Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Posted: 9/21/2001 11:02:25 AM EDT
What have we ever done to them? I read in another thread that we are disliked in the Arab world, and other people here are saying that the Arabs have good reason to be mad at us. But what have we really done to them? The United States pushed the United Kingdom and France to end colonialism. By our efforts, we freed Morocco, Tunisia, Libya, Egypt, Palestine, Jordan, Iraq, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Yemen, Oman, Bangladesh, and Indonesia. That is virtually the entire Muslim world. They were colonies, and we made them free. When our three most faithful allies, the UK, France and Israel attacked Egypt in 1956, we supported Egypt. Israel is of course the focus for those who would seek to excuse the recent attacks. You could argue all day who has a right to the land, as Jews, Muslims and Christians have at one time or another controlled it. But would Israel really not exist without our support? They did not need our help in whipping the entire Arab world in 1947. While we did support Israel thereafter, this was largely as a result of Cold War calculations. In every war the Israelis have fought since we started supporting them, we have restrained them after they have thoroughly whipped the Arab forces. Our pressures resulted in the return of Sinai and the embryonic Palestinian state. The Arab-Israeli conflicts have been and comparatively bloodless, because the Arabs have fought so poorly. While the Israelis have killed quite a few civilian Palestinians over time, the numbers are fairly modest. For example, 300 have been killed in the Infathada. And I doubt that you could call most of those killed “innocent.” While the Israelis may have used excessive force, the protestors were hardly peaceful. Muslims still control the Mount. For every dime we give Israel, we give a dime to Egypt. We sell F-15s, F-16s and M-1s to the Arab states. With regards to Iran, we forced the Soviets out of there after World War II. While we did support the Shaw, he was a prince compared to the Ayatollahs. The Iranian economy was growing faster before the fall of the Shaw, and there was less political oppression. When it became apparent that the Shaw had lost much popular support, we did nothing to support him. I have no pity for the Iraqis; they were given every chance to leave peacefully from Kuwait. We only acted in defense of an ally, another Arab state. If the Iraqis would comply with the UN resolutions, which they agreed to, the sanctions would end. Our intervention ended the Iran-Iraq war, where up to a million Muslims had killed each other. We have given the Arabs hundreds of billions of dollars for their oil. Without that, they would all be poor and powerless. We freed Afghanistan from the Soviets and their puppets. When Pakistan was threatened by the Soviets in Afghanistan, we supported them. When Beruit was in shambles (twice), we helped to restore order. We helped the PLO escape. While we later got involved in the Lebanese mess, are they really better off under the Syrian puppet than they would have been if we had won?
Link Posted: 9/21/2001 11:03:14 AM EDT
Our attacks in retaliation for terrorist attacks have always been extremely limited. In fact, they have been completely ineffective because they have been so limited to avoid extensive casualties. Are the Muslims wronged or just ungrateful? While I am not saying that our conduct towards them has been blameless, we have done many good things for them too. What I see is not people who are screwed by American oppression, but people who have screwed themselves and are looking for a scapegoat.
Top Top