Questions for those willing to respond:

[King of the Americas]

"The anti-American sentiments among those living in the Middle East are due mainly to which of these two options in YOUR opinion":

A.) Our unlimited support for Israel.
B.) Our Freedom.

---

"In Saudia Arabia, current U.S. Military efforts strive to protect which prinicple the most, in your opinion":

A.) Instituting a Democratic government for the common people of Saudia Arabia
B.) Protecting the ruling Monarcy for our own economic purposes

C.) King of the Americas

[Titanpoint]

(D) Franko and Jedi Knight

[Mr. Skinny]

I'll respond by saying that, IMHO, this thread should have been started in Politics and Current Events forum.

Continue.

[King of the Americas]

I just want to offer a simple poll, to see whether or not JREF's agree with Bush as to "why they hate us".

Were my questions and answers unacceptable?

[sir drinks-a-lot]

You sould have at least included a "C) Other" option to avoid the false dilemna.

I think it is a little bit of both A and B, but the main reason is that in their view we live in sin.

[Segnosaur]

Originally posted by King of the Americas
"The anti-American sentiments among those living in the Middle East are due mainly to":

A.) Our unlimited support for Israel.
B.) Our Freedom.

I would say B. Of course, the reason why the U.S. has so much support for Israel is that Israel is a democracy. (Were they not, the U.S. might support them but not to the same degree.)

Originally posted by King of the Americas

"In Saudia Arabia, current U.S. Military efforts strive to protect which prinicple":

A.) Instituting a Democratic government for the common people of Saudia Arabia
B.) Protecting the ruling Monarcy for our own economic purposes
Here, I'd have to say C) None of the above. Its done under the idea that stability in the area is better than chaos.

[King of the Americas]

...I DID use the term "mainly", in the first question.

&

I think it is clear that we are IN Saudia Arabia for OUR economic purposes, and NOT for the 'stability of the region', since our presence there causes much of the INstability...

[sir drinks-a-lot]

Originally posted by King of the Americas
...I DID use the term "mainly", in the first question.


It is still a false dilemna. The main reason could be neither A nor B.

[King of the Americas]

AMENDED Question(s).

Better, now?

[AlH]

Originally posted by King of the Americas
"The anti-American sentiments among those living in the Middle East are due mainly to":

A.) Our unlimited support for Israel.
B.) Our Freedom.

---

"In Saudia Arabia, current U.S. Military efforts strive to protect which prinicple":

A.) Instituting a Democratic government for the common people of Saudia Arabia
B.) Protecting the ruling Monarcy for our own economic purposes

Poor set of choices available, should at least give C.) Other for both.

For the first question, you are assuming that the average person in Pakistan, or Saudi Arabia or Iran, Palestine, Jordan, Egypt, Nigeria, etc has a 100% correct view and understanding of world politics and life in the United States, discounting the remote possibility that due to government or religious propaganda or just plan lack of interest or education or availability of information, they may have a distorted or incorrect assessment happenings or causes and effects in the world. After all, there are some posters who claim that people here in the US are hopelessly unaware of the "real" happenings in the world. A.) isn't even close, we haven't given the Israelis a fully stocked carrier group yet so it would be better worded along the lines

A.) Billion dollar military aid granted to Israel annually, with no equivalent counterpart offered to Arab countries.

For the second question, there are also other possibilities, such as a plain 'ol desire by the US military to have a base in the region to counter Soviet expansion into the area and after asking several countries for places to rent/lease/exchange for military hardware, Saudi Arabia came in with the low quote. How about providing a base from which to fly U-2s from for surveillance of the region, which we provide to all parties since the last big Arab-Israeli war? Providing training, maintenance and delivery area for the US built hardware purchased by Saudi Arabia? Site of Sumerian crashed U.F.O. being guarded by US troops while scientist try to discover how to excavate it? You could have covered all these with a simple Other category unless you were intending the poll to be biased in some way.

[King of the Americas]

AMENDED Question(s).

[AlH]

Originally posted by King of the Americas
AMENDED Question(s).

Better, now?

Of these two choices, which one, in your opinion, is more likely to be the greater cause in the anti-American sentiments among those living in the Middle East?

[The Central Scrutinizer]

E) I Love Lucy reruns

[RandFan]

We'll it's just not that simple. The problems are complex. And not everyone in the Middle East "hates" us. In fact many of the inhabitants love Americans.

1.) It suits the needs of the leaders of those countries to have a scape goat to blame the shortcomings of those leaders. So they use propaganda to enflame the citizens to hate the United States. This is well documented by the way.

2.) These people suffer from abject poverty. They are god's people. We in comparison are rich beyond belief and are infidels. Most of us have cars, TVs, plenty of food (we suffer from obesity for christ sake), etc.

3.) We don't adhere to their laws.

4.) We violate their lands with our military presence.

5.) We look after our own interests first.

6.) We support and believe in democracy and freedom.

7.) We support and we are friends of Israel.

9.) Our policies are often in conflict with theirs.

10.) We have done a downright lousy job of PR and diplomacy.

11.) We have not always kept our promises.

12.) Our needs have caused us to be in conflict with their allies.

Not in any particular order. They are all important. It would be impossible for me to choose between your two options. They are simply inadequate to explain our problems.

Complex problems such as this one demand that we look beyond just the political to solve them. Trying to decide if their is an overriding problem is illusive and not at all conducive to a solution.

[Ed]

Originally posted by RandFan
We'll it's just not that simple. The problems are complex. And not everyone in the Middle East "hates" us. In fact many of the inhabitants love Americans.

1.) It suits the needs of the leaders of those countries to have a scape goat to blame the shortcomings of those leaders. So they use propaganda to enflame the citizens to hate the United States. This is well documented by the way.

