Townhall.com, Where Your Opinion Counts
Talk Radio:   Bill Bennett   Mike Gallagher   Dennis Prager   Michael Medved   Hugh Hewitt   
BREAKING NEWS  LeftArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican   RightArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican  
Columns, funnies & more in your inbox!
  • Check the boxes and send us your email address to receveive your free newsletter
  • Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
  • Townhall.com’s weekly inside scoop on what’s happening behind the scenes in the world of politics. When news breaks, we report.
  • Signup to receive the latest daily Townhall cartoons
Tuesday, August 29, 2006
Dennis Prager :: Townhall.com Columnist
Just a reminder about who and why we are fighting
by Dennis Prager
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
[+] Text [-]
 
Poll
Was the Copenhagen Global Warming Summit Walk-Out a Win for the U.S.?


Last year at UCLA, I debated a professor who argued that Israel and the Palestinians were moral equivalents. He is not alone (especially on college campuses) in his lack of understanding of the immoral nature of the Islamic enemies of America and Israel.

Thus it is important to remind people once again about the moral world inhabited by the people we are fighting, whom President George W. Bush calls the Islamic Fascists.

Societal examples:

-- The Islamic Republic of Sudan, in its attempt to force Arab/Muslim rule on the largely non-Arab and non-Muslim population of southern Sudan, has led to the killing of well above 1 million Christians and animists and black (i.e., non-Arab) Muslims, in addition to the widespread enslavement, rape and torture of those people.

-- No major international Arab or Muslim organization has condemned the Sudanese government's mass murders that border on genocide.

-- The leader of the Islamic Republic of Iran has repeatedly denied the Holocaust and repeatedly called for the annihilation of Israel. As the 6 million Jews of Israel do not plan a mass exodus from their ancient and modern homeland, such annihilation would in fact mean another Holocaust.

-- The holy center of Islam, the Muslim country where the holiest Muslim sites are situated, is Saudi Arabia. That country bans the practice of any religion other than Islam, amputates hands of thieves, does not allow women to drive a car, mandates what women wear outside of their homes and is the only country in the world to feature a weapon on its national flag. Women were treated considerably better and had more civil rights in ancient Rome, not to mention ancient Israel, than women living in the holiest cities of Islam today.

-- Virtually every Islam-based country decrees the death penalty for any Muslim who converts to another religion.

In other words, every country that calls itself "Islamic" is morally inferior to just about every country in North America, South America, Western Europe, Eastern Europe, almost every Asian country and many African countries.

No Muslim country treats non-Muslims and their religions anywhere nearly as decently as any Western non-Muslim country (including Israel) treats Muslims. That is why tens of millions of Muslims immigrate to non-Muslim societies and virtually no non-Muslim immigrates to any Muslim society. In every Muslim country, non-Muslims are either systematically persecuted at worst or treated as inferiors at best.

Individual examples (in just the last five months):

-- "A German court sentenced a Turkish man to more than nine years in jail yesterday for the 'honour killing' of his sister. . . . The murder of Hatun Surucu, 23, who was shot several times at a bus stop in a Berlin suburb last year, shocked Germany. . . . Forced to marry a cousin in Turkey as a young girl, Ms. Surucu later broke with her Turkish-Kurdish family in Berlin and was living independently with her 5-year-old son, to the intense disapproval of her relatives. . . . Public outrage at the murder was exacerbated when some teenage boys at a school with many pupils from immigrant families . . . reportedly openly applauded the killing, condemning the victim for having lived 'like a German.'" (The Guardian, UK, April 14, 2006)

-- "Men using machetes attacked worshipers in three Coptic [Christian] churches in the port city of Alexandria [Egypt] on Friday morning, killing an 80-year-old man and wounding at least six other people, the police there said." (International Herald Tribune, April 15, 2006)

-- "An Egyptian state-controlled newspaper praised Monday's suicide attack in Tel Aviv, which killed nine people and wounded dozens, calling it an act of sacrifice and martyrdom." (Jerusalem Post, April 18, 2006)

-- In Britain, Abdula Ahmed Ali, 25, and his wife Cossor, 23, were arrested in connection with the plot to blow up airplanes flying across the Atlantic. According to Scotland Yard, the Muslim couple planned to take their 6-month-old baby on the suicide mission, using their baby's bottle to hide a liquid bomb. (Daily Telegraph, UK, Aug. 14, 2006)

-- "We've got Hezbollah fighters running around in our positions, taking our positions here and then using us for shields and then engaging the [Israelis]." -- words of a Canadian UN observer written days before he was killed by Israeli bombs (Ottawa Citizen, July 27, 2006)

-- "Canadian authorities rounded up a group of 17 Muslim men and boys suspected of plotting to bomb major buildings in the Toronto area . . . " (CNN, June 5, 2006)

-- In Australia, "[Islamist] propaganda has convinced many residents their suburbs are being overrun by Islamic extremists. . . .The Saturday Daily Telegraph revealed an escalation of anti-Semitic behaviour. . . . Jewish university students were targeted and forced to hide their traditional skullcaps beneath baseball caps to avoid abuse, while attacks on synagogues have increased." (Daily Telegraph, Australia, Aug. 26, 2006)

-- "A third suspect detained in a failed attempt to blow up two German trains is a Syrian national . . . German and Lebanese authorities are each holding one of two young Lebanese men accused of carrying the suitcase bombs onto trains in Cologne station on July 31. . . . Officials say they could have caused many casualties and set the trains on fire." (Newsday, Aug. 26, 2006)

Does all this suggest that we are fighting a billion Muslims? Of course not.

Does all this suggest that all or even most Muslims are bad people? Of course not.

It does suggest, however, that the dominant forces within Islam are bad at this time; that Muslims who see this evil in their midst have not mobilized any counterforce either out of fear for their lives or for some other reason; and that decent men and women around the world -- Hindu, Christian, Jewish, atheist, Buddhist and Muslim -- are threatened by this powerful, death-loving force.

Muslims who do not acknowledge the threat to civilization from within the Muslim world at least have two excuses -- fear for their lives or group solidarity. What excuses do non-Muslims have who deny this threat?

Share:
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
 
About The Author
Dennis Prager is a radio show host, contributing columnist for Townhall.com, and author of 4 books including Happiness Is a Serious Problem: A Human Nature Repair Manual.
 
TOWNHALL DAILY: Be the first to read Dennis Prager's column. Sign up today and receive Townhall.com daily lineup delivered each morning to your inbox.
Just a reminder about who and why we are
Since islamofascists only understand brute force we should use what they understand the best. If every time they attack our interests we give it back to them 10-fold, it shouldn't take too long to re-educate them to the new reality.

If we get wind of plans for usage of WMDs (nuke or bio), the stakes are dramatically raised and the response to the threat will be pre-emptive on target(s) of our choosing. It is a target-rich environment.

We will not fight the proxies anymore, but the principals, namely Iran and Syria and North Korea (if it decides to join the scuffle). We will make Imperial Rome look like a bunch of church ladies on a picnic. They will get the message and run like the cowards they are, hiding behind women and children.

Freedom from a world dominated by islamofascism will cost, but it will be worth the cost, in the long run. Otherwise western civilization is doomed. Its either them or us. I prefer we are the survivors.

The only good islamofascist is a dead one!

Well, a shameless plug...
... for my essay last week on my blog entitled "City of Glass". I dealt with this issue, also

I will also plug the book "Prayer for the Assassin" by Robert Ferrigno, which is a really good novel set in a future America that has been turned into a Muslim theocracy. A chilling tale.

Michael, the earlier poster, also is right on the money, IMO.

All Fair Points...
But it galls me that Prager never seems to acknowledge how we got to this point, or at least consider how we got to this point (maybe there would be too much disagreement for people to ever settle on a fact they could agree to "acknowledge"). It's as though history, for Prager, started with September 11, 2001, or perhaps with the bombing of the U.S. Marine barracks in Lebanon. Or maybe with the creation of Israel.

He never seems to wonder if our own actions in the past, and the actions of countries seen as our "allies", e.g. U.K., France, etc., could have messed up that region so bad that it is now being expressed as the terrorism that threatens us. Would the region have been so radicalized if the western powers hadn't been dicing all the territory up for the last 150 years? Maybe, maybe not. Would black Americans be in such a dilapitated socioeconomic condition if not for the legacy of slavery, Jim Crow, etc? Maybe, maybe not. But would be not be fools to dismiss the possibility out of hand?

I'm not saying we shouldn't respond to threats, or take measures to preempt certain threats from being realized. But let's not labor under the illusion that this is all about light versus the darkness, and democracy versus tyranny. I feel like I live in a tyranny sometimes, what with the irresponsive and irresponsible government stealing my money and letting in 20 million illegal aliens (among other crimes against the American people). And we're supposed to believe that the rest of the world will greet us with flowers because they want so badly to live like us? Maybe they want air-conditioning. I'm not so sure about the rest.

But Prager doesn't think about these things. He sees a threat to our civilization, as I do. But he never considers that many others in the world see a threat to their civilization as well. Only in their mind, the threat is us.

That denial of non-Muslims
is due, IMO, to a "religious" adherence to the Left.

Today I felt like I was banging my head against a wall debating the Iranian "holocaust" cartoons - which went into Islamist terrorism.

The more Left the commenter was, the more they completely denied there WAS such a thing as "Islamic fascism".

The startling thing for me was I know one of the commenters is Jewish and she attacked me with the same vigor as the Muslim..and avoided the points I made.

If you're interested at all ...see here:

http://www.feministe.us/blog/archives/2006/08/25/holocaust-cartoon-contest/


Orwell
Seems you have a slight disconect here ~ "I feel like I live in a tyranny sometimes" ~~~ "letting in 20 million illegal aliens" ~~~ "because they want so badly to live like us? Maybe they want air-conditioning. I'm not so sure about the rest"

Tyrannies have absolute control of their borders and their citizens, hence this is not a tyranny, plus 20 million illegal immigrants sort of proves they do want to live like us no?

And if it's not about moral vs immoral and just historical grievances the what would satisfy these grievances? Western influences out of the Middle East?, Jews and Christians out of Muslim land?, The end of Israel, The end of America, The end of the west? answer these questions and I'll consider taking you seriously, till then go read up on Jihad and the 12th imam.

A Religion of Peace?
Orwell
You need to read your history a bit more thoroughly. Islam has been attacking the West since Mohammad had the means to do so.

Please remember that all of the mediterranean was Christian in the seventh century. Modern day Istanbul (then called Byzantium) was actually the seat of the Christian church.

Islam occupied Spain and fought in France. In the East, they went all the way to the gates of Vienna. Along the way, millions of Christians were enslave, castrated, raped, and forced to convert on pain of death.

In this context, the Crusades were merely an effort by the West to respond to Islamic imperialist aggression.

The US in the early 1800 had their merchant ships pirated by North African Arabs, too.

When the Ottoman Empire sided with the German's in WWI, yes, Europe carved up the Middle East. In the process, they built rail roads, modernized ports, created an oil industry that currently pays Arabs some $500 billion per year, etc., etc., etc.

So let's not delude ourselves about Islamic aggression. There are a billion Muslims because millions and millions of non-Muslims have been forced or coerced into conversion.

Loyalty to a lie
The Islamic man embraces a lie in his right hand. "He can't deliver himself."

But so does anyone who rejects, 'truth.'
Jew or Gentile or Arab or Chinese or Indian or Korean or ...

Isaiah 44 is a good start at defining the problem.


Delusions of persecution...
The Islamic radicals don’t hate us for what we do. They hate us for who “they” are.

Islam is suffering from an “inferiority complex” and they hide that feeling of inferiority behind blame. They blame the West for forcing them to compete in the modern world where they don’t fit in. Their resentment and frustration is further fuelled by the backward 7th century thinking of their leaders. A typical tactic of tyrannical depots is to turn the people’s attention away from their own failures at home by falsely blaming some outside source, in this case the West.

Ask yourself, what has Middle Eastern Islam contributed to science, to technology, to medicine, to art or, for that matter, to civilized society in the last 300 years? This once proud culture, albeit misguided, is hamstrung by its own medieval religious doctrine. The 21st century is no place for a 7th century religion that preaches hatred and intolerance, condones murder and violence, and oppresses women.

Terrorism becomes for the Islamic radicals a form of self-affirmation and a defense against the embarrassment of feeling inferior and ineffectual. They vent their frustration and sense of hopelessness by attacking the West, which if continues will prove disastrous for all of us, including Islam. It’s time for moderate Islam to shed its mantle of irrelevance and rid itself of the fanatical extremist influences that constrain it.

to Orwell
Mr/Ms. Orwell;

You do raise some valid points, some of which I agree with and some I disagree. That's why we're here. Please folks - let's try to keep it civil.

(BTW - Is your nom de plume some sort of reference to George?)

But we are fighting people who seem to have no concept of conventional morality at all. They kill mass numbers of people because they think that this dude they call "allah" is pleased by that. They will kill themselves just to destroy large numbers of innocents, as in 9/11, so they can terrorize the rest of us. Whatever our faults, and they are many, we must realize the nature of the people we are fighting. We have never been in a war like this. These people are still pissed about the crusades, for pete's (or anybody else's) sake.

I would like to add one quotation to those quoted by Mr. Prager.

Sheik Hassan Nasrallah, on May 23 of this year (about a month before ordering the abduction of Israeli soldiers) made a speech on Arab TV in which he said: "Our strength is the willingness to sacrifice our blood and children."
(Source - http://www.memri.org SD #1176 5/26/06)

Keep in mind, if you will, that these are the words of a Muslim CLERIC.

afn&tt

Orwell
Previous posters ahve pretty well debunked your thoughts on Islam. My concern is, even in this country, peaceloving Muslims don't stand up and have demonstrations against the terrorism of a significant part of their religion. If they don't condone it, why are they such cowards? I think you could say that Christians in Nazi Germany were the same way but Chritians around the world came to the aid of the Jews and Euopeans. Explain American Muslims.
The black families in this country were sticking together from reconstuction to the early 60's when we replaced black fathers with a welfare check. The family unit broke down then and they haven't been able to rebuild it, thus 80% of black babies born out of wedlock and at least that % raised in fatherless homes. Daniel Moynihan-an honest liberal-recognized this early on.

Not so good
One of his lesser columns. Not because he's wrong, but because there's nothing new there and he eats up column-inches reciting recent history.

Plus, I *do* maintain he's wrong about Muslim immigrants coming to the West to escape Islamic strictures. They come here for the money.

Muslims that live in non-Muslim...
countries do want the freedom from persecution... that's why they moved here. But like "The murder of Hatun Surucu, 23, who was shot several times at a bus stop in a Berlin suburb last year, shocked Germany" by her own brother, they are afraid of converting back to their original faith, for fear that they will also be assassinated. And I agree with goblue... the black youth (predominantly men, because the women born into single black households don't appear to have converted, so kudos for them to realize that Islam is a religion that oppresses them!) have been brought into the world in basically the same conditions as the people of Islamic nations... kept oppressed by society and made to feel inferior. No wonder they convert! They have found something that recognizes them for who they are and they can relate. What gets me, though, is that Jesse Jackson, a "Christian" black man who is SO FULL of himself, needs to interject himself into the mediation process and meet with Nasrallah in Syria... yet in his column, Mr. Prager states, Sudan's government "has led to the killing of well above 1 million Christians and animists and black (i.e., non-Arab) Muslims," and no Islamic country is condemning it. But isn't Mr. Jackson a Christian black non-Arab? A lot of good his interference will be, if Nassy recognizes him as his inferior and worth condemning to death.

Meaningless minorities
I need some help here. Why do Monorities (in the USA) seem to always be planted inside the Liberal Camp? Is it a lack of insight, common sense, etc? To be a Liberal, is there some deficiency within something somewhere? I just can not understand why anyone (living in the USA) would not be strongly behind the 'riding the world of Islamic Killers' and, if a few innocents must die in the process, so be it? As any cancer, you must kill it or be consumed by it.

President Bush had it correct when he said, "You are either with us or the Terrorists."

Yes Orwell...
Woman-sellers *do* see us as a threat to their way of life. You managed to notice that all by yourself. Very good!

Orwell, call home...
Must be nice to live in the Land of Oz where rational thought is frowned on and one can stare blankly into space and wonder, really wonder, how many Angels can fit on the head of a pin. Orwell, please respond...If you and your wife and 2.5 children could live anywhere in the world, where would it be? I dare say that it would not be in Saudi Arabia; it would not be in Iran; certainly not Iraq; and probably not within 10,000 miles of any Muslim nation. So, pull your head from your rectum, see the world as it really is now, today, and be thankful that your wife doesn't wear a burka.

Unharmed?
This discussion is great and informative.

Orwell, your defense of terrorists and their BS reasoning is just plain wrong, and typically Liberal.

It reminds me of the hypocritical uproar and rush to the defense of Islamic terrorists in custody of America by Liberals. These slugs of the earth are treated no worse than a pledge at a college fraternity, yet the media and Democrats went ballistic. Do not even mention the made up accusations of tearing pages out of the Book of Lies, aka the Koran, and the Islamic World's reaction to those lies. How many people died?

Yet went the Fox News journalists are beaten, starved, forced to renounce Christianity and convert to Islam. The Liberal Western Press says they were released unharmed. UNHARMED?

Orwell, the apologist and appeasement mentality you suffer from has infected the Left. That mental defect is a greater threat to America than Islamic Fascism itself!

Prager's foolishness
Dennis lays out an impressive list of antidotes to "prove" his point that the dominant forces in Islam are bad.

The weakness of his argument is that a long list of antidotes can also be supplied by anyone who wants to "prove" that the dominant forces in the United States are bad. We could start, for instance, by naming the fact that the United States makes it possible for the Suadi regime to behave the way it does.

Anecdotal evidence is a weak way of making your point.

I also worry about his motives. Rather than searching for a peaceful resolution to the conflict––like engaging the peaceful, more moderate Muslims––he's stoking fear and hatred of the relatively small number of radicals. This is not the motive of a peace loving man. This is the motive of a demogouge, and a war monger.

This whole argument, we're good, they're bad, is so foolish to me. Does anyone doubt that there is a Dennis Prager on the other side saying the same about us? Does anyone out there doubt that there are a large number of people like you nodding in agreement with him?

