Al Qaeda Just Attacked Egypt, Why?

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
41

Elk,

“Thunder you ask me if I am ready to face the ramifications of some type of action into Saudi Arabia. Are you ready to face the continuing deaths of US forces in a situation that may degenerate even more with no success in the initial objective.”

Sadly, you did not answer my question.

But I will answer yours - am I prepared? Yep, largely because I do not share your pessimism about mission overreach. And, by the way, the initial objective was done quote nicely - getting Saddam out of power once and for all.

“There was a better way to face the threat of jihadists which I fully agree exists! We could have brough our forces to bear in a much more productive manner!”

I am all ears - what is your alternative?

“This type of advice was ignored by the current admin. because they couldn’t wait, couldn’t show patience…”

Iraq was at the end of twelve years of diplomacy. Bush got Congressional approval and took his case to the UN. Bush gave Saddam a chance to go into exile. Patience had run out.

“…couldn’t exercise good judgement, with the most precious commodity we have our American servicemen and women.”

Soldiers face death in the cause they are commited to. Your idea that our servicemen and women have been thrown into harm’s way willy-nilly ignores the ramifications of appeasement after the Gulf War. The US is cleaning up the mess the UN was supposed to attend to. These are the wages of appeasement.

42

Damici, let me clarify that I don’t think we should invade Saudi Arabia. I said, what I said about them being an ally in reference to Zap’s comment on the people who flew the 9/11 planes. Just trying to point out what I consider to be a deceptive tactic. Because ultimately the perps were not from Iraq but rather a country for whatever reasons justifiable or not we are on good terms with.

If it was my way whether it was Saudi Arabia or Iran, Pakistan or Indonesia, the UK or Syria, if we knew of a cell operating in said countries then they would be covertly visited and covertly killed.

43

"The biggest point - and I may not have expressed it clearly - is that not only are Islamist complaints refuted in a broader context, no one cares about the legitimacy of your complaints if you mass murder in the name of them.[/quote]
"

Exactly correct, and something the Palestinians should’ve learned long ago. Instead, they’ve fucked themselves in the eyes of much of the world (or at least he U.S. population).

44

Regarding our financial and military support for Arab states (namely Egypt and Jordan, as well as Saudi Arabia): yes, we support them with huge amounts of aid. I actually believe that we give Egypt as much money/equipment per year (about $300 billion worth) as we do Israel. It was a carrot we tried to use to pacify both sides after the (I think) 1967 war. However, the nation of Egypt isn’t sitting smack in the middle of someone else’s land, where someone else used to live, who has now been kicked out, cordoned off and persecuted. And THAT is the kicker.

(By the way, the Islamists are not at all happy about our propping up of the regimes in Egypt, Jordan or Saudi Arabia either; as stated earlier,they don’t see this as any kind of “favor” to them).

45

Maybe because Al-Qaeda is evil? You guys sure like to debate when the answer is right there in front of you: THEY’RE EVIL!

46

HH,

No one disputes that.

47

[quote]Damici wrote:
Good God, Thunderbolt . . .

Let me see if I can explain more clearly for you: They’re NOT angry at us because we, here in the good ole’ US of A, have all of our nice freedoms of being able to vote, and speak freely, and practice other religions, and watch porn, and our women can drive. In and of itself, THEY WOULDN’T GIVE A FLYING FUCK WHAT WE DO OVER HERE. What happens in Wisconsin/New York/Texas is of NO interest to them WHATSOEVER. So no, they don’t hate US because WE’RE free. Capice?

NOW, the system that THEY (the jihadists) would like to install in THEIR lands, what Bin Laden believes are “rightly” “Muslim lands” (which might include part of modern-day Spain . . . I’m not sure exactly how far back he goes in his thinking), would NOT be a democracy. It would be Sharia law, i.e. a fascist theocracy where no one could vote, women had to wear veils/burkas, there was no freedom to practice other religions or to watch porn, etc.

Remember the Islamic caliphate I referenced that Bin Laden would like to create, uniting what he considers historically (in all his lunacy) to be rightly “Muslim lands?” Well THAT portion of the world is one in which he’d like to install this theocracy.

AGAIN: if we (the U.S.A.) werent’ supporting Israel, “occupying” (in their eyes, anyway) “Muslim” lands and supporting shitty-ass rulers who they view as un-Islamic (and certainly despotic and not helpful to their people), whish is NOT realistic and NOT what I’m calling for (not regarding all 3 points, anyway), THEN they would not have been going out of their wayt to attack us. UNDERSTAND? COMPRENDE? CAPICE? If we weren’t affecting their side of the world in any way, they wouldn’t CARE what we do in Wisconsin or what freedoms we enjoy here, i.e. they don’t “hate us for our freedom.”

