East vs. West Part II

So many experts. So many opinions.
With everything that is SO different between the Islamic World and the Western World… How can we possibly find a way to live in peace??

It is understandable that the Islamic world doesn't understand what America is all about.
All the blame can not be placed on the shoulders of their leaders. Not their Political leaders nor their Spiritual leaders.
In part, we can blame the media.
We complain all the time about how people here in our own country base their opinions on news clips.
We take issue with this here at home...imagine how it plays out in Muslims nations.
We see clips every few months of riots in the streets over things that we think are 'No big deal.'
The Muslims in the Middle East have been conditioned to believe that the whole world is trying to destroy their Religion, their way of life.
Bush has tried to let the Muslims know that we are NOT trying to destroy their Faith. We are NOT trying to take over their Nations.
Trying to get people to understand that we want to live IN PEACE while invading their Nations is the most difficult thing to accomplish.

We have individuals right here at home who come out publicly and try to claim that the world would be better if Bush wasn't President. If Bush had not taken the fight to the Middle East.
These people are dillusional. The world was not more peaceful before Bush was elected. The hate that has been boiling over towards our nation did not begin when Bush invaded the Middle East.

The dislike of the 'American Way' around the World began way before Bush took his oath of office.

What are the issues with the Middle East and how do we fix the problems?
We don't want to become 'like them' and we don't expect them to become 'like us'.

Muslims Hate Liberals
The hate for Liberals from Muslims is pretty much the same as that from Neo-Cons here at home.
Muslims and Neo-Cons are against:
Abortion.
Gay marriage.
Pornography.
The hate against Neo-cons by Liberals is shared by Muslims.
Liberals hate:
Christians & Jews. (Though Liberals say it is just in public.)
The fight being taken to the Middle East.

We have a major problem because 'diehard' Muslims hate both of our fringes.
We have a major problem because the moderates can't get their opinions out since they aren't 'newsworthy'.They don't promote the polarization that keeps the two parties in the forefront. The polarization that keeps people tuning in to the news. We are a 'Reality TV' Nation. We want our news to be like a soap opera or a cock fight.

Both sides in our nation agree that women are equals. Married couples should decide how they live .(Issues like: Who works and who stays home with the children.)
True Muslims believe women are a few rungs lower than men.
Muslim men blame the bad behavior of men on women. Their men are not expected to control themselves the same as western men should.
These issues had to be resolved in Western Nations. These issues have to be resolved in Muslim Nations. It is a threat to men. Men do not give up power easily. This is understandable. Even Liberal women understand that their men have to feel like they are the one who provides.
The 'cure' for the Middle East begins with educating girls and giving equal rights to women.
I think both Democrats and Republicans can agree on this.
Democracy over Religious rule plays an enormous role in accomplishing this goal. If those on the left won't listen to G.W.Bush on this MAYBE they will listen to our First Lady -
Muslims are 'minorities' in Western nations. They are claiming and receiving rights that minorities receive.
Minority rights have got to be defined. Minority by race or gender I can understand. Minority rights based on religion or sexual preference are pushing the envelope.
What next? I'm a minority because I come from 'so and so' country?
I'm a minority because my parents never got divorced?

While the ACLU is fighting against everything 'Bush' and Christian, I don't see them fighting against everything Muslim.
While Clinton was President the Muslims made out like bandits.
'How Clinton Sold Our Children to Islam'
Is Bill Clinton a 'Born Again Muslim'? How about Al Gore? Do we know the religious backgrounds of the leaders of the ACLU?
What is going on?
We need their oil. Does that mean we have to embrace Islam?

While the fight goes on in our Nation between the fringes... Middle America is not being heard and the Muslims are winning.

A nation divided is a nation conquered.


Posted by Dawn at March 4, 2006 1:32 AM
Comments
Comment #131255

Dawn:

I don’t know what you’ve been sniffing but Liberals do not hate Christians or Jews. To be a Liberal means that you cannot by definition hate anything. Liberals strive for knowledge and understanding thru study and research. Thus we knew and understood going into Iraq was a disaster waiting to happen.

As for the Jews… a vast majority of Jews are Liberals but once again you are equating Israel, the country, with Jews.

I suggest you do the Liberal thing and study and research more. I suugest any source that does not have “BlessedCause” in its name would be a start.

