Do not make the mistake of thinking that because my conclusion is the same as another person's that my reasoning is the same
Sebastian Holsclaw, who might see the things I see if he saw what I look at (taking psychology into account will prevent that from being a tautology) says:
…and I see this Arab stereotype in the back of my mind saying, "Will understanding the Americans' motivations really help us? I submit that it will only help us if we can live with their objectives. If their objectives include things like 'Convert everyone to Free Market Capitalism,' or 'Bring Democracy to the entire Middle East,' or 'destroy Palestine,' or 'Arrange for our people to buy more cyclical, fashion driven products,' I'm not sure that knowing the motivation will help because we can't accommodate the motivation.
Moral equivalence? No. Functional equivalence.
Posted by P6 at November 22, 2003 08:06 AM | Trackback URL: http://www.prometheus6.org/mt/mt-tb.cgi/2345:) And I know that. But I am hoping that these aren't the real motivations. Because if my characterization of the terrorist motives are correct, then there is absolutely no hope of avoiding war. And if their characterizations are correct they can't avoid war with us. That is why I framed the question the way I did. I wanted someone to tell me the terrorist motivation that we could react to with some method other than war. So far, no one has even given a hint.
If you're really interested, you can find analysis out there. Here are some I turned up with Google. Note: I do not endorse or necessarily agree with any of these viewpoints or the people who make them. I've tried to find as wide a range of views as possible, from the far left to the far right and in other directions besides. Also, some of them were written a couple of years ago and the authors might have something different to say today.
Misinterpreting Osama's Messages? - Psychologist analyzes what is being said; from a left-wing website.
Bin Laden's Modest Goals - Libertarian columnist Joseph Sobran.
The Goals of Osama Bin Laden - Militant Muslim website.
Inside the Mind of Osama Bin Laden - Washington Post.
Moral Equivalence - Not sure how to classify this one.
Mr. Bush's War - Canadian columnist Eric Margolis.
Incidentally, my Google search also turned up this personal numerology report for Bin Laden. If all else fails...
I wanted someone to tell me the terrorist motivation that we could react to with some method other than war.
Much as the rest of the world looked for something in the USofA's motivation that could be reacted to by some method other than war.
OK, but so what? If they had found a way to deal with Islamist terrorism without war they would have tried to implement it.
So again, are there terrorist aims that we can live with, or are their aims so incompatible with us that we have to kill them or force them to give up their aims?
The 10:20 links are either weird (and strangely naive) psycho-analysis or tend to ignore some of Al Qaeda's stronger statements. This plays into my suspicion that many want to downplay Al Qaeda's aims when they don't fit in with a paradigm that we can capitulate to.
BTW we have already removed our troops from 'The holiest land of Islam', yet the attacks haven't noticeably dropped off.
You asked what was out there, I provided links to what I found. You don't like it, try searching yourself.
Oh and as far as I can tell, the American presence in Saudi Arabia is nearly as strong as it's always been. Surely you're not that naive.
If they had found a way to deal with Islamist terrorism without war they would have tried to implement it.
I disagree. War is a millenia-old hammer, an old, familiar tool.
Sebastian, in order to understand the motivation of those attacking us we need to recognize the the imposition of our economic and governmental system, the conscious extension and overwriting of our culture over that of others, is an aggression. We can discuss the desirability of one culture over another…for my part it's hard for me to judge another culture as more desirable than this one because all the criteria by which I'd make such a judgement arise from my participation here. But the fact is, this is seen as an aggression and is responded to accordingly.
"Sebastian, in order to understand the motivation of those attacking us we need to recognize the the imposition of our economic and governmental system, the conscious extension and overwriting of our culture over that of others, is an aggression."
You need to realize that while it is perceived as an agression by Middle Eastern cultures, it is in fact merely an extension of how we live our day to day lives. We speak freely. We allow our women to speak at all. We allow sexuality to be expressed. We engage in trade and learning. We don't need to murder Jews. We have a system of religious tolerance that doesn't allow for Islamic control over the society. The output of our society is a threat without us ever trying. And there is no way for us to stop the seduction of our culture on their young people without ceasing all contact.
If what they want is for us to stop the passive 'aggression' of our culture, that is impossible for us. We are not going to restrain and silence our women. We are not going to abandon our sexuality. And if they feel the need to resist it by trying to kill 40,000 people in New York City, they will only gain real physical aggression. The concious imposition of our ways didn't come until after the attack.
IF you are correct war with them is unavoidable. I suspect you are correct about their motivations.
I also have no problem noticing that the cultures of the Middle East are both socially and intellectually backwards. I realize you want to try for evenhandedness, but they are what they are. They engage in honor killings of their own daughters if they have been raped. They stone adult women who have been raped. They topple walls on homosexuals. They force girls back into burning buildings if they aren't wearing the proper clothes.
You need to realize that while it is perceived as an agression by Middle Eastern cultures, it is in fact merely an extension of how we live our day to day lives.
I agree totally, but the statement probably means different things to us.
I'm actually not trying to be evenhanded. I'm looking at cultures like they are organisms whereas the specifics you've mentioned are (in this metaphor) more like cellular interactions.