Why They Hate Us? The Roots of Islamic Rage - And What We Can Do About It

prontospyder

Diamond Member
Oct 9, 1999
6,262
0
0
Very interesting read (but kinda long) for anyone who wants to understand why millions of Arabs are anti-USA. Also offers some good solutions to solve this problem.

Newsweek

Some quotes:

<<If envy were the cause of terrorism, Beverly Hills, Fifth Avenue and Mayfair would have become morgues long ago. There is something stronger at work here than deprivation and jealousy. Something that can move men to kill but also to die.>>

<<In fact, Bernard Lewis, the pre-eminent historian of Islam, has argued that for much of history religious minorities did better under Muslim rulers than they did under Christian ones. >>

<<By the late 1980s, while the rest of the world was watching old regimes from Moscow to Prague to Seoul to Johannesburg crack, the Arabs were stuck with their aging dictators and corrupt kings. Regimes that might have seemed promising in the 1960s were now exposed as tired, corrupt kleptocracies, deeply unpopular and thoroughly illegitimate. One has to add that many of them are close American allies. >>

<<The fact that Islam is a highly egalitarian religion for the most part has also proved an empowering call for people who felt powerless. At the same time it means that no Muslim really has the authority to question whether someone who claims to be a proper Muslim is one. The fundamentalists, from Sayyid Qutub on, have jumped into that the void. They ask whether people are ?good Muslims.? It is a question that has terrified the Muslim world. And here we come to the failure not simply of governments but intellectual and social elites. Moderate Muslims are loath to criticize or debunk the fanaticism of the fundamentalists. Like the moderates in Northern Ireland, they are scared of what would happen to them if they speak their mind. >>

<<The biggest Devil?s bargain has been made by the moderate monarchies of the Persian Gulf, particularly Saudi Arabia. The Saudi regime has played a dangerous game. It deflects attention from its shoddy record at home by funding religious schools (madrasas) and centers that spread a rigid, puritanical brand of Islam?Wahhabism. In the past 30 years Saudi-funded schools have churned out tens of thousands of half-educated, fanatical Muslims who view the modern world and non-Muslims with great suspicion. America in this world view is almost always evil.>>

<<<<The biggest Devil?s bargain has been made by the moderate monarchies of the Persian Gulf, particularly Saudi Arabia. The Saudi regime has played a dangerous game. It deflects attention from its shoddy record at home by funding religious schools (madrasas) and centers that spread a rigid, puritanical brand of Islam?Wahhabism. In the past 30 years Saudi-funded schools have churned out tens of thousands of half-educated, fanatical Muslims who view the modern world and non-Muslims with great suspicion. America in this world view is almost always evil.>>

<<Yet carelessness is not enough to explain Arab rage. After all, if concern for the Palestinians is at the heart of the problem, why have their Arab brethren done nothing for them? (They cannot resettle in any Arab nation but Jordan, and the aid they receive from the gulf states is minuscule.) Israel treats its 1 million Arabs as second-class citizens, a disgrace on its democracy. And yet the tragedy of the Arab world is that Israel accords them more political rights and dignities than most Arab nations give to their own people. Why is the focus of Arab anger on Israel and not those regimes? >>

<<First, we have to help moderate Arab states, but on the condition that they embrace moderation. >>

<<In this case, stable political development is the key to reducing our single greatest security threat. We have no option but to get back into the nation-building business.>>

<<But more broadly, we must persuade Arab moderates to make the case to their people that Islam is compatible with modern society, that it does allow women to work, that it encourages education and that it has welcomed people of other faiths and creeds>>

looks like we'll have to do a lot of handholding....to get that part of the world on track.
 

