visited upon large parts of the world.
But make that connection they must, if such tragedies are not to be repeated, potentially with even more devastating consequences. US political leaders are doing their people no favours by reinforcing popular ignorance with self-referential rhetoric. And the echoing chorus of Tony Blair, whose determination to bind Britain ever closer to US foreign policy ratchets up the threat to our own cities, will only fuel anti-western sentiment. So will calls for the defence of "civilisation", with its overtones of Samuel Huntington's poisonous theories of post-cold war confrontation between the west and Islam, heightening perceptions of racism and hypocrisy.
As Mahatma Gandhi famously remarked when asked his opinion of western civilisation, it would be a good idea. Since George Bush's father inaugurated his new world order a decade ago, the US, supported by its British ally, bestrides the world like a colossus. Unconstrained by any superpower rival or system of global governance, the US giant has rewritten the global financial and trading system in its own interest; ripped up a string of treaties it finds inconvenient; sent troops to every corner of the globe; bombed Afghanistan, Sudan, Yugoslavia and Iraq without troubling the United Nations; maintained a string of murderous embargos against recalcitrant regimes; and recklessly thrown its weight behind Israel's 34-year illegal military occupation of the West Bank and Gaza as the Palestinian intifada rages.
If, as yesterday's Wall Street Journal insisted, the east coast carnage was the fruit of the Clinton administration's Munich-like appeasement of the Palestinians, the mind boggles as to what US Republicans imagine to be a Churchillian response.
It is this record of unabashed national egotism and arrogance that drives anti-Americanism among swaths of the world's population, for whom there is little democracy in the current distribution of global wealth and power. If it turns out that Tuesday's attacks were the work of Osama bin Laden's supporters, the sense that the Americans are once again reaping a dragons' teeth harvest they themselves sowed will be overwhelming.
It was the Americans, after all, who poured resources into the 1980s war against the Soviet-backed regime in Kabul, at a time when girls could go to school and women to work. Bin Laden and his mojahedin were armed and trained by the CIA and MI6, as Afghanistan was turned into a wasteland and its communist leader Najibullah left hanging from a Kabul lamp post with his genitals stuffed in his mouth.
But by then Bin Laden had turned against his American sponsors, while US-sponsored Pakistani intelligence had spawned the grotesque Taliban now protecting him. To punish its wayward Afghan offspring, the US subsequently forced through a sanctions regime which has helped push 4m to the brink of starvation, according to the latest UN figures, while Afghan refugees fan out across the world.
All this must doubtless seem remote to Americans desperately searching the debris of what is expected to be the largest-ever massacre on US soil - as must the killings of yet more Palestinians in the West Bank yesterday, or even the 2m estimated to have died in Congo's wars since the overthrow of the US-backed Mobutu regime. "What could some political thing have to do with blowing up office buildings during working hours?" one bewildered New Yorker asked yesterday.
Already, the Bush administration is assembling an international coalition for an Israeli-style war against terrorism, as if such counter-productive acts of outrage had an existence separate from the social conditions out of which they arise. But for every "terror network" that is rooted out, another will emerge - until the injustices and inequalities that produce them are addressed.
Crawl back into yours.
Nope, that's a quote from Colonel Chivington (Sand Creek).
I originally said it in response to someone saying that a large destructive attack would only result in more suicide bombers. My response is simple ... if you kill them all (or at least enough of them so that they cringe at the sound of aircraft or diesel engines), there won't be any revenge attacks.
The idea worked against the American Indians.
What does this mean? They invaded a neighbor and got shot for their efforts, conscript or no. "Imperial arrogance" is a meaningless propaganda phrase.
If Bush had marched on to Baghdad, he might have accomplished something. The murder of people desperately attempting to retreat back to Iraq was a disgusting act which comes close to genocide and certainly violates the rules of war.
No, that is more propaganda. Shooting at retreating troops is not outside ANY "rules of war," since you may well have to fight them again if you do not do so. If, in fact, Bush had taken your advice we WOULD have had to do so. Sorry, it may have been sad and unfortunate, but troops in a war they started are fair game no matter which way they're heading at the time.
Compare that with the relatively gentle hand of Iraq in Kuwait "if you're searching for moral equivalency".
Aren't we forgetting who invaded whom? "Gentle hand?" Are you seriously suggesting we give the Iraqi invaders some sort of gratitude for not killing more of their innocent neighbors than they did?
Only then can we hope to live in peace.
