Understanding terrorism

I'll tell you what. The current administration is indifferent to the niceties of religous and political innuendos in the Middle East. They don't know because they don't care. If ever there was a case of an administration wagging the dog, it would be a photo finish of that flap of the tail between the Nixon and George Jr. administrations. And I don't mean any Monica Lewinski's either.

Iraq is about oil. Forget religion, forget democracy, forget crimes against humanity (Jr. commits them all the time with little, if any public comment), forget the "war on terror."

Junior went into Iraq after 9/11 in order to make it appear to the public that he was making a response to terrorism. It didn't hurt things any that a strong American force in that region will be essential to securing US strategic oil reserves. It also didn't hurt that Jr.'s sidekick, Dick Chaney, has strong ties with Halliburten, Root and CO., and their ilk. Can anyone say "war profiteering"? Hitler had the Swiss banking system. The current administration has the Cayman Islands.

What nationality is Bin Ladin?

Class? Yes, you in the back, CORRECT!

WE DON'T CARE!

Iraq is about siezing strategic control of the most precious substance on the face (actually interior) of the earth - petroleum. Our military might would grind to a halt without it. He who controls the oil, controls the world's power and wealth. It is very, very simple. And it is a game played for high stakes without remorse or compassion on either side.

The Muslim members of the educated middle and upper class understand what is going on. That's why they are willing to become terrorists. The poverty stricken masses follow because they are poor and ignorant and Allah or Jesus via their local religous leader told them to do it.

More fools are we all.

[tw]

Originally Posted by marichiko

Iraq is about oil. Forget religion, forget democracy, forget crimes against humanity (Jr. commits them all the time with little, if any public comment), forget the "war on terror."

Junior went into Iraq after 9/11 in order to make it appear to the public that he was making a response to terrorism. It didn't hurt things any that a strong American force in that region will be essential to securing US strategic oil reserves.

Oil is a major part of the strategy. But it is a strategy that is Central Asia wide. For example, learn the politics behind the Caspian Sea oil pipeline. Pipeline intentionally routed so that the Russians have no influence. Carefully laid using detailed political considerations. The US is even talking about Georgia becoming part of the EU. It is why the pipeline does not run through both adversarial nations (ie. Armenia and Azerbaijan). It is why the US is courting so many K'stan nations.

It is why SCO (Shanghai Co-operation Organization) exists. From The Economist of 9 July 2005:

Judging from the activities of the member states (China, Russia, Kazakhstan, Kirgizstan, Tajikistan, and Uzbekistan), three principles define that new order: slaking China's thirst for energy, protecting member states as they tryrannise dissidents and curbing America's influence in the region.

We would not be in this problem if our energy consumption industry would innovate. GM being the classic reason why Americans must now get into a conflict and the quagmire that is Middle East and Central Asia. With innovation, American would have no trade deficient and could reduce energy consumption by up to 50% (and not by everyone driving Pintos as right wing extremists and other power brokers hype). Indeed, this is the technology that will be developed and sold by others (the competition) in later decades if America does not innovate today. History only repeating itself.

Meanwhile, we have also stated intentions on Iran. More nations we must fix to address an energy, per capita, that is about double what the rest of the world requires. The word is called waste. Either we fix the waste at home or we waste American lives in those other nations.

Meanwhile, there is no way around religion, ethnic rivalries, etc. If we demand energy now, then we must invade what we don't like; those that might impede the energy flow. We must get them to think like us; impose democracy upon them. But we could curb our appetite using innovation and let those nations first solve their own problems.

Yes oil is a primary function of this new American Imperialism - to get the oil at all cost. It is not the only reason - but oil is clearly a dominate reason. A recent massacre in Kirgizstan would be totally irrelevant if we were not trying to cozy up even to corrupt regimes. Yes we even have military bases in those countries. Why? What is the threat?

Today we must fix their religion to exploit our interests. To walk in without even knowing what is and is not important - ie religion - are the same reasons why the US is making enemies even among some of what were once friends in the region (ie Syria)

Do you know about the gas pipeline from Russia into Turkey? If you have knowledge of regional politics, then you better understand the significance of that pipeline. More interesting are so many Americans with opinions - who did not even know about the Russian Turkey pipeline or the massive politics behind the Caspian Sea pipeline.

We state the nations we intend to invade. Iran is next. Curious - another oil nation that does not kowtow to American demands. No problem. We will fix their government? Clearly that is sufficient to the cannon fodder among us to hype a war. That is enough for our religious extremists to hype a mission of saving them from their evil religious extremists.