2.) These people suffer from abject poverty. They are god's people. We in comparison are rich beyond belief and are infidels. Most of us have cars, TVs, plenty of food (we suffer from obesity for christ sake), etc.

3.) We don't adhere to their laws.

4.) We violate their lands with our military presence.

5.) We look after our own interests first.

6.) We support and believe in democracy and freedom.

7.) We support and we are friends of Israel.

9.) Our policies are often in conflict with theirs.

10.) We have done a downright lousy job of PR and diplomacy.

11.) We have not always kept our promises.

12.) Our needs have caused us to be in conflict with their allies.

Not in any particular order. They are all important. It would be impossible for me to choose between your two options. They are simply inadequate to explain our problems.

Complex problems such as this one demand that we look beyond just the political to solve them. Trying to decide if their is an overriding problem is illusive and not at all conducive to a solution.

Succinct and accurate, in my opinion

[specious_reasons]

One critique:

Originally posted by RandFan


6.) We support and believe in democracy and freedom.



I think the leaders of many of these countries hate freedom and democracy, because they'd be booted to the curb.

I think that many of the people wish for freedom and democracy, but see the US as squandering what we have, and feel we're all the more hypocritical because of it.

I also think that most people in the middle east don't think we support freedom and democracy outside the US, they think we support our own interests in lieu of freedom and democracy.

I've heard these types of arguments from Muslim authors when the war in Afghanistan was starting, I wish I could provide links... I'll have to rummage around old emails....

[Ben Shniper]

Originally posted by King of the Americas
"The anti-American sentiments among those living in the Middle East are due mainly to which of these two options in YOUR opinion":

A.) Our unlimited support for Israel.
B.) Our Freedom.



You really make a lot of assumptions here, assumptions I frankly don't share.

1. America's support for Israel is unlimitted.

Is it? America withheld aid to Israel until the 1960s, (during two major wars), sold weapons about equally to Israel and its neighbors (Israel's early weapons arsenals were French and British), And it withheld diplomatic support for Israel in the 1967 war. America used diplomatic pressure to stop Israel from advancing to Cairo, and also to prevent the complete takeover of the Suez Canal. During 1973, for several days the state department withheld aid to Israel while the Soviets were backing up Egyptian, Syrian, and Jordanian armaments.

It spent billions of dollars to both Egypt and Israel to facilitate handing back the Siani to Egypt in return for a limmitted and lukewarm, but lasting, peace. America has meddled in Israel's elections, to keep Netenyahu from winning and allowing Barak to offer an (American-backed) peace accord with Arafat. And when Arafat turned his back on the deal, America only belatedly stumbled into supporting Israel in a war with Arafat that was largely of American making (including the culpability I share for over-enthusiastically backing an illusionary peace process).

Now it has spent the last two years demanding Israel be constrained, not transfer Arafat out, not do anything provocative, and lay low. Presumably Israel may be going along while America prepares to attack Iraq for Iraq's many years of treachery and defiance of the surrender agreements. But America isn't going after Iraq specifically because of Israel, America has its own reasons, and Israel has its own as well.

I don't see it as all nice. Israel had more than a few incidents that get pointed out over and over (The U.S.S. Liberty, the defiance of UN resolutions, etc..), but America isn't Israel's lackey or vice-versa. They are really two different countries with interests that often happen to coincide, like Japan or Britain and America.

Now you may say "billions of dollars go to Israel every year". And I could reply "Egypt gets almost as much money." Now you might say "America is Israel's only defender in the UN", and I will say "Everyone else is too afraid of angerring Arab votes against their interests. And you might say Israel gets more weapons from America than almost anyone else. And I will point out a practical reason for that as well: Israel is in a good position to test those weapons to determine how effective, how dangerous, and how destructive or over-destructive they are. Plus Israel needs the weapons and will pay for them, and helps develop new weapons for both Israel and America.

Is Israel's relationship with America really so unlimmitted? No. It's just stronger than usual, with America and Israel sharing a common enemy for the time being. When the threat passes, or a bigger threat comes along, I'm sure Israel and America will be again no closer than Ireland and America (I use that analogy because there are about as many Irish in America as Jews. And, historically, when America was enemies with Britain it had VERY close ties to Ireland).

-Ben

[corplinx]

Okay, let me explain this real simply. Joe Mideast does not sit there watching Meet the Press and deciding that America's policies are diametrically opposed to his own.

The problem is fundamentalist Islam pure and simple. America is their great Satan, full of infidels. We eat pork, our women don't wear veils, we support Israel, we are tolerant of Jews.

Now the fundamentalists get a ton of TV time and newspaper copy space in all of those countries. Sadly, it seems their vitriol and victimization rhetoric wins out.

There is a serious victimization issue where the US is the boogeyman. Are you starving? Its not because fearless leader is too busy building palaces, its because of the Zionist controlled US.

There is no simple answer for your poll, there are way too many dynamics to cover.

1. Systematic Brainwashing
2. Victimization Rhetoric
3. Polarizing Doctrine in the mainstream
4. Zionist Conspiracy Theories in the mainstream

The list goes on and on.

Now, here is the mistake people make when trying to figure out why they resent the US. They assume that those people have the same life circumstances as the west.

[Walter Wayne]

Add to Randfan's list

13) Support of oppressive governments (Egypt and Saudi Arabia)

Note that if Israeli was not a democracy and the continued to receive support, they would hate the U.S. to. It is hard to like someone who is keeping an unwanted governmnt in power.

Walt

[Smalso]

I had a history teacher in high school (damn, that was over 40 years ago) who predicted problems in the Middle East and also predicted that they would be mishandled because of the misperception by of Americans of the causes of these problems. He said pretty much the same things RandFan said. Basically, it's a religious culture thing that goes back over a thousand years. To them, if you ain't Muslim, you ain't shiite.