Posted by: Aldous at March 4, 2006 2:52 AM
Comment #131257

Sniffing?
I made a point to say that ‘liberals’ hate Christians and Jews in PUBLIC.
There is a difference.

If people - HUMANS- would use their religions as they were meant to be used -

Liberals want what? No poverty? No suppression? People to see each other equally?
Are these not what a peaceful, loving ‘God’ would want?

I don’t care what religion or NON religion someone is.
Peace on earth is the goal. Right?

The problem is …. how we can achieve it.
‘Variety is the spice of life’ ???
All sides need to remember that.

Posted by: dawn at March 4, 2006 3:06 AM
Comment #131259

Aldous,
‘I suggest you do the Liberal thing and study and research more.’

Do you believe that there is such a thing as OVERANYLIZING?

Do you believe that even though we can compare history - history ‘in the making’ is never the same?

Do you believe that - in the near future - the majority of Americans will accept the ‘liberal agenda’?

Do you believe that the Muslim masses will - in the near future - accept that abortion and gay relationships are ‘normal’?

The ‘majority’ of the Middle East is possibly centuries behind us when it comes to social issues.

Basing everything on history will not fix the ills of today.
We have to make the Middle East snap out of their prehistoric mindset.
The Jews and
Cchristians made many mistakes. We know that. We have learned from that.
That does not mean that we sit back and let the Muslims do the same.
Pre-Emption.
Education.
I thought Liberals were big on education. Am I wrong?

Posted by: dawn at March 4, 2006 3:29 AM
Comment #131262

Dawn,
If the Conservatives and Liberals who have been learning for the last 25 years or so to be Politically Correct have the Courage and are willing to gain true Freedom than both the Democrats and Republicans better learn how to politically debate coming from a point of being Politically Unalienable Correct based on The Law of Nature and God’s Nature according to The Declaration of Independence. Fight Terrorism and educate Our Parents on what is Right for Society and Government in Our 21st Century Life’s just by raising the level of Debate so that “We the People” can PUC the World

Posted by: Henry Schlatman at March 4, 2006 5:11 AM
Comment #131274

Dawn

Double-edged ignorance is the problem.

First,most of Western society hasn’t a clue on Islam,and second,vice-versa.

We can do our part by trying to understand the problem there first.

“No God but God” by Reza Aslan (Random House) is an absolute must read for those who want to understand this religion from its inception.

Education is the only solution…we must educate ourselves first however before we can attempt to “educate” them.

Right now though,it’s kinda hard teaching anything there with bullets and bombs falling all over the place.

This has been a generationial thing…and will continue to be so until an Age of Enlightment hits that area of the world.

Question is this:Do we wait or do we “help” them get enlightened?

