MetaFilter posts tagged with foreignpolicy and Terrorism

Are nuclear weapons safe in Pakistan?

homunculus — Tue, 10 Nov 2009 10:44:09 -0800

Defending the Arsenal: In an unstable Pakistan, can nuclear warheads be kept safe?

Pakistan's Jihadi Problem Worsens

homunculus — Wed, 21 Jan 2009 17:30:08 -0800

Pakistan in Peril. "The relative calm in Iraq in recent months, combined with the drama of the US elections, has managed to distract attention from the catastrophe that is rapidly overwhelming Western interests in the part of the world that always should have been the focus of America's response to September 11: the al-Qaeda and Taliban heartlands on either side of the border of Afghanistan and Pakistan." [Via]

Britain's torture of Obama's grandfather

jonesor — Wed, 03 Dec 2008 06:56:44 -0800

The Mau Mau rebellion against British rule in Kenya lasted from 1952 to 1960. Although there were atrocities on both sides, there has been a movement in Kenya to claim compensation from the British government for their actions. Obama's grandfather took part in the uprising (some have labelled him an "insurgent") and was captured and brutally tortured by the British. The UK press now asks what effect this family history will have on US policy towards Britain and terrorism: "he may draw the broader historical conclusion that the imposition of torture and repressive violence has a habit of undermining the political legitimacy of world-class powers".

Talibanistan

homunculus — Fri, 05 Sep 2008 22:45:22 -0800

Right at the Edge. "The Taliban and Al Qaeda have established a haven in Pakistan’s tribal areas along the Afghan border. This is where the war on terror wil be fought – and possibly lost."

It's Tuesday

chuckdarwin — Tue, 11 Sep 2007 05:15:38 -0800

Martin Amis on 9/11 and the cult of death:

"Let us briefly trundle through the argument for moral equivalence, and let us begin with a trio of ascertainable truths. First, the years 1947 and 1948 saw two imperialistic decisions that guaranteed an increase in hostility between Muslim and nonMuslim: the partition of India along religious lines, and the establishment of the state of Israel. (These decisions also led to, but did not invent, murderous hostility between Muslim and Muslim – in East Pakistan, in Gaza). Second, throughout the 1970s the Arab regimes sponsored by the US started to head off political dissent by guiding the opposition towards Islamic fundamentalism. And, third, in the 1980s the US backed the Mujahidin against the Soviet Union in Afghanistan, and also helped to fund the Pakistani madrassas, whose graduates (all of them unemployable zealots) increased from 30,000 in 1987 to well over half a million by 2001. Thereafter, or so the equivalence argument goes, the Islamist vanguard, having wearied of seeing the battles fought exclusively on its own soil, visited a taste of this destruction on the West. Which turns out to suit the neocons and Christian Zionists, who can now place the US under military rule while they prepare their push for Islamic oil and for Israeli hegemony in the Middle East. The goals of the so-called “terrorists” (who are merely responding in kind to state terrorism from the US and its clients) are not delusive or messianic but solemnly political. So it has always been: the oppressed struggle against the oppressor; the wrongs of the past rise up to avenge themselves on the present."

America to the Rescue

homunculus — Thu, 23 Aug 2007 18:55:12 -0800

Three Generations of “America to the Rescue.”

vincentmeanie — Wed, 05 Jun 2002 11:16:14 -0800

Pat Buchanan the voice of reason? in times of insane government decree's of "with us or against us" and "shoot first ask questions later." Its amusing that wackos like Buchanan's viewpoints start making sense. So what is the price of the american empire?

Postroad — Fri, 21 Sep 2001 16:18:40 -0800

Fault Lines This piece counters the arguements of the self-laceration folks who blame the attack upon America as the result of our foreign policy, as though there can be no other explanation for Jihad. An apt title, since we are now seeing the split between far Right, Middle and far Left. Readers will, no doubt believe or argue with this relative to their perspective.

quercus — Tue, 18 Sep 2001 18:46:32 -0800

The positive impact of America can be overlooked in the chatter of how bin Laden is the bastard offspring of our malicious foreign policy, so the flip side should be highlighted. How about a Nobel peace prize winner who has saved literally millions of lives worldwide, but even 99% of Americans would fail to recognize? What will we reap from his sowing?

andrew cooke — Wed, 12 Sep 2001 08:42:42 -0800

Sorry that this will be offensive to many (seriously; if I didn't think this was important, I wouldn't post). It's an article linking American foreign policy to the terrible events yesterday.