Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Jill who wrote (170)	9/17/2001 6:09:29 PM
From: George Papadopoulos	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

I got permission by the author who posted this in another thread. For the record, I agree. And the guy who told me to get a one way ticket to Iraq, thank you so much for your intelligent comment. ---------------- We created Bin Laden. The Moslem world is poor. In the final years of the Soviet intervention in Afghanistan we had a policy choice. The Russians indicated they were leaving and they left behind Najebulah (he lasted three years more). His support was the educated classes, the modernizers in Afghanistan. But he was a "communist", whatever that means in a backward illiterate country like Afghanistan. We would have had to put together a coalition that included him and his supporters. Instead we chose the Mudjahaden and we supported Pakistan when they set up Taliban as the safer option. So we surrendered all of the "modernizers" to the religious conservatives --- essentially for Cold War ideological reasons. This gave Ben Laden and many like him an opportunity to appear as freedom fighters with "support" in the Moslem world. The image Ben Laden created for himself and we helped him create is one of a defender of Islam under attack. Ben Laden comes from Saudi Arabia --- a feudal monarchy which we support. He comes from a class of people that initially wanted moderate political change in Saudi Arabia --- such as limits upon the royal families dictatorial rule. We have ignored the brewing anti-feudalism. We have been on the side of the Shahs and the Princes in the Arab and Moslem world. We have not encouraged any form of political change in these outdated institutions. Then when change comes from below we helped the oppressors --- our "friends". Thus the real support for terrorists is not our "American openness" but our obtuse political discourse with the Moslem world. We don't have a clue about how people live in these countries. Try desperate poverty. And our political leadership doesn't give a fig about the mass of poor people in these countries or anywhere else for that matter. ======================= Terrorism occurs in the absence of any other political vehicle for demands for a better life. In the United States the 19th Century Labor movement was riddled with anarchists and "terrorists". Why? Because Unions were not legal and were broken where ever they sprang up. (remember when I posted here about how the Saudi's secret police were screening all email to find political dissidents) After Roosevelt union organizing became legal and the terrorists disappeared from the Union movement. People will always choose a better way if that path is given them. As to what we do and what Ben Laden does. He is first of all just a symbol of what is happening. In Pakistan, Egypt, and Israel the mosque is where the poor go for education and social services. These services are not provided by the state anymore. The religious conservatives provide the poor with whatever welfare is available to them. The hope of the terrorists is that the US will now strike out at "the people" as they try to get to the terrorists. Any massive military intervention in the Moslem world by us will be greeted with cheers from the terrorists. They are hoping our intervention "radicalizes the Moslem people." I'm sure the Ben Ladens of the Moslem world would love to get their hands on political control over Pakistan. Looking to Washington you ought to hope for a fully thought out political and economic program and not just a military quick fix.

To: Jill who wrote (170)	9/17/2001 6:38:21 PM
From: maceng2	Respond to of 281500

International effort by banks to stabilize the market. news.ft.com On the other hand (and in reference to your post) history has shown that we are usually completely unprepared for what happens next when aggression gets out of hand. World War 1 is a good example. It was all to be over by Christmas. Many terrible examples where steel and iron won over human flesh. After 4 years and millions dead, Spanish flue came and killed even more of that number, the trenches may have had something to do with it. It also spawned WW2 and many other problems the human race could do without. Watching any of the excellent history documentaries on TV show that war should be avoided at all costs. Japan recovered well from WW2 defeat because the USA had a big heart. An outstanding contribution to humanity by the USA imho, and the Japanese will to become a civilised world power that did not use war or terrorism to build it's strength. In it's kamikazi mode it continued to lose. Japan and the USA were, and still are, very different people with separate cultures. Can the human race learn from this without millions dead ? My heartfelt condolences to all those innocents who suffered in the NY tragedy. God bless America, Bush and his advisors in the trials ahead.