The ultimate cause was US “national interests,” which have only ever been the interests of the the oligarchs who run the country. They have always run the country. “National security” does not secure anyone’s safety; it secures the profits of imperialists. The Department of Homeland Security isn’t protecting us, it is cranking up the police state to protect the capitalist class from the working class revolting against grinding neoliberalism.
You’re the one removing material reality from the picture and chalking it up to a culturo-religious clash of ideas. You’re the one simplifying things down vibes.
9/11 has nothing to do with the US overthrow of foreign governments. The US didn’t make bin Laden into what he became, bin Laden did. The guy was an egomaniac bedazzled by his own bullshit. The notion that the attacks were reeeaaally about oil access or regime change or economic disparity as opposed to bloodyminded religious zealotry is a lie.
The notion that the attacks were reeeaaally about oil access or regime change or economic disparity as opposed to bloodyminded religious zealotry is a lie.
I love it when dummies who made up their own history fight strawmen of other dummies who made up their own history instead of you know, reading.
My guy do you struggle wirh reading comprehensive, he asked who funded the terrorists and extremism groups that came to power. Wanna know how iran became anti west when historically its the most liberal and urbanised muslim majority nation period.
“bin Laden did. The guy was an egomaniac bedazzled by his own bullshit” what bullshit would that be? You must think you’re so smart and know geo politics yet come here insulting others giving the most peewee American propaganda bs. So you’re conclusion “world is more complex than America doing all bad, but at same time Osama waa bloodyminded religious zealotry”
Latuff created his dopey comic because he knows his left-wing audiences want confirmation of their political biases. There’s nothing wrong with that. We all seek it on occasion. But what crimes the US is and is not guilty of has virtually no bearing on the fact that 19 muslim men literally took up box cutters against passenger airliners as a profession of their faith. The hijackers didn’t care about bin Laden’s politics, they saw an opportunity to kill infidels and they took it. They certainly didn’t care about Iran Contra or Mosadegh or fucking Halliburton profiteering, and they certainly didn’t become fundamentalists because of those things.
The wikipedia links are stunningly impertinent. The charts contexually lame. Muslim fundamentalism is the cause of the 9/11 attacks; no ackchually-tier insistence on proximate versus ultimate cause is necessary.
Again. You’re not showing off you’re capacity intelligence or critical thinking if you think 19 different men from various countries wirh a billionaire formerly cia asset Saudi billionaire leading them all for… Islam? I’m a former Muslim, so this is something I know alot of, but please dumb dumb, explain how they did it for “profession of their faith”
Did the IRA bomb London because of their Catholic estremist ways too? My god, I could make a fake news site right now, populate it with bullshit, and of 8 billion people, i know you specifically would find my site and believe whatever crap people say online
Who said anything about his socioeconomic position? He was in fact wildly rich. He was a product of US interventionism. He had been a CIA asset for years. He didn’t just wake up one day and decide that Allah wanted him to blow up buildings on the other side of the world, for no reasons connected to US foreign policy.
But the U.S. government and the American press have not always opposed Afghan extremists. During the 1980s, the Mujahiddin guerrilla groups battling Soviet occupation had key features in common with the Taliban. In many ways, the Mujahiddin groups acted as an incubator for the later rise of the Taliban in the 1990s.
Despite CIA denials of any direct Agency support for Bin Laden’s activities, a considerable body of circumstantial evidence suggests the contrary. During the 1980s, Bin Laden’s activities in Afghanistan closely paralleled those of the CIA. Bin Laden held accounts in the Bank for Credit and Commerce International (BCCI), the bank the CIA used to finance its own covert actions. Bin Laden worked especially closely with Hekmatyar—the CIA’s favored Mujahiddin commander. In 1989, the U.S. shipped high-powered sniper rifles to a Mujahiddin faction that included bin Laden, according to a former bin Laden aide.
If Islamism is the ultimate cause of 9/11 then Islamism must be the ultimate cause of October 7th which is literally the same story and the same propagandistic cover in the West.
