posted by Sam Richards
There is a good deal to say about creating “terrorists” and making enemies. I guess I laid out what seems to me to be a reasonable argument in the Christian Invaders lecture…but I didn’t have time to give a good many concrete examples of killing civilians. Here is a timely article about some real life, real time examples of people deciding that they must fight back against the invading forces. How many of us consider that “suicide bombers” might be avenging the death of a loved one and not just “crazy people”?
READ THIS ARTICLE: More cause and effect in the War against Terrorists
Here is some graphic video. One of the women who blew herself up in Russia was avenging the death of her husband by Russian forces. It’s funny how we often glorify vigilante killers in our society. Would YOU avenge the death of your mother/spouse/child if you had the opportunity? Look at some of the comments for insight into humanity.
If my family were killed by a group of people that were already invading my country and altering my life, I would be very inclined to become a suicide bomber. I never really thought that these people could be avenging the deaths of loved ones, I always assumed they had either been brainwashed into religious reasons, or are doing it for financial stability for loved ones they will leave behind. Seeing it in this light is really powerful. I can fully understand why people who feel that they have nothing left to live for in life because they lost those they love, could feel the need to destroy the lives of people on the side of the enemy. Looking at war from the perspective of the ‘enemy’ is really enlightening.
Hearing that soldiers we have trained and sent into a foreign country have the audacity and willingness to kill innocent civilians, especially the youth and women who are pregnant, is very unnerving. I never really thought that this nation could breed people with the ability to kill like this. These people have families of their own back in America; it’s not hard to see the similarities between our two countries, especially in a simple view of family. The fact that these civilians know that they are going to be killed and quickly get married before we invade is so sad! And the fact that the media is extremely selective about what is allowed to be broadcasted back home just leads our people even further into the dark. There are so many things wrong with this war, and this is just another thing I can add to the list.
[Reply]
This is the big dilemma in the United States’ “War on Terror.” It’s the Americans (mostly Christians) versus the Muslims in the Middle East. It doesn’t matter who strikes first. The other one retaliates with what they believe to be righteous wrath against an evil enemy. This is then repeated in a vicious cycle, with each attack inducing an even more passionate response from the attacked party. So, where does it end? Can anyone ever win? America gets attacked, and then they invade and bomb. Middle Easterners get killed and their family and friends have that much more motivation to fight the Christians. I guess the only way to make things better is to take the hit and be the first one to stop, but is it right to endure an attack and not do anything? An enormous amount of people would be absolutely outraged if America received an attack like those of 9/11 and sat back and didn’t take action. The country would then be perceived as weak and might lose its status in the world, but maybe that’s what it takes. The problem is, nobody wants to be the one who backs down first. We always think “well why don’t they stop, it’s not our obligation to stop first.”
In order to break the vicious cycle, we, meaning people on all sides of the conflict, need to stop looking at things as being so black and white. We need to put ourselves in the shoes of the enemy and see from their perspective, as Sam made the class do on Thursday. We need to see that maybe the things they do are as justified in their minds as our actions are in ours. We also need to realize that the Muslims who commit especially heinous crimes are an extreme minority, just as the Americans who torture prisoners represent a tiny number of disturbed individuals in a sea of good people. I believe that the lecture on Thursday got a lot of people to really start thinking about it. However, I feel like many people may have changed their minds very quickly, which I don’t think is necessarily right. I am afraid that too many people automatically believe the most recent opinion they’ve heard about a subject. We need to take everything we hear and read on an issue and take it all into account before we form our own opinions, not just spout back the last thing we heard.
[Reply]
I have always thought about how the actions of the U.S. could be perceived by the peoples of the middle east. and to see this article I see that we all have misconceptions about this war. I agreed when we went in to Afghanistan to track down Osama but now I don't see the point in staying there as an invading force we should aid in the creation of a stable government and security for the people ,then we should withdraw . this article made me think about how much good we have done there and how much of our security has cost the Afghan people , especially those that could have become suicide bombers. I think we need to rethink the reasons and rules we of engagement we follow there, as we need to strike a peace that can give those who lost peace and make us seem less like the christian invaders. someone here asked who was the real terrorists and they felt that we all could be seen as the bad guys for the actions taken by a few, I think we should truly find a hearts and minds balance so when a mistake happens as war is apt to cause that we could avoid retribution killings like we have seen.
[Reply]
The issue of Blacks versus Whites is one that is always discussed when dealing with topics on race. Only after reading this article and watching the video, have I began to realize that most of our discussions in Sociology 119 seems to always lead right back to Whites against Blacks, whether it be an example, or the main topic.
Avoiding any discussions on black and white cultures while dealing with ethnicity issues is something that can not be evaded. It’s almost the most prevalent topic that enters into any conversation dealing with the race relations. Probably because the “white vs. black” issue has one of the most dramatic effects on our history, it is what many people refer back to when dealing with race relations.
Slavery had an extremely dramatic effect on our culture. It all started because human beings have a certain nature of not accepting things that are different from themselves. The era of slavery, which even though is not as wide spread as it once was, is still prevalent in this day and age. This era was a horrific time for black people, but now it seems to have take control over different cultures and regions on this planet.
In the United States, slavery has been abolished, but a sense of difference may still remain amongst people of a different skin color. Racism still abides in the minds of some Americans, and this may contribute to why United States citizens of a darker skin tone, may not feel as much as an American, as an American with a light or pale skin color. This may further lead to a sense of “side-choosing” in a race relations debate.
I also think that the reason that conversations dealing with the black and white race, or better yet said, the African American vs. the Caucasian race, are mainly opposing one another, would be because one of our most major parts of history dealt with Black people in a long lasting struggle to gain their freedom. Other races such as the Latinos and Asians are not considered on the same level of one race opposing another. Looking back at our history, I am positive that the White race, feeling a embarrassed and ashamed at their behavior, embrace the United States and its constitution in order to make up for their past deeds. Until common grounds can be established, and old wounds healed, the issue of white versus black, in race relation topics will forever be prevalent.
I highly doubt that the topic of blacks vs. whites will be avoided during race relation discussions any time soon. If it does ever become something of less concern during a discussion about race, it will not happen any time soon. In my honest opinion, it may be one of those issues that will be permanently stained in this world. Metaphorically speaking, slavery left a scar on our ideas and beliefs.
[Reply]
When I first saw this video, I was completely shocked. For someone to care so much about something that they will kill themselves for it is a level of dedication that is incredible. This lady cared so much about her beliefs that she sacrificed her own life for it. Even though she believed in something that is terrible and is terrorism, she still believed so much in it that she would sacrifice herself. That takes a lot of commitment and I’m slightly impressed by that. However, while watching this video I felt a mixture of being disgusted and being impressed by her commitment.
Even though I was impressed with the woman’s commitment and her sacrifice, it doesn’t mean that I believe in terrorism or that what she was doing was the right thing. I believe that there are better things she can be doing to show that she doesn’t like the government or whatever. In the United States, when someone doesn’t agree with something they peacefully protest it; they don’t strap bombs to their bodies and blow themselves up. I don’t understand why other countries, mostly in the Middle East, have resorted to violence and terrorism instead of peace protests when they find something that they don’t like.
