Wow. fantastic work, Tom. You have provided a serious feast of food for thought. I wish every American would read and understand this.

Reminds me of a documentary that everybody should see called "Dirty Wars" by Jeremy Scahill. I highly recommend it.

Dirty Wars ++ Full Documentary USA 2013

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TN4Sn5u_pK0

A snippet from the publishers description:
"Dirty Wars follows the consequences of the declaration that “the world is a battlefield,” as Scahill uncovers the most important foreign policy story of our time. From Afghanistan to Yemen, Somalia and beyond, Scahill reports from the frontlines in this high-stakes investigation and explores the depths of America’s global k*****g machine. He goes beneath the surface of these covert wars, conducted in the shadows, outside the range of the press, without effective congressional oversight or public debate. And, based on unprecedented access, Scahill tells the chilling story of an American citizen marked for assassination by his own government.
...
As US leaders draw the country deeper into conflicts across the globe, setting the world stage for enormous destabilization and blowback, Americans are not only at greater risk—we are changing as a nation. Scahill unmasks the shadow warriors who prosecute these secret wars and puts a human face on the casualties of unaccountable violence that is now official policy: victims of night raids, secret prisons, cruise missile attacks and drone strikes, and whole classes of people branded as “suspected militants.” Through his brave reporting, Scahill exposes the true nature of the dirty wars the United States government struggles to keep hidden."

Of course these terrorists think they're doing the right thing. that's the first thing.

Do you think Jesse James considered himself an outlaw? He was doing what he thought was proper and correct.

Do you think 'Billy the Kid' considered what he did was wrong? He felt perfectly justified.

What about the guy who did the Oklahoma Bonbing? Do you think he thought it was a terrible thing to do? From his perspective, it was only right and just that he do it.

This is why we're losing in the Middle East. We've given the Middle Eastern countries thousands of reasons to h**e us, then we expect them to come over to our side.

We invaded their countries, k**led hundreds of thousands of Iraqi citizens, tortured and humiliated Iraqis, k**led civilians with drones and artillery and snipers, then expect them to rush to our side in gratitude.

Say what???

We believe in our ideology, but are surprised that they believe in theirs?

Do you think Suicide Bombers feel justified in giving their lives to k**l others?

Of course they do! Why else would they do it?

They are heroes in their own minds, and many, many people in the Middle East think so, too. Millions of them!

And we've given them many a good reason to believe that.

When you abduct a civilian for torture, you create 15-20 Iraqis--sons and daughters, parents and relatives, co-workers and neighbors--who will Never forgive what you've done. Never. When you k**l innocents with drones or artillery or bombing, you do the same thing.

When we destroy the cities and the government and destroy the economy and the society, do we expect them to love us for it?

Get real.

What percentage of Middle Easterners h**e us for what we've done? Really, make your own estimate.

Now, how do we convince each of them to respect us and admire us and want to duplicate our government and economic system for themselves?

Ya think?

They have a sophisticated culture much older than ours. They have a rich literature and an old and highly developed artistic culture. They have a religion they deeply believe in.

And we are destroying this, planning to bomb them until they love us!

Do you think we're going about this the wrong way?

How much bombing do we owe them to produce an ecstasy about what we do?


Tom Friedman, reviewing the book, Mission Failure:

Beginning with the 1991 decision of the first Bush administration to intervene in northern Iraq and create a no-fly zone to protect the Iraqi Kurds from their country’s genocidal leader, Saddam Hussein, “the principal international initiatives of the United States” for the next two decades “concerned the internal politics and economics rather than the external behavior of other countries....”

“The main focus of American foreign policy shifted from war to governance, from what other governments did beyond their borders to what they did and how they were organized within them,” writes Mandelbaum, referring to U.S. operations in Somalia, Haiti, Bosnia, Kosovo, Iraq and Afghanistan and toward Chinese human rights policy, Russian democratization policy, NATO expansion and the Israeli-Palestinian peace process.

(snip)

In each case, “the United States sought to make the internal governance of the countries with which it became entangled more like its own democratic, constitutional order and those of its Western allies,” Mandelbaum adds. “In the Cold War the United States aimed at containment; in the post-Cold War the thrust was t***sformation. The Cold War involved the defense of the West; post-Cold War foreign policy aspired to the political and ideological extension of the West.”

These missions, he notes, all aimed “to convert not simply individuals but entire countries,” and they had one other thing in common: “They all failed.”

Don’t get him wrong, Mandelbaum says. The U.S. beat back some very bad actors in Bosnia, Somalia, Kosovo, Iraq and Afghanistan, and later in Libya. “The military missions that the United States undertook succeeded. It was the political missions that followed, the efforts to t***sform the politics of the places where American arms prevailed, that failed.”

Read Friedman on your own or read the book. It matters.

Someone else's turn on the soapbox....

Tom, after reading your response I think it very clear that you did not read the article, the article was not about the terrorists themselves, it was about High School students living in and attending school in Belgium. Kids that should be integrated into the society. The author does have a liberal bias and does blame the system for society's failure to integrate these kids... Personally I do not think that it is so easy, I think that culture plays a big role in radicalization and passive support for terrorism. Many bad actors who played a role in terrorist acts were educated and middle class, the Brussels airport was attacked by two brothers who owned a bar, we have seen engineers involved, the guy in California had a good city job....

