Why terrorists attack America

[Fenir_LacDanan]

True enough GreyMouser, with most of your points.

Unfortunatley, I appear to have miss represented my own.

The point I was leading towards was regarding the general hatred of America by an increasing number of countries scattered across the globe, and basically all of the middle east (bar Isreal, of course).

Any student of history can see numerous attempt's by America to subvert soverign nation's right to choose their own leaders, when it suits their own intrest. The CIA, and other agencies, try everything from supporting revolutions to assination to install a government that will have a more friendly world view.

Bay of Pigs, anyone?

Oft the argument put forward is that America is helping the people of those countries, for they cannot help themselves. This is true in some cases, but most definetly not true in many others.

Politics, also has its place.

The Taliban were shooting weapons at Yank helicopters that Yanks sold them in their war against soviet agression. After the 1991 gulf war, America, for a time, supported a Kurdish uprising in the north, then withdrew its support when the political whims changed, (by the way, leaving the kurds to be brutally crushed by the Republican Guard).

America's friendships, it seems, are fickle.

One wonders if Kuiwait would have been the subject in 1991, and Iraq recently (weapons of Mass destruction??) of, shall we say, American intrest, if they did no house the second largest Oil fields in the world...

America went to war because a foreign government attempted to control and subvert their rights (no taxation without representation, and so on), so why wonder why countries who feel that "American Imperialism" is trying to overthrow their governments (or has in the past), or interferes with their own rights want to fight back?

They only use terror because it is the only weapon they have that they feel is effective. America would crush them in open battle.

[Fenir_LacDanan]

Just a note:

I do not support terrorists in any way, and I personally regard them as cowards of the highest order.

I am merely arguing the motives behind attacks, this being American interference in forign nations, and do not in any way advocate terrorism as an acceptable practice.

I enjoy debate, and feel this an issue worth examining, given world events, and am not trying to be offensive or flaming.

Fenir.

[Jonathan]

Originally posted by Fenir_LacDanan
The point I was leading towards was regarding the general hatred of America by an increasing number of countries scattered across the globe, and basically all of the middle east (bar Isreal, of course).

One has to make a distinction between the hatred of America in the Middle East and the hatred in the rest of the world. In the Middle East, the people hate the US mainly for their support to Israel. This isn't strange, since the governments in the Arab countries are anti-Israelian and at the same time control a lot of the media. There is nothing that the Arab leaders fear more than democracy - if the people in the Arab countries saw all the benefits with democracy, they'd overthrow their leaders. So the reasonable thing to do is to blacken the reputation of the only democracy in the region, Israel, and any country that supports Israel. The schools in the Middle East tend to teach the children to hate Israel and the US, so they will continue to hate whatever Israel and the US does.

The anti-americanism in e.g Europe is way different. The anti-Americans dislikes the US not for what it is, but for what it does. They don't like that the US takes action without having the rest of the world behind them. By doing so, they find the US being arrogant which is extremely annoying to them. This doesn't mean that what the US does is wrong, it's just that they are quicker to take action than most other countries, which is both good and bad.

Any student of history can see numerous attempt's by America to subvert soverign nation's right to choose their own leaders, when it suits their own intrest. The CIA, and other agencies, try everything from supporting revolutions to assination to install a government that will have a more friendly world view.

Bay of Pigs, anyone?

Of course governments with friendlier world views are in America's interest, it's in everyone's interest. Of course there can be other reasons for the US to overthrow a hostile government but no matter the reasons, overthrowing tyrannic governments is always something good. The Western world always try to contribute to democratic processes but as soon as it gets bloody, they withdraw their support. The US has the guts not to, but to continue helping.

Oft the argument put forward is that America is helping the people of those countries, for they cannot help themselves. This is true in some cases, but most definetly not true in many others.

That's a very isolationistic view. Should we withdraw all help just because we think the people are able to manage on their own? Less help will only result in more people dead, even if they are able to achieve well on their own.
I think we should try to help all people who wants democracy, no matter if they need any help or not. By doing so we show the world what we want - more freedom.

Politics, also has its place.

The Taliban were shooting weapons at Yank helicopters that Yanks sold them in their war against soviet agression. After the 1991 gulf war, America, for a time, supported a Kurdish uprising in the north, then withdrew its support when the political whims changed, (by the way, leaving the kurds to be brutally crushed by the Republican Guard).

America's friendships, it seems, are fickle.

The US never actively supported the Taliban. They supported those who defended Afghanistan from the Soviets, which you must agree was a nice thing to do. A few years after the Soviet retreat, the Taliban seized power without any help from America. The Taliban did get their hands on old American gunships but no one can possibly believe that was something the US intended.
About the Kurdish uprising, America has admitted that withdrawing its support to the Kurds was one of their biggest mistakes ever.

