Comments

Tom,
Should we be surprised? In any major organizational change--things get worse, before they start to improve. Major change is happening in the Middle East. Transforming a political system from dictatorship to democratic system is change of the highest order. The resistors, the people who are afraid, the people who are vested in the status quo, are doing everything possible to win--not change.
I think you should do your scheluded speeches and keep arguing for and promoting the types of leaders who unleash the talent and passions in people. Your views on effective leadership and "wow" organizations applies equally to governments/political systems as well as business organizations.
Paul B. Thornton

Posted by Paul B. Thornton at May 1, 2007 9:13 AM

Tom,

You travel more than I do, but my experience in Italy is that they hate the American government (mostly George Bush) but not Americans. In addition to the self-inflicted problems, there is a lot of distorted information floating around about the USA.

When you look at the entertainment that we export to the world, it's no wonder that they think we are a bunch of spoiled, selfish pigs.

I think it is important that people around the world meet real Americans and see that we are passionate about things other than bigger cars, fancier houses, owning guns.

Be safe,

Rod

Posted by Rod at May 1, 2007 9:18 AM

Tom, I am one of your fans, disciples, call it what you want. I have read every book and Power Point slide you ever published. I am also an Arab and I am sorry to say that your assessment of American impact in the Middle East is not accurate. I'd like to point out the following:

1) Arabs, due to Islamic teachings, are taught from boyhood to hate Jews and Christians or at best to look at them as inferiors. Hatred of America over there is not new. I grew up with it and to this day it is still taught over there.

2) America did not create a mess there. I am grateful for what brave Americans did in both Iraq and Afghanistan. Iraq especially got rid of a cruel tyrant who killed and tortured friends of mine. I might not agree with how the war effort is being administered now but the results are net gain for my people. Yes there is daily bloodshed, yes children and women die, but on the net we gained. Under Saddam there was daily, weekly and monthly bloodshed done in secret and was never covered by the media and it was much much more than the amount of people who die by suicide bombs and IEDs now. If you live in Baghdad and you don't like th violence in that city there are 18 other governorates (counties) you can move to where there is peace.
The Middle East is inherently violent and is a mess. America did not create anything there. Having the American press there, and the successive torrent of images that you guys get here makes it look worse than it is.

3) I know we might disagree on what I said. Many people like yourself tell me how well they are received as Americans in Middle Eastern countries. The reason behind that Tom is simply that you are American and you are protected by a country whose power they respect. I know you go to Dubai and Saudi and other Arab countries a lot. Ask there about the Sponsorship laws (kafala law) for non-American and non-European citizens of the world the kafala law as instituted in those countries is nothing but modern slavery. Women and men are brought from Asia or central Europe, their passports get taken from them at the airport and given to the Kafeel's (sponsor's) representative, to never see them again. After the passport is taken the kafeel takes all kinds of liberties with the expatriate employee. They can choose to pay or not to pay salaries. They can choose to go back on agreements. They can choose in many cases, such as domestic labor, to hold you prisoner in a house. I don't want to talk about all the abhorable things that go on in the Arab countries that you mentioned, but I am sure that if you do a little bit of independent digging you will confirm what I say.

4) Finally, I am sorry that you are disappointed with the 91% figure but it is not new and I assure you that it is not related to the Iraq war. The Arab press is bringing it to the forefront trying to present it as a result of the liberation of Iraq. That is not the case. Nevertheless the 9% who favor America and its role in the world do so with passion. I wish that you can visit or see that 9% and hear their opinions but they are either in jail or are exiled to America like me.

Posted by Jaber Al Ghanem at May 1, 2007 9:23 AM

Tom, one more thing. My vote if for you to go. People like you need to go there to talk about change, passion, innovation, the gospel according to Peter's is what they need. People there need to change themselves and ideas like your is what they need to hear even if they are mostly anti-American.

Posted by Jaber Al Ghanem at May 1, 2007 9:30 AM

Tom, I think you're looking at this the wrong way: The real struggle is between the extremists and the peacemakers, between those who look at the differences and those who look at the similarities, those who foster hate, and those who foster mutual respect. Turn the tables 90 degrees and this whole global conflict will make much more sense. So go to Turkey and Dubai and find out (and show) what we all have in common. Then there is hope.

Posted by Mike Sax at May 1, 2007 9:41 AM

Go Tom! Especially Dubai has such a dynamic and promising momentum to knowledge economy, spearheading the whole region and such remarkable meshworks of talented expats from all parts of the world and a leadership that moves the edge.

See the great fraction of leaders at this years World Economic Forum in Jordan on Middle East.

Bon voyage!
Albert

Posted by Albert Klamt at May 1, 2007 9:50 AM

JFK put it best: "Let every nation know, whether it wishes us well or ill, that we shall pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship, support any friend, oppose any foe, to assure the survival and success of liberty."

Make the trip!

Posted by Mark JF at May 1, 2007 9:52 AM

Tom,

You should definitely go.
For one thing, you don't know how accurate that poll was, or what other questions were asked.

Also, Egyptian people base their opinions on media reports just as we do. Without seeing or reading these reports its impossible to know what kind of picture they paint of the US involvement in Iraq or of the US in general.

And as you hinted at in your post, you are far from being an apologist for the US Governments actions in the Middle East.

