Five years ago last night, I was on an American Airlines plane between San Francisco and Boston. I think I was on the penultimate journey of AA Flight 11, the plane that was hijacked the next morning and was the first to hit the WTC, although I was too shocked to check my ticket stub to make sure. [AA 11 was an LA bound flight, my flight was LA to SF to Boston].
I remember waiting for the flight at SFO very vividly. It was delayed, so I sat patiently, nursing a novel. There were three wisacres in the padded reception seats facing mine, and they decided to pass the time by making remarks about how I was a terrorist, as if I was somehow deaf or couldn’t comprehend what they were saying. I lowered my book long enough to glare at them, and then went back to my reading.
That was in the good old days, back before such behavior was criminalized, back before I learned to shuffle, shuck and jive, to grin broadly like an idiot and look at my feet, back before passengers counted the number of times you went to the bathroom to pee. It was a long time ago.
I took a cab back to my place and fell into a deep dreamless sleep. Because we had arrived late, I decided to sleep in the next morning and was awoken not by my alarm clock but by my father, calling on the land line (back when I had roomates and no cell phone).
“Beta, turn on the TV,” he said.
I did. And I saw. But I did not yet comprehend.
I stayed in the living room all morning, watching events unfold on television, and talking to my father in NYC. I was lucky, I never had any trouble getting through. I didn’t realize then how much everything would change. How much, even five years later, things would not be the same as they were just 24 hours before.
<
p> I’ve been meaning to post something personal on this topic for years, but never got around to it. You know that I rarely talk about myself in my posts, both to preserve my anonymity but also because I’d rather you paid attention to my words than my person when I’m talking. This is hard for me to talk about. Last night, I was clenched down to my stomach in anticipation. Ironically, it was the sight of all the blather in the newspapers this morning that made me feel distant from the event, and which gave me enough perspective to start to write.
In typical desi fashion, I’m going to have to wing this. I’m going to write this in segments throughout the week, week permitting. I don’t know how well they’ll fit together or how much of what’s on my mind I’ll be able to share. Just bear with me as I post parts 2-?, and we’ll all get to see how it turns out together. Just don’t expect a happy ending to this one.
DharmaQueen :
You guys [Indo-Canadians] are always lining up to criticise American foreign policy. Are you as critical of the despicable Canadian policies towards the indigenous peoples up north?
No, they don’t give a damn. And, neither do the majority of the so called educated Indian daispora residing up north. All you guys do is, tch, tch. blame it on the white Canadians [ as if your taxes are only to alleviate suffering and you don’t live on stolen property] and go on with blasting America, which, I personally attribute to a severe case of envy. a la surrender monkeys. Tch, tch, tch, tch, tch……….if only the world took as much interest in th ehappening up there….they would be disgusted. talk about the kettle calling the pot kala.
Tashie, I appreciate your remarks. You’re right, anti-Americanism does not encourage peace, and I plead guilty to harbouring this sentiment from time to time.
But as a Canadian, during a time when Canadian soldiers are dying abroad, I find it hard to swallow that I should feel worse when a fellow Canadian dies, than when some Rwandan dies. I don’t get it and I find the jingoistic stuff on the cover of Canadian newspapers when one of our soldiers dies quite nauseating. It seems to me that this patriotic mourning is foolish and false – that the only true mourning is either personal (for a loved one) or the universal human mourning felt when any fellow human being dies.
Canucks Suk – you sound oddly familiar, where the hell ya been?
I don’t live on stolen property. I rent from someone who rents from someone who may have inherited from someone who stole property. Don’t blame it on me, brudda.
to Canucks Suk:
If you have something to say or discuss, you really shouldn’t have to hide behind an alternate name.
Tashie – well said.
and while we are on it, what about your great-great-great-grandmother who had to bite that bloody fruit in that stupid garden…what about her, huh?… no one’s crying for the fruit!…
“Are you as critical of the despicable Canadian policies towards the indigenous peoples up north?
No, they don’t give a damn. And, neither do the majority of the so called educated Indian daispora residing up north.”