Does anyone see where we're headed if both sides listen to the Dennis Pragers of the world?

Phylo out.





Michael
You say we should pass attacking the proxies and go straight to Iran, Syria and North Korea. What about Russia and China? They are blocking the UN from action. What about the UN itself. They condemn Isreal for attacking Lebenon with such force.

The real problem is the US. We are not consistent around the world. I attack Sadam because he is killing Kurds. What about the Sudan, where Thousands are being killed. Today, the Democrats want to be elected so they undermine foriegn policy, the same foriegn policy that Clinton, Kennedy et al supported in 1998.

Why is there no disapline in foriegn policy? Because there is none in the homes, schools and most churches. Very few understand goals and the work to achieve them.

Dennis, thanks for the history review, we need it, except the ones who need it most will not read it. The are blaming the U.S. but for the wrong reasons.

Phylo, you mean . . .
"anecdote", not "antidote", of course. Generally speaking, though, Prager is correct.

The vast majority of Muslims on this planet do NOT embrace religious freedom as we do. Even the Isrealis allow mosques in their country; Palestinians do not allow churches or synagogues.

The vast majority of Muslims on this planet SAY they condemn the violence, but do NOTHING to stop their terrorist brothers from committing it.

With CAIR and the ACLU condemning the US for spying on terrorists, can you actually reach the conclusion that a majority of Muslims are on our side?


Phylo Se Fizer
I love your comment Phylo, on how Dennis should approach the peaceful Muslims. Do the peaceful Muslims speak out against the Islamic facists? The Democrats state the US should negotiate with Iran whereas a year ago Bush was criticized for going it alone.

As I told Michael in the response above, consistancy. Negotiations appear as weakness. Phylo, please tell me where negotiations have solved a dispute between countries without a war and a clear victor. I have not found one. Was it Neville Chamberlain?

Gurky - good comment
We have demonstrated in the last few years we are no friend of anyone. China holds the key to Iran and North Korea and instead of having a strategy to work with China all we do is poke them in the ribs over human rights. We do not deal from strength, we have put fear in the minds of the public and lash out from this fear rather then strength. We are becoming the joke of the world and allow two bit dictators and cave dwellers to squander our lives and our tax dollars.

We do not leverage what we do well which is innovate. Instead we let the wealthy multinationals export our technologies and put move their wealth elsewhere. The public on the other hand have become content with Chinese goods because they are cheap and yet we spend every penny we earn.

Wake up folks, we are on the way to being a pauper nation and I think that will open the door to exremists of all flavors, Islamic, Christian, communist, and criminal. Lets take care of ourselves before we kneejerk to the next "danger" in the world.

We Should Negotiate!
I've been thinking maybe the left is right. Maybe diplomacy would be the best way to stop the Muslim terrorists from killing us:

Starting point for negotiations:

Terrorists: We want you to be dead.

US: We want to live.



Negotiations begin:

US: We want to live.
How about if we offer to leave Iraq? Will you let us live then?

Terrorists: No. We wanted you dead long before you went into Iraq. Have you forgotten about the Iranian Embassy in 1979, the Beirut Lebanon Embassy (and the Marine Barracks) in 1983, Pan Am 103 in 1988, the World Trade Center in 1993 and 2001, the Khobar Towers in 1996, the US Embassies in Kenya and Tanzania in 1998, the USS Cole in 200, and the Pentagon in 2001? You think this is only about Iraq?

U.S.: How about if, instead of stealing your oil, we pay you $70 a barrel for it?

Terrorists: No. You are already doing that.

US: What if we also give you billions of dollars?

Terrorist: No. You already do that, too.

US: What if we agree to live peacefully with you and let you run your own affairs, choose your own leaders, social rules, etc. You can kill political prisoners and subjugate women, and we won't interfere.

Terorists: No. You already let us do those things

US: How about if we promise to send you help for any natural disasters or disease outbreaks? At no charge?

Terrorists: No. You already do that. Offer something new.

US: What about if we give you nuclear and missile technology.

Terrorists: No. You already did that.

US: You are tough negotiators. All right, what if we let you kill all our Republicans. And Joe Lieberman. Then will you let us live?

Terrorists: No. We want you all dead.

US: Ok, what if we throw in Israel and all the Christians, too?

Terrorists: No. All the infidels must die.

US: All right, our final offer: what if we agree to convert to Islam. We'll make all our women cover themselves from head to foot and not let them drive or vote. Then can we live?

Terrorists: What about alcohol, pornography, abortion, nude dancing / free speech, and capitalism?

US: We'll gladly give up capitalism, but we really need the other things.

Terrorists: That is not compromise. You are refusing to negotiate.

US: All right. We'll give up alcohol, pornography, abortion, and nude dancing / free speech too, if we have to. Now will you let us live?

Terrorists: That's tempting, but it's not enough. You must die.

US: There must be something we can offer that you will accept in exchange for letting us live.

Terrorists: Our best offer is we want you all dead. We are, of course, willing to listen to your ideas. Islam is a religion of peace.


JMAN
Your comment about Bush's "with us or against us" is not consistent with his actions. The world is like little children, trying to see what they can get away with. If a parent does not respond consistently, the child does not know the consequences.

Isreal in the 50's, 60's and 70's responded to any attack with brutal force. The Islamic facists knew there would be severe pain for any action. Nassarreh yesterday stated he would not have kidnapped the two soldiers if he knew Isreal would have responded as strongly as they did.

CONSISTANCY!!!!!

Orwell
The easiest way to debunk your ludicrous notions about how "it's all our fault, and we deserve it" is not by pointing out how Muslems treat us, but how they treat each other. There is no more barbaric society in the history of humankind than that of the modern day Muslem society. Not even the most primitive of Germanic barbarian tribes would EVER even CONSIDER torturing and killing the teenage victems of rapes. Muslems, though, feel that is a "rational" reaction to such heinous crimes.

These "people" are not evil because of how they treat those with whom they disagree. They are evil because of how they treat their own people. These "people" are sub-human slime, end of sentence.

Orwell didn't read the article ...
... or he would not be blaming the civilized world for the problems of Islamic nations. Somolia, Sudan, Afghanistan, etc. are tribal nations that have not chosen to move forward with the rest of the world. As Prager pointed out, Muslims in these countries deny civil rights, persecute other religions, and kill their own citizens who don't agree with their beliefs.

The Islamofaciest threat can't be blamed on the west. Responsibility falls solely on extremist elements in Islam and its extremist clergy who preach hate and destruction.

SHNKNSN you are brilliant
with your permission, may I e-mail your comments to people in my address book?

Very funny Shnknsn
I am laughing like crazy. Good job!


SHNKNSN writes: Tuesday, August, 29, 2006 10:04 AM
We Should Negotiate

Orwell or Sick
Wants to know why we are not admitting that for the last 150 years we have messed up the middle east. My reaction is "so what". I can cry Mea culpa for days, and it changes not one thing about today. I can blame mommy, the postman, or the guy next door for my problems, but it does not make them go away.

And the idea that this is caused by the last 150 years of colonialism is stupid in the extreme. If anyone knows history, this area was par of the Byzantine Empire until that fell to Islam in around 1400. Then it was run by the Ottoman Empire till it fell in WWI. Only then was it run by the Brits. So, at best, we have had only 80 years to screw it up, not 150. And, during that time, they were so happy to be out from under the Turks, that there was little or no problems (until Israel was formed).

And this forgets the facts you don't want to face. Islam has been a militant organization since it's founding. The US fought them shortly after our Revolutionary War in the famed Halls of Tripoli. Ya see, there were these Pirates who held the world ransom until the US Navy went in and kicked their butts.

Read history before you make yourself look foolish.

There will be Consequences
God is Love; Allah is Hate. And, whether you believe it or not, there will be a final day of reckoning...and all the Muslims (a billion of them) will roast for eternity in the bowels of hell. They will all stand before God (not Allah) some day and account for their rejection of Him (He will say "I never knew you") and for their actions on this earth. That is small solace for us now. We know that Satan is roaming this earth "seeking whom he may devour" but God is still in charge...sin is running rampant thanks to Islam and this Godless world and all of its false religions, and we are heading down the slippery slope toward the "last days."

Muslim hearts and souls are infected with their false religion and we will never change them, so what is the solution? Kill as many of them as we can before they kill us. How about simplicity?

Slow change
Prager should also point out that while Sudan is such a humanitarian crisis, the US and Europe has offered NOTHING. What happened to spreading freedom and democracy? As for Saudi Arabia, our biggest allie in the ME, the US is doing and saying nothing about their human rights abuses.
A little history lesson for you "human rights champions", the Civil Rights Act was signed into law on 7/2/1964, almost 190 years of this country's existence so who are we tell to some country about how they treat it's own citizens.
Change is only going to happen in the Arab/Muslim world until they ALONE lead the charge against their own and that change is not going to happen overnight.

Fascinating
Orwell,

It amazes me to witness oblivious streams of "thought" from the far left. What difference does it make WHY they hate us? If someone assaults you at Starbucks while sipping your Grande Mocha latte, are you going to defend yourself or curl up in the fetal position and ask "Why me? Why, why why?" while being careful not to spill?
Myself--I'd like to think that I'd be a little more pro-active in defending myself, as I would prefer this country to respond on the larger stage.
I realize that my example is very simplified; I'm trying to make it a little easier to understand. Does this help?

Phylo,

Perhaps you could direct us to the "peaceful, moderate Muslims" that seem to have been overlooked in the search for a happy resolution to this worldwide problem. You really are "out"--no offense.

Paulie

Jeff - "The student of history"
Did you also know the Ottoman Empire divided what's now modern Iraq into three regions -Mosul, Baghdad and Basrah? Mosul - Kurds, Baghdad - Sunnis, Basrah - Shiites
Anyone want to take a guess why?

Incidentally, a Trivial Correction...
A very small point but a factual one, Saudi Arabia is not the only country to feature a weapon on it's flag as Mozambique's national banner prominently displays an AK-47, crossed with a hoe over aan open book, imposed upon a gold star.

The flag I'm working on for my breakaway republic of "Supercoolistan" features an ICBM crossed over a robot, imposed on top of a boombox and the profile sillhouette of Eddie Van Halen. Our flag will totally kick Mozambique's @$$ at the upcoming 2007 Flag-Offs and Superstar Jock Jam, so place your bets now.

Who Are We Fighting?
Little by little, a few people are coming around to the truth. The terrorists, and all those Dennis mentioned today in his blog, are the real Islam. So long as Islam exists, there will be no peace. Our strategy should be to quarantine this evil religion, primarily by achieving energy independence from the Middle East, and by ending all immigration from Muslim countries to the U.S. Once Iran gains nuclear weapons, which is inevitable, we must state clearly that any attack on the U.S., Japan, Europe, Australia, etc. will be an attack on us, and result in the annihiliation of Tehran.

To Tom Baron
Thanks. Please feel free to share "We Should Negotiate"

To Tom Baron
Thanks. Please feel free to share "We Should Negotiate"

This reply is to Orwell.
It absolutely amazes me how you can blame the problems in the Middle-east on past "slicing up of that region". Have you once stopped to consider that the Arab nations possess 99% of the land in that region and are in control of the world’s greatest natural resource, which literally flows out of the ground? How is the past history of that region to blame for the fact that the region's elites live in palaces and possess all of the wealth while they let the masses live in squalor? How is the past to blame for the fact that the ruling elite in that region keep their masses uneducated and brain-wash from birth to kill non-Muslims in the name of Allah? There are enough natural resources and land in that region to have every Muslim alive there living a very good life if not for the oppression of them by their own Muslim brothers.

You can blame all the problems in the world on past imperialism all you want to but history of humanity all over this planet is one in which there were those who conquered and those who were conquered. And those that were conquered were also conquerers such as the Aztec Indians who enslaved their enemies and practiced canabalism and human sacrifices with them.

Survival of the fittest is part of the evolution of mankind in general. In the big scheme of things, The west is one of many villians but it was also the first to evolve into a far greater society and the first to provide for human rights, equal rights, ect. One only needs to look at pockets in Afica untouched by Western civilization to see how far that continent would have come if left on it's own from the beginning. Living in mud huts and throwing spears at each other is a form of survival of the fittest, but a very primitive one. Not only is slavery a part of their past, but is still being practiced by them. Human slavery itself is part of human evolution that is not isolated to past European domination.

If I were an Arab American, Hispanic American, Asian American, Native American, or African American, I would thank my lucky starts that I was an American.........regardless of the past. The poor people in the Arab world need to pull their head out of the sand and wake up long enough to see who their true oppressors are. Consider what would happen if the Arab nations were to join the 21rst century and stop living like barbarians, and disarmed completely. What would happen to them? They would live in peace that's what. If Israel were to disarm today, they would be totally anialated tomorrow. Maybe you might want to stop and consider that little difference for a moment.




A bit of context
Islam both is, and is not, the enemy.

With more than a billion followers, the ratio of violence to believer shows quite clearly that most Muslims are non-violent. My direct experience is that many are open-minded and tolerant. Of course, it would be quite foolish to ignore the fact that extremist Islam is a driving force for a great deal of evil in the world. It is also obvious that the majority of world Islamic spokesmen are unwilling to denounce Islamic terrorism. Thus we are arrived at Chaos.

Orwell, however accidentally, touched on the matter of origin and possible solution, when he so falsely indicted America for the Middle East condition. The simple fact is that the United States has done comparatively little to manipulate governments in the Middle East, especially in comparison to Britain, France, and Germany, and that Americans have long held a name for being fair dealers. Ironically, this is one reason why Americans are targeted as hostages; terrorists knew the US would keep its word, and Americans have always held high profile, whether they represented their government, their business, or were individuals.

This is also the open door. America works; and that fact scares the juntas and oligarchies of the Middle East. A lot of Arabs come to America and discover not only a new country, but a mindset and character which is almost impossible to resist, a charisma born of idealism. It takes a long time to take root, but in many cases it does even when to American eyes the visitor is unchanged - they often realize the change themselves when they return home, see some injustice, and wonder why things should not be done the way the Americans do it?

We're the good guys, and the world knows it. That's why the terrorists hate us, and why they fear us.

Best Kept Secret
Since everything that is said in the article is true why does most of the world press and leaders talk about how peaceful Islam is and how it is only a tiny number of misguided terrorists who have ruined this peace loving relgion? Are these lies about peaceful Islam an attempt to keep the price of oil down, well it is sky high so there is no need to lie about Islam to placate OPEC. Why not tell the truth to the public so they know what they are facing? During WWII everyone in America knew the enemy was Japan, Germany and Italy. Most people in America act like they don't even know there is a war on today. During WWII we had a draft, gas and food rationing and no new cars were built as well as there were air raid drills in all neighborhoods. There needs to be something similar imposed on the public today. We need to know we are on a wartime footing. The homefront needs to make sacrifices that they know are related to the war. And they need to know that we are at war with all of Islam except those who actively oppose every single terrorist nation or group. If they support Hezbollah they are our enemy. If they support any other terrorist group they are our enemy, no exceptions. If they want to cut off the hands off of thieves or bury women and stone them to death that is their business but if they want to do that to us or impose such laws on us then they have a major problem with us

DJ Drummond
What happened to Bush's with us or against us. If the "peaceful" muslims truly want peace, they need to turn in the fascists. Personal responsibility is lacking in home education, school education and government education. The peaceful muslims know who is dangerous. Also, it is against the law to preach violent overthrow of the government. Any "religious" leader preaching it needs to have the law enforced. If our government chooses not to enforce the law, or selectively enforce the law, then we are lawless.

The your congressmen and police to enforce the laws or tell us which laws they are going to enforce and which laws they will not enforce.

Phylo, this is a new intellectual low...
even for you. I can only presume that you are a recent product of one of our fine liberal universities (but I repeat myself), so thoroughly have you absorbed the twin pillars of the Church of Liberalism: Mulitculturalism--no culture is better or worse than any other, except ours, which is inferior to all. Moral Relativism -- there is no objective good, evil or truth; these concepts are defined by each individual.

If liberal defense of Muslim society and the global jihad and terrorism it has spawned sound familiar, go back 20 years. We were hearing all the same things about Soviet Communism. They weren't so bad; after all, they shared the Democrat goal of Marxist Socialism. They loved their children just like us. It was our fault that they acted as they did. If only we would unilaterally disarm, they would leave us alone. How gauche of the stupid "cowboy" Reagan to identify them as an evil empire! And Uncle Fidel, why he's just a kindly old man who likes baseball...and they have such good healthcare!

What is really amusing is the contortions that liberals go through to blank out the contradictions between the Muslim savagery they defend and the other dogmas of the COL (Church of Liberalism). For example, to whatever extent evil exists, Republicans embody it by opposing gay "marriage"--yet the Islamist societies that are no worse, and probably better than, ours stone gays to death---blankout. Similarly, Bush is a threat to women because he opposes sticking a pair of forceps in a baby's head and vacuuming out his/her brain, yet the enlightened Muslim society treats women like cattle, repleat with forced circumcision and "honor killings"---blankout.

What you will never understand is that Islamofascist monsters don't care if you hate the US; they don't care if you despise George Bush; they don't care if you love Saddam and wish him back in power; they don't care if you hate Israel, and support their goal of completely destroying it along with every Jew on the planet--they still want to kill you and your family, and will do so at their earliest opportunity.

DJ Drummond
Last sentence, Tell your congressmen........ I get a little fast with the fingers.

Shnknsn
Great post, but please credit Sean Hannity for the original work.

These discussions
Of all these statements, tulsaman has it best. Congrats to your thoughts.
Ed

Fear also
Non-Muslims have the same fear as Muslims. I have no doubt about the reason for Euro-terrorists being so common in the movies these days. Hollywood directors, newspaper reporters, etc. only need to see the kidnapping of Steve Centanni, the throat cutting of Van Gogh, and the rioting and threats after the Danish cartoons to realize what they don't dare do to whom. I think even you'd be surprised how much influence is exerted by threats of Muslim retaliation for what they don't like.

The final solution
I know no one wants to hear this, and I frankly don't like to say it because I wish it were not true. I've been saying for years that the only way this conflict will ever end is for those who wish to live in peace eliminate those who don't. If the "peaceful muslims" can't clean their own house, then it is up to the rest of the world (aka the U.S.) to clean it for them. We won't have peace until they either choose to behave like civilized human beings or they are dead. I'm betting on dead.