Go, meet real people, show them that not all Americans (or Brits for that matter) are the same. And come back and tell us what you discovered.

Safe Journey.

Posted by Kenny Hemphill at May 1, 2007 9:55 AM

You definitely should go. Nice sane Americans like you are exactly what we need visiting the middle east to help improve how we are perceived in the world.

Also, in order to try and understand the 91% number, try and see it from the Egyptians viewpoint. Suppose a mid-eastern Muslim country was occupying one of our European allies, what percentage of Americans would support the Europeans try to remove them by attacking them? I'd bet your answer would be 100%.

Posted by mark at May 1, 2007 10:57 AM

Hey Tom... Marth heads back to Kabul in a couple of weeks as we, in our own small way, try to to win hearts and minds starting with lives and limbs... please wish her good luck and good health.

And my vote is, as always, "to go"...

Posted by james hathaway at May 1, 2007 11:36 AM

Go Tom.

Show to whom is going to listen and see you, that the "Other" is some one like Him, a human being, with kids, with dreams, with a football team, show them a picture of Cristiano Ronaldo.

Posted by Carlos at May 1, 2007 12:07 PM

Better still Carlos - show a picture of the entire Manchester United team? :-)

Posted by Trevor Gay at May 1, 2007 12:39 PM

Yes, you are rigth Trevor!!!!

Posted by Carlos at May 1, 2007 1:02 PM

Mr. Peters;

You've been all around the Middle East, but have you yet been to Iraq?

I'm sure the Soldiers, Sailors, Marines and Airmen there, and their leadership would love to have to come talk, and maybe you can see for yourself what the conditions on the ground are, rather than relying on organizations whose veracity is suspect.

Posted by Billy Oblivion at May 1, 2007 1:21 PM

Oh, and if you feel you need personal protection in-country, I will volunteer to go with you, and can hook you up with people who've done personal/vip protection in Iraq and who might be willing to do another 3-5 days. (Note, I've not been there yet, but will probably be going next year, either there are parts of Africa).

Posted by Billy Oblivion at May 1, 2007 1:23 PM

Go Tom! Fear, enmity and anger are the products of too little information and contact, not too much. Your passion, your message and your presence are a much better way to demonstrate all this is right about America than simply saying you're not going because 91% of Egyptians feel our politics - and by extension our military and our people - are wrong.

Your presentations are the epitome of hope and decency, wrapped in passion and delivered in a way that is universal. You'll never change everyone's opinion with a couple of presentations, but you'll change no ones by not going.

Posted by Andrew Hayden at May 1, 2007 1:27 PM

Go.

1. You don't know how the question was framed.

2. Would YOU feel justified in attacking Iraqi troops if they were occupying this country and your town in Vermont?

3. If you don't go, you lose a chance to put a good American face in front a lot of good Dubai and Turkey attendees.

Posted by Matt Charron at May 1, 2007 2:41 PM

Tom,

As an Arab, Mr. Al Ghanem nails it. There is such a thing as pure evil. In countries that have evil dictatorships and radically hateful and dangerous ideologies, their subjects are likely to echo the thoughts of their masters - there's really little other choice for them.

While it's expeditious to trounce ourselves and blame Bush, big cars, fancy homes, Hollywood, and our Constitution's second Amendment, deeper reflection reveals otherwise. While we teach our kids to play soccer, there are others in the world who are teaching their kids how to kill our kids. I'm hopeful that we wake up to this reality...

Posted by Kevin at May 1, 2007 3:08 PM

Absolutely go. I just returned from Istanbul and find it to be one of the most fascinating cities on earth. The people of Istanbul are gracious and approachable, and spending time with them may be liberating in some way! I was in Dubai late last year and, while I don't have any fear of travel in the general Middle East, I do not agree with the politics of Dubai and the UAE, and personally don't want to spend much time there (although I may be visiting Egypt soon if I mentally gear up for it!).

Posted by TP at May 1, 2007 3:53 PM

I don't understand why you assume it is "our" fault that other people don't like us and want to kill us. As the commentor stated above, this is not new. It is not the current administration's fault, George Bush's fault, my fault, your fault, or anybody's fault except those who hate and want to kill us. Screw 'em, you don't owe them anything and you are not going to win many, if any converts in those places. Watch your butt, they like to kill and kidnap in case you hadn't noticed.

In addition, the war on terror--in Iraq, Afghanistan, and other places, goes on and goes forward. It is hard. Damned hard. And people like you who are educated and informed enough to understand the truth should know better than to spout things about the increase in terrorism showing how we failed, and the failure of the Iraq war, etc. We all knew it was going to be long and tough and we all said we should do it anyway, but now the sunshine patriots come out of the woodwork and you want to join their crowing about it all being a mistake. And because the terrorists are fighting back and Egyptians want to kill US soldiers?

I had always thought better of you.

Posted by Mike at May 1, 2007 4:06 PM

Okay, I may not be the best at geography
but the last I heard,
Egypt, Turkey, and Dubai were three completely different countries (or emirate in Dubai's case).
Been to all three.
Sure they share a faith but I can sure tell which country I'm in.
Three very different places with three very different populations, to lump them altogether is pretty darn insulting.

