Yuku free message boards

Thanks elegant. Those are quality/investigative research articles, versus parroting back what the administration wants you to say (sounds like first grade all over again where you are taught to repeat mindlessly after me... or "else")

Regarding history of the middle East crisis, one could start with Adam and Eve or at least to Jacob, but to acknowledge that Arab and Jew live together better in the Middle East than many places in Europe, we really have to look to 1953 when the the US over threw the only elected president of an Arab State and installed the Shah of Iran as their puppet. The greatly feared and hated Shah ruled ruthlessly with an iron hand for 25 years with US monetary and military aid including training. Virtually the Iranian people were held hostage by the US and the Shah. When he was finally deposed, the Iranians took some American hostages in fear of an invasion. That was the first time uneducated Americans asked ; "Why do they hate us"? Ummm

So that started out some good books on the history of the region. Of course they hated us, so we supported Saddam in his 8 year war against Iran which ended in millions dead, and a stalemate. Just as the Iranian revolution and hatred to the US was blowback for the US support of a ruthless tyrant, so was the Gulf War a blowback from our support of Saddam which catapulted Iraq into military dominance in the region (that is before he was enticed to invade the dictatorship in Kuwait precipitating the Gulf War. The widespread slaughter of Moslems on the ground by US airpower most definitely sent a message to Moslems all over the world -- you are under attack.

Blowback also occurred when the US sent military aid and money to the Afghan rebels (most of them fundamentalists) via the Pakistani secret spy agency. The ISI established close ties with these Mujahideen and the US money eventually destroying the Afghan government. However they didn't have any plan as to what would happen later, so many years of tribal fighting between these Mujahideen religious extremist fundamentalists resulted with the most fundamentalist and extreme victor winning, the Taliban. The US actually welcomed them. Dick Cheney's company Unocol tried to get their pipeline through Afghanistan. The Taliban refused. Since Osama Bin Laden's international fighter group helped in the revolution against the Afghan government, he and his international fighters were given sanctuary in the Afghani Mountains. Everything seemed fairly copacetic for awhile but as US aggression increased in the region, Osama vowed to oppose it. Strangely they were still receiving funding from the Pakistani ISI.

Another large factor, for the growing enmity against the US, was the US unfailing support of Israel (right or wrong) also was a large factor that contributed to the rise in US hatred in the Middle East.

All the above are contributing factors. There are also others. Like the beneficiaries from all these occurrences? But that will come later, I think.

These facts do *not* justify the fact that some Moslems decided that their way of life was under attack and decided to attack, but it tries to show logically that due to US policy (knowingly or not) the growth of the special brand of violent Jihad movement increased in most Moslem countries at least a 1000 fold in less than fifty years. We have to understand that there was virtually no violent Jihad movement active in 1950 -- zero. It grew however as a a reaction to specific policies. It grew violent because it was told that these policies would never change without violence; i.e., they would be enforced via violence.

Violence doesn't seem to work in the long run IMO. In order to stop making t\he same errors over and over again, Americans have to smarted up and learn from history.

The problem is not the devil, not Islam, not Osama, or Saddam, or any other personification of evil (the devil made me do it)., rather it is the result of a long history of loutish policies which beat "the other" over the head with a stick, and then does not expect a reaction other than submission. Control freaks figured out a longtime ago that dumbed down people are the easiest to mislead. We can't make any functional decisions without the facts and the ability to think critically (something TV may pretend to have the monopoly on, but never will)..
.
Here's some honest books on the recent history and turn in events in the region.

"All the Shah's Men: An American Coup and the Roots of Middle East Terror" by Steven Kinzer -- Kinzer is an excellent writer and tells the story clearly and straightforward.

"Blowback: The Costs and Consequmces of American Empire" by Chalmers Johnson three volumes

This is something we wont get in school or corporate TV (although Chalmers Johnson was on TV for many years before the war)

Yes, didn't that short cartoon say it all! Amazing!

No surprise here either, but just for the record in case some one has some doubts, war is big business and the hawks are cashing in.

Study: Lawmakers Invest $196M in Pentagon Contractors

A new study shows members of Congress have collectively invested as much $196 million in military companies under contract with the Pentagon. The Center for Responsive Politics says the holdings could pose a conflict of interest for lawmakers deciding on spending for the Iraq war. More Republicans had military investments than Democrats, but Democrats have more money at stake. The highest stakeholder is Democratic Senator John Kerry. Kerry made at least $2.6 million from his investments between 2004 and 2006. He has up to $38 million invested in companies doing business with the Pentagon.

This is from democracynow.org on April 9, 2008