The final solution
I know no one wants to hear this, and I frankly don't like to say it because I wish it were not true. I've been saying for years that the only way this conflict will ever end is for those who wish to live in peace eliminate those who don't. If the "peaceful muslims" can't clean their own house, then it is up to the rest of the world (aka the U.S.) to clean it for them. We won't have peace until they either choose to behave like civilized human beings or they are dead. I'm betting on dead.

The final solution
I know no one wants to hear this, and I frankly don't like to say it because I wish it were not true. I've been saying for years that the only way this conflict will ever end is for those who wish to live in peace eliminate those who don't. If the "peaceful muslims" can't clean their own house, then it is up to the rest of the world (aka the U.S.) to clean it for them. We won't have peace until they either choose to behave like civilized human beings or they are dead. I'm betting on dead.

The final solution
I know no one wants to hear this, and I frankly don't like to say it because I wish it were not true. I've been saying for years that the only way this conflict will ever end is for those who wish to live in peace eliminate those who don't. If the "peaceful muslims" can't clean their own house, then it is up to the rest of the world (aka the U.S.) to clean it for them. We won't have peace until they either choose to behave like civilized human beings or they are dead. I'm betting on dead.

Question for the room
How many Muslims do you know, personally?

This is a crucial factor in separating reasonable caution from paranoia.

One or two points
Mr. Prager et al.,

You were "debating on the moral equivalency of the Israelis and the Palestinians," or the Israelis and Hamas? Both Israelis and Palestinians are people, and thus, according to some people at least "born equal," whom they may choose to ally themselves with later as individuals, notwithstanding. The moral status of Hamas is eligible for debate.

The Saudis have not banned the practice of all non-Muslim religions in Saudi Arabia, but they are banned in _public_. What's the problem with this? I've heard similar calls from people in the 'States, upset at the notion of Islam being practiced in public, as well as atheists, upset at having _anybody's_ religion imposed on them in public places. And I'm pretty sure that Jesus said it's better to pray in private than in public, anyway (Matthew 6:5-6:8).

Oh, and no, Saudi Arabia is not the only country with a weapon on its flag. To list them for you: Kenya (2 spears and a shield), Barbados (a trident), Lesotho (spears, again), Mozambique (a Kalashnikov!), Sri Lanka (sword, again), Swaziland (more spears), and the US Virgin Islands (arrows)! There may be more that I missed. Should we bomb Mozambique? Obviously a dangerous country, judging by their flag...

And to David Mac, if I may:

The Palestinians don't _have_ a country. That is a large part of the problem. The Palestinian Authority exists at the pleasure of the Israeli government, and certainly, as far as I have been able to find out, doesn't disallow churches or synagogues within the territory that they, nominally, control.

Further, the vast majority of Americans condemn terrorism, and do nothing to stop it. What should we do with them? Come on! The vast majority of Muslims (or non-Muslim Americans) will never meet a terrorist. What do you expect them to do, aside from condemn?

Flame away!
Peter


John Galt
I have not watched or listened to Sean H. in a long time. Did he say something similar?

This is who we Fight Dennis
Examine Literacy rates in:

* Algeria in 1998 was estimated at 61.6% (73.9% among males and 49% among females);
* Bahrain's literacy rate was estimated in 1995 at 85.2% (89.1% of males and 79.4% of females);
* Comoros total literacy in 1998 was estimated at 57.3% (64.2% of males and 50.4% of females); while according to 1995 estimates, literacy in
* Djibouti stood at 46.2% (60.3% of men and 32.7% of women).
* Egypt stood at 51.4% (63.6% of men and 38.8% of women-a notable accomplishment indeed after only 4500 YEARS of trying!));
* Iraqi literacy was estimated in 1995 at 58% (70.7% of men and 45% of women);
* Jordan iteracy rate was estimated in 1995 at 86.6% (93.4% among males and 79.4% among females);
* Kuwaiti literacy was estimated in 1995 at 78.6% (82.2% of men and 74.9% of women).
* Lebanon, literacy was estimated in 1997 at 86.4% (90.8% of men and 82.2% of women );
* Libyan literacy was estimated in 1995 as 76.2% (87.9% among males and 63% among females);
* Mauritania, literacy was estimated in 1995 as 37.7% (49.6% of males and 26.3% of females).
* Morocco was estimated in 1995 as 43.7% (56.6% of males and 31% of females)
* Qatar, literacy was estimated in 1995 as 79.4% (79.2% of males and 79.9% of females);
* Saudi Arabia a 1995 estimate put the literacy rate at 62.8% (71.5% among men and 50.2% among women); (they can't read, but they DO KNOW HOW TO COUNT MONEY!)
* Somalia, a 1990 estimate put total literacy at 24% (36% of males and 14% of females).
* Pakistan estimated that Male literacy is 34% for men and 14% for women
* Afghanistan literacy is estimated at 12% for males and 9% for females
* Sudan stood at 46.1% (57.7% of males and 34.6% of females);
* Syria, a 1997 estimate put the literacy rate at 70.8% (85.7% of men and 55.8% of women);
* Tunisia a 1995 estimate said the literacy rate was 66.7% (78.6% of men and 54.6% of women).
* United Arab Emirates was estimated in 1995 as 79.2% (78.9% among males and 79.8% among females);
* Yemen, a 1990 estimate put the literacy rate at 38% (53% of men and 26% of women)."

Figures for the Palestinian territories and Oman were not available. (as of Dec 2002, Adult Male Literacy in Palestine was 39.4%) - yes, and with those kids you see on TV throwing stones and molotov cocktails at Israeli soldiers the "Drop out rate" and illiteracy are as high as 85%)

THE ENEMY IS ISLAM!

Shnknsn
Sorry, it wasn't actually Hannity, it was Rush who did a bit almost exactly like your post on negotiating with terrorists. My apologies if you came up with the same thing independently. BTW, does your nom de plum have anything to do with Japanese bullet trains?

And islam is Evil
Scholarship and erudition are certainly required to comprehend these complex issues, but we indeed need more and WISDOM is required to reach the Truth and find the Solutions; as King Solomon taught us:

WISDOM COMES FROM GOD!

Wisdom is the eternal progeny of Faith - read Hebrews Chapter 11 and you will come to understand. But how can we attain this Immortal gift and thus recognize these EVIL LIES?

Now Satan, my friends is known as "THE OLD LIAR" - I trust you vaguely recall a tale about Eve and a forbidden Apple? Yes, we are dealing with LIES FROM HELL when we consider the MINDLESS (and usually unbearably long) RAMBLINGS OF THE ARAB Press and the "Islamic Intelligentsia" - THEY SPEAK THE EVIL LIES OF SATAN.

Thus we can see that we are dealing with THE FORCES OF LUCIFER:

These creatures are True Demons in human form. Monsters from Hades - it is as simple as that. We are DEALING WITH THE DEVIL.

Now we:

* Do not pray for the Devil
* Do not ask God to Bless the Devil
* Do not ask God to have Mercy on the Devil

We do ask, "St. Michael, the Archangel, Defend Us IN BATTLE. Be our defense against the wickedness and snares of the Devil. May God rebuke him, we humbly pray. And do Thou, through the POWER OF GOD - THRUST INTO HELL SATAN and ALL THE EVIL SPIRITS seeking the ruin of souls. Amen"

I say this prayer a few times a day - it is said at the end of the Catholic Rosary. Each time I do I ask our Lord to SEND THESE EVIL FIENDS BACK INTO HELL where they came from.

* The Terrorists are SOLDIERS & SERVANTS OF SATAN - and thus WORSHIP THE DEVIL
* The Terrorists ARE NOT INTERESTED IN LAND OR ANY POLITICAL END - their ONLY DESIRE IS MURDER, MAYHEM, CHAOS AND EVIL INCARNATE ON EARTH
* The Terrorists wish to ESTABLISH THE KINGDOM OF MOLOCH ON THIS EARTH - that is their sole aim - all other stated goals are simply LIES (remember that Lucifer is the Father of the Lie)
* The Terrorists MUST BE DESTROYED FOR THE GOOD OF MANKIND AND THE GLORY OF GOD

ISLAM IS A TERRORIST ORGANIZATION.
if a MUSLIM is not part of the solution, he is part of the problem.

To DJ - How many Muslims do you know?
Technically, I know one Muslim family who came to this country because of a desire for freedom and to live in peace because that could not be done in their country. The other family I know converted to Christianity and were immediately marked for death for that conversion. Would you like me to tell them they were only being paranoid?

Who we are fighting
To say it is extremists in the ROP who are the problem distorts both history and current facts. It implies that these crimes are committed by a small part of the Muslim population; and one that is not supported by the majority. This is not true. The two most recent elections in Iran and Gaza both were won win *majorities* (not pluralities like Clinton and Hitler’s election wins).

Dennis is a smart and brave man. He understands the above and bravely state so in his next to last paragraph’ “that the dominant forces within Islam are bad at this time;…” I would go one step farther. Muslims have been butchering members of *all* other religions for 1,500 years; not just the last 60 years.


Congratulations on being conservative
So blindingly conservative.

I would consider myself far to the left of the vast majority of comments made here, though there are some very rational and reasonable points made in some places.

OK, onto the original article. From the very outset it implies that all arabs/Muslims are one large coherent anti-US, anti-Semitic army. Frankly, implausible and untrue. The language implies that the US is fighting Islam - I really thought it was a war against specific terrorist organisations and groups that were -thought- to harbour them... As fallacious as that has proven to be.

People usually ignore the existence of moderate Islamic nations and the calming efforts that they exert within the arab region - countries such as Jordan. They are on good terms with the west and are quite progressive in their national and private conduct.

It would be more accurate to describe the arab/Muslim region as distinct groups of people, with a very different culture and heritage from us, who are commonly aware of (or on the the receiving end of ) past Amero-European transgressions and not particularly fond of the west due to that.

Yes, unfortunately within that frequently distrustful group you may find some extensive networks of secular and religious leaders willing to pervert the interpretations of their religion in order to condition their personal flock into a group willing to go to war as a poorly supplied private paramilitary. Christianity has been used in this manner as people pointed out in reference to the Crusades - it's being employed like this to a lesser extent today by declaring this a Christian morals vs Muslim morals struggle.

After that the article launches into a broad-ranging list of crimes and such perpetrated by Muslim nations or leaders. You would hate to see a similar list of US or western crimes being posted in the Arab world, but Bush would say it was anti-US propaganda, an unfair beat-up. In defense of all parties, please remember that 'nations' and armies commit acts and hold views that are based on the beliefs and commands of very specific individuals.

So, most of the article just succeeds in pointing out that western and Muslim sensibilities differ, that many individuals in the Muslim community are victims of manipulated religion being used as a tool to motivate militant actions, and that there are some extreme views held and enacted by individuals in positions of power. Welcome to religion, power, politics and age old grudges.

This obviously makes the entire Islamic community evil, sub-human and the enemy of the enlightened [cue angelic choir]. Hyperbole, bollocks, utter crap, whatever you want to call it.

After spending an entire article villifying everything Muslim there is a minor point made at the end - sorry for stirring up all of your hatred directed at the Muslims, I was actually just meaning there are some evil people pulling the strings... oops, did you bother to read this far, oh well.

So this is all aimed at motivating the fight to topple arab dictators? If you want to go after Iraq then win the right on issues relating to Iraq, the same for Afganistan or any other place, but you can't just paint the whole of the arab region as a hotbed of evil and immorality so that you can have an easy time picking random fights and ruining people's lives.

If you need to displace a theocracy based on the manipluation of Islam's beliefs then why not broadcast more accurate and moderate interpretations giving people the choice of beliefs, support the efforts of moderate Islamic nations, change people's thinking - it'll cost a LOT less, kill a lot less and not turn the west into a terrorist target.

Now onto the comments...

No Idea Log
asked: "Did you also know the Ottoman Empire divided what's now modern Iraq into three regions -Mosul, Baghdad and Basrah?" Well, they didn't do that exactly. In 1609, there were 6 Vilayets comprising the area that is now Iraq (Mosul, Ar-Raqqah - Including Syria and some of Turkey, Bagdad, Basra, Diraubekir - some of Turkey, Shehrizor - Some of Iran). These also included parts of Syria, Turkey, and Iran). As of WWI, there were 15 different Vilayets total and only the Mosul and the Van Vilayet still obtained in the area. There was not a Baghdad nor a Basrah Vilayet at that time even though they did exist earlier.

The rationale for this division was threefold. First, as communictions and transportation was limited, these Vilayets were approximate 1-2 days by fast horse apart. Second, these were mostly existing but conquered states. An example is that Sherizor was mostly Persian while Diraubekir was Kurdish. The third reason was that the leadership of the empire, the Osman family, wanted their sons to run something to give them knowledge and ability to rule when the previous Sultan died. This did lead to intercene warfare, and to changes, but it was one of the rationales.

Reference http://www.answers.com/topic/ottoman-empire

Check your "facts"
_Every_ Muslim nation discriminates against non-Muslims? I'll take exception to this. I worked for 3 years with an Iranian Zoroastrian. She still has a large amount of family in Iran and visited them at least once a year. She told us that the Muslims left the Zoroastrians alone to practice their religion, although they were expected to conform to Muslim dress codes outside the home. I have also heard on Public Radio stories of Christians in Syria who are largely left alone to practice freely.

Nor is Israel all sweetness and light. I have also heard on Public Radio from people who have lived in Israel that there are two road systems - one for Jews and one for non-Jews (meaning Muslims). When a Muslim road crosses a Jewish road, he Muslim must park his car, cross the road on foot and find transportation from that point on. This is very similar to our Jim Crow laws. Is it any wonder they feel like 2nd-class citizens? Have you not wondered when a Jew or Muslim is shot in a car, how did the gunman know the passengers were Jewish or Muslim?

As for Muslim women having fewer rights than they had in ancient Rome, Muslim women have more rights than they had in Arabia before Islam. They had no property ownership rights, no right to instigate a divorce, were traded like cattle, and infanticide was routinely practiced. I'm not saying improvements can't be made, but they are much better off than 1400 years ago. And the reason women cannot drive in Saudi Arabia is that women are not allowed to converse with men who are not relatives. If a woman crashed a car, she would be forced to confront the driver of the other car, the police, etc., who would most likely be male and not related. The reason for this in Arabia is because they have to be "holier than the pope" because it is the home of the two holiest cities in Islam.

Of course NONE of this excuses the suicide bombings or other acts of terrorism.

The world is changing very fast and my view is that Muslim society does not like change, or at least does not adapt well to it. It seems to be going through a period of extreme intolerance right now. We can only hope it will pass, and that our leadership and theirs will become more enlightened about each others' ways and quit trying to change each others' societies to suit their own view of what is "right".

they want us to forget - Islam is Deceit
Mohammed the Pedophile Prophet is notorious for his statement that "War is Deception". Mo was a brilliant criminal mastermind who understood the miscreant psychology of the Bedouin raiders he relied on quite well and knew that many Arabs are naturally dishonest. The murderous band of raiders that Mo relied on to murder and conquer in the name of his new Ideology of Terror responded well to an invitation to lie in the name of power, sex and money since, like many Arabs, they were born liars.

We shall delve deeper into the criminal genius of the Mass Murderer and Demon who is known as Mohammed - Holy Prophet of Islam:

Bukhari:V7B67N427 "The Prophet said, 'If I take an oath and later find something else better than that, then I do what is better and expiate my oath.'"

YOU CAN LIE WHEN IT BECOMES CONVENIENT!

Koran 9:3 "Allah and His Messenger dissolve obligations."

Mo can abrogate any promise or oath (and did) when shows a profit.

Koran 66:1 "Allah has already sanctioned for you the dissolution of your vows."

Allah the Talking Rock God has already sanctioned Muslim lies.

Bukhari:V4B52N268 "Allah's Apostle said, 'War is deceit.'"

This verse is NOTORIOUS in WORLD HISTORY.

Koran 4:142 "Surely the hypocrites strive to deceive Allah. He shall retaliate by deceiving them."

Allah, a "God" will strike back by deceiving men - got that? A 'GOD' WHO LIES - WHO IS THE FATHER OF ALL LIES?

Bukhari:V7B71N661 "Magic was worked on Allah's Apostle and he was bewitched so that he began to imagine doing things which in fact, he had not done."

Mo imagined a lot of things - and magic in fact plays an important role in Islam today as it did during the 7th century. Though Muslims assert that Islam is "Monotheistic" it incorporates many elements of paganism, including worship of demons and the use of magic spells (this known in Dar al Islam as 'modern medicine')

Bukhari:V6B60N8 "Umar said, 'Our best Koran reciter is Ubai. And in spite of this, we leave out some of his statements because Allah's Apostle himself said, "Whatever verse or revelation We abrogate or cause to be forgotten We bring a better one."

Abrogation ABROGATES ISLAM ITSELF! Even if the litterateur/theologian accepts the oxymoronic notion that GOD ALWAYS CHANGES HIS MIND - WHICH OPINION IS THEN CORRECT? I.E. When one verse FORBIDS MURDER but another CONDONES AND IN FACT PRAISES IT - WHICH VERSE IS CORRECT? Islamic "Scholars" 1 never can supply a satisfactory answer to this endless enigma.

Koran 33:11 "In that situation the Believers were sorely tried and shaken as by a tremendous shaking. And behold! The Hypocrites and those in whose hearts is a disease said: 'Allah and His Messenger promised us nothing but delusion; they have promised only to deceive us."

Allah is a lovely Talking Rock God - is he not? Note once again that Allah has promised to lie - this is a 'God"?

Koran 33:14 "Say: Flight will not avail you if you flee from death, killing, or slaughter. In that case you will not be allowed to enjoy yourselves but a little while. Say, 'Who will screen you, saving you from Allah if he intends to harm and injure you?'"

THE MUSLIMS WILL FIND AND KILL YOU! NOWHERE TO RUN - NOWHERE TO HIDE - YOU WILL LIVE IN TERROR!

Koran 33:21 "You have in (Muhammad) the Messenger of Allah a beautiful pattern of conduct for any one to follow."

