psoTFX wrote: And still you respond to text I've not written! Let me spell it out for you:
People chose their own paths
I have never denied that. It is not, however, relevant to the point I'm making.
They can either:
1) Choose a path of intelligence discussion, work out their grievances ... it may take years, it often does ... but it can be achieved,
2) Choose a path of hate and destruction ... a path that typically gets everyone nowhere and which every single religion on this fine blue planet of ours detests.
Neither party has chosen path #1. Few countries ever do. Instead, they apply a combination of bribes, military force, sabre-rattling, and other kinds of meddling in order to get what they want. I have never heard of a major country politely discussing issues with other countries when it could get what it wanted through coercion.
Screw U.S. policy, screw British/French/Belgian/Russian meddling in their former Empires, screw the Wests desire to see democracy. None of this gives anyone a legitimate reason to choose route 2.
I never said that it did. I only said that the roots of this conflict go back farther than the first shot fired. Please see the "road rage" example that I gave earlier.
Am I making myself clear yet?
Yes. Unfortunately, you keep acting as though I'm saying the terrorists' behavior is legitimate, when I have said no such thing.