[aragorn2]

Why is that? Perhaps invading sovereign nations and drone attacks have something to do with it. Or perhaps funding, arming and supporting apartheid states, toppling governments... Your country is a global bully and when someone gives you a taste of your own medicine, you seem shocked and surprised.

[grumpydba]

Nearly all muslim countries are apartheid states where kafirs are bullied. Give me a break.

[aragorn2]

Even if that were true, what’s your point? My point is that if you attack other nations, they will fight back. And they have every right to do so. We can discuss about the methods of resistance. I do not think it’s OK to target civilians under any excuse. By that measure, the US government is the biggest terrorist of them all. You want to fight terrorism? Start with your own government.

[exodust]

Terrorist sympathisers and apologists should read more about what terrorists get up to. Islamic terrorists are not freedom fighters.

Islamic terrorists also harm Muslims in their own country, it's not just "fighting back" against America like some action revenge movie.

They live to disrupt. They launch violent campaigns in their own communities to enforce hardline sharia everywhere as far as they can reach. They brainwash boys into thinking that everyone outside of their narrow sect, is the enemy. They pay for the boys food, health and "education" over many years to put them on the jihad path, and I don't mean the good type of jihad.

Look up the Peshawar school massacre, and notice how that had nothing to do with America, it was terrorists being terrorists. Sneaking into a school and shooting as many kids as they possibly could. Yep... keep those media reports coming in, we won't stop reporting it.

[aragorn2]

Yes there are crazy people. Nobody is disputing that. Everything you said, indoctrination, disruption, holds true with the US government. The only difference is that do it in the name of _their_ God (money, power).

One terrorism breeds another. Sweep in front of your own house before pointing out the dirt in front of neighbor’s.

[exodust]

"Crazy people"... it's a bit more than crazy people. And no, everything I said cannot be applied to the US government, not even close.

I'm not American, but I'm pretty sure "freedom" is one of the other principles of what Americans do things in the name of. You know, like freedom to drive a car even if you're a woman. That sort of thing.

They really hate it when other powers repress these basic freedoms.

I'm not trying to suggest United States is perfect, but there's a reason why so many refugees are flooding into Europe... hint: they're not fleeing from US drone strikes.

[aragorn2]

The reason being the war that the US government incited (in the name of their “God”).

[grumpydba]

It is true and documented extensively. By the way I'm French.

[aragorn2]

So what’s your point? That gives the right to the US government to attack countries at whim?

At the same time they block the UN in everything related to the oppression of Plestinians by Isreal and US puppet governments.

Like I said, let’s start with the biggest global terrorist - the US government that btw helped in the creation of ISIL. There is a nice analysis here: https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.washingtonpost.com/amphtml/...

[grumpydba]

Terror attacks are committed everywhere, even in neutral countries. Hence the source of terror is not the us. It's the suni ideology.

[aragorn2]

You are talking about Wahhabism, not mainstream Suni Islam. Wahhabism is supported and sponsored mainly by Saudi Arabia, good old buddies of the US government. Both governments are inciting wars and terrorism and benefit from it. The only God they believe in is money and power.

[jiojfdsal3]

The US has "invaded" several countries in Latin America like Chile and Venezuela. Why aren't these countries producing crazed terrorists like what you see in the Middle East? Britain "invaded" Hong Kong until 1997. Where are the terrorist networks in Hong Kong?

[dragonwriter]

> The US has "invaded" several countries in Latin America like Chile and Venezuela.

The fact that you have to use square quotes there may hint at the difference.

OTOH, while the US was backing unpopular dictators in Latin America like it does in the Middle East campus and engaging in mass direct and covert armed intervention against other regimes, violent (including terrorist) internal and international opposition to the US policy was also quite common.

But also, that was in the context of the Cold War, which both meant that the opponents often had state (perhaps indirect) support and that there were constraints on activity fron that sponsorship, because things like major attacks on the US homeland risked escalation against the sponsoring state.

[jiojfdsal3]

Latin American countries aren't producing terrorist sleeper cells. You don't hear about suicide bombings in Venezuela or Cuba or the many other countries the US has meddled in. There are many former French colonies and you don't hear about these colonies producing homegrown terrorists to attack France. We shouldn't confuse correlation with causation.

[dragonwriter]

> Latin American countries aren't producing terrorist sleeper cells

Once again, the US isn't doing the same thing to LA as it is in the ME; when it was, LA produced anti-US terrorists, but the manifestation was difference because of the Cold War context, which both supported such terrorists and imposed constraints on them as condition of the support.

> You don't hear about suicide bombings in Venezuela or Cuba or the many other countries the US has meddled in.

The US meddling in those countries failed, though, and suicide bombings aren't the only terrorist tactic. Anti-US terrorist attacks we're not unheard of in LA when the US was successful in imposing unpopular dictators. (There's no real modern parallel in LA to the occupation of Iraq, or the US role in Israel-Palestine.)

> There are many former French colonies and you don't hear about these colonies producing homegrown terrorists to attack France.

Yes, places that France is not currently imposing an unpopular regime on or seen as currently meddling in a manner hostile too aren't generating the same kind of response current and ongoing US action in the Middle East provokes.

> We shouldn't confuse correlation with causation.

But that's exactly what you are doing with Islam, while steadfastly ignoring other factors.