[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.