[Jillian]

Do you understand the terrorist point of veiw when it comes to the ever so generic U.s vs Iraq/iran sense? Like if you lived there, do you think youd hate US too? Based upon what weve done to their country, and just popular veiw of others around you? How Americans see Iraqians, how they see us... what do you think

[Crazyblue]

I don't know how I would respond with an entirely different life/perspective. I don't think I would hold the entirety of the US accountable though. I wouldn't be in favor of killing civilians on either side either. The problem that comes into focus is how would one go about fighting a country with such a large military? The nature of the terrorist groups is that they do not have the force to engage a country's military directly. The best they can hope for is the public to decide it's not worth the cost of human life to fight against them.

[DeepThought]

Terrorism isn't isolated to Iran/Iraq nor is it specific to the invasion of Iraq which came after 9/11. Terrorism has many flavors and many causes, but at the risk grossly oversimplifying the issue it comes as a results of a disenfranchised populace/minority who feel they have little or no recourse in matters and are up against a foe which they have no hope of defeating politically or militarily (at least not using conventional means).

While I can be sympathetic to some of the causes of many terrorists, I cannot be sympathetic to their actions. Their techniques are rarely effective in doing anything more than alienating those that might have been sympathetic.

[NoGrayArea01]

Personally, I would be happy if I were a (civilian, non-terrorist) Iraqi, having my country liberated from a crazed dictator. I can understand their resentment of the fact that our war did cause a certain amount of collateral damage, but the benefits probably most likely outweigh the cost.

Now, the terrorists themselves have a much different perspective on U.S. activities in their countries. Many of them favored Saddam's government anyway, so obviously they resent us even more than the majority of the populace and consider us as antagonists. Still, I have no idea what kind of perspective I would have if I had grown up in a completely different, almost opposite, culture.

[Zsych]

I expect you'd find that before the embargoes on Iraq, people's lives were pretty decent under Saddam Hussein. It was stuff like that that made it harder for the average person to find medicine even. Still.. under Saddam, you'd have found Iraq fairly stable even afterwards. Then you have the mission to kill Saddam, which unleashed not just regular anarchy but different racist or religious groups who wanted power that didn't have a chance before but now did in the chaos, so there was yet more violence, suffering and death... none of which was happening before US interference. Not to mention that even if you get pulled into some kind of military force, that doesn't mean that it was really your choice or that you don't have family and friends who care about you.

Bush may really have thought in his simple minded stupidity that we could go into Iraq as saviors and be loved by the people for it, but that idea was retarded. Sure there are Iraqis who did appreciate the US presence and what stability US forces brought - but that doesn't mean that their lives wouldn't have been reasonably okay if the US had never interfered.

---------- Post added 05-12-2011 at 06:56 PM ----------

	Originally Posted by DeepThought To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	While I can be sympathetic to some of the causes of many terrorists, I cannot be sympathetic to their actions. Their techniques are rarely effective in doing anything more than alienating those that might have been sympathetic.

I agree. Their techniques are ineffective and create additional ill will that worsens their situation. Such is the nature of emotional reactions not guided by intellect.

[NixonKneivel]

Revolutionaries are all terrorists.....until they win.

That being said, there's still a big difference between kicking the British out for unrepresentative taxation and bombing the WTC.

And warfare btwn grown men who choose to be soldiers is far more moral than strapping bombs to children.

[Jalex]

Is there a single country who doesn't talk trash about the USA?

Starting from the point that they refer to themselves as "America" when America is a continent (therefore, Mexicans, Argentinians, etc. are Americans as well), you would be amazed how easy it is to not-like the US.

[Also Lark]

	Originally Posted by Jillian To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	Do you understand the terrorist point of veiw when it comes to the ever so generic U.s vs Iraq/iran sense? Like if you lived there, do you think youd hate US too? Based upon what weve done to their country, and just popular veiw of others around you? How Americans see Iraqians, how they see us... what do you think

I understand the terrorist mindset, I live in northern ireland and lived through the end of the troubles, its got nothing really to do with such logical and rational objectives as effecting foreign policy most of the time.

With specific reference to recent US foreign policy in Iran and Iraqi I dont have a proble with it, in the case of Iran its mainly the British and French involved in that, not the US. The alternative of doing nothing is not a good idea. I think it would be a better question most of the time to ask do people understand the actions of the world powers who engage in interventionist foreign policies, it would be better than people came to understand them than fooling themselves that compassion, conciliation and compromise with terrorists will achieve anything.

