Not trying to argue but here`s some interesting facts.

[nevasleepnetzero.net]

Why Do Terrorists Keep Picking on the United States? Washington's war on terrorism is as doomed to failure as its war on drugs has been. "I think the American people need to know that we live in a world where by virtue of America's leadership to some degree, by virtue of a degree of fanaticism by some people, we will be targeted," declared National Security Adviser Sandy Berger after the bombings of two US African embassies on August 7, 1998.{1} When asked "What is it that these terrorists want from the United States?", Richard Haass, head of the foreign policy department at the Brookings Institution, replied: "Well, the answer is it's not anything we're simply doing. It is who we are. It's the fact that we're the most powerful country in the world. It's the fact that we're a secular country. ... It is simply who we are and it is our existence that really bothers them."{2} Thomas Friedman of the New York Times would say amen. Terrorists, he wrote, "have no specific ideological program or demands. Rather, they are driven by a generalized hatred of the U.S., Israel and other supposed enemies of Islam."{3} Finally, we have President Clinton: "Americans are targets of terrorism, in part, because we act to advance peace and democracy and because we stand united against terrorism."{4} These are some of the platitudes our leaders and pundits feed us after each terrorist attack against an American installation. ... the image of America the beauteous on its hill, so envied by all that it is subject to attacks by terrorists who cannot bear so much sheer goodness to triumph in a world that belongs to their master, the son of morning himself, Satan. Gore Vidal{5} What our leaders and pundits never let slip is that the terrorists -- whatever else they might be -- might also be rational human beings; which is to say that in their own minds they have a rational justification for their actions. Most terrorists are people deeply concerned by what they see as social, political, or religious injustice and hypocrisy, and the immediate grounds for their terrorism is often retaliation for an action of the United States ... The shooting down of two Libyan planes in 1981; the bombardment of Beirut in 1983 and 1984; the furnishing of military aid and intelligence to both sides of the Iran-Iraq War of 1980-88 so as to maximize the damage each side would inflict upon the other; the bombing of Libya in 1986; the bombing and sinking of an Iranian ship in 1987; the shooting down of an Iranian passenger plane in 1988; the shooting down of two more Libyan planes in 1989; the massive bombing of the Iraqi people in 1991; the continuing bombings and sanctions against Iraq; the bombing of Afghanistan and Sudan in 1998, the latter destroying a pharmaceutical plant which provided for half the impoverished nation's medicines; the habitual support of Israel despite the devastation and routine torture it inflicts upon the Palestinian people; the condemnation of Arab resistance to this; the continued persecution of Libya, now nearing the end of its second decade; the abduction of wanted men from Muslim countries, such as Malaysia, Pakistan, Lebanon and Albania; the large military and hi-tech presence in Islam's holiest land, Saudi Arabia, and elsewhere in the Persian Gulf region; the support of anti-democratic Middle East governments, from the Shah to the Saudis ... These are some of the American actions that can turn an Arab or a Muslim into a fanatic, into a terrorist, into a decrier of "America, the Great Satan". But those who feed us the platitudes know this. They're merely performing the time-honored public dumbshow. Mir Aimal Kansi, the Pakistani who shot five people outside CIA headquarters in 1993, told the FBI that he had done so to protest US policies toward Muslims in the Middle East, including the bombing of Iraq.{6} Two days after Kansi's conviction in 1997, four Americans were gunned down in Karachi, Pakistan while driving in a car. "I think the linkage is quite evident," said a former CIA counter-terrorism expert about the Karachi slayings.{7} The bombing of PanAm 103 in 1988 was clearly initiated by Iran as an act of retaliation for the shooting down of its own passenger plane by the United States a few months earlier, and American officials well know this. The bombing of the two US embassies in Africa in 1998 took place on the eighth anniversary, to the very day, of the arrival of the first US troops in Saudi Arabia, following the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait. And during the US bombing of Iraq in 1991, there were dozens of terrorist attacks against American institutions all over the Middle East and elsewhere. Did American officials and the media not pick up any hint of cause-and-effect? They did, but subsequently, when it's been platitude time, they suddenly become pre-Alzheimer. When terrorists attack, they're terrorizing. When we attack, we're retaliating. When they respond to our retaliation with further attacks, they're terrorizing again. When we respond with further attacks, we're retaliating again. Norman Solomon, media critic Good and bad terrorists On March 13, 1996, the United States assembled 27 world leaders in Egypt at an "anti-terror" conference after a wave of suicide bombers had killed dozens of people in Israel. President Clinton asserted: "We must be clear in our condemnation of those who resort to terror. Violence has no place in the future we all seek in the Middle East."{8} At the very same time, in Iraq, the US was supporting with millions of dollars the Iraqi National Accord, which was using car bombs and other bombings in Baghdad and other cities, trying to destabilize Sadaam Hussein. It was estimated that the bombings had taken the lives of more than 100 civilians in Baghdad alone during the preceding few years. Two weeks after the Egyptian conference, the attending countries met in Washington for a follow-up on counter-terrorism. Among the topics discussed were the flow of funds to terrorist groups.{9} The following month, President Clinton, with much fanfare, signed the Anti-terrorism Act, which bars financial transactions between American corporations and countries accused of supporting terrorism. Four months later, the administration quietly exempted Sudan, to allow a US oil company to negotiate an oil deal. At the same time, Syria was granted an exemption, to encourage participation by Damascus in the Middle East peace process.{10} In February 2000, there arose a new proposal for a major international conference to combat terrorism. On this occasion the United States was quick to throw cold water on the very idea, saying it would have no "practical benefits". The proposed conference was backed by the 119-member Non-Aligned Movement of Third World Nations. One of the issues the conference hoped to address was how to distinguish between a "terrorist" and a "freedom fighter", citing the examples of the Hizbollah and Hamas groups fighting Israel. The question of "state terrorism" also loomed as a possible conference issue -- for example, should military attacks by armed forces of any State be deemed acts of terrorism when civilians are killed? The 1999 NATO bombing of Yugoslavia had been discussed as a case in point.{11} FBI definition of terrorism The FBI defines international terrorism as "the unlawful use of force or violence committed by a group or individual, who has some connection to a foreign power or whose activities transcend national boundaries, against persons or property to intimidate or coerce a government, the civilian population, or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives."{12} The FBI definition, although meant to describe acts directed against the United States, would seem to cover rather well countless acts of the US government itself. Many of these acts will be found in the pages of this book, under the headings of bombings, interventions, torture, chemical and biological warfare, etc.