[Ben Shniper]

Originally posted by Smalso
I had a history teacher in high school (damn, that was over 40 years ago) who predicted problems in the Middle East and also predicted that they would be mishandled because of the misperception by of Americans of the causes of these problems. He said pretty much the same things RandFan said. Basically, it's a religious culture thing that goes back over a thousand years. To them, if you ain't Muslim, you ain't shiite.

Note that the wrongheaded side of the mideast debate systematically and collectively and consistantly predict that peace and prosperity will come to the Arab nations. But history has proven them wrong, as Arab nations are not all that interested in peace and prosperity. Not everyone wants a 3 car garage and 2 kids in a suburban town with a white collar job and a dog.

Some people want infidels to die and their religious beliefs to be vindicated above all. These are the enemies of freedom, peace, and democracy. And that goes for rabbis and priests who preach death as well as Imams like Osama bin Laden who preach death. The thing is, we see it more consistantly today in Arab countries. People seeking death to infidels and willing to lose everything, even their lives and their countries, to get it.

Think of all the wasted lives in Israel spent on a peace offer to a group that simply didn't want peace. Think of the dead Americans who died because America was too shy to "offend" Arab nations by responding to Osama bin Laden's calls for death to America. Think of the dead Afghanis who died because we let the Taliban stay in power so long, tens or even hundreds of thousands of them. We took the wrong approach. This must be corrected. We need less "incentives" to Arab nations to follow our way of life. The Arab Muslim extremists not only don't want freedom and prosperity, they hate these things. We need more "punishments", we need to make sure they realize that attacking America will lead to their own destruction.

This is my coldest of cold calculations. I admit it sounds like I am advocating violence for no good reason, but I am only advocating responding to force and threats of force with the same. Can you appease Osama bin Laden? Can you ignore him? It's not just Osama, it's Hizbollah, Arafat, Saddam Huessein and anyone who refuses to talk peace reliably (and why do we need to talk peace anyway?) Those who can't be reasoned with will eventually have to be stopped another way.

-Ben

[Fade]

I am personally of the opinion that the mid-east will never be peaceful as long as Islam exists. I believe that Islam, while not being to blame for all their troubles, is at the very least fuel for every issue they have. That, and Islam is by it's very nature very oppressive, and human beings are instinctively opposed to that.

And, I agree with Ed. RandFands post was succint and accurate.

[digitalmcq]

Originally posted by RandFan


4.) We violate their lands with our military presence.

5.) We look after our own interests first.

6.) We support and believe in democracy and freedom.




Question: What do 4 and 5 tell us about the accuracy of 6?

[RandFan]

Originally posted by RandFan

4.) We violate their lands with our military presence.

5.) We look after our own interests first.

6.) We support and believe in democracy and freedom.

Originally posted by digitalmcq
Question: What do 4 and 5 tell us about the accuracy of 6? Fair question. Our goals are often in conflict. Our security and progress for our own people do conflict with our desire to support democracy from time to time. It is a matter of priority. But I think it wrong to charachterize security and self interest as overriding that "support and belief in democracy". In fact supporting democracy is often in our best interest.

[RandFan]

Originally posted by wwayne
Add to Randfan's list

13) Support of oppressive governments (Egypt and Saudi Arabia)

Note that if Israeli was not a democracy and the continued to receive support, they would hate the U.S. to. It is hard to like someone who is keeping an unwanted governmnt in power.

Walt Perhaps it is something missing on my part. It seems that we are critisized for not supporting Saudi Arabia enough. Do you have evidence to show that support of Saudi Arabia has lead to hatred from muslims?

As to Egypt, didn't Egypt split from other muslim nations in stopping agression towards the zionist entity (Israel)? Hasn't this change caused us more trouble than supporting an oppresive government?

[Walter Wayne]

Originally posted by RandFan
Perhaps it is something missing on my part. It seems that we are critisized for not supporting Saudi Arabia enough. Do you have evidence to show that support of Saudi Arabia has lead to hatred from muslims?

As to Egypt, didn't Egypt split from other muslim nations in stopping agression towards the zionist entity (Israel)? Hasn't this change caused us more trouble than supporting an oppresive government?

The official government of said countries joined us. But what is you impression of Saudi and Egyption citizens. Start looking at a list of country of origin of citizens who have commited acts against the states. Would you not say that America's allies are over represented on such a list.

Compare number of Iraqi born terrorists to Egyptian or Saudi terrorists.

Walt

[RandFan]

Originally posted by wwayne
The official government of said countries joined us. But what is you impression of Saudi and Egyption citizens. Start looking at a list of country of origin of citizens who have commited acts against the states. Would you not say that America's allies are over represented on such a list.

Compare number of Iraqi born terrorists to Egyptian or Saudi terrorists.

Walt Oh I don't disagree with that at all. The question it seems to me is why? If these citizens were angry with the fact that we support their governments I would think that that would show up in their rhetoric somewhere. Instead we hear about us violating there sacred land, allowing women to serve in positions of leadership over men and many other offences against their Muslem beliefs. Am I wrong?

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by Smalso
I had a history teacher in high school (damn, that was over 40 years ago) who predicted problems in the Middle East and also predicted that they would be mishandled because of the misperception by of Americans of the causes of these problems. He said pretty much the same things RandFan said. Basically, it's a religious culture thing that goes back over a thousand years. To them, if you ain't Muslim, you ain't shiite.

In fact, many Muslim countries around the world have had a history of tolerance to non muslim faiths. For many years, Jews got a much better deal in muslim countries than in christian countries.

The problem, is radicalism, which has been reignited after the success of extremism in kicking america out of Iran and USSR out of afghanistan.

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by Fade
I am personally of the opinion that the mid-east will never be peaceful as long as Islam exists. I believe that Islam, while not being to blame for all their troubles, is at the very least fuel for every issue they have. That, and Islam is by it's very nature very oppressive, and human beings are instinctively opposed to that.

