Agreed.
> While gun control is obviously irrelevant, I don't think that the lack
> of democratic or at least representative forms of government in the
> middle east, along with responsive public institutions, some serious
> economic reform to ameliorate grinding poverty, and a well educated
> and (yes) enlightened, tolerant and socially responsible middle class
> to administer the countries are irrelevant. In fact I think the lack
> of these directly contribute.
I actually agree here too.
My point is that the causes of the terrorist act are many and complex. Poverty has a small part to play. Globalization may have a small part. Underlying religious and cultural differences have a part to play. Israel has a part. The Iraqi war has a part, etc.
Leftist commentators discredit themselves in my eyes when they point to a single, simple answer like globalization and poverty and try to blame the whole thing on that. Blaming it on the American empire is not much more sophisticated. Countries that choose to leave the American-lead secular capitalist club (Iran, Iraq, Afghanistan) are even more dictatorial and impoverished than those (Turkey, Egypt) which are pals with the US. Therefore I see no evidence that a withdrawal of American power from those regions would lead to a better life for the people there and an end to terrorism.
When people on the left blame the US for all of the problems of the middle east, it sounds to me like Jerry Falwell blaming homosexuality for the terrorist bombings. Your pre-determined conclusion is that the US is to blame to for all of the ills of the world. If Martians bombed us it would be in response to American imperialism.
>...
> The role the US empire plays in this game is entirely exploitive and
> oppressive and it is a natural target, since it both indirectly
> creates and directly supports these conditions in the name of `peace'
> and the statis quo.
Do you reject all shades of grey in favor of black and white declarations: "entirely exploitive and oppressive"? I recall a more complicated, nuanced history of the world. As I recall it, the United States called for a return to democracy in Pakistan after the coup. As I recall it, the United States refused to recognize the dictatorial Taliban government. Has the US been consistent in its fight for democracy: certainly not. Has it been consistent in fighting AGAINST democracy? No, that's not the full truth either.
What I ask from commentators on both the left and the right is acknowledgment that the problems of the real world do not have simple solutions and that the US is neither a malevolent force for evil nor a beneficent bestower of prosperity and happiness.
Paul Prescod