Oh, and by the way, “Canucks Suk” – I, as a so-called educated desi, do care about this issue. It’s something I deal with and have to think about just about every day.. It’s not easy being an Aboriginal in Canada (or the U.S., from what I gather) and it’s one of the most shameful situations that is really EVERYBODY’S problem. I don’t mean to hijack this thread, but we should definitely be paying attention to the situation of minorities. I’ve always said, racisim isn’t unilateral across the board…. With that being said, even the “smaller” struggles are worth discussion, and that’s precisely why I visit this blog.
To D.Q.: I really appreciate reading everyone’s thoughts on the tragedy of this anniversary. While I agree that we should feel “universal empathy/mourning” as you put it, having something like 9/11 hit so close to home, (in a much more relatable environment)…. as bad as it sounds… it really helped me empathize even more with warzones and conditions in other parts of the world…
discussing american support for Jehadism in Afghanistan and Pakistan w/o mentioning commuinism is like discussing america allying herself w/ the soviets w/o mentioning nazism.
That’s very true Manju. It should be obvious to those who point out America’s alleged hypocricy in hunting the same Bin Laden that they had initially armed to fight the Godless Soviets. Isn’t it actually a thankless Bin Laden who has turned on his former benefactor?
Jilted_Manhood –
The Jehadis don’t rape canard is a myth spread by some people to place those jehadis on a holy pedestal. Not only did they rape Kashmri Hindus, they also raped Kashmiri Muslim women. Most of the these Jehadis were/are [young] Pakistani and Arab recruits, who believe they are not just fighting for Kashmir, but to establish the caliphate across India. So, they have no qualms when it comes to assaulting Hindu women
Unsurprisingly, this behaviour is not restricted to foreigners. indeed, one of the prominent [ethnic, “legitimate killer” kashmiri] JKLF terrorists, known as Bitta Karate, bragged to a journalist about having raped Kashmiri Hindu girls and of having lost count after killing 35 Kashmiri Hindus. [please google him]
I personally know a Kashmiri Hindu woman, who was raped by those so called Mujahadeen.
Jilted – think about it – do you really believe that this guys respect women of other religions? esp, when those women are at their mercy. Btw, A few months ago, Asia Society in New York, hosted a documentary film viewing on the plight of Kashmiri women of the minority faith. The said docu, mentioned the rapes of minority women by “jehadis”.
here is a link with some information. i will pass on more info over the next couple of days.
p.s. do you live in new york? if yes, watch out for a very interesting kashmir related event at the asia society, soon.
Thanks kritic. I’ll stay tuned for the Kashmir event.
discussing american support for Jehadism in Afghanistan and Pakistan w/o mentioning commuinism is like discussing america allying herself w/ the soviets w/o mentioning nazism. Manju Esq.,
True, but again not the complete picture. A lot has to do that time of the height counter insurgency in Afghanistan – General Zia ul Haq was undertaking massive Islamization of Pakistan. A lot of funding from Saudi Arabia was coming in to Pakistan, Indonesia, etc.
Me know nothing, Jai Jai Santoshi Mata, Jai Jai.
I do not object to the idea of American intervention in Afghanistan against the Soviets(though to the best of my knowledge the only justification is the highly dubious domino effect theory. I’d be glad to hear other arguments.).
My case is simply that the US played into the hands of Pakistani fundamentalists and the ISI, giving them a free hand to use American resources as they will, out of sheer laziness and myopia. The ISI, unsurprisingly, encouraged the likes of the Taleban, ultimately destroying moderate voices such as Ahmad Shah Masood.
That scumbag!
Afghanistan itself had no strategic value for the Soviets. Pakistan did. Think from Pakistan’s standpoint. Communist/Russian influence is on one side, the Indians (who were Soviet friendly) on the other. The port of Karachi looks really appealing to anyone, particularly the USSR who didn’t have any ability to project force into the Persian Gulf. Russian military was playing catch up in the naval power projection game. USSR was pushing the construction of Aircraft carriers/heavy cruisers. The USA had full control of the sea lanes in the Persian gulf. The US strategy wasn’t myopic, actually, it was quite effective. Unlike Vietnam, the US commitment was limited, covert, and let proxies from a friendly nation do all the dirty work. People are also underestimating the help/support that came from middle eastern nations like Saudi Arabia that funneled in significant resources/money and fighters. OBL ran his charities for fighters from Pakistan which were funded by him and Saudis, not Americans. America’s critical contribution that helped the guerillas was the Stinger missle that took out Russia’s ‘flying tank’ Hind helicopters. The choppers, heavily armored, had one huge weakness. The exhuast of its powerful engines vented in the middle of the fuselage with a massive heat signature.
