web counter Media Lies: Why America hasn't been attacked again

Saturday, January 15, 2005

PLEASE NOTE: Media Lies has moved.
The new address is http://www.antimedia.us/.
Please adjust your bookmarks.

Why America hasn't been attacked again

Ali has been thinking about this issue, and his thoughts are very cogent, I think. He has noticed a change in bin Laden's attitude toward America —
Bin Laden has always referred to American people as an "evil" nation that is directly responsible for its government "crimes" and thus deserves an equal punishment. In the speech before the elections Bin Laden and for the first time recognized two Americas; one that is "evil" and which was going to vote for Bush and thus makes itself subject for attacks and one that's innocent (not voting for Bush) and is going to be safe. That statement declared Bin Laden's loss of initiative, and I'll try to explain my theory.
The change in bin Laden's stance toward America provoked Ali to assess what is going on.

He reasons that terrorists need support from people or nations. So long as the terrorists are doing things that benefit a nation, the nation will support them. This explains why Iran and Syria as so openly aiding the terrorists in Iraq. They gain from instability and chaos.
In Iraq the agenda of the Arab and Muslim dictators came to lie in Parallel with that of Bin Laden. He found himself in great need for their support in order to fight the "infidels" in Iraq and they found him useful to hinder America's plans there. This makes the question about America's security on its own land not what the terrorists want, but rather what those dictatorships want. Any attack on the American soil will only result in the American people asking for justice and favoring an operation similar to what happened in Iraq and Afghanistan, which is what the American administration wish for but can't find the necessary support inside and outside America. The reaction of the international community would be not very important at such circumstances, but America is expected to get some good support if it's attacked again. Now the terrorist are insane people, but their leaders and most importantly their financier are not that stupid when it comes to risking their power and control over their countries. So if the terrorist decide to act alone they would not only lose the support of these dictatorships but also would risk that those regimes might well, hunt them down in their countries and hand all the info they have about the terrorist to America just to prove their innocence and avoid a very probable serious American strike.
If you think about this for a moment, it explains very well what is going on in Saudi Arabia. The Saudis have turned a blind eye to the money, men and materiel that leaves their country headed for Iraq, yet they are aggressively pursuing al Qaeda inside their own borders.

It also explains why there have been no attacks on US soil since 9/11, and it should make you think really hard about leaving the MidEast. The moment we do, it's open season on America again.

Finally, Ali thinks that by staying in the MidEast until the job is done we will have defeated both terror and dictatorship in the MidEast.
If I were an American I would never worry about a terrorist attack on America as long as American troops are in Iraq. I'd rather worry about my government plans about the future of this war. The presence of American troops in the ME is needed until all dictatorships fall with force or without it and this will declare the end of both wars.
I have to say I agree with him. I think the Bush administration does as well. I hope the next administration will, because our future depends on continuing the course that Bush has set for us.

Will the American people support it?