Debate!! Do you really think that if we are just nicer that terrorists will stop?

[Elwood Blues]

Originally posted by auntpolly

If we had been a little less out for ourselves over the years, maybe we wouldn't be in this mess right now,

Please explain what you mean by "a little less out for ourselves"?

If you don't mind.

 

[Elwood Blues]

Originally posted by Saffron
We could be really, really, really nice to "them". But that won't stop a terrorist attack against the US by ANY militant/religious extremist group.

We could be really, really, really, mean to "them". But that won't stop a terrorist attack against the US by ANY militant/religious extremist group.

IMO, both are required.

Blowing Iraq off the face of the Earth won't stop extremist terrorist cells from doing what they do. Turning Iraq into a peaceful Democracy where freedom reigns loud and proud won't stop extremist terrorist cells from doing what they do.

So which would you prefer?

There was a 3rd choice. Leave Iraq alone.

Terrorism has no face. It comes from outside of the USA, inside the USA, foreigners, our own people, those that want us to change our policies in foreign lands, those that want us to change our way of life here at home. Terrorism is a complicated issue, one that any person elected to the be president will have to deal with, no matter who is elected president.

I agree.

 

[LisaSt]

It is not a matter of being nicer to stop terrorism it will never stop BUT being a nation with a nicer outpouring of support and not force towards some will help in building more support towards the US as a nation. Terrorists are never going to stop doing what they do for them it is a way of life and a means to an end in many of the countries that harbour them. You do not gain respect and admoration by going around flexing military muscle etc it actually just builds more animosity towards your nation and towards the people living there. Just like you see people who do not care for the countries that have terrorist living there people from over there look at the US as a sort of terrorist ruling by military might and this breeds animosity towards them same end diffent path getting there no one likes a bully and no one likes the rat.

 

[goin2disneyagain]

No I don't. They hate what we stand for- freedom, a strong nation. Niceness/Meaness has nothing to do with it.

 

[VampHeartless]

I don't think it will ever stop...EVER. It has been going on since the beginning of time...

I think we've just given them more of an identity now that we've declared war against them.

 

[patriciah2]

One thing to think about is that we are in the US looking out - others are looking in. Look at what we have, what we do with it, and how we approach the rest of the world. This really isn't a reply to the terrorism thread, but just something that I think we all need to keep in mind. We are so, so fortunate to be here - thanks to someone who made a decision 50 or 100 or 150 years. Think if that decision hadn't been made where you'd be and how you'd be living. I am thankful every day that I live in America. I think that this helps me sometimes to understand the frustration of others.

 

[treesinger]

Originally posted by patriciah2
One thing to think about is that we are in the US looking out - others are looking in. Look at what we have, what we do with it, and how we approach the rest of the world. This really isn't a reply to the terrorism thread, but just something that I think we all need to keep in mind. We are so, so fortunate to be here - thanks to someone who made a decision 50 or 100 or 150 years. Think if that decision hadn't been made where you'd be and how you'd be living. I am thankful every day that I live in America. I think that this helps me sometimes to understand the frustration of others.

Great point! IMO, these decisions that Bush is making will be looked back on in fifty years as the very reason that we were able to spread liberty through the Muslim world and howw the peace we will enjoy was started.

Remember this: there have been no wars that were ever ended diplomatically that were never refought. In war, there is only one side that gets to set the rules afterwards. Pray that it is the American side that wins.

 

[WillyJ]

The book "Imperial Hubris: Why the West is Losing the War on Terror," was written by a 22-year CIA veteran who ran the Counterterrorist Center's bin Laden station from 1996 to 1999 and is named Michael Scheuer.

He originally called himself "Anonymous" because there was a CIA rule that said for his own safety he needed to do so, but some paper in London narrowed it down ans then a Boston paper "outed" him and it turns out he didn't mind anyway.


As an active CIA Agent he did have to get permission to write and publish the book, and they had some say over content. . can't recall the exact details, but obviously he couldn't name other agents, specific operations, etc.


I've read it and it's interesting and worthwhile, but nothing in it is earth-shattering. . his main points are that terrorists don't hate us for our way of life or the way we live here, but rather our policies that affect how they want to live their lives. He criticizes Bush for waitng a month to go into Afghanistan and allowing many of the higher level Taliban and Al Quieda leaders to escape into Pakistan; and he says goig into Iraq was the worst thing we could have done for the safety of our country because by invading the second most holiest place in Islam Bush confirmed all the worst radical Muslims had been saying and made it much easier for terrorist groups to recruit.