When they came for the Protestants, I said nothing, because I was not a Protestant,
When they came for the Jews, I said nothing because I am not a Jew,
When they came for me, no one was left to help me.
You are an idiot, the bomb went off in America not overseas. Go put your head back in the sand and let the men take care of this ok?
In my opinion, you are one of the most intelligent and perceptive posters on these fora, and I usually find myself wishing, after reading one of your messages, that you would join the discussions more often. Not today.
For all of your perceptiveness, intelligence, and understanding of the great tides of history, I think you miss the larger picture here. Yes, we are a feminized culture. Yes, we have awakened to the reality of our Empire. Yes, Empire sucks virtue from the marrow of Republic. All of these things are true. And it is also true that these attacks are related to our practices and policies as an Empire. I'm here to say: that doesn't change things a bit.
God uses Empire just as he uses Republic. Without the massive infrastructure and global reach of Rome, Christ's message would have been so much harder to disseminate throughout the West. Without the civilizing influence of the British Empire, the world would be far more fragmented and culturally impoverished than it is today. Without the American Empire, communism might have truly conquered all as Russia "spread her errors throughout the world."
Witness what happens when Empires retreat into themselves. The fall of Rome in the West led to 500 years of darkness and death. The fall of Constantinople led to the establishment of a permanent Islamic threat at Europe's door. The fall of the British Empire led to the spread of communism and third world nationalism around the globe.
Empires are not perfect; in fact they are downright awful. The practice of Empire is ugly, feminizing, and demoralizing.
The alternative is worse.
Many people around the world hate Americans and Americans can't see why.
We must ask ourselves why. Hate doesn't come out of nowhere.
Many here in FreeRepublic condemned the US attacks on Yugoslavia and the bombings in Sudan. The Serbs hate Americans for that. The Sudanese hate Americans for that. That is a totally rational and normal reaction for them. The Serbs don't hate us because they envy our "success" and "freedom". They hate us because our government bombed their cities and killed their women and children. I think that those of you here who in the past condemned the bombings of Serbia and Sudan can understand why Serbs and Sudanese hate us.
But of course, those incidents are not the cause of these latest attacks. There is a seething hatred among Muslims for the US. And it is because of the mindless support that the US gives to Israel.
Those Muslims don't hate us because we are "successful" or "free". They don't envy us because they view us, not without cause, as morally decadent with rampant "gay rights", feminism and abortion. They hate us because of our support for Zionism. I have said it before here that Islamic terrorism is caused by Zionism and nobody listens. The US can go out and get revenge for whoever did this. But the root of it all, US support for Israel remains, and so long as that remains the terorrism problem will continue.
We can get as much revebge as we want. If we find out that Afghanistan is sheltering Bin Laden we could turn Afghanistan into a radioactive wasteland. But the terrorism will continue. The proof of this is Israel. Israel has been getting revenge for decades. It deals harshly with terrorism, without any of the civil libertarian sillyness, but yet it suffers more terorrist attacks than any nation on Earth. It is because no matter how much Israel retaliates the root cause of the terrorism, Zionist religious fundamentalism, remains.
I say we should just let the Islamic religious fundamentalists and the Zionist religious fundamentalists kill each other if they want. We shouldn't meddle in their religious disputes. So long as we meddle in the disputes of religious fanatics we are going to be targets of terrorist religious fanatics.
Anyway, where is the outrage for the 1 million per year American victims of abortion?
For those who don't recall, a little about Chivington:
Chivington made good on his genocidal promise. During the early morning hours of November 29, 1864, he led a regiment of Colorado Volunteers to the Cheyenne's Sand Creek reservation, where a band led by Black Kettle, a well-known "peace" chief, was encamped. Federal army officers had promised Black Kettle safety if he would return to the reservation, and he was in fact flying the American flag and a white flag of truce over his lodge, but Chivington ordered an attack on the unsuspecting village nonetheless. After hours of fighting, the Colorado volunteers had lost only 9 men in the process of murdering between 200 and 400 Cheyenne, most of them women and children. After the slaughter, they scalped and sexually mutilated many of the bodies, later exhibiting their trophies to cheering crowds in Denver.
Chivington was at first widely praised for the "battle" at Sand Creek, and honored with a widely-attended parade through the streets of Denver just two weeks after the massacre. Soon, however, rumors of drunken soldiers butchering unarmed women and children began to circulate, and at first seemed confirmed when Chivington arrested six of his men and charged them with cowardice in battle. But the six, who included Captain Silas Soule, a personal friend of Chivington's who had fought with him at Glorietta Pass, were in fact militia members who had refused to participate in the massacre and now spoke openly of the carnage they had witnessed.
