If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Some Guy)   An introduction to the history of US involvement in the Middle East   ( socialist.nu) divider line
    More: Interesting  
•       •       •

2550 clicks; posted to Main » on 18 Sep 2001 at 12:00 AM (16 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»

52 Comments     (+0 »)

Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | » | Newest | Show all

2001-09-18 12:07:19 AM  
from the socialist worker?

great commie rag.


2001-09-18 12:37:57 AM  
Delphi: Pay attention. Try again. Doesn't say anything about The Socialist Worker.

Read it. Research it. Make up your own mind.

Drew, kudos for having the guts to post this.
2001-09-18 12:54:47 AM  
Dismiss information out of hand just because of the source?

Now you know why I don't watch CNN/NBC/ABC/CBS/FOX/etc.


Kudos to Drew again. This is important stuff.
2001-09-18 12:59:03 AM  
That's fine that FARK posted this, and technically it offers an alternative opinion. But seriously, it's obviously biased.

The examples of US involvement in Middle Eastern histories are warped. Most of the "examples" aren't bad at all, they're simply instances when the United States sold arms to or supported a regime that best supported our interests. Then, they have the audacity to talk about the "evils" of Israel, as compared to our so-called "intrusions" in terrorist nations.

Never did the article mention the United States terrorist attacks in Saudi, and Iran, and Iraq, and Syria, and so forth, that targeted as many innocent women and children as possible. Hmmm...maybe that's because those NEVER HAPPENED. Maybe that's because the US has never attacked first -- all United States "incursions" are the result of foreign antagonisms that we had to repair.

The United States has never attacked first, and never will. That sort of thing just goes along with not being evil, unlike the publicly terrorist supporting Arab nations that were so hurt by US "incursions." fark that.
2001-09-18 01:09:10 AM  
I watched a TV interview with an Afghan militant this evening. He claimed that, in part, the attacks on the WTC were retaliation for when we fired cruise missiles at bin Laden's training camps in August 1998.

But here's what I don't understand. They were attacking the US, and even the WTC itself, long before the incident with the cruise missiles. I still remember hearing about the WTC bombing in 1993. So to me, his argument that last week's WTC attack was retaliation for firing cruise missiles at them is bunk.

Also, as Dan Rather pointed out in an interview with David Letterman a little while ago, "this is not Islam." I'm not Islamic, but most (all actually) of the Muslims I know do not condone violence. Most of the religions I am aware of don't condone it either. This is why I'm getting so pissed off every time I hear of anti-Arab violence stemming from the WTC attack.

To everyone who has even thought of doing this: the Arabs you are thinking about assaulting did not perpetrate this attack. By attacking them, you are only tearing us apart even further. During times like this, this is the LAST thing our country needs.

Wheeeee...it's late and I'm ranting. Bye-bye for now...
2001-09-18 01:09:27 AM  
Wow, what an unbiased, objective view on how everything America does is evil. I never knew that the poor, honest Middle Eastern governments were so beset by such an evil democracy that they are dying by the thousands every day. I guess freedom really isn't the answer, and we need more totalitarian governments to offset the evil that American democracy and capitalism has unleashed in this area of the world.
2001-09-18 01:18:52 AM  
Yeah! America is perfect, and anyone who says utherise is a dang COMMIE!!!!! And Comies are fags!!!!
2001-09-18 01:24:00 AM  
2001-09-18 01:30:59 AM  
All of the above.
2001-09-18 01:34:43 AM  
Rounded Bits:



Dear Red,
Read It. "Pay Attention," ? Please Dogmatic. Tell me what else to do.
2001-09-18 01:40:54 AM  
You said, "from the socialist worker? "
A quick Google search reveals that The Socialist Worker is located at
http://www.socialistworker.co.uk/ , not at this article's location.
Hence my comment that you are not paying attention.
BTW, while I claim neither, Socialism and Communism are not the same.
Once again, I command you: Pay attention (you are under my power).
2001-09-18 01:48:59 AM  
No, America is not perfect (as some people really enjoy pointing out). But to claim that we are the source of all evil in a war-torn region with one (admittedly alleged) democracy is ludicrous.
2001-09-18 01:49:01 AM  
I am under your power? Are you sure youre not a commie?

