Wednesday, September 14, 2011

Ron Paul, Blowback, and September 11

Steve Deace on his website gave the Republican candidates for president grades for their debate performance in the CNN debate.  This is what he wrote about Congressman Ron Paul:
Ron Paul (B-)
Paul was dramatically more alert and focused than the past two debates, and did a good job dueling with Blitzer in defense of individual liberty and personal responsibility. However, his continued insistence of U.S. foreign policy antagonizing the 9/11 terrorist attacks is both historically inaccurate in its failure to recognize the militant nature of Islam from its very introduction to the world (which led to the formation of the U.S. Marines), and also undercuts his valid argument urging Americans to reconsider our military policy in the Middle East.

There is no doubt that nations influenced by Islam tend to be aggressive.  Vox Day demonstrates this in his book The Irrational Atheist.  This is what he wrote:
However, it does show that skeptics would have been right to doubt my Wikipedia-based estimate, as I overestimated the amount of war attributable to religion by nearly 60 percent.  It's also interesting to note that more than half of these religious wars, sixty-six in all, were waged by Islamic nations, which is rather more than might be statistically expected considering that the first war in which Islam was involved took place almost three millennia after the first war chronicled in the encyclopedia, Akkads conquest of Sumer in 2325 B. C. 
In light of this evidence, the fact that a specific religion is currently sparking a great deal of conflict around the globe cannot reasonably be used to indict all religious faith, especially when one considers that removing that single religion from the equation means that all of the religious faiths combined only account for 3.23 percent of humanity's wars (emphasis added, p. 106).

Given that there is a "militant nature of Islam" one needs to consider whether or not that provides significant reason/blame for the terrorist attacks on September 11.  I would suggest that it doesn't.  Why was the United States singled out for such attacks?  This is the question that we need to consider, and the question is best answered by the United States Middle Eastern policy.  Our military presence in the region, our government's meddling in their affairs, and even our support of Israel.  Read carefully because this is important, this does not mean the attacks were justified, it just shows that there were specifics reasons that fanned the flame of the "militant nature of Islam" into a fire.  To deny this is misses one of the lessons September 11, 2001 taught us.  The United States government can't expect to meddle in the affairs of other nations without expecting some sort of retaliation, just like I can't walk up to you and punch you in the face without expecting some sort of retaliation on your part.

This video outlines how our government policy contributed to the terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001.

No comments:

Accept the Differences

Most of us understand that people are different and those differences are a good thing. The world would be a boring place if everyone beli...