Zia also had a tight grip on his establishment and was probably the last Pakistani leader to have such control. PMs Bhutto and Nawaz never had the same control over ISI. Zia wasn’t deposed, he died in a crash, which meant no one ‘earned’ the alpha position in many eyes. Fact does remain ISI and Zia progressively nudged Pakistan towards a more fundamental islamic direction, but considering the US is friends with the House of Saud, Pakistan looks like Vegas.
The problem of radicalization was also noted among those on the ground then and included in future threat assessments. It wasn’t an issue of being lazy as much as the nation and public’s priority focused around the communist threat. I don’t think anyone could have said that the salafists would have turned so severely against the United States with such effectiveness.
The issue, IMHO, was the fallout of US-Pakistani relations of the 90s, leaving Pakistan really by itself, while the threat grew. Our human intelligence assets degraded leaving us ineffective. Ahmed Shah Massod was holding out in in his slice of land in North Aghanistan OK, supported by few (India included) and he was assasinated days before 9-11. Salafists/Taliban were preparing for war on multiple fronts and they knew taking out Massod would help their fight with the USA. Their estimate that the US would suffer the same fate as the USSR in Afghanistan was wrong, though.
Afghanistan itself had no strategic value for the Soviets.
Gujudude,
Russians (later Soviets) have had their finger in Afghanistan pie for more than hundred years. Even Lenin wanted communism collide with British India head on via Afghanistan.
You are correct about significance of port of Karachi, and Pakistan’s importance and their concerns. Also, right on Persion Gulf corridor.
What strategic value is Afghanistan? It is place Russia could manouver militarily easily during winter months. Perhaps, gas in Northern Afghanistan. But then Russia has huge reserves themselves.
It might have been better than Vietnam, but that is hardly a compliment :). The proxies pushed their own interests, and the US possibly didn’t have a clue, or did and didn’t care, which is perhaps worse. I cannot see why the US needed to support Hekmatyar when Massoud was an equally successful warlord, and far more moderate. The only explanation I can see is that the ISI took the CIA for a ride.
Your point being?
Isn’t that another way to say myopia?
Highly subjective.
And then Allah gave them Iraq.
what a bunch of wimps!! a couple of thousand dead americans and all of you go weepy over it. makes me wanna puke. seriously dont you guys move on? you are just feeding the terrorist machine. they are just a mafia – a third rate one at that. Giving them so much airtime!! disgusting!!!
Hmm. And yet, without comparison, there can be no perspective. I want you to imagine what the world would be like, if, every time 5000 civilians were killed, two countries were invaded and their governments overthrown. Let’s be honest: only America awards itself that right. It’s the rationale of Terrible Vengeance; it’s Samuel Jackson aiming his .45 and delivering Ezekiel 25:17 to the entire Middle East. It’s also just a huge fucking mistake.
I do agree, 9/11 was a tragedy, and it will be commemorated and remembered as such. And you’re right; no one should have to die that way. Civilian deaths are deplorable. But we don’t really mind killing off 30,000 civilians while seeking out a dictator. That’s “collateral damage.” Ethically, what’s the difference? If we send A-10’s and F-18’s up a highway packed with civilians and military vehicles and destroy every single vehicle, isn’t that mass murder?
I’m sorry, I just can’t agree with Jilted Manhood’s extreme defense of anything in the name of America’s Just Cause, or his veritable deification of Americans. We’re just people. We are not God’s Chosen Few, no matter what this administration tells you (and I guarantee that this bunch of mutinous macacas wouldn’t fall under their definition, anyway). We’re really emotional, totally obnoxious while travelling, we wear dark socks with sandals, we don’t tolerate outsiders, and we hate learning new languages, science, or trying to think too hard. Our leaders are clearly culled from the same ranks, and their policy is emblematic of their laborious, Calvinistic, slightly xenophobic thoughts.