[dansouth]

Food for thought. Perhaps this is what the Iranian president and the Saudi prince meant when they referred to "addressing the root causes of terrorism." Let he who is without sin cast the first stone.

[Dylan]

[quote]Originally posted by dansouth@yahoo.com: [b]Perhaps this is what the Iranian president and the Saudi prince meant when they referred to "addressing the root causes of terrorism."[/b][/quote] Can you elaborate on this, Dan? Who or what exactly where the Iranian president and the Saudi prince referring to as "the root causes of terrorism"? [ 11-13-2001: Message edited by: Dylan Walters ]

[Dylan]

[quote]Originally posted by nevasleep@netzero.net: [b]Why Do Terrorists Keep Picking on the United States?[/b][/quote] It's not just the US these terrorist are picking on. Bin Laden and Co. have a long and nasty history of trying to take out anyone who doesn't follow their belief system, not just the US. The rest of the world should be glad that the US and it's allies are responding the way they are, as this affects EVERYONE.

[Alon]

I equate alot of the viewpoints expressed in that article to be the equivalant of verbal diarreh, and enemy propaganda. First of all that major international conference to combat terrorism was a bunch of crap. The article was stating that part of their agenda was to make Hamas/Hezbolah into freedom fighters. I could understand why the US won't be a party to such nonsense. This is the same Hamas that wants to kill Americans & Jews ! Just last week an article appeared in a hamas newspaper where it said that Anthrax should be put in the US water supply. Anyone who belongs to or who has connections to these groups are simply insane, no two ways about it. They are only up to no good, and they need to be eliminated. In case anyone's interested; there's various sites that contain translations from arabic to english. Take a look at what the major newspapers in some muslim countries are saying. It's full of lies and propaganda. Some of it is just outrageous. Take a look at the school material that children in some of these countries/territories learn by. Teaching young kids racism and vicious hate at an early age isn't exactly planning towards peace. All of the stuff I've mentioned is easily verifiable on the web. There are tons of sites regarding this subject. The US may have had it's share of mishaps, but in my opinion it is certainly the least guilty party in this confilct. alon [ 11-13-2001: Message edited by: Alon ]