I think a lot of people don’t understand geopolitics in the sense that it’s not a functional system of yeses and noes, it’s a system of maybes based on maybes.
The ultimate cause of October 7th is that the geopolitical factors especially the intentions of the US were to remove Palestinian question from the heart of the security architecture of the Middle East. October 7th was effective because it closed off the possibility of the Abraham Accords and a Middle Eastern security architecture based on a Saudi/Israeli/Egyptian agreement which was tacitly against Iran and the Palestinians.
Likewise the ultimate cause of 9/11 was based on geopolitical factors. The first Al-Queda fatwas said
It should not be hidden from you that the people of Islam had suffered from aggression, iniquity and injustice imposed on them by the Zionist-Crusaders alliance and their collaborators; to the extent that the Muslims blood became the cheapest and their wealth as loot in the hands of the enemies. Their blood was spilled in Palestine and Iraq. The horrifying pictures of the massacre of Qana, in Lebanon are still fresh in our memory. Massacres in Tajakestan, Burma, Cashmere, Assam, Philippine, Fatani, Ogadin, Somalia, Erithria, Chechnia and in Bosnia-Herzegovina took place, massacres that send shivers in the body and shake the conscience.
They’re literally referencing Chechnia and Tajikistan here. It’s a complex geopolitical statement. This is a group that has fought the USSR, who were not Zionist-Crusaders in their opinion. The references to Chechnia and Tajikistan were directly based on the calamity that liberalization of the USSR brought upon Muslims, that the US helped lead into those positions. Much like the Chicago boys in Russia.
The second said
First, for over seven years the United States has been occupying the lands of Islam in the holiest of places, the Arabian Peninsula, plundering its riches, dictating to its rulers, humiliating its people, terrorizing its neighbors, and turning its bases in the Peninsula into a spearhead through which to fight the neighboring Muslim peoples.
If some people have in the past argued about the fact of the occupation, all the people of the Peninsula have now acknowledged it. The best proof of this is the Americans’ continuing aggression against the Iraqi people using the Peninsula as a staging post, even though all its rulers are against their territories being used to that end, but they are helpless.
Second, despite the great devastation inflicted on the Iraqi people by the crusader-Zionist alliance, and despite the huge number of those killed, which has exceeded 1 million… despite all this, the Americans are once against trying to repeat the horrific massacres, as though they are not content with the protracted blockade imposed after the ferocious war or the fragmentation and devastation.
So here they come to annihilate what is left of this people and to humiliate their Muslim neighbors. Third, if the Americans’ aims behind these wars are religious and economic, the aim is also to serve the Jews’ petty state and divert attention from its occupation of Jerusalem and murder of Muslims there. The best proof of this is their eagerness to destroy Iraq, the strongest neighboring Arab state, and their endeavor to fragment all the states of the region such as Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and Sudan into paper statelets and through their disunion and weakness to guarantee Israel’s survival and the continuation of the brutal crusade occupation of the Peninsula.
Bin Laden himself has pointed to the 1982 invasion of Lebanon:
The events that affected my soul in a direct way started in 1982 when America permitted the Israelis to invade Lebanon and the American Sixth Fleet helped them in that. This bombardment began and many were killed and injured and others were terrorised and displaced.
I couldn’t forget those moving scenes, blood and severed limbs, women and children sprawled everywhere. Houses were destroyed along with their occupants, high rises demolished over their residents, rockets raining down on our home without mercy…As I looked at those demolished towers in Lebanon, it entered my mind that we should punish the oppressor in kind and that we should destroy towers in America so that they taste some of what we tasted and so that they be deterred from killing our women and children.
And that day, it was confirmed to me that oppression and the intentional killing of innocent women and children is a deliberate American policy. Destruction is freedom and democracy, while resistance is terrorism and intolerance.[32]
The idea that 9/11 was the invention of Osama Bin Laden getting high on Islam in a Mosque while chanting and then telling his evil followers that god has told him to destroy America is a false American invention seeking to discredit the actual geopolitical arguments that underpinned the attacks, and transform them into merely cultural grievances that escalated into a war which is easy to sell to a moronic liberal audience all to ready to consume propaganda because the Soviet Union fell and they needed a new bad guy that hated them for their freedom.
