[WS:] Thanks for that reference, Charles. I ordered the book. While the synopsis of the argument is certainly intriguing, it also contains a bit too much of the "blowback theory" to my taste. I am not denying connections between US foreign policy and terrorism, but viewing the former as the cause of the latter is too US-centric.
^^^^ CB: Wojtek, just thinking outloud, a lot of the specific bombings counted were not directed at U.S. intervention. Tamil, Palestinian. Then the one's in Iraq and Afghanistan _would_ seem to be directly related to U.S. intervention.
^^^^^^^
My main objection to this point of view is that politics is primarily local,and other countries often serve as punching boys or proxies in the local struggles. Superpowers certainly act that way, but they have difficulties to accept that their "glorious" countries may also be serving as mere punching boys for two bit pricks in pissant nations (to borrow from two famous US presidents) in their own games.
^^^^^ CB: What you say may be true. Not to be such a big "defender" of the study, but a main point seemed to be that the bombings weren't motivated by Islam or fundamentalist religion, which is the main stereotype we have of them, no ?
^^^^^
My other objection is that US foreign policy is far from being coherent and omnipotent. Most likely, it resembles a Titanic set on a collision and nobody on the board being able to change due to their incompetence, vested interest in the status quo, and stalemate between vying factions.
^^^^ CB: You know what pops into my head when you say that ? The old Engels idea about history being a bunch of accidents and haphazard, chancy events, out of which a law asserts itself. The U.S. actions are chaotic on one level as you say, but maybe some "laws" of policy assert themselves amidst this welter of helter skelter, ya think ?
^^^^^^^
I think that US-ers would like to think of themselves as a super-power -either for good or for evil, depending on political orientation - but a more accurate view is that is a bull in a China shop - it is inept, it does not quite know what is doing and each time it is trying to do something it causes some unintended damage and entanglement.
Wojtek