And, I agree with Ed. RandFands post was succint and accurate.

The Jewish faith can hardly claim to be contributing to stability. When taken to its extreme, like Islam, it leads to self contradictions. All you need is a few extremists to try to act according to those contradictions and you have a recipe for disaster.

For example, they believe in one, omnipotent god, but this god is only interested in the jews.

This god will reward them with their own land and peace and stability, but only if they act according to his laws. Any disasters or problems they encounter are only the result of his failing to protect them because they are not following his laws. The solution to the problems is to become more fanatical and single minded.

[Loki]

America presents different faces to the world :

A Political democracy;
An Economic Tyranny;
A Religious Monopoly.

IMO, it is the economic and religious 'personality' of the US that inflames opponents, more than the political.

[Walter Wayne]

Originally posted by RandFan
Oh I don't disagree with that at all. The question it seems to me is why? If these citizens were angry with the fact that we support their governments I would think that that would show up in their rhetoric somewhere. Instead we hear about us violating there sacred land, allowing women to serve in positions of leadership over men and many other offences against their Muslem beliefs. Am I wrong?

I don't think you can necessarily get all of a persons motives from their rhetoric. My belief that the support for the government is part of the problem is more of a conjecture based on an apparent correlation between "allied non-democratic government" = "enemy citizenry". I say apparent because I haven't really look in-depth, and the correlation I get mainly from watching the media. (I agree I am not being a thorough skeptic in this case).

This support for the government probably made it simpler for religious leaders to whip up a frenzy about the West, and easier to recruit.

Also, I don't think withdrawing support would have much of an effect now, as things have gone too far.

Walt

[King of the Americas]

...I'd like to thank you allfor your responses, although I have been greatly disappointed in most of the responses given.

I did NOT mean to make either question an either or one, defined with absolutes. Clearly, cultural biases play a huge part in their hating us, and indeed the infidels (Americans) are noted throughout most of their leaders speeches. However, there are other reasons why they hate us besides our Freedom...

My point is structuring the questions as I did, was that I wanted to see what most of you believed the root cause(s) of this friction to be, for the most part.

With that being said, I'll offer a slightly different question:

"Are we hated by the actions we take inside our own country, or is it more about the actions we take in other people's countries?"

By the talk out of our leaders' mouths, one would think it could ONLY, and IS only the first mention.

1.) It suits the needs of the leaders of those countries to have a scape goat to blame the shortcomings of those leaders. So they use propaganda to enflame the citizens to hate the United States. This is well documented by the way.

*Sure, we are an easy scape goat to point at, but I can't help but to wonder how easily we could be targeted as such if we WEREN'T putting troops in their lands to begin with.

2.) These people suffer from abject poverty. They are god's people. We in comparison are rich beyond belief and are infidels. Most of us have cars, TVs, plenty of food (we suffer from obesity for christ sake), etc.

*AGAIN, this is true but would they hate us to this same level, if our companies weren't setting up a McD's on every corner, and trying to shove MTV down the throats of their children??? They hate us because we're fat... In WWI, our soliders were often called the "dough boys" among our own allies, and yet we weren't bombed at home for it. We've been free and fat for a long time, why just now have these Middle East peoples become so enraged...?

3.) We don't adhere to their laws.

*If you mean to suggest that we allow WOMEN to carry guns into an around their holy places, then I guess you are more right than you know.

4.) We violate their lands with our military presence.

*According to OBL, ^THIS^ was one of the main causes of the 9-11 attacks, HOWEVER to even 'suggest' this would and still does label someone as a 'terrorist sympathizer'...

5.) We look after our own interests first.

*As we probably should, but I don't think this is really THE issue they're pissed about.

6.) We support and believe in democracy and freedom.

*DO we??? Moreover, IF we do support Democracy & Freedom, then do we actually oppose those who would NOT offer Democracy & Freedom to their peoples...?

7.) We support and we are friends of Israel.

*But is is much deeper than that. We actually turn a blind eye to Israel when it "Violates UN Resolution(s)." and we lend millitary support to an army that continues to do so against a seemingly unarmed civilian population. They are throwing rocks at tanks for christ's sakes!

9.) Our policies are often in conflict with theirs.

*Indeed, they do and they are.

10.) We have done a downright lousy job of PR and diplomacy.

*Agreed.

11.) We have not always kept our promises.

*I am not sure where you are going with this one. Specifics, please.

12.) Our needs have caused us to be in conflict with their allies.

*What...?

---

Preconceived notions...that we are slutty, fat, greedy, and imperialistic. Their leaders stand before their people and claim ALL of these things and more, but it is by our actions inside THEIR backyard that these preconceived notions are fortified and not absolved.

If we went in with meat and bread, instead of guns and tanks, how easy would it be for OBL to convience young men to become marters against the men who are helping to feed his family?

I mean it is tougher (albeit not impossible) to rally the troops agaisn the infidels, when they are actually paying sincere respect to your holy temples and people's beliefs.

[aerocontrols]

Originally posted by RandFan
Oh I don't disagree with that at all. The question it seems to me is why? If these citizens were angry with the fact that we support their governments I would think that that would show up in their rhetoric somewhere. Instead we hear about us violating there sacred land, allowing women to serve in positions of leadership over men and many other offences against their Muslem beliefs. Am I wrong?

Yeah, I think you are.

If liberating my land is called terrorism, this is a great honor for me. ~ bin Laden

bin Laden regards the Saudi regime as traitors who sold their birthright when Abdul Aziz Al Saud failed to apply full Islamic law. "The country was set up for his family. Then, after the discovery of petroleum, the Saudi regime found another support--the money to make people rich and give them the services and life they wanted and to make them satisfied."

source (http://www.thecriticalvoice.com/laden_interview.html)

Osama is rightly (if incompletely) called a 'dissident' because he hates the al Saud family. One of the main reasons he personally hates the US is because of our support for them. One of the largest reasons he gets support from the Saudi masses is our support for their tyrants.

