17-04-2004, 20:56
*This will all lead to Armaggeddon cause christian rightwingers in america are trying to destroy the world to conform to their bible worshipping idolatry
Holy War? Is That What Bush is About?
Editorial
Published on Friday, April 16, 2004 by the Minneapolis Star Tribune
The best way to think about Al-Qaida and its radical Islamic
associates is as a loose, worldwide confederation of jihadists aching
for a fight with the West, and particularly with the United States.
That's why the Bush administration's unilateral invasion of Iraq was
so dangerous: It gives the jihadists a confrontation they believe
they can win, just as they won against the Soviet Union in
Afghanistan.
It also inflames the Muslim world and helps the jihadists recruit
additional young radicals to their ranks. In that world, the
combination of President Bush's words and actions this week will
surely be taken to mean that he may actually seek to encourage just
such a clash of civilizations.
In his press conference this week, both in the opening remarks and in
responses to questions, Bush refused to yield a whit to critics of
the U.S. action in Iraq. He refused to admit to any error and
responded over and over with a handful of generalizations: "America's
objective in Iraq is limited, and it is firm. We seek an independent,
free and secure Iraq. . . . A free Iraq is vital because 25 million
Iraqis have as much right to live in freedom as we do. A free Iraq
will stand as an example to reformers across the Middle East." It all
amounted to a mantra: We are right; we will persevere, we will
prevail.
The very next day, Bush met with Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon.
He announced he was reversing several decades of American policy and
accepting Israeli annexation of chunks of the West Bank. He also
explicitly rejected the right of return for Palestinians who fled or
were forced out of Israel at its creation. The Associated Press,
quoting an Israeli official, reported that Sharon "thought that no
American president had ever made concessions so important to Israel
as Bush did on Wednesday" in blessing Sharon's unilateral plan.
But what did the Muslim world think? Predictably, it was outraged.
The Israeli-Palestinian conflict and American support for Israel have
always been at the heart of radical Islam's beef with the United
States. Granted, that seething anger in the Islamic "street" has been
manipulated generously by unscrupulous Arab governments that would
rather their citizens hate the United States and Israel than them.
The hatred, however, is very real, and very dangerous -- as 9/11,
Bali, Madrid and other terrorist attacks demonstrate. Yet Bush, by
embracing Sharon's own unilateralism, was in effect throwing sand in
Muslim faces worldwide. Other than the invasion of Iraq, there's
hardly anything Bush could have done to muster even greater support
for the worldwide jihad.
What is Bush thinking? There are clues in statements from his press
conference. "Now is the time, and Iraq is the place, in which the
enemies of the civilized world are testing the will of the civilized
world. We must not waver," the president said. Later, he added, "I
also have this belief, strong belief, that freedom is not this
country's gift to the world. Freedom is the Almighty's gift to every
man and woman in this world. And as the greatest power on the face of
the earth, we have an obligation to help the spread of freedom."
Bush came pretty close to proclaiming the fight against radical Islam
the divine mission of the United States. He may not have meant that,
but you can rest assured that is just how much of the Islamic world
will view his comments, especially in light of his actions the next
day on behalf of Israel. You can also bet it will be read that way by
the American religious right, which sees in defending Israel a way to
bring about Armageddon and the second coming of Christ.
We can't know Bush's motives, but it's not difficult to read the
effects, and they risk being catastrophic. There are pragmatic
reasons why some of what Bush gave Israel Tuesday will be part of a
final agreement between Israel and the Palestinians. But it should
have come about through negotiations. The way Bush has chosen to do
it is essentially saying, again, to radical Islam, "Bring it on."
© Copyright 2004 Star Tribune.
http://www.commondreams.org/cgi-bin/print.cgi?file=/views04/0416-
05.htm
Holy War? Is That What Bush is About?
Editorial
Published on Friday, April 16, 2004 by the Minneapolis Star Tribune
The best way to think about Al-Qaida and its radical Islamic
associates is as a loose, worldwide confederation of jihadists aching
for a fight with the West, and particularly with the United States.
That's why the Bush administration's unilateral invasion of Iraq was
so dangerous: It gives the jihadists a confrontation they believe
they can win, just as they won against the Soviet Union in
Afghanistan.
It also inflames the Muslim world and helps the jihadists recruit
additional young radicals to their ranks. In that world, the
combination of President Bush's words and actions this week will
surely be taken to mean that he may actually seek to encourage just
such a clash of civilizations.
In his press conference this week, both in the opening remarks and in
responses to questions, Bush refused to yield a whit to critics of
the U.S. action in Iraq. He refused to admit to any error and
responded over and over with a handful of generalizations: "America's
objective in Iraq is limited, and it is firm. We seek an independent,
free and secure Iraq. . . . A free Iraq is vital because 25 million
Iraqis have as much right to live in freedom as we do. A free Iraq
will stand as an example to reformers across the Middle East." It all
amounted to a mantra: We are right; we will persevere, we will
prevail.
The very next day, Bush met with Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon.
He announced he was reversing several decades of American policy and
accepting Israeli annexation of chunks of the West Bank. He also
explicitly rejected the right of return for Palestinians who fled or
were forced out of Israel at its creation. The Associated Press,
quoting an Israeli official, reported that Sharon "thought that no
American president had ever made concessions so important to Israel
as Bush did on Wednesday" in blessing Sharon's unilateral plan.
But what did the Muslim world think? Predictably, it was outraged.
The Israeli-Palestinian conflict and American support for Israel have
always been at the heart of radical Islam's beef with the United
States. Granted, that seething anger in the Islamic "street" has been
manipulated generously by unscrupulous Arab governments that would
rather their citizens hate the United States and Israel than them.
The hatred, however, is very real, and very dangerous -- as 9/11,
Bali, Madrid and other terrorist attacks demonstrate. Yet Bush, by
embracing Sharon's own unilateralism, was in effect throwing sand in
Muslim faces worldwide. Other than the invasion of Iraq, there's
hardly anything Bush could have done to muster even greater support
for the worldwide jihad.
What is Bush thinking? There are clues in statements from his press
conference. "Now is the time, and Iraq is the place, in which the
enemies of the civilized world are testing the will of the civilized
world. We must not waver," the president said. Later, he added, "I
also have this belief, strong belief, that freedom is not this
country's gift to the world. Freedom is the Almighty's gift to every
man and woman in this world. And as the greatest power on the face of
the earth, we have an obligation to help the spread of freedom."
Bush came pretty close to proclaiming the fight against radical Islam
the divine mission of the United States. He may not have meant that,
but you can rest assured that is just how much of the Islamic world
will view his comments, especially in light of his actions the next
day on behalf of Israel. You can also bet it will be read that way by
the American religious right, which sees in defending Israel a way to
bring about Armageddon and the second coming of Christ.
We can't know Bush's motives, but it's not difficult to read the
effects, and they risk being catastrophic. There are pragmatic
reasons why some of what Bush gave Israel Tuesday will be part of a
final agreement between Israel and the Palestinians. But it should
have come about through negotiations. The way Bush has chosen to do
it is essentially saying, again, to radical Islam, "Bring it on."
© Copyright 2004 Star Tribune.
http://www.commondreams.org/cgi-bin/print.cgi?file=/views04/0416-
05.htm