25 Civilians Blasted

[quote]thunderbolt23 wrote:
Beowolf wrote:

Then stop saying we are the ultimate moralists.

And this needs to be addressed.

Far too often, when Westerners criticize Islamic societies for doing whatever they do, there is a response that “well, America isn’t perfect either, you know - you should recognize that”.

It is a frequent non-starter. We don’t have to think America is perfect to think that the Islamists are morally unjustified in what they do.

I think the US has tons of work to do in improving its foreign policy - that is mutually exclusive from the fact that I think US foreign policy is not to blame for Islamism.

Again, one does not have to believe America to be perfect to think that America didn’t cause the barbarians of the ME to become enemies of civlization.[/quote]

The problem is, when a presidential candidate says 9/11 had absolutely no reasoning behind it, whether it was right or wrong, causes us to stop trying to fix the problem.

By not admitting that the US’s actions are the base cause of their hatred (of the majority) we do not move to change it.

US foreign policy is certainly not to blame for Islams expansionist semi-crazy attitudes of today. But it is certainly to blame for the way they hate US. They don’t hate us for our freedoms, or because we let our women walk around uncovered. They hate us because we have continually interfered, whether that interference was just or not, in their affairs.

When we point out the US isn’t perfect, we are trying to say this:

We can change the masses opinions of us in the Middle East. We may never change the total crazies, but because of our actions in Iraq, a new generation of otherwise PERFECTLY normal and peaceful Muslims will grow up being convinced to hate us, and that ultimate glory will come from killing us.

That is the point of Lixy’s posts. Though it is not always clear, he, along with the rest of us “America is not perfect”-ers, are trying to say we have options here. We CAN change things. They’re not spontaneously convincing the masses to hate America, it’s founded somewhere.

If there was no foundation, terrorist recruitment would drop off. How could they convince somebody to go kill themselves to kill a bunch of Americans if they’ve never cared about America or heard much about it in the first place?

Get my point?

[quote]Valentinius wrote:
Oh, it is founded on SOMETHING all right - it is founded on the same impulse that hates African Christians and animists, hatred of Buddhists (hence destruction of their culture and the statues), hatred of Jews (“apes and pigs”), hatred of anyone who dare criticize Islam (look at the streets filled with “moderate” Muslims calling for the death of Rushdie), and intertribal hatred.

With so much vileness directed outward at so many unrelated entities, why assume hatred directed at the US stems from a different impulse?

It is all one and the same - not a reaction to anything in particular, but an original, pathological action.

And the fact that they live like monkees rutting in the dirt, drinking their own feces and refusing to come out of the Bronze age.

[/quote]

You are one hell of a racist manbearpig.

Here is what you are dealing with. All in the name of Allah. Would the youngster even know what to do with the all the virgins?

Beowuf,

I would agree with you. US policy is causing a problem creating more extremism, and we should examine the reasons why these people hate us…

except…

What does US policy have to do with terrorists cutting people’s heads off in Chechnia, Bosnia, Pakistan, Thailand, and the Philipines?

What did it have to do with the Bali bombings?

The Taliban blowing up Buddhist statues from the 4th century?

The situation in Sudan?

If we suddenly changed our policy, do you think the islamists in those countries would get bolder or just fade away?

If we decided to stop attacking these bastards, do you think terrorism would just stop? Or do you think it would increase?

[quote]Gkhan wrote:
Beowuf,

I would agree with you. US policy is causing a problem creating more extremism, and we should examine the reasons why these people hate us…

except…

What does US policy have to do with terrorists cutting people’s heads off in Chechnia, Bosnia, Pakistan, Thailand, and the Philipines?

What did it have to do with the Bali bombings?

The Taliban blowing up Buddhist statues from the 4th century?

The situation in Sudan?

If we suddenly changed our policy, do you think the islamists in those countries would get bolder or just fade away?

If we decided to stop attacking these bastards, do you think terrorism would just stop? Or do you think it would increase?[/quote]

Once again, I don’t blame Islamic extremism on American foreign policy. I blame their attitude towards us, a nation half a world away, on US foreign policy.

I don’t think those terrorists would suddenly get ‘bolder’ if we pulled out of Iraq. I don’t buy this whole ‘bolder’ BS. It seems to me that terrorists have actually gotten more outright and more violent since we began our policy of interference. Were there extremist Muslim terrorists before the Cold War and the invasions invasions of the Middle East? I’d be very interested to find out the answer to that.

Nature abhors a vacuum?

Let me throw this out, and talk about a pull-out in Iraq…

I think that despite Iran, the Sunnis would “fill the vacuum” (Saddam was Sunni)…

Am I wrong, or are they appearing to be the more ruthless and unforgiving in all of this mess?