A "Socialist" is a communist, i.e. 'the worker' or 'fellow traveller' - buzz words for sympaticos.

One thing is for sure, you are certainly a pedant
2001-09-18 01:50:52 AM  
I made you say that.
2001-09-18 01:51:24 AM  
dam you!
2001-09-18 02:03:16 AM  
I'd like to take this moment to say that, for all the disagreements, FARKers are a pretty agreeable bunch.

Thbtbtbtbt! Commie!
2001-09-18 02:08:43 AM  
Interesting site with some interesting points. I think these attacks should make us Americans more aware of what our government is up to, yet I don't think you can blame the West for all the ills in the Middle East. I also didn't really care for, what seemed to me, the somewhat patronizing introduction. I think the tone of some of the sites like this one are only going to make Americans less likely to accept the information they provide.
2001-09-18 02:17:31 AM  
BobSaccamano from Jersey? Did you get me those pocket wizards?

Let me make one thing perfectly clear...

In lieu of recent of events and France's surrender, I have decided not to direct aggression(just indirect) towards fellow farkers at this time of great national crisis. "United we fark, divided we fall." Our foundation is freedom. Freedom of speech, freedom of religion, freedom of thought. That includes Communism, Rounded_Bits and Google Searches. differences in belief will be and have to be, i guess its a healthy thing: a system of checks and balances to counter exactly the kind of extremism we are now up against. Now that's democracy. Not to say that the system is all that swell or perfect. Bear in mind what Churchill said, democracy is not the best system, only the least corruptable
2001-09-18 02:31:46 AM  
Frankly, there is no doubt in my mind whatsoever about US involvement where it should not be in the Middle East, HOWEVER, my problem with this as an excuse for the whole WTC incident is that if this is bombing is to be considered a retaliation against US military backing of the wrong sides in the Middle East why the fark did the idiots pick a nonmilitary target like the WTC? Kinda shoots oneself in the foot decrying military wrongs by blowing up civilian targets.

2001-09-18 03:14:54 AM  

Daylight come and he wasn' home

Come, Mr.Taliben, give me bin laden
(Daylight come and he wasn' home)

Come, Mr.Taliben, give me bin laden

(Daylight come and he wasn' home)


Daylight come and he wasn' home
2001-09-18 03:25:27 AM  
http://us.news2.yimg.com/f/42/31/7m/dailynews.yahoo.com/h/nm/20010918/​ts/attac k_afghan_holywar_dc.html

Taliban Says to Engage in Holy War Against U.S.
2001-09-18 03:30:38 AM  
I agree with Darkwood, have we stuck our noses where it didn't belong? Yeah, sure, maybe, whatever, its not a excuse for them to attack the WTC, sorry.

The same way these facts are being used to show that "we deserved the WTC attack" they can be twisted to show that the spineless liberals who make us pull out of clean up efforts prematurely are just as guilty.

Its a simple fact, sometimes we've farked up. And instead of standing shoulder to shoulder, the liberals have sat there and picked apart our government from the inside, thus weakening our country.

Great, as I'm writing this, the Reuters is reporting that the Taliban has declared a Holy War on the United States.

Taliban Says to Engage in Holy War Against U.S.