DECEPTION IS THIS BEAUTIFUL PATTERN - see dummy?

Koran 74:31 "We have appointed nineteen angels to be the wardens of the Hell Fire. We made a stumbling-block for those who disbelieve and We have fixed their number as a trial for unbelievers in order that the people of the Book may arrive with certainty, and that no doubts may be left for the people of the Book, those in whose hearts is a disease. And for those to whom the Scripture Book has been given, and the believers, there should be no doubt. The unbelievers may say, 'What does the Lord intend by this?' The Lord will lead astray whomever He pleases, and He will guide whomever He pleases: and none can know the armies of your Lord except He, and this is no other than a warning to mankind."

The Angels of Islam GUARD THE FIRES OF HELL - some ANGELS!

Koran 74:52 "Each one of them wants to be given scrolls of revelation spread out! No! By no means! Nay, this is an admonishment. Let them keep it in remembrance! But they will not heed unless the Lord wants them to. He is the fountain of fear."

TERROR IS THE FOUNDATION OF ISLAM - this is critical to understanding Islam. While God/Jehovah/Yaweh is pure Love - ALLAH IS TOTAL FEAR - TERROR!

Bukhari:V2B24N555 "I heard the Prophet say, 'Allah hates for you for asking too many questions.'"

Allah the Talking Rock God HATES PEOPLE - rather odd for a "God" who is 'Kind. Merciful and Benevolent" no? Allah hates no one since Allah is a rock - THE PEDOPHILE PROPHET MOHAMMED HATES THE WORLD! (we shall ignore the poor grammar for now)

Koran 92:8 "We will make smooth for him the path to misery."

GEE THANKS DUDE! You're gonna make my misery smooth - HOW CONSIDERATE OF YOU that's just what I always wanted!

Ishaq:519 "Hajjaj said to the Apostle, 'I have money scattered among the Meccan merchants, so give me permission to go and get it.' Having got Muhammad's permission, he said, 'I must tell lies.' The Apostle said, 'Tell them.'"

WAR IS DECEPTION - Jewish and Christian children are taught "Thou Shall not Lie" - Muslims are TAUGHT TO LIE!

Koran 47:24 "Do they not understand the Koran? Nay, on the hearts there are locks preventing them from understanding."

HONEST PEOPLE WITH INTEGRITY CANNOT UNDERSTAND THE KORAN AT ALL.

Ishaq:548 "By Allah, the black mass has spread. Abu Bakr said, 'There is not much honesty among people nowadays.'"

The "Black Mass"is a.) the Nation of Islam or b.) devil worship

Koran 5:41 "Whomever Allah wants to deceive you cannot help. Allah does not want them to know the truth because he intends to disgrace them and then torture them."

Allah the Talking Rock God intends to disgrace them and then torture them! This is NO GOD - THIS IS SATAN!

John Galt
I did not hear Rush do anything like that. I do sometimes listen to him. I was just arguing with my brother who wants to "negotiate" with the terorists. I thought a transcript of such a negotiation would be funny.

Yes, SHNKNSN is my license plate. You are the only person to correctly identify the reference. Are you Japanese?

Bull Dog Drummond asked:
"How many Muslims do you know, personally?"

Know, a few dozens. Friends with 2-3. None terribly close, though I am very close with a number of Lebanese Christians.

However, history is history regarless of individuals. And the article talks about the officials and imams and not the general rabble.

DJ
I don't know how many muslims I know. I don't see the relevance. We have all, however, become more aware of what Islam teaches them. I strongly must disagree with your position on this subject because I don't think we can separate every individual muslim and determine if they actually intend to practice the venemous requirements of their religion. Can you imagine the vehemence toward those of us charged with deciding which muslims are "fanatical" and which aren't? Further, there is no benefit to stating that there are "peaceful" muslims. For, when they are called upon to act with violence by their imams, clerics, whatever.... will they choose to be obedient? They may hope they are never called upon. They may choose to not act, but to do so is to disavow Muhammed's own words.

Most of the regular posters I see here are well aware of this and have addressed it many times. As usual, though, a liberal bent poster does spice things up.

Conservative hugs

To Orwell
I am surprised no one brought this up, but if you want to blame Muslim terrorists on Western "meddling" in their affairs for 2 centuries, you also need to explain why non-Muslim sub-saharan Africa and non-Muslim Asia produce no similar terrorism, despite suffering even longer periods of Western "meddling", as well as why natives of the Americas do not return to Europe as terrorists despite even longer "meddling" by Westerners. It seems that, whatever the contribution of Western involvement with Islamic nations, there are other, more powerful forces which encourage Islamic terrorism, and that Western "meddling" played little, or no, part in this.

Jaybird repeats a slander
When he says: "Nor is Israel all sweetness and light. I have also heard on Public Radio from people who have lived in Israel that there are two road systems - one for Jews and one for non-Jews (meaning Muslims). When a Muslim road crosses a Jewish road, he Muslim must park his car, cross the road on foot and find transportation from that point on."

You ever been there? I have. The street signs are both in Arabic and Hebrew. There are no reserved roads. It is a total slander and untrue.

Jeff - WRONG
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subdivisions_of_the_Ottoman_Empire

No one said that the borders were exact but the majority of present day Iraq was comprised of those three areas.

One small correction to Jeff
Actually, Jeff, the Ottomans were notorious for finding a solution to internecine strife. True, while the sultan lived, his sons may engage in rivalry, but once one ascended to the position of sultan, he no longer worried about his brothers thanks to the age-old expedient of fratricide. Admittedly, there were a few (very few) exceptions, but by and large, every Ottoman sultan killed all his male siblings when he ascended the throne.

I don't fear Isreal
Jeff-

Good info. Thanks.
Oh. By the way. I don't seem to be that fearful of being bombed or kidnapped by Israelis. Am I just not enlightened?

Vulcan
You are not being PC enough. I appreciate that.

Jay_in_Milwaukee is wrong
A lot of errors in your post, but just to correct one: In pre-Islam Arabia, you say women had no property rights. That is entirely false. Mohammed actually inherited most of his initial wealth by marrying Khadijah (many alternate spellings) and gaining a share of her wealth. If women had no property rights, Mohammed would have gained nothing from his marriage.

Re. Jay_in_Milwaukee
I think it's you who should check your facts, far from being mistreated, the Arab population in Israel and in the territories administered by Israel has been freer than the population in any Arab state. Arabs in Israel vote. They elect leaders to the Knesset. They have their own political parties. They have their own newspapers. They have full rights to citizenship. They are free to speak their minds. There are more freedoms for Arabs in Israel than in any Arab state. I have yet to find evidence of non-jewish roads in Israel but here's a pic of the converse

http://www.middle-east-info.org/league/saudi/apartheidhighwaymecca.gif

or a banknote of Israel which includes arabic

http://www.middle-east-info.org/league/israel/banknote.jpg

In Lebanon, don’t try speaking out against the Syrian occupation. You won’t live long. In Saudi Arabia, don’t try converting from Islam. You won't live long. In Somalia, don’t try refusing sexual mutilation of your sister. She and you won't live long. In Tunisia, don’t try saying the government is corrupt. You won't live long. In Egypt, don’t try being a homosexual. You won't live long. In Sudan, don’t try being a separatist. You won’t live long. In Iran, don’t try having an affair. You won’t live long. In Iraq, don’t try to be a party activist. You won’t live long. In Algeria, don’t try to be suspected of Islamism. You won't live long. In Libya, don’t try asking about her role in international terrorism. You won’t live long. In Mauritania, don’t try helping a slave run away. He and you won’t live long. In Syria, don’t try throwing stones at police. You won't live long. In Oman, don’t try demonstrating for women rights. You won’t live long. In Morocco, don’t try saying Arab Saharawis have been displaced. You won’t live long. In Yemen, don’t try apostasy. You won’t live long.In the Palestinian Authority, don’t try supporting democratic Israel. You won’t live long.

P.S. Jay_in_Milwaukee
If you want to be taken seriously get your fact from somewhere other than N.P.R. NitWits Propaganda Network

OH MY GHOD!
Not an Idea ologue can't even read his own citation!

Hello. Your own source says those existed in 1877, but was changed in 1887. And, in 1887, your source agrees with what I wrote in that there are not 3, but 6 provinces that comprise Iraq. If you are going to cite, at least read the citation.

A response
"Since everything that is said in the article is true why does most of the world press and leaders talk about how peaceful Islam is and how it is only a tiny number of misguided terrorists who have ruined this peace loving relgion?"

Eric Rudolph bombed an abortion clinic and planted a bomb at the Olympics (or is at least a suspect), so Christianity must also be a religion of violence.

Obviously the above is a fallacious argument, but is meant to poke at the hole in the quoted argument.

So why don't the moderates speak up? Ask why they didn't in Nazi Germany. We keep calling them fascists. So how do fascists deal with opposition?

As for the Jeff, who writes that I repeat slander: Then your issue is with the guest on NPR who stated such. Sorry, the show was years ago and I don't remember his name, but he was also a resident of Israel for several years. I can't be sure, but I suspect this is more the case in border crossing areas or kibbutzim, if it exists at all. No, I haven't been to Israel. I only know what I hear, kind of like all of us and Islam, right?

So how _do_ those gunmen know the driver is a Jew? License plates? Do they have incredible eyesight that they can spot a yarmulke at night from 100 yards? Do they hang out on roads leading to kibbutzim? How do they know?

The real problem is extremism of any kind. When was the last time we burned a witch, stoned an adulterer, or sold a daughter into slavery for screwing around? My neighbor ate shellfish. Should I stone him or shoot him? If you really want to come right down to it, even our fundamentalist Christians are watered down from the laws put up in the Pentateuch. Have we become "civilised" or do the hard-core tenets of the religion just not matter that much any more?

I agree with the earlier poster who basically said we have to wait until they do it themselves. I've said it, too. They need their own Thomas Paine or Thomas Jefferson, otherwise it's a foreign system of government.

One problem we have in that part of the world is that their cultures still stress family and community while ours stresses the power of the individual. This sets up an inevitable clash within the family-tribal structure. No wonder they see democracy as a threat.

Again, none of this excuses suicide bombing. Suicide is a sin no matter how you slice it, either in Islam or Christianity. The mullahs had to resort to some rather large circumlocution to justify it. It begs the question of why don't the local governments clamp down it? Same as here - politics.

To butte1
So we have to resort to an ad-hominem attack?

My sources should be what? Corporate-owned National Lockstep Radio?

I'll stick with radio funded largely by the masses rather than by corporations with an agenda, thank you.

For instance: On August 9 or thereabouts they had on a 9/11 conspiracy theorist. He made a good argument. Then last week they had on an editor from Popular Mechanics, which had a report on 9/11 backed up by 300 experts in their fields. Now _that's_ a balanced viewpoint, unless you want to argue it's one author's viewpoint versus that of 7-8 writers and 300 experts.

I've also been able to hear ALL the parties for office in Wisconsin that I've wanted to, including the Greens and Libertarians, who so far have not been invited to any televised debates. That's a fair and objective viewpoint? I call it disenfranchisement and suppression of ideas.

Sure, the GOP or Demo is probably going to win, but the GOP was a minority party once upon a time, too, until they displaced the Whigs around 1852.

But now we digress.

Shnknsn
No, I'm not Japanese, but I speak Japanese and spent some time there on a business internship in the mid-80's. Most fail to identify the literary source of my own nom-de-plum, believing it to be my real name

Naked as a Jay
commented on several items.

"Eric Rudolph bombed an abortion clinic and planted a bomb at the Olympics (or is at least a suspect), so Christianity must also be a religion of violence." This is incorrect simply because the article initially spoke of governmental acts and laws, not individual. I would agree you could ignore the individual instances IF you can demostrate that they are at odds with the official positions of the majority of Islamic nations (Turkey being the primary exception as Attaturk turned it into a secular society...And even though it is tending to slide back into theocratic rule.)

"As for the Jeff, who writes that I repeat slander: Then your issue is with the guest on NPR who stated such. Sorry, the show was years ago and I don't remember his name". Do not belive anything you hear and question much of what you see. I have heard of the grassy knoll, UFOs, the American involvement in 9-11 and the protocols of Zion on NPR. Not one of them is proven or even likely and most absolutely debunked.

"I suspect this is more the case in border crossing areas or kibbutzim, if it exists at all." The only case where this IS true to a degree is where there are defensive roads, walls, and other barriers in the occupied territories. In those cases, no one (not Israeli Jew, Arab Jew, or American Christian) is allowed to cross.

"So how _do_ those gunmen know the driver is a Jew?" Do you really think they care? I know they don't. They did attack settlements where they knew only Jews would be living, since they had walled themselves in for defense. But most of the places hit are very public and the death toll from attacks runs about 70% Jewish, 20% Arab and 10% other/tourist. Similar to the overall demographics of the nation.

Jay
Gosh, I never realized they had progressed so much in 1400 years, perhaps in another 1000 years a woman might actually be able to go out in public on her own. To rely on the reporting of Public Radio is just plain ignorant. You are probably one of those people that believes that gullable isn't in the dictionary.

Jay in MIlwaukee
If sources of information are the topic, I refer you to Vulcan's quotes from the Koran earlier in this thread (1:13).

Talk about going right to THE source. There it is. Even if you dont't agree with his conclusions, it isn't spin or politically motivated.

SHNKNSN
Outstanding post! Certainly will be nominated for "Post of the Year" Award (and even if Rush did do it first, great minds think alike).

Thanks for the display of intelligence and humor, as well as a fine-tuned reality check for all the leftists/socialists out there. KUTGW.

Striker asks
If anyone recognizes his nom_de_plum. I think that he has to stop motoring around and stop the engine of the world in his head.

However, Mr. Mystery worker, I think you must be talking about the Reverend T. Clark as the source of your name. You wouldn't happen to live in Ontario or Upper Canada would you?

C'mon Jeff
I did read it and if you look at my original post on this matter. I didn't attach dates but the fact remains that those regions were created.

To: P, wilcox.
You do realize that the disputed territories NEVER belonged to "Palestinians". The territories became disputed over as the result of the 6 day war in 1967 in which Syria, Eygypt, Lebanon, and Jordan all attacked Israel with the goal of "pushing the Jews into the sea". Israel not only held onto it's own territory but pushed further out and took control of the land that is now "the Palestinians" who were really the displaced Arabs in that area from that war. These were Arabs who were refugees that the Arab countries would not take back but instead left in refugee camps. But we are to believe that Israel should have absorbed these people with open arms when Jewish people have been pushed out of 99% of the land in that region over thousands of years yet the Arabs don't want them to have the 1% of land that they have left because their child molesting prophet Muhammad gave instructions for all Arab land to be in the possession of Muslims only.


Since you have a problem with the fact that Israel uses segregation methods to separate their women and children from those who self-implode on school buses and in cafes, why don't you offer a solution on how to better protect their civilians from daily suicide bombers?

If you have a problem with the living conditions of those in the refugee camps, how about questioning why it is that the billions of dollars that UNWRA has sent there all ends up in the hands of terrorist leaders rather than to improve the squalid conditions of the "Palestinians"?

Two things typically happen in wars. 1) The winning side takes control of land and resources as a reward for winning the war (in this case, the war was started by the side that lost). What better deterrent to Arab nations than if you don't want to lose land, don't start wars? 2) Those that care about their women, children, and civilians take the fight to the enemy rather than allowing their civilians to get caught in the cross-fire of combat. Therefore, unless Israel wants to fight Arab nations on Israeli land, they need to keep control of the disputed territories in order to protect itself (ie, the civilians on Israeli land).

The very reason that Israel has had to exert control over the disputed territories is because the "Palestinians" won't stop attacking them. Maybe the answer to the problem in the middle-east can be summed up by the very words spoken by radical Islamic leaders that "the west loves life, we love death.........which is why we will win".

Religion of Conquest
While there may be hundreds of millions of peaceful Muslims in the world, the fact remains that Islam is and always has been a religion of conquest. From Muhammad's first setting out from Medina to conquer Mecca to the present day, Islam has always sought to subjugate the infidels. This passion continues to this day, and if you can't conquer or convert them, the next best thing is to kill them. The history books are full of examples of Muslim conquests, from Muhammad's conquest of the Arabian Peninsula by his death in 632, to the battle of Yarmuk in 636 that led to the conquest of Egypt and Syria. When Muhammad bin Quasim conquered Sindh in the early 8th century, the conquest of the Indian subcontinent began reaching its peak in 1526 when it ruled almost the entire region. The conquest of Constantinople in 1453 brought an end to the Byzantine Empire at the hands of the Muslim Turks. They laid siege to Vienna in 1529, and attempted to conquer it again in 1683.
For people who say that the Muslims have not contributed anything to science, mathematics, art and architecture, they are simply ignorant. The issue is that Muslims have made very little contribution in the past 800 years, because their still living 800 years ago. They have the mental state of a person living in 1200, not 2006, and it is stagnating them and not allowing them to progress as a people that see the world as one that no longer lives in the 13th century and no longer lives by 13th century rules.

Help The Politicians
IVES

HELP THE POLITICIANS

My leanings are conservative. I could criticize George Bush but will not. He is our leader and my daddy taught me there were three ways to do anything, the right way, the wrong way and his way; the point being we are far more effective working together than we are wasting energy and time debating unnecessary issues.

There is a plan in place and our immediate priority is to follow that plan and to intellectually and politically improve it as soon and as much as possible.

Liberals, you must either present a better plan for stopping Terrorism or be quiet !!!!!!!!!!! Present your plan, get elected on that basis and, regardless my fears and objections, I will let you lead. It’s the American Way. If you don’t believe Terrorism is a priority issue you can declare that there is no “War on Terrorism” after you have been sworn into office.

By the way, “George Bush has it wrong”, is not a plan.

What I would like to see is the incredible depth of knowledge and experience displayed in various postings on this subject focused on helping to strengthen the will of our Politicians. No compelling strategy has yet been verbalized to inspire the American, (or World), Public regarding the War on Terror with the exception that the use of the term Islamo/Islamic Fascists seems to have helped focus the debate.

