Response to traditionalists "Leftist response..."
Reader comment on item: Why the Left Loves Osama [and Saddam, Explains Lee Harris]

Submitted by Ricardo Ben-Safed (United States), Sep 6, 2003 at 15:52

Hard core Socialist wrote against "Why the Left Loves Osama (and Saddam)
"
Any real leftist with a solid intellectual basis in history and a good understanding of international relations would simultaneously condemn 9/11 and the US response to it (as did Chomsky and most other prominent left commentators)."

We do believe that the US world domination...We see ourselves as locked in struggle against the radical fundamentalists of every religion (including the religion of free market capitalism) to convince the oppressors AND the oppressed that war and destruction will not create a better world--but rather that if we want to survive as a human species, we need to work together to create a new and broader vision that will bring true liberation (rather than the "opportunity" to be dominated by the US in new and different ways).

Keep searching...

Dear Hard Core Socialist,
You resort to the same "religioius" false argument above: Let me turn it around and show you. Hard Core Socialist has provided no evidence of U.S. free market capitalism is an evil? Hence Dr. Pipes is correct, you support Osama and Saddam.

warmly,
Ricardo Ben-Safed
Philadelphia

Or where the U.S. has dominated ,or how the U.S. dominates when the U.S. could not even get the U.N. to abide by its own resolutions and conditions for Saddam to remain in power since the end of the Gulf War. Hard Core also has provided no evidence that the use of military action would have prevented 9/11. Surely the people in the WTC were oppressed

---

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened for relevance, substance, and tone, and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome, but comments are rejected if scurrilous, off-topic, vulgar, ad hominem, or otherwise viewed as inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the Guidelines for Comments. For informational purposes, we identify countries from which comments are sent.