[Peptobismol]

[Big A]

The US is not winning the war on terror. Al-Qaeda also has by no means won. But across a whole range of objectives, al-Qaeda has accomplished more of its goals than the US has of its

The whole premise of this article is simply mistaken, because the article wants to invent imaginery goals for al Qaeda and for the US. For example, the article states that al Qaeda's goal was to convince Muslims that Americans want to rape Muslim women and that is why al Qaeda mass-murdered 3,000 Americans on 9/11. That's complete nonsense.

al Qaeda stated that their goal was to mass-murder as many Americans as possible in a Jihad, because they are commanded to do so under Islam. They also stated that they wanted to drive all Christians out of Muslim lands, like the Americans in Saudi Arabia, for example.

None of this is stated in the article, of course.

But, the article is quite correct in saying that Arabs and other Muslims hate the United States and that bin Ladin is more popular in the Arab world than president Bush. What the article does not say, however, is that Muslims hated Americans long before 9/11.

It is true that many Arabs were thrilled to learn that 3,000 Americans were murdered by Muslims. For example, Palestinians danced in the streets when they learned of the 9/11 attack, because Palestinians are enemies of the US. It is also the case in other Arab countries. So what? That's old news.

[PhillipHer]

Excuse me for asking, but why is an obvious Troll like Olivier getting so much attention from Israel Forum participants? Can't you see that this guy is never going to let reality confuse him? He has marked the target, and then proceeded to bend all facts to suit it. OK, we have all read his views. And now, on to more constructive discussions.

[Paul Bunyan]

From al-Qaeda's point of view, the political unity of the Muslim world was deliberately destroyed by a one-two punch. First, Western colonial powers invaded Muslim lands and detached them from the Ottoman Empire or other Muslim states. They ruled them brutally as colonies, reducing the people to little more than slaves serving the economic and political interests of the British, French, Russians, etc. France invaded Algeria in 1830. Great Britain took Egypt in 1882 and Iraq in 1917. Russia took the Emirate of Bukhara and other Central Asian territories in the 1860s and forward. Second, they formed these colonies into Western-style nation-states, often small and weak ones, so that the divisive effects of the colonial conquests have lasted. (Look at the British Empire and its imposition on much of the Muslim world, e.g.)

I don't claim to know or even understand the motives and ideologies of terrorist groups like Al-Qaeda.
However, if the abovementioned quote does reflect their ideological basis then it is a flawed historical view just like the 19th cent. colonial empires.

The Muslims in general and the Ottoman empire in particular are no more and no less than foreign colonial power that invaded, conquered and brutally destroyed native cultures in the middle east, northern Africa and central Asia.
For example, when the Muslims invaded Egypt, in 7th cent A.D., the country was a big Roman-Byzantine center with rich culture and economy.

"529 the emperor Justinian closed the Academy of Athens, forbidding the teaching of what he called "pagan philosophy", yet Alexandria's schools remained open, teaching Aristotelian and Platonic philosophy"

"Alexandria also received another moment of glory during the Byzantine Era, as the Byzantines became rather infatuated with classical Greek culture that had been largely lost under the Romans, but well-preserved by the learned of Alexandria. Royal patronage of the arts and sciences had long disappeared, yet the poets, teachers, and scholars went on for their art's sake, supporting themselves through pedagogy and commissioned writing. But this was not to last. In the early seventh century the most successful Persian attack on the Byzantine Empire took both Jerusalem and Alexandria. The emperor Heraclius managed to beat back the Persians to the point of collapse but a new onslaught began, this time from the south. After battling the Persians, the Byzantine rulers had little hope of defeating the forces that came sweeping north from the deserts of Arabia. The final defeat of the Byzantine armies in 636 left Palestine and Syria open to conquest by the Arabs, and they spread like wildfire over northern Africa, eventually bringing Alexandria under their control in 642."

source: http://www.touregypt.net/alexhis3.htm

Regarding the Ottoman empire: here's an interesting article about Constantinople:

"By 1453, triple-walled Constantinople, one of the most coveted and magnificent cities in the world, had stood watch over the Bosporus for 2100 years. For the last 1100 of these, it had been the capital of the Byzantine Empire, crown of the Eastern Christian world and an international center of wealth, beauty, power and commerce. Constantinople was named in the fourth century for the reigning Roman emperor, Constantine the Great; in nativity the city was known as Byzantium, and today it is called Istanbul.

Also by 1453, Constantinople had been besieged many times -- by Persians, Avars, Arabs (twice), Bulgars, Russians (three times) and Pechenegs. During the Byzantine era, it had been conquered only once -- in 1204, by soldiers of the Fourth Crusade. The city served as the capital of the Crusaders' short-lived Latin kingdom until it was recaptured by the Byzantines in 1261.

And by 1453, the Byzantine Empire had been shrinking steadily for some 400 years, due to both internal political strife and military pressure from rival powers of both East and West. The capital city had suffered along with the rest of the empire. By 1453, Constantinople's population, once a million strong, had shrunk to a mere tenth of that. Although its historic luster had been tarnished, Constantinople, the gateway to Europe, was nevertheless an alluring military objective for the Ottoman Turks as they consolidated their hold in Asia Minor and Eastern Europe."

source: http://www.tughranet.f2s.com/kuwae.htm

The text above sounds to me exactly like a foreign military colonial power, i.e. the Turks, coveting a city that stood in its place for over 1,000 years, i.e. Constantinople.

in conclusion, Al-Qaeda and the rest of the Muslim world have no rightful claim none-what-so-ever, for nativity in places like North Africa, incl Egypt, the middle east, Turkey and central Asia.

[LottiFurmann]

OK, I understand now. I thought you wanted to judge whether Al-Qaeda's claims are right or not.

If you're trying to answer the question of what does Al-Qaeda want and whether or not they achieved it - then I would have to say that its a little presumptuous of you to claim such knowledge. You rely upon public announcements and self-made material like video cassettes. That is just propaganda for the public (Muslims public, no doubt) and it does not say anything about the real goals of the terrorist leaders. We also don't know how much effect these terrorist attacks have on gov'ts and on common people. These factors can only be judged in retrospect after a long period have passed (maybe 20 years?) I honestly believe no one knows for sure the grand plan of Al-Qaeda (if such a plan exists.)

I personally am willing to accept that the motives of Al-Qaeda and its friends are blind unrational hate. That does not mean that US and western world conduct in the third world is flawless and altruistic.

[radikal]

So get over it, right? Wrong.

http://www.archive.org/movies/detail...eRoadtoTyranny

Faith in conspiracies is the new religion.