One wonders if Kuiwait would have been the subject in 1991, and Iraq recently (weapons of Mass destruction??) of, shall we say, American intrest, if they did no house the second largest Oil fields in the world...

America went to war because a foreign government attempted to control and subvert their rights (no taxation without representation, and so on), so why wonder why countries who feel that "American Imperialism" is trying to overthrow their governments (or has in the past), or interferes with their own rights want to fight back?

In 1991, EVERYONE agreed that militaric intervention was necessary. In the UN security council, even Soviet and China voted for sending troops to Kuwait. There was A LOT more than oil that made America lead the attack against Iraq. And the reason why the US and nobody else lead the attack is rather obvious - America was by far the largest military power in the world. They still are.

When bringing more freedom to the people, any other American interests in a country is not that important. The important thing is that more democracy is brought to this world, be it that American companies profit from it. In fact, everyone profits from it. Those who fight back in order to defend "their" governments, like the Saddam loyalists, are a minority of the people.

They only use terror because it is the only weapon they have that they feel is effective. America would crush them in open battle.

They do not use terror ”only because of that”. Terror is something directed to ordinary people, a way to put fear into civilians. When terrorists from Al Qaeda kills Americans, they don’t do it to “liberate” Iraq or Palestine. They do it simply they believe the US is satan. Besides, to Al Qaeda everyone is a legitimate target, not only Americans.
What do you suggest? That America stops doing what’s right due to fear of terror attacks? That would mean that the terrorists wins, but it wouldn’t necessarily mean that the terror ceases.


Guess my conclusion is that the hatred towards America is unjustified.

[Radagast The Brown]

Nice post, Jonathan.

Originally posted by Jonathan
One has to make a distinction between the hatred of America in the Middle East and the hatred in the rest of the world. In the Middle East, the people hate the US mainly for their support to Israel. This isn't strange, since the governments in the Arab countries are anti-Israelian and at the same time controls a lot of the media. There is nothing that the Arab leaders fear more than democracy - if the people in the Arab countries saw all the benefits with democracy, they'd overthrow their leaders. So the reasonable thing to do is to blacken the reputation of the only democracy in the region, Israel, and any country that supports Israel. The schools in the Middle East tend to teach the children to hate Israel and the US, so they will continue to hate whatever Israel and the US does.

Well... that is not the reason, I think, the Arab leaders hate us (Israel).
They hate us because we got the land of Israel in the area they wanted to rule, and still want. So they attacked us after we announced our independence, and since then we're in a continuous war against most of them.

They hate USA, though, because it supports us, and I think the US supports us because we were the only democratic country in the area.

[Valandil]

Fenir - Remember too that from 1945 to 1990, the US was in a big chess game with the Soviet Union... of necessity. It's a struggle that I'm glad we won (and gladder still that we won it WITHOUT all-out nuclear war!)... and I think the rest of the world can be thankful as well. Cuba would not have been an issue if a Soviet-sponsored communist faction hadn't come to power. Similarly with Vietnam... except THAT struggle had been going on for AGES before we got in, and we came in to relieve the French. Again though, it was an attempt to halt the spread of Soviet aggression.

I wish we HAD stuck with the Kurds... wise policy would have dictated that we do so. Unfortunately, the political winds DO blow back and forth within our country... This can force our leadership to either change policies, or not get re-elected and then a whole new set of policies is in anyway.

There are always some in our country who would rather we just stay at home and be isolationist about everything. Personally, I think that's neither desireable nor even practical in the world of the 21st century. That IS a possible path though - but I think the rest of the world would be lessened by our lack of participation in it.

And yes, we DO want to set the terms for our involvement... doesn't everyone?

(EDIT: that last statement not meant to justify assassination attempts and such, which are generally deplorable. Not ALL of our actions have been the best, I'm sure... but taken as a whole, I think we do pretty well)

Frankly, I think we're just easy to blame when everything doesn't go just right. People all around the world hate us... but people all around the world also love us. Some idiots even cheered in the streets when the twin towers were destroyed - while attired in Nike, Coca-Cola and Chicago Bulls t-shirts! And let me tell you... when there's trouble someplace, we're usually right there to help! (except Rwanda in 1994 - when only Belgium stepped in - see Earniel... I remembered! )

[Last Child of Ungoliant]

of course everyone realises that if the cold war had degenerated, the battleground would have been us in the uk, and the rest of wurope

[Beor]

If it degenerated into a ground war, yes, it would be in europe, if it went worse, the Road Warrior wouldnt just be a good movie, it would be life.

