OT : Australian intervention in Solomon Islands

[Will]

Originally posted by Thermodyne:
The split is along party lines and while each side has its areas of power, it is not a clean divide. I feel that if a party would form that was right in the middle, they would become the majority very quickly. The two parties we have now just keep going further and further apart.

More like the split is along party lines... as long as it's not within 10 months of an election. For me, both Democrats and Republicans have become mostly indistinguishable. There are a few exceptions at the extremes of both parties, but for the most part, they're the same because they want to stay in office.

Personally, I take the same view as Erax. Anyone who thinks that conventional warfare will defeat unconventional tactics is just fooling themselves. The British tried during the Revolutionary War/War of Insurrection, and the start-up USA won in part because they (usually) refused to "play by the rules", march out in a long line, and let the other side shoot you while you shoot it. Vietnam, US troops were there trying to figure out just exactly who they were fighting; is this village supporting us or "the Commies"? Not that there was much that was conventional about Vietnam... It just seems analagous to the current "war"; are they with us, or with them, and what will it take for them to switch sides?

But I think the way to go is "cultural warfare". Right now, we aren't making much of an attempt to spread our ideas to the Islamic world. Parts of the younger generations in that culture are coming closer to a "westernized" culture, more because their elders are telling them not to than anything else. If there was an active outreach to truly embrace these people, then the radical fundamentalism that has spawned this particular batch of terrorists will eventually die out. The current policy of going into their house and making a show of force, shooting off some guns... that will only serve to harden their resolve, and we will have more, not less, terrorism on our hands.

Anyway, sorry for perpetuating the topic drift. deccan, thank you for posting this information, it hasn't exactly had an easy time getting to me through other channels... Let us know if anything else comes up!

[TerranC]

Originally posted by Will:
But I think the way to go is "cultural warfare". Right now, we aren't making much of an attempt to spread our ideas to the Islamic world. Parts of the younger generations in that culture are coming closer to a "westernized" culture, more because their elders are telling them not to than anything else. If there was an active outreach to truly embrace these people, then the radical fundamentalism that has spawned this particular batch of terrorists will eventually die out. The current policy of going into their house and making a show of force, shooting off some guns... that will only serve to harden their resolve, and we will have more, not less, terrorism on our hands.

Are you saying that the only effective way of stamping out islamic fundamentalism is assimilating them into western culture, erasing any cultural uniqueness?

[Krsqk]

Originally posted by TerranC:
Are you saying that the only effective way of stamping out islamic fundamentalism is assimilating them into western culture, erasing any cultural uniqueness?

I'm hoping we're not falling into the trap of "everything is beautiful in its own way" here. Some cultures--such as any culture which justifies killing to promote any religion--are worthy of being stamped out. Any "unique" qualities in their culture which are worth saving can be found in other Islamic cultures, or other Middle Eastern/Asian cultures, anyway. The defining element of their culture is the belief that killing infidels is good and earns them a spot in eternal bliss. That certainly isn't worth preserving.

[edit] Not that I think that exporting Western culture to them is the best thing to do; there are many elements of Western culture which I also find objectionable (such as the increasing emphasis on personal rights instead of personal freedom--general freedom requires the individual to act responsibly whereas the right to do something removes all responsibility for an action from the individual).

[ July 12, 2003, 04:04: Message edited by: Krsqk ]

[TerranC]

Originally posted by Krsqk:
The defining element of their culture is the belief that killing infidels is good and earns them a spot in eternal bliss. That certainly isn't worth preserving.

That's not a defining element of their culture; if it was, all islamic states would have declared a Jihad against ALL other cultures on the planet.

Also, every culture is unique; American Culture is different than British culture, just like Palestinian culture is probably different than Iraqi culture. It seems to me as if you talk as if you live in Planet PickACulture, where it's alright to stamp out anything you deem intolerable.

BTW, Islam does not promote itself by killing other, nor does any other modern religions of the world.

Edit: Minor grammatical error

Another Edit: I'm pushing this towards an OT discussion. I'll stop replying further.

[ July 12, 2003, 04:28: Message edited by: TerranC ]

[Will]

I'm not saying it's the only way, but it is _a_ way. I would hope that it gets to the point where there's a level of cultural understanding, so those factions where the goal really is "kill all the infidels" eventually lose their influence and voice in the culture, and then disappear entirely. I don't like all aspects of western culture either (most of my issues are with American culture, since I'm living in it), including the "victim" culture that we have. But, a complete incorporation would be very difficult, and take quite a bit of time, so I don't think that will happen. Most likely, it will result in changes to their culture and ours, but both will remain independant.

In an attempt to shove something resembling on-topicness, this would be similar to the changes deccan would like to see in S.I., land reform with definite boundries, government power given to local regions rather than central capital, etc. Small changes to the culture, which bring it in line with the rest of the world (as far as definitions of property), promote stability, etc.

[Krsqk]

I see (I think). You were looking at Islamic culture/Middle Eastern culture as a whole, whereas I see fundamentalist/terrorist factions as a separate culture. To the best of my knowledge, most Muslims have a healthy respect for human life, something terrorists definitely do not have. I think an important characteristic like this shared by a widespread, reasonably organized group of people is enough to define it as a culture of its own. IMO, of course.

And you're right--this is well off topic.

[Erax]

Once again... you cannot target the terrorists directly because they (and those who support them) are in hiding. This applies to cultural warfare (nice phrase, Will) as well. What you CAN do is target the population as a whole and bring them closer to your position, so that it becomes harder and harder for the extremist factions to find new recruits and get funding.

Post-war Japan is an example of this process. Their unique culture has not died out, but it has become intermingled with Western culture (and Western culture has received a contribution from them). The example is not perfect because Japan is an industrialized nation and that has an impact.

Thermo : I was trying to be funny, and I was referring to Robert Heinlein. I know you are not him because he is no longer alive. But you do sound a lot like him.