"Islam" and "terror" are facades over-simplifying the heart of the M.E. struggle

"The way this argument was formed is backward." It is true that from the beginning of the Iraq war, leftists have discouraged against the occupation of Iraq, claiming that the motive was oil, not creating a foundation for Democracy. yet the Bush administration recently and unintentionally empowered those leftists. In December, George W. Bush was quoted as saying that Islamic extremists will "gain access to vast oil reserves and use Iraq as a base to overthrow moderate governments all across the broader Middle East." Shortly there after, an oil conglomerate by the names of James Baker spoke of his support for a favorable Iraqi resolution that would allow him to gain further access to Iraqi oil. This information, paired with recent Baker report recemendations for supposedly strengthening Iraq, reveals the truth that the war in Iraq is about oil above all else. the recommendations are as follows... Recommendation 62: Iraq should create a fiscal and legal framework for investment as well as pressing Iraq to continue reducing subsidies in the energy sector until Iraq pays market price for oil products. Iraqi people do not have the ability whatsoever to pay market price for oil, therefore the majority of the oil would go to investment (the United States). Recommendation 63: The United States should help the Iraqi government in privatizing there oil industry into a commercial enterprise to encourage investment by outside oil companies. That recommendation speaks for itself. This information, along with the United States history of manipulating the Middle East for oil, un-blurs the picture that accessing oil is the primary objective of foreign policy in the middle east. Since I know you will ask, here is the past history... - Afghan/Soviet war (late 70s to early 80s) - Cheychen war (1996) - Gulf war (1989) "You started off with an assumption (that the struggle in the ME is all about oil and land) and then tried to form an argument for it." If you dig down deep enough, past the tag of an ideological war between the west and Islam, past the cultural differences, past the oil, you reach the bedrock of this war, and every war ever waged. Wars are waged for power and respect. attaining oil is a concrete example of power, it is a growing commodity and the more you have the better off you are. for the hierarchy of a group (for this argument the U.S. government), to achieve its desired goal in attaining power or respect they need the endorsement of people. Since the beginning of civilization, the hierarchy has exploited human nature in rallying their people and empowering their cause. George Bush himself had it easy, as a powerful tool fell on his lap. 9/11 was a horrible atrocity for the United States. Though when examined intrinsically, It is clear that the attack did not call for such an overzealous counter attack. George Bush wanted to begin occupying the middle east though and empowered the sudden American patriotism in achieving his goal. It is also a scientific fact that fear overpowers logic. George Bush then acted on the current American fear that resulted from the attack, speaking of terrorism, and how freedom was at stake, thinly veiling and geniously implanting an ideology of us vs. them. All the seeds were planted, and as long as he promised to protect us, and do harm to those who did it to us, we were just pawns in his game. You also say I "tried" to form an argument, the base of my argument is from an article in "Foreign Policy" magazine. a magazine widely read (translated into countless languages) and even used by politicians as decision making aids. I did not plagiarize it whatsoever, I simply used what I learned in the article and applied to the the current Middle East vs. West conflict. "If you understand Islam, you would understand why we fight them." My father is a Syrian immigrant I grew up in house where the TV channels flipped between CNN and Al-Jazeera I have spent over a year of my life in Syria, and have been to Iraq as well Do you know what its like to be in a taxi cab in Aleppo and sit silently as the taxi rants about how if he ever saw an american, he would kill him. he tells me this after he says i have an accent and asks were im from, I said canada. You think you understand Islam, but you see it through biased eyes. "In Islam (not even radical Islam, this is written in the Koran) all infidels "non-believers" are to be put to death. Any follower of Islam that kills these non-believers is rewarded in the afterlife." There are hundreds of english translations of the Qur'an, most of them published in the past 30 years. F.V. Griefenhagen, a historian who has spent much of his life studying english translations of the Qur'an came to the conclusion that recent translations of the Qur'an have been translated through the paradigm of cultural struggles. This is made possible for two reasons. Arabic and English are like water and fire, completely different translating a book would be hard enough. Religious texts are not static language, therefore they must be translated through the translators interpretation. "That is why this country was attacked on September 11th." We were attack on 9/11 because we had it coming. The united states trained the taliban with CIA war tactics and intelligence gathering tactics, as well as supply them military aid. Osama Bin Laden was manipulated into leading a war against the Soviet Union which Islamists fought unknowingly on the Behalf of the United States. Osama Bin laden was ashamed and angry for being tricked among other things. I don't want to type it all. if you really want, I will paste the argument from one of my previous debates in the next round. "They are doing what they believe they are RELIGIOUSLY commanded to do." This is the only thing you are even partially right about in your argument. The radical islamists do believe they are religiously commanded to do so. but most of the radical islamists join the movement in search of a "family" or a cause. a terrorist prison camp has proved this by capturing terrorists and treating them like humans inside, with ping pong tables, vocational classes, family like dinners and conversation and laughter. they have released 700 former radicals back into society with a 100% rehabilitation success rate. that leaves the few true radicalists, who rely on these followers for their power, that actually believe this bull. Without their followers, they are powerless, and hence radical islam becomes nothing but a tiny cult if that. I spent the entirety of this round disproving your con argument in which it appears you took this debate to do nothing but ridicule me as an uneducated, extreme leftist empathizer. I hope you will debate the topic in the third round.