Anti-U.S. Protests in the Muslim World

[BearBones]

I ask again, what is terrorism? In questioning our beliefs, we open ourselves to greater wisdom and compassion/understanding for others.

[Pointedstick]

Terrorism is when people we don't like do it. We call them "freedom fighters" or revolutionaries when we approve. At one point in time, not so very long ago, Osama Bin Laden and his Mujihadeen were freedom fighters battling the communists. Then they became terrorists once they started battling us. The American revolutionaries--especially the ones using guerrilla warfare--were probably considered terrorists by the British they were seceding from. It's all a matter of perspective.

[MediumTex]

{first a definition from Wikipedia}
Terrorism is the systematic use of terror, especially as a means of coercion. terrorism has no universally agreed, legally binding, criminal law definition. Common definitions of terrorism refer only to those violent acts which are intended to create fear (terror), are perpetrated for a religious, political or, ideological goal; and deliberately target or disregard the safety of non-combatants (civilians).

my take on it (always subject to improvement and change )

there seem to be two types of terrorism "war uses terrorism" and "terrorism is an act of war"

"war uses terrorism" - as pointedstick mentioned it depends a lot on who is doing it. bombing Dresden or Hiroshima in WW2 was an "act of terrorism to instill fear for a political purpose" but we were doing it in defense of our freedom..

"terrorism is an act of war" - bombing a building to force your political or religious ideology on others like 911 would be "terrorism is an act of war"

the tricky bit is the people doing the second type of terrorism always see themselves as being the people doing the first, and the people doing the first type seldom if ever have the clarity of vision to see when they have slipped over into doing the second

I would say that the U.S.'s use of nuclear weapons against the civilian populations of Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945 would qualify as terrorism under most definitions.

The fact that nations are at war should be irrelevant when talking about dropping nuclear weapons on civilian populations.

We justify Truman's decision based upon expediency, which is the same thing that a radical Muslim would do in justifying 9/11.

[BearBones]

the use of drones to bomb targets in Pakistan is a perfect example of this,

the people being bombed and pacifists in the US see it as "terrorism is an act of war"

the people in the US with a neocon perspective see it as "war uses terrorism"

and some of the libertarian minded likely see it as "the people doing the first type seldom if ever have the clarity of vision to see when they have slipped over into doing the second"

What you, Simon,Pointedstick and MT, have written seems very open minded to me. The definition is very tricky indeed, and it is easy to use it to justify your own agenda. For clarification, I am a US citizen and I love my country. But I do not always love the policies of this country, especially when it comes to meddling in the affairs of other sovereign nations, especially when the overt agenda is "freedom" but the covert agenda is power and control (especially oil).

So, before reacting to the anti-American protests throughout the Middle East (or even the tragedy of 9/11), I try to look at things from the opposite perspective. That is where you can really learn.

What would I think of the US if I were born and raised in Egypt, Libya, Pakistan, or Iran? What would I think of Israel? I bet that I would see the US as violent, repressive, dishonest, hypocritical, and fickle. And I might even see them as states that sponsor terrorism, killing way more innocent civilians than died in the world trade towers.

So, if terrorism is narrowed to killing innocent citizens, whether intentionally or "accidentally" (because one is willing to take the risk of innocent civilian death in dropping bombs in civilian populations), who has committed the most acts of terrorism, Muslims or the combined forces of the US?

[dualstow]

It is a matter of scale. Although most Muslims are not terrorists, most terrorists are Muslims.

Wow! That is a bigoted, dangerous, and narrow-minded statement. Interesting that none of those sensitive to anti-semitism are speaking up. Maybe off line? How do you define terrorist, Reub?

I was offline.   It's Saturday, the weather is beautiful, I found a new raw milk connection, and my wife was free for lunch. So it was either that or argue futilely about the middle east on a computer screen.
Now that I'm here: I don't know the stats on terrorists, but even if it were proven that most terrorists were Muslims, I think the statement would serve no purpose other than to hurt the reputation of innocent Muslims, who are the majority.
While a big fan of Reub's one-liners, I myself don't watch this mysterious "Fox" that you all keep referring to.

There is one area where I risk sounding (being?) bigoted: I do worry about the flow of funds from donations to mosques. Unless articles I have read in the past are wrong, large amounts of money donated by well-meaning, moderate Muslims has made its way to terrorist organizations. I don't know what to do about that without infringing on the rights -- this includes the right to privacy -- of moderate Muslims. Anyone?

[murphy_p_t]

"I see. Nothing bigoted about it as long as it is true, right?"