[Alon]

Ooops. (Itchy Fingers) [ 11-13-2001: Message edited by: Alon ]

[Hippie]

It is really upsetting we must even bother with a bunch of fux over in Afganastan that have been fighting someone (amongst themselves, when a legitimate enemy can't be found) for years, aren't capable of producing a lightbulb, treat women like it is 5000 BC, resist civility from other countries, etc., etc. When they (CNN or whoever) beam over a video of the main city street of Kabaul, it looks like it is fucking 800 AD! I mean, wtf, these people are not into progress and self-improvement. I don't think the efforts of the allies is going to bring about great change to a country that has been stagnant for 1200 years. I think we should just kick their asses (nuclear or conventional) for commiting the terrorists acts, show them that we don't fuck around with terrorism, and continue on our merry way. I don't think they are interested in building a better situation for themselves, and our efforts for rebuilding Afganistan after the destruction of the Taliban will be a "money pit". Also, if we go in and appoint an "American friendly" gov't. in Afganistan, after the war, that will probably come back and bite us in the ass again, in 10 years. btw: the Gore Vidal paragraph was moving. Hippie

[Chip McDonald]

America is just a paradigm that exists, the biggest target. A) There has to be one nation state that predominates over others. B) Being that the current nature of the planet is what it is, that nation state as an organization exceeds simple description of behavior. There's going to be bad associated with it. C) Only the mentally feeble choose terrorism as a means to balance a perceived injustice surrounding such a large and impossible vague system. Therefore it's pointless to try to quantify why the U.S. is a target of terrorism: the whole process is so huge the senselessness of terrorism itself shouldn't be given credit for an intellectually valid action. One can argue King Georgie let things get out of hand in Israel earlier this year, and that that led to our current state of affairs. It doesn't matter, though, because the people responsible for terrorism are not intelligent enough to work out a strategy to address those specific grievances. Overall the only reason one can conclude as to why the U.S. is a target is because there's too many stupid people on the planet.

[nevasleepnetzero.net]

Just a note to some of you.All that is stated in that article is fact.If there`s any rubuttle please use facts.Again I don`t wanna argue :)

[Alon]

[quote]Originally posted by nevasleep@netzero.net: [b] Most terrorists are people deeply concerned by what they see as social, political, or religious injustice and hypocrisy, and the immediate grounds for their terrorism is often retaliation for an action of the United States ... [/b][/quote] This is a fact ? What world do you live in ? alon

[WFTurner]

How to cope with being Bad and Guilty American.... gotta do a beer run. Do beer run.. use lots of gas... makes me feel better.

[nevasleepnetzero.net]

Hey Alon!Didn`t I say I didn`t wanna argue?I didn`t write that statment it came from a book called Rogue State by William Blum.Maybe you should write the Author if you have a problem with his wording.Let me just say this,I do not at all agree with the terrorist events that have taken place.I think they are cowardly and barbaric,but with an attitude like yours we will never realize our mistakes and how to improve our status in the Middle East!You have that I`m an American so I`m right no matter what attitude and that is a very big part of the problem. [ 11-13-2001: Message edited by: nevasleep@netzero.net ]

[Alon]

Hey Nevasleep !, I know that piece was not written by you. I'm not accusing you of anything. But I'm just stating that I have a problem with that article, regardless of who authored it. I'll agree that there are various facts that are true in that article, but there is a whole lot of bias against the US represented in that article. The whole tone of the article is slanted, and I've seen that exact same article posted many times on various forums around the web. When it comes down to it, it's just that guys opinion, and nothing else. Peace alon

[Super 8]

I thank God I live in this country. Everything in this thread is proof to me that our system -though imperfect- works very well. I see the free exchange of ideas. The freedom to question the actions/motives of our leaders. The freedom to voice your opinion knowing that although you might piss some people off, you won't be publicly beheaded for your views. Even outragously stupid views like Hippie's "Let's just nuke'm all" opinion can be respected and tolerated. By the way Nevasleep, for a guy who doesn't want to argue you certainly came on a little strong when Alon made a simple observation. Who died and made you Rush Limbaugh? [b]"but with an attitude like yours we will never realize our mistakes and how to improve our status in the Middle East!You have that I`m an American so I`m right no matter what attitude and that is a very big part of the problem."[/b]

