posted on Dec, 22 2006 @ 07:02 PM
To be sure, I don't think I could give guidance, but I'll offer the following thoughts. They are generalistic, and not meant as specific answers to
your confusion...the issue contains way too many 'variables' for specificity, so ultimately, if the thoughts that follow resonate with you then the
rest is up to you and your conscience.
You use the general term of 'Muslims' in the wrong context, not all Muslims are terrorists, not all Muslims celebrated 9/11 or 7/7, in fact, very
few, but, if you throw in a few of the variables that helped to ferment the discord prevalent in the Muslim mind as to Western interference in their
region, you begin to cognize what the real issues are.
Be under no illusion, absolutely none, Western influence, Western military, Western politic, is in Iraq, purely because of the country's resources.
The people of Iraq are wholly secondary to those resources it can offer to Western economy. Interference in Iraq by Western politic and military
is/was nothing more than a control grab for those resources. Anything of Western psychological and moral hopes are the wrong persuasion on the Iraqi
or Afghanistinian mind. Never, throughout their history has Western democracy ever been a hope for their societies. It only occurred in England during
the 16th century after a fashion, and only in America during the late 18th century, Iraq's societies have a much longer history than either England
or America, so the mindset to change is so ingrained in the Iraqi and Afghanistinian mind, that for Western politic and military to try to establish
it as if overnight, is pure bollocks!
Out of the entire population of Iraq, small minorities are fighting the invading Western forces, for varying reasons, some political, some economical,
some religious, but the common denominator between these various disparate groups is what they see as the Western enemy and its invasionary forces.
They are fighting it in the same mindset as that of the political adversaries of their enemy...the only thing different are the goals being
sought...one to secure resources of a separate soveregin country through the establishment of a new and friendly government, the other to throw out
the invasion forces. On the Iraqi side, it is simply to kick out the invasion forces, nothing more, but our media and governments call anyone fighting
against them as terrorists, afterall, to call them freedom fighters would be to acknowledge that your country's military is a invasion force (for the
wrong reasons), and this would not gain your consent and acquiessence to the conflict.
I as a conscientious human being do not accept the term 'collateral' damage, such a term simply sanitizes the appalling horror, death, and
destruction we throw down upon the Iraqi and Afghanistinian people in order to secure a political and economical goal. I see no difference between a
suicide bomber and a plane flying safely at 30,000 feet dropping tons and tons of very lethal ordinance upon a civillian population. It's Bull# with
a capital 'B' on both sides. You and I, in terms of mindset, are in the middle, equally so, by the terms of their culture, are the Iraqi and
Afghanistinian people. if you feel yourself conscientiously comfortable with the whole debacle, then my post has no point or persuasion for you, and
you are entitled to your diametric viewpoint. I simply want to point out that not all Muslims are terrorists, but if they were, they'd have good
reason to be so...our courageous men and women of the armed forces are being used immorally, and illegally, and are dying for crimes against humanity
committed by those pricks we put into power by our own vote.