Radical Muslims: richer, better educated

Edifying Gallup poll of 9,000 people in Muslim countries…the result, in a nutshell, showing that Muslims who considered 9/11 “justified” are wealthier, better educated, and more hopeful about their financial future than Muslims who consider 9/11 “unjustified.”

Interestingly, radicals show the exact same appreciation for Western “liberty/democracy/free speech” as do moderates.

Whatever is driving jihadist sympathies, it is not poverty, hopelessless, or lack of education.

http://www.foreignpolicy.com/story/cms.php?story_id=3637

I wonder exactly how much the average income is. “Above average or very high income” is pretty meaningless when the average muslim is super poor.

Not necessarily true. Getting an education would certainly make one more likely to discover the wealth distribution and in more detail how the west fucked up the world, if one is inclined to do that, and thus see any kind of anti-movement justified, while a poor worker probably doesn’t have time to get motivated by unfair socio-economic factors.
So it could be poverty, hopelessless, or lack of education, just not their own.

Right. It’s more likely the US invasion of Iraq and this Administration’s failure to do anything to address the Palestinian problem. Glad to see you’re coming around from your blinkered neo-con worldview, Morris!

-Tom

Umm, what is this administration going to do to address the “Palestinian problem”? What’s the supposed solution?

Is it what USA, France, or Germany did to address Britain’s “Irish problem” in the 19th century? Or is it what the western powers did about the “Polish Question” in that same era?

Because the world was peachy-keen before the evil westerners arrived!

Glad you caught that too.

The west did not fuck up the world. The world was always fucked up, the west simply capitalized on that and managed to make many of the fuckups more western in their nature.

Tom, you’re spending too much time here. Come back to EE and post meaningless drivel with the rest of us.

I know you’re young, Jakub, but we actually had presidents before this one. You might want to look into the things they’ve done before you make assumptions about what this Administration is and isn’t doing.

Just a tip.

Anyway, thanks for reminding me why I usually avoid P&R. I don’t know what I was thinking.

-Tom

This isn’t a surprise to me, but the idea that “terrorists are rich and educated” depends entirely on the situation.

It’s pretty obvious that people who work 12 hours a day, 7 days a week to scrape together $30 to support their family of four aren’t going to have a lot of time to spend considering the ideologies of al-Qaeda. Those are high level goals which don’t impact their daily lives. The poor might work as local foot soldiers if the money is good enough, but they aren’t about to abandon their jobs and families to live in the mountains and ponder a pan-Arabic caliphate.

For those like the Palestinians, however, the cause of the terrorists is relevant to their everyday life. The fight to free the Occupied Territories and rid themselves of Israeli rule is something that they would think about every minute of every day. Therefore the support for radical elements, and those that become terrorists, in Palestine would have a much different demographic.

That was used as I could have said “The US fucked up Iraq”, I do not imagine that what came before was necessarily unfucked.

Bingo. A bit like a depressed person only working up the energy to kill themselves when they get on anti-depressants. Seems counter-intuitive but it makes sense. Look back at the early days of the “worker’s revolution” of the communists. You had, for the most part, rich or middle class kids who were educated enough to see what the problems were for the rest of the public and decided to do something about it. This worked fairly well in the urban centers with unionizing but their efforts to organize county folk were almost comical because the rural peasants couldn’t stand these uppity, preachy, rich kids.

At least at first…and that’s where al Qaida was before Iraq. Now…? Reports say their numbers are growing and there are more terrorist attacks around the world than ever before. If Iraq, and less likely, Aghanistan drive out the Americans then they’ll have a huge boom and even folks who dismissed them as nuts or preachy rich kids will be taking a second look.

I do: espresso and royalty checks. And berets.

The problem is that nothing that any president has ever done has ever had any lasting impact. It’s a black hole of problem solving.

I’m not defending the Bush administration, I’m assaulting the thinking there’s an outside solution that can be enforced on Palestine and Israel. The very FAILURE of the past actions “before this one” is proof positive of that.

Who mentioned solutions? Please highlight for me the part of my post where I talked about solving the Palestinian problem, because I can’t find it.

But you keep up that good fight “assaulting the thinking there’s an outside solution”! Go get 'em, tiger.

-Tom

OK, Iraq before the US? Clearly fucked up. Before Saddam? Still fucked up. Iraq before there was an Iraq? Obviously fucked up. The region roughly equating to Iraq under the height of the Ottoman Empire? Not a happy place. Before the Ottomans? Less happy.

Westerners haven’t made things better in Iraq, especially of late, and this administration has made them clearly worse, but in general it’s some sort of sick self-loathing and the height of egotism to blame “the west” for ruining the world.

Oh right, just because you didn’t use the word solution means you didn’t mean it. I totally forgot. Does the word “semantics” have any meaning for you?

So what did you mean? How does this administration, or any other, “address” the Palestinian problem? Make glorious statements from the safety of our own shores, but never enforce them? Criticize Israel for everything that goes wrong, because they’re the only country with its shit together there and can actually be held accountable as a whole?

Just what were you saying? Specify. Be clear.

Tim Partlett is the winner of this thread.

Yeah, it usually means some jackass on the internet is flailing around without a clue for how to respond. Your point?

Just for giggles, here’s a question: Do you think this Administration’s approach to the Palestinian situation (i.e. sit around and do nothing) has earned us any goodwill in the Arab world?

Frankly, that’s a rhetorical question, since I have yet to see you participate in one of these threads without careening into an out-of-control tailspin of poorly informed idiocy. But if you’re really interested, you might want to look up stuff on Wikipedia about Clinton’s various attempts to get the two sides talking, Carter at Camp David, and, heck, I’m sure you could even dig up something on Reagan addressing the problem.

Granted, none of them “solved” the problem, as you so astutely noted. But they did a lot more than this Administration to “address” the problem, and thereby reach out to a lot of moderate Arabs around the world.

-Tom