BearBones...are you suggesting that people should exercise self-censorship for fear that their comments might be considered "bigoted"? Even if omitting discussion of difficult issues would carelessly put lives at risk?

[BearBones]

BearBones...are you suggesting that people should exercise self-censorship for fear that their comments might be considered "bigoted"? Even if omitting discussion of difficult issues would carelessly put lives at risk?

That's a far stretch from what I am suggesting. Just asking that we all consider the following things:

1. When we feel hatred in our hearts, take a look at the other side. That is how we learn, that is truly how we best affect change in the world, and that is how we nurture a sense of compassion and tolerance within ourselves and among others in this beautifully diverse world. Otherwise, how are our hearts any different, other than by degree, than those folks burning embassies?

2. I ask that we consider what is our definition of terrorism, as some have risked doing above. Can you see any hypocrisy in our foreign policy that may have provoked the current situation or which may be making the situation worse? It is in our best interest to look at this squarely.

3. Above all, I am asking for consistency on this forum.  If we are going to make anti-semitism taboo, then we should do the same for anti-Islamic comments. Either freedom of speech or censorship, but not inconsistency. This forum has too much value and integrity for that.

[MediumTex]

3. Above all, I am asking for consistency on this forum.  If we are going to make anti-semitism taboo, then we should do the same for anti-Islamic comments. Either freedom of speech or censorship, but not inconsistency. This forum has too much value and integrity for that.

I love the discussions we have here.

When, however, I sense people getting emotional or even a little hot in their rationality I think the quality of the discussion slips.

If possible I would appreciate it if we could keep things a little cooler, which means that the part of the discussion where we would otherwise demonstrate our biases toward Israel, Muslims, Democrats, Republicans, cats or dogs be kept to ourselves if it's only going to turn a rational and respectful discussion into an argument.

Coming here should not be exhausting or upsetting in any way.  Help us keep it that way.

[MachineGhost]

There is one area where I risk sounding (being?) bigoted: I do worry about the flow of funds from donations to mosques. Unless articles I have read in the past are wrong, large amounts of money donated by well-meaning, moderate Muslims has made its way to terrorist organizations. I don't know what to do about that without infringing on the rights -- this includes the right to privacy -- of moderate Muslims. Anyone?

Lauderers Anonymous
http://www.economist.com/node/21563286

[stone]

Reub, I'm not quibbling with your valid assertion that there are plenty of Muslim terrorists.
  I'm still no closer to getting an idea of  how your "smack Islam hard" strategy is supposed to improve things. Do you not care whether the "smack Islam hard" strategy has any benefit to anyone so long as it provides some vengence? I'm struggling to rationalise your position in any other way.

[dualstow]

Lauderers Anonymous
http://www.economist.com/node/21563286

Thank you for that, MG.

[MomTo2Boys]

How's the air quality?

If you are American, I'm sure living over there is quite an adventure.  If your Chinese I'm sure it's an adventure too.

The air quality is horrific. The US Embassy in Beijing and the US Consulate in Chengdu both have Twitter streams that track it, if you're interested. Some expats who move to China are newly diagnosed with asthma even though they never before had a history of such. It is common for a large amount of people to have walking lung infections. My family (me, my two boys, my husband) is very often sick in one form or another. Colds last for weeks, coughs never truly go away, ear infections, etc. For temporary visitors, though, it's not as bad. It takes your body a while - maybe six months? - before the weight of the ever-present airborne issues becomes something you live with or try to fight off daily, if your body is susceptible to these sorts of things. Some folks don't have as much of a problem with it - a lot of our friends are okay, I think, so really - not everyone suffers (I think). Our family tends to be susceptible to ear infections or continuing coughs, and so we have a harder time.

That sounds awful.  Not having good air to breathe would be a drag.  Do people wear masks?

Some of the Chinese wear masks when they're out and about going from here to there on their scooters/bicycles, but I've never seen any of us Americans/expats do so. For my family and for all of our expat friends/coworkers, it's more a war with the air on the inside of where we're dwelling/working, since that's where you spend 99% of your time.

So we try to put air cleaner machines in our homes and workplaces. Our family has an air cleaner machine thing in pretty much each of the bedrooms and in the living room area. However, I do a pretty awful job of keeping them clean because I don't think they work much at all, and so really - our time here in China is just sort of something that our health will just have to... survive. This past summer my kids and I spent a chunk of time back in the U.S. and it took about 3-4 weeks there for our bodies to detox off of the China upper respiratory crud that we had been carrying around with us. At some point (in the next year or two), when we move to somewhere without so much pollution, I believe our bodies will reset and then be fine.