Latest Breaking News
In reply to the discussion: Turkish Prime Minister Erdogan Angers U.S., Israel, Egypt With Mursi Defense [View all]Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)I suppose that depends on where you set your standards. if by "War on Islam" you picture a religious holy war for church and God, then no, there is no war on Islam.
if you take a look at US policies towards the Middle east, North Africa, and Southwestern Asia, however? We certainly seem to be making a lot of effort to destroy or subjugate lands peopled by Muslims, don't we? Maybe Islam is simply incidental, but I promise you, the people being fucked over by us don't see it that way.
Do you think the US is committed to peace, justice, and democracy in the Muslim world? Consider this.
Our greatest ally in the region is an openly theocratic / fascist monarchy that utilizes our extensive military aid explicitly to subjugate its own population (I'm talking about Saudi Arabia, if anyone's puzzled.) We support them. Full tilt. When they chop the heads off of people for being gay, we might mumble about it, but we still write the checks and send them the tanks and jets.
However, we are nearly rabid in our obsessive opposition to the Assad regime of Syria - a secular and fascist regime - as well as to the government of Iran, a theocratic democracy (yeah, that does sound weird, but it's how they roll.) We are so opposed to these nations, that we supplied Saddam Hussein with chemical weapons, knowing fully well he would use them against civilian populations in Iran. We are right now fueling the insurgency in Syria which, if successful WILL plunge Syria into the sort of violent chaos we see in Somalia or Afghanistan. That's how much we hate these regimes.
But wait, isn't a secular fascism at least a little better than a theocratic one, by American standards? Wouldn't a theocratic democracy, by the same token, be at least a little better than a theocratic monarchy? If we're going to go with the lesser of two (or three?) evils, then shouldn't it be Saudi Arabia that gets left high and dry? it's certainly a more brutal regime than either Syria or Iran (which yes, is saying quite a lot)
Here's the thing... Saudi Arabia does what the US says. They're compliant. We utilize their money and influence to manipulate other state in the region, and so we pat their little bungee-corded heads and accept the brutal totalitaninism of their regime. Iran and Syria are independent of the US - Iran is truly independent, while Syria is under the Russian sphere. They don't follow our demands, they don't pay us tribute, and so we endeavor to punish or destroy them. Just as we have destroyed two other nations that became noncompliant - that also happen to be Muslim nations. Hell, we effectively destroyed Iran once already with our overthrow of its democracy and the installation of a brutal, bloodthirsty dictator.
We also oppose movements for democracy in the region. We opposed every single motion of the Arab Spring, after the surprise in Tunisia. We opposed the overthrow of Mubarak, we helped suppress the Arab spring in Bahrain, we poo-pooed movements in Libya, in Algeria, in Morocco, in Jordan, in Lebanon, and in Syria. We later came back to Libya and Syria once thigns started getting violent, and decided to throw guns and money into the mix... Which is as bold an endorsement of violence over peaceful resolution as anything i can imagine. Why? because we liked these dictatorships. we were happy with Mubarak, and while we didn't care much for Ghadaffi and Assad, they were known factors we were cozy with all the same. The idea of the fellahin ("dirty peasants"
staging democratic revolutions was something the united states could not, would not, and did not tolerate.
We are on a crusade, hrmjustin. it's not in the name of Jesus, but the people in the crosshairs share the same religion that was targeted back then. Our crusade is to force the peoples of the middle east and North Africa into subjugation to the US, or into destitution and anarchy. It's about securing resources (primarily oil) for ourselves, while denying those resources to other players in the world - and exterminating local opposition to these twinned goals.