Skip to main content

View Diary: Ronald Reagan Caused 9/11 (206 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  You lost me (3.00)
    when you started talking about the Yom Kippur War. That is a loaded expression that tells me you take one side in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. The Palestinians and their supporters call it the Ramadan War.

    For the record, I consider myself neutral in that sad conflict, and still continue to call it the October War. Call me old fashioned, but when did the American media stop using that term?

    Also, you may know the oil market but you don't understand the ideology of al-Qa'ida or the reasoning behind their call to "slay the Americans where you find them." See my own post on the subject.


    by Danjuma on Thu May 05, 2005 at 10:15:45 PM PDT

    •  How is it loaded? (4.00)
      The war started on Yom Kippur.  It was the Egyptians and Syrians who attacked, and they lauched the attack on this date expressly because it was the holiest day on the Israeli calendar.  

      That's far from a first.  There have been many wars started on a holiday, or under cover of another event, to try for strategic advantage.  It's not "bad form," it's just war.

      I'm no Israeli apologist.  I certainly don't consider myself on the Israeli "side."

      TwoTaboos -- Politics and Religion.

      by Mark Sumner on Thu May 05, 2005 at 10:26:07 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  It's one-sided (2.33)
        You say The war started on Yom Kippur.

        You could just as easily say the war started in Ramadan. That's a great month for launching jihads in Islam. So there are two reasons for launching on this date, one for each religion.

        Again, just to be neutral, I will continue to call it the October War. That used to be the term in English for a long time. I don't accuse you of being an Israeli apologist, however, I do think the term "Yom Kippur War" is the Israeli term. Unless you ARE on the Israeli side, don't use it. It's loaded.

        And if religion is a taboo for you, then you especially shouldn't use either "Yom Kippur War" or "Ramadan War" when you talk about it.


        by Danjuma on Thu May 05, 2005 at 11:29:57 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Sure (4.00)
          this is why the attack on the World Trade Center and Pentagon shouldn't be called '9/11', but 'September,' or--even better--'The Attacks of 2001.'

          That the Yom Kippur War was launched on Yom Kipper was key for -both- sides, while Ramadan was key for only one. Yom Kippur is one day, while Ramadan (and October) is a month--hence 'Yom Kippur War' contains more information. Finally, yes, what we call wars depends upon where we were raised (see: War Between the States): perhaps in the Soviet Union students were taught this was the 'Ramadan War,' but in the States, you're foolish to claim someone is taking a 'side' when they are merely using the most common expression.

          And finally: wow. This is what you took away from the diary?

          •  (sigh) (none)
            No. That wasn't the only thing I took away from this diary. It was the signal that the writer didn't know anything about the discourse in Islam that spawned al-Qa'ida, and that he bought into a bunch of lies.

            for example:

            "OPEC announced an embargo on the sale of oil to countries that had aided Israel."

            FACT: OPEC never had, much less announced, any such thing, and such OPEC countries as Venezuela and Nigeria continued to sell the US oil through the Arab embargo.

            I will not be lectured about the Middle East by people who by into media lies about "Arab OPEC sheikhs." I will especially not be convinced by someone who wants to insinuate that I am following a Communist line (for the record I don't know or care what people in the USSR were taught to call the war.)

            How and when was the "common expression" (at least in the USA) "October War" replaced by the Israeli expression "Yom Kippur War"? Am I the only person here who even remembers the common expression "October War"?

            BTW, "9/11" is the common US expression for those attacks because 911 is the police emergency number. In Japan they call it the "simultaneous multi-terror incident." and there is no parallel with the October War, which went on for more than one day.

            As for bin Ladin, he attacked the US because we had troops in Saudi Arabia. Read his fatwa. This author may know a lot about the oil market, but the people in al-Qa'da really don't care about that.

            I remember telling someone that after 9/11 half the country wanted to find out what was going on in the Middle East, the other half wanted to "Nuke the camel jockeys!"

            This article (thank goodness!) isn't the latter, but, unfortunately, isn't the former either. Is it a sin to want people to really be informed about what is going on in Islamic discourse today?

            SHUT UP AND COUNT THE &%$#! VOTES!

            by Danjuma on Fri May 06, 2005 at 09:34:07 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Sin (none)
              Is it a sin to want people to really be informed about what is going on in Islamic discourse today?  

              No, far from it, but you did go way off the main, and very important, point of the diary.

              "There are only murderers in this room" - John Rooney in The Road to Perdition

              by jlb on Sat May 07, 2005 at 04:12:21 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  The point of the diary (none)
                is crude economic determinism that used to be dismissed as vulgar Marxism. I'm not impressed.

                Talk to me about why we were attacked when you've at least read bin Ladin's fatwa. If you could put it in an intellectual context we might have a fruitful discussion.

                SHUT UP AND COUNT THE &%$#! VOTES!

                by Danjuma on Sat May 07, 2005 at 06:51:05 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  I've read (none)
                  Bin Laden's fatwa, and a lot of other stuff about the ME and about Islamic concerns, to which I'm very sympathetic. What's your point anyway, since the diary is not about Islam but about the meta-attitudes of Americans about consuming the world and what they're due in life? I don't find this train of thought to be crude or reductive in any way, since it in no way ruled out other meanings or approaches. What he said about the rejection of Carter's philosophy for Reagan's is true and frankly definitive in a country as dominated by material conditions as this one - the two are not supposed to be separate here. Your objections are just picking a fight where this is none.  

                  "There are only murderers in this room" - John Rooney in The Road to Perdition

                  by jlb on Sun May 08, 2005 at 05:29:27 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  If you're still there (none)
                    I got just back from my life and can not catch up with all of KOS, but you did ask for my point, and I implied I would respond to you when you read bin Ladin's fatwa.

                    I am not trying to pick a fight. I am simply registering my skepticism about the explanations of this diary. The mention of the "Yom Kippur War" was just a trigger, but perhaps I should have first objected to other errors. I just picked the first one that jumped out at me.

                    Yes, the diary is "about the meta-attitudes of Americans about consuming the world and what they're due in life" but bin Ladin isn't about that. It's a very dangerous problem of Americans to assume everyone thinks just like they do.

                    As for Reagan's policies, I think that almost all of them, including energy, were bad for the United States, but that doesn't mean we have to blame them for 9/11, too.

                    Bin Ladin and his ultra-Wahhabi gang attacked the US because we have troops in Saudi Arabia, troops that should have been replaced with an international force, such as an international Muslim force.

                    We did have our troops in Saudi Arabia to protect oil supplies, but not direcly our own. Japan and Europe consume far more of Persian Gulf oil than we do.

                    Collectively the developed world had to protect the oil supply, although it was divided on how to do it. But there are many other things involved in this problem than energy policy, including the tendency to conspiracy thinking that has taken hold of much of the Middle East.

                    Finally, perhaps I am out of date, but has the Israeli noise machine really gotten all Americans to say "Yom Kippur War" in place of "October War" without thinking of the implications? The confusion of OPEC with Arabs I could attribute to ignorance, but this is replacement of one standard term with another. I object to it as biased.

                    SHUT UP AND COUNT THE &%$#! VOTES!

                    by Danjuma on Thu May 12, 2005 at 03:27:23 AM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site