CNN Headline Nov 6, 2001:

"You’re either with us or against us in the fight"

AP Headline Oct 6, 2005:

Bush: Radicals Seek to Intimidate World

One mans ‘terrorist’ is another’s mans ‘freedom-fighter’. A ‘liberator’ may be a ‘suppressor’ for those who oppose him.

Wide parts of Bush’s speech today use the same arguments and language that one Osama Bin Laden could use.

[T]he militant network wants .. to gain control of a country, a base from which to launch attacks and conduct their war against .. Muslim governments. Over the past few decades, [they] have specifically targeted Egypt, and Saudi Arabia, and Pakistan, and Jordan for .. takeover. They achieved their goal, for a time, in Afghanistan.

The above of course may describe the US attack on Iraq and suppressive countries ruled by U.S. friendly dictators. It may also paint a picture of some ‘Zarqawi strategy’.

How about:

The militants believe that controlling one country will rally the Muslim masses,
enabling them to overthrow all .. governments in the region, …

Does Bush talk about the Neocon program to "spread democracy"?

The next sentence can be used unaltered by both sides:

They target nations whose behavior they believe they can change through violence. Against such an enemy, there is only one effective response: We will never back down, never give in, and never accept anything less than complete victory.

Now here is a part of the Bush speech a Taliban commander might hold to rally his troops:

Like the ideology of communism, our new enemy teaches that innocent individuals can be sacrificed to serve a political vision. And this explains their cold-blooded contempt for human life.
…
Like the ideology of communism, our new enemy pursues totalitarian aims. Its leaders pretend to be an aggrieved party, representing the powerless against imperial enemies. In truth they have endless ambitions of imperial domination, and they wish to make everyone powerless except themselves. .. They seek to end dissent in every form, and to control every aspect of life, and to rule the soul, itself. While promising a future of justice and holiness, the terrorists are preparing for a future of oppression and misery.

And at last a really universal one:

Throughout history, tyrants and would-be tyrants have always claimed that murder is justified to serve their grand vision — and they end up alienating decent people across the globe.

This shows how there are radicals on both sides of this. They want to clash their personal small minded view of civilization with those who have a different on. Both sides can and do use the same dumb emotions and silly arguments.

I like to dream of putting them all on an island with a bunch of webcams and to let everybody watch how they fight it out.

But these folks would probably just sit down and find out how like minded they are. They probably would even agree on a "common project".

But then, didn´t they already do so?