What Is The Fallacious Arguments Against Salafi Jihadism

In this essay I will set out to debunk some of the facile and often fallacious arguments put forth by our leaders to justify our current and antecedent military involvement in the Middle East. I will begin with an analysis of western intervention in the middle east from 9/11 up until the present. The arguments under scrutiny will be from a wide range of influential westerners and think-tanks, but they will contain the same message: A direct call to arms against the supposed worldwide threat of Muslim extremism in the form of Salafi jihadism. I will deconstruct these arguments and point out any and all logical errors, lies, exaggerations and any other manipulations used to entice an educated population to support violence as the only means of

This attack supposedly prompted the American invasion of Afghanistan that same year. To get a better idea of why these attacks happened, one must examine both the victims and perpetrators, their motives for the attack and the subsequent invasion. After the attacks, George Bush made a famous speech in which he claimed to know the reason why they committed those heinous acts. “They hate our freedoms: our freedom of religion, our freedom of speech, our freedom to vote and assemble and disagree with each other.”[1] This, however, was not the real motive behind the attacks. In fact the motives were detailed by Osama Bin-Laden himself. In his personal memos and video releases, Bin-Laden outlined two primary reasons for his attacks on America. The first is American military presence and thus armed infidels in Saudi Arabia, which contains Islam’s two holiest sites, Mecca and Medina.[2] The second reason was because of Osama’s perceived attitude that America was nothing but an Israeli lackey. “[Jews] believe that all humans are created for their use, and they found that the Americans are the best-created beings for that use.”[3] Israel’s actions towards muslim Palestinians and other muslim states in the region galvanised Osama’s determination to make the American government pay for its

An iron fisted dictator that used internal security forces to maintain his grip on power by suppressing any and all dissent was replaced by a weak and corrupt pro-American government. The new government lacked any real form of legitimacy and violence in the country intensified as armed Shia and Sunni extremist groups and militias battled each other and NATO security forces across the country.[11] Terrorists attacks such as car bombings and attacks by armed gunmen increased, and many pundits and think tanks started to question the Coalition’s ability to properly run the occupation. The situation in Afghanistan was not much better. In 2001, when the United States invaded Afghanistan, most of the country was in the hands of the Taliban. There was a civil war going in the north, where an alliance of Tajik tribes along with a smaller number of Uzbeks opposed the Pashtun dominated Taliban. [12] The most populous regions of the country including the nation’s largest city, Kabul, were controlled by the Taliban who enforced Shariah Law and prevented women from getting an education. When our leaders spoke of our involvement in Afghanistan they spoke of human rights, democracy and access to education for all. But the situation in Afghanistan went from bad to worse as the initially defeated Taliban bounced back and took control of their traditional strongholds in the south. Following a