I'd like to see democracy spread through the Middle East just as much as Mr. Wolfowitz, but as this article shows, even those Arabs who were previously pro-American are not taking kindly to missionaries bearing swords. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A2452-2003Feb25.html
Ouch. I'm very patriotic, and I want to believe the US is a force for good in the world. But how can I, now?
I stopped reading that article in the first two sentences. It is the same Arab rhetoric we've been hearing for 30 years. "The US does things only because of Israel, the US wants oil." Blah blah blah. I find this article to be extremely simplistic, and biased. And yet a "patriotic american" like yourself found it to be earth-shattering. Incredible! I guess your patriotism is made of glass then isn't it?
manny, you should have finished reading, as it's not simplistic at all. Having lived for 2 years in a "friendly Arab country," know EXACTLY the attitude this article describes, right down to the ongoing conflict between the political/cultural arm of U.S. imperialism. That's complex stuff, and this article gets it right.
I think you need to consider what you mean by "biased" as this article just reports on points of view. As it stands now, it seems like you're using the term to arbitrarily eliminate information that doesn't fit your worldview.
No, it present's a man that i'm to listen to, and when i do, all i hear is uneducated garbage. He has no idea what he is talking about. He speaks with the typical Arab bias,which some people around here are starting to subscribe to(shudder). So yes, the article is biased when the person im first presented with holds those views.
Some might say that you talk with typical American right bias, and that you should be ignored. Just because someone is coming at an issue from a different perspective doesn't mean that they are completely wrong, or worse, should be ignored.
you're part right. they can still be credible. however, do you honestly believe all of foreign policy moves in that region are because of our "need" to "appease" our Israeli "masters"?
No. If America had strictly followed the desires of Israel since 1948, it would have done a lot of things differently. An obvious example is that Eisenhower would not have ordered Britain, France and Israel out of Egypt in 1956. (Suez crisis)
Exactly, so this denies the credibility of the speaker, because we both know what he claims isn't true, thus underlining my original claim. The man is a fool, yet people decided to base a thread on his statements, thus rendering this thread insignificant.
Regardless of his "credibility", the fact that he and many others like him, believe what they do makes this a very significant issue. His perceptions may be inaccurate (I'm not going to argue either way), but the fact that people act based on their perception of reality (and not reality) makes growing Arab hatred of the US a very serious issue. As I was reading this article, I couldn't help but think that Bin Laden must be very happy seeing so many muslims who were once pro-American become so angry at the US. Is Wolfowitz's "Marhsall Plan" for the Arab world going to have the opposite effect of its intended one?
Ummm....bin laden is dead. He's all about the video tapes. He hasn't made one since December. GASP! the audio tapes? I can make an audio tape with my impersonation of Walther Mathau on it, but does that mean he's alive? I will belive bin laden is dead until is see that f***ers new video.
I took care of that this morning. And you know, the sun shines brighter, the coffee tastes fresher, and the air, the air smells better. I'm a new man. Down with sockpuppets!!!
Down with superdave, who argues like a six year old. you just repeat that puppet thing because you have nothing else to say. i think someone needs a timeout, and then a nap. superdave gets grumpy when he doesn't get his nap.
Please find one sentence from the article that is "biased" that is not a direct quote from a 3rd party.