There are some fundamental issues which require clarification, expansion, and thorough debate. Can we collectively prepare a War on Terror Platform for our politicians? Help me here:

1. War Objective – (Pick One) - Kill All Muslims, or Embrace Isolationism / Appeasement, or Fight A Measured War to Secure World Freedom, (are there other options?)

2. Strategy
a. Kill All Muslims – Nuclear war with more than 60 countries to kill 1.6 billion of 6.8 billion humans is morally wrong and politically unsustainable and physically impossible.
b. Appeasement – I cannot intellectually prepare this option, anyone interested?
c. Measured War
i. Find Ways to Stop Radical Muslim Teachings, and
ii. Find Ways To Diminish Muslim Extremists Control By Fear, and
iii. Go To War with Radical Muslim Extremists Where and When Required
(Note: The Measured War Will Last Two Generations After The Muslim Radical Teachings and Fear Control Tactics Are Stopped or Radically Diminished, i.e. maybe 80 or 100 years).
Unless you picked Kill All Muslims, a moderate Muslim leadership alliance is required to accomplish Measured War Objectives.
3. Propaganda War – western nations are typically offended by this strategy but it has to be done. The paradigm shift required to bring the MSM on board will probably require either / and:
a. Election of appeasers followed by new extremists atrocities thereby providing societal and political courage to fight the war; or,
b. A deep political defeat of the liberal cut and run platform during elections for the next two years and beyond.
c. Effective communications accurately identifying the enemy, the nature of the enemy, proof the enemy does not represent the Islamic religion, the theatre of war, battle and intelligence successes, analysis of action, and adjustments or reality checks where success is not apparent. The communication medium until the MSM begins to accurate balanced reporting could include:
i. Blogs,
ii. News outlets determined to report events as they will finally be documented in 50 years, i.e. history,
iii. Inspirational Political Speeches, (President Bush must, prior to the election, be one of many to accomplish this task).
The most difficult Propaganda War issue is the world wide image from America that the public will not accept a long and difficult fight to protect its freedom; i.e. the legacy of the Viet Nam war. This image is further promoted by excessive coverage of cut and run politics, an unbalanced presentation of radical and abusive George Bush hatred, and inappropriate statements from former presidents Clinton and Carter.
IDF’s Lebanon war with Hezbolla requires a facelift regarding:
? Staged and false media reports alleging IDF atrocities
? Balanced reporting on IDF’s Beiruit attacks which were highly selective, focused on Hezbolla assets, and avoided most of Beiruit. The opposite was reported during the war.
? IDF erroneously used a proportional response for all of Lebanon, less than the situation required in southern Lebanon and in areas from which rockets were launched
? The IDF should demonstrate how attacks were focused on Hezbolla assets and / or rockets / missiles being used against Israel citizens rather than the Lebanese public, include film, policy, organization, etc.
? Present IDF strategic mistakes not to be repeated in future conflicts such as:
? IDF ground forces were not dispatched into Southern Lebanon soon enough nor in adequate numbers.
? IDF air, rocket and cannon attacks were widespread throughout Lebanon and should have been concentrated on Southern Lebanon and on rocket / missile launch sites when they were detected.
? UN and especially French peace treaty negotiations and security force dispatch performance provides justification the IDF should dramatically reduce any priority attached to future European diplomatic efforts during Middle East conflicts.
4. Tactics 1 – Surround the Islamic Fascist’s and continually apply political and physical/war pressure.
The enemy is currently in Iran, Syria, North Pakistan Tribal Areas, South Afghanistan, Somalia, and Sudan, with elements under varying levels of government control in other Middle East countries, (Lebanon will fall into an allied or terrorists category depending on the effective implementation of UN supervision supported by European military.). The US has troops and bases in Afghanistan, Iraq, Kuwait, Qatar, UAE, Djbouti, I saw US troops in Ethiopia two years ago. A Strong Israel remains a high US Priority.
Hmmmmmm, did George Bush actually surround most of our Middle East enemies? Sure looks to me like the key Middle East problem areas are surrounded, and without knowing the details I’m sure the US intelligence and military capabilities improve daily, (versus how they would improve were the US to adopt an isolationist strategy).
Pakistan is aligned with the US and is attempting to control radical Islamists in the Northern tribal areas.
Terrorists problems in the Far East are being addressed by most Muslim governments and Australia is active there and in Iraq.
Help me here, I know there is more public intelligence out there. Please be accurate. Lets prepare a white paper on this subject.
5. Tactic 2 – Use any resource necessary to prevent Iran from developing Nuclear weaponry and or delivery systems.
6. Tactic 3 – Shock and Awe. Lets prepare a complete list of major or key Islamic Fascists terrorists acts committed against US interests since the Viet Nam war; note the action taken; and recommend action the US should have taken to cause the enemy pause. Such a document, embraced by the public, will help Politicians make the right decision should future attacks occur. The US should execute a few pre-emptive attacks to demonstrate its continued belief this strategy is necessary.
7. Tactic 4 – Prepare a secret plan to control N. Korea. Try to keep this conflict on the shelf as long as possible.
8. Diplomacy – Intensive diplomacy efforts to either bring China and Russia on Board for the War on Terror, or if the US has to act, especially against Iran, to neutralize their opposition.
Establish ways to minimize the negative effects of liberal European politics, in particular the badly misguided French. French military history for the past 100 years will provide a good place to find facts which would demonstrate the incorrectness and arrogance of their philosophy. Recent public riots and seemingly never ending strikes also demonstrate the weakness of French political leadership.
Revive the sound US philosophies used to bring world order and success to our enemies following World War II and the Korean “police action”. Sure wish we had declared war in Korea and finished the job.

I think we would not be in this situation if the politicians and anti war demonstrators like Kerry hadn’t thrown in the towel in Viet Nam. I’ve been a little disturbed with the radical “authority opposing” Baby Boomers having lived through that period, (born in 1938), and sense that many radical liberal agendas and incorrect MSM philosophies remain driven by this anti authority philosophy.

IVES

The non-logger of ideas
Defends his citation with: "I did read it and if you look at my original post on this matter. I didn't attach dates but the fact remains that those regions were created." Yup. They were created, but they were 3 of 6. Also created in the same area were the Persian Empire, The Eastern Roman Empire, The Babylonian empire, the Turks, the Mongols, and a dozen more. But your point was trying to be that there should be 3 groups because there always have been. But that is flawed in that there never have been 3 areas. There have been 6 and 1 and 2 but I cannot name a time when there were exactly 3.

who we fight,lets give pacifism a chance
This is for all the leftist & liberals out there that believe in non violence. Lets try this and think out of the Box: 1) let get all the left wing female groups organize all the female muslims snd tell them not to have any sex with there men until they come to terms with the 21st century. 2) I understand that there is a tremendous revulsion to pigs in the muslim community. That being so, let post a notice at the remains of all suicide murders will be fed to Pigs and they will be become pig feces afer their death. Lets give pacfism a chance.

To: Steele
There has never been a war that the U.S. has fought in where the enemy nation was comprised of only a bunch of bad people. There were plenty of farmers in Germany who were doing nothing more than struggling to survive. Plenty of peasants in Japan who had nothing to do with Pearl Harbor or fighting for the Emperor. Up until Vietnam, when our country went to war, we viewd the country we were fighting against as our enemy period. Americans hated the Japs and Krouts and made no apologies for it. Millions of innocent civilians died in the war that did nothing wrong.

Once you start conducting wars with the type of mentality George bush has (along with everyone of his mindset and those to the left of him) where we must go in and find the bad guys and "hunt them down and bring them to justice" there will be no winning against the enemy. A war cannot possibly be won like that. We could be in Iraq for the next 100 years hunting down terrorists and killing them and the ones we kill will be replaced by new ones. We will lose many of our own troops that never would have had to die and in the end there will be far more death and destruction.

We cannot change their hearts and minds while we are bombing them. The two don't usually mix real well. And we can't change their minds by showing them what nice people we are. They've been too brain-washed and nothing is more powerful of a motivator than religious conviction. People have shown that they will die for religious convictions more so than for just about anything. Many people in the western world will not accept that a religion might be fundamentally evil because in this day of political correctness, all religions and cultures are equal so if some Muslims are bad guys, it MUST be that they are just some of the few bad apples spoiling it for the rest. Well, maybe they aren't all signing up to be suicide bombers but just maybe the majority of them support those who do because they admire those who they consider brave enough to do the act they themselves don't want to do.

It's not that they are all bad, only most of them and unfortunately, it is going to come down to the survival between them and us. The leader of Iran said that he is willing to lose half of his people if it meant destroying Israel. What is frightening about that is that once he acquires the nuclear technology to do just that, he will. And you know what? He still won't lose half of his people. We will go in just like we did in Iraq. By land, sea and air to "HUNT DOWN THE BAD GUYS AND BRING EM TO JUSTICE". We'll kill a couple thousand of their top bad guys a year while losing thousands more of our troops than neccessary because afterall, we AREN'T AT WAR WITH THE POOR, INNOCENT CIVILIANS OF IRAN. George Bush is much more of an LBJ than a FDR and what is really scarey about that is that half of our country and most of Europe considers him a war monger.

Why do muslims emigrate?
It is not to escape from totalitarian muslim regimes. It is to spy on the adopted country. It is to send information back to the Army of Islam about the weaknesses and shortcomings of the adopted country. They come to this country and other countrys to test and probe and to find weaknesses. It is to produce wealth to be sent back to be used against the adopted country. THERE ARE NO 'MODERATE' MUSLIMS! All muslims are soldiers in the Army of Islam. All muslims want to convert the world to the one religion. The muslims the President mistakenly calls 'moderate' are just as much at war with the rest of the world as are the ones to which he referred as 'Islamofacists'. The President is wrong about Islam. It is neither a peaceful religion, as he has stated, nor an honorable religion, as he has also stated. Islam is a movement. Islam is a religion. Islam is an army. Islam is a religion that is an army. The Army of Islam. And that army is 1 Billion strong.

Comments...
To Michael's - Tuesday, August, 29, 2006 12:53 AM
"Since islamofascists only understand brute force we should use what they understand the best..."
Welcome to a vendetta that will last an eternity - it will end up like Israel and the arabs and be almost impossible to stop. Also, constantly pointing out to countries that they are evil is bound to get them ramping up weapon production and talking tough - self-fulfilling prophecy.

To Orwell's - Tuesday, August, 29, 2006 1:33 AM
I commend you on your thoughtful analysis. Nice to see someone look beyond the implied facade of universal, unreasoning fanatic zeal.

To butt1 - Tuesday, August, 29, 2006 3:44 AM
What makes you think that tyrranies have absolute control of these things? Borders are patrolled by humans - the US has just as much control of its own borders. Unless the tyrants are in league with god - that's it - that's how they have 'absolute' control of their borders - they're omniscient. 20 Million people flood across the US border to get work because the low cost of imported goods from the US and Europe means they can't even compete for sales in their own country. You should watch "We feed the world" - Spanish tomatoes in African markets at a third the cost of local production. And yes, I imagine the US saying "we'll stop screwing with the balances of power in your region" might be appreciated. The US armed and trained Al Qaeda after all. The fact the US just roamed into Iraq so erroneously is sure to put all other Muslim nations on edge.

To Rugged Individualist - Tuesday, August, 29, 2006 3:57 AM
I'm pretty sure the Islamic community didn't just take a vote and decide to invade, they have no hive-mind directing them - welcome to an Islamic national leader deciding to wage war as so many other leaders from every background have chosen to do. If he used some accurate or perverted religious dictate as his means of motivating the masses then he would be just the same as so many other leaders who use anything they can.

To tulsaman - Tuesday, August, 29, 2006 6:50 AM
Rather than an inferiority complex they are likely to feel distinctly superior - we are the infidels who don't measure up to the distorted Islamic rhetoric. Also, I don't think they'd suffer from inferiority due to feeling like the odd ones out in the world - they have their ancient heritage and western ideals and brands are alien to them rather than them feeling uncomfortable for being so non-American. It's very egocentric to assume that anyone different to you must feel uncomfortable due to that difference. Truth be told there are probably a lot of arab oil barons in their mercedes pointing their gold ringed fingers at the US and laughing about your doomed reliance on a resource he controls... And he has every right to.

To Uncle Max - Tuesday, August, 29, 2006 7:17 AM
Please try to avoid implying that all of Islam is just frothing at the mouth to destroy the US and needs to be put down. I will never understand how the (unsubstantiated) actions of so few can lead to such broad generalisations. I'm sure the Israelis who conducted the abductions that led to that situation have at some point promised to give their lives so that arabs will never own Jerusalem, too. Bush has probably made proclamations that the US is righteous because it is willing to send soldiers to die in the name of freedom or liberty or some such...

To goblue - Tuesday, August, 29, 2006 7:54 AM
Um - you do get individuals and leaders of Muslim communities standing up to speak about incidents and ongoing conflicts. Unfortunately the US media gets better ratings from anti-Muslim rhetoric being parroted around in circles. In terms of marches and demonstrations, I would expect that there are some very pro-Saddam, pro-extremist individuals amongst the US Islamic community - you aren't just going to get the nice ones immigrating - even divisions within families. Large scale marches would be inviting reprisals from the local extremists and also cause rifts within families and that community. It's not that simple.

To kodiak60 - Tuesday, August, 29, 2006 8:34 AM
Jesse Jackson mediating is wrong? He is a well known mediator in international conflicts and he is not anywhere near Africa... So what relevance does meeting with a Syrian have to the genocide in Sudan? Is he just going to walk out and stop his peace-making efforts on principle? That would be saying "You arabs can go to hell for all I care - unless you stop the fighting over there in that completely separate country." There are lots of very different ethnic groups in Africa as well - it's not like every black man dying in Sudan is a relative of his - they may even have been tribal enemies... Then again, he may be working on efforts there as well..

Jman - Tuesday, August, 29, 2006 8:36 AM
Minorities would tend to drift toward the liberal side of politics in the US because the conservatives tend to hate them. There is the exception that the conservatives are great supporters of Isreal and therefore the Jewish community might drift to the conservative end, but it will also definitely send the Arab community to the other end... There is no racially determined access to common sense. Also liberals have not been cut off from access to common sense. I think you actually wanted to be "ridding" and not "riding the world of Islamic killers". I think your stance is really "if a few innocents happen to die - then they probably weren't so innocent anyway." This is the equivalent of a guilty until proven innocent system, where it is preferred to jail the innocent rather than risk releasing the guilty. Innocent casualties are one of the most emotive arguments to fight against aggressors. Angry people who's families are dead and they now have nothing to lose in gaining revenge - very safe way to go.

To HornDogg - Tuesday, August, 29, 2006 9:06 AM
People who are ignorant of history are doomed to repeat it. You know, some pretty smart people think it is a good idea to look back at what events led to other events so that they can understand why things are happening, how to fix them and how to avoid them. And no - I personally wouldn't want to even visit any country that the US might arbitrarily start a war with. If that wasn't a threat then I'd find visiting these places interesting.

To SteveHerbert - Tuesday, August, 29, 2006 9:09 AM
It's easy to spot the conservative isn't it - "I think your stance is stupid, just as with all liberals." He's not defending terrorists... If you say that people might think you identify all Muslims as being terrorists. All Orwell is saying is that there is history, and asking whether events and influences in that history, US or not, have led the middle-east to be such a ripe territory for hatred mongering warlords. It may be embarrassing to think that maybe the US has had a hand in creating the situation, but you can't just ignore it and nuke the problem to make it disappear. People's defense of the prisoners in Guantanamo is typically aimed at the fact that no-one has even proven that they did what is claimed. Guilty until proven innocent - but lets just not bother finding out. Those guys have been wearing hoods for the vast majority of the last several years... Sensory deprivation is torture. And 'the left is a threat to America' - well welcome back to the McCarthyism show. Scepticism of the government, its motives and means does tend to turn up some embarrassing details doesn't it?

To Phylo Se Fizer - Tuesday, August, 29, 2006 9:16 AM
Cool - finally someone else sane to join Orwell. Couldn't agree with you more - this kind of article just serves to inflame the issue on both sides, both in terms of content and the implied solutions.

To Gurky - Tuesday, August, 29, 2006 9:24 AM
God to see another sane head. The flip-flopping of parties seeking votes is a symptom of the stupid two party systems that are in place in so many democracies - it just turns into a popularity and 'I told you so' contest. But I'd still want Bush out no matter the alternative.

To DavidMac - Tuesday, August, 29, 2006 9:29 AM
It's all very well to start saying that 98% of Islamic fathers would have a heart attack if their daughter went out in a miniskirt, but you've got to give them time and reason to evolve socially. If they see the US, the poster child of western values and vices, constantly threatening and meddling then they'll run in the opposite direction and embrace traditional values and controlling behaviours and fight tooth and nail to resist.

To Gurky - Tuesday, August, 29, 2006 9:43 AM
I'm pretty sure history is littered with cease-fires and ending of hostilities, so I don't think you have to resort to following through on your genocide to finish a war.

To modernone - Tuesday, August, 29, 2006 9:50 AM
Yeah - things are being done pretty arse-about-face.

To SHNKNSN - Tuesday, August, 29, 2006 10:04 AM
Dude that is the most inflamatory, unhelpful parody I've ever seen. Of course you can't just send them a crate of cigarettes and they'll forgive you... But you have to make all the friends you can around them, you've got to starve them of ways to recruit people, and not by flaying and smattering the children either. If the reality of the US really lived up to the hype and it wasn't so easy to point and laugh, if it was seen as a phlianthropic state that didn't always hide a bloody huge demon in the details, if it didn't have a history of overthrowing stable elected governments, etc - then you might eventually starve the terrorists out and stop them from multiplying.

To Gurky - Tuesday, August, 29, 2006 10:05 AM
The Isreali reaction was really a tremendous over-reaction - especially given they had kidnapped palestinians shortly beforehand and still have so many Arab political prisoners in their jails.

To beowulfe - Tuesday, August, 29, 2006 10:06 AM
Holy mother of... That's an extreme view on the whole of the Muslim community - that'll help lots. Seriously - yes at the moment there are some very heavy handed and brutal people who are spreading and following through on some very brutal behaviours, however not long ago some of the Islamic nations were heading in very western directions - women being able to walk around in miniskirts , makeup and everything. Since that time things have gone backwards - it depends on the leaders and what they enforce. They need a stable region, time to evolve socially as they were before. So if you wouldn't mind could you just not brand all Muslims as slime that deserves only death? Never heard anything more neanderthal. Think about this - Italy isn't too far behind - they had a precedent set where the judge stated that no woman wearing jeans could be raped = no legal recourse - so too bad for those who suffered due to that ignorance.

