At 11:15 AM 3/24/2004 -0330 Travis Edmunds wrote:
>As far as I'm concerned, those opinions are far from startling. Is it truly
>a suprise to see such resignation,(and resignation is indeed what it is) in
>that first "opinion" there? We are after all, talking about a people who
>have been brutally and oppressively ruled by a brutal and oppressive
>dictator.
Well, one of the central points of my posting is that while such opinions
could be assigned to factors particular to the Iraqi experience, that inf
act the evidence is that such opinions are actually pervasive throughout
the Arab World. i.e. that despite the differences among the tyrannies of
the Husseins, Sauds, Assads, Mubarak's, et al. of the Arab World that the
fostering of such distorted impressions of the outside world is a common
thread throughout all of them. Indeed, this thread seems to run even
through the so-called "liberal" tyrannies of Qatar and the UAE.
Moreover, my point is that these distorted perceptions of the outside world
and utter lack of control over their own country's destiny (ie as the
tyrants hold absolute power in their own countries) to fuel the War by
Terror against our country.
Thus, I wonder, does your point about these distorted impressions of the
outside world being the natural result of any police force producing an
unhappy minority apply in your mind particularly to the Iraqi experience -
or can you extend this idea to explaining the prevalence of these
distortions throughout the Arab world?
You yourself ask this question, a little later on, and I think that it is
because the tyrants of the Arab World have found these distorted memes as a
useful means of channelling dissatisfaction with their own regimes into
outrage at the outside world. I'm not sure, however, that your analogy of
resentment at "police forces" applies more generally to the Arab world as a
whole.
>>Moreover, as has been noted many times on this List,
>>most Arabs living within the Arab World have been subject to some
>>particularly virulent forms of propaganda throughout their lives.
>
>Lets assume that it's more accurately called "culture" as opposed to
>propaganda for a minute. Now, another question: can you blame 'them' for
>their views?
>
>Lets get back to propaganda for a second. I say we all, all over the world
>have been subject to particularly virulent forms of propaganda throughout
>our lives. In fact, I was subjected to it a short time ago, during our
>provincial election. And you Americans are going to get a healthy dose (if
>you havent already), in your upcoming federal election. What's the
>difference with the Arabs? Actually, let me answer that for you. The
>difference is, they don't see the world through eyes of Red, White and Blue.
I think that in the above paragraphs you are attempting to equate virulent
anti-Semitism and anti-Americanism with both "culture" and
"electioneering." I can only hope that you can't be serious.
To equate virulent anti-Semitism and anti-Americanism as having the
legitimacy of being just another "culture" is simply indefensible. After
all, yes, I *can* blame them for their views, because these views are
wrong, false, and at their underlying roots in pure hatred - are
despicable. Admittedly, there are extenuating circumstances in that they
have been fed this propaganda their entire lives and *moreover* that this
has been done in combination with a careful restriction of outside
influences and ideas. To be an Arab does not imply virulent hatred of
Jews and Americans - to suggest that it is is gravely insulting to Arabs.
Anyhow, consider this example, the United Nations has recently reported
that the entire Arab World has only translated as many outside books into
Arabic in the past several hundred years as *Spain* alone translates in a
single year. In American elections you can buy ads and posters with your
ideas, but your opponents can equally buy ads and posters with competing
ideas. It is this lack of a free exchange of information in the Arab
World that has made anti-Semitic and anti-American propaganda so
devastatingly effective in the Arab world, and produced the disastrous
situation we have today.
>Consider for a moment, that the top-story of the Arab press must convey what
>is popular opinion, if it does not convey the objective truth. And we all
>know that it's an absurd notion, that the Americans assassinated two Arab
>journalists! So from whence does this popluar opinion come? Well, it's a
>reflection of a place and a time.
Perhaps I was not clear on this point in my original message.... these
rumours that the Americans had killed these journalists *on purpose* were
repeated time and again in the Arab press.
>>Given these stark realities, it is worth recalling that despite the United
>>State's strategic alliance with Saudi Arabia, it was Saudi Arabia that
>>produced Osama bin Laden; it was Saudi Arabia that produced most of the
>>9/11 hijackers, and that all of this occurred long before the US invaded
>>Iraq.
>
>Excuse me John, this may sound rude, but it's not my intention. Instead of
>offering up a few mundane facts as something profound, I say but one word -
>COINCIDENCE. Coupled of course with: cultural differences, religious
>fanaticism, etc...
>
>But ultimately, I think the word coincidence, sums everything up nicely.
Travis, I think that the above represents a typical example of the dangers
of line-by-line responding without considering the overarching points that
the author is trying to present.
In my original post, I had the following to say about this point:
While Saudi Arabia makes a convenient scapegoat because of the role
of Saudi nationals in 9/11 in my mind it is largely an artifact of history
that Al Qaeda was able to predominantly recruit Saudis instead of other
Arabs. The factors underpinning the decision to lash out so violently at
the United States seem likely to me to be reflected as much in the
propaganda evidenced above in Iraq as in other places....
Not only is your above statement not rude, but that was precisely my point.
I actually even used the word "coincidence" before deciding to go with
"artifact of history." (This was in part a response to a previous
argument here you probably did not see, in which Dr. Brin suggested that we
should have targeted Saudi Arabia for regime change long before we targeted
Iraq. Other war opponents have often made similar arguments.) Still, my
point remains, the factors that spurred a number of Saudi nationals to
launch 9/11 are and were present in Iraq and throughout the Arab World.
Thus, while Iraq certainly had no direct connection to 9/11 the presence in
Iraq of the same factors that bred 9/11 certainly made Iraq a long-term
strategic threat to the United States. Ultimately, the War on Terror
cannot be won by mere police actions and targeted strikes against the Al
Qaeda organization, it can only be won by changing the fundamental
conditions on the ground in the Middle East.
JDG
_______________________________________________________
John D. Giorgis - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
"The liberty we prize is not America's gift to the world,
it is God's gift to humanity." - George W. Bush 1/29/03
_______________________________________________
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