Note however, that withdrawing our support for the al Saud family would enable a takeover of Bin Ladenites, which would not lead to a sudden blossoming of good will towards us. Still, it does show up in their rhetoric.

MattJ

[Kodiak]

Originally posted by King of the Americas
"The anti-American sentiments among those living in the Middle East are due mainly to which of these two options in YOUR opinion":

A.) Our unlimited support for Israel.
B.) Our Freedom.



A & B & C.

C.) Our non-muslim capitalism.

Originally posted by King of the Americas
"In Saudia Arabia, current U.S. Military efforts strive to protect which prinicple the most, in your opinion":

A.) Instituting a Democratic government for the common people of Saudia Arabia
B.) Protecting the ruling Monarcy for our own economic purposes

Neither.

C.) Protect American (oil) interests, regardless of regime.

[King of the Americas]

Did you review my last statement upon this issue?

---

Non-muslim capitalism...ehh?

WHERE is this being practiced?

If you mean actions taken 'inside' our borders, then I'd say this has more to do with our "Freedom" to act in such a way, as opposed to our support for Israel.

---

Protecting our economic needs, regardless of the regiem or manner of governing body...?

AND this is what people say is hypocritical.

To support someone or something undemocratic, when we SAY that we DO support Freedom & Democracy is indeed hypocritical no...:confused:

[Kodiak]

Originally posted by King of the Americas
Non-muslim capitalism...ehh?

WHERE is this being practiced?

If you mean actions taken 'inside' our borders, then I'd say this has more to do with our "Freedom" to act in such a way, as opposed to our support for Israel.

Clarification: Our country is castigated by the followers of Islam for being a non-Muslim capitalist superpower, as well as your A & B.


Originally posted by King of the Americas
Protecting our economic needs, regardless of the regiem or manner of governing body...?

AND this is what people say is hypocritical.

To support someone or something undemocratic, when we SAY that we DO support Freedom & Democracy is indeed hypocritical no...:confused:

Who says this is hypocritical?? Not me. I've always believed in treating an enemy of our enemy as a friend so long as it serves our national self interest. Its that whole "statecraft" and "art of war" thing....

Freedom and democracy are ideals, but the real world doesn't feel any compunction to conform to these ideals.

We can't sit around waiting for a Utopia...

[RandFan]

Originally posted by King of the Americas
...I'd like to thank you allfor your responses, although I have been greatly disappointed in most of the responses given.

I did NOT mean to make either question an either or one, defined with absolutes. Clearly, cultural biases play a huge part in their hating us, and indeed the infidels (Americans) are noted throughout most of their leaders speeches. However, there are other reasons why they hate us besides our Freedom...

My point is structuring the questions as I did, was that I wanted to see what most of you believed the root cause(s) of this friction to be, for the most part.

With that being said, I'll offer a slightly different question:

"Are we hated by the actions we take inside our own country, or is it more about the actions we take in other people's countries?"

By the talk out of our leaders' mouths, one would think it could ONLY, and IS only the first mention.

1.) It suits the needs of the leaders of those countries to have a scape goat to blame the shortcomings of those leaders. So they use propaganda to enflame the citizens to hate the United States. This is well documented by the way.

*Sure, we are an easy scape goat to point at, but I can't help but to wonder how easily we could be targeted as such if we WEREN'T putting troops in their lands to begin with.

2.) These people suffer from abject poverty. They are god's people. We in comparison are rich beyond belief and are infidels. Most of us have cars, TVs, plenty of food (we suffer from obesity for christ sake), etc.

*AGAIN, this is true but would they hate us to this same level, if our companies weren't setting up a McD's on every corner, and trying to shove MTV down the throats of their children??? They hate us because we're fat... In WWI, our soliders were often called the "dough boys" among our own allies, and yet we weren't bombed at home for it. We've been free and fat for a long time, why just now have these Middle East peoples become so enraged...?

3.) We don't adhere to their laws.

*If you mean to suggest that we allow WOMEN to carry guns into an around their holy places, then I guess you are more right than you know.

4.) We violate their lands with our military presence.

*According to OBL, ^THIS^ was one of the main causes of the 9-11 attacks, HOWEVER to even 'suggest' this would and still does label someone as a 'terrorist sympathizer'...

5.) We look after our own interests first.

*As we probably should, but I don't think this is really THE issue they're pissed about.

6.) We support and believe in democracy and freedom.

*DO we??? Moreover, IF we do support Democracy & Freedom, then do we actually oppose those who would NOT offer Democracy & Freedom to their peoples...?

7.) We support and we are friends of Israel.

*But is is much deeper than that. We actually turn a blind eye to Israel when it "Violates UN Resolution(s)." and we lend millitary support to an army that continues to do so against a seemingly unarmed civilian population. They are throwing rocks at tanks for christ's sakes!

9.) Our policies are often in conflict with theirs.

*Indeed, they do and they are.

10.) We have done a downright lousy job of PR and diplomacy.

*Agreed.

11.) We have not always kept our promises.

*I am not sure where you are going with this one. Specifics, please.

12.) Our needs have caused us to be in conflict with their allies.

*What...?

---

Preconceived notions...that we are slutty, fat, greedy, and imperialistic. Their leaders stand before their people and claim ALL of these things and more, but it is by our actions inside THEIR backyard that these preconceived notions are fortified and not absolved.

If we went in with meat and bread, instead of guns and tanks, how easy would it be for OBL to convience young men to become marters against the men who are helping to feed his family?

I mean it is tougher (albeit not impossible) to rally the troops agaisn the infidels, when they are actually paying sincere respect to your holy temples and people's beliefs. Your post is the equivelant of taking a plane apart and saying that the constituent parts arent in and of themselves enough to create flight.

