To: Logain Ablar who wrote (130414 ) 10/20/2001 8:23:45 PM From: Haim R. Branisteanu Respond to of 436258 Tim, I am not sure if you are familiar with the mentality of Muslims in the ME or Central Asia and how they interpret signs of strength or weakness of their enemy. Further there are major differences let say between a Muslim in Uzbekistan or a Muslim in Arabia. Facts are that at a time that the hatred against the Western World was not so entrenched those folks were fighting each other like mad. The first major incursion in this century of the "West" is what sparked the hatred. One classic event was "Lawrence of Arabia" or the division of the Ottoman Empire in an arbitrary fashion by France and England, with disregard of cultural differences and ethic or sectarian divide. The governments of those countries brought to power their "Arabs" and we suffer the consequences to this day. France and England "dictated" who the ruler should be. My point being that last US Presidential election "they dictated who the ruler should be" and therefore were a turning point. For the majority of the ME population the election controversy and the way the election was won and by whom was the major "all clear" signal as a sign of weakness which was also interpreted as strength for most Islamic Fundamentalist. The stock market collapse ..... more the the NAZ ........ the Internet the symbol of the New Economy spearheaded by the Western Civilization .............. undermining their own totalitarian regimes by spreading the notion of democracy ........... also helped to justify "their view" of the world. In no way, do I justify the inaction of Clinton after the 93 and 98 attacks, but the Aden / Yemen incident only reinforced their assumption. On the other hand Powell nomination as Secretary of State was a great win for the Wahabis in the ME after all he was the symbol of "US obeisance" to the Saud Royal family since Desert Storm (Powell was the weak link in Bush Sr. Administration). Powell policies guidance of softness toward Islamic extremist all over the world further encouraged those bend for extreme actions and interpreted this policy as a major weakness in the US administration. Also the sudden rise of energy prices by a concerted effort of the Arabs and US oil companies further increased the feeling of a return to power of the "Arab Caliphate" and generated more funds to finance the terrorist cells spread all over the world. Therefore Powell lack of understanding what makes Islamic Fundamentals "tick" and his policy of almost obeying attitude to the governments in Arabia gave the green light to move forward. Major gruesome terrorist attacks were executed during the last year in Yemen, Kashmir, Russia (Chechnia), Israel and Philippines. Those were the "feelers" action to test the US resolve to oppose terror. Powell did not pursue an aggressive action against Yemen, after 17 US service men were killed not let he India, Russia, Israel or the Philippines respond in kind to the massacres on their territory. Remember that Assad leveled a city (Hamah) in Syria to suppress any resistance against it's dictatorship. King Husein in Jordan had the Black September when the PLO threaten his crown. In both instances between 25,000 to 50,000 people died. That is the language those people understand. Saddam Husein excelled in his attempt to keep himself in power in Iraq hundred of thousand of people were killed if by conventional weapons or weapons of mass destruction. He even had the horrific plot to poor flammable liquid on worshiper and set them on fire (yes this was weeks after Desert Storm and US forces under Bush Sr. & Powell were 100 or so miles away............ the Kurds suffered even more and the Bush & Powell betrayed them). That is the Powell problem IMHO. Lets stop at this point Haim