DioCassius

Senior member
Aug 30, 2000
352
0
0
One thing mentioned in the article that surprised me was how wide-spread the support for Palestinian suicide bombers is. I totally understand why Arabs in the region support Palestinians, but I thought the suicide bombers were more fringe than this article makes them sound.
 

tcsenter

Lifer
Sep 7, 2001
18,954
577
126


<< wartime lies >>

lol! This trash rehashes the same old debunked crap we were treated to just after the Gulf War, about there being no "surgical" strikes, Patriots were unsuccessful, etc. All have been sufficiently debunked. Lots of people attempting to manipulate this situation for their own political reasons, beware these "alternet" type sources who are usually socialist in nature and are opposed to anything the United States does if it doesn't jive with their bankrupt far left ideology.
 

burnedout

Diamond Member
Oct 12, 1999
6,249
2
0
The Newsweek article is very good. Saw an interview with the author on CNN. He seemed objective in his reasoning of the situation.
 

prontospyder

Diamond Member
Oct 9, 1999
6,262
0
0
Yep...the author, who is an Islamic Indian who has lived in the US for 25 years, brought out the harsh realities without being offending.
 

Stark

Diamond Member
Jun 16, 2000
7,735
0
0
My half-serious solution:

Level Iraq. Build a big military base. Move our troops out of Saudi Arabia.

The militant muslims may still hate us, but at least we won't be on their "holy" soil.
 

burnedout

Diamond Member
Oct 12, 1999
6,249
2
0
Yep...the author, who is an Islamic Indian who has lived in the US for 25 years, brought out the harsh realities without being offending.

What impressed me the most about him was his patriotic slant during the interview. His words weren't "the United States must" but "We must".

A very sharp, articulate gentleman.
 

syf3r

Senior member
Oct 15, 1999
673
0
0


<<

<< wartime lies >>

lol! This trash rehashes the same old debunked crap we were treated to just after the Gulf War
>>



actually, that article (the second one) is there mainly for the last section, which urges people not to accept everything they hear on the news... most appropriately here is the conclusion drawn by the media that the bin laden videotape essentially was an acknowledgment by bin laden that "he did it" when in fact, at no time in that video, did bin laden say "i did it." all he said was that he praised those who did, and he spoke at times on their behalf... that does not mean he said he did it.

syf3r.

 

prontospyder

Diamond Member
Oct 9, 1999
6,262
0
0
<<Level Iraq. Build a big military base.>>

Well, maybe we can just help the resistance rebels within Iraq to overthrow Saddam. From the article, I read that Iraq was one of the most modern, foward-looking Arab countries before that madman took over.
 

ToBeMe

Diamond Member
Jun 21, 2000
5,711
0
0


<< all he said was that he praised those who did, and he spoke at times on their behalf... that does not mean he said he did it. >>


Also doesn't mean he wasn't implying that he did it now is it????;) Think about it........why would he come out straight forward and admitt it??? he'd lose even most support he has now if he did that! He has to sound defiant yet not admitt to anything in order to continue and possibly gain support!;)
 

syf3r

Senior member
Oct 15, 1999
673
0
0
tobeme:

you seem to think the support bin laden has throughout the middle-east is very weak... it isn't as weak as the media makes it out to be. he has a lot of support. take a look at some of the other news venues and see for yourself. just because cnn, msnbc, and foxnews say one thing, it doesn't make it so.
(i'm out for the day).

syf3r.
 

tcsenter

Lifer
Sep 7, 2001
18,954
577
126


<< actually, that article (the second one) is there mainly for the last section, which urges people not to accept everything they hear on the news. >>

And I agree that people shouldn't believe everything they see and hear. But, to prove that by writing an article which itself is quite a marvel of half-truths, deliberate distortions, false premises and flawed logic isn't exactly what I would call a "good" way to bring people's attention to the media's accuracy problem.

<< .. most appropriately here is the conclusion drawn by the media that the bin laden videotape essentially was an acknowledgment by bin laden that "he did it" when in fact, at no time in that video, did bin laden say "i did it." all he said was that he praised those who did, and he spoke at times on their behalf... that does not mean he said he did it. >>

Funny, we must be watching different networks because at no time have I seen the media suggest or claim that Bin Laden confessed matter-of-factly to having a direct role in any of the attacks. He HAS, however, implied some level of involvment in several bombing dating back to 1998.