To techreck - Tuesday, August, 29, 2006 10:16 AM
Er.. Afganistan? The one where the US interfered and armed Al Qaeda so they could fight the Russians - who were also entrenched in the country? WTF? What planet are you on? The US and many other western nations have spent the better part of the last ... oooh maybe 200 years overthrowing leaders, imposing new ones, enlisting and betraying local communities to fight their wars in search of the riches of other countries. If you constantly have external parties stirring things up you can't reach a stable state - when things quieten down it will be the most brutal who rule, until there is a movement by the people to free themselves and evolve their own leadership and systems... If the brutal have rules that people find convenient for their own vices then it won't change quickly.

To Jeff - Tuesday, August, 29, 2006 10:30 AM
I believe your response to Orwell deserves this one: 'blow it our your arse' What, so 'we had to go into the middle-east and hand them their ass once before' is a good excuse for the current state of affairs? Did they somehow have a unique claim on pirates? On lawlessness? And "we've only been screwing with them for 80 years and international imposition of the state of Israel and its ownership of the hold land is no big deal..." that's a defence? None of us have any idea how many times and in what ways the west has decided to take other extreme actions in their territory - the US has taken very badly to the terrorists extreme actions on their soil. Under every Pope and leader Christianity has been used as a tool for militance. "It's a sin to kill - actually no it's a godly thing to rid the world of a pagan"

To Lexx777 - Tuesday, August, 29, 2006 10:43 AM
Woohoo - about time we had some talk of the impending apocalypse and people burning in hell. Ok - let me get this straight - Islam is encouraging the spread of sin ... we're better of killing ... whoops - hang on - isn't killing a sin? I think Islam has got to you - sorry looks like you'll be meeting up with the Muslims at the end... Bah - all this "you chose poorly - fwump" crap. But you do a good impression of a televangelist. Heh - even Bush, the Bible thumper that he is, was embarrassed by that question about whether this was the apocalypse - had a hard time not looking redicu-lous.

To ChasVS - Tuesday, August, 29, 2006 10:44 AM
"Mr. ChasVS? Mr. ChasVS - you're number has been called up - please join the queue for you fatigues and weapons ... what? I'm sorry - you don't want to die on a god forsaken sandy battlefield? But we have this record of you saying..." Yeah - somehow I think if conscription came in to feed an eternal war against Islam, trying to kill it off once and for all, a lot of people would suddenly have a change of heart and find a quiet path to Canada...

To not_an_ideologue - Tuesday, August, 29, 2006 10:46 AM
Yes - we have a winner - sanest voice in the house :)

To Paulie - Tuesday, August, 29, 2006 10:57 AM
By your reckoning the guy in on the floor had got the change to pay for his Grande Mocha Latte by mugging his attacker 50 ft back down the road. In that situation I would be laughing at him and think it was true natural justice for him to get his just desserts. You really think he wouldn't have it coming? And yes, there really are moderate Muslims you cretin - just because you don't care to look or the government 'guided' media you watch doesn't show them doesn't mean they don't exist.

To Ian M. - Tuesday, August, 29, 2006 11:05 AM
Hehe - very cool :)

To Old_Blue - Tuesday, August, 29, 2006 11:11 AM
[sigh] Seriously - when you give them the chance to have a stable political and economic environment they evolve socially and lead very moderate lives - actually, yes, just leave them alone - good, back away slowly ...

To Tara - Tuesday, August, 29, 2006 11:24 AM
Beware! Broad generalisations beyond this point...! Oh dear. Is it any wonder that so few are so rich when there are so few sources of external income? If you have a family or an individual controlling the purchase of oil and having access to a low cost work force are they just going to give it all away and make their few workers hugely rich while the others stay poor - sending inflation through the roof and starving the non-oil workers? It doesn't matter where you go, you'll find the same trends and find it getting worse until there is a 'social correction', it has -nothing- to do with them being Muslim - blinkers much? Western civilisation is not founded on philanthropy, it isn't that special in where it's at and it hasn't even been in this state for more than a couple of decades... Ok can you list the things that Muslims need to change to avoid your label of 'barbarian'? Israel is hadly blameless, that's a long nasty fight, so as with the assault in the Starbucks example earlier - why would you expect people to just let them go scott-free?

Anyway... Tired now - it's been scary meeting many of you - good luck in your path to understanding.


Steele
I see your path to understanding is longer than most. The overall take on your post is that you are ok with whatever terrorists do because their culture needs time to adjust to infeldel cultures.

Well I am not ok with being bombed and you have completely ignored the information that Islam does not allow for cultural change.

Gotta go. See you later.

Steele, regarding . . .
Muslim girls in miniskirts, and Muslim fathers having heart attacks: I never posted anything about that (or even close to it). My post was regarding the hypocrisy of the so-called moderate Muslims who give tacit approval to Islamofascists.

You must be confusing me with another poster.

pwilcox . . .
I based my post on two things:

1) A radio talk show host (Glenn Beck) visited Isreal last year and reported that there were no churches or synagogues in Palistinian-controlled territory, and

2) Cable TV news programs reported that the Palestinians in Gaza destroyed synagogues when Gaza reverted to full Palestinian control.

Please correct me if I'm wrong on either or both accounts.

Peter, it's not about land. It's that Islamofascists want all Israelis (read: Jews) dead or, at least, gone.

To Jay_in_Milwaukee
So, "As for Muslim women having fewer rights than they had in ancient Rome, Muslim women have more rights than they had in Arabia before Islam. They had no property ownership rights, no right to instigate a divorce, were traded like cattle, and infanticide was routinely practiced."

I will give you the rest, because I have read that the status of women was in some unspecified way improved under Islam in the Arabian penninsula, but Muhammad married a wealthy woman who had made a lot of money through a trading business. No property ownership rights, eh?

response to all
Most of the reponses to my post go something like this: C'mon Phylo, they hate us and there's nothing you can do about it so se let's kill'em all.

Look, I understand that there are a number of Muslims who are extremists and want to kill us all. But they are a small minority. The vast majorirty of Muslims don't. We need to team up with the moderates in an effort to mariginalize and weaken the extremists.

Unfortunately, Bush's strategy is doing the opposite. he's popularising and strengthening the extremists and he's making the moderates more sympathetic to their cause.

The point of my post, in case it was too subtle, is that the demagogues on both sides of this conflict need to be marginalized and difused. That's the only way out of this conflict.

You people seem to be suggesting that the extremists on our side will solve the problem. Meanwhile more and more Muslims are starting to believe that the extremists on their side will solve the problem. When the extremists like Prager and Nasrallah win, the rest of us lose.

Phylo out.

Phylo out.

Mercy. A lot of opinion
Orwell writes:

I feel like I live in a tyranny sometimes, what with the irresponsive and irresponsible government stealing my money and letting in 20 million illegal aliens (among other crimes against the American people). And we're supposed to believe that the rest of the world will greet us with flowers because they want so badly to live like us? Maybe they want air-conditioning. I'm not so sure about the rest.
------------------------------------------------
Many feel that way, especially conservatives that disagree with Bush’s socialism on domestic issues. His campaign promise to “reach across the aisle,” was a warning many didn’t heed. You can’t reach across the aisle and embrace the socialist leadership of the Democratic party without drawing back a bloody stump. That is what socialism does. It cuts off the hand that befriends it because its goal is victory, not appeasement and compromise unless it gets them a step closer to complete victory and even more socialism. They don’t hide that, but still many believe they can compromise with them.

For 70 years we have taken power from the states where social and moral issues were to be decided because each state has unique conditions that make solving problems difficult when done from Washington. However, the voters have chosen to let the politicians in Washington get away with this so you may as well say, “it is the will of the people,” but not all the people.

Orwell writes:
He never seems to wonder if our own actions in the past, and the actions of countries seen as our "allies", e.g. U.K., France, etc., could have messed up that region so bad that it is now being expressed as the terrorism that threatens us. Would the region have been so radicalized if the western powers hadn't been dicing all the territory up for the last 150 years? Maybe, maybe not.
-------------------------
Actually, it was interesting how much of the middle east was developed and places under British control vs. those not, have faired. India, for example is making great progress now and much of it is based on what they learned to like and not like while under British rule. But, the point was, most nations that haven’t had exposure to a nation like England or France, stayed in the dark ages longer because they had a culture that wasn’t prepared to deal with disease, famine, and economic changes that an “international” exposure solved through imports of what they didn’t have, and exports of what they did have and a new emphasis on “education” for each generation to “improve” and do things the previous generation didn’t know how to do.

Orwell writes:
Would black Americans be in such a dilapitated socioeconomic condition if not for the legacy of slavery, Jim Crow, etc? Maybe, maybe not. But would be not be fools to dismiss the possibility out of hand?
===================
According to some black leaders, blacks were better off before we began the “forced” integration. I am not saying we shouldn’t have done that but along with the “forced” integration we added social programs that made blacks more dependent on government and destroyed the family unit in getting benefits that with good intentions were meant to help.

National socialism (not social programs but how they are funded and administered) is filled with good intentions but always fails. John Kerry’s father was a government employee working in the rebuilding of Europe after WWII. He actually complained because we were “pushing democracy” and not “socialism” in Europe. His book "Star Spangled Mirror," sheds light on him and how he raised John Kerry to believe in socailism. Well, much of Europe, especially France, ended up with it anyways and look how that has destroyed much of old Europe and some once great nations. Now, new Europe (eastern block) is using capitalism to turn around from socialism and beating old Europe at just about every turn.

Our interference in the world was usually invited by some group (often a minority oppressed by a tyrant or corrupt government) and unfortunately, we usually left immediately after “victory” and the nation descended in to a new “tyrant” (Castro) or a new corrupt government that in some cases even became an enemy of the U.S. That is one reason we are trying so hard in Iraq to “stay the course.” Leaving prematurely usually leads to disaster, just in a new form from the old.

Why do we answer these calls?

Oil, iron, copper, rare earths, fear of communist or fascist expansion that would control those materials and our allies that we have trade agreements with. We also have always held “Christian” nations in high esteem since we were a “Christian” nation according to our founders. As the Constitution of S. Carolina states,
Quote:
That all persons and religious societies, who acknowledge that there is one God, and a future state of rewards and punishments, and that God is publicly to be worshipped, shall be freely tolerated. The christian Protestant religion shall be deemed, and is hereby constituted and declared to be the established religion of this state. That all denominations of christian Protestants in this state, demeaning themselves peaceably and faithfully, shall enjoy equal religious and civil privileges. To accomplish this desirable purpose, without injury to the religious property of those societies of christians, which are by law already incorporated, for the purpose of religious worship: and to put it fully into the power of every other society of christian Protestants,
===========================================
Right or wrong, our founders created a nation that for 175 years went to the aid of other Christian nations (Europe WW I and II) more often than “Muslim” nations unless there was significant national interests in the resources of those nations. Rubber, tin, and oil have always triggered political responses because we are a nation addicted to a high standard of living. “We the people” have demanded we maintain that high standard of living. Yet, what “we the people” often overlook is that it will take “foreign intervention” to keep that standard of living.

Even our currency value is now tied to oil since we took it off the gold standard and made the deal with Saudi Arabia we would support them if they would price oil in Dollars.

How many people have every thought about that. Why would a foreign nation price their goods in some other nation’s currency? Why not the Euro, now, since more oil goes to Europe from some Middle East nations than to us? Many economists say that if oil begins to be sold in “euros” we will see our economy collapse because nations will no longer desire our currency. That was a threat of Saddam, and is today a threat of Iran and Venezuela.

World domination is not a desire of most of the nation we “intervened” in. In fact, most of them support much of what we do. It is the Islamofascists both in and out of power in those nations causing the majority of problems. Remember, they are attacking their neighbors who don’t have “U.S.” style governments.

Quote:
Moslems have attacked the parliament in India, Christians, Hindus in India, Hindus in Kashmir. Europeans in France, Spain, Italy, England, Norway, Germany, etc., Russians, Ukrainians, Uzbekistan - and all the other "stans." Moslems have attacked the United States.

Moslems have blown up Buddhist shrines, attacked in northern China, non-Moslems in Thailand, non-Moslems in the Philippines, non-Moslems in Indonesia. Moslems have attacked in Sri Lanka and are slaughtering Christians in Africa. What's going on in Africa is a religious war.

Fundamentalist Moslems have attacked other Moslems in: Algeria, Tunisia, Egypt, Syria, Lebanon, Iraq, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Yemen, Kuwait, Jordan, Turkey as well as throughout Africa.
=======================================
To think a change of history or our policies now would change the descendants of radical Islamic leaders who desire world domination over any government, would make a hill of beans difference is to deny reality and the Islamofascists own statements and stated goals of world domination over all nations, Muslim and non-Muslim alike.

Look at So. Korea and Japan where we stayed after the war and helped rebuild. They have had their problems but look at the general trend of their economies and their standards of living now. There are no perfect nations or governments and we make mistakes but often they are to keep our standard of living high and the sacrifices were accepted by the voters. That appears to be changing but will they like living with a lower standard of living.

We depend on those nations for what we need. How will they react if we no longer "intervene." We can get a clue from Chavez in Venezuela.

Phylo
I'm still waiting to hear from these "moderates", so far all I seem to be able to find are this "small minority" of extremists. I guess the small minority was able to elect Hamas in the PA, and the small minority was able to elect Mahmoud Ahmadinejad in Iran, and it's all ok, because Hezbollah only makes up a small minority in Lebanon. Why don't you pull your head out of.....the sand, and recognize Islam for what it has become. Islam is a religion bent on the destruction of the "Western" way of life and the destruction of all of the infidels, and I know you're going to have a hard time believing this, but that includes YOU!!

Oh come on...
To Fuzzy - Tuesday, August, 29, 2006 4:59 PM
"The overall take on your post is that you are ok with whatever terrorists do because their culture needs time to adjust to infeldel cultures."

No, my take on this situation is that you don't declare war on unrelated countries or entire religions in retribution for the actions of a group who's membership was probably below a thousand at the time...

And now having decided to remain a constant thorn in the Islamic psyche the US is in a war that it literally cannot win. The harder the US fights the more people are won over to the extremist causes.

The comments in this forum make it plain to see how frequently and easily Americans are making the mental transition from terrorists to Muslims being the enemy.

So, pre-9/11 how threatened was the US by terrorism? Not very much. After all, the incoherent, uncommunicative umpteen branches of intelligence agencies managed to keep things pretty quiet - except for some obvious internal threats.
9/11 - big hiccup - but given the arguments on both sides (such as a third? of the hijackers turning up alive afterwards and the perfect collapse of 3 steel frame buildings which is a world first, etc) I am not even sure who did what there. Not interested in debating conspiracy theories.
Post-9/11 the US gov decides that romping through the ME with soldiers and tanks and cluster bombs is a good idea... And suddenly their incursion into Islamic states puts the US on a daily confrontation with terrorist threats.
The US is its own worst enemy at times, actually quite frequently. Initially the whole situation was a conflict with a single terrorist organisation. Al Qaeda was not very large and, if I remember correctly, not all that popular and having difficulty recruiting.
As soon as the US walks into the ME looking for a fight there are outraged victims looking for revenge, warmongers using it to recruit private armies and it becomes a war with the outraged and militant members of Islam..
If it had just exercised some self-restraint it would probably still be a small conflict with a small organisation that could be fought more effectively - but even then detractors would say that they should have invaded Afganistan and Iraq for good measure.

"Well I am not ok with being bombed"

Either am I, but it's a damn site more likely now that the US has embedded itself in the ME and chewing holes in the population.
Fine - stop the bombers, kill terrorist masterminds, tap communications, but sitting in the ME as a focal point and inviting civilian casualties is just making things escalate.
Whatever the US manages to put in place to control the chaos in the long term, it will be torn down and the coutry will have to start from scratch.

"and you have completely ignored the information that Islam does not allow for cultural change."

Dude - did you read where I discussed the more western culture that existed in some of the ME in the past and has since been squashed? I am seriously talking about women roaming around free, dressed in completely western clothing as though they were girls in any western country out for a night on the town... It can happen again, but they need the opportunity. You don't get progression while nations are clamped down in war-mode, you get regression.

Anyway, really need to sleep now..

Phylo re: Marines in Haditha

Maybe you didn’t get my post from Thomas Sowell’s column of 08/22/06 “Point of No Return.” I again responded under Michael Medved’s column “Why the World Hates America” dated Wednesday, August, 23, 2006.

You said at 9:32 AM, “What kind of people rape a fourteen year old girl and then gun down the whole village in a drunken rampage and then try to cover it all up (Marines in Haditha).”

I believe your implication was that the Marines are guilty.

Under Michael Medved’s column “Why the World Hates America” dated Wednesday, August, 23, 2006 11:55 PM I again questioned you.

Didn’t you get my post? Or are you ignoring the question?

Let me repeat it, “Did I miss something? I was not aware that charges had been made, that a trial was convened, and that a guilty verdict was announced. If you know these men are guilty, please document.”

You are very quick to condemn someone but very slow to prove your case. If you have some evidence to support your claim, now is the time to put it on the table. If not THEN A RETRACTION IS IN ORDER. How about it? Are truth and honor more important to you than your harbored hatreds?

If you can’t back what you said, then everything you have posted since your statement is tainted and your opinions are just flapping in the breeze with no substance to them. This would make you a liar. You want us to listen to you? This is now the third time this question has been posed to you. It is time to put up or shut up.

Phylo

Regarding your response to jeff in W. Thomas Smith Jr.’s Column We Cannot Lose This Fight on Monday, August, 28, 2006 5:07 PM.

>>>Phylo says: “we're out of options unless you want to re-instate the draft.”

My son is an Army recruiter. His entire recruiting office has never missed its monthly quota of enlistments. Surprisingly, most of those enlistments are coming from a college town. Who woulda thunk it? No, I do not think we will need to re-instate the draft any time soon unless you can get to that college and spread your poison. These young men are hearing the call and in spite what they hear from the campus liberals are responding to the same call that lead the Minute Men to make their stand. If what you find valuable is threatened when and where will you stand?

