Max Sawicky" <sawicky at bellatlantic.net>
The only credible explanation of 9/11 is in fact Islamic fundamentalist expansionism, possibly in coalition w/anti-U.S. Islamic militarism (i.e., Iraq), particular w/respect to Saudi Arabia.
%%%%
CB: Yes. However, I believe Iraq's leadership has had violent conflicts with Islamic fundamentalists. So, you might want to get the word "Arab" in there - Arab transnationalism. In other words, the anti-U.S. commonality is in part Arab. The U.S. is more militarist than the ones who pulled off 9/11. Look how much more military stuff the U.S. has than anybody. The U.S. has military bases all over the world, but the Arabs do not. Why is "militarism" not frequently associated with the United States ?
You might want to say "expansionism overthere", because loonies like Bush try to imply that "they" are trying to expand into the territory of the U.S. as a "justification" for U.S. war based on self-defense.
%%%%%%
The plan was to draw the U.S. into the big muddy of Afgh and do them like they did the Russians, meanwhile accelerating the IF influence in Pakistan, S.A., etc. How much of a threat this is (the attempt, rather than the completion) is a different matter, though by the recent experience something to be doubted.
%%%%%
CB: Yea."They" seem to have miscalculated. They now have both Russia and the U.S. on one side against them. Plus, Pakistan had to give them up. "They" seem to be overmatched. They were only able to succeed when the U.S. and Pakistan were on their side.
By the way, this important fact does not get mentioned enough. bin Laden's group used to be on the same side with the U.S. bin Laden was largely created by the U.S. I don't think that has sunk in enough in Peoria.
%%%%
As the Chipster says, one can recognize this without forgetting about hegemonism and the 57 varieties of depredations from the U.S. One could even suspect that U.S. actions were knowingly geared to provoke *some kind of response* from OBL/Taliban. that of course does not justify any such actions nor indict any of the victims. (see what stupid things we feel compelled to say by way of qualification?).
%%%%
CB: This is key. One has to do more than not forget the violence and depredation of U.S. imperialism. One must see them as a cause of the attacks on Sept. 11. The difference between "justify" and " cause" is playing with words by some. Lots of people no problem with saying that the U.S. attack on Afghanistan is JUSTFIED by the Sept. 11 events. But Sept. 11 didn't just fall out of the sky. It was caused/justified by the previous hegemony/depradations of U.S. imperialism. All the flagwavers want to pretend like before Sept. 11 Americans were still innocents abroad, like in _Daisy Miller_. This is typical "end of history amnesia".
%%%%%%
Altho I am soft on bombing OBL et al. I would be cautious about throwing around the term fascism, not because I disagree with how anybody in particular is applying it or not applying it, but because in a rhetorical/political sense it gives away too much to U.S. hegemonism. I think this is more the issue being argued, rather than some academic definition of fascism. It functions as a security blanket for gratuitous, unprincipled attacks on the left by Hitch & others. The implication is that anybody 'fighting fascism' could not themselves be fascist or otherwise have irredeeming features.
%%%%
CB: Yea