The fact that this isn’t common information despite being in multiple reputable places online speaks to the propagandized nature of the discussion of this event in America.
This wasn’t about globohomo, women’s rights, American cultural permissiveness, or any other bromides you can easily fit into “religious extremism” narratives. It was simply about the imperialism of the American Empire.
My friend, how are you so knowledgeable, I’m an avid fan of history and geopolitics. Do did you learn from books, articles, papers or just alot of digging and curiosity?
It’s a combination of books, news sources, and some formal education. I was lucky that my highschool still heavily invested in humanities before I went off to a stupid ass tech collage. Beyond that I am constantly researching things because I’m weird. So when people pull up reasons that are fairly well documented quite literally easily sourced on wikipedia of all places it’s incredibly easy for me to remember and reference them.
The ultimate cause was US “national interests,” which have only ever been the interests of the the oligarchs who run the country. They have always run the country. “National security” does not secure anyone’s safety; it secures the profits of imperialists. The Department of Homeland Security isn’t protecting us, it is cranking up the police state to protect the capitalist class from the working class revolting against grinding neoliberalism.
The boomerangs subtly implying the real truth of the matter - that the Australians were behind it all along! No wonder “the Bush” was involved!
Oh man, that pic goes fucking HARD! 😘👌✊
Most based @lemmy.world user
Tbf, I had no idea it was going to be Neoliberalism Central when I made the account 😄
Hop on over to a better instance, comrade!
I can’t like this post or the pic enough. Hard af. I’ve been shouting this from the rooftops since 2001.
Removed by mod
Proceeds to give the absolute most naive surface level interpretation
Ok then.
You’re the one removing material reality from the picture and chalking it up to a culturo-religious clash of ideas. You’re the one simplifying things down vibes.
Infographic: US military presence around the world The US controls about 750 bases in at least 80 countries worldwide and spends more on its military than the next 10 countries combined.
That’s a fantastic list of sources on the reality of US Imperialism. Saved
Thanks for the links! I never knew about second thought. Now I’m sufficiently angry at work watching them lol
Oooh so close! You’re almost there. Just one more step.
Who put those extremists into power by overthrowing middle east democracies? Who funded them?
9/11 has nothing to do with the US overthrow of foreign governments. The US didn’t make bin Laden into what he became, bin Laden did. The guy was an egomaniac bedazzled by his own bullshit. The notion that the attacks were reeeaaally about oil access or regime change or economic disparity as opposed to bloodyminded religious zealotry is a lie.
I love it when dummies who made up their own history fight strawmen of other dummies who made up their own history instead of you know, reading.
My guy do you struggle wirh reading comprehensive, he asked who funded the terrorists and extremism groups that came to power. Wanna know how iran became anti west when historically its the most liberal and urbanised muslim majority nation period. “bin Laden did. The guy was an egomaniac bedazzled by his own bullshit” what bullshit would that be? You must think you’re so smart and know geo politics yet come here insulting others giving the most peewee American propaganda bs. So you’re conclusion “world is more complex than America doing all bad, but at same time Osama waa bloodyminded religious zealotry”
Latuff created his dopey comic because he knows his left-wing audiences want confirmation of their political biases. There’s nothing wrong with that. We all seek it on occasion. But what crimes the US is and is not guilty of has virtually no bearing on the fact that 19 muslim men literally took up box cutters against passenger airliners as a profession of their faith. The hijackers didn’t care about bin Laden’s politics, they saw an opportunity to kill infidels and they took it. They certainly didn’t care about Iran Contra or Mosadegh or fucking Halliburton profiteering, and they certainly didn’t become fundamentalists because of those things.