(Afghanistan is another story…)

Mufasa

[quote]BH6 wrote:
It seems we have a competition going on between Lixy and the rest of us to see who can post articles detailing the war atrocities of thier chosen side.

Lixy posts articles on civilian deaths, someone else posts articles on female circumcision in Islamic culture. Lixy posts on criminal acts by US Soldiers, someone posts on muslims stoning little girls to death, and on and on and on.

There is a declared and organized propaganda war being waged by the Islamic forces we are opposing around the world. They are making a concerted effort to flood U.S. discussion forums and political blogs with information depicting the current war on terror as a failure. The American people are slowly buying into this viewpoint because our government won’t point out the underlying issues in this war.

There is a reluctance on the part of the US government, military, and all of western society to call out Islam as a mostly brutal, backwards, and ignorant culture. We are not encouraging reform, or working to improve the survival odds of the few Islamic moderates with the courage to speak out.

The greatest frustration in this war is that we will continue to fail to call it a clash of cultures until it is too late. We have gone beyond of war against terror, we are fighting to free people from religious oppression.
[/quote]

I think you’re wrong, and I certainly hope you are. If it’s a clash of civilizations, we aren’t going to win it. Ann Coulter style “let’s kill their leaders and convert them to Christianity,” which I hope you’re not advocating, is impossible and moronic.

[quote]Beowolf wrote:
thunderbolt23 wrote:
Beowolf wrote:

Then stop saying we are the ultimate moralists.

And this needs to be addressed.

Far too often, when Westerners criticize Islamic societies for doing whatever they do, there is a response that “well, America isn’t perfect either, you know - you should recognize that”.

It is a frequent non-starter. We don’t have to think America is perfect to think that the Islamists are morally unjustified in what they do.

I think the US has tons of work to do in improving its foreign policy - that is mutually exclusive from the fact that I think US foreign policy is not to blame for Islamism.

Again, one does not have to believe America to be perfect to think that America didn’t cause the barbarians of the ME to become enemies of civlization.

The problem is, when a presidential candidate says 9/11 had absolutely no reasoning behind it, whether it was right or wrong, causes us to stop trying to fix the problem.

By not admitting that the US’s actions are the base cause of their hatred (of the majority) we do not move to change it.

US foreign policy is certainly not to blame for Islams expansionist semi-crazy attitudes of today. But it is certainly to blame for the way they hate US. They don’t hate us for our freedoms, or because we let our women walk around uncovered. They hate us because we have continually interfered, whether that interference was just or not, in their affairs.

When we point out the US isn’t perfect, we are trying to say this:

We can change the masses opinions of us in the Middle East. We may never change the total crazies, but because of our actions in Iraq, a new generation of otherwise PERFECTLY normal and peaceful Muslims will grow up being convinced to hate us, and that ultimate glory will come from killing us.

That is the point of Lixy’s posts. Though it is not always clear, he, along with the rest of us “America is not perfect”-ers, are trying to say we have options here. We CAN change things. They’re not spontaneously convincing the masses to hate America, it’s founded somewhere.

If there was no foundation, terrorist recruitment would drop off. How could they convince somebody to go kill themselves to kill a bunch of Americans if they’ve never cared about America or heard much about it in the first place?

Get my point?

[/quote]

One of the few sensible people left on here. What no one is addressing in the stupid slams about terrorists hiding behind civilians (stupid because it’s obviously wrong, and stupid because what else do you expect them to do, as lixy noted) is that if we’re killing lots of civilians, as hard as we try not to, we will lose this war. Go read a history of Vietnam for fuck’s sake.

[quote]GDollars37 wrote:
One of the few sensible people left on here. What no one is addressing in the stupid slams about terrorists hiding behind civilians (stupid because it’s obviously wrong, and stupid because what else do you expect them to do, as lixy noted) is that if we’re killing lots of civilians, as hard as we try not to, we will lose this war. Go read a history of Vietnam for fuck’s sake.[/quote]

Thank you.

I don’t see how some people can’t see the parallels between Iraq and Vietnam.

Of course, some people still think we could have prevented Vietnam from falling to communism if we had just stayed a few more coughdecadescough years.

I’m not saying that the terrorists are right or just to hide behind civilians.

I’m not saying our soldiers should just sit there and die, not trying to shoot them.

I’m saying the civilian deaths, just or not, are pissing off Muslims, and breeding a generation of hatred.

Beowuf,

do a search on the Grand Mufti, or better yet, how about a google image search to get you an idea of what he was all about, and then read up on The Muslim Brotherhood. Bin Laden’s right hand man and teacher was one of those.

Interesting read. I’ll have to read more.