He offers some solutions including: don't treat Al Quieda like criminals or terrorists but as an opposition army; let the military be a military and not a police force/social workers-go where more concentrated lethal firepower where we know there are forces of violent, radical Muslims and aviod places like Iraq; and work to be seen as a fairer broker of peace between Isreal and the Palastinians. .

Obviously a lot more in the book, but that's the gist of it and I mostly agreed with his assesments and conclusions. .


And I agree with the young man serving in the Army- the unrest and fighting has been going on there since recorded history and we're not going to stop it-


I also think the sooner we can figure out a show of military strength that will leave an impression on the cordinated terrorist groups and then leave the area the better off we'll be- the three main groups in Iraq-Sunnis, Kurds, and Shia have deep cul;tural differences and they don't want western-style democracy and whether we saty another week, another year, or another 10 years we aren't going to be able to force it on them. .

 

[Trinity721]

In a short answer to the OP's title question, NO! Terrorists will never simply accept the philosophy, religion, culture or beliefs of those they oppose. Unfortunately, I doubt they will ever "agree to disagree".

Many people don't realize that terrorism has been around since the beginning of mankind. It doesn't just happen to the US, it happens all over the world and has been happening all over the world to all kinds of people.

 

[Viking]

Originally posted by AllyandJack
I used to think that if we had just minded our own business when it came to other nation's problems that we could have spared ourselves this grief. I'm no so sure it would have helped though.

Would a bigger alliance help us? Maybe. But, we can't sit around and wait for people to come to our aid. It would be nice if other countries that we helped would back us up. But, if they don't believe in our fight, we can't force them into it. I just wish we would have thought of that when we were out there fighting other nation's battles. I hope our next president, whomever he is, fights for US and lets everyone one fend for themselves.

But...it's too late to be nice. We can't go back and butt out, so now we just have to defend ourselves (perish the thought).

Besides, Russia was against us and they still got hit (it appears).

So, no, I don't think it would make a difference. It's sad, too. Wouldn't it be great if that was the answer to it all?

The first thing that came up reading your post is: You're UNGRATEFUL
The whole western world and a majority of the rest of the world came to your help!!!! Our boys are still in Afghanistan helping YOU!!
That harebrained Iraq-campaign had NOTHING to do with the war against the attackers of 9/11!!!!

You're problem and that of many of your countrymen still is, that you think of everyone who's not 110% for you is against you. As long as you don't see this mistake, nobody can help you

Nobody wants to tell you what to do in your country - But everybody expects you to respect that nobody wants you to tell other countries what to do inside their borders.

Don't get me wrong: Over here we're still grateful that you helped getting rid of Hitler (WE know how to be grateful!!), but that was 60 years ago and the world has made some progress. Unfortunately you didn't progress like the rest of the world, especially since Bush took, which led to some kind of megalomania on your side.

BTW. Russia is not against you - They have enough problems of their own. They got hit by some of their own terrorists.

 

[Viking]

Originally posted by WillyJ
The book "Imperial Hubris: Why the West is Losing the War on Terror," was written by a 22-year CIA veteran who ran the Counterterrorist Center's bin Laden station from 1996 to 1999 and is named Michael Scheuer.

He originally called himself "Anonymous" because there was a CIA rule that said for his own safety he needed to do so, but some paper in London narrowed it down ans then a Boston paper "outed" him and it turns out he didn't mind anyway.


As an active CIA Agent he did have to get permission to write and publish the book, and they had some say over content. . can't recall the exact details, but obviously he couldn't name other agents, specific operations, etc.


I've read it and it's interesting and worthwhile, but nothing in it is earth-shattering. . his main points are that terrorists don't hate us for our way of life or the way we live here, but rather our policies that affect how they want to live their lives. He criticizes Bush for waitng a month to go into Afghanistan and allowing many of the higher level Taliban and Al Quieda leaders to escape into Pakistan; and he says goig into Iraq was the worst thing we could have done for the safety of our country because by invading the second most holiest place in Islam Bush confirmed all the worst radical Muslims had been saying and made it much easier for terrorist groups to recruit.

