Marine Shot Unarmed Civilians

[quote]lixy wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
Because we are forced to deal with their shitty leadership they hate us?

I am so sick of this excuse.

Read closer Zap:

His National Security Council outlined the basic reasons: the US supports corrupt and oppressive governments and is “opposing political or economic progress”

They didn’t say “dealing” with them. It’s about supporting them.

The exact same applies for the brutal regimes you helped install in Latin America.[/quote]

Do we support for a corrupt and represive regime in Iran?

We we support a corrupt and oppressive regime in Libya?

Face it, the Middle East has not exactly produced liberal societies and decent governments.

And don’t give me that crap that America overthrows them when they do. I am tired of the one sided crap about Mossadegh. He declared Britain an enemy, flirted with the communists and nationalized the oil industry.

It is folly to pretend Mossadegh would prove to be anything other than a thug.

Wasn’t the previous western friendly Iranian PM murdered?

Those in the Middle East have to get their own house in order and stop blaming the US for their problems.

[quote]lixy wrote:
karva wrote:
PGJ wrote:

Bullshit. We are hated because we are different. They hated us in the 1800’s when the Barbary pirates captured American sailors and held them captive.

I don’t know much about Barbary pirates, but I have always thought that that is what pirates do, rob and behead people. Well, they don’t always behead them, it depends on weather and other conditions if they do or not.

Forget it. PGJ is convinced that Muslims are barbarians. From his answer to your post, it should be clear to any reader that he has a bigoted mind.

Ironically, he threatened me physically in another thread. You know who comes out as barbarian in that case…[/quote]

So history is bigoted? The fact is that Islam has used religion to justify aggression since it’s founding. Christians did it for a while about 1,000 years ago but have since reformed (you will no doubt point out the highly exaggerated Salem Witch Trials).

Hatred among tribes in that geographic area has been documented throughout history.

When did I threaten you physically?

If I said “Islam is truly a religion of peace, love and gentleness” would that get me off your “Bigot list”?

Not gonna’ happen. Not until I see as many muslims in the streets outraged about other muslims killing and torturing in the name of Allah as I see dancing in extacy every time an American gets his head sawed off.

I’m not buying your crap.

[quote]pat36 wrote:
Prove me wrong… [/quote]

You sound like you’ve fallen into HH’s category when you wrote:

“I am pretty sure y’all wouldn’t piss on a Jew if he were on fire.”

Then you try to whitewash it saying:

“This doesn’t mean I think all muslims are bad. It doesn’t even mean I think most muslims are bad I am sure most aren’t”

So, which is it?

Did I ever mention the people around me cried on 9/11?

What do you want me to do? I do more than my share to counter the Islamist propaganda, but it becomes increasingly hard when you start baseless wars or some of your leaders throw cheap shots like “The Christian God sends his son to die for you. The Muslim God tells you to send your son to die for him”.

I have ALWAYS denounced hate speech in mosques or on Arab news outlets, but what more can we do? You ask the Muslim world to reform. I totally agree with that. But do you think bombing them into reform will achieve anything? Let me know what you had exactly in mind.

[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
Do we support for a corrupt and represive regime in Iran?

We we support a corrupt and oppressive regime in Libya? [/quote]

No. But you do in Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Tunisia, Egypt, Turkey, Morocco and many others.

Did I mention how good friends you were with Saddam?

Can’t argue with that.

Mossadegh, too trivial? Let’s talk about other regions than the M.E.

How about Ferdinand Marcos in the Phillipines?

General Maximiliano Hernandez Martinez in El Salvador?

Manuel Noriega in Panama?

Pinochet in Chile?

Sallasie in Ethiopia?

Suharto in Indonesia?

Videla in Agentina?

Franco in Spain?

Duvalier in Haiti?

The other Duvalier in Haiti?

Batista in Cuba?

You can’t claim that the US is interested in anything else but its own interests. I don’t blame you for that, but when people die because you condone overthrowing democratically elected regimes and support bloody dictators it’s a different story.

If Mossadegh declaring Britain an enemy is reason enough to overthrow him, why would you not expect others to try and overthrow your democratically elected president? After all, he publically declared many countries as enemies. By your logic, it’s justifiable if Iranians try to overthrow Bush. You don’t realize that because you’re behind the gun.

