Terrorism is a direct result of foreign policy.

I hope my opponent is not indoctrinated beyond repair from propaganda and fear mongering in the Western Media. 1. Your first rebuttal point is literally the exact inverse of the truth. Hezbollah, Al Qaeda, the Taliban, and many other "terrorist organizations" started out as nationalist resistance movements fighting against Western Imperialism, Israel, and corrupt American puppet despots. How do you expect the people of the Middle East to feel when the guns, bombs, and tear gas being used against them are labeled, "Made in USA"? Religion, specifically Islam, is merely the rallying call used by the "terrorist organizations" to garner support and enthusiasm for their political resistance/retaliation causes. Osama Bin Laden is not a dumb man. He knows what gets the people fired up, and he exploits this fact to fuel his higher goals. The fact that you are quoting Barry Rubin, Director of Global Research and International Affairs for ISRAEL(!!!!), is honestly just humorous. You are quoting a man who is representing another one of the primary causes for Middle Eastern anti-American sentiment; of course he will shift the focus of the issue to something which doesn't criminalize his own country. Do you know what America's and Israel's nicknames are in the Middle East?... "The Great Satan and The Little Satan", respectively. In their eyes, Israel is an illegitimate, terrorist, and genocidal nation. Israel's military is, by all realistic consideration, America's military - seeing as how we fund it at a rate of $3 billion a year. Hezbollah was a direct result of Israel's invasion of South Lebanon in 1982. They were a Lebanese Nationalist Defense Organization, whose sole original goal was to expel Israeli (American) troops from their country; Israel invaded a sovereign nation, and not a single thing was said in the UN. Hezbollah's focus has obviously shifted to bigger and different goals, but nonetheless, it is an absolute proven fact they started as a nationalist resistance militia group. How, may I ask, is anti-Americanism a last resort scapegoat? Especially considering that the majority of Middle Eastern despots are also on our pay-role. A few examples are (were): Egypt's Mubarak, The Saudi Princes, Jordan's King, Pakistan's "official leaders", and obviously now Iraq and Afghanistan. I don't know which leaders you are referring to that are upset with their current position, seeing as how they all possess billions in foreign assets. It was just revealed that Gadaffi of Libya had over $40 billion worth of assets frozen around the world. The Anti-American and Anti-Despotism cries comes from the people, who crave and desire economic, political, and social freedom. American officials love complacency in these poor & deprived people, because as long as our puppet despot is in power, we can still ensure our oil contracts. I honestly have no idea what the point of your second quotation was, besides furthering my argument. Do you not notice the overarching theme there? We support a country for a few years when it serves our geopolitical/economic goals, but turn on them when our interests shift. How do you think that makes the average citizen feel?... Confused and angry as hell would be my best guess. And to clarify, the US did not "rescue Egypt" at the end of the 1973 War. Read a book covering the topic, and you will clearly see that Egypt had defended and pushed forward on the Gaza front. They did not need rescuing. What America did was essentially bribe both sides to stop: $3 billion to Egypt, $4 billion to Israel. That is all we have ever done; bribe and manipulate. And the Palestinian "peace brokering" was nothing more than a facade, and a cheap one at that. The talks changed absolutely nothing. The West Bank and the Gaza Strip are still virtual prisons for the Palestinians. East Jerusalem is no more integrated. To look at recent conflicts in the Middle East. We went to Afghanistan to fight Al Qaeda, when it was fully apparent that 13 out of the 15 terrorists came from Saudi Arabia, and massive funding came from Pakistan. Also, we invaded Iraq on the inane excuse of WMD's and overthrowing a ruthless dictator; yet we turn a blind eye to genocide in Libya. America essentially plays "Whack-o-Mole" in the Middle East, and hopefully these recent uprisings in the Middle East of SECULAR, young, and educated people will establish democracy and freedom which can't be bought by America. 2. Thank you for the amazing insight of "No warrants at all". Actually, look at charts of terrorist attacks by year, and you will see an obvious cause-effect relationship between American intervention in the Middle East, and terrorism. Bringing the fight to Arab nations does nothing but further exacerbate the problem. The longer you suppress something, the larger the retaliation will be. You cannot directly fight terrorism because terrorism does not have borders. You stop terrorism by actual allowing democracies to flourish, instead of supporting dictators. If a country is satisfied economically, socially, and politically, then terrorism is not allowed to grow. Terrorism grows from desperate and dire situations, where inaction equals inevitable death. Iraq and Afghanistan have no semblance of infrastructure to speak of, so I am not sure what you are talking about here. American troops destroyed any and all energy infrastructure, police infrastructure, education infrastructure, medical infrastructure, and civil infrastructure. Also, if you would look at official US documents, 60% of deaths in Iraq have been of civilians. 60 percent! How many more innocent people can die, while still warranting the "saving of the people" by overthrowing a dictator? Also, since US occupation in Afghanistan, the opium and heroine trades/addictions have surged unabated. Fighting drugs was one of the main points of the Taliban, but we killed all of them... 3. 100% false again. First off, you can believe a man who had nothing to gain or lose from his comments, which came when he feared imminent death in a cave. If we're going to use your argument; how can we believe anything Bush said, because he organized one of the deadliest attacks against the Middle East, and clearly doesn't have sympathy for human life. 3,000 people died in the 9/11 attacks and a subsequent 4,000-5,000 more soldiers. 100,000 people (at the very minimum) have died in Iraq. 50,000 people (at the very minimum) have died in Afghanistan. A vast majority being civilians. Israeli-American troops have killed an estimated 200,000 (at least) Palestinians, Lebanese, Egyptians, and Saudi Arabians over the last few decades. And how about the tens of thousands of Palestinian prisoners still being held? And how about the daily murders by Israeli soldiers against Palestinians trapped in their own country? I don't mean to belittle the atrocity of 9/11, but the numbers speak for themselves. Please tell me what you think Osama's "hidden true intentions" are. He clearly does not wish to form an Islamic Caliphate, which is so clearly propagated on Fox News. Terrorist groups purposes may become distorted or corrupted, but I don't think it is questionable that virtually all terrorist groups started out of necessity & nationalist resistance movements. What were American's fighting against Britain considered during the Revolutionary War? Terrorists? Or Heroes? I implore you to try and see a different perspective, other than the Western mentality which you are so obviously indoctrinated with. And I have still yet to see a real, tangible counter-argument from you. What do you feel is the driving force behind terrorism? How do you propose we fight terrorism (circling the middle-east, country to country, fighting border-less enemies is impossible)? What are the true factors and goals driving the terrorists? Please, do not quote an Israeli intelligence officer in your next rebuttal. That's like quoting the CIA. How about BBC, Russia Today, AlJazeera?