In regards to the article, I have never thought about terrorism from the other side. I don’t believe in terrorism but I can’t say that the things they do are necessarily evil. They are just trying to protect themselves and their country much as we are. The only difference is that they are harming innocent lives and killing themselves in the process of protecting their country. While they are justifying themselves by saying we are the attackers and terrorists and they are the defenders and innocents I don’t necessarily believe that. How can they say they are not terrorists when they are killing innocent civilians and themselves in the process?
Even though we are paying 2,000 dollars for the loss of every family member I don’t believe that it is enough. 2,000 dollars isn’t even close to being enough to cover the loss of a family member. I know that the United States doesn’t have to give any money technically but if we are going to give anything we should give enough to make it worth it so that the surviving family members don’t become terrorists themselves and kill innocent people for no reason. Take for example, Haji Sharabuddin, the 80 year old person who lost two sons, two daughters, and a granddaughter in the attacks. He then said that he would destroy everything and launch his own suicide attack on the United States. This is probably the worst thing that could have happened. For this person to result to thinking about killing himself and many innocent people because he is angry is terrible.
[Reply]
This is a sad and shock situation. I can neither justify the woman’s bombing nor criticize it. Same thing applies to the Russian government, too. I want to discuss about this problem within the perspective of international law and the steps that United States took back in Cold War period and now.
In international law, there are four factors that must be satisfied in order to be considered as a Nation-state and they are 1) self-governance (government), 2) territory, 3) sovereignty, and 4) population. In this case, the woman’s original nation had its own territory and population for sure, and administration unit, maybe since it was under Russian’s influence, but I must doubt whether it has had sovereignty.
In the real world, it is even possible for geographic region which insist on its characteristic as a nation-state. One of the clear examples is Taiwan. This nation was founded when people who sought democracy in Chinese main land’s escaped from communists during Chinese revolution period (‘civil war’). This nation actually had its own government which can be proven by the fact that there were some nations that had established diplomatic relations with Taiwan. Secondly, it had its own population and territory since there were people living there for a relatively long time. Thirdly, it had its own sovereignty and it can be again proven by the fact that, after China insisted on “open door policy”, China established diplomatic relations with countries as long as they cut off the relations with Taiwan. However, what is happening right now? Because of China’s big influence, many nations try to avoid talking about this problem even though Taiwanese cry out for their status as another ‘nation-state.’ There are some nations that still have diplomatic ties with Taiwan, but it is too small in comparison with the time period before China’s active diplomatic activities. In the United Nations, Taiwan is not claimed to be a country, but rather a part of China. Besides Taiwan, how about Tibet? or Uighur? Back to our original posting, how about those nations who were unable to be separated from Soviet Unions after the collapse?
As we have learned from U.S. history class in high school or college, there was once a time period called “Cold War” and this period produced many terms which caused students pain inasmuch as they need to memorize it for a quiz or an exam. Maybe, you are familiar with ‘Iron Curtain,’ or ‘containment.’ Yes, this period can be explained very well with a single phrase, i.e. Communism v. Capitalism. Some may claim that it is better to say communism v. democracy but I want to point out both communism and capitalism are the theories in economic system while democracy is under the category of politics. Anyway, where is the spirit that U.S and other western powers (NATO) had during the cold war? I meant they used tons and tons of money for propaganda that Redwing agenda is so wrong and even used some geographic regions in disputes to fight. Vietnam was the product of that time period. Does United States no longer wish to help weak nations because communism was proven to be ineffective and there are very few communist nations left in the world? I feel it is the time that United States withdraws from its position as the World Police which US claimed back in time and start to avoid the problems other nations have. Obviously, United States, then, must stop giving pressure or tell other nations what to do. The basic principle of this nation should not be forgotten. And, when that principle once became a live heart of this nation, it is time to be the leader.
The lack of support from other countries made these terrors to be occurred. Having an interest about these cases would be little bit of hope for those people in the article.
[Reply]
The issue here is of course a matter of perspective. It's a vicious cycle that really won't be changed until after we manage to sit down and reasonably deal with our issues; or kill off everyone who disagrees. The problem is that there will always be people who disagree with you in your policies. Every time you create a point you make at least one dissenter. Everyone can accept that a policy change will cause someone to disagree, and even argue against a point. However, there are occasional dissenters who can further motivate others. That is where the serious issues come from. Most people will have a negative view on an issue, but it's seldom the case where someone will actually resort to terrorism on their own; it requires a source of motivation – someone to ignite their fervor.
There are of course odd cases for this. There are obviously people who will go to any length to avenge a wrong, be it against themselves or their family, but they are not the norm. Most people won't actively fight against a wrong. However the issue anymore is that the amount of people willing to actually fight is growing – or at least the amount of tools willing to be used by the fighters is going up. That's the actual issue. The amount of people actually incensed by the current political issues might not have gone up any, but the amount of poor and undereducated people who are willing to lay their lives down has gone up geometrically. It's similar to age-old mafia practices. Larger terrorist organizations will protect the families of those who lay their lives down. Frequent offers of helping with family expenses or allowing housing and living accommodations will add incentive to underprivileged families for a child to lay their lives down for 'the cause'. It also helps that imams and other terrorist leaders will actively recruit from younger poor children, and similar demographics in order to further indoctrinate their followers at a younger age.
With that in mind it's hard and yet easy to understand the appeal of terrorism. Can you understand why someone would lay their lives down for a cause? Of course. You can look back at the Jedburgh teams from World war 2 – they gave their lives for a cause; freedom. What's the difference between them and a malnourished palestinian destroying a sbarro pizza in protest of Israel keeping their land? Nothing. The difference is simply that the allies won world war 2 and the middle eastern conflict isn't over yet.
It is absolutely true that history is written by the victors. People who blow up bus and police stations will either be freedom fighters or madmen, depending on who actually wins this current conflict. To ask if you would become a terrorist to avenge your family or friends is not a fair question. It's a serious question depending on your financial and emotional perspective as well as your social atmosphere. You need to understand that people can be pushed to extreme ends when they've got nothing else to loose. It couldn't happen in America, we don't have that level of loss and strife, it would be very rare to have someone pushed that far.
Terrorism is perspective and understanding. It's a being able to go beyond what most people would view as reasonable actions for a cause that someone views as extreme, but you're willing to die and fight for.
[Reply]
I always found it interesting how people didn’t know that the other word for “Terrorist” is “Freedom Fighter.” It would simply depend on who you asked. Back in the days where Ireland was occupied by the British Empyreal Military, the Irish Republican Army was known as a Terrorist organization by the British. Though I’m pretty sure if you asked any Irishmen back in those days and perhaps even today, the IRA would be known as “Freedom Fighters.” Back in the days of World War II when France was occupied by Nazi Germany, members of the French Resistance were labeled as Terrorists from by French appeasers and Germans. Of course, we know them today as “Resistance fighters.” But it’s all in perspective.
While I do understand to a certain degree why these “Terrorists” do what they do, I don’t by any means think that they’re right in doing things like that. Someone once told me that Terrorists aren’t stupid or crazy. They’re fighting for the same reasons why anyone in an organized army would fight for. They fight for a cause they believe in. “Muslim Extremists” blowing people up in trains or at US Army checkpoints isn’t something that should be looked at and say, “These durka-durka’s are all crazy! Why would any blow themselves up like that?!” Probably the same reason why Japanese pilots flew their planes into US Aircraft carriers in World War II.
