Sunday 26 November 2006

Fighting terror with... terror?

See earlier post on US foreign policy. (See later in this post for a list of some of the reasons America is so hated, especially by those in the Middle East.)

The "War on Terrorism" is not a real war*, it is a series of offenses — military and otherwise — launched by the United States and its participating allies following the 11 September 2001 terror attacks on the US. This "war" is or should be targeting the fairly fragmented extremist movements throughout the world, whose followers are like a [more] violent form of America's religious fundamentalists. I would think the US government would be able to understand fundamentalist Islam better than it does, considering the tens of millions of fundamentalist Christians (religious right and evangelicals, et al) residing in the United States. Alas, this is not the case.

These Islamic extremist movements do not target the United States and others because of their/our 'freedom', as has been heavily rhetoricized by the George W. Bush administration (and some by British PM Tony Blair), but because a multitude of actions and policies that anyone who studied up realistic sociology and history may grasp (i.e. not most of the Neoconservative movement).

Just some of those things causing the easy recruitment and support to fight against the "western menace" include:

  • the discrimination America** has shown or seems to have shown (in the eyes of the 'repressed') towards Muslims, partly due to a lack of understanding (poor public education) by many;
  • American — and overall western — foreign policy in, but not limited to, the Middle East, specifically the presence of US troops in Saudi Arabia and the pro-Israel stance that US foreign policy reflects, this stance is seen as an anti-Palestinian thus anti-Arab and anti-Muslim stance in such a delicate region on such a delicate topic (see here for my latest post on Israel);
  • a narrow view with an "us versus them" (black and white polar view) mentality shown by the US especially after 9/11 (11 Sep. 2001 terror attacks);
  • the notion that the United States, as the one standing superpower, has the right and privilege to police the world — even in defiance of international laws, etc.;
  • and, of course, Iraq, which practically speaks for itself (see my withdrawal plan here).

    When Israel attacks a village, like Biet Hanoun (in Gaza), and kills civilians or causes other direct anguish, those in Gaza or elsewhere who may have sympathized or even really liked Israel are automatically targets of extremist groups, especially if they are also united by religion. That is, if such people are not recruited by extremists — or at least support anti-Israel causes — they may even become core extremists themselves. That is the fire paradox at work: you breed terrorism in your attempts to fight it.^

    Vengeance is the ultimate recruitment tool, not fear of freedom.

    *: See Wikipedia, BBC News, Amnesty International, and others (Google search).
    **: I am generalizing, something I do not like to do too much, because there is no other way to put it).
    ^: More on this 'fire paradox' (esp. in the Mid East in re to terrorism) in an upcoming post.


    While on vacation this long weekend (Thanksgiving weekend in the US), I wrote down in a little journal — several times — ideas I had in my head. I often do this. An established opinion, or just a random musing, may run through my head and, if I can find somewhere to write my thoughts down, I record this thought for later use. Sometimes it gets lost if I am not able to write it down; sometimes I am able to record the thought but it never gets used; sometimes I make a record of the thought and later use it (e.g. for a blog post). The point of this explanation of my thought processes is that the opinions expressed above were entirely manufactured in a seemingly random fashion as I woke up the other day, were written down, typed up (after translating my odd handwriting, which looks like shorthand plus vowels, the same I use for note-taking), and posted.

    Technorati technorati tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
    In Perspective

  • 2 comments:

    Anonymous said...

    There is a need to address violent resistance through all means necessary - not just militarily. We need to look at economic factors, social factors, political factors and most importantly, the role the US has played in deposing democratically-elected governments when they don't agree.

    clearthought said...

    I agree, Wil. The US should not only get out of its Cold War-like mindset but also realize and accept alternatives to aggression or the icing of international relationships.