He offers some solutions including: don't treat Al Quieda like criminals or terrorists but as an opposition army; let the military be a military and not a police force/social workers-go where more concentrated lethal firepower where we know there are forces of violent, radical Muslims and aviod places like Iraq; and work to be seen as a fairer broker of peace between Isreal and the Palastinians. .

Obviously a lot more in the book, but that's the gist of it and I mostly agreed with his assesments and conclusions. .


And I agree with the young man serving in the Army- the unrest and fighting has been going on there since recorded history and we're not going to stop it-


I also think the sooner we can figure out a show of military strength that will leave an impression on the cordinated terrorist groups and then leave the area the better off we'll be- the three main groups in Iraq-Sunnis, Kurds, and Shia have deep cul;tural differences and they don't want western-style democracy and whether we saty another week, another year, or another 10 years we aren't going to be able to force it on them. .

Well said!!

Bush obviously believed that a similar thing like '45 in Germany would happen. But we shared the same cultural, ethical & religious background (Before '33), so it was easy to find our way back into the arms of the civilized world after 12 years of madness - especially as the Nazis had overthrown a democracy. Iraq has a different cultural, ethical and religious background and SH had ruled for 30+ years without having a democracy as predecessor.
Another thing: Mesopotamia was a high culture when our ancestors still roamed the woods and plains in small groups - not even tribes. So they consider you and us as barbarians/infidels, not worthy and certainly not qualified of telling them how to live their lifes. The just see you as warmongers greedy for their oil - Period.
Don't get me wrong: I also believe that the whole region needs democracy, that religion should not interfere with the administration of a country. But you can't make people see the advantages of democracy by force - especially when they have never experienced it.
Additionally they see that you can easily cope with Arab countries without democracy -like the Kindom of Saudi Arabia - as long as they supply you with cheap oil. If you -and us of course, too- would cease delivering weapons to them and instead promote democracy there, you'd become a lot more trustworthy.
BTW, how comes that in they USA still ignores the fact that the majority of the 9/11 attackers originated from Saudi Arabia? Your so-called ally

 

[vernon]

Treesinger said

And any of my brethren on the right wing that go to extreme measures to accomplish that goal are just as much a group of wackos as the Muslim extremists are. But at least they aren't killing people.

Jason are you saying that a desire to bring your children up in a world where they're not prematurely exposed to alcohol,drugs, unwanted teenage pregnancies, on demand abortions for teens, rampant sexually transmitted diseases, respect for your elders and a huge youth criminal underclass is somehow extremist?

There may be some extremist "solutions" put forward by "wacko groups" ( to paraphrase you) who share those IMHO understandable ideals. The fact that extremists on all sides can see a situation as undesirable for society doesn't make their observation invalid. Their solutions may be as or more undesirable than the offending behaviour, but to agree with their observation doesn't mean you have to agree with their solution. For example if I were to live in an apartment block and one neighbour played VERY LOUD music all night everynight, I would understand and agree with any neighbour saying that moves could and should be taken to try and stop that antisocial behaviour. It doesn't mean that I'd agree with one of the neighbours blowing his head off with a shotgun.

The point I'm trying to make is that the perception among many Moderate Arab groups is that American society as portrayed on MTV (Christina, Britany + and number of Rap stars) is how American society actually is and how it wants to be. That simply isn't the case, much of America is conservative, respectful and religious but that isn't how you are portrayed in your own media and it's certainly not how you're portrayed in the media you export abroad. I'm not suprised muslims are frightened of the America as shown on Rap videos on MTV, I think those same videos concern many middle class, non extremist perfectly normal Americans. The difference is Y'all know those videos only represent a tiny microcosm of American society. From someone who doesn't know the "real" America and can only judge from the movies,videos and TV shows that are exported the belief is that is a reflection of main stream American culture, values and beliefs.

What is happening broken down to it's simplest form is many people not living in the USA say " If this is how America is, we don't want it". Instead of saying, "well actually that's not how it is, the realitity is .... , we understand your point, because we wouldn't want it like that either" , the response usually is, "screw you, we'll do what ever we want and don't tell us how to live in American, or tell us what we can do outside of America either. We know best and we think it would be best if you all lived like us" .