Again, don’t misinterpret this as putting all the blame on the US. By no mean am I trying to say that you are solely responsible for terrorist attacks. No. Your interventionist policy sparked a hatred that’s pervasive worldwide. That some choose to express it by blowing up innocents instead of resorting to more peaceful means is NOT your fault.

[quote]lixy wrote:
pat36 wrote:
Prove me wrong…

You sound like you’ve fallen into HH’s category when you wrote:

“I am pretty sure y’all wouldn’t piss on a Jew if he were on fire.”

Then you try to whitewash it saying:

“This doesn’t mean I think all muslims are bad. It doesn’t even mean I think most muslims are bad I am sure most aren’t”

So, which is it?

Did I ever mention the people around me cried on 9/11?

What do you want me to do? I do more than my share to counter the Islamist propaganda, but it becomes increasingly hard when you start baseless wars or some of your leaders throw cheap shots like “The Christian God sends his son to die for you. The Muslim God tells you to send your son to die for him”.

I have ALWAYS denounced hate speech in mosques or on Arab news outlets, but what more can we do? You ask the Muslim world to reform. I totally agree with that. But do you think bombing them into reform will achieve anything? Let me know what you had exactly in mind.[/quote]

In all seriousness, I’d like to see more public displays of remorse from the Muslim society. Largely, they have been silent. Yet when someone misuses a Koran or draws a picture of Mohammed, there are spontaneous riots in the streets.

When a suicide bomber blows up a market and kills hundreds of fellow Muslims…I see no outrage. When a suicide bomber blows up Americans, there is celebration. The fact that it is always done under the guise of “The Will of Allah” just makes it worse in the western mind. That is the common perception.

When we see massive displays of public rage or support for actions as these, it would be nice to see the same public display when your religion is misused in such an evil way.

When you rage over a cartoon and are stone silent over the decapitation of prisoners, that sends a clear message to western society.

I have seen no anti-terrorism movement out of the Islamic society.

[quote]lixy wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
Do we support for a corrupt and represive regime in Iran?

We we support a corrupt and oppressive regime in Libya?

No. But you do in Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Tunisia, Egypt, Turkey, Morocco and many others.
[/quote]

Why are they all corrupt and oppresive? Seems to be the norm in the middle east whether we support or do not support them.

[quote]

Did I mention how good friends you were with Saddam?

Face it, the Middle East has not exactly produced liberal societies and decent governments.

Can’t argue with that.

And don’t give me that crap that America overthrows them when they do. I am tired of the one sided crap about Mossadegh. He declared Britain an enemy, flirted with the communists and nationalized the oil industry.

Mossadegh, too trivial? Let’s talk about other regions than the M.E.

How about Ferdinand Marcos in the Phillipines?

General Maximiliano Hernandez Martinez in El Salvador?

Manuel Noriega in Panama?

Pinochet in Chile?

Sallasie in Ethiopia?

Suharto in Indonesia?

Videla in Agentina?

Franco in Spain?

Duvalier in Haiti?

The other Duvalier in Haiti?

Batista in Cuba?

You can’t claim that the US is interested in anything else but its own interests. I don’t blame you for that, but when people die because you condone overthrowing democratically elected regimes and support bloody dictators it’s a different story.

If Mossadegh declaring Britain an enemy is reason enough to overthrow him, why would you not expect others to try and overthrow your democratically elected president? After all, he publically declared many countries as enemies. By your logic, it’s justifiable if Iranians try to overthrow Bush. You don’t realize that because you’re behind the gun.

Again, don’t misinterpret this as putting all the blame on the US. By no mean am I trying to say that you are solely responsible for terrorist attacks. No. Your interventionist policy sparked a hatred that’s pervasive worldwide. That some choose to express it by blowing up innocents instead of resorting to more peaceful means is NOT your fault. [/quote]

Why don’t ypu list all the repressive communist regimes we opposed?

The world is a fucked up place. It always has been.

America interacts with the world. We are forced to inreact with fuck ups. There ar efuck ups that are friendly to us and fuck ups that are not. It is not our fault they are fuck ups.

We are forced to deal with them even though we do not like them.

Read more of Ike’s writings. He greatly disliked Batista. He hoped Castro would be a good change but feared Castro would turn into a dictator and side with the USSR. His worst fears were realized.

It is the same story in all those places. The US supports the lesser of two evils because it is too hard to do anything else.

