Tuesday, July 03, 2007

Terrorism = poverty and injustice?

Moral Relativists and their leftist symphathizers have long rationalized the use of terrorism by concluding that injustice, poverty, and disempowerment are the root causes rather than a belief in a deeply-held, Islamist ideology (although wealthy terror czar Osama bin Laden and the educated British-born Muslims behind the 7/7 bombings already debunked that theory). If only they were free of their corrupt governments and had adequate housing and employment, there would be no terrorism. The recent Glasgow plot contradicts that line of thinking. British investigators have implicated physicians in the plot and are searching for four other Muslim doctors believed to be involved in the planned attacks (see Forbes article).

When will the elites wake up and realize that this ideology supercedes race, sex, and socio-economic status. Are poor, young uneducated men more susceptible? Definitely, but the common denominator here is the embrace of radical Islam, rapidly in recent years by men and women of all backgrounds and cultures. Fundamentalist Islam is the root of the problem, not poverty, and until we recognize that and demand moderate Muslims to speak up and take back control of their religion, we can expect larger and more deadly attacks to come. Unfortunately, western leaders continue to bask in sunlight of blissful ignorance and self-destructive political correctness.

4 comments:

BJB said...

Brandon,
I wonder, could our neo-con driven foreign policy have anything to do with it? You know, as Ron Paul tried to set forth, as Pat Buchanan has set forth, and has your man Rudy G finds "ridiculous?" Better be careful, if you reject knee jerk and trite explanations (ie the hate us for our freedom) then you might find yourself bucking Rudy's lead!

I have posted on the war at “Whitefish and War” on my blog.
http://bjbrownsblog.blogspot.com

I will be posting on that same subject again in the week to come. It is very important that conservatives think in terms other than mere jingoism on this crucial subject!

Brandon Kenig said...

Mr. Brown,
I disagree. Western influence extends beyond the bounds of our foreign policy and includes the reach of our media, entertainment, pop culture, and major corporations. The radical Islamic fanatics resent our influence and the possibility it will lead to change and reform in their own countries.

Terror against the west has been occuring long before 9/11--even back to the 1960s. And if you are still prone to blame that on our alliance with Israel after WWII, you might want to consider the recent examples of violence and outrage due to the Danish cartoons and the Pope's comments. I think those would have happened regardless of our foreign policy. Even if we closed every military base in the mideast, pulled out of Iraq and Afghanistan, and embraced an isolationist foreign policy, the attacks would not stop. It goes much deeper than that. When relgion is involved, nothing else matters.

But you're right--I would not just say they hate us for our freedom--it is much more complex than that. In a nutshell, you have a part of the world still living in the 6th century, refusing to adapt and change, and responding to the change occuring around it by embracing a radical, fascist-like component of their religion.

Mike4Freedom said...

History has shown us that the main driver of terrorism is nationalism. If you invade a nation and/or do bad things to its people, they will fight back. If they do not have an army, they will do what they can with their small numbers.

The US has done bad things in the Middle East at least since the 1953 episode where we orchestrated the overthrow of an elected government and installed our puppet, the Shah if Iran. It has been down hill ever since.

Maybe most Americans don't remember this but the Iranians sure do. They suffered under the vicious dictator for 26 years until they got enough people together, using terrorism, to over throw him.

Itaq was a stable nation with no civil war and Sunni and Shia even intermarrying until we invaded, overthrew the government and created the driver for the religious fanatics to attract large numbers of people hurt by our invasion.

BJB said...

Mike,
I perceive that you are neither a Bush nor Rudy man. Good analysis.

What do you think of Ron Paul? I am trying to get Brandon to consider switching teams. You know, since Rudy is dead meat and all anyway.

Oh, Brandon, good analysis on your part as well. Not quite right, as they say across the pond, but good nonetheless.

And as for the stuck in the 6th century bit -- do we want them all living our lifestyles? Think Algore would be the first to tell us that that would not work.