Plus the poll was about American troops, not civilians.
I suspect that since the U.S. is at war, this isn't news to the army.
The troops expect to be attacked.

Posted by K at May 1, 2007 4:38 PM

Tom,

Thanks for the question. Assuming fair surveys, points of consideration here are:

1. The Egytian folks may view our military as a tool or instrument whereas, we see them as an extension of ourselves. My son has been in both Afghanistan and Iraq several times. It is highly personal to me.

2. I do realize that a significant number of people, both here and abroad,are driven to strongly hold, group and verbalize opinions while allowing themselves to be safely mistaken through ignorance.

3. With all the complexities involved between Western Allies and The Middle East, the risk of being ignorant is very high.

I think you should go, but then again, I may be ignorant. Only true history will tell.

Posted by Scott at May 1, 2007 5:11 PM

Dear Mr.Peters

I'm from Muslim country- Malaysia and I am Muslim myself. From my own personal perspective, most Muslims doesn't hate American people as a whole. In fact, most of us trying to live the "American dream" outside America.

But, most of us had an adversed opinion with Bush administration policies and with Mr Bush himself.
But, of course this doesn't apply in the war torn and political instable countries which American directly or indirectly involved.

Mr Peters, do not worry. Please continue to educate 'us'.

Posted by Izwan at May 1, 2007 8:47 PM

I would first like to congratulate K for being such a smart/respectful woman. Thanks for shedding some light on this dark Western misconception that the Middle East is a Nation (FAR from it).

I won't comment Jaber's statements. It would take me a book. I'm just sad he takes so simplistic routes to explain such a complex (right on Tom) situation.

Anyway, I'm a Frenchman with an Arabic heritage who is living/working in the US now. I can tell you one thing: don't be pissed. People in the Middle East do not hate American people. American people are fantastic people (I mean it), though they should read more books and watch less TV if you want my opinion. People from the Middle East (and here I include myself) HATE George Bush. Just one question: where are the Weapons Of Mass Destruction? Weren't they the very reason the Bush administration was willing to sacrifice young Americans (I feel deeply sorry for the families)? NO. The reality, and we are business people so we understand this better than the others: George Bush didn't give a damn about WMD or about making the world a better place by getting rid of Saddam (the US created him, supported him against his war with Iran in the 80s', surprisingly kept him in power after the first Gulf War). The Bush administration is there for one thing my fellow businessmen and women: OIL. PERIOD. Ask Halliburton (and Cheney), ask Exxon... and watch Syriana with Geroge Clooney if books are too long for you guys (no offense). 91%of Egyptians AND Algerians AND Lebanese people AND Saudis AND Emiratis AND AND AND hate Bush. I would bet half of the money I have on my bank account 91% have absolutely nothing against Americans. NOTHING.

Tom, please go and WOW them. They need you. Badly.

Cheers|Samir

Posted by Samir at May 1, 2007 9:58 PM

I certainly do not blame us for the acts of terrorism that took place on 911. However I think it is grossly irresponsible not to consider our role in the "process" and growing regional instability since the invasion of Iraq. I think one can indeed argue that we have on net destabilized the Mideast, and there is little to show for the effort other than a growing stack of bodybags. (Believe me, if you've ever seen 'em you'll never forget them.) Hence we are--arguably--responsible for providing fertilizer for some of the subsequent acts, including Iranian intransigence and maybe even the standoff in Turkey. (Not to be preachy, "arguably" is not a conclusion but simply suggests there is a debateworthy topic under consideration.)

If a demonstrably disturbed kid guns down thirty plus mates, it's indeed the kid who performed the horrid act. But the looseness of our (Virginia's) gun aquisition rules certainly suggests there are a few drops of blood on our hands. True??

Posted by tom peters at May 1, 2007 10:03 PM

If you do not think America's moral reputation has taken a big worldwide hit, I suggest you are out to lunch. Rusty Calley and Agent Orange were about the worst of it in Vietnam--and the Soviet threat was far more severe. Terrorist weapons of mass destruction scare the shit out of me--but are no match at the moment for thousands of hydraheaded Russky nukes aimed with exacting precision at D.C. and LA and probavly even cities as small as Omaha.

Posted by tom peters at May 1, 2007 10:09 PM

I'd like to invite you to visit Syria, Tom, to see that this place too isn't all that the State Departmnent paints it. Lots of good things are going on which rarely if ever get reported. A warm, tolerant people, towards Americans too...

Perceptions of the US may be distorted these days, but then so are perceptions of a lot of places. Sadly, US embargoes being what they are, you can't come here on business, but pass through for a couple of days on holiday, and bring the camera.

Posted by Rob at May 2, 2007 1:42 AM

You should go.

91% is their world. One of your slides says that a talk is meant to change the world. You should go to get a shot changing this world of hatred.