Posted by: sicilianeagle at March 4, 2006 8:03 AM
Comment #131277

2Pe 2:9 The Lord knoweth how to deliver the godly out of temptations, and to reserve the unjust unto the day of judgment to be punished:
2Pe 2:10 But chiefly them that walk after the flesh in the lust of uncleanness, and despise government. Presumptuous are they, self-willed, they are not afraid to speak evil of dignities.
2Pe 2:11 Whereas angels, which are greater in power and might, bring not railing accusation against them before the Lord.
2Pe 2:12 But these, as natural brute beasts, made to be taken and destroyed, speak evil of the things that they understand not; and shall utterly perish in their own corruption;
2Pe 2:13 And shall receive the reward of unrighteousness, as they that count it pleasure to riot in the day time. Spots they are and blemishes, sporting themselves with their own deceivings while they feast with you;
2Pe 2:14 Having eyes full of adultery, and that cannot cease from sin; beguiling unstable souls: a heart they have exercised with covetous practices; cursed children:
2Pe 2:15 Which have forsaken the right way, and are gone astray, following the way of Balaam the son of Bosor, who loved the wages of unrighteousness;
2Pe 2:16 But was rebuked for his iniquity: the dumb ass speaking with man’s voice forbade the madness of the prophet.
2Pe 2:17 These are wells without water, clouds that are carried with a tempest: to whom the mist of darkness is reserved forever.
2Pe 2:18 For when they speak great swelling words of vanity, they allure through the lusts of the flesh, through much wantonness, those that were clean escaped from them who live in error.
2Pe 2:19 While they promise them liberty, they themselves are the servants of corruption: for of whom a man is overcome, of the same is he brought in bondage.
Jud 1:7 Even as Sodom and Gomorrah, and the cities about them in like manner, giving themselves over to fornication, and going after strange flesh, are set forth for an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire.
Jud 1:8 Likewise also these filthy dreamers defile the flesh, despise dominion, and speak evil of dignities.
Jud 1:9 Yet Michael the archangel, when contending with the devil he disputed about the body of Moses, durst not bring against him a railing accusation, but said, The Lord rebuke thee.
Jud 1:10 But these speak evil of those things which they know not: but what they know naturally, as brute beasts, in those things they corrupt themselves.
Jud 1:11 Woe unto them! for they have gone in the way of Cain, and ran greedily after the error of Balaam for reward, and perished in the gainsaying of Korah.
Jud 1:12 These are spots in your feasts of charity, when they feast with you, feeding themselves without fear: clouds they are without water, carried about of winds; trees whose fruit withereth, without fruit, twice dead, plucked up by the roots;
Jud 1:13 Raging waves of the sea, foaming out their own shame; wandering stars, to whom is reserved the blackness of darkness forever.
Jud 1:14 And Enoch also, the seventh from Adam, prophesied of these, saying, Behold, the Lord cometh with ten thousands of his saints,
Jud 1:15 To execute judgment upon all, and to convince all that are ungodly among them of all their ungodly deeds which they have ungodly committed, and of all their hard speeches which ungodly sinners have spoken against him.
Jud 1:16 These are murmurers, complainers, walking after their own lusts; and their mouth speaketh great swelling words, having men’s persons in admiration because of advantage.
Jud 1:17 But, beloved, remember ye the words which were spoken before of the apostles of our Lord Jesus Christ;
Jud 1:18 How that they told you there should be mockers in the last time, who should walk after their own ungodly lusts.
Jud 1:19 These be they who separate themselves, sensual, having not the Spirit.
Jud 1:20 But ye, beloved, building up yourselves on your most holy faith, praying in the Holy Ghost,
Jud 1:21 Keep yourselves in the love of God, looking for the mercy of our Lord Jesus Christ unto eternal life.
Jud 1:22 And of some have compassion, making a difference:
Jud 1:23 And others save with fear, pulling them out of the fire; hating even the garment spotted by the flesh.
Jud 1:24 Now unto him that is able to keep you from falling, and to present you faultless before the presence of his glory with exceeding joy,
Jud 1:25 To the only wise God our Savior, be glory and majesty, dominion and power, both now and ever. Amen.

Posted by: RDAVIDC at March 4, 2006 8:24 AM
Comment #131282

Without a freely elected government in Iraq or anywhere we cannot teach anything because you cannot reason with people who have closed their mind to everything but their way.Under radical Muslim leaders, other views result in the loss of your head.Under radical Liberal leaders you still have the hate and refusal to listen to reason.The goal of the Muslim religion is peace,the goal of the Jewish religion is peace.The laws of GOD were given to all verbally through the heads of families,then to the Jews in writing as part of the plan GOD had to bring CHRIST into the world to save us from our sins.All people had the choice to follow GOD or not and most didn’t and still don’t.The Muslim religion basicly is about living peacefully with each other as is the OLD and NEW TESTAMENTS but a radical view of both has caused ‘Holy Wars’not authorized by either religion.In all parts of the world there are those who would take away freedom from those who have it because they cannot control free people,free people control themselves.They cannot force there radicalness on free people,so,they first take away their freedom then make them follow their way or jail and or kill them if they won’t follow.Freedom is worth dieing for and many have given their lives for the freedom of others and there are those who try to take it away again so we must keep on fighting to remain free.We here in America are still fighting to stay free of those here and abroad who would enslave us.Under Liberal influence America has lost many rights,while they say they want more freedom for all they want to take away our right to decide for ourselves what is MORAL.Freedom to them is total IMMORALITY, telling us we have to allow people with radically different views on morality to teach our children or WE are being unfair.OUR children should be brought up according to OUR beliefs.They are OURS.Liberals should not be allowed to make chioces for us,they claim good intention,but, nothing good has come from Liberalism yet.It teaches we do not have the right to decide what is good or bad,right or wrong,and that is a GOD given right.

Posted by: RDAVIDC at March 4, 2006 9:06 AM
Comment #131290

Aldous

I always have trouble knowing when you are being serious, but I think you have articulated an attitude indeed prevalent among liberals.