[quote]PGJ wrote:
So history is bigoted? The fact is that Islam has used religion to justify aggression since it’s founding. Christians did it for a while about 1,000 years ago but have since reformed (you will no doubt point out the highly exaggerated Salem Witch Trials).[/quote]

Islam is not to blame for the excesses of some anymore than Christianity is to blame for the crusades.

85% of Muslims are not dark-skinned, speak Arabic or wear any form of head-gear.

Right. But that’s cultural NOT religious. Mohammed actually managed to unify the region in an unprecedented manner.

I shall quote you:

“You are a sad piece of trash. I wish I could meet you face to face, I bet you aren’t so bold.”

http://www.T-Nation.com/readTopic.do?id=1563401

If you didn’t mean that as a physical threat, it sure as hell sounded like one!

No. Religions by their very nature allow such excesses. (Where’s Pookie when you need him?)
It’s the way some people twist the message that makes violence possible. Saying that Islam is responsible for terrorism is like saying democray is responsible for the war in Iraq.

This has been rehashed ad nauseaum. Many Muslims protest terrorism. The news corporations don’t think that makes as good of a news story as people killing each other.

A quick Google search would reveal to you the numerous demonstrations that took place in the Muslim world following every single terrorist attack. Myself, I’ve been in some public demonstrations against the whackos who go around killing innocents. Your “dancing in extacy” (sic) crowd is always in Palestine, and if we talk numbers, we would get hundreds more condemning terrorism than praising it.

The fact that bad news travel fast and that FOX delights in footage of any celebration of those horrendous events helped forged your perspective. Of course, patrolling Iraqi streets in a humvee isn’t exactly the way to go if you want to learn about other people’s culture or religion. Can you blame them for not exactly being thrilled at your presence there? Ever since you got there, things became catastrophic.

Ren did a fantastic job on one of the threads to collect the outrage of Muslims following some terrorist attack. He claimed it took him a few minutes. I don’t have the patience to go around hunting those for you, but you might wanna start by going thru these:

http://www.masnet.org/views.asp?id=514
http://www.islamdenouncesterrorism.com/

http://www.religioustolerance.org/islfatwa.htm
http://groups.colgate.edu/aarislam/response.htm

[quote]lixy wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
Do we support for a corrupt and represive regime in Iran?

We we support a corrupt and oppressive regime in Libya?

No. But you do in Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Tunisia, Egypt, Turkey, Morocco and many others.

Did I mention how good friends you were with Saddam?

Face it, the Middle East has not exactly produced liberal societies and decent governments.

Can’t argue with that.

And don’t give me that crap that America overthrows them when they do. I am tired of the one sided crap about Mossadegh. He declared Britain an enemy, flirted with the communists and nationalized the oil industry.

Mossadegh, too trivial? Let’s talk about other regions than the M.E.

How about Ferdinand Marcos in the Phillipines?

General Maximiliano Hernandez Martinez in El Salvador?

Manuel Noriega in Panama?

Pinochet in Chile?

Sallasie in Ethiopia?

Suharto in Indonesia?

Videla in Agentina?

Franco in Spain?

Duvalier in Haiti?

The other Duvalier in Haiti?

Batista in Cuba?

You can’t claim that the US is interested in anything else but its own interests. I don’t blame you for that, but when people die because you condone overthrowing democratically elected regimes and support bloody dictators it’s a different story.

If Mossadegh declaring Britain an enemy is reason enough to overthrow him, why would you not expect others to try and overthrow your democratically elected president? After all, he publically declared many countries as enemies. By your logic, it’s justifiable if Iranians try to overthrow Bush. You don’t realize that because you’re behind the gun.

Again, don’t misinterpret this as putting all the blame on the US. By no mean am I trying to say that you are solely responsible for terrorist attacks. No. Your interventionist policy sparked a hatred that’s pervasive worldwide. That some choose to express it by blowing up innocents instead of resorting to more peaceful means is NOT your fault. [/quote]

Any chance you could summarize the point of bringing up each name? I’m not sure why a few of them were provided as as an indictment against the US.

[quote]PGJ wrote:
In all seriousness, I’d like to see more public displays of remorse from the Muslim society. [/quote]

Same here. They are not reported enough in your media. Try reading the foreign press and you’ll be stunned.

No. They are being ignored because it’s not as good a headline as riots and murders.