91% say attacking is justified. Justified to achieve what end? Towards ensuring that native people get to govern themselves without the intervention of "aliens". This is at the core of democracy.

i think that this fear and hatred comes into play because we still have limited boundaries... American... Egyptian... Indian... and so on. We have a term for supposed creatures from Mars - Martian. But there are no such generic terms in common parlance when it comes to Earth - Earthian???

it is time that we take up responsibility for not just our government's actions but actions of humankind as a whole. An Earthian would feel such responsibililty. this would give the required mental framework to work towards solutions that benefit the world and not just a pocket.

today is Buddha Purnima, the birth anniversary of a HUMAN who advocated qualities of compassion, tolerance, contenment, and self-discipline. Qualities that are ALWAYS in short supply. In the business context these qualities make a lot of sense. For example, i believe that Compassion is at the root of ecomagination effort at GE.

i have no clue of the ground reality or how complex the situation is... but i strongly believe that qualities of compassion, tolerance, contenment, and self-discipline are required to make progress.

You should go... because this is an opportunity / responsibility to influence and help better sense prevail in organizations and in turn the world.

Posted by Sathish Selvakumar at May 2, 2007 6:51 AM

Mr. Peters:
I remember taking statistics in college. Very revealing. Bascially, pollsters can word questions in a million ways to get varying responses. One poll does not a substantial opinion make. What was the sample size? What was asked? How was it asked? When was it asked, what time of day?
I'd go. I agree that more US citizens need to leave their own country and be seen by others. Just as all Muslims don't "hate" Jews and Christians, not all US citizens are overweight, gun-toting, self-absorbed, too much tv watching, geo-political ignoramuses. Just some of us are and yes, those people always seem to get be on tv or radio.
Will be following your exploits. Good luck

Posted by nextgenradio at May 2, 2007 7:00 AM

Tom wrote, "If a demonstrably disturbed kid guns down thirty plus mates, it's indeed the kid who performed the horrid act. But the looseness of our (Virginia's) gun acquisition rules certainly suggests there are a few drops of blood on our hands. True??"

True. But here's the rub...

I have a license to carry a concealed handgun. To obtain the license I underwent a criminal background check and my mental health history was inspected. The latter, however, is not required simply to purchase a firearm. This is why the nutcase in VA was able to secure a weapon.

I would be supportive of requiring a mental health records check for all gun purchases. But I can also envision the hand-wringing that would take place on the left at the very thought of this. Yet, it's these same folks who would be quick to take away my right of personal protection because it would make them "feel" safe.

Not on my watch...

Posted by Kevin at May 2, 2007 7:27 AM

What seems revealing to me is your attachment to US soldiers and to your 'americanness'. It's easy to describe the equation of one US solier or the US flag or 'freedom' with America as a particularly American preoccupation, but that reinforces the problem.

We constantly conflate symbols (image of a GI) and the things that they refer directly to (an individual soldier) and the things that they conjure up indirectly (Vietnam, freedom, oppression, colonialism or whatever). This is so often unhelpful.

Posted by Andrew at May 2, 2007 7:40 AM

I agree 100% with Samir on his assessment of the Bush administration. Most of the responses here amaze me since they reveal that most Americans are still in the denial mode about the Harakiri US has committed in Iraq. Some are trying to portray it as a fight of ideologies- a war between 'good' & 'evil'. Get real please... I know that it makes all of us feel good about taking cudgels on behalf of the 'good' and go out to 'rescue the world' of all 'evil' but whether you like it or not, US (or any other country) isn't out to do that. For example, you may want to look at the policy towards other dictatorial regimes.
Well, all countries 'at war' have their own bodybags to worry about. The Egyptians approved of attacks on US troops in Iraq. As K rightly pointed out, don't the troops (and the US admin as well) expect so (that's why they sent troops, not cultural ambassadors). You may want to take note that the same percentage (91%) of Egyptians do not approve of attack on American civilians.
As far as your dilemma is concerned, I think K really nailed the issue. I don't quite see the connection there, Tom.

Posted by Mohit Bhushan at May 2, 2007 7:47 AM

That actually is a big question. I think the same thinking may be the future of our foreign policy. Once this debacle with Iraq is past, I believe we will be asking the same thing as a nation. My guess is that we will become much more isolationist. Perhaps we will realize as Phil Ochs once said..we are not the cops of the world. I for one might welcome a bit more concentration on our domestic problems (imagine what those dollars in Iraq could have done for education or building a hydrogen based economy). Neocons have it dead wrong. Maybe it is sad, but I suspect we will look at unrest in the world and ask our self the same question as a nation...should we go? Just stay safe boss...

Posted by Mike Neiss at May 2, 2007 8:03 AM

Religion has, and always will be, the most significant influencer of human history. In North America (I grew up in Canada, live in the States), we've forgotten that. We've stripped it out of our educational system to the point that students have no idea how history was truly shaped.

What we're seeing in the Middle East is nothing new. It started around 2000 BC and will continue.

The person who truly wants to understand our world must start from this point of view. The comments posted by Jaber Al Ghanem are right on IMO.

Again, as most of the comments suggest, you should go. Common sense is always good sense.

Posted by Rod at May 2, 2007 8:41 AM

"Do I indirectly support the 91% of Egyptians who want to kill our troops by going to Turkey and Dubai? "

Interesting, why do you think you are supporting the generic GOP of Egyptians by going to DXB/ MCT or any other place ? If you go to Kabul will you be supporting Osma bin Ladin ? That line of thinking does not hold water, correct ??

"America's reputation in the world as a beacon of hope and decency " - and that decency has long gone and only people like you can repair it. Not the Government. Its the grass root level biz man /woman who are the people can build those bridges once over again.

