I said Islamist not Islam
Crutial difference.
Islam is a religion, people worship Islam, I have absolutely no problem with this.
Islamism is a political ideology. One where the imperitives of the state become governed by the Koran. Islamism is the political system that one finds in Saudi Arabia or Afghanistan under the Taliban.
The principle goal of Islamist terror organizations is to create a truly global ummah. This would be having a global Islamic superstate in the mould of the Taliban. One would think that this type of poltical thought is in opposite of liberty, but I suppose that that would be wrong.
Now in regards to Global Terrorism I will make it clear. Not all Muslims are terrorists, a lot of Terrorists are Muslim.
There is an important distinction to understand. I am saying that the principle threat from terrorism is found in the Islamist terror organizations. Nationalist movements like ETA or the IRA have political considerations because they have political goals. Islamist organizations have wholesale slaughter on their minds, as witnessed on 9/11 and more recently in Beslan. Muslims will often support Islamist groups because they are the only legitimate alternative to the despotic regimes they suffer under. If all Muslims were free, if Islamic society became more open and advanced, doing away with honour killings and rapes - then the support for Islamist movements would be reduced.
All people deserve to live freely, unfortunately they dont. Peace cannot be guaranteed while despotic systems florish.
***EDIT***
Where did I make a big fuss about the Russians? I simply said that one must consider the broader situation when analyzing Cold War actions.
This is fun because you are going around calling me a fascist, making very simplistic arguments all the while pretending that I am irrational. To FYMers I present this as case in point of BDS (Bush Derangement Syndrome) and wish to say it substantiates my claims in prior threads about such individuals