I perfectly understand. It’s indeed shameful. The cartoon story is notable because said cartoons were published by Arab newspapers long before the story broke out on the international scene. Nobody really cared. Muslims frowned upon it and that was it. Several week later (remember, after it was published in Muslim countries), some radicals saw it as a good story to score political points. The rest is history…

Please don’t confuse Iraq with the rest of the world. You are occupying a country. I don’t see how you can expect the locals not to resist that by all means.

If you had a foreign army occupying your country and one of your buddies blew of the occupiers’ head, I would expect the same from you. It’s sad, but it’s a crucial distinction you should make in order to properly understand the issue.

I see the way it’s presented in the media every day and am appalled by the lack of perspective they take in reporting that.

Let me enlighten you; every action a Muslim take is in the name of Allah. When I sit down for breakfast, I say “Bism’ Allah” out loud, same thing when I sit down on my desk or when I grab weights in the gym. It’s cultural bias that makes you perceive some of the insurgents’ crimes as “will of Allah”. Except of course, for the Al-Qaeda kooks. Those revendicate their actions as God-driven.

I addressed that in my previous post.

[quote]lixy wrote:
pat36 wrote:
Prove me wrong…

You sound like you’ve fallen into HH’s category when you wrote:

“I am pretty sure y’all wouldn’t piss on a Jew if he were on fire.”

Then you try to whitewash it saying:

“This doesn’t mean I think all muslims are bad. It doesn’t even mean I think most muslims are bad I am sure most aren’t”

So, which is it?

Did I ever mention the people around me cried on 9/11?

What do you want me to do? I do more than my share to counter the Islamist propaganda, but it becomes increasingly hard when you start baseless wars or some of your leaders throw cheap shots like “The Christian God sends his son to die for you. The Muslim God tells you to send your son to die for him”.

I have ALWAYS denounced hate speech in mosques or on Arab news outlets, but what more can we do? You ask the Muslim world to reform. I totally agree with that. But do you think bombing them into reform will achieve anything? Let me know what you had exactly in mind.[/quote]

So in essence, nothing. Some gestures and weak words are all you have to offer when it comes to rooting out the evil devouring your religious beliefs. Throwing a band-aid on a gaping wound.

We were attacked Lixy, not once but many times and we turned the other cheek many times. Do you really think we should take it? We should reach out to those who want to kill us for no good reason. What the hell did you think was going to happen.

You and your fellow muslims are doing nothing to stop it. You do not condemn, but you condone, defend, and justify those who do harm in the name of islam. You do it by saying “Yes, what the terrorists were wrong, BUT if the USA…( fill in the blank)” It is your job to make sure the practitioners of your religion are peaceful. It is our job to defend ourselves.

While I think Iraq was a travesty and one of the biggest mistakes ever made by the leadership in our country; I am by in large for rooting out the terrorists with force. Starting with AL Kade Duh and moving on down the line. If anything in America we are to tolerant and forgiving to our detriment. Had we done something in '93 with the first WTC bombing or maybe with string of hi-jackings in the mid- eighties, things wouldn’t have gotten this bad.

lixy,

I’m relieved that you weren’t harmed. I was worried about you for a couple of days. I was even concerned they’d replace you with someone effective.

Imagine my relief on both scores when you restarted your posts!!!

Anyway, I’d like to hear your response to the saddam tapes.

Here: EXCLUSIVE: Saddam's Secret Tapes - ABC News

Please read this brief synopsis very carefully.

I urge anyone who still opposes the invasion of Iraq to read this.

If you are like me, you will probably end up frustrated that Bush hasn’t pushed this issue harder.

JeffR

P.S. lixy, be careful impugning the source. As you know, abc is consistently hostile to all things Republican.

[quote]lixy wrote:

When did I threaten you physically?

I shall quote you:

“You are a sad piece of trash. I wish I could meet you face to face, I bet you aren’t so bold.”

http://www.T-Nation.com/readTopic.do?id=1563401

If you didn’t mean that as a physical threat, it sure as hell sounded like one!

[/quote]

Check again, genius. That was jumper, not me.

Support of terrorism and extremism is rather widespread throughout the Islamic world. I’ll provide this article. One might not like the source, fine. I don’t present it as unbiased. However, it DOES site the polls and surveys it uses to make it’s argument. If one doubts the survey/poll results as provided here, feel free to google them and check them out first hand. I’m using this because it does pull these polls together in one article.