[LeiDeLi]

[quote]I`m an American so I`m right no matter what attitude and that is a very big part of the problem." [/quote] Perhaps there is that danger. But sometmes we really are right ! :) Isn't there a remote possibility that America has become the strongest and wealthiest nation on Earth because our political and economic systems actually do promote progress, virtue, and all things that human beings consider "good" ? I didn't see any smiling, happy people in any of the smuggled video-taped footage of Taliban-controlled Kabul. Have you seen the scenes in now-liberated Kabul ? He who is without sin can cast the first stone....but no one seems to be inhibited from slinging mud at the very country that has insured their own safe freedom to opine vacuously. Peace, (after the Taliban and Al-Qaeda....and Saddam....are destroyed....throw in parts of Iran and Saudi Arabia also). LeiDeLi PS We might offend the Muslims ? Who here cares ? They should be begging our forgiveness for offending us.

[Chip McDonald]

[quote]Originally posted by nevasleep@netzero.net: [b]Just a note to some of you.All that is stated in that article is fact.If there`s any rubuttle please use facts.Again I don`t wanna argue :) [/b][/quote] Some of what is stated in the article is fact, some is subjective opinion. However, Gore Vidal's is spot on.

[fantasticsound]

[quote]Originally posted by nevasleep@netzero.net: [b]Just a note to some of you.All that is stated in that article is fact.If there`s any rubuttle please use facts.Again I don`t wanna argue :) [/b][/quote] What facts? You don't even list the author, but then berate someone for not taking him/her to task directly. Don't post information you obviously affirm and then try and back track your way out of responsibility for posting it. You posted it, you DEFENDED it.. but you don't want to argue. Try saying what you mean next time. You wanted everyone to swallow this, hook, line, and sinker, without question. It's not arrogant to defend what you believe. I missed the supposed, "I'm American, so I must be right," in the post you demeaned. Must be your, "Stupid, arrogant Americans think they're always right," goggles blinding your view. Our government is hardly innocent in a variety of past actions. The civilians at the WTC, and on each of the hijacked planes WERE innocent. They didn't attack anyone, and personally, I'm sick of, "philosophers" waxing poetic about the grievances of other countries against the civilian population of the U.S. Those were people who died. Thousands of civilians. Not symbols of U.S. prosperity and imperialism. People. Many people have commented that you can extend the olive branch to these fanatics, and you won't get your arm back. They don't want peace with the U.S. They want us destroyed. From the President, to soldiers, to civilian adults to children. They don't care who they kill. Everyone is a target. They've proved this, time and time again, by their actions. You can't veil that in theorys of hate. If this were whites attacking blacks, everyone in the U.S. would understand these are hate crimes. But since we have so much and they, as countries, have so little, they're justified in hating us? No sir. Understanding their thought processes is important. But it makes no difference in what actions we must take.

[nevasleepnetzero.net]

Not even worth the discussion!And sir Whites have been attacking blacks in this country since it`s history began. [ 11-14-2001: Message edited by: nevasleep@netzero.net ]

[Hippie]

Super 8 wrote: > Thanks, no problem. -Hippie

[lovesinger]

[quote]Originally posted by nevasleep@netzero.net: [QB]Not even worth the discussion!And sir Whites have been attacking blacks in this country since it`s history began. [QB][/quote]I beg to differ: VERY MUCH worth the discussion, Neva! (Otherwise, why would you initiate it? ... and with such a lengthy post [like some of mine]) [b]fantasticsound[/b]'s few words addressed the [i]heart[/i] of the matter succinctly, and underscore an observation I've made many times that it seems difficult for many [b]"philosophers" waxing poetic[/b] to balance their intellectual excursions with a healthy dose of concrete reality-based thinking. Welcome aboard, friend.