You make some interesting points, but I would hope that you can recognize that the concepts that you throw out may or may not be true, have you spoken to vets who served over there? I have seen many stories of Iraqis welcoming the American presence, Bush never should have gone in, that is true, the vision you have of what took place there just may be a bit tainted, I think that an Iraqi's take on the war may be influenced by many things not the least of which sect he belongs to, Sunni or Shea. Another thing you might consider about the bias that you project in these statements is if what you said is true, why were we attacked on 911, why were there several failed as well as successful attempts prior to 911? Why are terrorist attacks taking place in countries that had nothing to do with Iraq or Afghanistan? Your rational sounds good Tom, but it does not explain radical Islam, and the terrorist attacks that are occurring around the world, your bias allows you to blame the US and look no further, but that is just wrong, it explains nothing.

Blurry, it will not surprise you that I disagree. I don't approve terrorism at any level, and certainly don't approve any of the violence. But I understand at least part of it.

On 9/11 were attacked by 15 men from Saudi Arabia and four others, none of whom were from Aghanistan or Iraq. We lost approximately 3000 citizens.

As a result, we attacked Iraq (!) and Afghanistan (who refused to turn over Bin Laden when asked).

As a result of our attack and war, some 100,000 Iraqis were k**led--100,000 at least, and the estimates go as high as One Million!. We pulled people off the street, held them prisoner forever, and still hold them, and have a long and disgraceful history of torturing them.

Can our indignation over the attack, and the loss of 3000 citizens, compare to our attack in Iraq--which country had absolutely no role in the attack against us--can that indignation compare to the Iraqi experience, and their own indignation?

Against that background, read this:

“Our cities are facing a huge problem, maybe the largest since World War II,” Mr. Goldstein said. “How is it that people who were born here in Brussels, in Paris, can call heroes the people who commit violence and terror? That is the real question we’re facing.”

Remember assimilation is always a two generation issue. Adults emigrated to the Lower East Side in New York in the 1800s, from all over the world, and it was common that the adults Never learned English. The kids, the second generation, learned English and became assimilated into our society. It is the primary responsibility of the schools to integrate students--Foreign and domestic--into Americn Society, assimilating our collective values, morals, and ideals.

No one else has this responsibility.

It works, but it works slow.

Irving Berlin, one of our most successful emigres, arrived in this country when he was five years old. His Father Never had a full-time job in this country, and when he died, his wife became a midwife, having delivered eight children herself. Irving lived on the streets for 2-3 years, singing blue parodies of song lyrics to popular songs in bars for tips.

He went on to become fabulously wealthy, but never fully recovered from his early days of poverty.

As one of my college profs used to say, the mills of the gods grind slowly, but they grind exceedingly fine.


(Still in progress....)

Tom,

I don't deny that the Iraq war was a mistake, whether or not Bush lied can be debated but what is clear is that Iraq was not the threat that the country thought it was when we went in and we certainly had no plan for the aftermath of that war. I am sure that we stirred a hornet's nest in the middle east but let's also be clear that terrorism did not start with the Iraq war, the ISIS terrorists today are not talking about the issues that you are describing, they are talking about global jihad and one religion that all must follow or be either ens***ed or k**led, there are no choices of freedom and liberty with these folks, it is not in their ideology.

I posted the results of PEW polls of Muslims in different areas of the world sometime back, I suggest that you google them, the results are alarming. I come into contact with people of many different cultures and religions and I am not alarmed by them, I see what I assume to be Muslims through my work and I see them in the public course of my daily life such as shopping etc. My interactions with these folks have been so far very positive, but what I am seeing occurring in the EU I find to be quite alarming, and I am not talking just about the terrorists acts alone, but the support these guys seem to have among their communities, what the legislator/teacher reported is shocking, the vast majority of his students consider these mass murders to be heroes. When you read the results of the PEW polls you see similar sentiments among the majority of Muslims around the world.

I am just pointing out with this post that there is reason for concern, we know that we are not only a target of global jihad, we are the target for global jihad. I think it foolish to proceed as if there is no threat or little threat, I also think it foolish to not question our politicians in matters of their ability to keep this country safe, I think that politicians on both sides of the aisle have demonstrated that they put themselves and their legacies first before the American people, I also think that both democrats and republicans have demonstrated that special interest groups have 10 fold greater influence in DC than do the American people. In terms of nationals security and immigration as well as national security. Why is proceeding with caution so offensive to democrats, why is it that in the eyes of many our country belongs to the world and not to the American people?

Blurry, you posted this post before I posted mine above--just to keep the chronology straight.

I don't disagree with what you post. My point (which I didn't make too clear above) is that recognizing the interests of Both Nations is the only way we can arrive at some satisfactory solution.

As long as we bomb and k**l, and don't develop some kind of understanding with the populations and governments in the Middle East, success will always be on the horizon, and the Middle East will join Vietnam as another failure.

We cannot bomb our way to peace. Understanding is the only way.