[ManWithNoName]

Originally Posted by Zsych To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

I expect you'd find that before the embargoes on Iraq, people's lives were pretty decent under Saddam Hussein. Still.. under Saddam, you'd have found Iraq fairly stable even afterwards. Then you have the mission to kill Saddam, which unleashed not just regular anarchy but different racist or religious groups who wanted power that didn't have a chance before but now did in the chaos, so there was yet more violence, suffering and death... none of which was happening before US interference.

Are you kidding, there was tons of suffering and death before US interference. The only reason you didn't hear about it because it was systematic. Which in a way compared to know is probably worse. Saddam was able to cover up and keep a lot of his atrocities not that well known though the use of murder, torture and the secret police. He committed acts of genocide against the Kurdish people which part of his governmental mandate was to wipe them out along with a few other minority's and anybody who threatened his power.

"According to The New York Times, "he [Saddam] murdered as many as a million of his people, many with poison gas. He tortured, maimed and imprisoned countless more. His unprovoked invasion of Iran is estimated to have left another million people dead. His seizure of Kuwait threw the Middle East into crisis. More insidious, arguably, was the psychological damage he inflicted on his own land. Hussein created a nation of informants — friends on friends, circles within circles — making an entire population complicit in his rule".[9] Others have estimated 800,000 deaths caused by Saddam not counting the Iran-Iraq war.[10] Estimates as to the number of Iraqis executed by Saddam's regime vary from 300-500,000[11] to over 600,000,[12] estimates as to the number of Kurds he massacred vary from 70,000 to 300,000,[13] and estimates as to the number killed in the put-down of the 1991 rebellion vary from 60,000[14] to 200,000.[12] Estimates for the number of dead in the Iran-Iraq war range upwards from 300,000.[15]"

	Bush may really have thought in his simple minded stupidity that we could go into Iraq as saviors and be loved by the people for it, but that idea was retarded.

Yeah I kind of agree with you that whole invasion of Iraq was very simpleminded and it has caused a lot of suffering and not brought as much stability as people thought it would and the main reasons behind the invasion probably weren't all that noble to begin with. But then again if Saddam hadn't been toppled he probably would have gone on killing large amounts of his own people for years and the regime would have continued until his death when you would have either gotten a successor taking over and continuing it all or the same general chaos you have now. Looking upon the history of the regime I think that even with the 100,000 civilian deaths, the anarchy and warring religious groups, and now slow rebuilding, Iraq is better off cause at least the suffering is not as systematic, and with him gone it at least has the possibility to rebuild and try and become something better. US interference did suck but it was one of those things where there is simply no easy way to bring about change.

[gecko]

I understand that propaganda is effective and group-dynamics are powerful. I'd hope I'd see the absurdity of fighting over patches of land *with God's blessing* and have the capability of escaping.

[Senseofrelief]

The problem with terrorism is that it lacks credibility and substance....

In the past, revolutionaries fought against monarchies, regimes and political systems that were universally considered to be oppressive, squashed civil rights etc ect.....ofcourse all the revolutionaries were terrorists...until the regime changed....

The terrorist of today, thinks that a bible is the know all, end all solution, to all laws and political systems, then make the tactical leap, to blowing up civilians and themselves as somehow a workable means to those ends.

It's stupid, mainly because bible thumping idiots that simply believe illogical material as working logic will probably do stupid things.

None the less, all terrorism in the middle east comes out a hatred for what Israel did to the Palestinians...working backwards, those that support Israel are part of the problem, and those that support those that support Israel are part of the problem. Ergo...'let's blow up a couple of office buildings as a working solution to the Arab/Israili conflict'.

You have to wonder at the level of tactical stupidity that these guys work at.

Anyone who has done real coursework on the middle east conflicts have come to the same conclusion...the Palestinians got screwed...the next assumption is not that hard to realize but is pretty clear, that they aren't smart enough to get their land back. Which begs to ask the question...maybe they don't deserve it...stupid people don't make good stewards of the land.

So it's kinda like this for me....the Palestinians got screwed, but in the end, they are fighting for their land, like the Jews, for religious reasons, not because the land has gold ingots encrusted in the soil...it's all religious, it's all illogical, most of the people over there, at the very core, or idiots, as the Koran, or Bible, or Torah is the basis for every dumb thing they do, from when they get up in the morning to when they go to bed.