Tashie, I’m going to have to say that the American people also deserve quite a bit of anger. We elect that elite, time and again. We also prevent people who do not fit a very narrow definition from ever…EVER…becoming “leader of the free world,” no matter how badly this country needs the change in perspective. And so the cycle continues.
And tangentially, I think the idea of “jehadis don’t rape” as totally hysterical. I mean…what, is that the moral high ground? Amazing, but that’s how propaganda works, I guess.
And GujuDude…right on. Your take of Afghanistan and Pakistan is fairly accurate, though you do underestimate the influence of America in that region at the time. The Stingers were pivotal, to be sure. But have you read “Charlie Wilson’s War” by George Crile? The CIA involvement in Afghanistan was massive–the biggest covert operation in history, actually, and very nearly a neatly-wrapped-up explanation for the fall of the Soviet Union. Good stuff, worth reading. Check it out.
The CIA involvement in Afghanistan was massive–the biggest covert operation in history, actually, and very nearly a neatly-wrapped-up explanation for the fall of the Soviet Union. Good stuff, worth reading. Check it out.
Yes, Salil.
People like Zhibnew Brenzinski (NSA Carter Administration) thinks the fall of Soviet Union and Iron Curtain started from Afghanistan, and bunch of Jihadis is small price. And Pro-Pakistan wonks acknowledge Pakistan played a key role – from that prespective, it is correct.
CIA was very much in Afghanistan, much before Russian tanks rolled in but then Russians had always been there.
What I’m saying is how Pakistan/ISI ran the insurgency against the Soviets was their business, afterall, Pakistan had more to lose by being stuck between USSR-India. The US did not want to involve itself more than it neede to. AFTER the soviets pulled out is where backing certain elements would have helped. The Taliban was formed in 1994, not during the soviet insurgency. We could have backed another coalition before Taliban promoted by Pakistan even came into the picture. That is four years (92-96)lost. While soviets were in the picture, Afghans were allies of convinience. The late 80s an 90s were a decade of lost opportunties to ‘clean up’. THAT is where we were myopic. The degradation of US-Pak relations in this time also coincides with nuclear exports of AQ Khan to dPRK and Iran. NOt being inovled in the region hurt us on multiple fronts.
I’m trying to look through the lens of that time. Hindsight is 20/20. The mission was always defined to put a dent into the Soviets, not much more. ISI didn’t take the CIA for a ride, but I’ll take the second part of your assertion that the US probably didn’t care because the political establishment (both dems and repubs) never saw them as a threat. US policy disengaged from the region once the soviets were neutralized and we’ve paid the price for it.
Kush: There was some value for the USSR in holding Afghanistan as you detail. It is a nice outpost wedged right between Iran and Pakistan, though it wouldn’t make any sense to hold it unless they had larger ambitions for the return value.
Salil Maniktahla:
Using the comparisons to shot on us aren’t approrpiate for this day, its an issue of taste. Like I said before, there is plenty of time to yell at us all for the rest of the year for whatever grievances. A bit of courtesy for one day, is that too much to ask?
Anyway, I’ll pick up the book you’ve recommended and check it out. I may be underestimating the US direct involvement on a tactical level, but sources I’ve read uptil now have suggested that the US provided covert support in terms of intelligence and weapons/funds (stingers). The confluence of americans working hand in hand with the fighting jihadis wasn’t as direct. ISI was the middleman who had more control of the dynamic and keeping the Americans and Afghans somewhat seperated would be in their interest, right? Else their value decreases. Anyway, I’ll put it on the reading list and see where it takes my opinions/positions.
Who’s yelling? I merely questioned American actions taken in the name of the victims of 9/11. Calling it a matter of taste is kind of silly; I can claim to be honoring their memory as much as anyone, by standing against the sort of “America Uber Alles” ideas that several people around these parts seem to advocate. That the rest of the world sympathized with us so strongly that we got away with it…well, we squandered that opportunity. It seems like the average Joe (or Raj?) wants candlelit vigils and some handholding today. Pardon me if I don’t share the same need.
