Clarification/Follow-up by abirl on 03/16/03 12:58 am:
Dear purplewings,

In response to your comment, I want to clarify a couple of things further to help you understand more about the anti-American feeling in the region:

1. The Head of the Nuclear Energy Commission stated quite categorically that not only does Iraq NOT have nuclear weapons, but it also does not have the capability to make them in the future. Unlike chemical and biological weapons, which can be produced in small mobile facilities, nuclear weapons require large reactors that cannot be hidden or moved. So, the idea that Iraq is has nuclear weapons is quite simply not true. Of course, it may have chemical and biological weapons but that is still not sufficient justification for war because there is no convincing proof that Iraq constitutes an immediate threat to US security. If you have time, please read this article from the New York Times.

2. I think that the American people believe in their hearts that an American occupation of Iraq would be "good and kind", but nobody in the region buys that. They have only to look at the American track record, which is far from reassuring.
When people here see that the US, far from being "good and kind", actively supports a brutal and racist occupation by Israel, providing it with the weapons and financial aid it needs to continue unchecked and dismissing its crimes as "self-defense" and constantly protecting it against any form of international condemnation, why would they believe that the US occupation of Iraq will be any less racist or brutal, also in "self-defense"?
When the people here know that the US provided WMD to Saddam Hussein and stood silently by while he used them against the Iraqis, why should they believe that the US has suddenly developed a conscience and now cares deeply for their well-being?
When people here see the treatment of prisoners at Guantanamo, who are being held indefinitely with no end in sight, in spite of the fact that it is very likely that a sizeable portion of them had nothing to do with Taliban or Al-Qa'da but were simply unfortunate enough to be in the wrong place at the wrong time, what are they supposed to think? The US appears to be sending a loud and clear message to the world: "See, THIS is how we treat our enemies. If anyone hurts or threatens us, we have no problem dispensing with little things like the Geneva conventions and due process of law." (See the Human Rights Watch report for 2003).
When people here see that the US made grandiose promises that it would re-build and help Afghanistan but has so far failed to deliver on these promises, why should they believe its promises about Iraq?
For all these reasons, the US unfortunately has no credibility in the region.

Regards,
Abir

Clarification/Follow-up by purplewings on 03/16/03 5:23 am:
Hi again Abir.

I did read the NYTimes article and am surprised at some of it, because I have read several articles in other newspapers that indicate there is no doubt whatsoever that Iraq has been involved in nuclear production, so how do we decide which is the truth? We can't really wait quietly until it is used because that would be too late for anyone.

This is a quote from the article: "History shows that inspectors can be misled, and that Mr. Hussein can never be trusted to disarm and stay disarmed on his own accord. But a far larger and more aggressive inspection program, backed by a firm and united Security Council, could keep a permanent lid on Iraq's weapons program."

That would be fine with me and most others. After all, do the Arabs really believe the American people are happy at the prospect of going to war? That's just not so. Still, we're happy that our leadership takes action to protect our people because as we've seen/experienced, we are as much a target as any other country. Terrorist activity has long been the way in that part of the land. I communicate with a man in India who has told me of the many terrorist attacks there over the years, but they don't fight and agitate their attackers...but simply wait for them to stop and move on. I find that sad because it really says "Leave me alone and go kill someone else." We didn't get our freedom by lying down and letting someone come here and kill us, and we won't keep it doing that either, so action is what keeps us safe.

As far as the ongoing battles between Israel and other Arab countries, we support Israel for various reasons, only one of which is trust. Whether we should help them or not is based on the interests of the USA. We see the battle as that of many Arab nations wanting to murder those who don't agree with them or follow their controlling dictators.
Of course that shouldn't make us a target of hatred simply because we prevent the butchery that would come about for the Jews, without our aid. We really can't murder everyone who doesn't agree with us, can we?

Most of us do believe American occupation would eventually bring about results the Arab people would generally find peace with. We have so many freedoms that they do not. Of course you don't miss what you've not had, but once you do have it, you could not exist happily without. (Just like television, or automobiles)

As far as our treatment of the Al Quaida prisoners, it's doubtful they are suffering as severely as you believe. Still, since they live their lives trying to harm others, why should we treat them as honored guests? In many countries they would already be on the other side of the grass where noone would need to further worry about their treatments.

Also Abir, I don't think we have failed on our promise to help re-build in Afghanastan. How do we do that while there is still such Al-Quaida activity going on? How do we do that in the face of approaching war in the same area? Right now we have to rebuild our own destroyed areas and tend to the business at hand. Rome was not built in a day.

I still believe Iraqi people would benefit with our occupation, whether they know it yet or not.

I still also hope we don't need to go to war to maintain the safety of this country and every other country that would be victimized by the blood thirsty methods of Saddam Hussein or Osama Bin Laden.