This is the flaw of your reasoning. The problem is complex and dynamic and does not lend itself to your deconstruction. "rocks against tanks" You are joking right? The arms and legs of children strewn on the ground last week were not caused by rocks.

I hate to be the one to let you in on the news KOA but we have gone in with meat and bread and it would be very easy for OBL to convince your men to become marters against men who are helping to feed their family.

He did it quite easily in Somalia where our only goal was to feed the people. After they were fat and happy they killed our soldiers and dragged their bodies through the streets. You couldn't be more wrong.

Do you really need examples of where the US did not keep their promises? How about not helping the Kurds after we told them that we would but instead let Saddam slaughter them as we stood by and watched?

[Kodiak]

Originally posted by RandFan
Do you really need examples of where the US did not keep their promises? How about not helping the Kurds after we told them that we would but instead let Saddam slaughter them as we stood by and watched?

Or how we left the Montanyards high and dry in Vietnam after we pulled out 25+ years ago...

[King of the Americas]

Please respond to this:

"Are we hated by the actions we take inside our own country, or is it more about the actions we take in other people's countries?"

By the talk out of our leaders' mouths, one would think it could ONLY, and IS only the first mention.

---

"Your post is the equivelant of taking a plane apart and saying that the constituent parts arent in and of themselves enough to create flight."

*Hardly, my post took each one of you 'reasons for hating us' and gave futher detail as to why and how this was or is true. This retort was a most false analogy. You idea of them hating us because we are free doesn't fly, and no amount of supergluing extra wings is going to make it do so.

"This is the flaw of your reasoning. The problem is complex and dynamic and does not lend itself to your deconstruction. "rocks against tanks" You are joking right? The arms and legs of children strewn on the ground last week were not caused by rocks."

*The problem IS very complex, but that isn't what our leadership (Bush) is tell us. Out of their mouths is is quite simple, "They hate us because we are Free." 'Rock against tanks', indeed! ISRAEL is the one dropping laser guided bombs into apartment buildings... The PLA is armed with small arms (mainly), and they DO use suicide bombers strapped with explosives. However, for the most part, the stuggle is one of a well armed military force invading or expanding its borders against an ill-equiped rebel force. I have actually seen pictures of children throwing stones at tanks and soliders, one of which had been shot for doing so.

"I hate to be the one to let you in on the news KOA but we have gone in with meat and bread and it would be very easy for OBL to convince your men to become marters against men who are helping to feed their family."

*ONLY if we continued with our other activities in the area.

"He did it quite easily in Somalia where our only goal was to feed the people. After they were fat and happy they killed our soldiers and dragged their bodies through the streets. You couldn't be more wrong."

*And here is the flaw in you logic. You can't kill a man's family, and then offer him a steak and think everything is going to be okay. While we ARE the ones providing food and medicine to many 3rd world individuals, this can't be separated from the other activities we are taking part in that aren't so humain...

"Do you really need examples of where the US did not keep their promises? How about not helping the Kurds after we told them that we would but instead let Saddam slaughter them as we stood by and watched?"

*THIS is the only point you chose to respond to out of that whole retort.

:rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

What about the concept of 'preconceived notions', and our behavior either fortifying those notions, or absolving them???

If anyone here is "taking a plane apart and saying that the constituent parts arent in and of themselves enough to create flight.", it is YOU. "Feeding people won't make them love us, look at what happened is Somalia!" But this issue isn't separate from our other actions!

What is causing the people in the Middle East to dislike us?

Is it the actions we take INSIDE our borders, or the actions we are taking part in inside THEIR borders???

[King of the Americas]

...still waiting.:rolleyes:

[RandFan]

Originally posted by King of the Americas
...still waiting.:rolleyes: Give me a break, I didn't see your post. You are not always johny on the spot with your responses so don't go breaking my balls.

[King of the Americas]

:p

[RandFan]

Originally posted by King of the Americas
Please respond to this:

"Are we hated by the actions we take inside our own country, or is it more about the actions we take in other people's countries?"

By the talk out of our leaders' mouths, one would think it could ONLY, and IS only the first mention. Two words "false dilemma" (http://www.sjsu.edu/depts/itl/graphics/adhom/dilemma.html). Now I know that this has been pointed out to you before. Do you understand what a false dilemma is?

RandFan
"Your post is the equivelant of taking a plane apart and saying that the constituent parts aren’t in and of themselves enough to create flight."

*Hardly, my post took each one of you 'reasons for hating us' and gave futher detail as to why and how this was or is true. This retort was a most false analogy. You idea of them hating us because we are free doesn't fly, and no amount of supergluing extra wings is going to make it do so. You are wrong. They are true in total. And yes they do hate our freedom. Their rhetoric is full of contempt for the fact that we do not imprison homosexuals, also that we allow women to walk in the streets alone and laugh in public. That we allow free speech (pornography), that we allow the consumption of alcohol and other mind-altering drugs. They want us to stop these things. And they want us to stop them RIGHT NOW! How you could possibly state that they do not hate us for our freedom is simply beyond me. There is tons of information on the web to corroborate that fanatical followers of Islam hate freedom.

Why Islam Hates Freedom (http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/696303/posts )

In Islam, democracy, as well as the very notion of the freedom of human conscience, represents a dangerous deviation from the Koran and the Sharia. Elections are seen as a form of blasphemy. They are Satan’s vehicle to destroy the Koran. You really should do a little research before you make a claim.

RandFan
"This is the flaw of your reasoning. The problem is complex and dynamic and does not lend itself to your deconstruction. "rocks against tanks" You are joking right? The arms and legs of children strewn on the ground last week were not caused by rocks."