Right On: The straightforward arithmetic of jihad
By MICHAEL FREUND [Recent columns]

It’s time we open our eyes and confront reality. Ever since the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, the media has sought to reassure us that only a tiny minority of Muslims actually support the use of violence against Israel and the West.

It’s just a small fringe, a marginal few at best, they tell us, so don’t worry about it all too much. One percent or three percent - who cares? Just sit back, enjoy your morning eggs and coffee and have a nice day.

But a look at the numbers tells a very different story. The extent of support for global jihad is frightening in its proportions, and the numbers are anything but insignificant.

Consider, for example, the following statistics regarding support for suicide bombings and other types of terror attacks.

In a poll conducted five months ago, and broadcast on Britain’s Channel 4 TV, nearly 25% of British Muslims said the July 7, 2005, terror bombings in London, which killed 52 innocent commuters, were justified. Another 30% said they would prefer to live under strict Islamic Sharia law rather than England’s democratic system.

Now, one in four justifying terror may not be a majority, but it certainly isn’t a “small fringe” either.

In other countries, the figures are no less unsettling. A survey published in December found that 44% of Nigerian Muslims believe suicide bombing attacks are “often” or “sometimes” acceptable. Only 28% said they were never justified.

According to the annual Pew Global Attitudes Survey, released in July 2006, “roughly one-in-seven Muslims in France, Spain and Great Britain feel that suicide bombings against civilian targets can at least sometimes be justified to defend Islam.” The report also found that less than half of Jordan’s Muslims believe terror attacks are never justified. In Egypt, only 45% of Muslims say terror is never justified.

STILL THINK only a “tiny minority” are in favor of violence? In Israel, the percentages are even more alarming. After Cpl. Gilad Shalit was abducted by Hamas terrorists last summer, a poll conducted by the Jerusalem Media and Communications Center revealed that 77.2% of Palestinians supported the kidnapping, while 66.8% said they would back additional such attacks.

More than six out of 10 Palestinians also said they were in favor of firing Kassam rockets at Israeli towns and cities.

And lest you think that war fever lay behind the results, consider this: four additional polls published in September, nearly a month after the Lebanese conflict had ended, all found large majorities of Palestinians backing terror attacks against the Jewish state.

Indeed, in various countries around the world, support for Muslim fundamentalist terror groups appears to be widespread.

On the fifth anniversary of the September 11 attacks, a survey conducted by Al-Jazeera asked respondents, “Do you support Osama Bin-Laden?” A whopping 49.9% answered: yes.

And the July 2006 global Pew survey found that among Muslims, a quarter of Jordanians, a third of Indonesians, 38% of Pakistanis and 61% of Nigerians all expressed confidence in the mass murderer who founded al-Qaida.

In Lebanon six months ago, the Beirut Center for Research and Information found that over 80% of the Lebanese population said they supported Hizbullah.

And do I need also to mention that a majority of Palestinians backed Hamas in parliamentary elections last year? Sure, there are also places where support for violent jihad is not as high. As Reuters reported on October 15, just 10 percent of Indonesian Muslims said they backed jihad and supported bomb attacks on the island of Bali aimed at foreign tourists.

But Indonesia is home to more than 200 million Muslims, so while 10 percent may sound like a small number percentage-wise, it is actually quite large in absolute terms. It means there are some 20 million Muslims in Indonesia alone who are willing to say out loud that they support the use of violence and terror against innocent human beings.

Since when is that a “marginal few”? The question of whether a “tiny” or “sizable” minority backs the global jihad is far more than just one of semantics. It goes to the very nature of the struggle that Israel and the West now find ourselves in.

The figures above, taken from a variety of nations, continents and contexts, all point in one very ominous direction. They demonstrate beyond a shadow of a doubt that the global jihadist movement enjoys a wide and broad base of support that extends far beyond just a minuscule number of supporters.

POLITICIANS and journalists might wish to believe, as we all do, that the backers of violent jihad are few and far between, and that they do not represent large numbers of people with like-minded extremist views. But that is simply not the case.

The arithmetic of jihad is quite straight-forward, and it is time we stopped looking the other way and pretending otherwise.

The threat posed by Islamic fundamentalism to Israel and the West can, and must, be met. With determination and a sense of purpose, victory is not out of reach.