Thanks for this exchange, even if we disagree on some issues, I respect you for putting some information out here for us to reflect on and also for giving me a chance to air my thoughts. Disagreement and discussion are often what prevents fear, anger and war. May God bless you and yours.
Loral

Clarification/Follow-up by abirl on 03/16/03 1:01 pm:
Hello, Loral.

First, I want to say that in my previous answers I have not necessarily expressed my own opinions (although I agree with a lot of what I have said). What I have tried to do primarily is give you a picture of how Arabs in general think in order to try to show you that the reasons for anti-American sentiment, whether right or wrong, are DEEP, not superficial or silly reasons like the ones I have read in various questions on the boards: envy, fear, stupidity, irrationality, being taught hatred since childhood and other such nonsense. The message I am trying to convey is that it is very easy to trivialize the feelings and fears of the "other". This is dangerous and it is being done by BOTH sides. In fact, it is this mutual ignorance and indifference which is at the root of the problem.

I agree completely that every country has a right to act in self-defense and no one can deny this right. It would be criminal of any government not to protect its people. If there is a REAL and immediate threat to the US, no one would oppose their right to wage this war just as no one (including the Arabs and Muslims) opposed the US's right to make war on Afghanistan. The US had no trouble building a coalition for that purpose. However, the Arabs (and most of the rest of the world too) do not believe that the US is really acting in self-defense today when it plans to attack Iraq. Whether they are right or wrong, this is what most of the world believes and this is why most of the world sees this war as an act of aggression and is doing everything possible to prevent it.

About Israel: it is not so much American SUPPORT for Israel that people here object to, it is American BIAS. Protecting the Israelis is one thing. Supporting them in their crimes and oppression against the Palestinian people is another thing. Yes, the US should act in its own interests, but it should also act in the interests of justice. In fact, the US's blind and unconditional support for Israel is often NOT in the US's long-term interests. If it were to follow a more even-handed policy without double standards, I believe the US could almost single-handedly bring about Middle East peace, a peace that is in the interests of both the US and Israel, a peace that would do more to protect US security than any number of wars in Afghanistan or Iraq or anywhere else. I believe the US's current policy is one of the main factors preventing peace in the Middle East. The US is therefore endangering its own interests.

It's not true that the Arabs "don't miss what they don't have". There is real and widespread desire for democracy and discontent with the current governments. I believe that, if it really wanted to, the US could help change to come about from within using PEACEFUL means. Maybe you are right and US occupation will eventually bring about positive results. The question is will those positive results be worth the price in terms of human death, displacement and suffering and how long is "eventually"? I am not optimistic.

Whether the Al Qaida prisoners are suffering or not is not the point. I believe that those who are guilty of terrorism deserve a punishment commensurate with their horrible crimes. The real point is that many of those held at Guantanamo may not be guilty or have anything to do with the events of September 11th. Denying them any way of appealing their imprisonment or defending their innocence is the real problem.

As for Afghanistan, I agree that the US can probably do very little at the moment to rebuild given the current situation.

It is natural that we should disagree on various issues, but I believe we agree on the really important things. In my opinion, they are:

* War should never be entered into except as a last resort. All possible peaceful means should be exhausted first.
* Justice should always come before self-interest.
* In any conflict, neither side is ever completely blameless.
* Both sides have a duty to make a real effort to understand and address each other's grievances and to realize that they too may have made mistakes and contributed to the problem.

The most important thing I wanted to convey, which is why I answered this question, is that it is important to make an effort to understand and to think twice before resorting to comfortable superficial explanations that demonize or trivialize the "other" while preventing any kind of self-examination or criticism. From what I have read on the boards so far, this tendency appears very widespread. The Arabs are equally guilty of this.

It's been a pleasure talking to you, Loral. Thank you for listening.

Regards,
Abir

Clarification/Follow-up by purplewings on 03/16/03 2:07 pm:
All points of agreement are correct Abir.
If only our leaders could manage amicable exchanges such as this to arrive at a more acceptable conclusion.
It has indeed been a pleasure, and I wish there were a way to bring others to this site and read the explanations and opinions we've discussed.

I will end at this point so we don't have to deal further with the red clarification notices.

Have a great week ahead!
Loral

Clarification/Follow-up by abirl on 03/20/03 12:57 am:
Hello again, Loral.

I would like to post this whole discussion as a FAQ in the Middle East category. Is that OK with you? Would you prefer for me to include your user name or remove it?

Regards,
Abir

Clarification/Follow-up by purplewings on 03/20/03 6:08 am:
That's fine Abir. Just go ahead and use my user name. If someone gets mad at me, it's okay, because I only expressed the way I feel, even though I want to learn more and am willing to see differently. Thanks for asking me first, that's very nice of you.
Many blessings,
Loral