Mufasa

[quote]
I think you’re wrong, and I certainly hope you are. If it’s a clash of civilizations, we aren’t going to win it. Ann Coulter style “let’s kill their leaders and convert them to Christianity,” which I hope you’re not advocating, is impossible and moronic.[/quote]

I’m not advocating any conversions. I think the invasion of Iraq has forced a reformation on Middle Eastern Islam (Wahabbi Sunni and Shite both), and the increase in terrorism is a violent spasm as ME Islam begins to cope with the concept of democracy, religious freedom, and freedom for women.

ME Islam has been a political force, dominating and opressing the Arab people. Embracing democracy means sacrificing the total power that the clerics have on the people. They aren’t going to let go without a fight. If you think Iraq is bad, wait until Saudi Arabia faces this reformation. Iran is already facing a backlash in its society against the religious opression of the government.
The liberal western society of Europe and the United States are a model for the rest of the world. There are no other people in the world that enjoy the personal freedoms that we enjoy in the West.

The clash of cultures is between the liberal west and the religious/political opressors of the Middle East. It is real, and it will get more violent before it is over. If the reformation of the Catholic Church is any example, this one is going to be bloodbath.

[quote]Beowolf wrote:
I don’t see how some people can’t see the parallels between Iraq and Vietnam.
[/quote]
Perhaps it was actually more sensible to be involved in Vietnam than in Iraq. Bolshevism perhaps had a more realistic shot at world conquest than radical Islam; is based on concepts of human nature that are further from the truth than radical Islam; and has a bloodier history than radical Islam. (Radical Islam’s murders have the spectacle and the media coverage, but I believe Bolshevism has the numbers.)

My understanding is the South Vietnamese military controlled most of the countryside of South Vietnam in 1973, and might have continued to do so (without any significant U.S. military presence) had the U.S. Congress not cut off funding.

(Pardon my digression from the main topic of the thread.)

[quote]BH6 wrote:

I think you’re wrong, and I certainly hope you are. If it’s a clash of civilizations, we aren’t going to win it. Ann Coulter style “let’s kill their leaders and convert them to Christianity,” which I hope you’re not advocating, is impossible and moronic.

I’m not advocating any conversions. I think the invasion of Iraq has forced a reformation on Middle Eastern Islam (Wahabbi Sunni and Shite both), and the increase in terrorism is a violent spasm as ME Islam begins to cope with the concept of democracy, religious freedom, and freedom for women.

ME Islam has been a political force, dominating and opressing the Arab people. Embracing democracy means sacrificing the total power that the clerics have on the people. They aren’t going to let go without a fight. If you think Iraq is bad, wait until Saudi Arabia faces this reformation. Iran is already facing a backlash in its society against the religious opression of the government.
The liberal western society of Europe and the United States are a model for the rest of the world. There are no other people in the world that enjoy the personal freedoms that we enjoy in the West.

The clash of cultures is between the liberal west and the religious/political opressors of the Middle East. It is real, and it will get more violent before it is over. If the reformation of the Catholic Church is any example, this one is going to be bloodbath.
[/quote]

I agree with most of what you’re saying, but that’s ultimately their fight, not ours. There’s no surer way to discredit the forces of reform than by being their patron. No one likes being a tool of foreigners.

[quote]gdol wrote:
BH6 wrote:

I think you’re wrong, and I certainly hope you are. If it’s a clash of civilizations, we aren’t going to win it. Ann Coulter style “let’s kill their leaders and convert them to Christianity,” which I hope you’re not advocating, is impossible and moronic.

I’m not advocating any conversions. I think the invasion of Iraq has forced a reformation on Middle Eastern Islam (Wahabbi Sunni and Shite both), and the increase in terrorism is a violent spasm as ME Islam begins to cope with the concept of democracy, religious freedom, and freedom for women.

ME Islam has been a political force, dominating and opressing the Arab people. Embracing democracy means sacrificing the total power that the clerics have on the people. They aren’t going to let go without a fight. If you think Iraq is bad, wait until Saudi Arabia faces this reformation. Iran is already facing a backlash in its society against the religious opression of the government.
The liberal western society of Europe and the United States are a model for the rest of the world. There are no other people in the world that enjoy the personal freedoms that we enjoy in the West.

The clash of cultures is between the liberal west and the religious/political opressors of the Middle East. It is real, and it will get more violent before it is over. If the reformation of the Catholic Church is any example, this one is going to be bloodbath.

I agree with most of what you’re saying, but that’s ultimately their fight, not ours. There’s no surer way to discredit the forces of reform than by being their patron. No one likes being a tool of foreigners.[/quote]

gdol,

Sure am glad that the French didn’t feel that way in 1777.

Look to the majority of the planet. Once they get a sniff of Democracy, there’s no going back.

saddam wasn’t going anywhere. Our efforts to remove him were a failure.

It was either remove him pre-terrorist attack or after.