Valandil: The war here has been going on for centuries as well (correct me if I am wrong, Radagast the Brown), the Crusades were fought here to try to recalim the Holy Lands (which I think is Isreal (once again, RtB, correct me if I'm wrong)), and havent the various Muslim factions here been at eachothers throats for quite some time?

[Radagast The Brown]

Originally posted by Beor
Valandil: The war here has been going on for centuries as well (correct me if I am wrong, Radagast the Brown), the Crusades were fought here to try to recalim the Holy Lands (which I think is Isreal (once again, RtB, correct me if I'm wrong)), and havent the various Muslim factions here been at eachothers throats for quite some time?

Sure, I will correct you whenever you want. But when you say 'here' do you mean Middle East?

[Beor]

Yeah, sorry if I was (whats the word?) incoherent(?) (its the WD-40 again, (see Venting thread)).

EDIT: I still forgot to clarify, yes, the Middle East.

[Radagast The Brown]

Ok. I learnt about it in history 3 years ago.

Originally posted by Beor
Valandil: The war here has been going on for centuries as well (correct me if I am wrong, Radagast the Brown), the Crusades were fought here to try to recalim the Holy Lands (which I think is Isreal (once again, RtB, correct me if I'm wrong)), and havent the various Muslim factions here been at eachothers throats for quite some time?

First - It's Israel. Many have this mistake, as I pointed to azalea in another thread.

And yes, the crusaders faught against the Muslims, but they lost, I think after about 100 years. Maybe less. And since then Israel is Othman (sp.), and afterwards British.
This is about what happened in all the Middle East - the Othman Empire ruled here, afterwards the British/French and then independence of many countries.

[Last Child of Ungoliant]

can i pitch in plz??

Roman Empire > Eastern Roman Empire > Byzantine Empire
> Ottoman Empire > Middle East as it is now (more or less!)

the current strife should be seen as the fault of us in britain,
carving the world up between the wars, i mean, look at India/Pakistan/Bangladesh, we never get it right, do we?

i think, everyone should be able to live where they want and not harass each other, that would of course be impossible, as every race has their petty hates...but at least we are all friends in cyberspace, eh?

[Ruinel]

Originally posted by Fenir_LacDanan
Countries like Iran, Iraq, Afghanistan, Cuba, Haiti, Panama, Vietnam, Palestine, and many others have all suffered this.

*sigh* Why, oh why, must the world be filled with nescient people? *sigh*

ummmm... America was asked to come to some of those countries, [FLAME DELETED]

Your attitude is so typical. All you people ever want to do is blame the US, point the finger at America. I suppose Spain deserved 200 people to die in that last bomb explosion on the commuter train. I suppose the Israelis deserved to die while sitting in a coffee shop, visiting with family and friends.

I'd actually be happy if the US closed its borders and turned its back on the rest of the world, letting them all fend for themselves. Sure, it would be damn bloody and barbaric for a while as ruthless dictators wiped out hoards of innocent people in the most inhumane ways, but hey, there's always Europe to step in. They could handle it. Right?

If you asked some of the Cuban-Americans in Florida (or elsewhere) what their opinions of Castro and the state of Cuba, they'd say that America wasn't doing enough to help the Cubans regain their country and bring the people out of abject poverty.

I think the question shouldn't be..."Why do terrorists attack America," but should be "Why do terrorists attack [insert country here]" Terrorists work all over the damn globe. America has really only been attacked with one big blow, and small attacks from one asinine, group of extremists (al Qaeda).

Look at Israel! Spain! England! Russia! Egypt! This is only a few. Terrorist are all over the globe. You think America is special because someone attacked it? You think America deserved the special attention of a bunch of woman-hating, opressive, piss ants? This has been going on all over the world. [FLAME and FLAME BAIT DELETED]



Last edited by Sister Golden Hair

[Lizra]

heh!

[Coney II]

I got meself worried for nothing.......she's most definitely back

(see happy thread)

Nice ter see ya not avoiding the swear filter there Ru

[Fat middle]

Ruinel, cannot you show your disagreement without flaming?

[Beor]

Ruinel, you are my new hero, and role model. Just sayin'.

And to continue your point, if I may, if you go out and ask most Iraqi's, they are happy that we are here, and they will tell you that we are helping them more than hurting them.