These people are all fighting for their homes, or their religions, or their families. In their eyes, we are the unjust; we are the monsters. Try to justify it any way you want to, but in war; atrocities are committed on both sides. And these atrocities can cause “Terrorists” to spring up. If their cause is worth dying for, they’ll do it. And they’ll hurt or fight anyone who stands against that cause.
Personally, I feel that I would probably want to take some sort of action to avenge my family, or a close friend, or a spouse if I felt some grave injustice was done to me. But to take it to the level of these guys? Probably not. But I can only say that because I have options. Legal pursuits, organizations, peace demonstrations, rallies… America is great in that it allows these alternatives to blowing up the nearest school. Places like Afghanistan? They don’t have the ability to do anything like that. And to them, we’re a foreign power there to take their land, culture, and oil.
Still, even if I were in the situation of many of these terrorists, I don’t think I could do something like blow myself up in the name of righteous vengeance. I don’t think I have the stomach or the balls to do something like that. But you never know. People usually don’t know what they’d do until they were faced with the circumstance. Taking that into consideration, I can’t say that being a terrorist wouldn’t be huge stretch for me. I don’t know and I really don’t want to find out.
[Reply]
It deeply saddens me to read an article and watch a video on suicide bombing. Worse than that, its crazy how they explain the reasoning to why they do it. I'm not surprised by the actions of the "enemy" or the residents of Afghanistan. Newton's Third Law even states "For every action, there's a reaction" and it just so happens that Newton's Law is dealing with force.
In war, you cannot claim what's "fair or not fair" because both sides will suffer some kinds of loss. I don't think anybody in their right mind would think that Afghanistan would welcome us with open arms especially if we destroyed most of their land & culture. It just hurts hearing the story from their side, about how we're tyrannical for attackign them, killing them, and LYING on purpose about it… that sentence about
Americans killing 100 Afghanistan civilians in an air strike and vehemently about it saying they killed Japanese soldiers" is just so horrible. I don't like war in general because of the fact that lives becomes statistics. Nothing is fair in all out war. The patriarch who lost two sons, daughters and a mother had a point. He felt as if he lost EVERYthing, and he had nothing to live for. How would you feel if you lost your parents, siblings, close relative, soulmate in marriage, or your spouse that were INNOCENT to a clip from a rifle? It makes you feel terrible inside, knowing that your 15 year old who had a bright future was lost to bullets from a gun. To add insult to injury, we consider it a statistic, a number, like its an expendable object. I agree on paying homage by giving the man two sheep for his culture, but $2,000 per life is NOTHING!!! How could anyone even think that they can pay for a life?!? That's absurd to me; they should make sure that man is WELL off, for himself and whoever his next in kin is/are.
I seen the movie "The Traitor" where Don Cheadle plays a CIA agent who is undercover and plays the role of a person who pretends to be in an Arabian gang for a massive bombing. He learns about why they are deciding to bomb innocent civilians and has a conversation with one of the leaders. The leader replied "Each and every month, thousands of lives are taken by the Americans who have nothing to do with the war. They kill our wives, children, mothers, fathers, and family, and no one takes this into account. They act as if our lives do not matter. Then when we take extreme measures and bomb American civilians and take lives, we are seen as terrorists! They've done the exact same thing to us and now its our turn to make them feel our pain, live in our world, and know what its like to lose everything". Such a powerful statement… it made me want to sympathize with the Antagonist of the movie because of that statement. Truth of the matter is, we don't realize what occurs until we put everything into perspective and say "That could happen to me".
[Reply]
Being from America, i tend to look at the war from the perspective of an American. Although I like to think that I can understand both sides, this simply is not true at all. The fact is that The United States never gets invaded because we are too busy invading other countries. A country as powerful as ours doesn't have to worry about being invaded. For this reason, we will never really know what it is like to be invaded. Countries in the Middle East, such as Iraq, have to worry for their lives every day whether they are on our side or not. I don't know about you, but if some unwanted country came into my land and killed my family, I would feel very hostile towards that country. This act would incline many to become suicide bombers, because their hate for that country has become so intense. When I think about innocent families dying because of us, my perspective changes a little. Many Americans express their hate for Middle Eastern people for different reasons, but sometimes we don't realize that the feeling is definitely mutual. In my opinion, America has far too much power. We go in to countries we have no business invading, often times for questionable reasons. It isn't fair to allow a country to do this. It causes the death of many innocent people. I think that there are much better ways of coming to a solution than invading a country and killing thousands of innocent civilians.
Sometimes I wonder why America hasn't spent their time going into other countries, where our presence might be productive. Getting involved in countries in Africa that need our help would seem to be far more productive than invading countries in the Middle East, wouldn't it? The only thing is that Africa doesn't have oil like the Middle East does, and it seems as though that is all our country cares about. Although I had never looked at it from the perspective of those in the Middle East, I have to understand, in a way, where they are coming from. Our society's view of a terrorist is a mindless, heartless person who has no reason for being so hostile, except perhaps because of religion, which sometimes can be true. But it isn't the only reason terrorists can be so hostile towards our country. What we don't realize is that we kill the families of these "terrorists", and that many of us would act with the same sort of hate if a ruthless military came in to our country and did the same thing to us. What we need to do is look at the war from the perspective of the Middle East, and understand that these terrorists aren't completely insane for having some sort of hate against the United States.
[Reply]
(This goes in between my last two posts)
In order to break the vicious cycle, we, meaning people on all sides of the conflict, need to stop looking at things as being so black and white. We need to put ourselves in the shoes of the enemy and see from their perspective, as Sam made the class do on Thursday. We need to see that maybe the things they do are as justified in their minds as our actions are in ours. We also need to realize that the Muslims who commit especially heinous crimes are an extreme minority, just as the Americans who torture prisoners represent a tiny number of disturbed individuals in a sea of good people. I believe that the lecture on Thursday got a lot of people to really start thinking about it.
[Reply]
There is a wealth of misunderstanding in our global conflicts. Unfortunately, many of us do not know what we are “fighting” for. Like many of the other students who have commented, I rarely have thought about these conflicts from the “enemy’s” point of view. When I envision the enemy, I picture a Middle Eastern man, usually with a beard. It is terrible that I have created this stereotype in my head, because there are clearly many faces and peoples which commit terrorist acts. This video was very disturbing. It is so sad to see things like this happen in our world. I feel guilty and lucky to live in a country where I do not fear for my life or freedom on a daily basis. I feel that terrorists embody very passionate but distorted goals. I am not even sure what their goals are. I am unsure of why they hate western culture and influence so much but then again I do understand why. We sit in class and hear about all the wrongs our country and Europe have inflicted upon the world.
[Reply]
So our violent past as a country is being challenged by independent radicals who are interpreting and carrying out what they feel is the solution to the problem. It is so sad, yet easy for me to say, that people want to hurt others and I do not have the answers for why they do. It is easy for me to say this because I have lived a generally sheltered life, free of violence. Although, there are so many who have suffered at the hands of those with greater wealth and power, at no fault of their own. I can only imagine the anger and resent which festers in the individuals which have been oppressed. This is not a justification for the actions of terrorists but an attempt to make sense of their choices. I believe that is a crucial element in the gap in global conflicts. It is easy to react, usually irrationally, to the choices of one radical individual. When one commits a wrong onto you, an immediate reaction is far from wise. Sometimes we must look deeper to why the perpetrator chose to carry out this plan.
