I've been Thinking

[MMMMMM]

Hi again, Lestat,

I'm not trying to discount the political goals and aspirations on the part of the people in question; they certainly have those too. However, for the global jihadists (and bin-Laden and Zarqawi definitely are global jihadists), religious considerations are of great importance in shaping their views and goals. Actually, such persons, who take the Koran most literally, cannot truly separate the political and religious components as we can; and the ideology of Islam itself is not very tractable to such a separation, anyway.

Islam contains a code for the conduct of all human affairs, outlined out in the Koran, and elaborated on in the hadiths (along with biographical information of Muhammad's life); and Islam has the ultimate goal of eventually bringing the entire world into submission under Allah's will. Devout Muslims are those who fully submit to Allah's will. Such submission, over the entire world, is in fact is the ultimate Islamic concept of peace: all humankind under Allah, all following Allah's will and instructions, and thereby living happily and worshipfully ever after in that wonderful state. "Peace" is following Allah's will, along with other like-minded followers. And Allah's will is spelled out clearly in the Koran, because Muhammad recorded the precise words of Allah, as told to him by the archangel Gabriel (interestingly, there are no questions of authorship with the Koran, as contrasted with the various books of the Bible: the Koran is all from one source and all recorded by the Allah's Mesenger, Muhammad).

As for your bringing up the intelligence of religious fanatics: I too would guess that on average it may be on the lower side; yet, it is amazing what some intelligent people can end up believing if that is all they hear and read from the time they are little children. Imagine being forced to pray ritualistically five times a day, too. Growing up fully immersed in unquestioned religion and faith can cause many to accept such dogmas without question. Also, the fundamental aspects of personality which are developed during the early years of childhood, often tend to stay with people for a lifetime.

[hetron]

I'll try to reply as best I can to each segment of your post:
[ QUOTE ]
Hi Hetron,

You will notice that I expressed that scenario conditionally. Actually, quite a parlay of adverse trends and developments would have to occur before I would actually advocate such a course of action. It could happen, though.

[ QUOTE ]
it is so very INTERESTING to me that you propose going in and "molding" the middle east instead of just suggesting leaving the whole region alone. Do you feel that Islamic fanaticists would lose their preoccupation with the west if we lost our preoccupation with their oil?

[/ QUOTE ]

No, the Islamic fanatics would not lose their preoccupation with the West if we lost our preoccupation with their oil.

Firstly, the only reason they have any sort of substantial economy at all, is because we buy their oil. Otherwise their GDP would be just terribly, terribly small--and even with the massive oil sales, it is not large compared to other Western countries or regions. So we do help their economies tremendously. Of course, it is a mutually beneficial arrangement. And yes, much of those revenues are concentrated amongst the ruling powers in the Middle East. Yet without those revenues the region would be far poorer still.


[/ QUOTE ]

Ok. I won't debate that.

[/ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Secondly, the principal reason the Islamists hate the West is for religious reasons. The words of Zarqawi and bin-Laden make very clear the religious component to all of this, and this undercurrent is ever present. Their specific stated grievances are just add-ons to the basically religious fanatical theme of hating infidels, democracy, and anything that runs contrary to prely Islamic religious rule.


[/ QUOTE ]

It is unclear if they could garner any support for these ideas if the common folk didn't seem to think that the US was a supreme meddler in the region.

[ QUOTE ]

The problem with just "leaving the Middle East alone" is threefold: 1) if left alone it will continue to fester and produce more virulent anti-Western propaganda and hatred, a la the Saudi Arabia worldwide ideological campaign, 2) Nuclear weapons in the future hands our fanataical enemies such as Iran, could be disastrous, and 3) the current state of the Middle East is entirely deplorable with regard to human rights and especially women's rights. I can't feel morally OK with just allowing many millions to be so oppressed if there is anything within reason which we can do to help the causes of freedom and human rights--and I would hope that you can't, either.


[/ QUOTE ]

Like I said, if the united states was so concerned about human rights, it would do more to help stop human rights abuses in parts of the world that were less economically important, eg, africa. Of course, our silence when it comes to the massacre in darfur is deafening.
[ QUOTE ]

However, as mentioned above, quite a parlay would have to occur before I would actually advocate a Western war against, and occupation of, such countries as Iran, Syria and Saudi Arabia.

[/ QUOTE ]

[Lestat]

You seem to know much about this. To the point where you've gotten me interested to learn more about the Islamic faith myself.

I agree that it's not easy breaking away from years of brainwashing which begins in early childhood. Of course this would increase the possibility of a few intelligent religious fanatics here and there. This is especially true of those who I suspect have lived very sheltered lives.

I'm not sure if men like Osama fall into this catagory however. Some of these guys have traveled the world over and received their education at major universities (you would know better than I if this were true, but I'm guessing that it is). In other words, they have had exposure to the outside world and ample opportunity to think for themselves.

I think we can agree that whatever Osama's personal beliefs are, he must certainly know that catering to the intellectually inferior masses by using religion as a tool, is the surest way to unite his front and further his cause. Just look at how often George Bush throws the word God around to try and unite the intellectually inferior of this country.

[Lestat]

In re-reading my reply it might seem as if I look down on religious people. This is NOT the case and I'm sorry if it came across that way.

Unfortunately, I really do believe that people in large masses whether they be Americans, Muslims, or whatever, are capable of becoming blithering idiots! There's something about human beings in large numbers that when the individual thought process is taken away, it makes them collectively DUMB! A pretty sad take on humanity, huh?

[MMMMMM]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I can't feel morally OK with just allowing many millions to be so oppressed if there is anything within reason which we can do to help the causes of freedom and human rights--and I would hope that you can't, either.

[/ QUOTE ]




Like I said, if the united states was so concerned about human rights, it would do more to help stop human rights abuses in parts of the world that were less economically important, eg, africa. Of course, our silence when it comes to the massacre in darfur is deafening.

[/ QUOTE ]

I wasn't suggesting that the United States is acting primarily for altruistically moral reasons; rather, I was just stating personal feelings regarding how repugnant I find the oppression of millions of people. And yes, the oppression (and worse) in Sudan, Nigeria, and Darfur is really horrible and sickening. And the US and UN are paying it relatively scant attention it seems.

[MaxPower]

You make a good point MMMMMMM. The religous and political aspects cannot be seperated out for them. They are one and the same.