• @Candelestine@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      -26 months ago

      I don’t disagree. Just disagree that his method was as simple and straightforward as people here seem to think, just believing what he’s spoon feeding them 100%. He was sophisticated, a leader. Not some simpleton.

      As if Americans would just give him what he wants for knocking down a couple skyscrapers. Have you even seen our culture? We shoot each other in our own streets, much less foreign attackers. How people think we could just forego a chance at revenge is just utterly, hilariously wrong in every way.

      • @Maggoty@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        46 months ago

        He believed we would leave because he grew up in a world of Western countries being driven out by anti colonial violence. It’s not that complicated. He wasn’t a political science guy, or an anthropologist. He was a radicalized construction engineer.

        • @Candelestine@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          -36 months ago

          I don’t think you need to be an anthropologist to figure out that attacking someone’s civilians nearly guarantees counterattack. We still needed the oil out of the region back then to boot.

          • @Maggoty@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            16 months ago

            Shockingly it doesn’t. You’re also not taking into account his radicalization. Which allows for a lot of irrational beliefs.

            • @Candelestine@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              16 months ago

              That is actually a fair criticism. I simply don’t think it’s as strong an influence over strategic thinking. In any decent thinker anyway.