KOA
*The problem IS very complex, but that isn't what our leadership (Bush) is tell us. Out of their mouths is is quite simple, "They hate us because we are Free." 'Rock against tanks', indeed! ISRAEL is the one dropping laser guided bombs into apartment buildings... The PLA is armed with small arms (mainly), and they DO use suicide bombers strapped with explosives. However, for the most part, the stuggle is one of a well armed military force invading or expanding its borders against an ill-equiped rebel force. I have actually seen pictures of children throwing stones at tanks and soliders, one of which had been shot for doing so. I'm not arguing that there are not Palestinians throwing rocks. I am arguing that your claim that there are ONLY Palestinians throwing rocks is disingenuous and cynical. The suicide bombers target civilians including children. The Israelis do not.

RandFan
"I hate to be the one to let you in on the news KOA but we have gone in with meat and bread and it would be very easy for OBL to convince your men to become martyrs against men who are helping to feed their family."

KOA
*ONLY if we continued with our other activities in the area. What other activities? There were NO other activities in Somalia. What the hell are you talking about? We went there to feed the people.

RandFan
"He did it quite easily in Somalia where our only goal was to feed the people. After they were fat and happy they killed our soldiers and dragged their bodies through the streets. You couldn't be more wrong."

KOA
*And here is the flaw in you logic. You can't kill a man's family, and then offer him a steak and think everything is going to be okay. While we ARE the ones providing food and medicine to many 3rd world individuals, this can't be separated from the other activities we are taking part in that aren't so humain... There is no flaw because we were not killing people in Somalia KOA, where did you get the idea that we were?

RandFan
"Do you really need examples of where the US did not keep their promises? How about not helping the Kurds after we told them that we would but instead let Saddam slaughter them as we stood by and watched?"

KOA
*THIS is the only point you chose to respond to out of that whole retort. Again, what the hell are you talking about? What about the points above? Were you high when you responded?

What about the concept of 'preconceived notions', and our behavior either fortifying those notions, or absolving them???

If anyone here is "taking a plane apart and saying that the constituent parts aren’t in and of themselves enough to create flight.", it is YOU. "Feeding people won't make them love us, look at what happened is Somalia!" But this issue isn't separate from our other actions! Again I have no clue as to what the hell you are talking about. Somalia proves that food alone will not keep people from hating us. It is not deconstruction because it proves MY point.

What is causing the people in the Middle East to dislike us? You really don't know yet?

Ok, let me post it again,

RandFan
1.) It suits the needs of the leaders of those countries to have a scape goat to blame the shortcomings of those leaders. So they use propaganda to enflame the citizens to hate the United States. This is well documented by the way.

2.) These people suffer from abject poverty. They are god's people. We in comparison are rich beyond belief and are infidels. Most of us have cars, TVs, plenty of food (we suffer from obesity for christ sake), etc.

3.) We don't adhere to their laws.

4.) We violate their lands with our military presence.

5.) We look after our own interests first.

6.) We support and believe in democracy and freedom.

7.) We support and we are friends of Israel.

9.) Our policies are often in conflict with theirs.

10.) We have done a downright lousy job of PR and diplomacy.

11.) We have not always kept our promises.

12.) Our needs have caused us to be in conflict with their allies.[/b]

Is it the actions we take INSIDE our borders, or the actions we are taking part in inside THEIR borders??? Once again KOA you are presenting a false dilemma.

[King of the Americas]

Your detailed response is greatly apprecaited, as was your explaination of a 'false dilemia'.

In retort, I would suggest that indeed this problem IS very very VERY complicated, and to suggest that it is an either or thing WOULD make mine a 'false dilemia' accusation or question.

---

My responses to the Somalia were NOT intended to draw attention to our other activities 'in Somalia' but in other parts of that region/area. IF we did NOT have bases in other people's countries like Cuba, Korea, Germany, Saudi Arabia, it would be increasingly difficult for leaders in these countires to say, "SEE they are invading us, killing our women and children and putting armed soliders in our churches!"

My retort was that you can't separate yourself from your global policy toward military occupation. Because, people understand that the food comes first, then economic American based infra-structure, and finally a military force to protect it.

---

What kind of dilemia is it when a leader refuses to speak of or allow the discussion of ANY other reason why something is happening. (I.E. Bush says they attacked us because we are Free, but in fact just as you stated it is a very complicated issue, and indeed our actions outside of our borders has LOT to do with why they hate us.)

[karl]

Originally posted by RandFan
You are wrong. They are true in total. And yes they do hate our freedom. Their rhetoric is full of contempt for the fact that we do not imprison homosexuals, also that we allow women to walk in the streets alone and laugh in public. That we allow free speech (pornography), that we allow the consumption of alcohol and other mind-altering drugs. They want us to stop these things. And they want us to stop them RIGHT NOW! How you could possibly state that they do not hate us for our freedom is simply beyond me. There is tons of information on the web to corroborate that fanatical followers of Islam hate freedom.

You seem to have missed an important distinction here. The article you linked to and quoted does not support your claim. Fundamentalist Muslims don't care what us Westerners do in our own countries, for much the same reason that you -- and most of us -- don't really give a damn that some pissant nations in the Middle East or Africa still execute women for committing adultery. Sure, they vehemently oppose your lifestyle as such, but to them you are already beyond salvation. You can drown yourself in porn and booze for all they care, as long as you do it on your own turf, safely out of their view.

It's not until you start interacting with them that things can heat up. Then it's different. If you enforce, advocate or merely flaunt your culture in the presence of Muslims you are suddenly perceived as a corrupting influence on those who are not beyond salvation -- like selling drugs and pornography to kids.

This wasn't much of an issue before the invasion of Afghanistan. Not just the die-hard fundamentalists are of the opinion that the Taliban may not have been perfect, but at least they were trying. (OK, so they hosted a tiny terrorist group, but who hasn't? :-) They were young. They needed the money.) And then the US and its allies raided their proverbial public school and turned it into a crack house.