Gujudude,
I get your point. Though I am having some trouble agreeing with the idea that it was okay for the US to let the Pakistan support Islamic fundamentalism, because the war in Afghanistan was ‘their war’ in some sense. It seems okay in isolation, but combined with its support of repressive regimes in Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Iran, etc, for similar pragmatic reasons, I think it reduces the American rhetoric of liberty and equality to tokenism. But that is not surprising to anyone, I guess.
But comparisons of this situation to the Nazi/Soviet dilemma, as Manju/Jilted make, is unfair. War was unavoidable for the US after Pearl Harbor. In 1979, probably less so. Also, the Soviet Union was a major power in WW2 and could not be ignored, plus it was already at war with Germany. The US could hardly ask them to step aside so they may have a go at Germany too 🙂 . On the other hand, there were options to radical Islamists in Afghanistan; only the US did not find it politic to persuade Pakistan to support them.
I remember the day of September 11th, I was at work. There was a New Zealander who kept going on about how terrible it was and he was really starting to get on my tits. So when he asked me for the fifteenth time, “Isn’t it just terrible?” or words to that effect, I told him, “Look, there are too many people in the world anyway. Don’t you think it’s great when some of them are eliminated?” He was not a happy Kiwi afterwards.
Then they had a memorial down the road for the people who died and they blocked off traffic and a bunch of people from work went. I said, fuck that, nobody had a memorial for the 1.5 million children the Yanks killed in Iraq, why should I go to a memorial for a few thousand of them?
Eurodesi – Wouldn’t that mean 1.5 million less terrorists in the future?
Salil, we (Americans) wear dark socks and sandals when travelling? Did you actually write that? What on earth…..does that have to do with anything.
Kritic, please. Just because Eurodesi has gone all undergraduate on us……the evil Yanks didn’t kill millions of Iraqi children. Saddam Hussein did.
I despair. Sometimes, I really despair….
To: Salil From: A poet.
We wear dark socks with; Our sandals. Samuel Jackson -like we draw blood.
(read 1st and 3rd para of #68). Sorry, I know I shouldn’t, but…..while the rest of the comment was very insightful, that part had me in stitches. We wear dark socks with sandals! Hey ho!
And finally, to put a lie to the squandered sympathy bit….schadenfraude was a huge emotion on 9-11. Almost immediately, the ‘you got what you deserved with your evil foreign policy’ started. Read the editiorials and headlines from LeMonde, der Spiegel, Times of India, etc, etc. on Sept. 12. Some people just couldn’t wait for the, “well, you do support evil regimes, so….” Schadenfraude. That’s what a lot felt. Squandering good will! Huh. I don’t think so.
I want you to imagine what the world would be like, if, every time 5000 civilians were killed, two countries were invaded and their governments overthrown
Taliban was a government that this guy would like to retain or perhaps dislodge by peaceful negotiations. This guy is talking about 5000 civilians killed but won’t look into the numbers Saddam and the Taliban would kill every year. America is not going around invading countries even every f*ing two decades.When some right wing lunatic on radio berates Hollywood liberals like Sarandon and Clooney for not sticking to their art and instead talking politics, I cringe because Clooney and Sarandon are smarter than most of these lunatics on radio/TV. Even though I might not agree with their ( Clooney and co ) views. I however strongly believe that this guy for example should stick to whatever the hell he does and leave worldly discourse to sane people and spare us his perverted and freshmanic world view. we don’t tolerate outsiders, and we hate learning new languages, science, or trying to think too hard.
You are factually dead wrong. America is the most diverse nation.You have to commend a people for tolerating obnoxiousness embodied by the likes of you. Americans speak more languages than any other people. More Americans travel outside of their country than anyone else. Science ? Do you think before you blabber?
Finally I’d advise you to take a long break from your desi self-segregation ( that is look beyond your circle of ‘Bunty and Bubbly’ friends and cousins ) and hang out with Americans of all different demographics.
Jilted, The sort of blanket personal condemnations you direct at various commenters (myself, now Salil) makes it hard to take you seriously. Salil is trying to make his points on the basis of arguments, not personal attacks against you or some other commenter. Please do the same.