You said, liberal by definition cannot hate anyone. Many liberals believe that absurd statement and it gives them a feeling of moral entitlement. It is like the idea that blacks cannot be racist or the poor cannot be greedy. I have seen liberals who are very good at hating. Read both sides of this blog and you will easily find examples.

Posted by: Jack at March 4, 2006 11:02 AM
Comment #131291

Aldous,

Thanks for the jocularity with your quote:

“Thus we knew and understood going into Iraq was a disaster waiting to happen”

Really, well, I guess Albright & Bill Clinton & Reid & Pelosi & Dean & Hillary Clinton might be a little confused about the “we” in your statement. (You gotta mouse in your pocket or something?)

Anyway, here’s what those prominent dems thought about Iraq from 1998 to 2002:

http://media1.streamtoyou.com/rnc/111505.wmv

Oh!! And how come many more fold democrats voted to authorize the Iraq War than Gulf War I? In fact, maybe we should blame the dems for not putting up the same fight they did for Gulf War I … but of course you don’t want to talk about Gulf War I. That was quick and easy and libbers have no argument with quick and easy!!

Or are you still gonna march around with your 1991 hippie college profs “No Blood For Oil” sign?

Posted by: Ken Cooper at March 4, 2006 11:04 AM
Comment #131295

Ken

Bravo on the link…the music…Traffic’s “Low Spark of High Heeled Boys” waxes eloquent as background too..

This piece would,in and of itself,makes terrific piece to comment.

My..how we all forget….

Bravo

Posted by: sicilianeagle at March 4, 2006 11:57 AM
Comment #131310

Ken Cooper,

How come many more fold democrats voted to authorize the Iraq War than Gulf War I?
Very simple. It would have been political suicide for ANYONE - of EITHER party - to oppose Bush so soon after 9-11. The Wrong wing attack machine was in full throat; those of us who opposed the invasion were accused of all kinds of things - I personally was spat at and called a traitor. Few in Congress had the fortitude to take the same stand.

Posted by: ElliottBay at March 4, 2006 2:03 PM
Comment #131312

Elliot

They (Dems) probably did the right thing at the time based on what we knew then. I hope they did it for reasons of integrity. I supported the war based on what I knew then and I support it now based on what I know why, BTW. The implemention could have been better. That is a defensible postition.

Your excuse for them makes them even more craven than I would say they are. You are accussing Democrats of knowingly getting their country in a war they KNEW was wrong just because they were too timid to resist or too interested in keeping their jobs. I don’t believe these leading Dems are that bad.

Posted by: Jack at March 4, 2006 2:11 PM
Comment #131318

one thing is certain those countrys always can count on is our ability to implode from within,they capitalize on it and use it to their advantage , but as a democracy we do have the right to criticize and disagree with each other. ask the majority of people in the world what do you want? a job, a roof over their head, to feel safe, to raise a family,to love, to see their children prosper,to have food on the table, that in my opinion is what you would hear. now on the other hand when they are exploited and deceived they become hostile it is only human nature that comes from leadership, not god or allah or yahweh or whatever you belive in. we believe their evil, they belive we are evil that again is poor leadership.

Posted by: rodney brown at March 4, 2006 4:08 PM
Comment #131320

Dawn:

By this time everyone on this blog knows I’m a liberal. I’m also Jewish. Are you trying to tell me that I hate myself?

What gets me is that you claim to be in the political middle and that you hate our polarization. Yet you list a raft of generalizations, very few of which are true, and almost all are calculated to increase hatred towards one group or another. Like your generalization about liberals hating Christians and Jews.

If you want to be in the middle first try to understand opposing viewpoints. And don’t be so eager to make big generalizations.

Posted by: Paul Siegel at March 4, 2006 5:29 PM
Comment #131321

Rodney,
“One thing is certain those countrys always can count on is our ability to implode from within…”

Remember the USSR? They fought the mujahideen in Afghanistan, some of the same people we’re fighting, literally the same people, and they lost. The USSR lacked any self-correcting methods for changing policy. They lacked a free press, they lacked an opposition party, they jailed dissidents. And they lost. They’re inability to change led them to continue following their leaders until they lost.

They stayed the course.

Dawn,
“It is understandable that the Islamic world doesn’t understand what America is all about.”

I think they understand. The Muslims understand that people and nations act in their self-interest. When The colonial powers divided the Middle East last century, the Muslims understood it was about oil.

Because oil was in our self-interest.