They hate us because of our support for Israel, our presence on/occupation of their lands, our support for the shitty regimes in their countries, and a few wacky historical things that go so far back it’s laughable, like the Crusades.

Wanting to install a non-free regime in THEIR land does NOT equal “hating us for our freedoms.” OK?

Have we gotten that one out of the way?[/quote]

Generally you may be correct concerning the jihadists who are sitting in Afghanistan right now.

However, I think the home-grown terrorists in Europe (and probably here) ARE expressly upset at the freedoms we have here – specifically because they provide “corrupting” influence on Muslim immigrants, and also specifically because certain Sharia practices are specifically outlawed by our liberal laws.

It’s just one example, but the Guardian, a newspaper in the UK, had an op-ed piece written by a radical Muslim complaining that the government in the UK should not be encouraging Muslims in the UK to vote, because voting was antithetical to Muslim principles.

48

[quote]Damici wrote:
Regarding our financial and military support for Arab states (namely Egypt and Jordan, as well as Saudi Arabia): yes, we support them with huge amounts of aid. I actually believe that we give Egypt as much money/equipment per year (about $300 billion worth) as we do Israel. It was a carrot we tried to use to pacify both sides after the (I think) 1967 war. However, the nation of Egypt isn’t sitting smack in the middle of someone else’s land, where someone else used to live, who has now been kicked out, cordoned off and persecuted. And THAT is the kicker.

(By the way, the Islamists are not at all happy about our propping up of the regimes in Egypt, Jordan or Saudi Arabia either; as stated earlier,they don’t see this as any kind of “favor” to them).[/quote]

I think every nation on the face of the earth is sitting smack in the middle of the land where someone else used to live – I guess the only differentiating factor is how recent the former people were dispossessed, and whether they were killed, assimilated or kicked out. We’re much too civilized now to allow the winners to just eliminate the losers (at least in the Middle East – we aren’t doing much about what’s going on in Africa).

It’s true there wasn’t a nation of Israel prior to the middle of last century, but there wasn’t a nation of Palestine either.

The politics in the middle east is very convoluted – no one seemed to care too much about the plight of the Palestinians until very recently, and no Muslim border country (Egypt, Jordan, Syria) seems to care enough to either give the Palestinians a homeland within their borders or just invite them on in (I believe Jordan actually has quite a few Palestinians living there, and doesn’t really want any more). The Palestinians are much more valuable to the other countries as a political symbol, because people in the U.S. and Europe find that argument much more persuasive than just “we hate Jews.”

I don’t pretend to be any expert on the situation over there, but I can predict with a fair amount of certainty that the formation of a Palestinian homeland state wouldn’t result in rosy relations between Israel and its neighbors.

49

BB,

I don’t doubt that that’s the case in some places, like the UK, to which Muslims have emigrated, but it is by now means one of their main gripes. The “reasons” given for the 7/7 attacks in London, for example, were our presence in Afghanistan and Iraq. I seriously doubt that if none of these main issues I’ve mentioned existed, that they’d be blowing up subways and buildings because the land the THEY emmigrated to has laws that they’re not to fond of. Some of them might occasionally do something out of anger at that, but it wouldn’t be a mass, worldwide movement, as jihadism is now, if it weren’t for these other major issues.

50

[quote]BostonBarrister wrote:
Damici wrote:
Regarding our financial and military support for Arab states (namely Egypt and Jordan, as well as Saudi Arabia): yes, we support them with huge amounts of aid. I actually believe that we give Egypt as much money/equipment per year (about $300 billion worth) as we do Israel. It was a carrot we tried to use to pacify both sides after the (I think) 1967 war. However, the nation of Egypt isn’t sitting smack in the middle of someone else’s land, where someone else used to live, who has now been kicked out, cordoned off and persecuted. And THAT is the kicker.

(By the way, the Islamists are not at all happy about our propping up of the regimes in Egypt, Jordan or Saudi Arabia either; as stated earlier,they don’t see this as any kind of “favor” to them).

I think every nation on the face of the earth is sitting smack in the middle of the land where someone else used to live – I guess the only differentiating factor is how recent the former people were dispossessed, and whether they were killed, assimilated or kicked out. We’re much too civilized now to allow the winners to just eliminate the losers (at least in the Middle East – we aren’t doing much about what’s going on in Africa).

