The Arab world and 9/11

[Adam Smith]

Re: Re: The Arab world and 9/11

Originally posted by chegitz guevara
They were killed off in the '50s, '60s, '70s, and '80s by the local thugs and the CIA. That's why they turned to "radical" Islam.

Possible counter examples:

Jordan: Moderate by Arab standards. AFAIK no CIA involvement

Morocco: Appears to be relatively stable and westernized, so why do they have radicals?

Kuwait: Pro-reform bloc is about 40 percent of parliament, but can't push through reforms in spite of US support

Egypt: pro-democracy groups suppressed in recent years in spite of US objections

edit: formatting

[chequita guevara]

The later two counter-examples are from the 90s.

It should be remembered the while Jordan is moderate, it is still a repressive monarchy which uses torture, beatings, and extra-judicial executions to suppress the Jordanian people's natural desire for demcoracy.

Morocco waged an extremely vicious war against the people of the Western Sahara for decades. It also uses torture and executions to deal with political opponents.

[Ned]

Che, I stand corrected. I just checked. The Shah did leave just prior to Khomeini's return.

Also, on the topic of the Ayatollah, it seems to me that the aggressive, anti-western Muslim fundamentalism we see today really "began" in the 1970's in Iran. I just read the Time magazine report on the Ayatollah from December of '79. They seem to correctly predict the rise of anti-western islamic movements across the Moslem world.

CNN is now running has a story on that Muslim conference in London. The conference is openly anti-West, anti-capitalist and basicly declares war on Europe and the United States. They openly celebrate the rise of Islam after centuries of decline. They intended to replace decadent capitalism with pure and holy Islam.

This sound all too familiar, doesn't it?

[Imran Siddiqui]

By turning on them, I mean no longer diplomatically recognizing them nor conducting any trade with them and perhaps even putting sanctions on them until representative governments come into being.

That's a silly plan, Gatekeeper. That would mean (in the sake of consistency), we'd be sanctioning 2/3rd of the globe. That would not work wonders for our economy.

Saddam is the single worst dictator, aggressor and violator of human rights since Hitler.

Hello Mr. Hyperbole. Have you never heard of Pol Pot? The Shah of Iran? Mao?

Saddam is no where NEAR Hitler. Saying such proves your ignorance.

[Dr Strangelove]

Ge Pap- May I point out that the Sudanese Civil war, the Iran-Iraq war, the Rwanda massacre, the Cambodian massacre, the Ethiopean-Eritrean war are all either past history or currently in resolution? The undeclared war of al_qeada against the US and the west is not.

[Ned]

Granted, Imran, there are others right up there on the Hitler scale. Pol Pot, Chinese puppet, and Mao both indeed deserved mention.

But Saddam is still in business and seeks to add to his reputation.

[Jack_www]

Most of the hatered for the US in the middle east is because of the foreign policy of the US. One thing that sticks out in my head would be there support for Isreal. Many countries in middle east would be more than happen to see Isreal no longer exist. I know too that OBL main goals was to drive the miltary persence of the US out of his home country. But it is very said to me too see people in the middle east chear about thousands of people dieing at the hands of terrorist, and think that because of the actions of the US government that those people deserved to die. The hatered that is displayed all over the world disgusts me. Why do people have to hate others people so much that they are willing to kill them and even themselfs in the process.

[Dr Strangelove]

Re: Re: The Arab world and 9/11

Originally posted by chegitz guevara


They were killed off in the '50s, '60s, '70s, and '80s by the local thugs and the CIA. That's why they turned to "radical" Islam.

Many of these so-called "democratic" reformers were in fact puppets of the Soviet Union. For example, documents released by the Soviets in the 1990s show that the Iranian communists were indeed planning to take over Iran with the aid of Soviet troops still occupying parts of northern Iran. The Shah's coup prevented the communist coup. If Stalin's henchmen had taken over Iran the resulting bloodbath would have made the Shah's actions look like a Sunday covered dish supper. One thing is certain, they never would have allowed Kohmeni to live.

[Ned]

Jack, The anti-US hatred of Ayatollah Khomeini is the source of much of the Islamic anti-American hatred. Khomeini anti-Americanism was primarily based on our support of the Shah who was introducing liberal, Western ideas into Iran. The thing that most upset the Ayatollah was the liberation of women, as witnessed by the Family Protection Act of 1967. Just prior to the revolution, Iranian women were wearing revealing western outfits, sported decadent western makeup, flaunted their idolatry with gaudy jewelry, reveled in debauchery by dancing seductively in discos, and even had the impudence to demand equality before the law and the right to vote!

Yes, Islamic anti-Americanism is wholly based on American foreign policy!

[Jack_www]

Most of this happened too during the cold war, when the United States wass willing to support even dictators, so long as they were pro-american and was not comunist. Many people thought that comunist was worse, so they went with the dictator instead. Also i dont claim that the sole reason why people hate the United Stated is because of US foreign policy, but the fact stands that most people hate the many things the US has done in the middle east.

[Ned]

OK, Jack. What have we "done" in the Middle East? Of course we support Israel against Arab aggression. But is there anything else?

[Imran Siddiqui]

Khomeini anti-Americanism was primarily based on our support of the Shah who was introducing liberal, Western ideas into Iran.

Um... Ned, you have the story wrong.

The anti-Americanism WAS based on the support of the Shah, and technically on keeping the Shah safe in the US during the Carter administration when Iran wanted to try him for crimes.

Iranians absolutely HATED the Shah, and not because he was western. He was a feckless thug who rode out with his secret police and massacred anyone who dared disagreed with him. He was Iran's Pinochet and many disappeared. That is why the Iranians hated the man.

[Ned]

Imran, Khomeini was kicked out of Iran because he opposed womens rights. His campaign from France was centered on this. One of his very first acts on gaining power was to repeal the Family Protection Act. A whole series of anti-women's lib decrees followed.

True, the Shah was hated by most Iranians because of the secret police. Khomeini hated him for this and because of his liberal reforms.

Carter merely allowed the Shah to visit the Mayo Clinic. He left shortly thereafter. Khomeini demanded the US return the Shah even when the Shah was in Panama. Khomeini demanded that the US be put on trial and that he pick the judges. He demanded that Carter be replaced and that he pick the next president.

Whether the Iranian revolution started as a pro-democracy movement, it ended with the first radical fundamentalist Islamic state in modern times.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Carter merely allowed the Shah to visit the Mayo Clinic. He left shortly thereafter.

Actually he didn't. Carter was weighing whether to shelter him or let him go. Kissenger came to him and said we should protect him because 'of all he's done for us'.

Oh, and I wonder if you knew that the biggest backers of Khomeni were the women of Iran.

[Ned]

Women of Iran backing Khomeini? You gotta' be kiddin'