Support your government even if they aren't your first choice.
2001-09-18 03:33:58 AM  
The WTC is(was) a military target. The reason that we are in the Middle East is money. So it would be in a war, which by they way has already been declaired on us, a military target. If you think that in someway the enemy isn't fighting fair, because it didn't go to Paris Island then you might now understand what the British felt when the minuteman shot from behind hedgerows. We weren't fighting fair then, because we knew that it was useless. So this force was taken at our economic center(the head) rather then the muscle(military) which would easily defeat them.
Do not belittle the enemy, they have struck a well placed blow. If you underestimate you opponent you have already lost the first round. We need to begin to ask why this happened and I think that there are a number of good facts in this article that might start you on your way to an answer.
2001-09-18 04:16:30 AM  
The U.S. has supported regimes in Latin America just as bad as those in the middle east. It was always self interest, but it often didn't matter who was in power for either side, they were brutal. I will skip making examples of various nations around the world who were going to be ruled by ruthless killers no matter who was in charge, and just mention that there isn't much fear of latino terrorists in America though they have at least as much reason to be bitter. It's a holy war, with politics and history as a secondary aspect usually to the zealots who do such things.
2001-09-18 05:35:21 AM  
now that the airlines are going to bailed out by the govt. do we need to start thinking up a name for our new National airlines?
2001-09-18 06:00:55 AM  
sort of off topic, and let me apologise in advance if this is old news, especially with all you 'puter types out there. I was just sent this e-mail....

Type 'NYC' into a new Word document; has to be capitals and increase font size to 36.
Change the font to 'Webdings', and you'll see a representation of 'I love New York'.
Now change the font to 'Wingdings'....
2001-09-18 07:25:02 AM  
WoodyTX, where exactly does the article claim that the US is the source of all evil?

Maybe I simply missed it, but to me it seems like they are simply spooning up some historical facts. If you think this casts an unfavourable light on US foreign politics, you should question the politics, not the facts.
2001-09-18 08:27:08 AM  
I flipped to the last page and this is what I saw.

[image from webnt.physics.ox.ac.uk too old to be available]
2001-09-18 08:39:05 AM  
Have you tried YMCA in Wingdings?
2001-09-18 09:56:01 AM  
Let me summarize the whole thing piece which was incredilby, overtly, mind-bendingly biased.....

United States ='s EEEEEEEEEVIL!!!

And they call me biased...

2001-09-18 09:57:44 AM  
Delphi, socialism is NOT communism.

In case you didn't realize it, the U.S. has elements of socialism already. Things such as welfare, social security, medicare, etc., are socialist programs. In general, the voting masses in a democracy don't have lots of money so they can't really afford the luxuries of food and health, so socialist programs tend to spring up.

Socialism is the future.
2001-09-18 10:05:08 AM  
And about the web page and it's information... it does seem a little biased because it isn't showing some of the good things the U.S. has done for the region, like supporting earthquake victims in Turkey. But it does raise some eyebrows. My question is, do you TRULY think that a government of a people that don't give a shiat about the rest of the world themselves give a shiat about the rest of the world? It should be a little obvious that most foreign policy that the U.S. has is to benefit itself. Why are we farking around in the mideast? We need oil for your SUV and we need to sell our guns. Does the mean people should kill innocents? No, no one should ever kill innocents. Not even the U.S.
2001-09-18 10:27:48 AM  
We need Hacksaw Jim Duggan to set the Arabs straight.
2001-09-18 10:49:36 AM  
Nerme: "Socialism is the future"

I'll remember that when they start locking up "difficult" people like me who refuse to live for everyone else's sake.
2001-09-18 11:29:58 AM  
I think it is important that we all take a closer look at US foreign policy in the Middle East, and at least try to understand why some people there may not view the US as the land of the free and the home of the brave, but instead as the source of bombs and rockets. I say this not necessarily as any kind of apologist for those who carried out the attack on the WTC, but more because it is important to understand what makes our foe tick in this battle. It will allow us to better infiltrate and weaken their organizations and ultimately end this horror with as little violence as possible.
2001-09-18 12:09:23 PM  
Not necessarily relevant, but it is all true.
2001-09-18 12:20:31 PM  
Terribly biased... painfully twisted in a pro-middle east direction... but it important to read between the lines and see how invasive and petty our goverment has been.