The bombs that were exploded here recently in Baghdad and in Karbala at the mosques on that holy day (I forget what it is called, sorry) were set to try to shift public opinion away from supporting the American forces here, and to make some other point, I'm sure, but the opinion didnt change too much. We are putting huge ammounts money and effort into this place to make the standard of living of the average Iraqi citizen better, and it is working, you can tell just by looking around. The people arent scared to go outside, they are more friendly, as opposed to when we first got here, and the public works are being repaired or are already repaired.

Most of the people setting the bombs and causing the violence arent even Iraqis, they are some sort of radical faction(s) from other countries bent on changing the peoples will against America.

Now, I can only speak for what I see, and my expierence is limited to Iraq, but I've seen this first hand, I deal with it every day, so dont try to tell me that we are a nation who's primary goal is to oppress and warp others to our will and our view of what is right. We arent telling anyone how to think, we are helping them live.

Rad: Israel, got it

[sun-star]

Originally posted by Ruinel
I think the question shouldn't be..."Why do terrorists attack America," but should be "Why do terrorists attack [insert country here]" Terrorists work all over the damn globe. America has really only been attacked with one big blow, and small attacks from one asinine, group of extremists (al Qaeda).

Good point. It’s too simplistic to suggest that terrorism only started to be a problem in the world when it began to affect the US. A question like the title of this thread looks for an America-specific answer (and usually an America-specific cause) which disregards the impact and existence of terrorism – Islamic and otherwise – in the rest of the world. America’s history has some limited relevance, but if the question we want to answer is about terrorism as a modern method of warfare, we need not to ignore all the other countries where it’s an issue.

I'd actually be happy if the US closed its borders and turned its back on the rest of the world, letting them all fend for themselves. Sure, it would be damn bloody and barbaric for a while as ruthless dictators wiped out hoards of innocent people in the most inhumane ways, but hey, there's always Europe to step in. They could handle it.

Just to clarify - that was rhetorical exaggeration, right?


Fenir_LacDanan, where do the recent murders in Spain fit into your hypothesis?

[azalea]

Originally posted by Radagast The Brown


First - It's Israel. Many have this mistake, as I pointed to azalea in another thread.

Oh, yeah, just spread my spelling errors all over the board!

I, too, like the point about terrorism going on for decades in other countries. They may hate the US, but they hate others too, for a variety of reasons.

[Sween]

Ahhhhh my kind of thread !

Now one of the main rerason i think that there is suchy hatred of the US and the west by certian countrys is because of adverts. Now i hear u saying 'ADVERTS' what the hell is he on about? How could Adverts be the cause of a lot of this trouble. Well let me tell you, its a saturday David has woken up with a bit of a hangover gets the misses to cook him a meal and set off down the pub for saturday afternoon football. Now this pub in question has a rather 'sneaky' satalite. The laws in this country mean that we cannot screen premiership games live on a saturday but they can on Arab channels which this one picks up. And what i have noticed is during the Ad breaks they have a lot of western commercials (esspecially pepsi) and these show young Arabs drinking pepsi and dancing round and not wearing arab attire, in other words acting like westoners like our goodselves.

Now this is all well in good in our country and doesnt raise so much of an eyebrow except this isnt us and this isnt there culture and as i hear one sauldi official once say 'we have been living in the modern world for 30 years, you have been for 200 and you shaped it so its hard for us to adapt' . Now think long and hard on these words esspecially 'you shaped it' the modern world is our world not there and a simple Ad on an arab channel whilst nurseing a hangover and drinking orange and water brought it home to me this is what they dont like they dont like the way we and by we i mean companys (which are the sign of a democracy by the way free companys and free working environment) trying to effect change in there world for profits and disregaring and threating the hardline relgious beliefs of there people.

Think they are been stupid think of our own country we still have fuss about gay love on screen and things that go against the churchs credo and i dont think of this been a relgious country anymore then think of how the deeply relgious countrys are and how there deluded ideas are not so diffrent from there own yet there reactions are it has to be said

[jerseydevil]

Let me just say - how much destorted crap can one person dish out? I think you get the prize.

Originally posted by Fenir_LacDanan
The point I was leading towards was regarding the general hatred of America by an increasing number of countries scattered across the globe, and basically all of the middle east (bar Isreal, of course).

Yeah - most of those countries hate us - until they need us to come to their resuce. Look at the South Korean demonstrations against American troops being stationed their. Of course that only went on until North Korea started lobbing missiles into the Pacific and then then they had demonstrations where they were holding up American flags.

Any student of history can see numerous attempt's by America to subvert soverign nation's right to choose their own leaders, when it suits their own intrest. The CIA, and other agencies, try everything from supporting revolutions to assination to install a government that will have a more friendly world view.