What happened to the simple explanations such as Weapons of Mass Destruction? The real reasons are too complex for the masses to understand especially when most 20 year olds don't even read or listen to real news. Did you know about the SCO? Did you understand the significance when China failed to find oil in their Xinjian province? Why didn't Rush Limbaugh discuss this?

China's failure to secure a strong domestic supply of its own combined with its quasi-capitalist economic upsurge makes it public enemy number one as far as the US is concerned. China remains strongly xenophobic and is bristling with apprehension at the unrest it sees on its western perimeters.

US strategy will be to use the K'stan nations, as you call them, for one purpose. This area will be the recipient of a massive flux of refugees from the on-going engagements that the US will have with the Middle East. While upper echelon members of the pentagon and the administration's inner circle may know little of the regional subtexts and history, they do know that the West will never win the hearts and minds of the East. We did learn at least that much from Vietnam.

With this reality, our petroleum interests in the Mid East will remain forever precarious ones. The solution will be to persue an ever more scorched earth policy in our Mid East "liberation" efforts and creating a massive outflux of displaced population from the area while stopping short of genocide.

Those remaining in their homelands will be the ones most amenable to "democracy," if you will. Their former countrymen turned refugees will completely destabilize the "K'stan" area with their influx. China will look most unkindly on this upheaval on its borders and will have little hesitation or remorse in resolving the problem in the most expedient manner.

We will have accomplished the American occupation of the oil producing nations and given our enemy something to occupy itself with, as it drains its military and economic strength with the expenditure of the energy required to enforce the safety of its western provinces. The resulting slaughter of innocents will make the US look like the good guy by comparison, and Jeb Bush will jubiliantly be inaugurated into his third term at the White House.

The above scenario was described to me by a retired Lt. Colonel who was a professor of Russian studies at the US Air Force Academy. He was half joking when he told it, but by the end of his narration, he got a serious look on his face and said, "Hell, I think they'll actually do it."

[tw]

Originally Posted by marichiko

China's failure to secure a strong domestic supply of its own combined with its quasi-capitalist economic upsurge makes it public enemy number one as far as the US is concerned. ...
The above scenario was described to me by a retired Lt. Colonel who was a professor of Russian studies at the US Air Force Academy. He was half joking when he told it, but by the end of his narration, he got a serious look on his face and said, "Hell, I think they'll actually do it."

To appreciate the larger picture as describes by marichiko, one should be looking at a map. Oil fields in the Chechnyan side of the Caspian Sea are now obtained by the west using the recently completed Caspian Sea pipeline that terminates on Turkey's Med coast. This leaves the regions between the Caspian Sea and China; wedged in between Russia on the north, China on the east, and Pakistan, Afghanistan, and Iran on the south: Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan, Tajikistan, and Kirgizstan. A race is ongoing for access.

Even though the region's oil tends to be rather bitter – requires significant additional refining - it is the region where thirsty manufacturing nations could collide if we all are not careful. As if it was not bad enough that powerful nations vie for control. The region is dominated by dictators of unsavory histories, and a ripe breeding ground for religious fundamentalist uprisings. Imagine Indiana Jones as an oilman - and even his American bosses are nothing but greedy.

It does not help Indiana when American reputation in Iraq makes life difficult for Americans everywhere else. You have not yet seen the fallout from Guantanamo and Abu Ghriad. You have seen all the phoney orange alerts created by torture. You have seen increasing insurgency that will only get worse. Now our poor hero, Indiana must go to other places where these American traditions (including torture) are widely rumored.

[tw]

Having seperated the terrrorist and insurgent organizations from White House propaganda, we should now move on to who gets recruited as terrorists. Therein lies more problems with White House type propaganda. Terrorist typically are not just recruited by some ghostly organization called Al Qaeda. Most terrorists recruit themselves.

Take this example provided by The Economist on 14 July 2005:

One example of such amateurism is that of two Moroccan men from the Dutch city of Eindhoven, Ahmed el-Bakiouli and Khalid el-Hassnaoui, who tried to enter Afghanistan in December 2001 in the hope of fighting some Americans. Having failed, they went to Kashmir, where they were swiftly killed by Indian security forces. In Britain, several terrorist plots uncovered since 2001 have been striking for their incompetence and lack of outside expertise.

Most so called terrorists are not recruited as current government propaganda would have us all believe. Most go looking to be terrorists. If they get lucky, they encounter a real terrorist who can teach them. This is a nightmare for police. How do you locate and arrest an Al Qaeda recruiter when he does not actively recruit and when Al Qaeda does not exist as government tells its enforcement people?