Unfortunately, it was not in the self-interest of the vast majority of people in the Middle East, other than the few sheikhs and corrupt leaders who took the money and wielded power.

I think the Iranian Muslims understand us very well. The US overthrew their democracy in 1953 and established the Shah. The Shah established SAVAK and a policy of westernizing the Iranian people.

If the US stood for Human Rights, we might stand for something. Instead, we no longer stand for anything meaningful. We stand for a powerful military, and lots of money.

Neocons like Bush talk about democracy, but it’s only talk. Watch their actions. Look at their long history of supporting authoritarian regimes. Look around today, at Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates.

Liberals hate Christians and Jews? Sheesh. I’m not a member of a Middle East religion, and I want you to know, I think women should have the same rights as men. I don’t ascribe to the Ten Commandments, especially the one that lumps women into the same group with property and cattle.

Posted by: phx8 at March 4, 2006 5:30 PM
Comment #131338

phx8 point taken, i also followed up with as a demoracracy …….and ended up my post with poor leadership. we did supply the mujahideen with arms and it helped them greatly. and reagan took a lot of flak for it.

Posted by: rodney brown at March 4, 2006 9:10 PM
Comment #131340

boy did i remember the USSR, i was stationed in germany from 1974-1976 in the army and like the other rodney use to say hey ill tell ya i dont get no respect. no most of the folks there were ok..!

Posted by: rodney brown at March 4, 2006 9:24 PM
Comment #131343

Rodney,
“… Ask the majority of people in the world what do you want? a job, a roof over their head, to feel safe, to raise a family,to love, to see their children prosper,to have food on the table…”

Absolutely right. Unfortunately, we’re saddled today with profoundly incompentent leadership. Articles constantly appear in the right column of Watchblog illustrating the results of this incompetence; repeated condemnations of Islam, repeated confusions of a small number of radical fundamenatlists- and I mean a very small number- with the rest of the Muslim population.

For example, I could bring up the example of the Lord’s Resistance Army in Uganda. The LRA wants the Ten Commandments to be the law of their land. Now, I could say the insanity of the LRA is representative of all Christians. Of course, this is ridiculous. Most Christians would have no trouble differentiating between themselves and the LRA. Yet time and again, these same Christians confuse all Muslims with a small number of radicals.

But because of incompetent leadership, the hatred keeps spreading. Time will tell, but Iraq appears to be the greatest strategic blunder in US history. It seems to be fueling a fire for a larger conflict, a battle between the radicals of Islam & the Evangelicals of Christianity and allied Zionists.

Osama bin Laden suffered a tactical defeat when his organization was dismembered. But he was victorious on a strategic level beyond his wildest dreams. OBL sought to polarize, and he succeeded. Although he wanted to bring the battle to Americans, after 9/11 he saw nothing but failures. Yet the US was foolish enough to invade Iraq on made-up pretexts. Osama bin Laden couldn’t have done it without the gross ineptitude of Bush & Cheney.

Posted by: phx8 at March 4, 2006 9:44 PM
Comment #131344

Dawn,

Your characterization of liberals is cartoonish. What you’re really saying is that you understand the terrorists hating America for its secularism. I’m not surprised. You even sound like them. I’m sure you would much prefer it if everyone in this country were forced to follow your religion and have your beliefs. Sucks for you the middle ages are over.

Posted by: Max at March 4, 2006 9:53 PM
Comment #131345

phx8 great post, open ,honest and with passion !thats what is missing in washington today. seems like they just talk, were is the BEEF! sorry about the slang!

Posted by: rodney brown at March 4, 2006 10:02 PM
Comment #131349

This recent visit to India included a protest by 150,000 Muslims. The media ignored that protest. It din’t fit into the propoganda narrative, that somehow all Muslims are crazed, intolerant suicide bombers. Unfortunately, large numbers of Muslims even in India seem to detest Bush.

The Bush visit to Pakistan is inexplicable. The security precautions were wild. Bush took his life into his hands going to Pakistan. Why? The last thing we need is for Air Force One to get shot down. We gave the Pakistanis a gratuitous slap, denying to them what we just offered to India. What was the point of that? Totally unnecessary. I’m not judging US policy towards India or Pakistan, just the diplomatic ineptitude that went with the trip, and the gratuitous slap. It’s not like Bush went there to congratulate Pakistan’s dictator for capturing Osama bin Laden.