It’s true there wasn’t a nation of Israel prior to the middle of last century, but there wasn’t a nation of Palestine either.

The politics in the middle east is very convoluted – no one seemed to care too much about the plight of the Palestinians until very recently, and no Muslim border country (Egypt, Jordan, Syria) seems to care enough to either give the Palestinians a homeland within their borders or just invite them on in (I believe Jordan actually has quite a few Palestinians living there, and doesn’t really want any more). The Palestinians are much more valuable to the other countries as a political symbol, because people in the U.S. and Europe find that argument much more persuasive than just “we hate Jews.”

I don’t pretend to be any expert on the situation over there, but I can predict with a fair amount of certainty that the formation of a Palestinian homeland state wouldn’t result in rosy relations between Israel and its neighbors. [/quote]

BB, excellent points as usual. Man has stepped on man thoughout history.

The world doesn’t seem to give much of a shit what happens in Africa. Of course the UN waited until the Hutu massacre of the Tutsi was over and then had the “media” trial. They seemed to have opened up a big can of worms regarding freedom of the press issues and did nothing to stop the slaughter. Very disturbing.

The Palestinians never had their own state, now they are demanding one and most of the world seems to agree that they should have one. Who is next? The Amish? Can Mexico reclaim Texas?

Seriously, the Palestinians have been manipulated for years. I feel sorry for them up until they blow up a school bus.

There are a lot of problems in the world. Many scholars try to pin them on the west. Sometimes they are right, sometimes they are not.

51

BB,

It’s a valid point that plenty of nations are sitting on land where someone was kicked out previously (like the American Indians), but the Palestinian issue happened VERY recently in the scope of history, to the point where the Palestinians are still a few yards away, albeit essentially cordoned off into some shitty territories with major restrictions on things like travel, ability to work, water supply, etc. The fact that someone might’ve been kicked off some land elsewhere in the past doesn’t change anything – two wrongs don’t make a right. The Palestinians just happen to still be around and still be vocally upset about it. The situation there makes ZERO sense, especially with regard to our supporting it.

What you said about other Arab countries not wanting to take in the Palestinians and wanting instead to have them as a political symbol to use for their own ends is also true – yet it doesn’t change the fact that Israel is sitting smack in the middle of what was the Palestinians’ home. At the VERY fucking lesat, they should demolish every last settlement and outpost that’s beyond the '67 borders, pull the fuck back to those borders, build a damn wall if they want to (ON the border, NOT outside it), and relinquish what the damn UNITED NATIONS has been telling them for decades to relinquish. But the point is, the U.S. has NO FUCKING NATIONAL INTEREST in supporting Israel to the tune of $300 billion/year, and taking on all the blood and worldwide hatred that comes with it. If it somehow BENEFITED us, that would be one thing (still probably not worth it, but THEN it might be something to consider). But, if you remove any emotional attachments from the situation, it does NOT benefit us. Not one single iota. It merely creates enemies for us.

And you’re right, by the way, that the creation of a Palestinian homeland, side-by-side with Israel, wouldn’t pacify the fanatics. They want to “drive Israel into the sea” and take back the whole thing. That’s unreasonable, I realize (although I’m not surprised, since it was all taken from THEM), but the Israelis SHOULD pull back to the '67 borders, at the very least, nevertheless.

I’ve never once heard anyone articulate a believable argument for why we truly should be supporting Israel to the extent that we do.

52

Zap,

I agree with feeling sorry for the Palestinians right until they blow up a school bus. Nevertheless, at the basic heart of the fact, forgetting about aaaaaall the other wrongs that have been done in the world, having another group of people come in and squat on their land and kick them out is . . . wrong. Period.

The reason disputes between nations and groups in Africa or elsewhere in the world aren’t on the front burner of the U.S.'s agenda is because we’re not actively supporting one side of those conflicts (nor one who is very much in the wrong in large part), and our NATIONAL SECURITY is not being severely threatened by those situations. Our national security, IS, however, being severely threatened by our unbending and blind support for Israel. This support does ZILCH for us, yet it brings death and destruction upon us. Great bargain, huh?

53

Oh, one other big bone of contention for Bin Laden that I forgot to mention (pre-Iraq War, anyway), was that he claimed we’d “starved” 1,000,000 Iraqis with the sanctions that we put on Iraq after the first Gulf War, adding to the total of Muslims that we’ve allegedly killed (in his eyes). (He conveniently sees no need to blame Saddam Hussein for causing those sanctions to be imposed).