The truth is, the world would be, probably, a better place if everyone did live as life is in the REAL America, but what is exported as the American dream lifestyle, isn't how you live and IMHO it isn't how you want to live. The vision that is exported is a corruption of reality, but when that vision is questioned, America becomes very defensive, assuming it is an attack on the way you live. If you (plural) could open your ears and minds to what is being said to you, you'd realise the points being raised do have some validity. Many of Islam's fears about America are based on a fiction woven by the American media, with some understanding and a lot of explanation most of those fears would disapear. If you/we can deal with the majority of those justified, but unfounded fears we could show moderate Islam that their greatest danger is not from the west, but from the extremists within their own religion we would be a great deal nearer to building an understanding and much closer to a sustainable PEACEFUL future for all of our children.

 

[treesinger]

Originally posted by Viking
Well said!!

Bush obviously believed that a similar thing like '45 in Germany would happen. But we shared the same cultural, ethical & religious background (Before '33), so it was easy to find our way back into the arms of the civilized world after 12 years of madness - especially as the Nazis had overthrown a democracy. Iraq has a different cultural, ethical and religious background and SH had ruled for 30+ years without having a democracy as predecessor.

Fair point. But I look at a different angle. Muslim countries, as a rule, are at least partially theocratic in nature, if not fully. Those in power in these countries won't touch democracy with a ten foot pole because they know it will be the beginning of the end of the Muslim hold on power in the countries they rule. Put bluntly, unless they were made to consider Democracy in at least a close resemblance to the way Westerners understand it, they never would have accepted it. It would interfere with Muslim law too greatly. And, as it happens, the Iraqi Governing Council decided on a Parliamentary system which is British, not American. And they do still reserve a place for Islam to be included in the law, but it foes not override the law.

Let's look at this another way...if America were suddenly turned into a Radically Fundamental Christian Country that made God's law the only law at the expense of freedom and liberty, would you think we were a backwards people? I'm thinking you would. I would. I'm betting that the world would say that we needed to get our heads out of our spiritual asses and join the modern world of acceptance, tolerance and diversity. And the world would be right. For that very reason, The US is right to wage this war. We need to provide the Muslim people in the Middle East an outlet for freedom. Theocracies are dangerous and oppressive, and in the hands of someone like SH, deadly. Now that Iraqi's truly have a voice in their country, it hopefully will never happen again.

Another thing: Mesopotamia was a high culture when our ancestors still roamed the woods and plains in small groups - not even tribes. So they consider you and us as barbarians/infidels, not worthy and certainly not qualified of telling them how to live their lifes.

Aren't you reaching here just a little bit? Heck, if we're going to play the ancient history game, I descended from Adam and Eve. So there.

The just see you as warmongers greedy for their oil - Period.

And anyone who thinks this is so is IMO just plain ignorant. And someone else's ignorance is no reason NOT to take action.

Don't get me wrong: I also believe that the whole region needs democracy, that religion should not interfere with the administration of a country. But you can't make people see the advantages of democracy by force - especially when they have never experienced it.

Very true. But democracy wasn't forced on them. The forced that was used was so that democracy would finally be an option to them, not to establish a government as we saw fit. Also, it wasn't just Americans helping on the IGC. Many representatives from the Coalition of the Willing helped educate the IGC on the different forms of democracy and the IGC choose after being fully informed. And they chose NOT to follow the American form of government. But they chose democracy nonetheless. Thank God that we used our military might to allow them to be able to even THINK of making a choice as such.

Additionally they see that you can easily cope with Arab countries without democracy -like the Kindom of Saudi Arabia - as long as they supply you with cheap oil. If you -and us of course, too- would cease delivering weapons to them and instead promote democracy there, you'd become a lot more trustworthy.
BTW, how comes that in they USA still ignores the fact that the majority of the 9/11 attackers originated from Saudi Arabia? Your so-called ally

Don't get me started on SA. I'm with you on this one. Our relationship with SA is completely unacceptale to me. And beyond the oli connection is also the stock market connection. SA investors own such a humungous portion of stocks in the US that, if we completely cut ties with SA, their withdrawal of investments would be more crippling than any terrorist attack could ever be.
I say cut ties and damn the consequences. We'll live. We'll struggle mightily, but we'll live. And we'll learn to be independent for real.

 

[treesinger]

Originally posted by vernon
Treesinger said
Jason are you saying that a desire to bring your children up in a world where they're not prematurely exposed to alcohol,drugs, unwanted teenage pregnancies, on demand abortions for teens, rampant sexually transmitted diseases, respect for your elders and a huge youth criminal underclass is somehow extremist?

There may be some extremist "solutions" put forward by "wacko groups" ( to paraphrase you) who share those IMHO understandable ideals. The fact that extremists on all sides can see a situation as undesirable for society doesn't make their observation invalid. Their solutions may be as or more undesirable than the offending behaviour, but to agree with their observation doesn't mean you have to agree with their solution. For example if I were to live in an apartment block and one neighbour played VERY LOUD music all night everynight, I would understand and agree with any neighbour saying that moves could and should be taken to try and stop that antisocial behaviour. It doesn't mean that I'd agree with one of the neighbours blowing his head off with a shotgun.

The point I'm trying to make is that the perception among many Moderate Arab groups is that American society as portrayed on MTV (Christina, Britany + and number of Rap stars) is how American society actually is and how it wants to be. That simply isn't the case, much of America is conservative, respectful and religious but that isn't how you are portrayed in your own media and it's certainly not how you're portrayed in the media you export abroad. I'm not suprised muslims are frightened of the America as shown on Rap videos on MTV, I think those same videos concern many middle class, non extremist perfectly normal Americans. The difference is Y'all know those videos only represent a tiny microcosm of American society. From someone who doesn't know the "real" America and can only judge from the movies,videos and TV shows that are exported the belief is that is a reflection of main stream American culture, values and beliefs.

What is happening broken down to it's simplest form is many people not living in the USA say " If this is how America is, we don't want it". Instead of saying, "well actually that's not how it is, the realitity is .... , we understand your point, because we wouldn't want it like that either" , the response usually is, "screw you, we'll do what ever we want and don't tell us how to live in American, or tell us what we can do outside of America either. We know best and we think it would be best if you all lived like us" .

The truth is, the world would be, probably, a better place if everyone did live as life is in the REAL America, but what is exported as the American dream lifestyle, isn't how you live and IMHO it isn't how you want to live. The vision that is exported is a corruption of reality, but when that vision is questioned, America becomes very defensive, assuming it is an attack on the way you live. If you (plural) could open your ears and minds to what is being said to you, you'd realise the points being raised do have some validity. Many of Islam's fears about America are based on a fiction woven by the American media, with some understanding and a lot of explanation most of those fears would disapear. If you/we can deal with the majority of those justified, but unfounded fears we could show moderate Islam that their greatest danger is not from the west, but from the extremists within their own religion we would be a great deal nearer to building an understanding and much closer to a sustainable PEACEFUL future for all of our children.

::applause::

Great post!
I am very nearly a right wing wacko myself. I very much want my children to have the convservative values that DW and I have. And striving for that is not a bad thing. Thinking that CERTAINLY isn't a bad thing. But LEGISLATING is is going too far when taken to an extreme degree.

Wanting a conservative country is not extremist. We agree there. Pushing for legislation to make common sense conservative laws is not extreme. But were we to overthrow the government and form the Radical Fundamental Christian States of America (RFCSA), THAT would make us wackos. Big time wackos.

I'm not saying that observations themselves are invalid because of extremity. But, as an example...
If it is Muslim law that a woman must be clothed from head to toe in black, and you believe in that law, I can't argue with your religious beliefs. But if you make a law rewuiring that all women in your country do as such or they will be beaten bloody, that is wacko behavior.
Myself, I'd rather see Britney Spears dressed from head to toe, but I'd be a wacko for suggesting we beat her if she refuses to do so.

I think you were mistaking me as saying that wanting different ideals is extreme. My definition of extreme is much more strict than that. I think we were agreeing all along there.

On to the media...
I'd like to dress the media from head to toe. I can't say enough bad things about the media, especially show-biz.

Let's have some words about misconceptions:
1. I know that Ireland isn't full of drunken slobs eating potatos.
2. I know that not all Muslims are terrorists.
3. I know that not everyone in France is smelly and snobbish.
4. I know that not all Englishmen are debonair and sophisticated.
5. I know that not all Swedes are blond hair/blue eyed.
6. I know that not all Germans drink lots of beer and wear lederhosen.

And if I did believe any of the above were true, I'd be an ignorant uninformed person. Anyone who thinks Americans are like those people presented on TV are also ignorant and uninformed. If Muslims think that is what America is, they are ignorant of us. They need to educate themsleves on the world around them. But I think the problem is, that is what the Muslim leadership WANTS their people to think about us, to keep the fire stoked nice and hot. To make us look so Godless and immoral. Further, in Muslim-ruled countries, I don't think the capacity exists for Muslims to correctly educate themselves on the "Real America".

It's a real shame. Most Moral Americans and Muslims want the same things. We want peace. We want morality. We want safe streets, clean parks, running water. Maybe even the Disney Channel. Any American with a little intelligence recognizes this. Many Muslims don't understand this because they are not allowed to see us any differently than MTV portrays us. And if all I knew about America is what MTV shows, I would think the USA was Satan's Playground and a den of damnation. That is neither fair to us, nor fair to them.
If Muslims CHOOSE not to educate themsleves, then they have only themsleves to blame. If they are not ALLOOWED to educate themselves, then it is their governments faults. Which brings me back to how glad I am that we freed Iraq from those chains so they can make those choices now and REALLY have a voice and independent thought.

 

[DVC Ian]

This is a huge thread

I am a Democrat. I've been one all my life. I guess I followed in my Mom's footsteps. But as I've gotten older I've found that more so than not, that's where most of my beliefs lie when it comes to politics. I've also found over the years that its next to impossible to make someone change to your way of thinking. Politics, like religion, is very personal.

Anyway,going back to the original thread question. No, I don't think being nice to "terrorists" is the right way to go.

 

[vernon]

If Muslims think that is what America is, they are ignorant of us. They need to educate themsleves on the world around them. But I think the problem is, that is what the Muslim leadership WANTS their people to think about us, to keep the fire stoked nice and hot. To make us look so Godless and immoral. Further, in Muslim-ruled countries, I don't think the capacity exists for Muslims to correctly educate themselves on the "Real America".

To a degree you're correct, to a large degree they are ignorant of you. Some of that is their own fault (as individuals) maybe 25% , a lot of it is some of their governments' faults maybe 55% and some of it is the fault of "Corporate America" and the American Media maybe 20%.
IMHO it's a little bit rich (and arrogant) to just stand there and say "It's not my fault you don't understand me, you'd better try harder, because I'm not changing the way I do things, and I don't think you're worthy of me taking my time to help you". If America had made even some effort in this area I would be more understanding of the mentality that Islam needs to get it's act together, but until America starts making some effort to make itself correctly understood, then the fault is shared ( granted not equally shared).

If we value the future world we plan to leave to our children, I thnk we owe it to our children (not the muslims) to make sure we do all we can to ensure they inherit a world in which it is safe for them to bring up their own children. We should do everything WE CAN to bring that about. If someone doesn't understand you, the duty to help that understanding doesn't just fall on the person listening, there is a responsibility to the person talking to try and put things in a way to help the listener to understand correctly. IMHO it's a bit like someone who can use sign language shouting at a deaf person over and over again expecting them to lip read, it's not working, try something else, because you can!! . America has the ability to communicate much better than it is doing, why not do so? Why expect the "listener" to do all the work when you could help them by taking a responsibility to do things in such a way that makes it easier for them.

The prize of success is too great not to put in our share of the effort. We should do our best to make it easier for them to understand us, not more difficult JMHO. If we can be seen to be trying to deal with our 20% of the problem, I think you'd see a decent improvement in the 80% of the fault that lies elsewhere.

 

[treesinger]

Originally posted by vernon
To a degree you're correct, to a large degree they are ignorant of you. Some of that is their own fault (as individuals) maybe 25% , a lot of it is some of their governments' faults maybe 55% and some of it is the fault of "Corporate America" and the American Media maybe 20%.
IMHO it's a little bit rich (and arrogant) to just stand there and say "It's not my fault you don't understand me, you'd better try harder, because I'm not changing the way I do things, and I don't think you're worthy of me taking my time to help you". If America had made even some effort in this area I would be more understanding of the mentality that Islam needs to get it's act together, but until America starts making some effort to make itself correctly understood, then the fault is shared ( granted not equally shared).

