Blogcritics: Comments on "The West is in a race for its life"

Comment by jadester

Thu, 19 Jun 2003 05:11:16 EDT

"almost no terrorism occurs in the world's poorest 49 countries" Even i, a lowly member of the public, can explain this; these terrorists most often do not see their own countries as their enemies, or at least not the enemies they wish to attack. The point is that they take their religion more seriously than, e.g., the average christian, and when they see elements of western culture that go againts their religion managing to worm their way into their society, they feel the ened to fight back. Have you not ever seen any of these terrorists talknig on tv? whilst i kno you cannot 100% trust everything you hear, there seems to be ageneral consensus amongst those who have talked on tv that this is a major factor in their wanting to blow western stuff up. The sad fact is that the majority of western people do not respect islamic culture as they should, and whether intenionally or (as is most likely the case) not, this causes great offence to the islamic peoples. The sooner more people stop all this bullshit, escalating military posturing and instead sit down and talk with each other AND LISTEN TO EACH OTHER, the better...

Comment by mike

Sun, 15 Jun 2003 03:16:50 EDT

"We" aren't weary and "we" aren't interested in worldwide "ass kicking." And "we" continue to be amazed by the tendency of prowars to project their bloodthirsy fantasies onto their opponents. As in Mr. Schwarz's statement that "what now makes fanatical Islamist terrorism so dangerous is the marriage of its unrestrained goals with a highly adaptable, loosely structured international network that can increasingly kill very many people with relative ease." Strike "Islamist" from that sentence and you have an excellent description of Rumsfeld's "flexible" new military.

Comment by Doctor Slack

Sat, 14 Jun 2003 19:01:20 EDT

It would be nice if those who were so concerned with "Islamoterrorism" also had policy prescriptions for it that seemed practical. Evidence thus far is that "kicking Islamoterrorist ass around the globe" -- if this is a reference to military action -- doesn't cut it. The strictly military approach has spectacularly failed just about everywhere it's been tried; the result is almost unfailingly a dialogue of arms between extremists. If people are serious about the "war" on terrorism, they'll start looking at a more diverse range of options. Among other things, that involves strengthening and enforcing pesky things like "international law," which seems un-macho and un-gratifying. The real test of people's commitment to stopping terrorism is if they're up for that kind of drudgery.