[Reply]
The case of the woman in Russia seems more like an outcry of extreme pain and mourning for her lost husband. Sometime vigilantes are supported and glorified, Batman anybody? But these unrealistic portraits make only for good movies, where in real life, real people use rudimentary and barbaric means of making their voice heard. The problem is that many of these voices are saying different things. I am naïve in believing in world peace, and feel hopeless in its coming in my lifetime, and then I feel guilty that I do not believe in the cause which would leave me feeling satisfied in this world.
[Reply]
This was a very interesting article that raises a lot of questions when it comes to the tactics used by our country in response to terrorism and the situation in the Middle East and elsewhere. It brings to question where we draw the line between responsiveness and recklessness.
Obviously when things like September 11th and Saddam Hussein's reign of terror, so to speak, in Iraq occur, action is necessary. No American would have stood idle if President Bush had not taken drastic action following the actions of September 11th. At the same time, regardless of your opinion on the matter, Saddam Hussein had to be overthrown from his position in Iraq. He committed genocide and he was a threat to the area and the world at large. Even harking on the oil issue, you cannot have a person that dangerous in charge of a country that is so heavily relied on by so many for such a valuable resource.
However, in every war imaginable, there are stories about some innocent civilians getting killed by soldiers who, for one reason or another, could not fulfill their duties properly. It is tragic, but a fact of war. It happened in Korea, in Vietnam, and in Iraq during the first Persian Gulf War. And now it is happening in Iraq and Afghanistan. But this time it is different. The Iraqi and Afghani militant fighters have access to much more than any other United States war enemy in history. Suicide bombers are so common in these war zones, and soldiers literally cannot tell who is who. Their enemies dress like their friends and their friends dress like their enemies. There is the threat of roadside bombs everywhere and they are hidden all along the roads in the countries our army occupies. They could be anywhere at any time.
It is safe to say that most of these insurgents exist prior to some of the mishaps that occur in the line of duty. However, as this article points out, we can create more enemies every day because protocol is not followed. Our troops are brave and, for the most part, perform according to the standards set forth by the Army. However, the amount of stress they are under, especially when you are somewhere in the world where death is a daily occurrence and you may not know if you or the guy next to you is making it back from the next mission. That is enough to drive anyone insane and sometimes some soldiers cannot handle that stress.
Over in those parts of the world, civilians have the access to the kind of weaponry that can kill a lot in a little amount of time. The leaders of the insurgency I am sure are not ones to say no to a woman who wants to avenge the deaths of her family by blowing herself and ten American soldiers up. It really is a tough situation on every side and unfortunately, it has not changed since war has started.
[Reply]
After coming to lecture and reading this article I am absolutely infuriated by the "War of terror." This is a never ending battle in which the government has successfully blinded the majority of the population with help from the media. Why do we never hear the end of the happenings in Iraq? Because the government wants to constantly remind us of how much "terrorism" is going on there and we are doing the right thing. In reality, we are sticking are noses where they do not belong. We have no entitlement to be there, and although I support our troops I can no longer justify in my mind our activities over there. This is a war for oil. It has been said by important government officials and covered up by the same ones. In my new perspective on this, its just a giant lie fueling the greed of our government officials. No one can really do anything and the media successfully portrays the muslims as our enemies. What happened to the land of the free? Even muslims in our country are experiencing prejudice as people see them as a threat. This is ludicrous. They are people just like we are, with radicals on their side just as we have radicals here. Why do we think we are better than them? We have the same type of religious radicals doing the same acts that are depicted through the media.
Now lets look at it from their perspective. We invade their country with the reason to remove their countries leader from a position of power, which we already did. We said we were looking for weapons of mass destruction, which was a lie, none were found. We want to fight "terrorism", which is obviously a relative term. They are normal people, just like the people in our country. They all do not want to exterminate christians and americans. They have radical groups, and so do we, there is no difference. The more I think about it the more I am infuriated. If we had Iraqi soldiers invading our home towns for our RESOURCES, killing innocent people and government officials that they decide are evil, we would all be infuriated. There would be acts of defense that would be deemed as patriotic, not terroristic. This is absolutely ridiculous and there must be alternative motives by our government as they know exactly what they are doing. Our troops are being misused and we are wasting so much money on military forces, all for oil. Maybe it is profitable to our country, or maybe just to our leaders. Either way, the war can not be justified any longer and the damage is already done. If I lived in the middle east, I would hate Americans. If my family and friends were being harrased and murdered by the christian soldiers, I would see christians as evil too. Both our media and Iraqi media is taking everything our of perception, looking at the motives of one another as irrational, evil, and fueled by religion. Hopefully one day the truth can come out, and we can focus on real terrorism, which is acted by extremists and not the majority.
[Reply]
The last few classes about war and Christian invaders has been extremely interesting to me because I do not know much about the situation. I don't stay as up to date on political issues as much as I would like, so I like learning about them in class. To be completely honest, I have never thought about war in the terms that Sam has set out for us. You would think that it is pretty common that people would think about the other people's perspective but it's not. I think I don't fully understand the war or take the time to find out more information on it because I don't have any friends or family members that are fighting over seas. I guess I assumed that some innocent people were being killed, but not to the extent and the actual numbers that I thought. And as Sam said in his posting, I was among the people that thought most of the suicide bombings took place by "crazy" people. I'm sure there are a few bombers that are crazy, and some of the bombers do it because of their religion or affiliation leaders tell them to. I never would have ever expected that some of the suicide bombers were blowing themselves up in retaliation to loosing someone/s close to them. After reading the article that Sam included, I am shocked to say the least. My view on war has changed a little bit due to the information this article provided. The article included a story of an elderly man (80 years old) that said his two daughters, two sons, and one grandchild were killed due to American troops. First off, this is outrageous. All five of these people were innocent civilians just continuing with their daily routine. The article continues to say that as compensation for loosing his ENTIRE family, he only received two sheep and $2,000 a person. Regardless is the sheep means something more or not, they possessions the American troops gave him will never bring his family back. As a result, this man has threatened to become a suicide bomber. What I find interesting, and shows very vividly the difference between two cultures is that the elderly man would even consider doing this. In America, if someone's entire family was killed because of invaders, most people would grieve and probably become depressed, not think of retaliation. So my point is, just like the article mentioned is that the war is only perpetuating people who have lost loved ones to do stupid things like this. To me it almost seems like it is a never ending battle. War takes place, innocent people die, their loved ones take avenge and that continues the war. It is a lose lose battle, so when will it ever stop?
[Reply]
Everyone wants to feel safe. When your country has been attacked by someone else and innocent loved ones have been killed you need someone to blame. You find out who did it and you hate them, this is a natural reaction. Even if the hate is unreasonable or undeserved you need something and someone to hate or want to know why they did it or your loved one died for nothing. Suicide bombers avenging deaths may have unreasonable hate and their actions seem irresponsible but understandable depending on their individual situation. I am not saying suicide bombings are ok just that I think I can see where the extreme actions can come from.