As can anyone see evidence of this from all countries throughout history. The funny thing is - we let Eurupe have it's freedom after World War II, unlike what the Soviet Union did. So according to your definition Russia should be the one hated. England and france are the ones who created the modern Middle East. England created Iraq, India, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Iran and the rest of the Middle East.

Bay of Pigs, anyone?

I can't really speak for the Bay of Pigs, although it is interesting that you have a problem with the United States supporting Cubans fighting for their country, but have no problem with the fact that Castro came to power through a revolution. You might also find it interesting to know that Cuba belonged to the United States and freely left the US, because they voted for Independence.

Puerto Rico also has a vote every 10 years for whether they want statehood, independence or remain a territory. They have through all these years voted for territory, with statehood a close second. Independence gets only about 10% and the biggest argument against indepence is the cry of "look what happened to Cuba"

Oft the argument put forward is that America is helping the people of those countries, for they cannot help themselves. This is true in some cases, but most definetly not true in many others.

Yeah - and it seems as if you forget the majority of good the US does in the world. This might be shocking to you - but the majority of Iraqis actually like the US and actually are happy the invasion took place. They're main concern is security.

Politics, also has its place.

The Taliban were shooting weapons at Yank helicopters that Yanks sold them in their war against soviet agression.

So - I suppose we should have just let the Soviet Union invade the whole world and take over the Middle East then, because that's what would have happened. You seem really great at pointing the finger at the US - but don't look at the politcal environment that these things were happening in. Sometimse one has to pick the lesser of two evils and at that time it was supporting the Taliban against the Soviet Union. Our problem wasn't that we went into Afganistan to fight the Soviet Union - it was that we left before rebuilding the country.

After the 1991 gulf war, America, for a time, supported a Kurdish uprising in the north, then withdrew its support when the political whims changed, (by the way, leaving the kurds to be brutally crushed by the Republican Guard).

World opinion let the Kurds die - NOT America. Bush wanted to go into Iraq and finish the job as it should have been in 1991 - but the world did not support it. The Kurds felt they had the backing of the United States, then Bush ended up listening to world opinion. You know that little multilaterlism thing everyone seems to be talking about. You know - how the US is supposed to only listen to what the world wants and thinks we should do. Then when the world opinion idea backfires - the finger is pointed at the US 10 years down the road .

America's friendships, it seems, are fickle.

Actually - you know whose friendships are fickle? - France and Germany's. We supported them all during the Cold War, we rebuilt Germany from the ground up, we rebuilt the democracy that Germany now has. France during the Cold War - pulled out of NATO. Why? Because it knew it had the protection, without having to handle any responsibility. Then after the Soviet Union fell, no thanks to France, they rejoined. Amazing - talk about fickle friends. We're there for every country who needs help and ESPECIALLY our allies and you have the nerve to question that.

One wonders if Kuiwait would have been the subject in 1991, and Iraq recently (weapons of Mass destruction??) of, shall we say, American intrest, if they did no house the second largest Oil fields in the world...

Actually - America gets a much smaller percentage of it's oil from the Middle East than Europe or Japan. Europe gets over 50% of it's oil from the Middle East and japan gets over 70%. As for going in for a reason - based on Europes arguments against Iraq - I'm beginning to quesiton why we even bothered going into Bosnia. Meloshivic did not have any WMD, did not attack any country outside of itself and there was no UN resolution agreeing to the invasion of Bosnia and the removing Meloshivic from power. Oh - but wait - I forgot - Europe wanted him removed - so I suppose it's completely different. Funny though - they couldn't handle the job on their own even though we didn't want to get involved initially.

America went to war because a foreign government attempted to control and subvert their rights (no taxation without representation, and so on), so why wonder why countries who feel that "American Imperialism" is trying to overthrow their governments (or has in the past), or interferes with their own rights want to fight back?

The majority of Iraqis are NOT fighting Americans. By the way - which countries have we taken over in this grand empire that we have? Oh yeah - I forgot , we have Guam don't we?

They only use terror because it is the only weapon they have that they feel is effective. America would crush them in open battle.

You are actually blinded enough to think that this war is against America? It's not against America - the terrorists are against the western world. They are only using various things to justify their attacks in order to divide the rest of the world from America. You better hope that America survives, because if we don't - they aren't stopping with us.

People had better wake up - this is World War III. The Spain bombing had nothing to do with Iraq, it had to do with changing an election in order to disrupt an alliance. France received a major terrorist thread today - for them the terrorists are using the "headscarf ban" as the reason for attacking them. France was just shocked that they were being targeted since as they stated "even though we weren't in support of the Iraq War".