[quote]IrishSteel wrote:
[quote]Dustin wrote:
[quote]IrishSteel wrote:
[quote]Dustin wrote:
[quote]IrishSteel wrote:
LOL - and you prove my point - - “this round” - - perennial excuses for starting yet another jihad against the West - as muslims have done for centuries now . . . .[/quote]
Excuses?
It’s like the bully that constantly picks on a kid and then one day, after all the abuse, the kid fights back and busts the bully in the nose.
Afterward, the bully cries foul and claims to be the victim.
Americans need to take off their red, white, and blue glasses and see what the government does in their name.[/quote]
Riiight, all of the hatred towards the West and the US is based solely off of the trillions of dollars we have paid into the ME, the humanitarian aid we have always provided, the weapons we have sold to ME nations that allow them to defend themselves, the goods and services we have continued to provide, and on and on - we’ve been just merciless in our goodwill - we should stop . . .
Yep - we’ve been the big bad ugly bully . . .whatever . . .
[/quote]
Please edumacate yourself.
No, absolutely no reason to hate us.
This isn’t even taking into account the governments constant fellatio of the Saudi Kingdom and Israel.
If you are simply an American Statist and don’t care what the government does, then fine. Just say that, but don’t ignore the last 70 years or so of the U.S government’s constant meddling in the ME and say the U.S does nothing wrong.[/quote]
Educate yourself - regardless of the current rationale for violence against the west (it make sno difference which western nation is the target) - the basic premise underlying the entire jihadist movement is one of islamic domination over all other forms of government. The “submission” of the globe to Allah’s reign. Individual reasons for taking up arms are based in causalities that occur regulary on all sides of the issue. For every “wrong” the US commits there is a corresponding “wrong” committed by the other side.
The underlying intention of the West has never been to harm, maim or kill anyone in the ME. Do people get harmed maimed killed? Yes. It has never been the intention of the West to subjugate, enslave or reign over anyone in the ME. Has the US (and the West at large) supported governments that do this things? Yes - has that been wrong? If you call it wrong, then for each instance you cite, you must define the right action in those situations - can you do that? What would have been your choice in Afghanistan as the Soviets invaded? What would have been your choice in choosing whom to deal with in the ME as the British pulled out - what tribe would you have selected as a trading partner? What would have been your choice in Iran - which rebel faction would you have supported in opposition to the Shah?
People like you try to make it seem so simple to show how the West has wronged the ME without actually understanding ANY of the underlying tribal, cultural, national and international ramifications affecting each and every decision along the way - - - And all of this still is based on a centuries old ideology that demands that anything not islamic be subdued or destroyed.
Say what you will, in the end, either you will have to fight islam or submit to it[/quote]
sorry but you are wrong.
islams did not start out as a ideology with world domination as its goal. the religion came about in the same period the arab people in the arabian dessert expanded to bysants and persia. In the same period the ME colonies of bysants was week, so it fell to the arabs without much struggle. The new muslim arab leaders in the new empire called “kalifat” allowed christian and jewish practice.
let us skip forward to the crusades. The crusades are a big part of europeen history. I the europeen nations wanted to recapture the old eastern provinces of bysants and gain control over the tradeways to asia ( the sillky way ). Well for the muslims the crusades are a footnote in the history, its one of many conflicts. and around at that time they looked at europa as a distent, poor and barbaric region who they did not care much about. So no the muslims have not from early on had a hostile or imperialistic wiew towards europa.
let us skip forward again, to the era of Napolion. In the 1700s and early 1800s the ottoman empire had started to die from with in. the sultan in todays turkey had lost practical influence over the provinces.
When the frecnch then landed in egypt, the empire failed to defend egypt. This is the start of europeen dominance in the middle east. and know muslims and other people of the middle east started to be aware of europa, and they with good reason feared the competition from the industrial europa. after the first world war the europeen powers gain full control over the middle east, and all the problems within this region has its origins from the first and second world war.
and under the cold war, when both the american empire and the sovjet empire used the middle east as a chess board, violent jihadisme grew in popularity and took over for the arab nationalisme who grew strong during the world wars. and now this is biting us in the ass.