|
Already gave you my answer, which tied in well with your 5 flawed points.
You on the other hand haven't replied to something from a couple of days ago so I might as well copy & paste my points here:
It's simple really. It's supposed to show you that rather then criticizing the US, maybe you should step back a minute and look at whats been happening.
You say the US enforces terror on the region. Look at how many of the Middle East's own leaders have done far worse, sometimes b/c they've been fighting a lot of their homegrown terrorist organizations.
It's not b/c of Israel or the US that many of these countries are fucked up. It's b/c they've had leaders who were too hungry for power, who collaborated with the Soviets, and who ignored their own people. The thing is, these Middle East leaders started bigger thhen life cult of personalities for themselves to ensure that everyone but them would be responsible for problems.
Again, it's much easier to blame the super rich United States, or a small Jewish state, for your woes.
That is the message I'm trying to get across here.
I think George W Bush is a clown, and its sad we dont have Gore or Kerry as our presidents. Still, I'll take him anyday over someone like Assad, who has next to no political experience (Bush was "at least" governor of Texas), or the way Assad treats Lebanon.
The connection to Bin Laden is that Osama as that fuckin bastard of all bastards will critize the US all day but not so much the rulers of the Middle East.
That's the connection and it's an obvious one.
As for Sadam, we never would have even supported him in the 80s if it wasnt for the fact that Iran took our embassy hostage. Carter, a pretty weak president, actually wanted to have formal relations with the Revolutionary Guards (like you do). However the Shah was sick with cancer and wanted to fly to America since we have some of the best hospitals in the world (not so terrible now, are we?). When his visa was granted, the barbaric Revolutionary Guards stormed the embassy, and took our people hostage. For over a year. Shame on you for saying they deserved it. Even if they were gathering information again the Revolutionaries they didnt deserve it
Sadam's profile in the Middle East was pretty favorable when he was fighting Iran - most Arabs weren't rooting for the Iranians.
When Sadam invaded Kuwait all that changed. We, the United States, moreso then any other country, stepped in to help Kuwait and Saudi Arabia. while the people of Kuwait know we had economical (read oil) interests to help them, they were grateful nontheless for our help.
When we invaded Iraq the second time part of the reason was to keep an eye on Iran, and to take Sadam down once and for all. The thing is, at the time Iran was making progress towards the west and had a relatively moderate leader in office, Khatami (I think that's how you spell it).
Well, the Iranian people voted for more hardline fundamental conservatives back in office. These people spewed nothing but hateful rhetorics towards the West, rather then trying to prove to the West that they're not part of the axis of evil.
The suckers in Iran alienated the US more then ever, as well as France, the UK, and there's stronger resentment towards Iran from officials in Germany (who understand the situation much moreso then most ordinary citizens in Europe).
The countries that don't have a problem with Iran obtaining nuclear power are usually third world countries that depend on Iranian oil.
Here's some proof for ya that some countries in the Middle East DO ask for western intervention:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cedar_Revolution
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_September_in_Jordan
And you might want to read about incidents that arent b/c of the West:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hama_Massacre
Notice how Arafat was detested by both Assad, president of Syria, and by Nasser (president of Egypt). Notice how the king of Jordan repeatedly asked for American assistance, and even got Israel to do some of the dirty work for him.
There are loads of complicated problems in the Middle East that have little to do with the West.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hafez_al-Assad
Syria's was a very unstable country with lots coups until the early 70s. Notice how the Muslim Brotherhood tried to assasinate Assad on more then one occasion.
BTW, here's some information about the current president of Syria:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bashar_al-Assad
Here's my favorite part from there:
"Until he became President, Bashar's only formal political role was as the head of the Syrian Computer Society, which was mainly in charge of introducing the Internet to Syria in 2001"
They also dont bring up how hypocritical the Revolutionary Guards are in Iran. After all, during Iran's war with Iraq, you had arms deal between Israel and Iran.
It should be noted that prior to the revolution of 79, Iran was America's strongest ally in the Middle East. There were also direct flights betweeen Tehran and Tel Aviv. And what does Carter do? He decideds to act all innocent like Krypton and just hope for the best. The American public also didnt really care too much, especially after the situation in Vietnam. So Vietnam became communist, Iran became a fundamental regime, and thankfully Jimmy was ousted out of office.
Anyways, Iran's leaders talk shit about Israel 24/7 yet they accepted Israeli aid in the 80s. Of course Israel's reason to back Iran was b/c of how much Sadam was a threat at the time. Israel took care of Iraq's nuclear facility, to which most of the world is grateful to Israel.
|
reply is nothing more than speculation... I restated the argument, and allowed you to address each aspect of the model to which you now refuse. So much for gettin "shot down"... I'll give you one more chance..If you take it, I might actually have some respect for you and listen to what you have to say..
