>I do think you may have a somewhat distorted version of life in the US but that is understandable considering media/Hollywood treatment. Remember this is a very big place with a very diverse population. Most of the things that are true of any humans are true in some part of the US. The most remarkable thing, for me, is that it works as well as it does. The level of social mobility is still amazing. But of course freedom implies the freedom to fail as well as to succeed. Look at the game you call football and we call soccer. A great team will score one or two more points than a bad team. Here it is more like basketball, where a great team can score 50 more points than a bad team <g>
>
>And one of the greatest things about Western democracies is that citizens have the right to be indifferent and to ignore or mock those in power <s>.

Well, if there is no way to change anything while you can mock those on power all you want, you could also consider it as totalitarian rule taken to the next level <g>
Milosevic tried that for 10 years, but then at the end he got ousted.


>
>I also agree about exporting Democracy, but perhaps for different reasons. The political system we enjoy is the product of a long history and an evolving body of law and custom. I don't think you can export that, but can only export the seed of ideas that may someday grow into that. I don't believe this will be successful in Iraq or in any other part of the Middle East as the historical underpinnings are not there.
>
>But I also do not believe imposing Sharia on a society that has had a taste of freedom of thought can be any more successful than imposing Western ideas on a society with no cultural or historical background in that direction. ( I think one of the biggest advantages of for Khomeni's followers in 1979 was that there was very little true freedom of thought under the Shah, so at least that part didn't change. )
>
>My biggest problem with societies that are based on a 'big idea' and wish to control all aspects of an individual's existance from the center - Iran, the old USSR, Nazi Germany, North Korea, Iran, Spain in the 16th century etc - is that they limit freedom of conscience and expression and do not permit humans to make their own choices - even bad ones. Freedom can be very frightening, but the lack of freedom is much worse.

Here I can agree 100%. I grew up in (communist) society like this. Aldough we enjoyed middle class living standards, for me personally it was never right. I don't care to be well-off, if it is ill gained, or I have to trade
my concience, right to speak or my vote for it.


>
>I have no problem with Iran being an Islamic republic ( though I am sure I would if I were Iranian ) but I fear for Turkey, a country very dear to me, as I am a Kemalist and admire Turkey's unique history and culture. Wahhabi money is threatening that society and I would be very sorry to see Turkey become a battleground for the struggle to define the dar al-harb and the dar al-Islam.
>
>I would not be surprised to see very big upheavals in Syria and Egypt. Mubarek and the Ba'athists are certainly the next big target for the Brotherhood. I do not see a smooth resolution of this and I don't believe there is much the West can do about it. That will primarily be a concern for Egyptians and Syrians.
>
>But Pakistan? That's going to be a very very serious problem. I think our willingness to let other countries do what they like ends when they have nuclear weapons that can be sold, stolen, used or given to others.

I don't believe anything will happen with Syria or Egypt. I don't believe
that wahhabi brotherhood is all that strong, and this is where I will disagree with you. I think that there is great degree of myth mounted up
on bunch of scattered radical lowlifes, and all that for daily political purposes of promoting yet another war.
Sir. Robin Cook tought so as well( before he suffered massive stroke while mounteneering) and as per him Al-Qaeda might very well be dBase3+ application!

As I might be distorted by holiwood about fact of life in US (or more by my wife who grew up in NY), I think that there is also great degree of distortion and wrong perception of Islam and middle east countries by ordinary Americans. And more over that this perception was maticulously/gradually built up, along last 10-15 years.


>I assure you that if 9/11 had not happened most Americans would have been quite content for Afghanistan to continue to do whatever it liked. ( in truth, most Americans would have never heard of Afghanistan )

>But I don't think we owe the world altruism. We act in our own best interests, as have all nations throughout history. The really amazing thing is that we do not act in our own interests in proportion to our power. If 9/11 had been perpetrated by Iran there would not be an Iran right now. Remember this is a country that never saw a bomb in two world wars. It was a traumatic national event on a level that would have been unimagineable in 2000. Of course this had nothing to do with Iraq, but it explains why the mentality shifted to 'shoot first, ask questions afterward'. That is not to say this is a good thing, but it is very human.

At first, I have to admit that I no longer believe that 9/11 was commited
by dbase3+ record entries with OsamaBL as 'admin'.
If you believe that 3 buildings hit by 2 airplanes, can fall in it's footprint at gravity speed, then I will have to quote you on another
post in this thread ;
Gravity is not only good idea, it is also a law.
I sincerely feel sorry for what happened, and hope that someone will eventually break out and prove who really did it.

Reaction afterwards as you said WAS 'human'. And that is exactly scarry part
of this story. Basically, it is enough to scare/steer people in right direction and k-boom - Highest/mightiest military power of all times will react without thinking twice!
In a month or so, far far away country was hit.
Analysis? Investigation ? Trial ? What if they did not do it ?
What is gonna happen after we remove Taliban ?
I don't believe thinking was really clear and analysis was really resourcefull. I think only question asked was;
'Who we gonna hit next ?' - And that was Iraq.
That is trully scarry. To me and to meny other people troughout the world.

WhereAs, Greatest power should imply greatest responsability,
and as you mentioned self restrain.

>
>I know most of the Middle Eastreally believe we went to war in Iraq to steal the oil. If that is the case this is the most incompetant theft in history. ( and it would have been much cheaper to cut a deal with Saddam. We could have supported the invasion of Kuwait - and Saudi Arabia - armed Saddam ( not with token intelligence etc as in the Iran/Iraq war but with serious American arms ) and controlled enough oil to have gas selling for 20c a gallon here. We do a lot of things that are probably ill-advised, but the image of America that is so popular in the Middle East is just not accurate. Saddam was a gangster and gangsters can be bought. It would have been much more efficient to rule Iraq through Saddam if that were our goal.
>
>( oops, there I go, off on another rant ... sorry, I'm just another frustrated American wondering what we are doing over there and what we are getting in return ... )
>
>I do agree that there are many complex agendas at work, driving foreign policy. Of course our most complicated one is the American oil interests that have kept us inter-twined with a region that would otherwise be irrelevant to us. Imagine the history of the last 100 years if oil were worthless. Imagine Saudi Arabia, Iraq and Iran. I actually think they'd be happier. I know we would.

Believe me that Idea crossed my mind few times <lol>
What would have been SaudiA today, if some Japaneese geek came up with (open source)idea - making possible for your Cadilac to run on bottle of piss! <vbg>

I wld like to see those filty rich fat Saudis make a living on inventing
microchips, or software architecture etc. But I guess that kind of 'toilet jobs' are for fools like us :))