The sort of blanket personal condemnations you direct at various commenters (myself, now Salil) makes it hard to take you seriously
I think you missed what he had to say about me earlier. Look at comments # 31 and his subsequent comments. Besides he had to drag me into his comments yet again when I didn’t quite belong there. I am not an exreme supporter of America. Just look at my comments on this blog. As far as your not taking me seriously, I am not bothered. I know how credible you are with your blanket condemnation of the Western ( read White ) world. One just has to thumb through a few of your comments on this site.
Yes Jilted (or is that wilted?). I did miss that little piece of comic duelling. Trust men to bring it all down to their willies.
See y’all later.
Yes Jilted (or is that wilted?). I did miss that little piece of comic duelling. Trust men to bring it all down to their willies.
See! You may punch me in the nose, you may even curse my mother and still get away with both unharmed but if you ever insult my ……
MD @ 78: “And finally, to put a lie to the squandered sympathy bit….schadenfraude was a huge emotion on 9-11.”
You are on the money with this regarding editorials that were less than “God Bless America” in their tone and content – not to mention all those kids dancing in the streets of, say, Gaza.
But this makes one wonder, doesn’t it – apart from all the social, econonomic, political, relgious reasons offered – at a purely human level, why and how can “they” exult over the death and suffering of distant others? Seeking answers to this question and the resulting understanding is perhaps more useful than all the instant sympathy that is offered.
we don’t tolerate outsiders, and we hate learning new languages, science, or trying to think too hard.
Don’t try to pass the anomalous for the normal. Xenophobia exemplified by Dubai ports ( by the way opposed by Democrats like Schumer ), amnesty for aliens e.t.c is deplorable and frustrating. I am all against it as are many Americans. But that behavior doesn’t define at least my American experience. science
If you are hinting at opposition to stem cell research for example, well that again doesn’t qualify as America’s sweeping denial of scientific inquiry.
Salil:
You weren’t yelling, though quite a few internet messageboards I’ve visted did have lots of hot air, I apologize if I took it out on you a bit.
This is what I’m saying – it is perfectly OK for you to not have that need. All I’m asking is that, for the sake of courtesy, why do people want to crap on American’s on 9-11 and give them a guilt trip about Rawanda, Darfur, et. al. and tell them NOT to mourn their own?
I find it hypocritical that on one hand those who claim to ‘care’ for people say “oh, you’ve lost only 3000, look at the other places in the world!”. To me that isn’t constructive. Discussing US policy IS fair game (which other threads here do discuss and I’ve participated in those), but telling people they shouldn’t be mourning because more people die somewhere else, which fairly or unfairly many may not have any feelings about or even be well educated on is being an ass to folks for the sake of throwing rotten tomatoes at them. Again, there is the whole year for that. Those that FORCE you to mourn shouldn’t be doing that either, to each their own.
There is a constructive way of raising the issues (like trying to educate people on other issues of the world) and then there is one that isn’t (telling people they shouldn’t feel sad because more people die somewhere else and they should pay more attention there).
And finally, to put a lie to the squandered sympathy bit….schadenfraude was a huge emotion on 9-11. Almost immediately, the ‘you got what you deserved with your evil foreign policy’ started. Read the editiorials and headlines from LeMonde, der Spiegel, Times of India, etc, etc. on Sept. 12.
Yes and No. I guess it depends in what way you want to see yourself. Salil is not entirely wrong about “goodwill“.
For every kid dancing in Gaza, there were huge candlelight vigils in London, Jakarta, Madrid, and you name it.
Does Times of India write editorials anymore? Or at least the online version? There are no editorials on online version.
I did not read LeMonde (did you? Siddhartha probably did, so cannot comment) at that time but I did read The Economist, India Today, The London Times – They were very empathic.
The Economist had some of the finest editorials at that time.
Sashi – yes, you make a good point. But, even if I can understand what makes someone exult over the death of others, it doesn’t mean that I will necessarily agree that they are right to exult or in the diagnosis of that exultation, does it 🙂 ? I mean, let’s be honest. The template is Palestine and Israel. It’s why it stirs such emotions, even though, on a purely rational level, it’s a pretty small scale conflict. What you feel about suicide bombers/homicide bombers/resistance, says a lot about how you view the world. It’s not a rorshach test, but it’s something like an indicator. It indicates where you’ve drawn the line….