The US government is screwed in its policy and just b'coz you are Americian, does not mean that you fall into the same bucket - of being flawed on your personal initatives.

Posted by /pd at May 2, 2007 10:20 AM

Neither the US government or the military will change the 91%. But normal people like you and me will.

Posted by Andy at May 2, 2007 6:58 PM

Interesting to read through all of these comments; the thing that occurs to me is that the US has not been a beacon of hope and decency (in a truly global sense) for a very long time. As per some comments already posted, its American foreign policy rather than Americans that are truly disliked for the most part. Such foreign policy portrays America as a beacon of self-importance, self-involvement, and self-centredness - certainly a long long way from being the leader of the free world.

The harsh reality is that America has so very much power, and yet such very little knowledge of how to use it wisely.

Those that preach a different message should be applauded, so I say go, and spread the good word - and travel safely.

Posted by Tim B at May 3, 2007 12:22 AM

You should come over to the Muslim part of the world, Tom. For regardless of the thousands of years of history, as one of your posts said, "Life is that way" (*pointing forward*).

There are no simplistic answers - and I don't want to either justify or blame any side. I don't think as humans we've done a great job on any "side."

As for the USA - perhaps the adage "the road to hell is paved with good intentions" best summarizes it.

One can have a great idea (such as democracy), but one can't demand its implementation elsewhere without creating a necessary process of change, AND having a stake in it. At no level do humans accept this attitude. There are many, many people who are very smart and have the right answers for themselves, but that does not mean others will simply accept their ideas or way of life. It doesn't happen that way. I will not change my fashion sense if a very fashion-savvy lady just thinks I should because she has figured it all out. Has she figured out my budget? If she's not interested in that I am not interested in her solution - and her forcing me will lead to a reaction. These interactions and behaviors are observable at very micro levels.

At other times, what works for us does not work for others, though we may be very sincere in our suggestions. Cultural differences, for instance, are a reality.

I hear so many of those "they are trying to change our culture" speeches from Western leaders. And guess what, in a Muslim country, you could take and deliver the same speech for the US "we will not accept their attempt to change our culture!"
The Western experience with Muslim icons (say, Hijab) shows that "If you don't want it, don't look at it (e.g. the violence in Hollywood movies)" is NOT a solution.

Posted by Ramla A. at May 3, 2007 4:32 AM

For a very long time, global culture has been threatened by US/ Western icons which are now a cause of concern in the US itself. Crazy consumption, fast food (which our parents warned us about), manners, violence in movies, disrespect/ lack of support for family - the global culture has felt the pain. While this culture was "organic" to the US/ West, we didn't even have time to prepare. In most of our countries, it came overnight. Imagine the shock. We used to get a burger for Rs. 8-15 (lower-end) to Rs. 50 (higher end) in Pakistan before McDonald's came in at a price of Rs. 150-200. Quickly the prices in Pakistani restaurants went up - and now there is little choice. Buy a Pizza at Rs. 750 where its cost is no more than Rs. 80-90. Is it any wonder that there is resentment? I understand the franchisees are Pakistanis, and we ought to appreciate our own culture - yet the point is that if a flawed culture (say, of unsustainable consumption) is pushed world-wide, its aftermath will also be global. That responsibility has to be assumed. What's happening is this that McDonald's problems are global, but its solutions (eco-friendliness, healthy consumption) are limited to the US/West. It's the whole "it's your problem" approach. IT DOES NOT WORK THAT WAY.

Since 9/11 happened, our government (Pakistan) has addressed few issues other than managing US business. What would US citizens do if their President were always busy changing things overnight and keeping their public in the dark? Not paying attention to family, health care, or education because we have global matters to take care of - and if don't, we are threatened to be attacked?

How does it feel to be treated like you are a group of people whose job is to live around the wishes and commands of political leaders thousands of miles away - who initially buy & use and then desert/assassinate our leaders? Yes I understand it's our problem that we elect such leaders, but do assassinations and off-shore manipulations help? Why are we just a pawn in the world-order - lesser classes of human being who can have no "Pakistani dream"? Why are our agricultural policies dependent upon how much cotton and wheat and rice some other nation wants to consume - a nation that can outbid the locals thanks to currency exchange rates?

Why lend a hand in increasing our problems while assuming no stake nor responsibility?

Is THIS how the world ought to be treated? Are Muslim countries the only one feeling the effect of Western manipulation? How about Africa and its bloody trades and pharma scams? How about consuming the world's food and energy like there's no tomorrow and not respecting others' opinions on that matter? How about not urging the leaders to listen to the voice of the world when they're warning, but putting votes behind the leaders when they're dealing with issues going out of hand through violence? How about not seeing what's right in front of the eyes - who in their right mind thinks that the growing violence is actually ushering in an era of peace? April 2007 was the bloodiest month in Iraq - do deaths mean something or not? How is that peace? Are we hypnotized into believing such counter-intuitive suggestions? And if it's true that peace will come after lots of blood, then whose blood should it be? Which race of human blood is so dispensable, its blood compensated with, "Oh sorry, you know, we chose a dumb leader who we're gonna change next time."?