All genocidal criminals sound alike, I suppose. Goebbels, Chivington. Pol Pot's justification for slaughtering children was "kill the grass down to the root."
It appears the terrorists have won when it comes to you, at least. You stoop to their level.
They were pawns. One imperial overlord forced them into an army. Another one slaughtered them because of it. The whole game is disgusting. And don't forget that the US bankrolled Saddam before he moved into Kuwait.
The million Iraqis killed by the US embargo are also pawns. There isn't even any good reason for this one.
Ah HA! The ole JOO-hate peaking out from behind the mask. A little Islam in the mix? This is not about racism, this is about retribution. In case you have not noticed Americans no longer care if you think we deserve mass murder or not, we are going to relocate you to hell and you can take your beliefs with you. We tried to be nice, but...
Why should we go after the subhuman that perpetrated this mass murder when, as you apparently believe, we deserved it? Why not just drop it?
Why should we ignore the ones who gave these murderers a safe harbor in which to terrorize the civilized world? Are you aware that your proposed response to the killers is Chamberline-esc. You sound like appeasement is the ultimate answer to the problem of terrorism. How would terrorists achieving there goals end the terrorism problem? Wouldn't they be encouraged if we pulled back as a response to their terrorist activities?
Name a country that doesn't have a problem with terrorism so we can emulate them. You can't. Even France hasn't appeased the terrorists enough to stop the bombings. That tells me appeasement doesn't work.
Has the US done a lot wrong? Yes. But the good we have done far outweighs the bad. Are you suggesting the USA should be perfect, never make poor decisions? Well that's the only way to not piss any group off. My country is damned if we do, and damned if we don't. We only do the best that we can. We will continue to do the best that we can. We will not cower in the corner. We will do our best to rid this world of all those responsible for this incomprehensible deliberate attack against unsuspecting civilians. And that means those that knowingly harbor and/or finance them, and you are either with us, or against us. You have made your choice, and I have made mine.
I don't hate you but I wish everyone who supports what was done to NY City had been in the WTC towers in place of those who were.
Three-fold.
1) Obviously the people who did this need to be brought to justice. And they will be. There's no doubt about that.
2) Let people in planes, especially the crew, arm themselves. That a 757 can be taken over by three men with razor blades is a huge indictment of the so-called security arrangements in airports.
3) STOP GETTING MIXED UP IN FOREIGN WARS. Start by acknowledging that the Isrealis need to protect themselves. If they want to occupy Palestine, let them take the consequences.
First, I did not write the article. Second, the article was written 30 years ago (see my post 59), so it is likely Bangledesh had not offered the aid of which you speak at the time it was written. Third, the exception does not prove the rule...the article's main premise is still valid, IMHO.
But thanks for pointing out this fact about Bangledesh's generosity...I did not know that and it is nice to know SOMEONE out there made such an effort on our behalf...
I respectfully submit that you're retreating into generalities now, and you've obviously already equated the U.S. to Iraq in terms of being an "imperial overlord," yet another propaganda phrase that does not stand up to any sort of objective scrutiny. If you really think we were equivalent in that war, ask the Kuwaitis.
I insist that there is no shadow of moral equivalency between the Iraqi government allowing its citizens to die of a world, not a U.S. embargo (if it were only us it wouldn't kill anyone, would it?) and the deliberate targeting of innocent civilians in a terrorist attack. None. The argument has failed, give it up.
It isn't any sort of "game," it is war. There aren't any rules; if there were, 5000 people would still be alive on the East coast. It disgusts me as well. If you can think of a way to stop this without killing anyone, I'm all ears, but please don't suggest that the solution is to undo fifty years of foreign policy - that cannot be done.
Who, When, Why and by Whom? Fess up or shut up! Substantiate Please!!!
I killed no one in a foreign country and I doubt anyone in the WTC did! I don't control the economy of third world countries and I doubt anyone in the WTC did. What's your point? These innocent people have suffered DEATH at the hands of Terrorist Murderers that are out of control.
Poverty stricken Americans have yet to make the news in blowing up Mecca.(sarcasm) How dare you justify, in the least, the actions of these madmen based on their impoverishment. Also, it seems that you blame the worlds problems on America!? Is this true?
Terrorism is the most hiddeous of the intrinsic evils because it PREYS on the UNSUSPECTING INNOCENT. Like a cancer, it needs to be surgically removed.
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.