Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by skunk, Apr 7, 2004.
I feel this sets things out very well.
It costs so much more money to protect against terror than it does to commit an act of terror. Independance Hall is fenced off. THe Statue of Liberty is closed. because of the terror threat.
I wonder how strange it will be for our children to conceive of a time when you could touch the Liberty Bell or walk into a govt. building without being searched.
I agree with the article. It seems we are making the problem worse. We could have just stayed in Afghanistan and spent our money there. Then put pressure on the Israeli and Palastinians to come up with a just solution. Then left UN inspectors in Iraq and waited Hussein out or proved ourselves first in Afghanistan the in Palestine before invading Iraq, or at least planned a bit better there. But Bush and the neo-cons were greedy. They had to have their invasion now.
wouldn't it be nice to have a national dialogue on how to reduce the root causes of terrorism? it would be so... refreshing
It will never happen. Why? Because a large number of people in this country think that by addressing the root causes of terrorism, rather than focusing all of our efforts on killing the already existing terrorists, would actually be giving the terrorists what they want.
Nothing justifies terrorists' actions. But at the same time, I see little justification for a nation ignoring the root cause of the actions which killed 3000 of its citizens. ALL avenues for preventing such an action in the future should be explored.
How can you have a dialogue when we have "journalism" like this:
we are doomed
I totally agree. My own speculation is that they hate us for two reasons. One, we are a christian nation that ALWAYS sides with Isreal. Two, America (in their eyes) is a decadent cesspool of materialism, sex, and opulance. To them, we are an immoral people. Theirs' is a religious crusade. However, they belive that government and religion should be the same thing. Thus, the few crazy Muslims will continue to persecute the "infidels" until we either adopt Islam as our government, or we "execute every last mother-f**king one of" 'em.
Totally agree on point one. Not so sure about point two though. Iraq was very western and consumer-istic before the sanctions after Gulf War I. They had a very high literacy rate, modern cities, and many more of the trappings of a 'Western' society. I don't dispute that there are people trying to change that under the banner of Fundamentalist Islam at this time, but they weren't among those who, like UBL, espouse a hatred of 'Western culture'.
Mactastic, your right regarding Iraq. I meant point two in a more "whole world" scope. Iraq definately has a flavor of US culture. However, fundamentalist who've come to Iraq see this war as an opportunity to strike us.
I always get a little twinge when I hear the US described as a "Christian nation." That issue aside for the moment, the ideological problem radical Islam has with the US (and other Western nations) is that we're essentially secular societies -- religious perhaps, but not governed by clerics. The real conflict is between the values of secular and religion-based governments. The solution isn't imposing Western ideas on the Middle East, because that only feeds the fear held by even even moderate Muslims that the West won't stop until they wipe out traditional Islam. They've got plenty of historical evidence for this in their corner. The US occupation of Iraq can hardly be expected to make them feel any differently. It's worth keeping in mind that some people in the US are as anxious for a fight to the finish with radical Islam as they are anxious for a fight to the finish with us.