[Nawledge]

most of you are making a simple issue complex. and these problems will never end because people don't want them to. I challenge anybody to respond to my post in a rational manner without changing the subject or trying to detract or distract from my post. My point: we are human beings so we want to live, therefore we can't let people take our lives away from us. very easy to comprehend. so when terrorist try to take our lives we must stop them. that is a seperate issue then why do these problems exist. America will never accept responsiblity for anything. that's evident even by the post on this thread. look at the pattern. it's consistent. and it says the terrorist are insane, they must be killed. but the pattern never says that america has ever done anything wrong (completely Ill-logical) even when people admit that America has committed a wrong act ie: slavery, terrible foreign policies whatever still the person making that comment usually does not conclude with America taking responsibility. (you know, writing the wrong, finding a solution, making better) now when it comes to the terrorist or other countries and the wrong that they do, then we make sure they take the blame and make sure they take the responsibility for their actions (rightfully so) but there appears to be a double standard for America. Now i'm an American, ohio born and I want to know what you other Americans think about that, because all i usually hear from other americans is " yeah america has done some bad stuff but i'd rather live here than anywhere else and lets kill those other evil people over there for the bad things they've done" but i never hear we've done wrong, lets correct it, and stop those people from doing wrong and help them correct theirs. I hope you all respond and i want you all to watch and see how many people actually respond to what i said as opposed to spouting rhetoric.

[Danny M]

[quote]America will never accept responsiblity for anything.[/quote] I have to disagree. I think that America has taken responsibility for some past actions, and certainly has a lot to answer for overall, but it's siege mentality time. Civilians were overtly attacked during peacetime which makes all the terrorists' grievances moot points to me. This country has certainly done some questionable things to/ with the folks over in the middle east, but on 9/11 we got tossed into a fight or die situation. At this point, I have a simple answer for all the wrongs/ questionable actions perpetrated by this country in the middle east: I don't care. Ask me again when the smoke clears. [quote](you know, writing the wrong, finding a solution, making better)[/quote] This is a beautiful ideal, but it's not so simple to carry out. Just removing our dependence on Saudi oil would cause major global upheaval, not to mention what would happen at home. The oil companies would probably face massive layoffs and revenue losses, which would result in a pretty decent unemployment jump and stock market dip. The resulting destablization would quickly spread to foreign markets... What about the trucking companies? What about air travel? What about service station owners? This scenario might not actually be the right one, but it is a risk. On a more personal level, I can't afford to buy a new vehicle. If oil powered internal combustion engines go of service in a relatively sudden fashion, I've got a problem. None of this has anything to do with being in love with "big oil." It has everything to do with realizing that the interconnection and balance amongst businesses, economies, and countries is not so easily changed without earth-shattering results. Bottom lines: Has America done some pretty off-smelling things? Yes. Should we endeavour to avoid doing those things? Yes. Should we try to put right what we can without "killing the patient" as it were? Yes. Should we cave in to terrorists and governments who wouldn't even think twice about doing things ten times worse than anything America has ever done, without even a twinge of remorse, and do them over and over again without any allowed discussion at all? No freakin' way. When clear and present danger to our way of life shows up, should we proceed to kick it's butt as hard as we possibly can? [b]Yes.[/b] -Danny

[nevasleepnetzero.net]

I agree!That was a sensible answer.Your right when put into a corner you must fight no problem with that!Let me say this fella`s these facts,and they are facts,definatly have taken place and we can not change that but we should try and understand what type of challenge we face as a country!You simply can not go with the attitude of kill em all,that`s just not reasonable!We have to educate ourselfs on the policy`s of our government and how to change policy`s that affect us all.That`s all I`m tryin to point out.You can`t slap someone in the face and then wonder why they are mad at you.That`s just not logical.This post will definatly do one thing if not anything else!It will show if you`ve been blinded by hate or are willing to make a change! Peace!

[LeiDeLi]

[quote]most of you are making a simple issue complex. and these problems will never end because people don't want them to.[/quote]Simple...yes [quote]I challenge anybody to respond to my post in a rational manner[/quote]OK [quote]without changing the subject or trying to detract or distract from my post. My point: we are human beings so we want to live, therefore we can't let people take our lives away from us. very easy to comprehend. so when terrorist try to take our lives we must stop them.[/quote]Agreed....simple [quote]that is a seperate issue then why do these problems exist. America will never accept responsiblity for anything. that's evident even by the post on this thread.[/quote] Irrational conclusion. "America" has done many misguied and evil things in the past. That doesn't in any way change the simple fact that terrorist must be destroyed (as we both agree). [quote] look at the pattern. it's consistent. and it says the terrorist are insane, they must be killed. but the pattern never says that america has ever done anything wrong [/quote]That is because "having done something wrong" does not in any way justify allowing murderers to attack your citizens. [quote]....(completely Ill-logical) even when people admit that America has committed a wrong act ie: slavery, terrible foreign policies whatever still the person making that comment usually does not conclude with America taking responsibility. (you know, writing the wrong, finding a solution, making better)[/quote] Your comment is completely illogical, and violates your own stated premise: in the situation we are discussing that fact that America may have "done something wrong" (even if we do include acts of over 100 years ago) has nothing at all to do with the *simple* fact that murdering terrorists must be eliminated. Or maybe I should claim that I have a right to kill you because your great grandfather was a slave-owner ?....illogical. [quote]now when it comes to the terrorist or other countries and the wrong that they do, then we make sure they take the blame and make sure they take the responsibility for their actions (rightfully so) but there appears to be a double standard for America.[/quote] So exactly when did we murder 4500 Muslim Al-Qaeda citizens ? Afghani Citizens ? Muslim Citizens ? There is simply no comparison here. Since there are no comparable atrocities, there is no "double standard". [quote]Now i'm an American, ohio born and I want to know what you other Americans think about that, because all i usually hear from other americans is " yeah america has done some bad stuff but i'd rather live here than anywhere else and lets kill those other evil people over there for the bad things they've done" but i never hear we've done wrong, lets correct it, and stop those people from doing wrong and help them correct theirs.[/quote] I agree. Let's make every effort to not do "anything wrong". Let's be remorseful for anything that we *seem* to have done wrong in the past....and let's annihilate those who are currently trying to destroy our society. Simple. Logical. [quote]I hope you all respond and i want you all to watch and see how many people actually respond to what i said as opposed to spouting rhetoric.[/quote] Since you have not spouted *any* specific facts (except the vague historic reference to "slavery"), and refer only to vague notions of "doing something wrong", I guess your criterion for "spouting rhetoric" is pretty lenient. :) LeiDeLi

[LeiDeLi]

I think that the analogy between Islamic Fundamentalism and cancer continues to be the most illustrative of the current world situation: No one wants to undergo chemotherapy, radiation therapy, or have an amputation. Yes, each of these courses of treatment result in unecessary killing of human cells. Yes, there will be remorse. Yes, there will be long-term repercussions. Yes, it will be very painful....and YES, maybe you even did things in the past that tended to increase your risk of contracting cancer. But that doesn't change the fact that if you wish to survive, you must take *aggressive* and *thorough* action immediately, or the cancer will kill you. You don't deserve cancer and cancer is thoroughly bad, even if you did smoke, drink, or take drugs in your past life. Similarly, the psychological cancer of Islamic fundamentalism threatens to destroy every value that we hold as civilized and modern. "We" probably engaged in risky behaviors in the past that have increased the probability that this cancer would arise and fester. But that in no way justifies it, does not mean that we deserve its ravages, and does not absolve us from the duty of completely eradicating it from the Earthly organism. It will be painful, perhaps long, will result in killing and remorse. But those who wish to survive with any semblance of human freedom and dignity will commit themselves to agressive "therapy" as soon as possible. Therapy means removing the infected organisms from contact with the rest of the living organism. If you wish to lay down and die, and/or submit your society and loved ones to the same fate, then you are welcome to that decision. If you think there is an easier form of therapy, then you are falling for quakery and wishful thinking. The world's graveyard is full of societies that mistakenly thought that they could reason with barbaric madmen. Peace, LeiDeLi

[dansouth]

[quote]Originally posted by Dylan Walters: [b] Can you elaborate on this, Dan? Who or what exactly where the Iranian president and the Saudi prince referring to as "the root causes of terrorism"? [/b][/quote] U.S. policy in the Middle East.

[dansouth]

[quote]Originally posted by Dylan Walters: [b] It's not just the US these terrorist are picking on. Bin Laden and Co. have a long and nasty history of trying to take out anyone who doesn't follow their belief system, not just the US. The rest of the world should be glad that the US and it's allies are responding the way they are, as this affects EVERYONE.[/b][/quote] Agreed. Most terrorist acts have happened elsewhere. We didn't pay much attention to it until it started happening here. And most of the terrorism in the United States has been home grown. Only two terrorist acts in the United States have ever been waged by international terrorists, and both were directed at the same city, even the same building. Why do terrorists keep choosing the United States? Maybe they got bored with all of those other countries they've been attacking for the last forty years.

[dansouth]

[quote]Originally posted by Hippie: [b]It is really upsetting we must even bother with a bunch of fux over in Afganastan that have been fighting someone (amongst themselves, when a legitimate enemy can't be found) for years, aren't capable of producing a lightbulb, treat women like it is 5000 BC, resist civility from other countries, etc., etc. When they (CNN or whoever) beam over a video of the main city street of Kabaul, it looks like it is fucking 800 AD! I mean, wtf, these people are not into progress and self-improvement. I don't think the efforts of the allies is going to bring about great change to a country that has been stagnant for 1200 years. I think we should just kick their asses (nuclear or conventional) for commiting the terrorists acts, show them that we don't fuck around with terrorism, and continue on our merry way. I don't think they are interested in building a better situation for themselves, and our efforts for rebuilding Afganistan after the destruction of the Taliban will be a "money pit". Also, if we go in and appoint an "American friendly" gov't. in Afganistan, after the war, that will probably come back and bite us in the ass again, in 10 years. btw: the Gore Vidal paragraph was moving. Hippie[/b][/quote] Who exactly do we nuke? A bunch of starving innocents whose country has been at war since 1989, whose government was overtaken by oppressive extremists in 1996, who have walked hundreds of miles on foot to the relative shelter of refugee camps because the land won't produce food after three years of drought? What would YOUR town look like after twenty-two years of war, three years of deadly drought, five years of oppressive government, and six weeks of being bombed by the United States Navy? Give me a break! If you can't tell the difference between the criminals who perpetrated the acts of September 11th and the millions of innocents who are caught in the crossfire, maybe you should do a little research before you suggest nuking an entire country into oblivion.

[dansouth]

[quote]Originally posted by LeiDeLi: [b] Isn't there a remote possibility that America has become the strongest and wealthiest nation on Earth because our political and economic systems actually do promote progress, virtue, and all things that human beings consider "good" ?[/b][/quote] Yes, and there's also a less remote possibility that our government, which was designed by wealthy men for the promotion of wealth - nothing wrong with that, mind you - opened the door for the captains of the Industrial Revolution to profit off of new technologies and amass incredible fortunes while exploiting dirt poor immigrants with dreams of a better life. Uneven income distribution encouraged more companies to enter the "game" and produce more goods and wealth. The net result has been good and bad. The country and its inhabitants are, taken as a whole, wealthier than anyone else. But the environmental downside has been significant, as was the human toll. And as soon as the profitibility factor slipped, production was shipped overseas. So now the once proud manufacturer of the world imports all of its steel - yes, even the steel for those wonderful "American" cars - and can't build a television set that you could sell at a profit. It think that's a much less remote possibility than some imbecilic ideal about gaining wealth because we did the right thing.

[Nawledge]

LeiDeli I was'nt sure if you were agreeing with me or saying that i'm irational in the end but let me make myself clear. the terrorist should be stoped, and I don't feel remorse over that. I think if you re-read your response to me that you will see a pattern of bias. maybe you think that's appropriate i do not. In your post it's clear that you don't concede that America has ever really done anything out and out wrong, exept maybe a hundred years ago or something like that. and because I did'nt do any of the fact listing that nevasleep already did you said that i was spouting rhetoric myself. I did'nt feel the need to list the facts because it's not the point. the point is that there are people who think that America has'nt done anything wrong since slavery (rediculous) and there are people that think that slavery has'nt caused any problems that we face in our country today (also rediculous i'm not saying that America is the direct sole cause of what's happening with todays terrorist, that would be a lie, like my post said "roots and responses are seperate issues" but you seem to be bringing them together, my opinion/point is that America is not faultless, you wrote this: You don't deserve cancer and cancer is thoroughly bad, even if you did smoke, drink, or take drugs in your past life. Alot of Doctors beg to differ with you because you get what you give yourself, and if you take poison you deserve the poison in your body, just like the terrorist deserve what they get for attacking us. you also said alot of things that basically inclined that we can't really do anything about the problems we cause or contribute to because the fabric of countries business and such are too tightly woven together, I don't believe that. you either are for doing what is right or wrong, i'm not perfect, but there are things this country has done to its own people that would be considered evil if it was done by another country, and i'm talking about with in a hundred years, and i don't think that whether you can drive your car or not has anything to do with it.