[Reply]
After reading Sam's initial post and the attached article, it became clear to me that I would probably, under extenuating circumstances, avenge the death of a close loved one. Obviously it would depend on how that loved one was killed, and by whom. I do not think I would go as far as sacrificing myself to a suicide bombing, but I would risk inevitable jail time or the death sentence. I would not feel comfortable killing others who weren't behind the death of a loved one, which is why I would take personal revenge to the one or few people that were responsible.
[Reply]
Suicide bombing has proven to be one of the most efficient and least expensive tactics ever to be employed by terror groups. The 32 groups in 28 countries have adopted this terrorist tactic.
Counterterrorism observers have tended to ignore female terrorists because historically there have been few of them, as compared to male terrorist, and they were usually less violent, and less visible. Because women rarely lead violent organizations, most officials see men as threats and not women. However, female suicide attacks in Israel and Chechnya demonstrate the effectiveness of female terrorists, who get close to their intended targets more easily than the male because they do not attract the same level of search from security personnel. Using women for suicide bombings has an added danger to those charged with preventing bombings. Women are less likely to be searched for bombs than men, either for moral or religious beliefs. Sometimes searches might be portrayed as an indecency act towards women, especially the possibility of being accused of sexual harassment or fear of breaking Islamic laws that require women to remain traditionally clothed in public.
As this phenomenon of female suicide bombing increases, however, security forces in Iraq, for example, “could be faced with the possibility of having to deal with a group of young, educated, middle class women”, fighting for their beliefs and their territory (Honawar).
The use of women has other advantages, as the innocent appearance of pregnant women can be effective in passing security and gaining close proximity to the target. Women’s motivation for carrying out such attacks can be the issue of equality as already mentioned, but, often, romantic feelings trigger female volunteers or even their desire for revenge for a dead relative or a significant other (Dugdale-Pointon).
Whatever, the motivation of suicide bombers, all terrorist suicide attacks are incredibly difficult to stop. Check points and tightened security can help prevent the bomber reaching a high profile target but some casualties are unavoidable. Preventing a random suicide bombing in a crowed public place is extremely difficult to prevent, and even if a bomber is detected, defusing the explosives is almost impossible. The greatest potential risk suicide terrorism may pose in future is if terrorists combine the use of Weapons of Mass Destruction to spread smallpox or ever anthrax across the nations. Such a combination of attack methods would increase the death numbers of a single terror attack and would increase the psychological effect on public morale. Although this level of suicide terrorism would constitute a tremendous threat, in reality, the delivery of effective countermeasures is proving to be a very difficult task.
Given the globalization of terror from nonstate groups, I believe that suicide bombings, which include female suicide bombings, will increase. Next will be the “first” Al Qaeda female suicide bomber. “The Federal Bureau of Investigation has acknowledged that Al Qaeda is actively recruiting women, 106 perhaps for just this role” (National Counterterrorism Center). Moreover, international terrorist organizations will try to further assess U.S. security vulnerabilities and exploit weaknesses. “While female suicide bombing may not change the political outcome for the United States or its allies, it will negatively and emotionally affect American lives, beliefs, and morale” (Zedalis).
Honawar, Rohit. Research Officer, IPCS.
“The Glorification of suicide terrorism”. October 19th, 2005. http://ipcs.org/article/jammu-kashmir/the-glorifi...
Zedalis, D. Debra. “Female Suicide Bombers” 2007 http://www.strategicstudiesinstitute.army.mil/pdf...
Dugdale-Pointon, TDP., “Suicide Attacks – Terrorist”/http://www.historyofwar.org/articles/weapons_suic...
[Reply]
Reading this article was pretty intense for me; the article definitely enforced what we learned at Thursday’s “Christian Invaders” class. It’s ridiculous to see how our country has come to the point where we’re not even fighting terrorists that belong to certain organizations; the terrorists and radicals that we’re supposed to search after and bring justice to, whether in the form of a court trial or killing spree, are mostly if not all Arab Muslims. I think because of that stereotype and immediate and unwise judgment we, as Westerners, place on them, it probably gives a government like the one in the United States to say it’s OK to risk and kill the lives of innocent civilians. To hear suicide bombings in random places in the Middle East, whether in Iraq, Afghanistan, Israel or wherever, seem mundane and common these days; to hear the facts and stories behind the actual suicide bombers is something we don’t hear too often. Initially, I thought suicide bombers would be the radicals like we discussed in class, who really think that it is in “God’s Will” to destroy the Americans for the sake of Muhammad. I can see why these radicals would think that way, given the lecture Sam gave on Thursday. We discussed that day how we, collectively as the American people, are there to take the oil from the Arab Muslims. This article, however, dives one level deeper; Arab Muslims who aren’t considered as threats are being killed left and right, leading them to take drastic measures to avenge the deaths of their loved ones.
The whole issue makes me feel unsettled. Because of the stereotype we place on Arab Muslims, I’m sure Arab Muslims place the exact stereotype on Americans, specifically American Christians. As an individual living in America, it’s not hard to feel somewhat responsible for this; we pay tax dollars for our troops to be shipped overseas, but to fight for what? As a Christian, I feel like Muslims will place this negative light on me. Now I fear for those who are going on missionary trips to the Middle East. I do believe that, as believers of Jesus, we should proclaim the Christian gospel to the corners of the Earth. But if I were to be a missionary to that area, I don’t want the Arab Muslims to think I’m there solely to convert them or think I’m taking their oil.
Would I avenge the death of my loved one? If I weren’t a Christian, yes. But coming from this background of faith, I wouldn’t. It’s hard not to think about something like this though. We’re talking about real people and those who are close to us. It’s unsettling.
[Reply]
One thing that really struck me about the Christian invaders lecture was the fact that the United States army is allowed I think it was 29 civilian casualties for every soldier killed, or for every terrorist they kill. That is appalling, and I am not one of those anti-war people. I agree with Sam that war is pretty much necessary when there are limited resources for many people. I believe that we elected a democrat to get us out of the war, and so far Barak Obama has not done that. Why are we still fighting this war?
One thing that struck me during this whole article was how did we start this? Weren’t we provoked to go over to Iraq or somewhere in the Middle East after 9/11? I thought that 9/11 was always the justification for the Iraq war, but apparently it was for oil. Now since I am only 19 years old, I forgot that there was a gulf war in the early 90’s. So I thought that could be the justification for the suicide bombers, and for the two WTC bombings. But what happened before the gulf war to provoke the bombings? It would be nice to see where this all started, maybe it has something to do with Israel? That is my hypothesis but I do not know for sure.
In the blog post and in the lecture we were asked if we would take action and become a suicide bomber or terrorist if one of our family members were killed by a foreign military force. I would say absolutely that I would want to seek revenge if a member of my family was hurt by a foreign military force. I would find the weapon to do the most damage that I could afford, and attack. It is sad to think that way, because it is just what the suicide bombers are doing to our troops. I think almost everyone would fight back if their family was hurt. I think this kind of lecture needs to be spread across college campuses, then to our parents, then to government to let them see this. I think it would definitely help us get out of the war faster, and have people open up their eyes more. It has definitely impacted the way I am thinking. This kind of lecture kind of annoys me, just because how right Sam is. I would always support our troops, but we are doing the wrong thing in the Middle East. Although you have to remember that it is not our soldier’s fault that this war is happening, they just are following orders. So maybe the government should see this video, and start thinking from a more sociological perspective, rather than jumping to the first action that pops into their heads.
