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: Bilow who wrote (127641)	3/28/2004 11:55:15 PM
From: NightOwl	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 281500

The historical reality is that lower Manhattan has been the target of terrorist bombers for about 100 years now. The problem existed long before Islamic fundamentalists ever saw an airplane and it will still exist long after no one considers commercial flying at less than hypersonic speeds. It's not a problem that is unique to our time, it's an ongoing problem that dates (at least) to the anarchists of the late 19th century. And if you want to call the civil war related incidents like the one at Harper's Ferry, or the post war shenanigans "terrorism", the problem predates the common availability of dynamite. I'm a "conservative", which means that I believe that the old ways are generally better. The old ways of fighting terrorism is to use various police forces, and it's still the best way. Hi Carl, Yes I am sure you are conservative. But you have apparently slept with the anti-warristas for so long that you have acquired a few of Graham Green's old fleas. <vbg> Lower Manhattan may have been blowing up every quarter for the past 100 years, but if so it was at the hands of your demented brethren and your lovely sistereen. Never was it on the target lists of Vietnamese terrorists or any other foreign civilians prior to AQ. We have had some remarkable foreign enemies since 1791. We've contested numerous foreign wars, and imposed our economic and cultural power in places The Great Khan never knew existed. Yet in all that time not one NY structure was struck or bombed by any of their agents, saboteurs, spies, enemy aliens, messengers of god or soccer hooligans. This is not insignificant. ...Iraq is not Vietnam. ...And OBL is not HCM. If you remain on top of the slag heap long enough, sooner or later you will come to accept that radical Islam is defined by your existence. It isn't your presence in their countries that puts the Islamist on the road to terrorism. It is your dominant existence period. Simply put, you are an affront to God. You do not deserve to be on top of any slag heap. Your position there is a crime against god and man that AQ must correct. Moreover, this Anti-Bilow sentiment is not some far out dementia of a teeny minority within the Islamic world. It is rather the daily bread of the vast majority of Arabs, Persians, Pashtuns, and much of Islam wherever it's found, including your back yard. It may be acted on by few, but Anti-Bilowism is the "thought" of many millions for whom ultimate success by the Islamist "actors" inspires neither fear nor opposition. It is self-delusion to think that OBL's enemies are totalitarian Arab regimes at home. OBL is neither a Jefferson nor a Payne. In OBL's mind, it was God and Islam that brought down the USSR. You are next on their list. Arab governments of whatever stripe are no more than tools in the fight to be rid of you. I applaud your instinct for "the old ways." It will serve you well. You will eventually need to go back a little further than the founding of "Scotland Yard" for a model. But when you tire of playing "law and order" and decide to put an end to these exclusionary religionists... the bond fires and dumb bombs will be there waiting. 0\|0 All praise and glory to The Deadly Dichotomy, may it bless us with its swift and painless death.

To: Bilow who wrote (127641)	3/29/2004 10:55:05 AM
From: Hawkmoon	Read Replies (5) \| Respond to of 281500

The Iraq war is considerably worse than Vietnam in that few people were arguing, 12 months on, that the war in Vietnam was a diversion from the contest with Communism. First off, I would agree that fighting terrorism requires a robust police and investigative effort designed to disrupt and interdict actual terrorist attempts against actual targets. However, terrorism does not just spontaneously ignite without having "fuel" to feed the flames. And that fuel is the social and political hopelessness that currently exists within the Middle East under the existing repressive and corrupt governments there. The fundamentalists prey on the discontent and despair that prevails there, and attempt to funnel it into a militant ideo-theology aimed at destroying the west. We've seen that international political pressure has just not been effective in altering the totalitarian reality in Iraq. Saddam's regime controlled all the means of repression and information for that society. Thus, it required a military overthrow of that regime, followed by the creation of an effective governmental foundation and economic restructuring. Thus, I would opine that the strategy is to assist in making Iraq into a example of how the Arab world can find a new economic and social vision that will improve the economic lives of millions of its people. But furthermore, with the current waves of terrorist activities against muslims who are cooperating with the CPA efforts, it is irrefutably dispelling the notion that muslims were not responsible for the 9/11 suicide attacks. And it is dispelling the belief that it was a American/Jewish conspiracy aimed at generating a clash of civilizations and the destruction of Islam. What is slowly being initiated is the understanding that Islamic militancy offers only a vision of destruction and repression, not economic prosperity and personal liberty. Iran has shown that fundamentalist governments don't have the first clue how to create and sustain a workable economy that can deal with the demographic baby boom sweeping through the region. And the overthrow of Saddam, despite the resistance by certain Islamic militants, has sent a message to many other regimes in the region that if they don't fundamentally change the manner in which they educate and instill social and moral values into their children. And this pertains to Iraq as well.. We cannot permit the perception that the US has an obligation to solve all of their problems for them. They have to take charge of their own future, and within defined international norms of society, carve out a vision of dignity and prosperity that is sustainable and egalitarian.. Iraq, IMO, was crucial as a first step towards altering the direction of economic and social progress in the region. It isn't going to be easy, nor bloodless. But it does plant the democratic "flag" squarely in the middle of some of the most troublesome regimes in the muslim world and it's challenging the militants to knock it down. And the more they try and knock it down, the more they will be forced to wage their war and suicide bombings, not against Americans, but against the Iraqi people themselves. And that can only undermine their popularity, IMO.. Because it makes the Arab "street" recognize that they are not immune to the wrath of the reactionary forces seeking to dominate their religion and societies. So yes.. police efforts in the US are helpful to thwarting Islamo-Fascist attacks against the US. But more important is to carry out a "forward defense" by attacking the causes from which the militants are drawing support. Hawk