This site is not maintained. Click here for the new website of Richard Dawkins.

Comment

← Two articles on al-Qeda and Terrorism

Abdul al-Hazred's Avatar Jump to comment 28 by Abdul al-Hazred

Luis,


By what criteria? That it wouldn't be pro-American, perhaps? What about a disgusting regime like the one in Uzbekistan, which enjoys friendly relations with the United States but isn't any better than the Taliban? Did it become "more disgusting" when relations with Washington were strained a few years ago?


By looking at its opposition, and who wishes to topple it. Have you ever been to Saudi Arabia? Ever done much reading on the topic? I don't support the US's support of Uzbekistan, I merely said there are situations where lesser evils have to be tolerated, and I said KSA was one such place.



Maybe our sympathy should start to gravitate towards them rather than, say, the Iraqis they slaughter.



You only mouth support for Iraqis because the raison d'etre for your whining happens to be the United States. Where were your whimpers when George Galloway (another of the leftist whingers) was complimenting Saddam and profiting from the Oil for Food scandal? It is sickening to watch people suddenly start to give a shit about human suffering only when it serves their intellectual games.


it were axiomatic that "lesser evil" translates into whatever Western leaders judge it to be.


You just made that up, I never said that. I gave ONE example, and you extrapolate that nonsense. Get a grip.


I'm sorry, I didn't know that horror towards a state's actions was contingent upon it not being a democracy.


Democracies tend to be a lot LESS horrible.


That, as well as everything else you said, doesn't negate the apartheid nature of Israel's occupation of Palestine. Furthermore, given that Israel's atrocities are underwritten by the West, WE have a responsibility to withdraw our support for them (or don't we?), rather than droning on about how democratic and wonderful the country is (and thereby acting as cheerleaders for state violence).



Oh here we go... Your sympathy for the Palestinians. Of course you and your ilk love the Palestinians, but not really. As King Hussein of Jordan killed 20,000.... silence. When the Jordanians and Egyptians denied their self determination... silence. When Egypt fires on their refugees... silence. When Israel endures 8000 rocket attacks and goes on to kill 1400 Palestinians (over 800 of them militants) then you squeak. You don't love the Palestinians, you don't really care, this is all part of the mental masturbation that comes with anti-Zionism.

Did you stand up and protest when Sri Lanka murdered 20,000 Tamils? Do you REALLY care about human suffering, or only when it stirs your intellectual curiosity?

Apartheid? Not really. But if you would take the time to visit the settlements you would see the command the high ground. If Israel leaves these would be platforms to target Tel Aviv and the entirety of the coastal area of Israel with rockets. So why would Israel ceded this territory to a group that would once again attempt to carry out the genocide of the Israelis as it has done over and over again?


Israel can have security, by stopping its American-backed rejectionism and thievery. It's simple: when you steal other people's resources, block their food and medicine, snipe at their farmers, bulldoze their homes, impose collective punishment, break children's limbs, kidnap and torture people, reduce their territory to Bantustans criss-crossed with road-blocks and fences so that other people can move in, expect an ugly response.



This bit of blood libel is bellow contempt.

It is odd (and completely ignorant) that you think Islamist violence against Jews is a "response". May I suggest Ibn Warraq's "A History of Islamic Anti-Semitism". As for security, I suggest you spend some serious time in the Middle East, and see what security is all about.


"Destabilise" simply translates into "frustrating American designs".



Not quite. The Pakistani government (and this should color your view about the situations) has long been interested in seeing Afghanistan be a religious state... because they do not want it to be a Pashtun state which would spread Pashtun nationalism to Pakistan and in turn destabilize Pakistan. Unfortunately it seems the lesser of two evils has back fired for the Pakistanis. The ISI has long supported the Taliban, and now the chickens are coming home to roost and the Pakistanis think it is drone strikes that are the cause. I believe it should be left up to military commanders on the ground. If they are against the strikes then so be it.


Throwing acid into women's faces was the invention of a Washington favourite during the anti-Soviet war. Secondly, the Taliban has no monopoly on anti-woman thuggery.


Islam has mastered anti-woman thuggery. And yes the US supported the Taliban in its effort to evict the Russians. So what? They are Islamist assholes and now we have to deal with them, what should we do? You simply complain and complain, never do I hear a solution just vague malodorous whiffs of ill advised conjecture.


A fabrication, as I've mentioned earlier. Iran threatened no such thing.


No it isn't. I cited numerous comments from Im-a-dinner-jacket that said just that. Not only that Iran supports two organizations (Hezbollah and Hamas) that declare as their reason for existence the destruction of Israel. What message should we take from that? Your lies and deceit on behalf of the Iranian regime are shocking. And not only that, Iran supports Hezbollah the leader of which (Hassan NasrAllah) said that he hopes "every Jew gathers in Israel so it would be easier to eliminate them from earth". So I suggest you stop smoking whatever it is that you are smoking and get a reality check.


No, you both are. The existence of delusions on one "side" doesn't preclude the other side having delusions.


That is true, one does not preclude the other. But the eschatalogical rantings of Shi'a fundamentalists should certainly at least alarm you? Pursuing weapons of mass destruction combined with public (in front of the UN General Assembly) supplications for the end of time and the victory of Islam makes the hair on my neck stand up.


because your religion of state worship demands it


I don't worship the state. I see it as the best available means to ensure the maximum amount of rights and security at this point. If you have a better solution I would love to hear it.


A false dichotomy. Firstly, it isn't for the West to decide how other people should live.


Agreed.

Secondly, supporting these vile regimes actually INCREASES the threat of Islamism


The greatest leaps forward in Islamism came in the absence of foreign intervention. Please save this self flagellating nonsense for someone else.


Irrelevant. Its CRIMES are at issue here



Not irrelevant. Israel is a valued ally of civilized countries. You know nothing of what a "crime" is in the region. A crime is going soft on security and letting your citizens die.


How about instead focusing on how the Soviet Union lead the world in aspects of space travel? Sound reasonable? Yeah, I thought not.


No that is relevant. The USSR did make great advances, it's scientists would have made those advances elsewhere had they been allowed to escape the USSR.


By the sounds of it, neither have you.



I lived there. It is worth at least a visit. You hear about these horrible and dehumanizing checkpoints and then you see them and it's a big let down, you hope to see pointed nosed Jews eating Palestinian babies, but alas it is akin to a shitty airport security line.


Maybe I'm an idealist, but I tend to think that civilised people don't back torturers, they don't spray populated areas with white phosphorous, and they don't lay siege to cities with depleted uranium munitions that lead to a huge spike in deformed babies. They don't invade other peoples' countries, fund brutal occupations, train and arm death squads, or kidnap people and hold them in gulags. Furthermore, civilised people don't downplay their own responsibilities by erecting an edifice of pieties to shield themselves from culpability.



You are an idealist, and when it comes to dealing with the real world it seems that idealism is fucking useless. But I would agree with you here that the US has a lot to answer for. I am rather more appalled at its tolerance of thieves at the upper echelons of the economy (more to worry about when you start screwing your own people). But yes there is certainly no doubt that the US made some real time calculation that turned out to be foolish and cost a lot of people their lives. Some of these are being recognized and fixed, some are not, and all are out in the open for discussion. So I don't know where you think I am shielding America from culpability. I am simply saying that it isn't such a perfect world and that all decisions have consequences, many of them negative.

Sat, 01 May 2010 15:23:00 UTC | #464584