Why is the US a target for terrorism?
- Thread starter ohio
- Start date
I'm upping the terror alert ot "plaid".
Maybe they played pin the tail on the donkey to decide it would be us. They could have put up an international map on the wall, blindfolded some guy, and proceded to pin the tail on a random country to terrorize.
Jealousy.
They can whine about how much we waste, or how we only help countries that can help us. But plain and simple they want what we have. If they cannot get it (obviously) they will try and destroy it.
They also think that we should help more countries out financially and other forms of aid (food, medicine, etc...). We have enough budget issues, we do not have to go around and give countries money. If their people would move somewhere where food grows, they may actually survive!
I do not see the US moving from number one anytime soon, so yes we will always be a target.
They can whine about how much we waste, or how we only help countries that can help us. But plain and simple they want what we have. If they cannot get it (obviously) they will try and destroy it.
They also think that we should help more countries out financially and other forms of aid (food, medicine, etc...). We have enough budget issues, we do not have to go around and give countries money. If their people would move somewhere where food grows, they may actually survive!
I do not see the US moving from number one anytime soon, so yes we will always be a target.
Bingo. Israel is at the root of the whole thing. If we were to allow Israel to get rolled, like the British did in 1948, then all of a sudden it wouldn't matter if we stationed the entire US military in Saudi Arabia. Of course it would only be a matter of time once these out of work terrorists figured something else out, which leads us to the second root thing Toshi mentioned. These terror groups would all of sudden focus on the overthrow of the their "secular" governments to install religious based governments like Iran.
Its why most of the Arab countries of the Middle East don't dispute the presence of Israel. Keep looking over there and not at we your leaders.
Osama, however, has a different beef. He is angry because of the presence of US troops in the Saudi, the land of Islam most holy sites. His offer to lead a group of former Afgan fighters to protect Saudi Arabia against Iraq in 1990 was rejected. The Saudis turned him down in favor of US troops. His "displeasure" with this eventually lead to his exile from Saudi Arabia. He from time to time brings Israel into his rhetoric but typically goes back to his orginial issue. The problem is that most Muslims don't get to bent out of shape about the US presence in Saudi Arabia at least not like they can about Israel.
HHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAAAAAA!!!!
goobers
goobers
Do you think we would have to completely "sell out" Israel to obtain a stable and satisfactory solution? My personal opinion is that peace could be achieved, but we would violate our policy of not giving into terrorism. That policy has dug us into a corner where we can't help everyday Palestinian civilians, because Palestinian terrorists keep ruining things for the whole crew. We keep waiting for them to stop, when we know the longer we wait (and side with Israel while waiting) the less likely it is to stop.
very well said but if i may add, even if the u.s stop its support of israel you still have a pourcentage of right wing israele settlers that dont really care what the u.s does.these people will only add fuel to the fire and attracting even more palestian suicide bombers.i think isarel is at a point were they are not as handicaped as they where in the past if the u.s decide to pull there support.
Imagine the following scenario, a country ten times more powerful than the US decides that the Indigenous North America Natives should get their own homeland and decides to give them Califonrina and then arms them with enough nuclear weapons to defend themselves, whilst denying the US any, gives them lots of money and aid to survive and backs them in expansion into Arizona. How would the displaced US citizens feel?
The problem with the Isreali solution is that it was not holistic and it was at the expense of the Arab world. Couple that with the West's distrust of Islam and you have a recipe for disaster. The disgruntled Arabs have no other means to retaliate other then terrorist methods so that's what they do.
Will you always be a target? Only so long as you retain your current position.
AND who is responible for that? Who had the opportunity to do it right the first time? BUT who went ahead and made the transistion as painful as possible with little or no chance of success?
If it hadn't been for the support of the US in those early years Israel would have simply disappeared. Maybe that was what was intended all along.
As for Ohio, I do agree with your point. The terrorist thing makes it difficult if not impossible to negotiate. Because it does start you down a slipperly slope. That's why I found a change in PLO leadership so intriguing. Getting Arfat out might lead to someone who doesn't have so much blood on his hands that negotiation would work without the terrorist stigma. I do believe that it is going to take a third party at this point. The US can't be expected to drag these parties to the table everytime. I do get pissed because no one else seems seriously interested in putting themselves into that role.
And to further rbx's point, part of the problem is that the Israelis have become independent of the US, at least on the short term. So our approval or disapproval doesn't mean as much as it used to especially with the current government. So maybe that does open a door.
But wouldn't it be nice if Canada or Norway or some other country stepped up and inserted themselves into the role of peacemaker in the Middle East.
Do you think the US would actually let that happen?
Bitching about blame won't solve a thing so why do you insist on blaming other nations for getting it wrong in the past as some form of justification for current actions? If there's a problem the thing is to solve it, not waste time on blaming others for its creation. Of course, it's much harder to fix a problem than it is to find someone to blame. I see it every day in every area of life.
Who knows? No one has ever stepped up to the plate and tried to seriously resolve the issue so its pretty much a moot point. They make feeble attempts but don't follow thru with them. But see it isn't easy and the chance for success is slim, so why take the chance inserting yourself in the process and becoming the new scape goat.
Ain't bitchin' about who is at fault. When was the last time you heard a US diplomat or official even mention 1948. I just want to make sure that you know where a lot of this started and how it became the US's problem. It also has a lot to do with how the problem evolved over time and how the US got where it is. See because knowing the whole story is important when you try to solve a problem.
I think pulling out completely would be the same as starting an all out war ourselves. Israel is strong, and they've fought off their enemies before, but we'd be inviting a bloodbath if we disappeared.
I think we need to stop viewing the situation as "will we or won't we support Israel," and instead view it as "Can we achieve peace in Israel/Palestine." We have done a great job of vilifying Palestinian terrorists (rightfully so), but we haven't done as good a job of vilifying extremist Israelis, especially settlers. It's a chicken and egg problem, and I don't buy the argument that its more legitimate when it's an army that does the killing. It's wrong on both sides. and even if it wasn't, Israel still doesn't have the right to enslave a population.
We need to start providing aid to Palestinian refugee (concentration/labor) camps the same way we would (or at least I hope we would) in any other territory. We don't have to support/legitimize Arafat to do that, but it would go a long way towards restoring some order to their lives (which in turn might prevent some from turning to extremism). A healthier, more educated, more free Palestinian population is that much more likely to pursue legitimate channels for their cause and/or recognize the problem with their current leadership.
I don't know if it adds any legitimacy to my case, but I'm Jewish, and I lived in Jerusalem for some time immediately following the Gulf War, so I'm not under any hippy illusions about group hugs solving the whole problem.
again very well said ohio,but i think that BOTH arafat and sharon need to step down as they both have to much blood on their hands(sharon for the palestian beiruth massacre) and arafat for the palestian suicide bombers.the big problem is also syria and hizib allah(iran supported milicia) have a stake in all of this.being lebanese i would really like to see syria(the goverment not the people get their a$$ kicked
(they really screwed up my country)one thing i do like is that the u.s is starting to see that syria is not as clean as they thought it was.
#1 - Because Al Gore invented the internet.
#2 - As long as we have Waffle Houses, yes.
It's a giant crucible of crap now days, that's for sure....being lebanese i would really like to see syria(the goverment not the people get their a$$ kicked
one thing i do like is that the u.s is starting to see that syria is not as clean as they thought it was.
Are the people better off than they were 13 yrs ago? No.
Do they still only take cash?
You can have ours.
That would be GREAT for me!
