• Maggoty@lemmy.worldEnglish
    21·
    2 years ago

    It was literally his manifesto and single demand for two decades.

    • Candelestine@lemmy.worldEnglish
      12·
      2 years 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.worldEnglish
        3·
        2 years 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.worldEnglish
          13·
          2 years 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.worldEnglish
            1·
            2 years ago

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

            • Candelestine@lemmy.worldEnglish
              1·
              2 years 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.