![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
vovatGoing back to my whole anti-war thing from yesterday, one particularly disturbing thing about the recently discovered Osama bin Laden video is that, in some ways, his position doesn't seem to be that much different from that of many American leaders, or, for that matter, leaders in many (and possibly most) other countries.
"God knows that it had not occurred to our mind to attack the towers, but after our patience ran out and we saw the injustice and inflexibility of the American-Israeli alliance toward our people in Palestine and Lebanon, this came to my mind. The incidents that affected me directly go back to 1982 and afterward, when America allowed Israelis to invade Lebanon, with the help of the American 6th Fleet."
So, if you're pissed off at the American government, you attack innocent people in the World Trade Center. And if you're pissed off about Al Qaeda, you attack innocent people in the Middle East. It also helps if people on your OWN side die in the process. The fact that someone lives in the same general proximity as someone you hate is reason enough to have them killed. Am I interpreting the warmongers' mentality correctly here? It also seems to be the case that everyone sees someone else as the aggressor, so they attack that aggressor, and then become aggressors to the people they just attacked. Talk about a vicious circle.
Now, I'm not saying that it would solve all our problems if we just had the leaders fight each other without involving their citizens. It would be a nice start, perhaps, but, unfortunately, things just aren't that simple. I'm also not saying that I don't see any difference between the American government and terrorist groups like Al Qaeda. I AM saying, however, that using war and tit-for-tat retaliation as the primary means to settle disputes pretty much guarantees that the cycle is never going to end.
On a lighter note, I'm hoping to be able to finish assembling my pirate costume tonight.
"God knows that it had not occurred to our mind to attack the towers, but after our patience ran out and we saw the injustice and inflexibility of the American-Israeli alliance toward our people in Palestine and Lebanon, this came to my mind. The incidents that affected me directly go back to 1982 and afterward, when America allowed Israelis to invade Lebanon, with the help of the American 6th Fleet."
So, if you're pissed off at the American government, you attack innocent people in the World Trade Center. And if you're pissed off about Al Qaeda, you attack innocent people in the Middle East. It also helps if people on your OWN side die in the process. The fact that someone lives in the same general proximity as someone you hate is reason enough to have them killed. Am I interpreting the warmongers' mentality correctly here? It also seems to be the case that everyone sees someone else as the aggressor, so they attack that aggressor, and then become aggressors to the people they just attacked. Talk about a vicious circle.
Now, I'm not saying that it would solve all our problems if we just had the leaders fight each other without involving their citizens. It would be a nice start, perhaps, but, unfortunately, things just aren't that simple. I'm also not saying that I don't see any difference between the American government and terrorist groups like Al Qaeda. I AM saying, however, that using war and tit-for-tat retaliation as the primary means to settle disputes pretty much guarantees that the cycle is never going to end.
On a lighter note, I'm hoping to be able to finish assembling my pirate costume tonight.