If I come to my own conclusion that Bin Laden was directly involved, that is my own conclusion.
 

prontospyder

Diamond Member
Oct 9, 1999
6,262
0
0
<<you seem to think the support bin laden has throughout the middle-east is very weak... it isn't as weak as the media makes it out to be. he has a lot of support. >>

The Newsweek article states that he has a lot of supporters/sympatizers....in the millions.
 

ToBeMe

Diamond Member
Jun 21, 2000
5,711
0
0


<< you seem to think the support bin laden has throughout the middle-east is very weak... it isn't as weak as the media makes it out to be. he has a lot of support. take a look at some of the other news venues and see for yourself. just because cnn, msnbc, and foxnews say one thing, it doesn't make it so. >>

LOL! Sorry dude.....I get news channels from damned near everywhere and surf through them constantly.........if you can't see the reasoning in him not admitting it even when other Muslim nations agree the evidence provided is sufficient I'm sorry.......BTW....I never said his support was weak, I said he could not come out and admitt it because he is an extremist trying to garner support from moderates in the area and and admission would make that much more difficult!;)
 

TheDingo

Senior member
Sep 10, 2001
552
0
0
I could really care less if these people hate us, but it's when they start attacking us that I get pissed. The fact of the matter is, we can't go over there and say "please like us". We need to topple their hateful government, replace it with a level headed one, and work on the future.
 

Helznicht

Senior member
May 8, 2001
617
0
0
First artice is great, lots of facts without any spin.


The others, ehhh.


The point that we are hated because we support Saudi Arabia is silly. First off, the US does not have the responsibility to judge what form of Islam is good, bad, oppresive. Thats the goverment of that perticular countries responsibility. The fact is, Saudi has control of its people and is responsible for them. Our presence in Saudi has not been attacked by the saudi people. The Saudi Goverment doesnt allow that militant crap, so you have a stable nation. If the Saudi Goverment is responsible for setting up militant extremist schools elsewhere in the Middle East, the countries that they reside in should step in. Moderate
goverments can be worse. Take Indonesia for instance, a VERY moderate goverment with a very militant/extremist problem right now.

Hunger in Iraq. The truth is the citizens of Iraq are no worse than they were during the 2 years before Kuwait because Saddam was building up the military, the only difference now is we now send more Aid.

Islamic Militants, what can I say. If 500,000 militant christans amased on Mexicos border, Threatening to attack and drive them from our continent, our goverment would opress them too.

The first step to peace is showing these middle east countries that they ARE responsible for the actions of thier people.

You dont see any private schools in the US teaching children that violence against this group or that group is the solution to thier problems. Why? Because our Goverment close that school up quick. Other goverments should do the same.

 

Texmaster

Banned
Jun 5, 2001
5,445
0
0
Its a good article but what it fails to pick up on is the fact that many Muslims see the West as Christian only, despite what the population really is, that is how they see us. The hatred stems back to the time of the Crusades which are still mentioned in many Muslim hate speeches.

They see the West as ending their reign of power in the world going back before World War I.

People need to recognize that this is as well is part of where their hatred is coming from.
 

BiggieC

Senior member
Apr 6, 2000
385
0
0
At this point in history, fanatical Islam is the most dangerous religion to the peace of the world. Not only do many of them hate, but they choose to act on that hate. Several Muslims in all parts of the world have denounced the US for what they are doing. From the middle east to southeast Asia, Muslims see any attack on other Muslims as wrong. I see this view as being very stupid. I mean, what shoudl we do, let Muslims do or kill whoever they want and then not do anything simply becaus they are Muslims? I know not all Muslims think this way, But i think you would be surprised at teh number that do.
 

tcsenter

Lifer
Sep 7, 2001
18,954
577
126


<< They see the West as ending their reign of power in the world going back before World War I. >>

EXACTLY! At least on that half of the world. They are jealous that western democracies (infidels) rule the current world stage and not their puritanical form of Islam. Even moderate Islamic states are attacked by these zealots, referring to them as "so-called Muslims". Militant Islam lost to the west because liberal democracies appeal to people FAR more than what puritanical Islam has to offer. They literally are insane with jealousy and resentment for that.