That said, the smart thing for the US is to surround all the oil fields, regulate the flow of energy, then let all the idiots over there kill each while they thump their respective bibles.

[hablababla]

I understand "why" they do it from giving a logical look at the Islamic faith and their surroundings. But it doesnt mean I agree with it or anything. Ive had Christian friends literally say they would kill for their faith.. so it does go both ways.

I have a friend that was born in Iran and lives in Dubai now. He says not everyone there hates Americans. Theres just many things misunderstood. And our leaders do define us largely whether we like it or not.

[Zsych]

Well hate is a strong word. Most people anywhere, don't particularly care about any one else's lives unless they themselves are being affected in an obvious and significant way.

@ManWithNoName: Systemic trouble, I'll agree with. There was a degree of trouble happening there beforehand. For most people though, life was relatively stable - and it tends to be, as long as you have a decent amount of money. Pure communism won't cause any serious problems if there's a lot of money in the economy.. like oil money...

Unfortunately, after the US invasion, it was anarchy. And where some people really did appreciate americans being around for stability, more probably weren't happy because their lives had gotten worse, and they had invaders on their soil (better your own road to hell and all that..)

[Vagrant]

It truly depends on the "terrorist" group.

Some "terrorists" are simply labeled as such because they are fighting for their own freedom or ideals against a perceived-oppressive regime which is trying to exert its control over them. I can empathize with this.

Some "terrorists" are labeled as such because they agree with an extremist view (or know no other view) and will enforce such extremism on others. I can only mildly empathize with this, but not much.

Some "terrorists" are insane (such as schizophrenia or paranoia) and choose to act out on their insanity. I cannot empathize with these people, although I understand the reason.

However, the term "terrorist" is subjective. The person applying the label may view the other as extremist, when the other may view the original person as the extremist.

[Shadizar]

	Originally Posted by Jillian To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	Do you understand the terrorist point of veiw when it comes to the ever so generic U.s vs Iraq/iran sense? Like if you lived there, do you think youd hate US too? Based upon what weve done to their country, and just popular veiw of others around you? How Americans see Iraqians, how they see us... what do you think

Don't have to. Canadians already have a dim view of Americans, and we're neighbors.

[raimius]

It depends. I can understand those who resort to guerrilla warfare for reasons of revenge or political ideals fairly easily. I do not understand the religiously motivated ones nearly as well. It is very difficult for me to envision a situation where someone disagreeing with my religious views should be murdered.

[sircockburn]

I'm looking for a book that covers terrorist-recruiting methods. Whatever they do seems to work, and it'd be nice to apply some of their persuasion tactics in my own professional/personal life.

If anyone knows of a book, I'm all ears. Thanks.

[Shagrath]

I'm an Arab myself, living in the Middle East (Lebanon specifically), and while I don't hate the United States I want it to stop its involvements in the Middle East. However, I despise extremist Muslim groups and I advocate peace between Israel and the Arab countries, even though I dislike Israel's occupation of Palestine.

[Shadizar]

	Originally Posted by sircockburn To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	I'm looking for a book that covers terrorist-recruiting methods. Whatever they do seems to work, and it'd be nice to apply some of their persuasion tactics in my own professional/personal life. If anyone knows of a book, I'm all ears. Thanks.

Find people who are similarly disgruntled about... whatever it is your disgruntled about. Give them a gun and show them how to use it. Then give them a nifty catch phrase to shout when they charge off to die; classic ones like "for God" or "for France" always work well; but strive for originality and try something like "FOR PUUUUUSSYYYYY".

[stealthfighter]

In my country, Islamic terrorists have shown no respect for anyone even innocent civilians. While I agree that some terrorists are really fighting for noble causes (ethnic freedom, anti-imperialism, etc.), the fact that they are pursuing their goals at the expense of the lives of innocent and peaceful people (by the thousands in some cases) makes their action pointless and contradictory to the cause they are fighting for.

[TylerRDA]

It's pretty logical to me. Wage war on American culture... fight those who perpetuate the culture. However logical and moral justification are not the same thing. I think it would do us a buttload of good to actually listen to what they have to say. But to be 100% brutally honest, I can't say I wouldn't be ultra pissed at a cultural steamroller (especially given Afghanistan's history of occupation), but probably not enough to blow myself up about it. But heck, as the 'bad buy', I am still a little sympathetic to their cause, but not the way they want to go about achieving it.

[Samoan Corleone]

I understand a little bit of terrorist, but I'm not fluent.