Posted by Ramla A. at May 3, 2007 4:57 AM

It does go back thousands of years, yes, when people of color were colonized and made to believe they are inferior races. Listen to some of the contemporary speeches by Western leaders and imagine them to be the speech of a Muslim leader. Feel how layers and layers of pride and prejudice reveal.

Humans anywhere don't get angry without reason.

We are two different thought systems based on entirely different premises - and that is it. It's not a "clash," it's "co-existence."

Each of us have our problems and drawbacks and implementation flaws. The best policy for each is to mind our own business while building bridges.

We are not getting off this planet anytime soon - so the quicker we realize we're all in it together, the better. Whatever I have written above does NOT mean that the US alone is to blame - I am only presenting the other side which isn't visible in the media (though CNN has changed dramatically recently) to help the US citizens understand why "other" people are acting and thinking the way they are.

I think reading "Seven Habits of Highly Effective People" could help the foreign policy makers understand and put things in perspective. I keep recommending this philosophy to our own people here - also driven by "good intentions" with poor implementation (Tom's rant).

Tom - what you teach to the corporate world (primarily) is applicable to the political world. THAT is why you must reach out. A person who thinks with their mind and heart is above and beyond any nationality. They are HUMAN in a universal sense - and you are in the universal zone. You face the dilemma that philosopher and global-level thinkers faced over history - but they live in the hearts of people the world over because they rose to the universal level of humankind.

Thanks for listening to my "rant."

Posted by Ramla A. at May 3, 2007 4:58 AM

What a fantastic rant Ramla.

Although it is long it is well worth sticking with and reading in full. It reminded me of what Mr Gandhi said when asked what he thought of Western Democracy. He famously replied ‘I THINK IT WOULD BE A VERY GOOD IDEA’ Another hugely powerful and relevant quote that comes to my mind from the Bible is ‘LET HIM WHO HAS NO SIN CAST THE FIRST STONE’

Yours Ramla is a victory for common sense – if only everyone shared your views the world would be a safer and happier place. We would not be killing each other needlessly; we would not have 20,000 people dying every day, mostly children, because of poverty.

Using the 91% rule I crudely estimate at least 91% of us mere mortals all over the world do not want to see wars and mutual bloodshed on the scale we currently see it regardless of where the blame lies (and frankly what’s the point of apportioning blame anyway?) ….. So I guess I have to ask in our supposedly modern world why the hell can’t we all get along with each other?

Posted by Trevor Gay at May 3, 2007 8:41 AM

I think the idea that there are "irreconcilable differences" between religions/ethnic groups/etc., and that this inevitably leads to warfare, causes more wars than the actual differences. For instance, Muslims and Christians lived side-by-side in the former Yugoslavia, and generally got along as individuals; but this didn't erupt into warfare until a leader came along with the message that the "others" were their enemies and needed to be exterminated.

Depersonalizing the "others" (e.g., "all Muslims hate Christians") is the first step towards warfare; getting to know each other as individuals can defuse the process. Bottom line: an informed, respectful individual meeting with other like-minded individuals from another country can help to undo a great deal of political ill will. (The statistic that most alarms me is that only 14% of U.S. citizens have passports.)

Posted by Paula at May 3, 2007 11:34 AM

"I certainly do not blame us for the acts of terrorism that took place on 911. However I think it is grossly irresponsible not to consider our role in the 'process' and growing regional instability since the invasion of Iraq. I think one can indeed argue that we have on net destabilized the Mideast."

Of course we have destabilized the Middle East, we HAD to destabilize it to change it. There was NO reasonable path from where it was on 1 Jan 2001 to a safe, stable region that supported the inherent human rights of its popluation.

You may have seen the body bags of my brothers in arms coming home, but you've DELIBERATELY turned a blind eye to the mass graves and the torture rooms of the tyrants of the area.

You espouse paying more attention to women in this country and in the western world, but you support (through your words) a "stability" that makes them not "second class citizens," but in fact non-citizens in those areas.

" and there is little to show for the effort other than a growing stack of bodybags. (Believe me, if you've ever seen 'em you'll never forget them.) Hence we are--arguably--responsible for providing fertilizer for some of the subsequent acts, including Iranian intransigence and maybe even the standoff in Turkey. (Not to be preachy, "arguably" is not a conclusion but simply suggests there is a debateworthy topic under consideration.)

Yeah, because the Iranian's weren't being stubborn about their nuke program before, and Turkey...

Don't even get me started. Never mind, I am started.

"little to show"? Like the Cedar Revolution in Lebanon? Not MUCH difference, but some.

Like the freeing of the Marsh Arabs? At least for a few years until the cut and run crowd on the left has their way, and we let happen to our allies in Iraq what happened to our allies in Vietnam.

We have been a good friend to dictators--in the name of stability--and been VERY bad at assisting those who help us. And you would perpetuate that.

If a demonstrably disturbed kid guns down thirty plus mates, it's indeed the kid who performed the horrid act. But the looseness of our (Virginia's) gun aquisition rules certainly suggests there are a few drops of blood on our hands. True??

False.

School shootings have been fairly consistent as a function of population (not necessarily the number of deaths, some shooters are more accurate than others, some get stopped--usually by other armed students or teachers than others).

Other countries (Germany and England for example) have had these sorts of incidents and have very, very tight gun laws.