The Economist also defines what a terrorist is as demonstrated by so many historical examples:

They began as a group of second- or third-generation Dutch Muslims, mostly male and in their late teens or early 20s, who became discontented with their country and surfed the internet for ideas. At least at first, this and other groups of disaffected Dutch Muslims were pathetically unsophisticated. One was caught in 2003 trying to make a bomb—drawing on tips from a website, but using the wrong fertiliser. At some point, however, the group found a mentor who was more sinister and sophisticated: a Syrian jihadist-recruiter who came to the Netherlands and coached them in doctrine.

In Britain, too, security services have concluded that these days, connections between local youths and foreign godfathers are usually formed at the youths’ behest. To a surprising extent, the onus is on individual zealots (or groups of them) to find mentors. Al-Qaeda does not actively seek recruits for the jihadist cause, partly because that would attract the attention of the security services and partly because, ever since the destruction of its bases in Afghanistan, it has—in the view of well-placed British observers—been too loosely organised to recruit systematically.

Notice who most terrorists were. They are not recent immigrants. Often they are the second or third generation - citizens for their entire life - who often become estrangeed even from their own family and then somehow find purpose in an extremist religion. This is not just Islamics. Zionists who would openly steal Palestinian land in violation of Israeli law are really no different - except that this latter group is given a wink and nod from the Israeli government that says they are illegal. Religious christian extremists are increasing in western nations where early examples include the bombing of women health clinics and other institutions that violate their radical religous beliefs. IOW what we see from Islamic extremists may become a growing problem from other religions. Why? Their underlying purpose is to save us from ourselves. We somehow are the misguided and confused sheep. Somehow their actions in the name of a stupid concept called god will save us all. Organized religion rarely condemns and 'rats out' their extremist brethern.

First the potential terrorist starts by becoming fantantically religious. That alone does not make one a terrorist. However another factor is their inability to cope with life's complexities. Richard Reed is a classic example. So pathetic that he could not even give himself a hot foot - thereby explode a small shoe bomb. Others received even less knowledge sufficient to damage. IOW there are more terrorists among us who simply don't get much attention. But they consistently have common breeding ground - extremist religion. Any and all religion; not just Islam.

London's recent copy cat bombings may only be just that. Wanna-be extremists trying to accomplish what other religious extremists did not accomplish. Most interesting are the differences between Madrid bombings, those two weeks ago in London, and those just yesterday. This last copycat group hoped to just throw their bomb into a train as the train left the station - rather then blow themselves up. Even the Spanish bombs used a completely different system for triggering and more destructive composition. Most in common with these bombings is the reason for the will. Each apparently used different explosive. Each is typical of a terrorist organization that duplicates only what they read in the papers. But all are based in classic nonsense of religious doctrine.

No organized terrorist group exists as George Jr would preach when he talks about a 'war on terrorism'. The common factor is in cult lies - religion that can be interpreted however the human wants. Even worse, other cult members stay quiet rather than 'rat out' the enemies of mankind.

At least Muslim leaders in Europe are finally asking the question - "we think we see a problem". They finally discovered mirrors. Suddenly religious leaders are seeing a problem when the non-religious use reality to question the motives of the religious extreme. Funny how extremist religious leaders once could never see themselves in those mirrors.

The Economist also make one more interesting point:

In many cases, ... groups of young, disaffected Muslims goad one another down the path to extremism. People who may be bound together by ethnicity, worship or criminal activity develop a common interest in the suffering of Muslims across the globe. Websites and satellite television channels then supply visual images and incendiary rhetoric from any place where Muslims are fighting non-Muslims. The favourite war used to be Chechnya; now it is Iraq.

Mission Accomplished?

[tw]

Originally Posted by tw

Oil is a major part of the strategy. But it is a strategy that is Central Asia wide. ... It is why the US is courting so many K'stan nations.

It is why SCO (Shanghai Co-operation Organization) exists. From The Economist of 9 July 2005:

Now a new twist in the K'stan drama. From the Washington Post of 30 July 2005

U.S. Evicted From Air Base In Uzbekistan
Uzbekistan formally evicted the United States yesterday from a military base that has served as a hub for combat and humanitarian missions to Afghanistan since shortly after the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, ...
Scores of flights have used K2 monthly. It has been a landing base to transfer humanitarian goods that then are taken by road into northern Afghanistan, particularly to Mazar-e Sharif -- with no alternative for a region difficult to reach in the winter. K2 is also a refueling base with a runway long enough for large military aircraft.... Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld returned this week from Central Asia, where he won assurances from Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan that the United States can use its bases for operations in Afghanistan. U.S. forces use Tajikistan for emergency landings and occasional refueling, but it lacks good roads into Afghanistan. Kyrgyzstan does not border Afghanistan.