Okay, So Osama Is Dead. Now What?

[dairygirl4u2c]

i never really hear good reasons for their hate and attacks etc.
'terrorists hate freedom' as the hogwash from the right, 'they hate our prosperity while they suffer' as the worst i hear from the left.
i'm sure it has to do with religious fanaticism that simply says 'we are not muslim' and therefor bad. but it's not really usually said to be that... they aren't that superficial or whatever.
i heard before and somewhat makes sense, that it's nto that we're wealth or christian, it's that our policies are exploitative and keep others down. so on all counts, the left points are probably more at play, even with the more superficial ones.

[kamiller42]

[quote name='Socrates' timestamp='1304634042' post='2237687']
Yeah, I suppose "poverty and oppression" was the reason oil millionaire Osama bin Laden, who was born into a life of wealth and privilege, took up the life of a terrorist.

And as from what I've read, it doesn't seem the 9-11 hijackers themselves came from a background of extreme desperate poverty.

Also, oil-rich Saudi Arabia is one of world's greatest hotbed's of Islamic extremism, and home to the world's biggest funders of Islamic terrorism.
Since these oil-rich jihadists earn most of their wealth selling oil to western countries, blaming their activities on poverty simply makes no sense.

While claiming most of the world's violence is caused by economic inequality is a popular left-wing cliche (which unfortunately seems to be blindly accepted by many), it simply is not true.
While it may be hard for us in the modern day secular-liberal west to comprehend, religion and ideology can often be more powerful factors in human behavior than dollars and cents.
Most of bin Laden's and Al Qaeda's statements have a lot to do with Islamic ideology, and nothing to do with economics or money.

While liberals won't say much about it (unless attacking Christians), the Islamists hate the West for its perceived immorality and secularism, rather than for its wealth.
[/quote]
Ding, ding! Give that man a cigar!

dairygirl, the right says the terrorists hate freedom, but not because America is free and they're not. The right says their hate for freedom is rooted in their religious fanaticism.

And I might be the first to say this, but I think it's also a power trip. The affluent leaders use religion to amass power by leading the poor and less educated. It's a power they'll never get anywhere in their lands because that kind of power usually goes to those born into money... BIG money. If the people would have more opportunities to share in the power structure, in their careers and government, they might be less likely to go off the deep end with religion. Not a cure all, but one piece of a larger solution.

[Amppax]

[quote name='Socrates' timestamp='1304634042' post='2237687']
Yeah, I suppose "poverty and oppression" was the reason oil millionaire Osama bin Laden, who was born into a life of wealth and privilege, took up the life of a terrorist.

And as from what I've read, it doesn't seem the 9-11 hijackers themselves came from a background of extreme desperate poverty.

Also, oil-rich Saudi Arabia is one of world's greatest hotbed's of Islamic extremism, and home to the world's biggest funders of Islamic terrorism.
Since these oil-rich jihadists earn most of their wealth selling oil to western countries, blaming their activities on poverty simply makes no sense.

While claiming most of the world's violence is caused by economic inequality is a popular left-wing cliche (which unfortunately seems to be blindly accepted by many), it simply is not true.
While it may be hard for us in the modern day secular-liberal west to comprehend, religion and ideology can often be more powerful factors in human behavior than dollars and cents.
Most of bin Laden's and Al Qaeda's statements have a lot to do with Islamic ideology, and nothing to do with economics or money.

While liberals won't say much about it (unless attacking Christians), the Islamists hate the West for its perceived immorality and secularism, rather than for its wealth.
[/quote]

You know, there is a possibility that it is a mixture of both...

[4588686]

[quote name='Amppax' timestamp='1304656089' post='2237842']
You know, there is a possibility that it is a mixture of both...
[/quote]


No. He's talking out his arse.

The fact is that anyone who tried to ascribe one motive to 'the Islamists' doesn't know much about the subject. The things motivating Shamel Basayev are different from those motivating Usama Bin Laden which are different from those that motivated the mass upport for the dea Ayatollah in Iran during the coup et cetera ad infinitum.