Even in countries with little cultural history of firearm ownership you find similar outbreaks, like the guy in Japan who went non-linear with a sword on a subway platform killing 6.

"If you do not think America's moral reputation has taken a big worldwide hit, I suggest you are out to lunch."

Or at the library looking at G-8 protests from the 1990s when Clinton was in office, and "International ANSWER" was organizing protests against Capitalism and the Industrial world.

Have things gotten worse since "Chimpy McBushHitler" took office? Yeah, but then a non-stop onslaught from rabid domestic and foreign press hasn't exactly helped.

BTW, ANWSER are the same people who are paying/supporting/organizing the Anti-war, Anti-US /Bush/Blair rallies. Look at the signs those people are holding, don't you recognize a brand when you see it?

"Rusty Calley and Agent Orange were about the worst of it in Vietnam--and the Soviet threat was far more severe."

And how did the Left in this county advocate responding to the Soviet Threat? By disarming. Because the soviets "loved their children too."

Which may have been right, but:

Terrorist weapons of mass destruction scare the shit out of me--but are no match at the moment for thousands of hydraheaded Russky nukes aimed with exacting precision at D.C. and LA and probably even cities as small as Omaha.

The difference is that the Soviet Leadership could be bargined with. They'd lie, they'd cheat, but they could be bought. They did love their children in the end. In this war there is no one to buy off and no one to bargin with. The extremists who are waging this war don't want Dachas on the black sea, they want us kneeling to their god.

I'm with Private John Moyse on this one.

Also note what happened when we left Vietnam, first we pulled our soldiers out, soldiers who'd been micro-managed from the White House (something this President is NOT doing, but Congress is trying to) were pulled out, then Congress cut funding to the South Vietnamese (Congress had promised to continue financial and military (non-troop) aid). Then South Vietnam fell, and the Communists set up the reeducation camps (something they'd promised not to do). About 100,000 died in those camps. Another 500,000 took the ocean in everything from ships to lashed toghether rafts hoping to get picked up. About half of them did.

Which means about half died in the attempt.

The fall of Vietnam lead to the fall of Cambodia. About 2 million died there. Mostly hard core counter-revolutionaries. You could tell they were because they were wearing eye-glasses.

You think for a second that that similar things won't happen in Iraq?

How much is a little brown man on the other side of the world worth to you?

And before you call me a racist, I'm the one who signed with the military after the Iraq War started to go over there and help free my fellow man, regardless of race.

You're the ones saying that no American life is worth it.

For at over 50 years (sometime after WWII to 2003) we persued a strategy of "stability" in the Middle East, a policy that allowed almost ANY behavior (from chattel slavery condoned in the Koran, and practiced in most Arab nations to one degree or another (including the UAE, of which Dubai and Bahrain are part)
http://www.africanholocaust.net/articles/21stcentury%20slaves.html
http://www.informaworld.com/smpp/content~content=a757719086~db=all

This policy meant we had to keep treating the Saudis as friends even as the hereditary rulers were funding the madrasses that blamed western society for the lack of progress in the middle east, as they pointed the blame for the results of their 9th century cultural norms on those in the west who lead much better lives.

Yeah, there's less stability in the Middle East, but maybe, just maybe if enough people are willing to accept that the soul of a little brown person on the other side of the world has as much value as the soul of the person sitting next to them, and that it is more important to free people than to keep plutocrats and dictators in charge, regardless of how much the friends of those dictators and plutocrats pay you for a few hours of speaking.

Posted by Billy Oblivion at May 3, 2007 6:51 PM

hi from Turkey...

I send my commands to tom@tompeters.com...

Posted by fikir cilesi at May 4, 2007 4:47 AM

1. TP - yes go & thrive there in Islam-world - they love & crave your "all things women & girls" sexism mantra - wear a shirt saying such - they love that ... they aren't into enslaving women & girls like the liberal media declares! Love the way you tweaked the data in this post - just like in the ISOE novel.

2. Peter Dawson - no wonder you get layed off career after career - please come to USA for a career - we love you here & you'll be a perfect fit as Democrat esp. since you love to slight USA.

3. Ramla - breathe deeply while working on the Islam "brand" - somehow the most hated brand in the history of the Universe.

4. 91% is 100% pertaining to Islam-world hate for British - esp. their lead role in partioning land for the creation of Israel circa mid-1940's.

Posted by sean_love&peace at May 4, 2007 8:54 AM

Trevor: Thank you for listening. Admittedly the issue is much more complicated and there is no simple solution.

Yet the only hope I see at this moment - strangely - is in the nomadic culture. The Western nomads who are cross-pollinating ideas and connecting cultures may still be under the radar as a force of change - but this is where I sense any peace will come from. So far, this group is being studied only in terms of a curious work/travel trend. But their impact in years to come will stem from the bridges they have built during their travels and inter-cultural learning. However, I sense that this "impact" will post-date a global conflict. Too much escalated conflict to be controlled by simplification.

My second source of hope are the Internet-based social networks. Why? How? Long story - another time.

More here: http://nextbyramla.blogspot.com/2006/06/internet-government-of-people.html

Posted by Ramla A. at May 4, 2007 10:33 AM

Are you familiar with Thomas P.M. Barnett's work? I strongly recommend him. He was a Kerry supporter, but you'll find his conclusions remarkably balanced. He enjoys allot of support in high places in DC, including the Pentagon... and is largely responsible for some of the re-engineering that is in process.