Now on top of every thing else I’ve read by you, I see that you are a military genius and know that there are no options left. May I inquiry what armies you’ve lead into battle? How many options have you heard that you can say we are out of them? How many (besides C&R) have you proposed?

Revolutionary War Naval hero John Paul Jones was doing battle with a British ship when his own ship was badly damaged. The British commander called over for Jones to surrender. He answered, “I have not yet begun to fight.” He and his crew then captured the British ship. But what options would you have given him?

I have one option for you… stay the course in Iraq for it will be the staging area for Invasion Iran.

>>>Phylo continues: “Even then, I think all we could do is stave off the inevitable for a few more years, probably losing another couple of thousand guys and another couple of hundred billion dollars.”

Are you really concerned for the guys in Iraq? I know - 3000 dead in five years. There were 3000 dead in the first ten minutes of D-Day. If those boys hadn’t attacked the Germans on the beaches at Normandy, everyone in America east of the Mississippi would probably be speaking German right now. Military planners were considering the invasion of Japan and estimated casualties in the millions. If we had not defeated Japan do think that everyone else in America would be speaking Japanese? I know you do not believe that Islam (the Religion of Peace) is no threat to us; but every imam in every mosque, every ayatollah, and every terrorist says the same thing… we will see you dead. I for one believe them.

So you think we can save a couple of hundred billion dollars? What good is money to a dead man? We can always make more money. But if we lose the fight with Islam, money will be the least of our worries.

>>>Again Phylo: And by the way, all of you people who are scared that the Muslims are going to take over the world are delusional. They don't have anywhere near the power to take over even a country like Spain. Did you see the quality of their rockets in the Lebanon War? All these years of wanting to kill the Jews, and that's the best they've come up with? Do you have any idea how much force it would take for them to conquer and control the United States? Any idea at all? What the hell are you people so afraid of?

If you don’t think that Muslims will try to take over the world it is you who is delusional. They have been saying that very thing for 14 centuries. Don’t you know their history? How do you suppose they will take over Spain? Let’s see, the Muslim birthrate is high, the Spaniard birthrate is low… I see that in twenty years Muslims will outnumber Spaniards and simply vote Spain out of existence. They will call it Al Andalusa.

Do you suppose that Iran will make an atomic weapon and then sit on it? They just might. But then again they might just lob into Israel. Who cares, you? NOT. Muslims are NO threat, they are PEACEFUL, right? But then Israel will cease to exist won’t it?

I heard a joke… Some missionaries watched an African pygmy start to carve up a dead elephant. Laughing, they asked, “How are you going to eat that elephant?” Replied the pygmy, “One bite at a time.” So if you were to contemplate conquering America, how would you proceed? Just like the pygmy, on bite at a time. They think in terms of many years, even centuries, and are patient. You think in terms of days weeks and months and are impatient: “We’ve in Iraq too long now, we must get out.” They will outlast you.

Bush never promised a quick war. He said up front that this was going to be a long and drawn out affair. But he also said that it is war we must win.

Truly, Phylo, you are out.

Flags
It was a pretty strange claim to make that Saudi Arabia has the world's only flag featuring a weapon. All Prager had to do was consult an Atlas or any of dozens of common reference sources for flag pictures.

Like Saudi Arabia, Angola, Oman, and Sri Lanka feature swords. Kenya and Swaziland have spears, and Mozambique has a rifle. Those are just from a quick scan.

If you can't get simple facts right, how do you expect anyone to take your argument seriously?

Steele
I don't think we are at war with countries. Maybe we can agree that we are at war with a few dictators. I am in the camp that believes we are at war with an ideology that is fashioned thru Islam, enforced thru Islam, defended by Muslims.

You think its a leap to blame Muslims for terrorism? Why? Are we disagreeing that they typically are the perps? If so, there can be no debate between us.

As for going to war with countries, I don't see how what we are doing in Iraq can even be called a war. We deposed Saddam when he violated UN resolutions. That gave us an opportunity to see if it was possible to make an ally in the middle east by spreading democracy. It may not work, but it is an alternative to nuking everybody. In spite of all of Pres Bush's failings, this effort is commendable. No, it's not easy, but it would be worse (to me) if we had not tried.

It took seemingly forever to get past the contrived argument that we only went to Iraq over oil. There has not been and won't be a worthwhile review of the Iraq venture for many years to come.

For everyone here who thinks its not about Islam, Iraq should be a good test case for that theory. If its cultural or economic, we should know in the next 20 years. My prediction is that during those 20 years, we will see MUSLIMS blowing things up and killing people because they are not MUSLIMS.

I know it is very un-politically correct to look at something for what it really is but I can't pretend anymore that Islam is not the problem. Blaming cultures and economies and land disputes is an excercise in avoiding the real problem.


what "unrelated countries"
Steele writes:

No, my take on this situation is that you don't declare war on unrelated countries or entire religions in retribution for the actions of a group who's membership was probably below a thousand at the time...
=======================
So who did we "declare war on" that was unrelated. Are you referring to Iraq? That was an ongoing war that started when they invaded Kuwait. We were under a cease fire but not an end to the war. That is why Clinton bombed them and said we'd be back with even more force if he didn't stop violating the cease fire.

However, maybe you meant some other countries we have invaded.

Phylo
Phylo ~ The Harvard Press puts militant and fanatic Muslims at an estimated .01 to four percent of the 1.2 billion Muslims of the world meaning there are somewhere between 120,000 to 4,800,000 jihadists! not a bad little suicide brigade ! I'm pretty sure there are not 120,000 to 4,800,000 westerners willing to strap bombs of their own design to their bodies and set of towards the local Muslim disco-tech to kill some non-believers! and besides what Muslim in his or her right mind is going to try and convince a Jihadist that his belief is wrong when doing so would be proof of his non-belief and turn him or her into just another infidel marked for death?

Tara, David Mac
Tara, you are arguing with your own imagination. I never said any of the things that you seem to attribute to me, and they're not really relevant to the central precept of Mr. Prager's hypothesis that Islam is inherently immoral. All I wrote, was that Palestinians (or Arabs, if you prefer) are not some non-human species, and are inherently morally equal to Israelis, Americans or British, until an individual does something to prove that he or she is immoral.

David, thanks for your reply. I'm not sure that the fact that there are no churches or synagogues proves that they're banned. After all, there isn't a mosque (nor a synagogue, probably) in most small American towns, is there? It's unfortunate that the synagogues were destroyed when Israel withdrew from Gaza, from a symbolical viewpoint, but really, what else could have happened? Either desecration or the inviolate symbol of the power of Israel to prevent the Palestinians from doing as they please with what is allegedly their own land. To be honest, I'm surprised that these synagogues weren't bulldozed by the Israelis themselves before leaving, as they did with the (potentialy useful) homes in abandoned settlements in the Gaza Strip.

While you may be right that there do exist, in number enough to be of some concern, what you label "Islamofascists," it's not a word to sling around at everybody who does something you don't like. Some problems _can_ be resolved through levelheaded negotiation and fair treatment of both sides by the mediator. And, of course, some can only be resolved with the use of force. It's when you apply the wrong solution to the problem, that you aggravate it.

Peter

pwilcox. . .
Peter, thanks for responding. I agree with what you wrote but only to a point.

It seems to me, IMHO, that Israel has bent over backwards to accommodate Palestinian demands regarding land. Israelis have vacated Gaza, West bank settlements, the Sinai, S. Lebanon etc.
With very rare exceptions, Israel doesn't use terrorism as a combat tactic.

I have no dog in this fight and I try to be objective, but I do not see any probity on the part of the Palestinians or any their Islamofascist brothers. They continue to target civilians and use non-combatants as cover.

As a former soldier, I can tell you that targeting civilians (in a tactical sense) doesn't work: it wastes ammo, reveals your position, doesn't eliminate any threat to friendlies.

Peter, you're obviously an optimist. Again IMHO,I see no plus side to mediation or to negotiation with Palestinians. Oh, there COULD be negotiations. At the same time, the Islamofascists would be planning another atrocity.

Negotiate?
pwilcox writes:
Some problems _can_ be resolved through levelheaded negotiation and fair treatment of both sides by the mediator. And, of course, some can only be resolved with the use of force. It's when you apply the wrong solution to the problem, that you aggravate it.
========================
Correct, "some" things can be negotiated.

The Islamofascists say publically that they want Israel destroyed and all land returned to Muslims.

How do you negotiate that. As was pointed out, Israel has done everything include return land and yet the goal after all the negotiation is "destroy Israel."

What do you suggest as negotiation. Israel give up the land given them by the UN, or give up 50% or 75% or 90%? Well, when they have even 10%, the goal of the Islamofascists will be the same.

Regrading "throwing around" the term Islamofascist, are you serious? It is how we speak of those doing harm to the world without labeling all Muslims as the problem. Muslims aren't the problem, Islamofascists are, like Ahmadinejad, Bin Laden and others. Whether it is 10 or 10 million, you use a lable that singles them out so that "good" or "moderate" Muslims aren't included.

Socialists seem to be the main objectors to the truth of what kind of people we are dealing with. I hope you are not a socialist, just afraid the truth will stir up "hate." Yet, the hate is already there. They hate all "infidels" and any Muslims that want to be "moderate." Remember, it isn't just the "U.S." they hate. They hate Muslims they consider "weak," too. The "Taliban" is their chosen form of Government leadership. While not the name they would use, the Taliban was symbolic of the type of rule they desire for the world.

Muslims aren't in general, calling for the death of the people in all the nations they have been attacking. Islamofascists have. If you looked at that list of nations they have attacked, you will see nations that really haven't been that close to the U.S.

Also, how can you say a "few" when they have people in all those nations attacking them. Zarqawi had cells and contacts all over.
quote:
PARIS - Wherever European prosecutors turn these days, as they unravel suspected Islamic terrorist cells and track leads across the Continent, they keep coming across the fingerprints of one man: Abu Musab Zarqawi.

Mr. Zarqawi, a one-legged Jordanian Bedouin currently thought to be hiding in Iran, has emerged as a central suspect in one Al Qaeda-related plot after another, investigators say, from allegedly smuggling suicide bombers into Iraq to orchestrating the recent car bomb blasts in Turkey and planning chemical attacks in Europe.
http://www.csmonitor.com/2004/0123/p01s04-wome.htm
==============================
We are talking "small armies" in some places, down to a few people in a "cell" in other places. We have them here (not the armies), we have them in Africa, Asia and the majority of the middle-east. We are talking about people who take their instructions from "higher ups" and those "higher ups" take their orders from very high religious leaders and political leaders like Ahmadinejad.

Negotiation is impossible as long as their goal is the complete distruction of all infidels or as their teachings state, making slaves and servants of all who aren't 100% Muslim and adhering to their radical teachings.

What would you "offer" them they want? They aren't interested in "prosperity/" They want complete control. Their form of radical Islam teaches they are to look forward to death in battle, not prosperity so they will have a "better place" with Allah for eternity. From the time they can speak, they are taught to "die for Allah."

Mothers praise the death of their children because they believe that child will have a "better place" with Allah because he died killing "infidels" or people who support them. What do you offer them when they want to give birth to even more suicide bombers?

DavidMac, Old Man
David, yes, I'd agree that I'm an optimist as regards other people. I do think that you have to have _some_ faith in humanity, however often they may disappoint you. Why would I trust anyone at all, otherwise? Surely one has to hope for the best, while preparing for the worst, as the proverb goes...
While Israel has made some (large) concessions over these last few years, they have also made it perfectly clear that they will not tolerate "free thinking" (I'm not sure how else to put it, but I know that it's not the right phrase...) on the part of Palestinians, when they decided to elect Hamas over the demonstrably corrupt Fatah party. Of course Hamas have a violent and in some respects criminal history, but the reaction to their victory in democratic elections was swift and brutal on the part of Israel. What could have been a new start for both sides was, I feel, forced to become an untenable situation by Israel.
I understand that, as a soldier, targeting civilians doesn't work. However, as a "terrorist" (hang on, I'm not saying I'm a terrorist!), targeting the military doesn't make sense. They're better armed than you, better armoured, and paid to face death by the civilian population they're supposed to be protecting. It's the civilians (as the majority of the population in any democratic country _I_ can think of) who will influence government policy. Low intensity warfare against a popularly supported military could go on for years with no appreciable gains, while the terrorist hopes for an immediate, visceral reaction on the part of a "terrorised" population - as some analysts have understood Zapatero's election in Spain following the Madrid bombings.
Israel doesn't tend to use terror tactics against its enemies (though allies are fair game, historically speaking...) because it doesn't need to. The Palestinian population already live in poverty, are subject to the closing of their borders on a whim, and face constant incursions into their towns and assassination of their less savoury leaders (whether or not these targetted assassinations are acts of terrorism seems to be up for debate, too), as well as the recent arrest of 40% of the members of their parliament. Who needs _random_ acts of violence, when you already exercise that level of control?

Old Man,
You don't need to negotiate with the "Islamofascists," but if you don't negotiate with anyone at all, what happens? The Arab League, i.e. the recognised governments of the Arab countries seems willing to at least talk, and their proposals aren't quite as bad as "destroy Israel, kill all Jews." Unfortunately, their website's English side isn't working right now, but you can read a summary here: http://www.al-bab.com/arab/docs/league/peace02.htm
That's you're starting point, right there.
I understand that "Islamofascist" is a specific label, but I believe strongly in the power of words, and thus the importance of using them correctly. Given that "Islamofascist" is a relatively recent invention, I'm willing to allow the inventors / early adopters of the word to define it (to a degree - I understand that it pertains to Islam, not necessarily bad, and Fascism, almost universally agreed to be bad...), though it is inarguably a pejorative.Even DanMac slipped up above (at least I think he did), using the phrase "... I don not see any probity on the part of the Palestinians or any their (sic) Islamofascist brothers." In that sentence he slipped into describing the Palestinians and the "Islamofascists" as brethren. The Palestinian people as a whole, I hold, are _not_ to be equated with the "Islamofascists." But it's an easy slip to make, and every time you do, you're reinforcing the link between Palestinians (not necessarily bad) and "Islamofascists" (bad), in your listener/ reader's mind.
Moving on... you hope I'm not a Socialist? Why ever not? Wouldn't it make it easier for you if I was? You could just dismiss me as "another Socialist," and ignore me. If someone is making sense, why not listen to them, regardless? But, to put your mind at rest, no, I wouldn't call myself a Socialist.
I just searched the text of both of my posts above, and could not find the word "few" in either of them. You may want to re-read. Regardless, there are less "Islamofascists" than there are anti-"Islamofascists", and far fewer than there are just plain old non-"Islamofascists" in the world. They may have cells all over the place (though I doubt Zarqawi will be founding many more), but I posit that by negotiating with the "nons", and identifying and neutralising (yes, I accept that this is necessary) the actual "Islamofascists," progress might be made.
To push it a little further, a little creative writing for you:
"Mr Bush, a white American Christian, currently thought to be based in Washington, D.C., the capital of the United States of America, has emerged as a central suspect in one C.I.A./ US Army-related plot after another, investigators say, from allegedly smuggling cluster bombs into Israel via the United Kingdom, to orchestrating the recent (aerial) bombings in Afghanistan and kidnapping and torturing insurgents in Iraq.
====
Source - non-existent
We are talking small armies in some places (such as UK, Germany, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, South Korea, Japan, Afghanistan, Kyrgyzstan, Cuba) down to a few people in a "cell" in other places (name me a country without any CIA operatives in it...). We have them here (including the armies), we have them in Africa, Asia, and the majority of the Middle East. We are talking about people who take their instructions from "higher ups" and those "higher ups" take their orders from very high political (and self-described religiously inclined) leaders like Bush."
Yes, this is sophistry at its most basic, but I do think that its valuable.
The ones who aren't interested in prosperity are the ones to worry about (the Romans understood this...), but the vast majority of Muslims are, I assure you, just as interested in prosperity as you are (Me? Well, maybe you should worry about me, then).
Regards
Peter

An Apology
I'm sorry for the formatting of the above post. I was concentrating so hard on writing it, that I didn't think about how it would look. Please forgive me.

Also, sorry for the spelling mistake!

Peter

Steele...please
Would you please flow with the "conversation" and not write an epic addressing every single post that was written. Besides the fact that your responses and views to each were enough to induce a migrane but the length was just inhumane and could be considered torture(and you and your ilk hate that, right)
Thanks for your attention to this request...........

pwilcox writes:
The Palestinian population already live in poverty, are subject to the closing of their borders on a whim, and face constant incursions into their towns and assassination of their less savoury leaders (whether or not these targetted assassinations are acts of terrorism seems to be up for debate, too), as well as the recent arrest of 40% of the members of their parliament.
=================
It is important to look at the people, I agree.

So let's look at them.
quote:
JERUSALEM – In a revelation that surprised many here associated with the deal, it emerged this week the charitable foundation of Microsoft founder Bill Gates largely was responsible for transferring to the Palestinians the high-tech Jewish greenhouses of the Gaza Strip prior to Israel's evacuation of the area.

The greenhouses, passed in a private charity deal last summer, reportedly have been stripped and looted by Palestinian gangs and Palestinian security officers hired to protect the structures.
snip----------------
Al-Masri yesterday said the Gaza greenhouses are fully functioning and are producing at full capacity. He also said most of the stolen greenhouse equipment has been recovered by the Palestinian Authority police. His claims could not be independently verified before press time.
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=49710
===================
Kind of bad news, good news but it is indicative of what happens with you have a nation without internal controls and you are dependent on others to feed you. The Palestians are now finding they can't even run the greenhouses properly and need Israeli consultants.

Much of the poverty of the middle east is related to poor education, corrupt government and religious leaders who believe "education" should be restricted to their version and not much outside of the religion is needed for survival.

Palestine is poor because of its own culture like most poor nations, not because of outside oppression. They had the same type of land Israel had - desert. But, Israel dug and irrigated and show the whole middle-east how hard work, innovation, education, and teamwork could turn a desert area into a productive area. Yet, Palestine and others refused to change their culture and thus, they lived in the same poverty they lived in before Israel even came to the Middle East after they were given the land after WWII.

