Salon attempts to tackle a rather large issue in one article today, and I think it misses the mark by a wide margin. They take up the question of the media ignoring the reasons behind the attacks. We have been told that hatred was the reason. Salon's says that this is not sufficient for an explanation. It produces a couple of people who note that the crux is the American hypocrisy in the region. After that there are comments about how we don't trust democracies in the region and try to keep our friendly dictators in power. To me this simply glosses the surface, and ignores more issues than it confronts. If we accept that America tries to keep its own friendly dictators in power (take the Shah of Iran for example), we must look at who their would-be ousters are and what motivates them. Certainly the examples of Iran and Afghanistan make clear that these ousters are not necessarily the freedom and democracy loving regimes Salon says are angry with us for suppressing such ideals in the region. Moreover, these regimes have been among the largest supporters of terrorism which specifically targets civilians. Finally, to ignore the allure of controlling the oil supply coming out of the region is just foolish. While it is nice that bin Laden talks of his anger that the US has troops in Saudi Arabia and that these infidels are a stain on holy Muslim lands, one can't help but wonder if he's actually upset that the American military presence prohibits him from mounting a coup the way the Ayatollah did in order to get control of one of the world's oil centers. It's fairly obivious that bin Laden, al-Zawahiri and Mughniyeh are not particularly religious men and use Islamic teachings to corrupt and manipulate, so why don't we take an honest look at their goals.
- posted by levinson @ 9/25/2001 09:08:00 AM