The inherent flaw with the War on Terror - Lmk if u disagree

Regardless of whatever the heck your point is, it still
doesn't support your assertion that just as many poor people there will
still hate us and join up in or support terroists there regardless of whether
we finally get off of our butts and do something to geniunely help them
for once.

the backbone of terrorists, the people that support them, the people that
join them, the people that hide them, are the poor people there striving to
make ends meet. if we help these people out, there will be less terrorism
against us.

so you're saying that you agree with my post and
answered yes on the poll. we should give international aid, especailly o
the poorest of countires where poverty is most likeyl to breed teroorism

Oh, I see. Now you blame all the poor people living in
arab regions for the terrorists attack that a small percentage fo them
commit.

...and win them over to our side would seem wrong
to one who believes that all arabs, not just a few rich well funded ones,
are responsible for 9/11.

If you don't blame all arabs for the terrorist attacks,
then why do you think it would be so wrong to actually send some aid to
them?

You were the one that said that that would be equivalent to us giving
Japan money after they bombed pearl harbor. How could you compare us
sending aid to poor arab regions and poor arab people to giving money to
Japan (when the Japanese govt. purposefully attacked us) unless you
believe that the poor arab people themselves were responsible for 9/11.
Had I suggested that we give money and aid to the terrorists, that would
have been a fair comparison. But that's not what I said, I said that we
should give aid to poor arab, not the rich terrorists who financed and
carried out 9/11. So the only way the comparion to Japan (where the
majority of people supported what the govt. was doing) would hold up is if
you considered almost all poor arabs to be terrorists who supported and
helped bring about 9/11.

Sure, have a two pronged approach of giving help inlcuding money,
but also fighting aggressively the people who are simply evil. However,
when we give money, do not get confused and believe that their problems
are our fault.

However,
when we give money, do not get confused and believe that their problems
are our fault.

Um, a lot of the problems they have there ARE
our fault, for supporting (creating) an economic model designed to keep
the rich ruling class rich, and keep the poor peasants poor. We've known
the effect our actions have had on the region for years, and yet we've
done nothing but perpetuate the system (if not make it worse) by
throwing up our hands and saying 'it's not our problem, it's your problem.'

Now we are reaping what we've sown. In order to solve the problems of
terrorism, we must be willing to go to the source of the problem.
Cycloptichorn

You've done nothing but make unsubstantiated claims that their
problems are our fault. If it wasn't clear before, I challenge you to give
specific evidence in support of this belief.

Emphasizing defense of the oil states from external threats ignores the more serious problems of domestic instability and political opposition to the ruling Gulf monarchies. The U.S. should engage these governments on questions of accountability to their citizens and their own constitutions and urge them to open up their systems to allow for greater public participation.

Only through serious steps toward democratization can these governments avoid the destabilization of Islamic and liberal activism. Kuwait is an example where even limited steps toward democratization reinforced stability and helped undermine security threats to the monarchy. Kuwait's Shi'i, 25% of the population, participated in the (male-only) parliamentary elections and won many seats. The U.S. could save tens of millions of dollars in military spending in the Gulf oil states, and perhaps U.S. lives as well, if the socioeconomic and political conditions of the most deprived Shi'i populations were improved.

While on the surface, these may seem like completely unrelated events, they all embody a similar core philosophy. These conflicts are each characterized by having one group which sees itself as being tragically oppressed, and seeks freedom or prosperity through the annihilation of an 'evil' group of oppressors. Sound familiar? It should. The comparison between the scenarios mentioned above and the situation that prompted the September 11th attacks is obvious. America is the perceived oppressor at which Bin Laden directs all of his rage.