He has a very clear view of the issues surrounding the disaffected "underdeveloped countries" (including those that are cash rich) and their relationship to the developing nations.

Take a look at, "Blueprint for Action."

His blog: http://www.thomaspmbarnett.com/weblog/

Posted by John Woods at May 4, 2007 12:48 PM

Thank you Ramla for your informative comments. I am sure the only way forward in any dispute is to find common ground. That means compromise on both sides. The Northern Ireland ‘war’ is a classic example. Both sides have ‘given ground’ in their long standing dispute and at last it appears Northern Ireland is a more peaceful place after 30 years when we witnessed innocent civilians being blown up; innocent women and children dying unnecessarily. Immediately common ground was identified the troubles diminished and now - thank God - it appears peace has broken out at last. Trying to understand another culture is at the heart of this. Imposing one culture on another culture will never work. Why do we not learn this?

Posted by Trevor Gay at May 4, 2007 2:32 PM

"2. The status of women: The Muslim society, amongst many others, is growing with deep misinterpretations of the concept of gender rights and roles. Somehow - all theories that I have come across and particularly the feminism of the 60's/70's - imply that being a man is a higher state of being. So - women are liberated if they are free to copy men."

Horsepucky.

Free is free. It means you do what you wish. It should come with responsibility, but freedom means you and you alone get to choose who to copy.

In the 60s/70s it was the men who held the power, and the women who wanted it, so like any other primate they emulated those who had what they wanted.

And them that emulated the best got what they wanted. Heart disease. Stress. Families they really didn't know.

"Gender rights" is more horse manure. Rights are rights, innate because Jehovah/God/Allah put them there, or because it's a fundamental aspect of intelligence, or just because a society that firmly insists on the concept is more successful in the only way that matters (Marx's "value goods"), rights are for all people and trying to manifest them one way for pointers, and the other for setters is the best way to make sure your society stops getting better.

Map creature comforts to the political and social freedom of various societies around the world, and look at what their most pressing concerns are. In the countries with the highest rates of political parity among the sexes the citizens are the furthest from real want.

Trevor:

When someone breaks into your house in the middle of the night, you going to bargin with them so that they only take one television?

In the current conflict the oppositions goal is a world wide caliphate, the elimination of the state of Israel, the destruction of the Jewish race, the conversion of all non-Christians (remember the Jews are dead) to Islam, and making Christians in effect slaves. Now, of course these may be exaggerations, sort of public talking points by "extremists" to make their real demands more "reasonable".

So what would those be? A restoration of lands taken in the Reconquista? Any land that had ever been under Muslim rule?

Northern Ireland and and Britain could both give ground because ultimately their goals were very similar, and each was out to protect a sizeable interest group.

This ain't that.

Posted by Billy Oblivion at May 9, 2007 12:24 AM

Billy - is the answer to meet violence with violence to try and solve problems? Let me be clear I fully support my Government's position of course and I am proud the UK is America's greatest ally in the war on terrorism. My personal view remains however we gain more by trying to understand why people feel the way they do than trying to blow the limbs off each other in the name of justice and that applies to all sides.

Posted by Trevor Gay at May 9, 2007 4:20 AM

1. Thanks Billy for reality check logic & reason. Trevor - indeed UK as ally is important given our intertwined history.

2. However, the UK with its history of decades of homegrown terrorism - 3500 killed [IRA, et al] - and its "citizens" 7/7 preying on UK and others ...

3. ... clearly means the UK is suspect as ally - given net export of terror & easy breeding of such in UK safe havens.

4. The new 6 terroists USA just arrested had witness of them laughing & celebrating while watching killing & mayhem of free world citizens.

5. To "understand" is faulty logic - clearly they are brainwashed to hate you, UK [death to UK], your family & free world citizens - is a world war - time to be an effective Christian soldier. Satanic-Islam pledge to castrate a soldier Prince - understand?

Posted by sean_peace at May 9, 2007 8:23 AM

Sean - So your answer to resolve dispute is to carry on killing each other - Yes?

It is somehow very sad you consider UK as a 'suspect ally' - given UK troop deaths second only to US deaths among coalition forces in Iraq conflict - is UK not doing enough?

Posted by Trevor Gay at May 9, 2007 10:17 AM

1. Maybe check the mirror Trevor for the enemy within. The new '07 Einstein biography quotes him as saying ... "as long as there are people there shall be war" - clearly satanic-Islam may be forced to evolve from killing "infidels", but intellectual, cyber & other war may always endure.

Posted by sean at May 9, 2007 11:04 AM

As so often Sean - let us agree to differ but remain friends ..... and therein is a message for the world :-)

Posted by Trevor Gay at May 9, 2007 5:51 PM

Billy,

We are in agreement about the women-related part of your comment.

Only that, after years of believing "gender rights" cause a split between genders, I now see it as "human rights, gender-specific." Such as, different facilities in gender-specific toilets. That's it.

It's the scarcity mentality that makes us perceive the rights of one as usurping rights of the other.

So I understand we are essentially saying the same thing, worded differently.
---

Posted by Ramla A. at May 11, 2007 4:42 AM