Posted by: phx8 at March 4, 2006 10:58 PM
Comment #131350

phx8

You have to give Bush credit. If you believe that he knowingly took his life into his hands he obviously thought it worth doing. Even if he was mistaken, we can no longer criticize him for not risking his own life for what he believes to be true. I guess Aldous will have to stop his tirades about his putting only others at risk.

Posted by: Jack at March 4, 2006 11:19 PM
Comment #131354

“Unfortunately, large numbers of Muslims even in India seem to detest Bush.”


I’m sure there are large numbers of Muslims that detest Americans in general-just as there are Americans that detest Muslims.

I saw plenty on the media about the protesting, so maybe your news stations just didnt cover it?

I don’t see how Bush visiting Pakistan is “inexplicable”, in fact, I think it is heroic!

It doesn’t matter what country our President travels to, there will be people there against it, and people here against it-doesn’t matter if it’s Bush, Clinton, or a new Dem OR Rep-there are always people that will come up with a reason to bash it, rather than focus on the real reason behind it. Just like this war-what’s getting old is the whole “we lied about why we’re there” instead of the FACTS behind WHY we’re there. That’s the problem today-too many people are quick to let the bullshit roll off their tongue before letting their eyes show them facts. Young, old, black, white, Christian, Jew, American, Asian…doesn’t matter, ignorance knows no prejudice..

Posted by: Tanya at March 4, 2006 11:42 PM
Comment #131357

“Absolutely right. Unfortunately, we’re saddled today with profoundly incompentent leadership. Articles constantly appear in the right column of Watchblog illustrating the results of this incompetence”

And I’m sure there’s never ANYTHING in the “left column” that could be even remotely incompetent? God, I’m so sick of this “right vs left” crap, when are American’s going to wake up and realize that we all breathe the same air? Everyone is entitled to their own opinions, unless it doesn’t match what that person believes, then it becomes a hatred-I think my son’s 2nd grade class has a better understanding of how Americans SHOULD be acting than most Americans do.

Yes, I’m a “righty”, Republican, whatever the hell you guys wanna call me. Have I ever voted Democrat? Absolutely. I vote for the person, not necessarily the Party-at least until a few years back when I joined my local GOP. But that doesn’t mean that I don’t respect the opinions of the Left-I enjoy good conversation, on ALL topics, but why must it always resort to political bashing? Or worse yet, Jack bashing, Dawn bashing, Eric bashing, etc? Apparently noone in here is entitled to give their opinions, unless it happens to agree with the majority..yup, that’s demonstrating the meaning behind being an American alright.

OK-getting off my soapbox now-think I’ll go read up on my Cruise Critic forum-it’s so nice to be able to have everyone get along in a discussion.

Jack, Dawn, Eric, et al-keep up the good work! I enjoy reading the articles, its just the comments that get to me! =)

Rodney-((((hugs))))-glad we’re OK now….

Marysdude-if you don’t like it here, why don’t you stay on the left side of the page and shut the hell up about us right-wingers for a change…

Posted by: Tanya at March 4, 2006 11:59 PM
Comment #131358

welcome to watchblog tanya!! glad your back! also dale g we could use you! and ron brown my friend from down south. ron my daughter holly says no more goat stories!

Posted by: rodney brown at March 5, 2006 12:12 AM
Comment #131360

Rodney said: “ron my daughter holly says no more goat stories!”

Dare I ask?? *winks*

Posted by: Tanya at March 5, 2006 12:43 AM
Comment #131388

Paul, Phx8, Max,& Aldous,

That was easy.
Now imagine you live in a part of the world where you are told what to think from the day you are born and you are not allowed to disagree.

Posted by: dawn at March 5, 2006 9:49 AM
Comment #131400

Jack,
I don’t think I’ve ever attacked Bush for his personal attributes. Like everyone, I have my opinions of course, but I try to direct criticism & praise at policies. Is flying into a dangerous situation courageous? I suppose so. Is it a good idea for a president to demonstrate courage by exposing himself or herself to danger? Generally speaking, no, not unless there is a very compelling reason, for example, Lincoln at Petersburg. I just don’t want to see the president take risks. The downside is too terrible to contemplate.

Tanya,
I certainly don’t hate anyone for disagreeing with me, and if I’ve ever given that impression, I apologize. There is nothing wrong with disagreement though, and we try to decide on policies affecting our future, it’s inevitable disagreement will occur. Weighing the alternatives in discussion is a good thing!