Doing the "will of Allah" doesn't include needing to be a doctor or engineer or other scientist to Islamofascists who want warriors. What is taught is that you need to be willing to die for your religion because that gets you a "better" place in eternity.

In many ways, Islamofascists are like the "war cultures" of many people over the centuries where farming, business, and other enterprises were viewed as 2nd class occupations and the only honorable one is "warrior" and dying for your beliefs, nation, afterlife or leader.

Those are the people you can't negotiate with until their belief system is changed. Until you have them believing like the 95% Muslim population in Dubai or the 23% Muslim population in Singapore, they won't "negotiate." Yes, you can negotiate with many nations in the middle-east, and I haven't really seen anyone say you can't. We are not talking about negotiating with Muslims, just Islamofascists.

They, regardless of their number are the enemy determined to take over the world including all Muslim and non-Muslim nations. France is very concerned they may become a Muslim nation due to their birth rate differences, rapid immigration (remember they have open borders for the most part) and growing gang and civil unrest in Muslim communities that France isn't prepared to deal with. Heck, they can't even deal with a student riot.

However, you do have one nation that we are trying very hard to negotiate with, Iran. How do you think we are doing with Ahmadinejad and his belief the 12th Imam will protect them if they start a major war? How are we doing at stopping their nuclear enrichment? How are we doing at their threat to drive the price of oil to $100 a barrel or higher if the UN impose UN sanctions?

What do you give him? He has all the money oil can provide. He has weapons, he has power, he as deals with China and Russia and all he wants is Israel destroyed and the U.S. humbled or destroyed. What do you negotiate when what he wants, nobody is willing to give him?

(that is not to say that if he finds the 12th Iman doesn't come to his rescue he won't back off, call for a cease fire or comply with sanctions, while he regroups, but his goals won't have changed)

Again, regarding Islamofacsist. What would you call Islamic people who are calling for fascism? We could just call them Fascists but that wouldn't say which fascists we are talking about. There are fascist parties and groups in many countries, including the U.S. who base their policies on
quote:
A system of government marked by centralization of authority under a dictator, stringent socioeconomic controls, suppression of the opposition through terror and censorship, and typically a policy of belligerent nationalism and racism.
=======================

So, I simply am singling out the fascists that are Isamic fascist. What is wrong with separating them from the millions that aren't Islamic Fascists? That doesn't mean they are more or less dangerous than any other "war culture." That just means we are focusing on a specific war culture that wars against Muslims and non-Muslims in their quest for world power. They are stronger than you think.

Regarding the "missles" that Hezbollah used, they were not given the better missles with the longer range because Iran and Syria didn't want to be so directly invovled they would risk Israel's attacks on them as well. They didn't really make a secret of the fact they had better missles but weren't supplying them to Hezboallah.

They may be a "war culture" but they aren't stupid and they want to win, not just "war." They want victory and they are patient at times and agressive at times. Anytime they see they are outgunned, they call for a cease fire to regroup, rearm and refinance. This is a world wide organization with funding from most countries. The U.S. has uncovered several organizations funding the Islamofascists here in the U.S. Britian has, Europe has, Asia has.

This is not a "middle east" situation. Read that list again,
quote:
Moslems have attacked the parliament in India, Christians, Hindus in India, Hindus in Kashmir. Europeans in France, Spain, Italy, England, Norway, Germany, etc., Russians, Ukrainians, Uzbekistan - and all the other "stans." Moslems have attacked the United States.

Moslems have blown up Buddhist shrines, attacked in northern China, non-Moslems in Thailand, non-Moslems in the Philippines, non-Moslems in Indonesia. Moslems have attacked in Sri Lanka and are slaughtering Christians in Africa. What's going on in Africa is a religious war.

Fundamentalist Moslems have attacked other Moslems in: Algeria, Tunisia, Egypt, Syria, Lebanon, Iraq, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Yemen, Kuwait, Jordan, Turkey as well as throughout Africa.
==============

Then add the ties to South America where Chavez has agreed to supply them with the uranium they need. This is a world wide event. It is not a group of people just threatening peace in the Middle East. Nor is it a group of poorly funded rebels. These are some of the best fund fascists in the world, certainly better funded than any other fascist group I know of.

Did we "fund" some of their growth when we thought we could use them to help bring down communists or other regimes that we felt were hurting American interests and our standard of living which depends on resources from virtually every section of the globe and the allies we have around the world? Yes.

Hindsight is wonderful for that. Just like Iraq. After we won the war, did we think the new government would be attacked like is was by Syrian and Iranian supported terrorists? No.

But, thankfully, they did send thousands to their death by sending them to Iraq. Thankfully we don't still have the 3 training camps Saddam's republican guard were overseeing to train the more than 8,000 terrorists. Thankfully, Iraq is no longer doing the plasma research on enrichment that they could have used or sold. Thankfully, Iraq is no longer funding the suicide bomber families, threating to distabilize our currency by selling in Euros. Thankfully the 500 WMD shells have been uncovered and disposed off that he hid in violation of UN, not U.S. demands in the cease fire. Thankfully he is no longer able to send Russian convoys to Syria with documents, money, men, WMD or whatever it was he felt he had to get out of the country.

While Iraq was not the "war on terror" objective but more a keeping of Clinton's promise and the enforcement of the cease fire, that the UN agreed needed to be enforced, it became a part of the war on terror that we should be thankful it happened. It showed how involved Iran and Syria are involved in terrorism and Islamofascism.

While we never want the loss of even one soldier's life, it still is necessary to "know your enemy" and his potential. We have seen the potential of the enemy and how he will fight. Iraq has been a very good training ground for our military and what we will face in any other nation we have to enter that has similar conditions.

It is sad, but the only thing a "war culture" respects is a more powerful enemy they can't defeat. But, they will virtually never give up the goal of defeating that enemy even if it takes centuries if the people are not lured away from the "war culture" as they have been in places like Dubai.

Yo Phylo
Are you not listening to the rhetoric and seeing the actions of the Muslim leadership around the world? To break it down, words mean things. They are telling us what they want to do to us "infidels". What is it about what they are saying that you don't get? THEY MEAN IT! There is no one brilliant enough to negotiate with that mentality. It is arrogant and foolish to not take them seriously, and act accordingly, or we could let them kill us while we attempt negotiating with them.

We're fighting because we have to
Either convert or die. It's up to you. Isn't that the choice your given before your either killed or allowed to convert with fear and taxes imposed on you because you weren't born Muslin. Who wants to live a life where you feel as if your back in the fifth century. No music, no craft if it isn't approved of first, no dancing, no traveling without permission and every day is a gift of life because it is they who have allowed you to live one more day. You don't ignore extremist like these who just wants to enslave and kill at will because they feel it's their time for Muslin justice and Muslin rule. Extreme beliefs produces extreme measures. Killing is just their way of getting what they want without objection, just submission. We're dealing with a mind regardless of their education who has been conditioned so much, reason and reaching out to is just a delay in your death. It was wrong of our courts to grant any rights to terrorist who understand nothing but killing you. History has shown us there are some species who died out because it was their time to do so. In the New World there were no places for these species to live and survive. The same is also true of these terrorist. They must be hunted down and killed without mercy because their time for the type of world they want to impose on the rest of us is dead and gone. Those bleeding hearts who represent these terrorist in World Opinion and our courts are as much to blame when these killers kill again.

Sitting on enormous wealth....
Iran and many of the Arab states in the Middle East are sitting on enormous wealth – oil.

Saudi Arabia, for example, ranks number 1 worldwide in proven oil reserves – an estimated 264 billion barrels (The U.S. ranks number 11 with 21 billion barrels.). Yet with a per capita GDP of about $14,000, this oil-rich country ranks 46th worldwide in economic health (Israel ranks 28th with a per capita GDP of approximately $24,000.). This is due in part to Saudi Arabia’s economic system, which is based on state control rather than a free market economy, and its dependence on imported tangible goods and services.

The economic development of Saudi Arabia wouldn’t be in the favorable position it is today, if it weren’t for U.S. (and other free world) technology, tools, equipment and experience in exploration, drilling, extracting, transporting and refining crude oil.

The socialistic and state-centric economic systems found in Middle Eastern Arab states provide little opportunities for their people to find work and become wage earners. This lack of opportunity results in frustration and resentment, especially among the well-educated young Arabs, who feel their talent and energies are wasted.

Terrorism provides an outlet for self-affirmation and a defense against the embarrassment of feeling ineffectual and not valued. They vent their frustration and sense of hopelessness by blaming the West. Witness the nineteen highly educated, well-to-do 9/11 hijackers, fifteen of which were from oil-rich Saudi Arabia.

A note to the liberals, Islamic apologists and “blame the U.S.” crowd on this site: During my lifetime the U.S. has prevailed over national socialism, imperialism, communism and numerous other threats to our way of life. Now we are faced with an adversary bent on converting the world to their religious fundamentalism. You can wallow in self-loathing and “white guilt” all you want, but I, for one, am proud to be an American and will defend her any way I can. If that make me arrogant and egocentric so be it. Inshallah!

A note to herr stahl: I personally don’t believe that Arabs are inferior (I’ve lived in an Arab country and know a little about their personal views). I do believe that they themselves feel less important and less valuable because of the repressive and authoritative systems they live under. Why else would any person willingly submit to martyrdom?

tulsaman writes:
I do believe that they themselves feel less important and less valuable because of the repressive and authoritative systems they live under. Why else would any person willingly submit to martyrdom?
========================
Because they are taught they get a better place in eternity if they die killing infidels. This life to the radical follower of Islam is worried about the next life and killing infidels here. Not the leaders as much as the followers. The leaders don't see to be as willing to die for the cause as they are to get others to do if.

When even your mother and father raise you to believe you should die killing infidels and receive that better place with Allah, it is easy to understand martyrdom.

Be glad the majority aren't raised that way.

Sincerest apologies
To Jeana81:

Sorry I made your brain hurt. It pays to exercise it.

Personally, when I read so many redicu-lously generalised, imflammatory, racist, religiously fanatical and hateful comments I felt they all -had- to be rebutted. I literally couldn't believe what I was seeing.

If each moderate and reasonable view that I put forward was enough to give you a migraine then I suggest you stop reading and continue to believe whatever warped and hateful things you have grown attached to, as is implied by your opinion of my views. If that's what you seek, you could create a mutually reinforcing and congratulatory back-slapping club, like a conservative religion.

To all:
I would like to point out that I am a product of a comparitively balanced and serious media. You are what you watch.

I would suggest that you guys watch too much Fox, that too much of what you guys are allowed to see, and their preferred high-rating material, is geared to the opinions of media magnates who have far reaching financial and political interests. It doesn't matter if it's to make money or a mutual back-scratching operation with the government.

You all really need a good dose of the Daily Show - Jon Stewart for President - and he's Jewish too, so you can't say I'm some sort of pro-Arab, anti-semitic fanboy. You all need a chance to see how stupid things look from the outside.

Also, you reap what you sow. All of this broad ranging hatred for everyone in the middle-east is just going to end up in conflict and increasing misery for decades, if not longer. It's easy for all of you to talk tough, but if you were witness to the maiming and despair in the hot-zone you'd likely feel differently.

My issue with a people and country so set on full-blown conflict with the middle-east is that it's not just you who will be targets. The whole of the western world becomes a target implicitly since you are so heavily tied into every other country - all are seen as implicit or explicit extensions of US will.

The most invigourating thing I have seen is a documentary about face-to-face Israeli/Palestinian negotiations where, as part of a group, a former PLO? leader and an Israeli military officer actually managed to trust each other and organise peace. They even seemed to understand each other's stance - and there was peace. Until the Israeli military decided to botch another surgical strike on some leader and cause some 'collateral damage', then a Palestinian group bombed them back... etc.

It IS possible to negotiate peace even in regions that are so war-torn, but the ever present chance of idiocy on either side can undo huge amounts of work in an instant. Sorting out conflicts in a cooperative and respectful manner may sound unworkable, but the alternative is truly abhorrent. War between very capable armies and a civilian population, another term for this is 'massacre' or even 'holocaust'.

No, you may not be able to negotiate with hardened terrorists, but if they don't have a frustrated and terrified pool to pull from, if you peel away their less sure members, then the few who are left will eventually be beaten in a low-scale conflict.

I give up, there is no point arguing with a series of hateful, ideological brick walls.

reflections on 9/11
Reflections

Imagine for a moment a region of the world extending from the Black Sea up into Russia, and Eastern Europe, across Northern Africa, enclosing the entire Arabian and Iberian peninsulas, the Anatolian, Iranian and Tibetan plateaus, the Indian sub-continent, the Philippians islands, and all the islands of the Persian gulf and Mediterranean Sea, including Crete and Cyprus ruled by one man.

Now imagine that an individual holds in his hands nuclear, chemical and biological weapons capable of being delivered to Western Europe and the American continents. And to further complicate things this man controls the hearts and minds of millions of followers by claiming to speak for God. Seems like something out of a nightmare or an Oliver Stone movie, but this is the twisted dream of one man, a shadowy puppet master, who manipulates others into executing his perverse visions, while he hides among cowards and women in a remote region of the world, out of the public eye, to avoid capture.

In the last five years, the world has learned that this is the vision of ‘Mujahid Sheik Abu Abdullah’ Osama Bin Laden, who wants a caliphate enclosing those geographical boundaries from which he will have the resources to cripple the West and extend his murderous vision of global Islamic Jihad around the world.

On September 11, 2001, the first volleys were fired in the first international war of the 21st century. On that day in just a couple of hours over three thousand innocent men, women and children were killed on the orders of Osama bin Laden. Since then, he has pulled the strings in Span, France, Iraq, Afghanistan, Iran, Syria, Lebanon, Israel, and Saudi Arabia to incite Muslim hatred of the west and advance his twisted visions.

Since October 07, 2,999 American soldiers, sailors, marines, and air men have paid the ultimate sacrifice, and about 30 thousand have been wounded in preventing the conflagration the bin Laden would ignite across the earth. Those brave men and women answered the call to go to Afghanistan and Iraq so that Islamic Jihad would not come to America again. And it is no accident that it has not.

Their blood and resolve has done its job abroad, it is up to us to do our job here at home. We must keep the home front solid and stalwart against the moaners and gainsayers, the duplicitous politicians who do one thing and say another, undermining the resolve of the American people. We must demand that our News agencies show the true story of the conflict, not their defeatist, un-American biased view. We would do well to remember the words of William Durant-“A great civilization is not conquered from without until it has destroyed itself from within.” We must therefore guard against internal corruption and dimming of the American dream of Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.

Our fine military as manumissonaries, have completed the task of ending slavery in Afghanistan, and are carrying the dream of democratic self-determination to Iraq. Their task is fraught with danger as the mindless minions of bin Laden march to his mad vision of Jihadic apocalypse.determined to prevent Democarcy at all costs.

They desreve our unwavering support as they defend us against these shadowy serpents, who would strike again at innocent men, women and children in a magnified replay of 9.11. We must understand that “War is a bad thing: but to submit to the dictation of other states is worse’ and that ‘freedom, if we hold fast to it, will ultimately restore our losses, but submission will mean permanent loss of all that we value. To those of you who call yourselves men of peace, I say you are not safe unless you have men of action at your side. Judging freedom to be happiness and courage to be the creator of freedom, it remains for you not to fear risks, but to rival what these men have already done.” Thucydides 455 BC

What greater remembrance and memorial to the dead of September 11, 2001 and all the American military dead or wounded since, than free and democratic governments in Afghanistan and Iraq.

Jonathan W. Biggar
September 11, 2006

HERE'S WHAT I THINK
Here is what I see going on. There is no way for me to know if this is any kind of a conspiracy, but it is definitely happening and it is not good. The Chinese are supplying Iran with weapons. Sure, some weapons are officially going from North Korea to Iran, but N. Korea does nothing China does not allow. Therefore, Iran is taking these Chinese weapons and distributing them to their various terrorist gangs to engage America and/or Israel. America has to defend the free world and support Israel. This costs money, lots of it. Now Iran is in the process of making nuclear weapons. Not many people know it, but Russia sold Iran ballistic missile subs while Billibabla Clintahammud was chasing Harmonica Blowlowski around the Oval Office. Now AMERICA is going to have to spend billions to prevent Iran from nuking more than a couple of AMERICAN cities. Add to this the billions we will need to recover from the nukes that probably will go off in AMERICA before the lefterals (leftist liberals) allow the military to end the threat from Iran. All this time China is bleeding AMERICA’S economy dry by using slave labor to take more and more AMERICAN jobs away from AMERICA and bankrupting the companies that try to compete without closing their AMERICAN factories and moving them to China. When the AMERICAN economy collapses from all this, our military will become a shell of its former self because we will still be fighting terrorists supplied with weapons from China, but we will not be able to replace anything used or lost fighting terrorists because the government will be broke due to no one paying any taxes. That’s because nothing will be manufactured in AMERICA, on account of all the import buying and the foreign companies, who do assemble goods over here, don’t pay any corporate income tax because their books say they don’t make any money and no one, who could do anything about it, will. All this time China is steadily building up their military, with the help of traitorous AMERICANS and money-grubbing western countries like France and Germany. Then China will deal the final blow to AMERICA’S economy by nationalizing the only AMERICAN owned factories left, the ones built in China by companies that would have gone out of business if they did not. This could have been averted, in my opinion, with tariffs on all goods imported into AMERICA in excess of the amount of untariffed goods a country buys from AMERICA.And don’t hand me any crap about trade wars. Sure, some companies may suffer, but they would have ( this ain’t going to happen as long as there are lobbyists) brought that on themselves by moving their factories overseas. Anyway, with AMERICA’S military broken and broke, we will be at the mercy of China and their thugs, the Muslim insanists, if there are any left alive. I don’t remember China being merciful to anyone before, so I don’t see them starting now. AMERICA could be in for some deep #@$&%!~(* and it will be our own fault.
Sign Up to Post Your CommentsSign Up to Post Your Comments
If you are already registered, click here to login. Otherwise, please take a few seconds to register with Townhall.com. Once you sign up, you’ll be able to post your comments immediately, use the action center, get podcasts, and more!
Note: Fields marked with a red asterisk (*) are required.
Salutation:
First Name: