Am I just blind?

Nonetheless, Jay is correct that you’re spinning a narrative out of one person’s opinion.

Yeah, um, not so much. Google dKos for “christian extremists” and you’ll find a shitload of people who share the same view. (This is just one example — I’m sure that you can find plenty more if the mood suits you.)

Yes, and Republicans make their “chops” off of creating the idea of an Islamic conspiracy to eradicate the U.S. One way to unify people is to scare them together over a common enemy. And I’d add that al Qaeda’s criticism of US troops in Saudi Arabia is more aimed against the government and royal family than it is against the U.S.

If you look a the suicide terror campaigns across the globe you find that they have a lot in common, namely some kind of occupation. Suicide terrorism is simply not a diversion to unite people towards some elitist goal. It’s effective in ending or curbing occupations, not creating utopian regimes.

Al Qaeda’s top people may primarily want to re-establish the caliphate. Even if that’s so, that’s not what hooks the people who actually act on behalf of the group. As I said, how they recruit people is through demonizing us. It’s been effective as it has been because of some of our actions, lately Iraq, as you mention. Without those actions there’s no support for al Qaeda, so in reality that’s what we should focus on.

And! another thing! Most of the Islamic fundamentalist terror is regional, not international. Al Qaeda was a marginal group heading for extinction before the invasion of Iraq. Just as the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan — at what time al Qaeda arose — unified a pan-Arabic fundamentalist movement, so, too, is the U.S. occupation of Iraq.

True as it goes (though al Qaeda formed after the Soviets left Afghanistan), but Iraq hasn’t really unified anyone. Al Qaeda at this pointed is hated by both Sunnis and Shiias in Iraq. Iraq strengthed al Qaeda because it gave them another example of our misconduct in the Middle East.

Sure, Islamic fundamentalism is a problem. But I’d argue that religious fundamentalism always exacerbates and increases the violence in any political, societal, or regional conflict. Look at the abortion issue here in the States, where fundamentalism added terror and violence to a political debate. And I realize that Islamic fundamentalism in the Middle East is a bigger problem than Christian fundamentalism here.

But if you think that’s because of the “natural” or “inherent” superiority of Christians or Americans, you’re nuts. We’re just better off, we enjoy basic human and civil rights and are pretty dang prosperous, economically. And we’re relatively free from the type of ethnic and nationalist tensions that have gripped the Middle East for centuries.

This, I agree with. I have no problem saying that were Christianity in the positon of Islam, the world wouldn’t be much different. It’s not like Christians haven’t been suicide terrorists - there were several in Lebanon in the 80s. Religious conflict, not specific religions, is a more powerful contributor to suicide terrorism. Though I will say that I think concepts like jihad are easy to manipulate, which makes Islam somewhat more friendly to this kind of violence than other religions. It’s not the root of the problem, however.

I’ve mentioned it before, but Robert Pape’s Dying to Win is an excellent book on the subject. I put a review on here and I think there’s one on Intelligent Discontent, too.

Good lord. Be sure to set your alarm every 90 minutes at night, so you can look under your bed for “Islamists.” And make sure your tinfoil hat has a chinstrap, so it doesn’t fall off when you do sleep.

…you’re saying that the opinion that you and Neiwert apparently share is outside the mainstream left?

I don’t remember when I said that Americans are more likely to die from right-wing terror than from Islamic terror.

Al Qaeda, however, is motivated by our actions. Their statements, their recruitment propaganda, etc focus on the perceived crimes we’ve committed in the Muslim world, particularly having troops in Saudi Arabia.

Yes, and Republicans make their “chops” off of creating the idea of an Islamic conspiracy to eradicate the U.S. One way to unify people is to scare them together over a common enemy. And I’d add that al Qaeda’s criticism of US troops in Saudi Arabia is more aimed against the government and royal family than it is against the U.S.

And! another thing! Most of the Islamic fundamentalist terror is regional, not international. Al Qaeda was a marginal group heading for extinction before the invasion of Iraq. Just as the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan — at what time al Qaeda arose — unified a pan-Arabic fundamentalist movement, so, too, is the U.S. occupation of Iraq.

Sure, Islamic fundamentalism is a problem. But I’d argue that religious fundamentalism always exacerbates and increases the violence in any political, societal, or regional conflict. Look at the abortion issue here in the States, where fundamentalism added terror and violence to a political debate. And I realize that Islamic fundamentalism in the Middle East is a bigger problem than Christian fundamentalism here.

But if you think that’s because of the “natural” or “inherent” superiority of Christians or Americans, you’re nuts. We’re just better off, we enjoy basic human and civil rights and are pretty dang prosperous, economically. And we’re relatively free from the type of ethnic and nationalist tensions that have gripped the Middle East for centuries.

Yeah, maybe my post was sloppy. Maybe my point wasn’t clear.

Jay,

Fair enough, but that’s not really how I read your post. When you use fairly minor incidents and compare them with a global problem, it looks awkward.

This statement specifically deserves comment:

And let’s be honest: the idea of Islamic extremism representing any kind of global culture war that wants to expand militant Islam to the United States is an invention of right-wing bedwetters. Al Qaeda’s goal is not to exterminate the US, but to be the center of a pan-Arab movement that replaces corrupt and entrenched aritocratic rule in the Middle East with populist, theocratic goverments. The group attacks the US to earn its “chops.”

That’s completely backwards. That is what al Qaeda wants, in the sense that every Sunni Islamist wants that. Al Qaeda, however, is motivated by our actions. Their statements, their recruitment propaganda, etc focus on the perceived crimes we’ve committed in the Muslim world, particularly having troops in Saudi Arabia. You’re right that al Qaeda is not attempting to fight any kind of global culture war, but Islamism on the whole is very much a cultural threat to basic human rights.

I’m almost struck speechless by the contortions going on behind this post.

Almost.

Let’s take a look at the salient facts behind the recent shooting in Moscow, ID.
Hamilton’s first contact with Latah County authorities was in 1999, when he w…

And let’s be honest: the idea of Islamic extremism representing any kind of global culture war that wants to expand militant Islam to the United States is an invention of right-wing bedwetters. Al Qaeda’s goal is not to exterminate the US, but to be the center of a pan-Arab movement that replaces corrupt and entrenched aritocratic rule in the Middle East with populist, theocratic goverments. The group attacks the US to earn its “chops.”

Any you know this how? I’ll defer to Mike Harris’ opinion of your overall grasp of the issue.

Or would you say that the two of you are not outside the mainstream left?

Just wondering.

And let’s be honest: the idea of Islamic extremism representing any kind of global culture war that wants to expand militant Islam to the United States is an invention of right-wing bedwetters. Al Qaeda’s goal is not to exterminate the US, but to be the center of a pan-Arab movement that replaces corrupt and entrenched aritocratic rule in the Middle East with populist, theocratic goverments. The group attacks the US to earn its “chops.”

The quotes you clip from my post were not intended to indict Christians, but to end the notion that somehow Muslims are unique in putting religion ahead of government or that they approve of violence to solve political problems.

Also, if anything, I wish we took Islamic terror more seriously: I think the current policy theory of waging strategic war against terror puts ideology over reality. If we wanted to curtail Islamic terror, we’re going about it the wrong way.

To Craig: I think the “fuckin’ miracle” is how you take an opinion of one guy and find it in half the nation’s “narrative.” By comparison Christ’s trick with the fish and the loaves was minor league.

Personally I think, while extremist terror on both the left and the right seems to be more imminent, I’d have to be foolish to think that Islamic terror groups didn’t pose a bigger danger for a big attack and possibly more deaths.