As for hatred- I do see a lot of hatred and irrational fear in columns on this side. I am not pointing at anyone, I’m not critiquing messengers, only the message. I believe some very negative emotions color political perceptions for the right, especially in regard to the War on Terror, Muslims, and immigrants. And yes, I blame the Bush administrations for decisions which have led to this atmosphere of hatred and irrational fear.

“Just like this war-what’s getting old is the whole “we lied about why we’re there” instead of the FACTS behind WHY we’re there.”

We’re there because we thought Iraq presented a threat to our national security. It presented no such threat. Perhaps if Saddam Hussein could have lived another decade or two, Iraq might- might- have become a threat to our national security. Maybe. While public perception was nearly unanimous in our dislike of Saddam Hussein (I recall polls showing 92% of Americans thought he was bad news), few thought that was sufficient justification to invade. Hence, the pretexts, which were simply lies.

Does Iraq present a threat to our national security today? No, not really. In spite of the bloodshed, no Iraqi has ever been arrested for attempting to cross US borders with intent to attack. Not one.

Now that’s food for thought, isn’t it?


Posted by: phx8 at March 5, 2006 12:08 PM
Comment #131404

The radicals hate everyone. If they aren’t able to find and kill the “infidels”, they turn on themselves. Take a look at the sectarian violence. Sunni and Shiite have hated each other more than Orthodox and Catholic ever did, and for longer. Even France is not immune to the violence directed toward the west. I wonder if they’ll ever take time away from producing white flags to realize this.

Posted by: Tony at March 5, 2006 12:36 PM
Comment #131419

this last two weeks at least i can take my hat off to france, thanks for your kindness and fortitude for the last two weeks!

Posted by: rodney brown at March 5, 2006 2:23 PM
Comment #131421

Excellent points Tony and Phx8-

It’s just ashame that not everyone can agree that there is no room in our short life span for hatred. Think of how many issues could be resolved by simply shaking hands and putting an end to that hatred. I realize that’s a childhood imaginary scheme, but it makes sense to me. My hope is that one day, my children, grandchildren, or great-grandchildren will be able to enjoy living in a world where much hatred between countries, races, etc. is resolved. Of course reality tells me that’s impossible, but one can dream! =)

Posted by: Tanya at March 5, 2006 2:37 PM
Comment #131430

tony point taken,i would not want to be in the auto insurance business in france today.

Posted by: rodney brown at March 5, 2006 3:34 PM
Comment #131442

Tony,The radicals hate everyone. If they aren’t able to find and kill the “infidels”, they turn on themselves. Take a look at the sectarian violence. Sunni and Shiite have hated each other more than Orthodox and Catholic ever did ever hear of Northern Ireland?

Posted by: ElliottBay at March 5, 2006 5:00 PM
Comment #131465

“Sunni and Shiite have hated each other more than Orthodox and Catholic ever did ever hear of Northern Ireland?”

Well, the IRA recently announced it would no longer use violence, and the bloodshed seems to be declining there. I know this is very un-politically correct but I think it’s true to say that nowadays most violent terrorism is a muslim phenomenon. You don’t hear of extremist Catholics, Buddhists, or Hindus hijacking planes in order to kill innocent people. Neither do atheists.

Most muslims are peaceful of course but radical islam is the problem.

Posted by: John at March 5, 2006 8:50 PM
Comment #131512

John,

Most terrorist attacks are carried out by men. What would you suggest?

Terrorism is a form of asymmetrical warfare, usually used by the weak against the strong. It targets civilians & terrorizes them, with the intention of polarizing the vast middle, demonstrating the vulnerability of the strong, and in short publicizing & destabilizing the situation.

Most conflicts today occur in countries with Muslim populations. Many of these take place on Muslim turf, and the Muslims are usually fighting a defensive battle againt oppressive governments. In most cases the Muslims are weaker, and so resort to terrorist tactics. Even then, terrorism is rare, in terms of the word’s definition.

Terrorism is taking place in Colombia (narco-terrorism). The Lords Resistance Army in Uganda is a large group which also practices terrorism, and they are arguably the most despicable movement on the planet- worse than Zarqawi, worse than Al Qaida in terms of the misery they inflict. Sadly for the Ugandans, they are the wrong race, they are poor, and they don’t have any oil, so help from us won’t be arriving anytime soon.