The wikipedia links are stunningly impertinent. The charts contexually lame. Muslim fundamentalism is the cause of the 9/11 attacks; no ackchually-tier insistence on proximate versus ultimate cause is necessary.
Again. You’re not showing off you’re capacity intelligence or critical thinking if you think 19 different men from various countries wirh a billionaire formerly cia asset Saudi billionaire leading them all for… Islam? I’m a former Muslim, so this is something I know alot of, but please dumb dumb, explain how they did it for “profession of their faith” Did the IRA bomb London because of their Catholic estremist ways too? My god, I could make a fake news site right now, populate it with bullshit, and of 8 billion people, i know you specifically would find my site and believe whatever crap people say online
Ah yes, no one could ever have a serious issue with U.S. foreign policy
I think it might have been Islamic terrorism.
I’ll post it again: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proximate_and_ultimate_causation
But for real though, Osama benefitted from Western Imperialism and was directly motivated by religious scripture, not his socioeconomic position.
Who said anything about his socioeconomic position? He was in fact wildly rich. He was a product of US interventionism. He had been a CIA asset for years. He didn’t just wake up one day and decide that Allah wanted him to blow up buildings on the other side of the world, for no reasons connected to US foreign policy.
6 December 1993: Anti-Soviet warrior puts his army on the road to peace
FAIR: Forgotten Coverage of Afghan ‘Freedom Fighters’
I’m aware - I think we disagree on which is the proximate and which is the ultimate cause.
If Islamism is the ultimate cause of 9/11 then Islamism must be the ultimate cause of October 7th which is literally the same story and the same propagandistic cover in the West.
I think a lot of people don’t understand geopolitics in the sense that it’s not a functional system of yeses and noes, it’s a system of maybes based on maybes.
The ultimate cause of October 7th is that the geopolitical factors especially the intentions of the US were to remove Palestinian question from the heart of the security architecture of the Middle East. October 7th was effective because it closed off the possibility of the Abraham Accords and a Middle Eastern security architecture based on a Saudi/Israeli/Egyptian agreement which was tacitly against Iran and the Palestinians.
Likewise the ultimate cause of 9/11 was based on geopolitical factors. The first Al-Queda fatwas said
They’re literally referencing Chechnia and Tajikistan here. It’s a complex geopolitical statement. This is a group that has fought the USSR, who were not Zionist-Crusaders in their opinion. The references to Chechnia and Tajikistan were directly based on the calamity that liberalization of the USSR brought upon Muslims, that the US helped lead into those positions. Much like the Chicago boys in Russia.
The second said
Bin Laden himself has pointed to the 1982 invasion of Lebanon:
The idea that 9/11 was the invention of Osama Bin Laden getting high on Islam in a Mosque while chanting and then telling his evil followers that god has told him to destroy America is a false American invention seeking to discredit the actual geopolitical arguments that underpinned the attacks, and transform them into merely cultural grievances that escalated into a war which is easy to sell to a moronic liberal audience all to ready to consume propaganda because the Soviet Union fell and they needed a new bad guy that hated them for their freedom.
The fact that this isn’t common information despite being in multiple reputable places online speaks to the propagandized nature of the discussion of this event in America.
This wasn’t about globohomo, women’s rights, American cultural permissiveness, or any other bromides you can easily fit into “religious extremism” narratives. It was simply about the imperialism of the American Empire.
Yes, it’s a rich tapestry.
My friend, how are you so knowledgeable, I’m an avid fan of history and geopolitics. Do did you learn from books, articles, papers or just alot of digging and curiosity?
It’s a combination of books, news sources, and some formal education. I was lucky that my highschool still heavily invested in humanities before I went off to a stupid ass tech collage. Beyond that I am constantly researching things because I’m weird. So when people pull up reasons that are fairly well documented quite literally easily sourced on wikipedia of all places it’s incredibly easy for me to remember and reference them.
Why did he constantly talk about how the attacks were politically motivated? What is the basis for claiming that he was motivated by religion?
https://lemmy.ml/comment/15291634
Are you trolling?
Based