Why? Because if we understand the shiatty things we have done in the past, we can NOT do them in the future! Do I think the U.S. is "EEEEEEEEVIL"? No, but we've been petty and strong-handed and had trouble keeping a straight face while we calling our actions just.
2001-09-18 12:38:32 PM  
Otto: The WTC is(was) a military target.

Really? So all those killed/injured are (were) soldiers? You know, professionals who accept the fact that they may well be exposed to danger on a regular basis.

I was in the Army. I can identify a military target. It's usually painted green or brown (or grey, if you're into boats), has a lot of people with the exact same uniform on or near it, and generally has the capacity to do harm to you.

Thinking that there is no difference between civilians and the military will get you into nasty corners.
2001-09-18 12:54:38 PM  
yes, the article is biased but then so is the belief that america is whiter than white, a land of freedom and democracy. Somewhere between the two extremes is something that resembles actuality.
It was interesting to note Dubya state that countries / govt's that support terrorism etc should be considered no different than the terrorists themselves. Three letters : IRA.
The murder of innocents whether it is direct or indirect is inexcusable, that i think we all agree on. I just hope that this agreement is not considered applicable during whatever retalliation is made. Blood does not wash blood. Never has, never will.

oh and for the guy who said communism and socialism were the same things ? I can offer you the following [check that url, surely that doesn't say washington in it ? it DOES, therefore it must be true...]

sorry, sorry, sorry. i know, but the whole farking world is holding it's breath and i'm not sure i trust the man with the gun.
2001-09-18 12:56:43 PM  
jesus boy get it right - '..hope that this agreement is considered applicable..'

is how it should read...long day...rush of blood to the head causing inability to type...
2001-09-18 01:21:36 PM  
Js: Good point. Socialism and communism aren't the same, except by the relative aggressiveness of their applications. In other words:

Socialism = Robbery at gunpoint.
Communism = Murder, then robbery.

Quoting Marx in an economic context is about as intellectually bankrupt as quoting Creationism in an evolutionary context. Marx has been debunked as economic theory time and time again.
2001-09-18 01:36:27 PM  
Blah blah blah.. blah blah blah.. who cares.
2001-09-18 01:50:44 PM  
There is a lot of stuff in there that is highly questionable. That is the issue with the media... nobody presents a totally unbiased case, which is why WE the reader must use our critical faculties to try and see through the bull, and figure out what the truth might be.

I think it's great that FARK posted this... at least it's a change from the steady diet of jingoistic crap we've been feeding on for the past few days.
2001-09-18 02:45:59 PM  
I don't believe most of what I read, and neither should you.

Still the CIA is not a good nanny for baby democracies, in fact they are mean nasty buggers. Surprise!

We train them to be freedom-fighters for "democracy" which really means they are there to let our business partners in so we can make money. This is not evil, just is how it goes.

But when the freedom-fighters are done torturing and killing innocents and then decide to turn on us, they are labled terrorists.

We made them what they are to a certain degree. We trained them. We gave them weapons and sold them too. Read about Amnesty International's torture watch--who sells the guns and torture devices to the middle-east? WE DO!

First and foremost we should shutdown the "School of the Americas" do a google search on it.
Why do we do this?
For freedom? For democracy? Human Rights?
2001-09-18 03:06:04 PM  
Socialaism != Communism

Socialism != Dictatorship

Socialism != Fascism

Get your fact straight before posting. America has indeed medled very poorly in middle eastern affairs, and yes it is coming back to haunt us. This does NOT justify the WTC incident, nor acts of this nature. But we also are not 100% sure that bin Laden actually had anything to do with this attack. We may never know. If we attack without proof then we are indeed in the wrong.

Let us not throw away what moral high ground we have to stand on. If we attack without due cause they SHOULD declare a jihad against us. It will not be pretty, and they can't win....but it would be the right thing in their situation to do.

