Mon 10 Mar, 2003 11:31 am
This is a successor thread to The US, the UN & Iraq. I have had to close the previous thread (which may be found at: http://www.able2know.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=1048&start=4300
) because it is so long that it is loading very slowly.
The previous thread will, of course, remain where it is and naturally you can copy and paste from it as you wish. Sorry for the interruption.
'Why do they hate us?'
By Peter Ford | Staff writer of The Christian Science Monitor
September 27, 2001
Most Arabs and Muslims knew the answer, even before they considered who was responsible. Retired Pakistani Air Commodore Sajad Haider - a friend of the US - understood why. Radical Egyptian-born cleric and US enemy Abu Hamza al-Masri understood. And Jimmy Nur Zamzamy, a devout Muslim and advertising executive in Indonesia, understood.
In the United States, military planners are deciding how to exact retribution. To many people in the Middle East and beyond, where US policy has bred widespread anti-Americanism, the carnage of Sept. 11 was retribution.
And voices across the Muslim world are warning that if America doesn't wage its war on terrorism in a way that the Muslim world considers just, America risks creating even greater animosity.
The vast majority of Muslims in the Middle East were as shocked and horrified as any American by what they saw happening on their TV screens. And they are frightened of being lumped together in the popular American imagination with the perpetrators of the attack.
But from Jakarta to Cairo, Muslims and Arabs say that on reflection, they are not surprised by it. And they do not share Mr. Bush's view that the perpetrators did what they did because "they hate our freedoms."
Rather, they say, a mood of resentment toward America and its behavior around the world has become so commonplace in their countries that it was bound to breed hostility, and even hatred.
And the buttons that Mr. bin Laden pushes in his statements and interviews - the injustice done to the Palestinians, the cruelty of continued sanctions against Iraq, the presence of US troops in Saudi Arabia, the repressive and corrupt nature of US-backed Gulf.
Against the background of that humiliated mood, America's unchallenged military, economic, and cultural might be seen as an affront even if its policies in the Middle East were neutral. And nobody voices that view.
From one end of the region to the other, the perception is that Israel can get away with murder - literally - and that Washington will turn a blind eye. Clearly, the US and Israel have compelling reasons for their actions. But little that US diplomats have done in recent years to broker a peace deal between Israel and the Palestinians has persuaded Arabs that the US is a fair-minded and equitable judge of Middle Eastern affairs.
We can make the hatreds greater or try to confront them. That is up to Bush!
Thanks, jes. Pity us poor dialups.
When Saddam is gone and Iraq stabilized, the Palestinian State will become a reality, Sharon will be castrated, North Korea will be dealt with and then Iran.
Syria is in the same league with Lybia----zippo
If road runner is available in your area, I highly recommend it---you're "online" 24/7 with only a rare interruption of service and it costs about the same as a phone line with dial up ISP----the increase in speed is magnifico.............
...in the Middle East and beyond, where US policy has bred widespread anti-Americanism...
People with a little less rabid anti-American bias might consider the possibility that repressive regimes in that region have controlled media and their people's perceptions for years in a successful effort to deflect public unrest away from the government at home. Were the general unrest in these countries ever focused where it belongs--at their own governments--those governments would topple in days.
Here's a bit of news that most people probably missed about GWBush's news conference last week. According to USA Today, "Bush made two unprecedented moves that could signal the way his administration will handle the media - during war time. First, reporters were summoned into the East Room in pairs, "as if we were in grammar school and were being called on the line for something," CBS Bill Plane says. Then, Bush called on reporters from a predetermined list assembled by White House press secretary Ari Fleischer." What was notable about this press conference was the absense of many notables, including Time, Newsweek, USA Today, The Washington Post and Hearst columnist Helen Thomas. c.i.
That is an odd sounding news conference, c.i.
Very valid point Tres----perhaps one day the US will wake up and produce a meaningful PR campaign on Al Jazeera.
It is absolutely beyond imagination that we have authorized Hollywood to conduct our PR campaign with everything that is hated about the US.
I knew Bush had a list for who he would call on, I didn't realize that there was a quota set on who could be present. This isn't a democracy, its a totalitarian demagoguery. Beware!
What was notable about this press conference was the absense of many notables, including Time, Newsweek, USA Today, The Washington Post and Hearst columnist Helen Thomas.
It is about time they gave that doddering old idiot, Helen Thomas, the door. I hope her absence will be permanent.
And now, back to 'business':
we sometimes really should look back and recall history, here: latest history:
Timeline: Saddam's Iraq (BBC "in depth")
More about the strategies in the last 30 years:
The Thirty-Year Itch
GWBush also refused to speak in Europe, because they couldn't guarantee a "warm" welcome like he received when he spoke to both houses of congress and the world.
This must be your new world view on population control.
''We certainly have very serious concerns about Saddam Hussein setting fire to the oil fields,'' another senior U.S. official said.
But Saddam told Dan Rather he wouldn't do that-------and Dan Rather believed him.
I heard it was even questionable that Iraq set their oil fields ablaze last time.....supposedly there have been stories of gulf war vets that have stepped forward and said that they were ordered to set the oil fields on fire after the gulf war and that it wasn't Iraq.
Welcome aboard Marc - do you have any links? Thanks