That's one part of the matter. Another part is political. Fundamentalist Islam has quite a few parallels to Communism. The natural resources on Islamic territory are considered the property of all Muslims alike. According to this view, the regimes in for example Kuwait and Saudi Arabia do not have the right to sell oil and keep the profit to themselves. When your oil companies buy Saudi oil and sell gasoline to American motorists, you are acting as a "fence" for the allegedly corrupt, criminal Saudi royal family. And to make matters worse, American troops are stationed in Saudi Arabia to keep that very family in business. To "promote stability," as you call it.

Stuff like that is what gets intellectuals and high-ranking fundamentalists like Osama bin Ladin worked up. For the common people it usually takes a different kind of rhetoric, something more concrete, like "The US is supplying Israel with the weapons that kill our Palestinian brothers." Not entirely relevant, but it sounds good. And soon there might be a lot more where that came from.

[King of the Americas]

No one is missing any distinction. They are outrightly ignoring and or dismissing them completely. I am not speaking about the posters here (however some are ever so willing to do so also), but THE leader of the country attacked during 9-11.

The plan is simple, tell America that the ONLY reason they are being attacked is that the bad guys don't like the fact that we are Free. THEN dismiss anyone who says otherwise as the unpatriotic, blame America first crowd, who is only interested in sympthasizing with terrorists, and that they should love America or leave it.

Sadly, the plan is working, and there has STILL been no open debate about why we were attacked among our leaders, and those who would offer the foreign policy flaws causing these anti-American sentiments are dismissed...

Amazing it is that 15 of the 19 hijackers were from Saudi Arabia, and yet no one could or would make the connection to our behavior/policy in that country as having anything to do with the attacks. Even more so, that OBL himself would give numerous accounts of exactly why he attacked us, and would have his motives taped and well documented but STILL the actual reasons behind the attacks would go on unheard and largely ignored...

karl,

I agree with the sentiments you offered, but if you continue to espouse them you will be labeled an unpatriotic terrorist sympathizer.

:(

[Smalso]

Interesting thread and some good points made on all sides of the argument. To me, after reading through the posts, one point stands out and I believe it is one upon which all agree. The problem is a highly complicated one and there is no simple solution. Maybe there was one at some time in the past, but not now.

[RandFan]

Originally posted by karl
You seem to have missed an important distinction here. The article you linked to and quoted does not support your claim. Fundamentalist Muslims don't care what us Westerners do in our own countries, for much the same reason that you -- and most of us -- don't really give a damn that some pissant nations in the Middle East or Africa still execute women for committing adultery. Sure, they vehemently oppose your lifestyle as such, but to them you are already beyond salvation. You can drown yourself in porn and booze for all they care, as long as you do it on your own turf, safely out of their view. That is fair, I did miss the distinction. I will back up my argument at another time. I'm too busy now celebrating. But yes, my link fell short of the mark.

RandFan

[King of the Americas]

...on this issue?

Argeed that the issue is VERY complicated and can't be characterized in an either what we are doing inside our borders or what we are doing in other people's backyards, cause effect kind of thing.

'I' hold that the Bush administration is flawed in its absolute refusal to admit or even 'discuss' the possibility that it IS our foreign policy that is part of the problem, in that it creates an environment of hostility toward the U.S. from the peoples in regions where our foreign policy is shall we say 'inconsistant'.

"They hate is becauce we are Free."

...being one of the most simple, biasedly inaccurate statements imaginable when it comes to this 'complicated issue'.

[RandFan]

Originally posted by King of the Americas
They hate is becauce we are Free."

...being one of the most simple, biasedly inaccurate statements imaginable when it comes to this 'complicated issue'. But this was presented only as "part" of a complicated whole. You can't pick out a single issue and then accuse me of being simple minded when it comes to this problem. I listed a number of reasons. You are being intellectually dishonest here.

[King of the Americas]

I was characterizing the Bush Administration's (AND the stance of elected officials the government, over) stance not your's.

[Rollerball37]

Originally posted by King of the Americas
I was characterizing the Bush Administration's (AND the stance of elected officials the government, over) stance not your's.

Back at the board from whence he came, we used to call this maneuver the "Olympic Backpeddle." Meaning that once the KOA tripped over his own pompous, ill-informed tongue and that fact was pointed out, he would reply with a:

"Oh, but what I REALLY meant was…. (insert lame excuse here)"

He'll call me a 'misinformationist' but his behavior here that proves my knowledge of his methods is accurate.

[King of the Americas]

:rolleyes:

[King of the Americas]

...?

[Kodiak]

Not so fun when the shoe is on the other foot, eh KOA? :bricks:

[patoco12]

Originally posted by RandFan

1.) It suits the needs of the leaders of those countries to have a scape goat to blame the shortcomings of those leaders. So they use propaganda to enflame the citizens to hate the United States. This is well documented by the way.

I think that is the biggest reason right there. The ironic thing, too, is that their leaders are all in power because they control the oil!! The oil wealth of the Middle East is its biggest source of corruption and is what is holding it back.

[NightG1]

Originally posted by King of the Americas
"The anti-American sentiments among those living in the Middle East are due mainly to which of these two options in YOUR opinion":

A.) Our unlimited support for Israel.
B.) Our Freedom.

---

"In Saudia Arabia, current U.S. Military efforts strive to protect which prinicple the most, in your opinion":

A.) Instituting a Democratic government for the common people of Saudia Arabia
B.) Protecting the ruling Monarcy for our own economic purposes
Our unlimited support of our freedom. I can't answer number 2 because none of the choices make any sense.

[King of the Americas]

People don't hate our Freedom, they hate what some of of have done with our freedom in THEIR country.

*What IS out purpose in Saudi Arabia, if NOT to protect the Monarchy that sells us our cheap oil?