the larger social issue is inequity..
That is the fundamental reason why people fight.. equal pay for equal work..
As muricans' we're lucky to live in this country where the entire nation is paid significantly more for the same work as someone else..
The outside world is certainly not oblivious, and ultimately, this form of military-capitalism is unsustainable..
The tipping point may be outside of '"OUR"' life times... but one must keep these things in mind before frivolously assigning blame...
No one WANTS to be a terrorist, they fall into it because of relative hardships..
sigh.........
the larger social issue is inequity..
That is the fundamental reason why people fight.. equal pay for equal work..
I think you are simplifying too much, and that you are a victim to the fnords of the 'merican propaganda machine.
Terrorism isn't really an "ism" - it is a tactic. Terrorism has usually been used as a means to an end, when the perpetrators have not been able to see any better type of means. That is where the inequity lies.
It has nothing to do with standard of living. Acts of terror have also occurred by various groups in both USA, Europe and Japan where people live as us, mostly by the same standards, with the same standard of living as you and me: IRA, ETA, "Bader-Meinhof"/"RAF", Aum Shinrikyo ...
Terrorism has also been used many many times by states - to inflict "terror" - to scare people into submission. This is why civilian populations were bombed in WWII, culminating in the greatest act of terrorism ever: the nuclear bombs over Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
The word "terrorist" has been misused a whole lot in the recent decade by leaders in both USA, Russia and in various dictatorships to denote whoever happened to be the current enemy of the day.
I would vager that the majority of the prisoners in Guanamano Bay who were taken in Afghanistan (or near the border) who the US are labeling as "terrorists" actually had had the intention to fight the US invasion of Afghanistan using first and foremost conventional means of warfare.
Can’t say I fully agree with TP4, but I definitely agree that Americans are paid far more for inferior work and they get that because the international system is shaped and controlled by the US military which secures supernormal profits and extra benefits.
Top chefs in Asian restaurants (in Asia) get less than the dumbest burger flipper in the US.
Top lawyers in India, with as much brains and hard work as their counterparts in New York, get less than your average clerk (or brainless college school administrator) in the US.
In Hindu, Buddhist and Confucian societies most people quietly accept this. Even in my country it is accepted that Americans will always be paid more regardless of quality of work.
In Islam there is a strong tradition of struggling against tyranny. Muslims are called upon to do things NOW. No eremitism, no monasticism, no quiet contemplation/ meditation. Not for the future, not on account of karma or something that looks back. The tradition of social action (as well as using military force to resist injustice) is strong. Mohammed was a warrior and a trader, not a monk like Gautama.
This means that it is easy for discontented Muslim people to go off on a tangent. The same people who are taught in India that something is the karmic consequence of what he did in his past life, will be taught in the Islamic world that it is because of some evil force from the Great Satan, which all the faithful must struggle against. That’s why Buddhists spin prayer wheels but Muslims throw stones at effigies.
Findecanor, I would not say that even Hiroshima/ Nagasaki were the worst terrorist acts ever. During the Vietnam war a certain invading terrorist force spent over a decade pouring chemical weapons on the civilian population of a small country that had never attacked it. 3-4 million North Vietnamese civilians died, and millions more now are born deformed because of Agent Orange.
In any case it is fairly well known now that the majority of the ‘terrorists’ in Guantanamo were not even dangerous. They are the ‘losers’ in an ugly and mercenary competition. The most dangerous terrorists and well connected militants got away. The marginal fighters, some people in the wrong place at the wrong time, were turned in by locals for fat ransoms.
That’s the problem when it comes to money spent badly. When the US offers a ransom for terrorists, all the local Afghans start looking for foreigners, weak people, unpopular members of local minority tribes, etc to scapegoat. And since the US military had very poor controls on the money spent (it was the same in Iraq), they basically listened to every local spewing BS about how dangerous someone was. Fact is, if that someone was really so dangerous, he would have connections to the Taliban, and he would not be turned in, because the locals would not dare piss off the Taliban which is still very strong in Afghanistan today.
