Replies

The western allies, by bringing about the exile of the ruling houses of Germany and Austria-Hungary accomplished what they set out to do, which is to destroy the old order and hinder the creation of a restorationist movement. Whether or not this was evil is not the issue. Whether it worked is the question, and it most certainly did. That the cure proved worse than the "disease" is poetic justice, but not necessarily relevant to my proposed solution to the Islamic Question. The comparative success of Ataturk's secularisation of Turkey demonstrates that it is entirely feasible to eliminate the political influence of fundamentalist Moslem clerics. To do this will require some degree of violence, just as it did in Turkey. Of course, "the West" is not willing to tolerate this, so my suggestion is purely academic.

As far as the CIA being responsible for arming and training the mujahadeen, that is hardly new news. Our foreign policy has been a disaster at least since the war against Spain. One consistent thing is that we either back the wrong people, or back the right people the wrong way. Considering the American propensity for siding with the Moslems, our continued support of Israel is a mystery to me.

"...Whether it worked is the question...

OK--as long as we grant our enemy his utilitarian calculations then, and stop all this nonsense about "good" and "evil"; "freedom" and "terrorism"; and the "clash of civilizations". Osama made his mistake in trusting the reliability of his sources--images of American pop culture, the behavior of corporations and politicians. Mistake number two was projecting his own prejudices and beliefs onto the innacurate data--much as you are doing by predicting the reaction of the "arabonthestreet" once he has been "liberated" from his ranting mullahs.

Just bad business practices, that's all it amounts to on either side. Each side will go back to the drawing board and return to the bargaining table with a new proposal. Osama--or whatever the negotiator on the other side might be calling himself--may be more inclined now to see the virtue of the "top down" approach which you describe. Given the state of our political, cultural and religious leadership I think he could work quite a few concessions into the bargaining process...

The comparative success of Ataturk's secularisation of Turkey demonstrates that it is entirely feasible to eliminate the political influence of fundamentalist Moslem clerics.

Some solutions truly are history-bound. There is no way on earth Ataturk could succeed today were he to embark on a similar campaign. The intellectual climate simply does not permit it...I mean is there anyone, anywhere who could get suckered into emulating the "West?"

No, I think there can be only one Council of Trent. After that, you're just increasingly likely to end up with a Vatican II...