Plato, please explain.

Submitted by Moshe (Israel), Jan 10, 2007 at 12:37

Plato,

I don't quite see how your comment relates to "Ferdos' Nazi style joke". In any case, I do appreciate it.

That oil interests are a most central player in all this Islamic mess is obvious. I more than agree with you that the desperate dependence of the modern global economies on Middle Eastern oil is the main driving force behind the power and influence of the Islamic World. This obviously explains also the disproportionate interest of the entire world in Middle Eastern politics as contrasted to other centers of unrest on the globe like Darfur for example, where full scale genocide could go on almost unnoticed for years.

Unfortunately, the Muslim World instead of living with this unique opportunity to educate itself and build healthy, competitive economies, is wasting this huge "oil wealth" and power on wars, destruction, and domineeringness. One of the best known manifestations of this is the so called "Palestinian problem" about which I already wrote to you earlier (To Plato, re: Palestinian "anomaly".). More recently however it turned out that they are much more ambitious than that; they will not settle for less than Islamizing the whole world.

Nevertheless, I would appreciate if you could explain to me your following statements with which I must admit that I need some help:

1. "Until the "free civilised" West helps the benighted Muslim nations to democratise themselves there will be terrorism. And not in the way "democracy" has been brought to Iraq and Afghanistan!"

Could you please indicate what in your opinion would be the right way for "the "free civilized" West help the benighted Muslim nations to democratize themselves"?

2. "Iran has no right to wipe any one off the map. But they have a right to nuclear capabilities especially if other nations who threaten them have such capabilities. North Korea, Pakistan, India and Israel have nuclear capabilities."

Has anyone ever threatened Iran with nuclear weapons? For that matter, is anybody at all threatening Iran conventionally? Except of course the need to stop Iran's current nuclear ambitions?

I am looking forward to your kind explanations.

Moshe

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".