Quote:
Originally Posted by cres
While those conclusions could be reached, the underlying reason for their efforts was/is to not be under imperial control from a far distant government.
Half-truth. The underlying reason for their efforts was/is to not be under ANY influence of western interest much less any government outside one of which that has strict Islamic law. Extremist are unable topple any Middle Eastern countries (i.e. Saudi Arabia) that has the support of US/Western interest, not with out some drastic shift in public opinion against US influence (i.e. the purchase of oil form Middle Easter countries specifically) in such countries. Why is this important? Extremist want to unite the Middle East under one government, one of which of strict Islamic Law that has zero influence from the west, whether economic or political.
Quote:
Which if you are an American should resonate with you. Your ancestors were traitorous terrorists, who partook in a war to free yourselves from the reign of a distant monarchical society. The 'founders' as you have canonized them, were not interested in bringing a fight, just for a fight sake. They were intent on militarily achieving what negotiation could not deliver.
As someone has already pointed out, stark difference between the two are prevalent in the comparisons. Once more, motives are different. We are talking about an insurgency, in the case of US action against Britain, to a "random" group of terrorist/extremist who feel they speak for the entire conglomerate of sovereign middle eastern countries.
(sorry for interjecting someone else comments into your post, but it fits so well)
Quote:
Those brown people are not stupid. They study history, both current and distant. So while you may look at your citation as the only acceptable one, it would behove you to look at other cause & effect reasons. They want to fight us, its the only reason they would attract us is assuming the conclusion.
I think you have underestimated my knowledge base on this issue. I pointed to the F.A.S report to counter your "chain mail" argument. While I understand the issue is much more complex, I think your understanding of the situation is quite limiting when you disputed my contempt for your "they just want us to go home" generalization.
Quote:
Originally Posted by krmont22
Small group of random terrorists speaks for all sovereign countries in the middle east itt.
No sovereign country in the middle east has decided to attack us for our policies in the middle east, except for Iran, indirectly. In case you are confused, Islamic Extremism is the culprit for majority of the violence in the middle eastern countries that has US troops. In other words, people who conform to the ideology of the "random terrorist" are the one carrying out the violence.
Are you of the opinion that sovereign nations are attacking the US military in order for us to vacate their land? If not, who is? Could it be extremist who follow the ideology of those "random" terrorist and not the voice of sovereign Middle Eastern countries?
Last edited by FleeingFish; 03-01-2012 at 12:40 AM.