[Reply]
The video opened my eyes to a side society doesn’t want us to see. Although we are fighting an “enemy,” that same “enemy” has a family that would be completely devastated if they were to lose their life. I honestly can say that I would not avenge my family’s death, I would probably be so heartbroken that I couldn’t live without them, but I wouldn’t continue the cycle of killing somebody’s loved one. I honestly think my next plan of action would be suicide. I do realize that by killing myself, somebody in my family would suffer, but I don’t think I would blow myself up just for the fact that it sounds absolutely disgusting and I want my body in one piece (thank you very much). A human life is so valuable, and to treat each other like they are disposable is irresponsible. There are so many other ways to express how you are feeling, at the end of the day, the Russian’s woman death was in vain, as was her husband’s. I would continue to fight the Russian forces until they were sick of me. I would rally up as many people as I could. I wouldn’t shut up for ANYBODY! My story would never be silenced, and yea she killed herself so now it’s getting publicity, but just like everything else, our attention span is so short that I guarantee by May nobody will be talking about this. After reading the article, I am left disgusted. How could they think to even begin justifying killing civilians by “offering” them a peace gift? I would be FURIOUS. There isn’t a monetary equivalent to the life of a loved one. I hope that the 80-year-old Haji Sharabuddin doesn’t actual go through with his suicide attack, but instead can continue to use his anger, hate and fuel that to let the forces know that they are extremely insensitive. How can anybody think that $2,000 would be worth a life? The fact that it’s also being offered per victim is ridiculous. Where is all this money coming from? They need to use that money towards buying a clue and realize who they real enemies are instead of creating more from civilians. This vicious cycle will never end until people realize that war truly isn’t an answer. Lives are irreplaceable and we need to realize that we can’t keep doing this anymore.
[Reply]
I understand this women is hurt by whats going on, although i would not be able to kill myself over it. Even though i am not in her position, but I don't think this is what her family would want or anyone close to her. This would only cause more pain and loss because of the way she died. It's not like she died during this, she did it to herself therefore i think it would cause more pain to her family because they may feel that she is not happy with the people who are still alive, and that are there to support her. I understand revenge but a revenge in this manner because if this were the way everyone took care of their revenge there'd be no one left here.
[Reply]
I thought this was a really interesting perspective on suicide bombers. I will admit that I am one of those people that looked at suicide bombers as crazy people following a religion that made them do some of these things. I never looked at it from the point of view that they were trying to avenge a death of a loved one. Personally I do not think that I would avenge the death of a loved one by killing myself and risking the lives of others. I think there are other, more proper ways to grieve. Although on the other hand, I will most likely never have to go through the same type of grievance as those who have a loved one killed from foreign troops. At least I would hope not. I think it is really terrible that there are American troops who are killing innocent civilians and then blaming it on the Taliban. The Taliban is already bad enough, they should not be blaming them for stuff that they did not even do. Because of that, it seems like it is just more acceptable for the Taliban to do that because it is expected of them. Another thing I thought of while I was reading this article was the horrible events of 9-11. There were many innocent Americans who were killed that day, yet there were not any reports of suicide bombers from families that had a loved one killed in the World Trade Centers. So then I guess my question comes back to the fact that maybe it does relate to their religion. These Americans had to suffer the same grief that Afghans are suffering when one of their loved ones is killed. I think there are proper ways to grieve, and instead of creating more war as we are currently doing, maybe we should be reaching out and helping the innocent people of Afghanistan and maybe showing them our perspectives. The article brought up an interesting point that I agree with, which is that if we continue to cause war in their country then they will continue to go about avenging the death of a loved one by these “crazy” instances of suicide bombings. I think as long as we know our country is going to be safe, then we need to begin to stop the war on terror. Maybe we should begin to face this issue using peace. Personally, I believe that this war is going on long enough so let’s stop it before more innocent lives are lost, either there or here in America. The article made another good point that this war has no real end, and that these instances of terrorism will keep getting worse until the war is finally over.
[Reply]
Alright hold on a second. Avenging the lives of your father/mother/wife/child is one thing. I’ve thought about how I would react to the murders of my loved ones in a military or criminal act, and my imagination paints me as a vigilante using stealth and finesse to exact revenge solely on those responsible, ideally while wearing a cool mask. Basically turning into Batman. I would not strap a bomb on my chest and go into a subway full of innocents. It’s pretty hypocritical—murdering people’s spouses and children because someone else… murdered your spouse and children? Mindless killing of people who simply share the same nationality as your true enemies doesn’t make sense.
America characterizes its “vigilante heroes” completely differently than the portrayals of modern day terrorists. In fact, most of the time there is a foil to the hero, a character who does use fear and dirty tactics to exact their revenge. He usually is, or ultimately becomes, a bad guy.
On the other side of the coin, lets pretend America gets invaded by, oh say the Russians (been playing cod4). Straight up invaded, as in bombed into submission and then your neighborhood is occupied. Between the bombings and the occupation, your parents and one of your siblings is killed. What would you and your surviving sibling do? I doubt many of you would sit on your hands and wait for things to get better. You would do something, anything, to get even and possibly scare the Russians out of occupation. And if your neighbor was in the same boat, and he knew how to make a bomb, wouldn’t you want to plant that on the road and hope an enemy humvee runs over it?
This is also a clear example of how history is written by the victors. Hypothetically, if the terrorists “win”, you can bet that all of the martyrs and suicide bombers throughout the war would go down in history as heroes of war, and saviors of the nations. I have a friend from England who calls (half-jokingly) the Boston Tea Party a terrorist attack. But in reality, wasn’t it? But we are taught from an early age that the Boston Tea Party was a fantastic display of independence and displeasure with the British. Meanwhile, things like the Whiskey Rebellion and the secession of the South are looked on as negative things. Why? Because we won. Had we lost, it would be a different story. They wouldn’t be insurrectionists but heroes. It’s a weird, thin line that just goes to show you really need to look at an issue from all sides before you decide who is wrong and who is right. Its not always as clear as you think.
[Reply]
Personally, I don’t really understand the whole idea of “avenging” someone else’s death. I understand that obviously when someone close to you has died, you are upset and want to mourn. However, there are so many other ways to mourn a loved one’s death than to kill yourself and others with you. Getting revenge and killing other people doesn’t seem like something that your loved one who passed away would be proud of anyway. I really don’t think there is any way I would ever avenge someone’s death by doing something so drastic as killing other people and myself by way of a suicide bomb.
