Arguments I Don't Understand
1) Any suggestion that American foreign policy decisions have an impact on anti-Americanism is unacceptable.
Isn't it self-evident that if you pursue an interventionist policy of taking sides in world conflicts this will create both enemies and friends? If Jack and John are beating each other up and I intervene on John's behalf isn't it natural and expected that John will like me more and Jack will like me less?
Isn't it logical therefore that I should only intervene if I actually want to be part of the conflict and I'm prepared for it?
How is it that Americans expect that they can be actively involved in so many conflicts and everyone on all sides will still see them as neutral observers or something?
That is regardless of whether Jack or John were in the right to start with. In the long and complex history of American interventions, there were lots of times when Americans were on the right side and a few times when they weren't. That's if we were talking from a moral pov.
But morality is ultimately irrelevant in politics.
2) Islamophobia is racist.
How can that be? Islam is not a race. It is a system of belief. Systems of belief are not entitled to respect. They have to earn it. And they earn it when their proponents present them in a manner that earns the respect of others. In modern times, Muslims have singularly failed to do that. And so my anger against Islamophobia is directed mostly at my own co-religionists.
It is like Communism. I would describe myself as anti-Communism because having examined the tenets of Communism, it didn't inspire my respect. Infact it scared me. I don't think I'd like it if someone called me racist because of that.
***Caution: These are random thoughts inspired by a sleepless night spent flipping between Fox TV, CNN and Iqra TV. They're not very well-thought-out as they're a result of listening to lots of arguments with lots of holes in them rather any serious attempt to construct my own argument.