But the longer we continue to underestimate the extent of the problem, the more difficult it will be to defeat it.

So let’s put aside all that wishful thinking, and roll up our collective sleeves and get to work. Like it or not, the war on terror still faces a long road ahead.

[quote]lixy wrote:
PGJ wrote:
So history is bigoted? The fact is that Islam has used religion to justify aggression since it’s founding. Christians did it for a while about 1,000 years ago but have since reformed (you will no doubt point out the highly exaggerated Salem Witch Trials).

Islam is not to blame for the excesses of some anymore than Christianity is to blame for the crusades.

85% of Muslims are not dark-skinned, speak Arabic or wear any form of head-gear.

Hatred among tribes in that geographic area has been documented throughout history.

Right. But that’s cultural NOT religious. Mohammed actually managed to unify the region in an unprecedented manner.

When did I threaten you physically?

I shall quote you:

“You are a sad piece of trash. I wish I could meet you face to face, I bet you aren’t so bold.”

http://www.T-Nation.com/readTopic.do?id=1563401

If you didn’t mean that as a physical threat, it sure as hell sounded like one!

If I said “Islam is truly a religion of peace, love and gentleness” would that get me off your “Bigot list”?

No. Religions by their very nature allow such excesses. (Where’s Pookie when you need him?)
It’s the way some people twist the message that makes violence possible. Saying that Islam is responsible for terrorism is like saying democray is responsible for the war in Iraq.

Not gonna’ happen. Not until I see as many muslims in the streets outraged about other muslims killing and torturing in the name of Allah as I see dancing in extacy every time an American gets his head sawed off.

This has been rehashed ad nauseaum. Many Muslims protest terrorism. The news corporations don’t think that makes as good of a news story as people killing each other.

A quick Google search would reveal to you the numerous demonstrations that took place in the Muslim world following every single terrorist attack. Myself, I’ve been in some public demonstrations against the whackos who go around killing innocents. Your “dancing in extacy” (sic) crowd is always in Palestine, and if we talk numbers, we would get hundreds more condemning terrorism than praising it.

The fact that bad news travel fast and that FOX delights in footage of any celebration of those horrendous events helped forged your perspective. Of course, patrolling Iraqi streets in a humvee isn’t exactly the way to go if you want to learn about other people’s culture or religion. Can you blame them for not exactly being thrilled at your presence there? Ever since you got there, things became catastrophic.

Ren did a fantastic job on one of the threads to collect the outrage of Muslims following some terrorist attack. He claimed it took him a few minutes. I don’t have the patience to go around hunting those for you, but you might wanna start by going thru these:

http://www.masnet.org/views.asp?id=514
http://www.islamdenouncesterrorism.com/

http://groups.colgate.edu/aarislam/response.htm[/quote]

For once, I think you have made some good arguments. However, the perception is just as I have explained. My recommendation is for the truly peaceful, remorseful Muslims out there (and I know there are many) to be more active in denouncing terrorism in the name of their religion.

I agree the faith has been twisted, but it SEEMS as though everyone is going along with it. Written statements, letters to the editor, and stuff like that isn’t going to cut it. I believe that the 35,000,000 people of Iraq could easily flush out the terrorist element and clean up the place. It would be bloody, but in the end it would show that the majority “good Muslims” are done being bullied buy the minority “bad Muslims”.

And with that, stop all the Sunni, Shia and whatever other branches of Islam in-fighting. You don’t see Baptists out there blowing up Episcopal churches.

[quote]lixy wrote:
PGJ wrote:
In all seriousness, I’d like to see more public displays of remorse from the Muslim society.

Same here. They are not reported enough in your media. Try reading the foreign press and you’ll be stunned.

Largely, they have been silent.

No. They are being ignored because it’s not as good a headline as riots and murders.

Yet when someone misuses a Koran or draws a picture of Mohammed, there are spontaneous riots in the streets.

I perfectly understand. It’s indeed shameful. The cartoon story is notable because said cartoons were published by Arab newspapers long before the story broke out on the international scene. Nobody really cared. Muslims frowned upon it and that was it. Several week later (remember, after it was published in Muslim countries), some radicals saw it as a good story to score political points. The rest is history…

When a suicide bomber blows up a market and kills hundreds of fellow Muslims…I see no outrage. When a suicide bomber blows up Americans, there is celebration.