It is no different than communists who are bitter and full of hate for western ideals because their bankrupt ideology turned-out to be a huge failure. We actually see this phenomena in at least one major newspaper everday, usually in the editorial section. Bitter leftists who refuse to admit their system was terribly flawed literally blame western ideals for communism's failure. Its projecting bitterness and frustration onto an external target so you don't have to admit that your system is a failure because its WRONG.

It would be like if you and I played a game of chess, and you kicked my butt because you were a better than me, and I spent the next 20 years of my life bitter, fuming, and resentful of you because you were better. I might even convince myself that you somehow cheated, or more appropriately to this situation, that the only reason you won is because your family was more affluent than my family, and therefore you had better opportunities and advantages than I. Your upscale school had a chess team, and my school had none of that because I lived in a poor neighborhood. So, you're really not "better" than me in chess, its just that I was at an unfair disadvantage because your father was a "greedy" and unscruplous businessman, while my father was an "honest" working man who wouldn't cheat anyone to make a buck - like your father.

See how jealousy can get to a point where bitterness and resentment consumes the way you perceive the world? I hear and see this sort of mentality every day. Your family is 'wealthy' because your father's a crook, and my family is 'poor' because my father's an honest working man. I can only think to myself, 'Well, keep telling yourself that! BTW, your dad out of jail yet?'

This form of puritanical Islamic ideology is comparable in every way to the Nazi's. It is my belief what we are witnessing the rise of another Nazi-type movement; a fanatical movement based on puritanical religious ideology instead of nationalism or racial supremecy. The Nazi's believed the "Aryan race" was destined to rule the world, and no amount of murder or human depravity was "too much" in their quest to upset the then-current world balance in order to give "rise" to the Aryan's "rightful" place at world's throne. You could replace "Nazi" with "Islamic fanatics" and "Aryan race" with "Muslim" in the Nazi's doctrine, and it would mirror the sentiment of these fanatical Islamic movements.

This bit about Israel and U.S. "defiling Muslim land" simply because we're on it is an obfuscation, a DELIBERATE obfuscation, of the true underlying motives behind this fanatical movement. They use these "side-issues" to draw sympathizers, just like the Nazi's exploited long-standing stereotypes and greivances people had about Jews (they're greedy, they will swindle you in business, they have horns under they're hats and tails under their coats, they dress funny, they talk funny, they're talking about you when they speak in that funny language, etc).

To give any legitimacy to the notion that this movement is the result of U.S. policies in the Middle East is akin to claiming the Jews wouldn't have been targeted by Nazi's had they not been so greedy or dressed funny. These are side-issues that have nothing whatsoever to do with the "core" motivations and ideology of fanatical Islamic groups.

 

prontospyder

Diamond Member
Oct 9, 1999
6,262
0
0
<<The first step to peace is showing these middle east countries that they ARE responsible for the actions of thier people.>>

I agree....they gotta start taking care of their citizens and also convince them that Islam is not a religion of hate. Here's a disturbing quote:



<< On that score, Islam had little competition. The Arab world is a political desert with no real political parties, no free press, few pathways for dissent. As a result, the mosque turned into the place to discuss politics. And fundamentalist organizations have done more than talk. From the Muslim Brotherhood to Hamas to Hizbullah, they actively provide social services, medical assistance, counseling and temporary housing. For those who treasure civil society, it is disturbing to see that in the Middle East these illiberal groups are civil society.

I asked Sheri Berman, a scholar at Princeton who studies the rise of fascist parties in Europe, whether she saw any parallels. ?Fascists were often very effective at providing social services,? she pointed out. ?When the state or political parties fail to provide a sense of legitimacy or purpose or basic services, other organizations have often been able to step into the void. In Islamic countries there is a ready-made source of legitimacy in the religion. So it?s not surprising that this is the foundation on which these groups have flourished. The particular form?Islamic fundamentalism?is specific to this region, but the basic dynamic is similar to the rise of Nazism, fascism and even populism in the United States.?
>>