[Reply]
That was an interesting video, i mean that in the sense that i have never seen anyone just blow up like they somehow spontaneously combusted. But i dont know if i would ever avenge the death of a loved one by blowing myself up. There are so many circumstances that need to be filled for me to blow myself up in the name of anything. If somebody killed my entire family for absolutely no reason other than they wanted to i dont think i would go in the direction of suicide bombing to get back at them… i think that with time my pain from the massacre would diminish somewhat and i could carry on living my life. If the reason that this person killed my whole family was because he was a government agent who thought they were some kind of terrorists i still think i would find another way to get him back. As im typing this i am realizing that i wouldnt ever blow myself up in the name of vengence for my family, but it is very interesting to think about what the conditions in that womens life must have been like fo r her to go so far as to blow herself up with a bomb in the middle of a sidewalk in a place where she did no damage to anyone but herself. I dont know anything about her husband and i know very little about the government of russia so i dont know what might have provoked the husbands death in the first place. Whatever happened i would think that the punishment didnt fit the crime and she was trying to speak out against that. Or maybe with her husband gone she literally has nothing else to live for, this is more depressing than the other scenario cause this means she has no friends or family to stay with. Maybe it was just an overreaction on her part, i mean they are in russia she probably already had quite a bit of vodka by then so alcohol might have been a factor. There could have been a chance she was next on the governments hit list so she decided to turn the tables on them and kill herself first, while at the same time maybe take a couple of them out. I don’t know what leads to a person wanting to blow themselves up, but that might be cause im from Pennsylvania and there is absolutely no reason to get that mad here. I do understand that there are places where life is so bad that it could be an option though. Im just glad I do not live in one of thos places.
[Reply]
Wow! This is very deep. When it comes to the topic of suicide bombers, once again I can’t understand why people call these people crazy or extremist when most of them time they do these suicide bombings in revenge for one thing or the other. Like Glenn Greenwald said these unnecessary killings have been going on for over a decade now and probably longer than that. How many American-haters and new suicide bombers are we creating every day? American troops are just being reckless and taking things overboard. This is not a topic to use for comedy but comedian Cat Williams in one of his acts said how do we look? We have all these guns, bombs, and weapons of mass destruction to fight people wearing sandals and walking around practically harmless. I can’t even be mad at the suicide bombers that decide to retaliate when their innocent loved ones have been killed. I say this all the time to my friends and family I can’t even imagine how the streets of America would be if things were vice versa, if this was the ground of the war. I’m scared of what could even possibly happen. America keeps on provoking these people and making things worse. I wonder if they are trying to wipe out the Arabs, in Afghan, Iraq, Iran and so on. I don’t support the war in Iraq and never did. I feel like it’s just wrong on all levels. The people who bombed the world trade center in 2001 must have been provoked from previous things. No sane person just wakes up one morning to kill random people it just doesn’t sound right. I don’t see what makes “us” (Americans who believe in the war) feel like they are any better than the Arab/Muslims that are defending their country by blowing themselves up. “We” are just as bad, American troops have been there for about 10yrs for a reason that today is not clear. How many people will they kill before they are satisfied, how many mothers will be shot and kids will grow up without a family all in the name of retaliation? I never knew that we practiced two wrongs make a right. We have so much going on in our society to worry about that I can’t understand why we are worried about what is going on in a whole different nation. Slowly people are backing out from supporting America because we are just going overboard now. We are killing unnecessarily, and using force that doesn’t need to be used. First we were looking for Osama Bin Laden, and then looking for weapons of mass destruction, 9yrs later we still have not found anything. My question is why are we still there? Why are we still killing thousands of people because I’m sure the number of people killed during September 11th is nothing to close to the number of innocent people dying because of the war?
[Reply]
I never thought that suicide bombers emerged from the fight on terrorism. This concept came clear to me while reading the article, “More Cause and Effect in the War against Terrorists.” This passage had a story about U.S. military going into a village and killing five civilians in Paktia. Just reading these words about our military made the hair on the back of my neck stand up. Rarely do you see such a tragic story told about our military in the news that has the grief falling towards the “terrorists.” I put terrorists in quotations because this is an extremely violent word to call someone and shouldn’t be thrown around so commonly when regarding a certain race. The article continues with quotes from the eighty year-old man who lost two sons, two daughters and a granddaughter in the attack. Here are a few lines that told reporters when asked about how he felt, "I have lost patience. I am obliged to revenge my martyrs. I will destroy everything I have and will launch my own suicide attack. My heart is burning." These words are aggressive and angry, but wouldn’t you be feeling the same way if five innocent members of your family were murdered? Stories like these make me wonder why countries wage war on each other while civilians ultimately suffer. They suffer not only from losing lives and family members, but economically as well. Wars hurt family life along with the economy. I hope that someday our world leaders will develop a plan to deal with confrontations among countries differently. War is seriously not the answer. War made the story about this eighty year-old man becoming a suicide bomber justified. I wrote the beginning of this blog before class on Tuesday and thought that it was one of the most interesting topics I ever blogged on. However, class on Tuesday was more interesting then terrorism. Sorry to change topics mid blog but I would really like to talk about a few things that were discussed in class. We had a guest speaker that was an old psu grad and cast member on survivor that recently just got back from Haiti. He told us a few facts that I would like to repeat to you now. 1) 9/11 was one of America’s greatest tragedies. Nearly 3 thousand people were killed in this horrible event. The earthquake in Haiti killed over 3 hundred thousand people (10 times the amount of 9/11). 2) 2.5 million people are no homeless because of the earthquake. These are unbelievable facts that should be made known to people around the world that can help. People in Haiti need our help and I encourage all of us to donate time and/or money in the effort to save this nation. In conclusion, I will apologize again for changing topics mid blog but I hope you all learned something from what I wrote and I made you THINK.
[Reply]
This article actually made me feel sick to my stomach. When Sam did the Christian Invaders lecture the other day, it really made me put myself in the shoes of those people in the Middle East. With that being said, it’s disgusting that U.S. soldiers would offer this man money for each family member they had killed. Money obviously doesn’t make anything better and then to go and offer him a goat so that he feels as if he cannot take revenge on the United States. How would these United States soldiers feel if five of their civilian family members were killed by foreign soldiers? I may not agree with this war but I am behind our soldiers no matter what, but they really are going to try and make peace with this man through such ridiculous means!
[Reply]
We provide the means that produce terrorists. It is that simple. Western powers are viewed in the eyes of the radical Muslims as the infidel. We are bad people in the eyes of radicals. So, it’s only right for the radicals to want to kill as many of us that they can. So as we kill our enemy we are ultimately cultivating the land for a new crop of enemy to grow.
We feel as though our culture should be the way of the world, but keep in mind that their society and laws have been around a lot longer than our ways of democracy. So really we are the radicals in their eyes. We are the ones attempting to pollute the world with our evil ways. We are the ones attacking them and ruing their countries, not only as Christians but as Americans.
Our society is a great one. We are as diverse as a society can get and we have the potential to do great things, and for the most part we do. But America has a major flaw. This country suffers from good imitative but bad judgment. We take the initiative to help everyone that needs it, but we sometimes act in poor judgment by not seeing the whole picture before we act. America admittedly went into a war in Iraq with no exit strategy. We effectively located, closed width, and destroyed the conventional enemy (Iraqi Military), by fire and maneuver in record amount of time. But we failed to help those innocent civilians that we left in the wake of our “shock and awe” destruction. It was not until we were committed and occupying the country that the U.S. started to formulate a plan on how to best deal with the civilian populous.
As coalition forces cleared cities civilians were killed. This happens, war is not pretty. Those that were killed were sons, daughters, parents, and grandparents to people. They were killed by the infidel. So now someone will fight to avenge the death their fallen. And I agree. I would definitely do the same if I lost a family member in that manner. So this is how we grow more insurgents and terrorists.