Better to remain silent and have others think you a fool, than to open your mouth and remove all doubt.
2001-09-18 03:43:23 PM  
I was at Ft Benning (GA) in late 97 or early 98 when they tried to protest the SoA. I saw the protesters arrested. It was great fun.

Of all the arrests, not one was from Georgia, or even the south. There was an angry girl with blue hair, a couple of dried-out ex-hippie lesbians, a college professor (short-sleeve blue shirt and tweed jacket, complete with elbow patches) and what looked like a starved, pale white guy (and I mean white like paper, not race). There were others, but those are the memorable ones.

I am not making this up.

One of my drill sergeants was an instructor at the SoA. I asked him about it, and (in a rare moment of not screaming) he told me that the SoA prides itself on attempting to teach professionalism to its students. A professional military will not execute a coup, nor will it go off into vigilante actions. The things that Noriega, etc. have done are not due to the training that they got there, just as the Army is not responsible for what McVeigh did.
2001-09-18 04:41:15 PM  
I agree.
Nobody is to blame for these malicious people being here on this planet.
No entity of the gubbment has ever done anything wrong.
They all strive to exist and flourish, like bacteria or Virri do in nature.

So to ascribe a moral or ethical agenda to any government or military action or institution is impossible and a waste of time.

Trust the powers that be. They have your best interests in mind. Thinking about "better" ways is a sign of insurgency and is a disservice to your country.

Then I ask is having a critical view of your own government's actions a bad thing? Why would you dare to ask questions? The government never does anything wrong.

We can say with confidence that ignorance makes evil possible, that complacency makes things worse, that not thinking for yourself will let attrocities occur. Sure, nobody has ever been wronged from a graduate or flunky of the US Intelligence or Military apparatus--ever. These people acted on their own, they just happened to use the guns we gave them and the training that they recieved.

Would this world be a more peaceful place without armed militants of any persuasion? I think so.
2001-09-18 05:04:11 PM  
I agree with your last sentences.

From what I have seen on the inside and outside of our military, any friendly contact with another country's military (with the exception of advanced countries such as England, Germany, Japan, etc) would have a beneficial effect on the behavior of their military.

Our military is extremely professional. Yes, we have soldiers in jail for rape and murder, but show me a population of young men which doesn't. Yes, we teach other countries to kill more efficiently, since that's basically the job of a military. Yes, we make allies out of people we wouldn't let in our country, but that is the nature of war.

We didn't want the Soviet Union in Afghanistan, so we trained/equipped the Mujaheddin to defend it. If they come after us, how is that our fault? Sounds more like it's their fault for being such fundamental a$$holes that they would attack their former allies.

We've made bad decisions before. It's arguable that the whole Iraqi incursion into Kuwait was our fault, since our Ambassador to Iraq told Saddam that we weren't concerned with his internal affairs, and he considered Kuwait "internal".

However, to automatically assume that whatever problems there are in the world are due to American involvement is ridiculous. What tanks did we destroy in Iraq? Soviet ones. What is the international symbol of the terrorist? The AK-47. Who dropped land mines disguised as toys on the Afghans? The Soviets.
2001-09-18 05:16:29 PM  
The people that are suggesting we try to understand why there is so much hate towards the US, and actually look at our foreign policy are not saying the attack was deserved or justified. No American is thinking the attack was was deserved or justified, it was an attrocity to be sure. So lets undertsnad that, no one is trying to justify the attack. But taking action without any understanding of why it happened can only be flailing blindly.
www.zmag.org has some interesting analysis. Robert Fisks is particularily interesting.
2001-09-18 05:53:13 PM  
Buckshot sez

-- all United States "incursions" are the result of foreign antagonisms that we had to repair.

Holy living hell. Granted you posted a long time ago, I want to give you a chance to recant this statement. This is one of the stupidest things I've read in 46 years.
Displayed 50 of 52 comments

Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | » | Newest | Show all

This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking

On Twitter

Top Commented
Javascript is required to view headlines in widget.
  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.