Please don’t confuse Iraq with the rest of the world. You are occupying a country. I don’t see how you can expect the locals not to resist that by all means.

If you had a foreign army occupying your country and one of your buddies blew of the occupiers’ head, I would expect the same from you. It’s sad, but it’s a crucial distinction you should make in order to properly understand the issue.

The fact that it is always done under the guise of “The Will of Allah” just makes it worse in the western mind. That is the common perception.

I see the way it’s presented in the media every day and am appalled by the lack of perspective they take in reporting that.

Let me enlighten you; every action a Muslim take is in the name of Allah. When I sit down for breakfast, I say “Bism’ Allah” out loud, same thing when I sit down on my desk or when I grab weights in the gym. It’s cultural bias that makes you perceive some of the insurgents’ crimes as “will of Allah”. Except of course, for the Al-Qaeda kooks. Those revendicate their actions as God-driven.

When we see massive displays of public rage or support for actions as these, it would be nice to see the same public display when your religion is misused in such an evil way.

I addressed that in my previous post.[/quote]

I think we have a difference in opinion of the purpose of American forces in Iraq.

You call the occupiers. I call the liberators. We did not conquer Iraq, we invaded and overthrew a corrupt dictator. We could have easily done an old school Roman conquest of Iraq, planted our own leaders and established American rule and kept all the oil and resources for ourselves and made Iraq the 51st state.

We didn’t. We took care to make it clear that we had no issue with the Iraqi people and have gone out of our way to avoid civilian casualties (remember we used to just carpet bomb entire cities). Yes, shitty things have happened, as you have pointed out on numerous occasions. The fact is we are there to liberate a nation, remove a threat to international peace and security, and provide a better life for the Iraqi people.

The terrorist do not fight to protect Iraq, they fight because they have been brainwashed to believe it is their religious duty to oppose the infidels.

Obviously, that is something America did not plan on.

It will take time. America was a complete disaster for almost 100 years after declaring independence.

I ask you, what is it going to take for the Islamic world to understand that America is not a conquerer. We are there to try to make it a better place. Who doesn’t like freedom? Freedom did not exist under Baathist rule.

If we leave now, no doubt some form of totalitarian Baathist or Taliban or Al Quaeda element will be in charge. Is that what Muslims want for Iraq? Are we pissing up a rope to assume that Muslims would prefer liberty and freedom over fascist religious fanaticism?

[quote]pat36 wrote:
We were attacked Lixy, not once but many times and we turned the other cheek many times. Do you really think we should take it? We should reach out to those who want to kill us for no good reason. [/quote]

They’re trying to kill me too. Not once, but many times they attacked my country. But you don’t see us going around invading other countries just to feel better about ourselves.

What do you want me to do? The police I pay for with my tax money is doing an excellent job at taking them down, but they’re too numerous and their ranks are growing by the day as long as the M.E. is the way it is.

You can’t make terrorism disappear overnight and you can’t fight it using an army. This much should be clear.

It’s unfair of you to say that. I just provide context.

You do realize I was meters away from a terrorist attack that left a pile of bodies in Casablanca? It’s my job to defend myself as well, and so I point out what I see as fueling terror. The unlawful invasion of Iraq was clearly one of them.

Arab nationalism is dead because it aligned itself with the wrong side during the cold war. The Islamists were the only alternative left to challenge the dictators in place throughout the Arab world. I believe the answer lies in reviving the movement.

However, you guys are still opposing it because of economical reasons. Such movement will nationalize everything the way Chavez did in Venezuela. So, it’s a double-edged sword and at the end of the day, it’s all about money and power.

Couldn’t agree more.

[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:

Because we are forced to deal with their shitty leadership they hate us?
[/quote]

How are forced to deal with their leadership? This was a quote from 1958. We were dealing with them because we want (need) their natural resources. I posted a more detailed response to Jeffr’s nonsense that dealt with this issue in the Targeting Girls School thread. I guess I could dig up more quotes and links if you’re interested.

I didn’t say it. It was Ike’s advisors that told him this “excuse”. Take it up with them.

Well, yes, when these dictators we support (for economic reasons) butcher their own citizens.

We shouldn’t be dealing with them in the first place.

Yes, usually after the slaughter is over and information slowly gets out that the U.S. government supported said oppressive regimes.

