[tw]

Originally Posted by lookout123

I have been hearing arguments for some time that the key to ending the conflict between western culture (us) and islamic extremists/terrorists/bombers/whatever (them) is that we must first understand what has caused them to do what they do. I have also heard that their beliefs and actions can be directly tied to poverty and lack of opportunity.

I agree we should try to understand what caused the movement, and do our best to create an immunization for the root. long term solution. I also believe we should attack and destroy the symptoms whereever we can find them now. short term fix.

This thread is predicated on assumptions that actually create the problem. For example (Point 1) we should identify and fix the reasons for the problems? After how many hundreds of years, if we don't understand the problem by now, then we are the problem.

The problem is found in a loosely organized Muslim Brotherhood. This 1400s organization continues into the twentieth century by murdering Sadat of Egypt, nearly toppling Asad of Syria, and threatening Saddam of Iraq. It has other faces such as terrorism in Chechnya. Now tell me how we are suddenly going to stop or fix what has been ongoing long before the United States even existed.

That assumption that we are going to fix the problem is part of the problem. But then more assumptions only make the problem worse. It was their problem. Why does the US have to fix things that are not US problems? The Muslim Brotherhood was a regional problem that would have remains a regional problem had we not decided to fix the region - impose democracy on those nations - remove a Saddam that was a diminishing threat even to his neighbors. A problem to be fixed by Egypt, Saudi Arabia, etc.; not the US. If we did as promised - rescue Kuwait and get out - then the Muslim Brotherhood would have nothing but antagonistic respect for the US. But the US lied. We did not leave. We therefore ensnarled ourselves into the quagmire.

We could have left. We could have left the region with Saddam in power - a diminishing threat that was only a regional problem. But somehow we have low intelligence, high testosterone leaders who always need to do things without any smoking gun reason. This mistake is why we are expected to read and learn from the Pentagon Papers; learn history so we don't make the same mistakes. This is why intelligent people routinely mock those whose only reasoning is sound bytes - ie Rush Limbaugh and George Jr.

Having followed leaders with many sound bytes and no intelligence, we are targets of the Muslim Brotherhood. Just a second reason that assumptions in this thread are really a reason for Islamic based terrorism. We insisted on fixing the region without even understanding the problem; instead of letting them fix their own region (Point 1). And then we lied about what our intentions were. We stayed when we said we would leave (Point 2). We stayed using some nonsensical reasoning that we are god's people and therefore could only do good? That we will fix things by imposing democracy? We even lie to ourselves!

A third assumption is its all about Al Qaeda. That's playing propaganda games to avoid the issue. It plays right into the hands of Muslim Brotherhood. Classic guerilla warfare tactics. Get us to attack a ghost enemy. It’s the Muslim Brotherhood. Al Qaeda was only one dandelion in a grassy field full of dandelions. If we are not going to be honest about whom we have antagonized, then we are right back in the Viet Nam syndrome all over again. Point 3 - Lookout123 has even assumed an enemy that does not physically exist as he has defined it. More reasons why his assumptions are the problem.

There is no master arch enemy called Al Qaeda. Calling Musab al-Zarquawi a member of Al Qaeda is to brainwash Americans into a concept they can better understand - an evil empire. That's why the Muslim Brotherhood survived so long. It is not a monolithic enemy in the sense that Lookout123's assumptions imply.

A fourth false assumption was to assume Saddam and Muslim Brotherhood are same. Or that they were all enemies of their people. Or that Saddam was a problem that needed fixing. We have created a perfect training ground for terrorism - Iraq. We destroyed a force that was keeping the Muslim Brotherhood in check. And now we have made it easy for these Islamic fundamentalists to not only train, but also recruit. We never first learned what the real threat was - instead inventing myths about weapons of mass destruction. We lied to ourselves - that is 70% of those reading this post. Muslim Brotherhood was never (in modern history) the growing threat that it is today. Every day the US stays in Iraq only provides the Muslim Brotherhood with more troops. Why? We even lies about what were threats to America.

So we declare victory at hand because we have killed more 'terrorists' this year than last. Vietnam all over again; where it was our own assumptions that created the problem. We repeatedly violate principles of warfare that were even well understood and written in 500 BC. How in hell do we ever expect a victory when we even deny basic concepts of war? Amb. Bremmer (who was given the Freedom Metal for making things worse) being a classic example of the Ugly American.

Some many years ago in a very contentious discussion with MaggieL, I was strongly forthright about the concept. You better damn well have a smoking gun before unilaterally attacking another nation. A point so obvious that the concept is better proven than god. Without a smoking gun, then no strategic objective can exist. Without a strategic objective, then no exit strategy and no goal to win. We have that in Iraq because no smoking gun existed. George Jr has no strategic objective other than to fix the region according to American assumptions - impose democracy.

We had no smoking gun. Therefore we have no strategic objective. All this while, we are only making more dandelions and providing those dandelions with a field to train and with anger to make them dangerous. And so we have a fifth assumption that creates more misunderstanding of a US / Islam conflict (which even our best friends the Saudis tried to warn us about). Fifth assumption - we are going to fix their society. Bull. Only they can murder one another in enough numbers to eventually want to fix their society. That is the history of democracy. Democracy or other stable government cannot be imposed. It must be earned.

Does the word "meddling" better summarize the real problem?

The assumptions posted and implied by Lookout123 are really the problem. It will only get worse until we confront the assumptions and myths - such as this monolithic enemy called Al Qaeda. Every week in Iraq means we will create more dandelions that become a new branch of the Muslim Brotherhood. Not a nice picture. Meanwhile, remember this date I constantly cite: when the world changed- 1 Aug 1990.