Rambling on and directed an others: in your anger (some justified) at past US policy, don’t forget who the salafists, the jihadis, the bin Laden’s are. You can hate the US all you want, but if you are a women, a jew, a gay, an infidel, or a ‘bad’ muslim, they will hate you, anyway. However much you may sympatize with them for their hatred of the US. And they will think you deserve to die. That’s not alarmism. That’s just what is.
I’ll dig up the editorials, Kush. There was horror. And sadness. And Empathy. But Good Will? Define good will.
Look at Anne Appelbaums column in the Telegraph? Can’t remember, but it’s linked at realclearpolitics.
And, remember the US embassador to Britain? Question Time? The audience had him in tears. There was horror. But there was plenty of schadenfraude. So, yes and no is accurate. Forget Times of India, I must have been thinking of something else.
Define good will.
Empathy is a more accurate word. That is the word I used.
A country like US will always have mixed emotions – being the only superpower today. Something akin to Texas bashing (due to its sheer size) within the States.
Kristoff in NYT had an editorial where a kid from middle east went on tirade against US around 9/11, and then toward told him toward the end of the conversation that he was waiting for his green card to be fully processed, and would like to be a dentist in US. Pretty much sums it up.
Salil used “good will”. I think he means a lot of people thought that 3000 civilians did not deserve to die on 9/ 11, and they wanted to help US in ways they could (sure, a lot of countries tied it/ expected to financial aid in return – I think Eastern European countries used 9/ 11 to position themselves closer to US). Let Salil define goodwill. I am second guessing.
Kush, good point – I guess we are saying the same thing in different ways. When that general expression, that cliche, that drawing room talking point of ‘we have squandered their good will,’ comes up, what the speaker is signalling is that the United States should have behaved in a certain way, and didn’t.
MD @ 89: MY answer to your (rethorical?) question is, “yes, you neither have to agree with the exultation of the others or their reasons behind doing so.” But as I was saying before, other than simply wondering (sentimentally?) “why they hate us so?”/ “why aren’t they with us?” etc, and reaching for reflexive or convinient answers (“because they hate us”, “because their religion is murderous”, etc), it is useful to come to a deeper (perhaps, I mean to say philosophical?) understanding of the sources of human antipathy etc towards the suffering of others.
And yes, just like you said “fundamentalists” (of all stripes; it is useful to remember that hatred, even if in comparison it may seem begnin, towards “women, a jew, a gay, an infidel, “bad” religious person” is not limited to those hiding out in the badlands – plenty of that to go around here as well) scare the hell out of me as well because they have given up on asking questions.
Unfortunately for all the Western “intellectuals” like Chomsky and his ilk, that part escapes their thinking. Or maybe they think that is acceptable flagellation for “colonial-imperialistic” collective guilt of the West.
An opinion by an Arab-American:
amnesty for aliens e.t.c is deplorable and frustrating.
I meant to say opposition to amnesty….
Ennis, I just spent a couple of minutes of my time reading this. I don’t mean to be glib, but I sincerely hope it leads somewhere other than a maudlin epiphany about the courage it takes for a brown dude to do post 911 groceries in NY without being made to feel unloved
I couldn’t agree more! I just spent a few minutes of my time reading this post and I want a pony, and a unicorn … oooooh, and a unicorn with wings … Those of you from the reality-based community can go get some saffron balls and stop complaining! No more maudlin epiphapiphafannies! Hail Mogambo!
MD:
No one here expressed any sympathy for the jehadis. I think you are mixing up two groups, who have very different objections. There are:
a)jehadis who have a long-fermenting ideological hatred for the US,
b) perfectly ordinary people who are irritated by American foreign policy over the years.
Most of the people in group b) are as dead-set against the jehadis as the Americans are today. Unless, of course, ‘you are either with us or against us 🙂 ‘ ….
This is the last post, archie bishop. This is where it all leads to, my friend. Right here. The end of the line.
And now, at the end of your vaunted journey, here is the information you have been searching for: that wilted manhood is PURE. COMEDY. GOLD.
Eh? Come again?
sakshi:
are you paraphrasing bishop Tutu?