Honestly the terrorists are going to grow no matter what. They are picked from a young age to live a life like this. Think about gangs in America. It’s the same exact concept, except without I.E.Ds. Young Americans, coming from a disadvantaged upbringing, enter into this life of crime and violence, because this is all they know. And at a young and mentally fragile age they can be easily manipulated into believing what the gang wants them to believe. So where’s the difference. Gangs hate police just like insurgents and terrorists hate coalition forces. Gangs resort to violence and so do the terrorists. Gangs obtain funding from illegal activities and so do terrorists. So I guess my question is; where are the troops fighting this domestic terrorism on the streets of the U.S.?
Sam stated throughout this class that we need to see things through a different lens. America looks through its lens every day. America looks outward on the world through its lens. America fails to look in on itself through that lens. We are at war. I have said this before and I will say it again. We are a nation at war with ourselves. We spend money on wars in foreign lands, but we fail to fund and fight a war on our failing education system in the U.S. We fund and fight opium fields in Afghanistan and even use our own D.E.A. agents in conjunction with American troops. But yet we fail to fight this never ending war on drugs that floods the streets of America. We build homes and shelters for the civilians that we displaced from their homes from our artillery and air strikes, but we leave our homeless to die hungry and sick on the streets in America. We are losing a war with our selves. Our nation is taking two sides. The rich are getting richer, and the poor are only getting poorer. We are seeing the push of the blue collar Americans into the working poor. And the working poor are being pushed into the streets. We elect leaders to protect our best interests, but all they do is pursue their own special interests and ensure they keep their pockets lined with money. What will the future hold for this nation? I am uncertain. I see some rough times ahead. I hope for the best and prepare for the worst.
Semper Fidelis
[Reply]
Sam brought up a great point in class about how we never think about reversing the situation. The whole Chinese taking all the coal from our state/country really made me think about how our war in the Middle East, maybe not the full extent, but definitely a very large part of it is about a natural resource that THEY clearly are entitled to. In my discussion group, we talked about the war and if our perspectives changed as a result of what Sam talked about, and granted my perspective on it did not really change. However, I did say that without a doubt, if someone in my family died as a direct result of a war, that I would want to avenge my family's death by any means necessary. So in this whole flip-flop situation, basically what I said is that I understand how someone who lives in the Middle East may hate America, especially if a family member was killed by, for example, a misguided bomb. Personally, I would be furious that such a thing happened and would want to go after anyone that I saw was responsible, be it soldier, commander, anyone.
I agree with many of the posts who say that it is hard to understand what going through an event like that must be, and clearly, I cannot fully relate. However, I relate it to this simple situation: a big brother has a younger sister, younger sister goes out and dates random guy, random guy breaks younger sisters heart, big brother (and consequently, father of daughter) goes out and breaks random guy's face. For me, that is the simple equation, and the ultimate example of how we truly act as humans. Sure, we all say we want to be civil and deny our animalistic side, but when push comes to shove and one of your family members is harmed, whether that is simply hurt emotionally or killed, you want to go out and find the person responsible for the pain.
Believe me, I am not a violent person, nor am I saying that in this situation, every single person would act like me. I just feel like anyone who says that they would not go out and exact some revenge is trying to be nice and cordial about the whole situation. If someone killed your mother and you DID NOT do something about it, then there is something wrong with you. Yeah, revenge and violence are never the answer and we all should forgive those who hurt us, but in my opinion, there are some things you can never forgive someone for. Vengeance should never be the real reason for doing a certain act, but at the same time, it is impossible to deny our animalistic side when crazy stuff goes down. We all want to look out for ourselves and those we love, so why wouldn't you want to get revenge on someone who did something horrible to your family?
[Reply]
in 3 pieces
I think this blog entry has a lot to do with the difference of two cultures. We as Americans will never really understand what it is like to be a Muslim (or a Christian) in the Middle East at this time in the world and because of that, I don’t think we will ever completely understand why some people do what they do. The video clip from the Australian news show was a very disturbing image that just goes to show how different we are in our beliefs and cultures. Here in the United States, Christianity is the predominant religion and within that religion we learn that committing suicide isn’t ever right, no matter what the reason is. Apart from religion, we just think as a society that suicide is something that you do when you are extremely depressed and unhappy with the life that you are living and that suicide is the last possible alternative. What we fail to understand is that in another country and religion, suicide has a completely different meaning to these people than it does here in the United States to us.
[Reply]
To them, committing a crime such as a suicide bombing something that you do when you lose someone and you want to avenge that person’s death. You may not get to kill the specific person who killed your love one but the point is to make an impact and show people that you are doing it because you lost someone.
We sometimes think that it is all about hurting Americans. Yeah, sometimes that is the reason for crazy suicide bombers and terrorists but on the other hand, like the 80 year old man mentioned in the article, he was simply an old man who lost not one, but four of his loved ones. He’s juts an old man who was affected by this war in a very negative way. Was it fair for the American soldiers to come into his town and kill the innocent people in his family, 2 being women and one of them being pregnant? We didn’t enter this war to kill all Middle Eastern people and that’s really what it seems to be coming to.
[Reply]
. It seems absurd to me that you can just give someone a couple of farm animals such as sheep and they feel consoled and better about the fact that you just murdered their family members in cold blood.. It’s kind of ironic, actually that they are so extreme. When they find out you killed their loved one, they want to be a suicide bomber, but if you offer them something as miniscule as a sheep, they feel like you are offering everything you have to beg for forgiveness. This is just something we will never ever understand as Americans. We need to just accept it and try to stop the heart of it which is killing civilians.
[Reply]
I wish I could be 100% positive and say “YES WE CAN CO-EXIST!” but the truth of the matter is we are still fighting the same battles we were fighting hundreds of years ago. The only difference is the cause. What will it really take for us to co-exist? It has to start with a genuine care and understand of the other country. What makes us think that we have a “right” to the oil of another country’s? If the United States is so advanced, then they should find other ways to survive without depending on another country’s resources. But for the purpose of co-existing, I think it needs to be a two-way street. If we want to maintain positive relations with another country, we have to be open to actually keeping that relationship positive. We can’t keep enforcing or pushing our beliefs on to another country’s or even judge them based on our beliefs. We seem to be a nation ready for change, yet dead-set on the way things are. It’s like the other countries are playing tug-of-war with a rope hooked on to a brick wall. I’m not sure what it would take for us to co-exist, I think SOME conflict is always healthy, but not at the expense of another person’s life. I honestly think the issue comes from our arrogance and stubbornness. It doesn’t make any sense to me why we feel we HAVE to “rescue” another country. I understand that our resources might be more advanced than theirs, but we shouldn’t take on this “burden” if we are going to hold it against the other country. I understand that most of us want to co-exist and be able to effectively communicate and relate to another country, but it is those who are firm in their narrow-mindedness that are preventing us from moving forward in a positive light. We have to find a happy medium otherwise we will continue to live in tense world, where people are ready to fight at a drop of a pin. I really wish I could see into the future and see just what the world would be like. I probably wouldn’t be looking 5-10 years but maybe 25-50 years? This is going to be a great task for the world to take upon themselves because we can’t keep living in a place where people feel the only way they can seek revenge is by killing themselves and take others out with them.
[Reply]