Whether we (do you mean U.S. government or American citizens?) are the bad guys is up to you, I guess. I’m just laying out the facts.

[quote]
The problem is obviously on their end, not ours.[/quote]

Of course they have to look in the mirror and take some responsibility, but our government certainly isn’t helping the matter.

Dustin

[quote]JeffR wrote:
I’m relieved that you weren’t harmed. I was worried about you for a couple of days. [/quote]

Well, exams are getting closer, so…

It confirms what I’ve been yelling for years.

“Terrorism is coming. I told the Americans a long time before Aug. 2 and told the British as well … that in the future there will be terrorism with weapons of mass destruction.” Saddam goes on to say such attacks would be difficult to stop. “In the future, what would prevent a booby-trapped car causing a nuclear explosion in Washington or a germ or a chemical one?” But he adds that Iraq would never do such a thing. “This is coming, this story is coming but not from Iraq.”

There was also a bit about WMDs that was not particularly fascinating. I mean, of course. the guy lied. That’s what dictators do. The question is what’s the sin of the slaughtered Iraqi kids to deserve such fate?

In foreign affairs, the only difference between Democrats and Republicans is that the former implement the policies quietly while the latter do it in the broad daylight and even brag about it.

[quote]PGJ wrote:
Check again, genius. That was jumper, not me.
[/quote]

Ooops! My bad.

Please accept my most sincere apologies.

[quote]lixy wrote:
pat36 wrote:
We were attacked Lixy, not once but many times and we turned the other cheek many times. Do you really think we should take it? We should reach out to those who want to kill us for no good reason.

They’re trying to kill me too. Not once, but many times they attacked my country. But you don’t see us going around invading other countries just to feel better about ourselves.

You and your fellow muslims are doing nothing to stop it.

What do you want me to do? The police I pay for with my tax money is doing an excellent job at taking them down, but they’re too numerous and their ranks are growing by the day as long as the M.E. is the way it is.

You can’t make terrorism disappear overnight and you can’t fight it using an army. This much should be clear.

You do not condemn, but you condone, defend, and justify those who do harm in the name of islam.

It’s unfair of you to say that. I just provide context.

You do it by saying “Yes, what the terrorists were wrong, BUT if the USA…( fill in the blank)” It is your job to make sure the practitioners of your religion are peaceful. It is our job to defend ourselves.

You do realize I was meters away from a terrorist attack that left a pile of bodies in Casablanca? It’s my job to defend myself as well, and so I point out what I see as fueling terror. The unlawful invasion of Iraq was clearly one of them.

Arab nationalism is dead because it aligned itself with the wrong side during the cold war. The Islamists were the only alternative left to challenge the dictators in place throughout the Arab world. I believe the answer lies in reviving the movement.

However, you guys are still opposing it because of economical reasons. Such movement will nationalize everything the way Chavez did in Venezuela. So, it’s a double-edged sword and at the end of the day, it’s all about money and power.

While I think Iraq was a travesty and one of the biggest mistakes ever made by the leadership in our country; I am by in large for rooting out the terrorists with force. Starting with AL Kade Duh and moving on down the line. If anything in America we are to tolerant and forgiving to our detriment. Had we done something in '93 with the first WTC bombing or maybe with string of hi-jackings in the mid- eighties, things wouldn’t have gotten this bad.

Couldn’t agree more.[/quote]

Lixy,

Don’t you see that your attitude is part of the problem? You are a Muslim, correct? You are an insider. Don’t expect the police or the military to solve the problem. YOU and other Muslims, in the name of world peace, have a responsibility to clean up your own act.

You indirectly condone terrorist actions by saying stuf like “I oppose terrorist, BUT if America wasn’t doing this and that…”. You see how you consistently deflect the responsibility? You do it in almost every post.

Every time you start up a new thread about America atrocities, you support the terrorists. You claim to be doing it to provide perspective. What you are actually doing is attempting to point out how America is the evil element, NOT the terrorists.

Muslims must put the blame solely on terrorists without the “…BUT America…” clause.

Individual Muslims, like you, have got to stop the whole “I can do nothing about it” crap.

Wake up and realize your entire religion is under seige by a small group of fanatics. You better figure out a way to stop them from the inside or else we will continue to lump you all together.

Children’s cartoons praising suicide bombings on national TV isn’t helping us, the West, feel any better about your religion. Start there.