What Socrates is doing is like trying to explain American, European, Israeli, and Japanese foriegn policy by pointing to one major factor that motivated the Uited Kingdom to begin a foriegn policy of Empire. Get what I'm saying?

[RezaMikhaeil]

[quote name='Socrates' timestamp='1304634042' post='2237687']Also, oil-rich Saudi Arabia is one of world's greatest hotbed's of Islamic extremism, and home to the world's biggest funders of Islamic terrorism.Since these oil-rich jihadists earn most of their wealth selling oil to western countries, blaming their activities on poverty simply makes no sense.[/quote]

This is an oversimplification of the situation. Surely the Saudi Royals and many people in Saudi Arabia do have quite priviledged situations but many in Saudi Arabia live in complete poverty.

[quote]While claiming most of the world's violence is caused by economic inequality is a popular left-wing cliche (which unfortunately seems to be blindly accepted by many), it simply is not true.
While it may be hard for us in the modern day secular-liberal west to comprehend, religion and ideology can often be more powerful factors in human behavior than dollars and cents.
Most of bin Laden's and Al Qaeda's statements have a lot to do with Islamic ideology, and nothing to do with economics or money.[/quote] Once again not true. He mostly has cited the United States Foriegn Policy, particularly our unconditional support of Israel, while denying the Palestinians the most basic of human rights.

[quote]While liberals won't say much about it (unless attacking Christians), the Islamists hate the West for its perceived immorality and secularism, rather than for its wealth.
[/quote] That isn't why they have a problem with the West. As a matter of fact, when Prince Bandar first met Osama Bin Laden [as he said on Larry King Live], Bin Laden thanked him for sending help from "our friend in the United States, to rise up against the Atheist" [in Afghanistan]. He didn't have a problem with the people in the States until later. It was after he became involved in the situation in Palestine that he began to rebuke the west. He rebuked the West because of it's unconditional support for Israel, while ignoring the attrocities committed against the Palestinians. The situation is political before it was ever religious.

[quote name='Hasan' timestamp='1304660266' post='2237852']
No. He's talking out his arse.

The fact is that anyone who tried to ascribe one motive to 'the Islamists' doesn't know much about the subject. The things motivating Shamel Basayev are different from those motivating Usama Bin Laden which are different from those that motivated the mass upport for the dea Ayatollah in Iran during the coup et cetera ad infinitum.

What Socrates is doing is like trying to explain American, European, Israeli, and Japanese foriegn policy by pointing to one major factor that motivated the Uited Kingdom to begin a foriegn policy of Empire. Get what I'm saying?
[/quote]

I couldn't have said it better. This idea that the Iranian Regime, Al-Quida, Hamas, etc. all being "buddies" is completely false. As a matter of fact, when Al-Quida went into Gaza, they did not unite with Hamas. They tried to create an Islamic Emperate [their title] in Gaza and impliment a strict form of Shariah, while calling Hamas hypocrits. What was Hamas's response? The last thing that Al-Quida heard was a gunshot going off as their leader got his head blown off. Regardless of how people would like to paint Hamas [I'm critical of them too], they do not hate Christians. They have Christian Churches right next to Islamic Mosques and have often protected them from terrorist attacks. If we believed everything that the republican party [not libertarian conservatives] tells us about Iran, we'd believe that they hate Jews. However this is completely false, as they have one of the largest Jewish populations in the entire middle east, for which they treat with dignity and respect. That Jewish population even has a seat in parliment. Those Jews went there during WWII, when they were being murdered throughout Europe and Muslims - essentially - saved them. Why do Iranians not like the US? Well lets see, a million of them were murdered by Saddam, who was backed by the US. Americans love to say, "September 11th 2000 people died", try a million in Iran during the imposed war.

[Socrates]

[quote name='Hasan' timestamp='1304660266' post='2237852']
No. He's talking out his arse.

The fact is that anyone who tried to ascribe one motive to 'the Islamists' doesn't know much about the subject. The things motivating Shamel Basayev are different from those motivating Usama Bin Laden which are different from those that motivated the mass upport for the dea Ayatollah in Iran during the coup et cetera ad infinitum.

What Socrates is doing is like trying to explain American, European, Israeli, and Japanese foriegn policy by pointing to one major factor that motivated the Uited Kingdom to begin a foriegn policy of Empire. Get what I'm saying?
[/quote]
I never claimed all Islamic terrorists have exactly the same goals and agendas.

My point is there isn't solid evidence that the primary cause of Islamic terrorism and violence is chiefly economic inequality.

I'll stand corrected if you can show otherwise, but how many statements are there from Islamic militants which claim economic woes as the main source of their grievances?


The claim that the "root cause" of Islamic terrorism is economic inequality comes from Western liberals, not the terrorists themselves.

[Socrates]

[quote name='RezaMikhaeil' timestamp='1304723933' post='2238124']
This is an oversimplification of the situation. Surely the Saudi Royals and many people in Saudi Arabia do have quite priviledged situations but many in Saudi Arabia live in complete poverty.[/quote]
The ones in complete poverty aren't the ones responsible for funding Islamic radicalism word-wide.

And if poverty is the real cause of terrorism, why should rich people in privileged situations be involved with terrorism at all? I suppose it's out of pure altruistic love for their impoverished brethren?
And, how exactly does terrorism improve the economic position of those in poverty? I must be missing something.
If the funders of terrorism were so interested in helping the poor, maybe they should consider sharing their wealth, rather than blowing poo up.

[quote] Once again not true. He mostly has cited the United States Foriegn Policy, particularly our unconditional support of Israel, while denying the Palestinians the most basic of human rights.

That isn't why they have a problem with the West. As a matter of fact, when Prince Bandar first met Osama Bin Laden [as he said on Larry King Live], Bin Laden thanked him for sending help from "our friend in the United States, to rise up against the Atheist" [in Afghanistan]. He didn't have a problem with the people in the States until later. It was after he became involved in the situation in Palestine that he began to rebuke the west. He rebuked the West because of it's unconditional support for Israel, while ignoring the attrocities committed against the Palestinians. The situation is political before it was ever religious.[/quote]
Political-military, not economic.



[quote]I couldn't have said it better. This idea that the Iranian Regime, Al-Quida, Hamas, etc. all being "buddies" is completely false. As a matter of fact, when Al-Quida went into Gaza, they did not unite with Hamas. They tried to create an Islamic Emperate [their title] in Gaza and impliment a strict form of Shariah, while calling Hamas hypocrits. What was Hamas's response? The last thing that Al-Quida heard was a gunshot going off as their leader got his head blown off. Regardless of how people would like to paint Hamas [I'm critical of them too], they do not hate Christians. They have Christian Churches right next to Islamic Mosques and have often protected them from terrorist attacks. If we believed everything that the republican party [not libertarian conservatives] tells us about Iran, we'd believe that they hate Jews. However this is completely false, as they have one of the largest Jewish populations in the entire middle east, for which they treat with dignity and respect. That Jewish population even has a seat in parliment. Those Jews went there during WWII, when they were being murdered throughout Europe and Muslims - essentially - saved them. Why do Iranians not like the US? Well lets see, a million of them were murdered by Saddam, who was backed by the US. Americans love to say, "September 11th 2000 people died", try a million in Iran during the imposed war.
[/quote]
When did I say anything about those guys all being buddies?

But, yeah, it's all Big Bad America's fault (except of course for Saint Obama, who is Pure of Heart). The poor peaceful little Muslim victims!

And while Iran may not hate Jews, Hamas most certainly does. Just check out their TV programming! (Makes Hitler's rhetoric look mild by comparison.)