Muslims in America masadi the hypocrite and liar, and may you never have to suffer the miseries you wish upon me. And may you get the mental treatment you badly need (I am giving you a pass on your hateful posts as being the result of insanity).

(i have briefly glimpsed a couple of the unsolicited posts you have written to or about me, and see it is more of the usual abuse).

Muslims in America dm #184 no doubt an arab middle class developed, but it was never politically strong. in pakistan, the middle class has been strong enough to clip the wings of musharraf and reduce him to being a "convenient idiot" for zardari to keep for now. in the middle east, dictators are firmly in place.

While there was big talk of pan-Arabism and nationalism under Nasser, these various kings and dictators of the arab world made sure that there would never be a political union of the kind formed in europe, let alone a separate country. You can blame this on "western interests" if you like - I happen to believe that as long as the middle east nations fail to produce true democracies, they will remain what they are - a patchwork of kingships and dictatorships, all pointing to the west and isreael as the "enemy" in order to take attention away from their own lawless rule.

Muslims in America #181 you may think so, but a moments reflection should clarify why you are on the worng track.
read #182 where I make the same point (i.e. intentions of decision makers are irrelevant, it is their actions and the likely result of those actions that are relevant)

Muslims in America majumdar #177 I am arguing not on the basis of the majority opinion in India thinks, but based on simple logic (i.e. how likely was the US attack to result in overthrow of Saddam and replacement with democracy and the rule of law).

The arguments presented below are not based on the above goal - thus, e.g., the instincts of the Indian people are not necessarily based on the above goal - the epic and ongoing struggle for democracy and the rule of law in Pakistan has drawn at best a tepid response from the Indian public, as even Aitezaz Ahsan admitted when questioned while addressing the US lawyers association in NY. Nor was the above the goal of the other side in India mentioned in the writeup, i.e. those who " warned that there was no profit in antagonising the US" (i.e. their goals was India's relations with the US, not freeing Iraqis from a dictatorship.

Only by carefully establishing goals and weighing the likelihood of a given set of actions meeting those goals (regardless of intentions), can we have a realistic basis for an opinion

Muslims in America in #178 it should read "replacement of dictatorship with democracy and the rule of law".

Muslims in America majumdar #176: By "stated goals" I was referring to goals I had stated (i.e. replacement of democracy and the rule of law in Iraq), not what anyone else had stated which, contrary to what you believe, I am in fact totally ignoring as being unreliable.

Your reference to Mush's stated goals is thus off the mark for the same reason. In fact, musharraf is a proven windbag and liar anyway - and if I ignore public statements made by far better men then him then rest assured I have no interest in what he claims. Actions speak louder than words.


Please think about this for a second before giving a knee-jerk reaction.

Muslims in America majumdar #141 "So what was the motive for invasion of Iraq? "

I lack the god-like abilities possessed by so many on chowk to determine "what evil lurks in the minds of men" (only The Shadow knows that!). More important, motivations are not even relevant. What matters is the logic of an action in light of stated goals. And there I have already made my point below in comparing the logic from the goals of providing security to the US population and the goal of getting rid of a dictator and restoring the rights of the Iraqi people to a democratic constitution and the rule of law.

you continue: "But I believe you supported this invasion, didn't you?"

Yes I did. From the point of view of the Iraqi people mentioned above. And it makes as much sense today as it did then. The only thing I did not predict is the incredible incompetence of the Bush administration which I outlined below and which everyone knows today.

Muslims in America cheema sahib #140 You make a very good point when you say that "one has to present a substantial alternative rather than rhetoric; ....oh they invaded our brothers....oh how bad...oh...oh....then the emotive pictures to go with that rubbish"

True. What you say inspires me to come up with the ... bugles..drums...
The Second Law of Chowk Thermodynamics: We cant think with your emotions.

Explanation: Thinking is a function assigned to the brain, not to the hormones.

You continue: "truth is, it is Iraqis being killed by Iraqis in the name of insurgency day in day out; I am yet to see any condemnation of this here by anyone!...."

True. This is an example of what happens when we violate the above-mentioned Second Law of Chowk Thermodynmaics.

Muslims in America PM: sadly, we cant all be geniuses like you.

Muslims in America majumdar #136 From the point of view of the US population, it was obviously the wrong country - the US population was attacked by Al Qaeda in Afghanistan. And so it was a strategic mistake from day 1.

From the point of view of the Iraqi population, if the result had been the removal of Saddam and the restoration of a democratic constitution and the rule of law, then it would have given the Iraqi people what any sane people would like.

OK?

Muslims in America that should be "sectarian hostilities", not "sectoral hostilities", btw.

Muslims in America BJ2 #132: I must regretfully differ with you on this, guruji. These "sectoral hostilities" are a convenient excuse used the republicans to put responsibility on Iraqis for the mess, rather than in the Bush incompetence.

The basic mistake Bush admin. made was to sack the entire Iraqi military (rather than using it to supplement its own forces after the fall of Saddam); sack the entire Baathist membership (which meant sacking civil servants down to schoolteachers. This basic weakness gave rise to further problems (e.g. the insurgency, which combined with lack of discipline, led to Abu Ghraib) that fed on one another.

Muslims in America #127 dm: How the hell was I supposed to know that Bush would turn out to be so totally incompetent? So that was a cheap shot, if I may respectfully say so.

Muslims in America dost mittar #126 You are right that during the Cold War the US saw right wing religious parties as being natural allies against a Godless Communism. And you are right that Nasser (allied with communists) fought "maudoodi's chehlas", primarily Syed Qutb who read arab translations of maudoodi's ideology while jailed by Nasser. To what extent this translated into US help in the growth of maudoodism in Pakistan is anybody's guess though. While jamaatiya student groups tended to be well organized in the 1960's and also well equipped with jeeps, I dont recall any evidence of funding (let alone US support) to these groups. The US dealt with Ayub Khan in the 1960's, and any funding to religious parties would have been with Ayubs agreement.

So: While you are right on Cold War alignments, I think you go too far in assuming that it was because of the US that Maudoodism flourished.

So, what caused Maudoodism (in Pakistan, and its offshoot the Islamic Brotherhood which gave rise to Al Qaeda) to flourish? Any objective look at middle east history will tell you that it was the failure of these societies to modernize.

Example: in Egypt as far back as the early 19th century the royal family was trying to be "western" in the superficial sense of clothings, mannerisms, and spendthrift ways. But it failed to develop a significant middle class that "westernized" in a deeper sense of education - as happened in Meiji Japan, e.g., or in the education among hindus in India (as opposed to the muslims who failed here due to opposition by the echobooms of the 19th/20th century to western education).

Bottom line: Dont blame the US for religious extremists. The failure rests squarely on the elite (both the corrupt sheikhs and rulers, and the regressive theocracy). And thus, the US cannot fix what muslims can only fix themselves - by giving the boot to the "superficial westerns" of the hamidm kind, as well as to the "regressive islamists" of the echoboom kind as well as the "clueless marxists" of the masadi kind. And learning something that progressive people have done throught history - namely, have the humility to learn from others.

Muslims in America correction to emergency alert below: "Intruder sighted". Not "Sighed".

Sigh...:-(

Muslims in America "Attnetion Masadi!! "White Man Defense Alert!! Man your Battle Station!!"

Intruder sighed at co-ordinate #122, and believed to be that arch-villain tahmed!