BH6 is right on, it’s a spasm.

Like kicking a beehive.

However, there’s good news on your horizon, hillary’s latest stance is to pullout the majority of American forces from Iraq.

Send her some cash and join the winning team!!!

JeffR

[quote]NealRaymond2 wrote:
Beowolf wrote:
I don’t see how some people can’t see the parallels between Iraq and Vietnam.

Perhaps it was actually more sensible to be involved in Vietnam than in Iraq. Bolshevism perhaps had a more realistic shot at world conquest than radical Islam; is based on concepts of human nature that are further from the truth than radical Islam; and has a bloodier history than radical Islam. (Radical Islam’s murders have the spectacle and the media coverage, but I believe Bolshevism has the numbers.)

Of course, some people still think we could have prevented Vietnam from falling to communism if we had just stayed a few more coughdecadescough years.

My understanding is the South Vietnamese military controlled most of the countryside of South Vietnam in 1973, and might have continued to do so (without any significant U.S. military presence) had the U.S. Congress not cut off funding.

(Pardon my digression from the main topic of the thread.)[/quote]

Neal, please stop it. You are attempting to throw ice water on a psychotic delusion.

“Bush lied, everyone died.” “Iraq is equal to Vietnam.”

No matter the veracity of either argument, that’s all the peanut gallery can digest.

So, please refrain from trying.

They’ll scream at you.

JeffR

[quote]gDollars37 wrote:
Beowolf wrote:
thunderbolt23 wrote:
Beowolf wrote:

Then stop saying we are the ultimate moralists.

And this needs to be addressed.

Far too often, when Westerners criticize Islamic societies for doing whatever they do, there is a response that “well, America isn’t perfect either, you know - you should recognize that”.

It is a frequent non-starter. We don’t have to think America is perfect to think that the Islamists are morally unjustified in what they do.

I think the US has tons of work to do in improving its foreign policy - that is mutually exclusive from the fact that I think US foreign policy is not to blame for Islamism.

Again, one does not have to believe America to be perfect to think that America didn’t cause the barbarians of the ME to become enemies of civlization.

The problem is, when a presidential candidate says 9/11 had absolutely no reasoning behind it, whether it was right or wrong, causes us to stop trying to fix the problem.

By not admitting that the US’s actions are the base cause of their hatred (of the majority) we do not move to change it.

US foreign policy is certainly not to blame for Islams expansionist semi-crazy attitudes of today. But it is certainly to blame for the way they hate US. They don’t hate us for our freedoms, or because we let our women walk around uncovered. They hate us because we have continually interfered, whether that interference was just or not, in their affairs.

When we point out the US isn’t perfect, we are trying to say this:

We can change the masses opinions of us in the Middle East. We may never change the total crazies, but because of our actions in Iraq, a new generation of otherwise PERFECTLY normal and peaceful Muslims will grow up being convinced to hate us, and that ultimate glory will come from killing us.

That is the point of Lixy’s posts. Though it is not always clear, he, along with the rest of us “America is not perfect”-ers, are trying to say we have options here. We CAN change things. They’re not spontaneously convincing the masses to hate America, it’s founded somewhere.

If there was no foundation, terrorist recruitment would drop off. How could they convince somebody to go kill themselves to kill a bunch of Americans if they’ve never cared about America or heard much about it in the first place?

Get my point?

One of the few sensible people left on here. What no one is addressing in the stupid slams about terrorists hiding behind civilians (stupid because it’s obviously wrong, and stupid because what else do you expect them to do, as lixy noted) is that if we’re killing lots of civilians, as hard as we try not to, we will lose this war. Go read a history of Vietnam for fuck’s sake.[/quote]

Hey, gdol.

Quick question: Are you saying that the terrorists aren’t using innocent civilians and sacrosanct locations as shields?

Don’t want to put words in your mouth.

JeffR

[quote]JeffR wrote:

Look to the majority of the planet. Once they get a sniff of Democracy, there’s no going back.

JeffR
[/quote]

That remains to be seen.

[quote]orion wrote:
JeffR wrote:

Look to the majority of the planet. Once they get a sniff of Democracy, there’s no going back.

JeffR

That remains to be seen.

[/quote]

bota,

Example: austria.

After embracing one of worst humans ever produced, your country doesn’t look like it’s going that route anytime soon (at least as long as the U.S. protects you).

However, there are those sniper weapons…

JeffR

[quote]JeffR wrote:

Hey, gdol.

Quick question: Are you saying that the terrorists aren’t using innocent civilians and sacrosanct locations as shields?

Don’t want to put words in your mouth.

JeffR
[/quote]

You misread. He meant they’re obviously doing it, and it’s obviously wrong. That’s not debatable.

You totally misinterpreted his statement.