If we value the future world we plan to leave to our children, I thnk we owe it to our children (not the muslims) to make sure we do all we can to ensure they inherit a world in which it is safe for them to bring up their own children. We should do everything WE CAN to bring that about. If someone doesn't understand you, the duty to help that understanding doesn't just fall on the person listening, there is a responsibility to the person talking to try and put things in a way to help the listener to understand correctly. IMHO it's a bit like someone who can use sign language shouting at a deaf person over and over again expecting them to lip read, it's not working, try something else, because you can!! . America has the ability to communicate much better than it is doing, why not do so? Why expect the "listener" to do all the work when you could help them by taking a responsibility to do things in such a way that makes it easier for them.

The prize of success is too great not to put in our share of the effort. We should do our best to make it easier for them to understand us, not more difficult JMHO. If we can be seen to be trying to deal with our 20% of the problem, I think you'd see a decent improvement in the 80% of the fault that lies elsewhere.

Again, fair point. I inadvertently skipped it. The media is DEFINITELY responsible in its own right. But media is controlled by the few and the rich. How do we as conscientious Americans stop the to take responsibilty for our 20%. I don't see a solution.
I think WE are as much victims of the media (as subjects of the perpetuated misconceptions) as other cultures are (for believing the false representations).

All I can do is set a good example as a person and raise my children to want the same.

 

[WDWHound]

One thing people forget is that the stated goal of Bin Ladin and Al Qaeda is "to return the golden age of Islam to the earth". Not just the Middle East, but the entire world, and they have stated that they plan to start with Europe. They are beginning their version of the Crusades (and we all know what a great idea that was).

This is not about getting them to under us, its about religious fanaticism and those who are using Islam to obtain power. The leaders of these movements are not interested in understanding us. Look at what just happened to the French. They are not part of the War in Iraq, in fact they protested it loudly, however, they recently passed a law that does not allow religious symbols to be warn in schools. Now, I believe this was a bad law, but a reasonable response would be to protest the law peacefully. Instead, 2 French reporters were recently taken hostage and their Islamic Terrorist captors are threatening to kill them if the law is not repealed. Al Qaeda has also promised more terroist acts unless this law is repealed.

Funny, they say they have the right to make their own laws regarding religion in their own country, but they seem to be unwilling to extexd that right to the rest of the world. Does this sound like a group that is seeking understanding? The US is accused of meddling in the Middle East, but no one is accusing the Terrorists of meddling in French affairs.

Nothing any country can do will make the terrorists happy, because if the terrorists lose their reason to fight, the people leading them lose their power base. They will ALWAYS find a reason to pursue their goal of spreading Islam thru out the earth. One of the earliest posts on this thread showed that they are not interested in being reasonable. As was said early on on this thread, their stated conditions for ending the war is for us to leave the Middle East (extreme, but might be viewed as reasonable by many) and for the US to convert to Islam (not a chance and they know it). They laid down impossible conditions because they are interested in anything but destroying us.

I wish it were not true, but when face with groups like this,but our only option is to wipe them out. Is the war in Iraq the best way to do this? That is a debatable point, but one way or another these groups must be destoroyed and the abuse of Isalm as a tool for the power grabbers must end.

 

[LisaSt]

No matter how much time and energy is put into bringing democracy to the Muslim wold there are to many people in those countries that still believe that the Muslim way is the only way why should we try to tell them they are wrong simply because we do not agree with this. I find it very difficult to believe that this war was just becaue Bush wanted to set Iraq free he wanted to finnish what his faterh started so many years ago and in a small part it is for the oil. I can honestly say I do not for one minute think it is to try to bring democracy to a country that will never embrace or accept it. When it fails the US can say well we went in and gave it a try and in the end they will still have gotten what they wanted out of it or what Bush wanted out of it. I don't mean to step on any toes with saying this but come on people be realistic do you honestly think what is going on over there is truly better for the people over there. I don't think it is and after everyone leaves and they try to form a democratic government somone will kill the leader of the democratic party and put in place another muslim ruler and the cycle will start all over again. There is no end to this and it will rear it's head again wether it be in 2 years or 20 years it will start again.

 

[minniepumpernickel]

Hound says, "Our only option is to wipe out groups like this"

Eradicating a whole group of people or trying to wipe out a whole population would only make the problem worse. Targeting the leaders and changing the ideaology would work better.