Posted by: phx8 at March 6, 2006 1:00 AM
Comment #131579

“don’t know what you’ve been sniffing but Liberals do not hate Christians or Jews. To be a Liberal means that you cannot by definition hate anything.”

Is Al Frankin not being a good Liberal when he say’s, and I quote, “I hate Conservitives”.

At least one Liberal can hate, and he seems very proud of it.

Posted by: Boughregard at March 6, 2006 11:53 AM
Comment #131586

The violence in Northern Ireland is not all sectarian. It is also for political and nationaleistic reasons. I have tipped pints with Irish Catholics and Protestants, alike. At the same time, even. They are passionate about their politics and religion, but maniacal about football.

Posted by: Tony at March 6, 2006 12:14 PM
Comment #131590

You could try living more closely together and not bombing peoples back to the middle ages just because they take a different position to the US.

Posted by: Mat at March 6, 2006 12:22 PM
Comment #131594

RDAVIDC, I have never read such crap. What a wanker you are. Talk about fair elections, how about Florida 2001 - was that fair? And do you think all people in all dictatorships are unable to think for themselves? People think along socio economic lines, this is why Americans think that polluting the world is ok, invading the world to save them from themselves is good and why god is good. Try thinking outside your liitle box for a change and you might try to understand where other people are oing from.

Posted by: Mat at March 6, 2006 12:29 PM
Comment #131717

it’s fine that you disagree and take a few pot shots i do it myself. have you seen what the third world is putting in the air. yes we could do much better here. but they should not have a free pass to destroy the earth just because they are a quote a third world look at china and india and mexico and brazil their not even making an attemp to reduce their polluting of the world they just sit back and say look at those asses in the us fighting over everything, kind of makes this country look like the asses

Posted by: rodney brown at March 6, 2006 7:57 PM
Comment #131721

please ignore the last post because that guy was a ass ME.

Posted by: rodney brown at March 6, 2006 8:11 PM
Comment #131796

dawn
For someone who ended her post with,

A nation divided is a nation conquered.

I find it just a little odd that you choose to spend alot of your time taking potshots (and rather effete ones) at those dreaded liberals.

Don’t get me wrong, you’re almost there with,

The ‘cure’ for the Middle East begins with educating girls and giving equal rights to women.
I think both Democrats and Republicans can agree on this.

…but don’t you get even a little gut feeling that this might be a little bit too cute & comfortable, and then really miss the important point? Feminism (yes, a word even more terrible than liberal) was, among other things, founded on cold hard cash. Don’t try and tell me that the Suffragettes didn’t all have rich daddies all cashed up through the industrial revolution, and even then it took a few more decades before WWII labour shortages and baby boomer economic expansion gave women a real shot at equal rights. And you expect the Middle East and every other part of the world to just ‘hey presto’ make this happen? Your liberal attitude (read the rights of the individual) isn’t wrong, you just need to put some more thought into the how, now that you understand the what. Sure I’m patronising, so what, bite me.
This sort of thing doesn’t happen in nice hollywood style 1st, 2nd & 3rd acts. It’s always useful to note that at the same time that the western Renaissance enlightenment was happening, so were one or two inquistions. It’s a nice bumpy ride we’re in for… as the old Chinese curse goes “may you live in interesting times”.

rodney brown got it absolutely spot on when he said that,

ask the majority of people in the world what do you want? a job, a roof over their head, to feel safe, to raise a family,to love, to see their children prosper,to have food on the table, that in my opinion is what you would hear. now on the other hand when they are exploited and deceived they become hostile…

KISS (keep it simple stupid) right rodney?
It’s not about our differences, but our shared humanity and the desire to raise our young and provide them with a future where the answers to peace can be found.

There isn’t a dislike/hate for the ‘American way’, someone burning the American flag while wearing a Nike ‘swish’ t-shirt isn’t a contradiction. They want alot of what is represented in America, they just aren’t prepared to do it for your benefit, in fact it will probably need to be at your expense… that is your jobs. You want a strong leadership to protect you, you elect Bush. They want strong leadership to protect them, they elect Hamas.

I find this constant refrain of how America is going to bring democracy to the world a terribly pernicious form of self-delusion. The US of A was not a beacon of democracy for the poor huddled masses who flocked to it. That’s not why they came, and continue to come, whether they be Mexican labourers or Australian actors.
If you want one word that captures the idea of America, it is ‘opportunity’. And that is the best thing USA can give to the rest of the world, assuming you actually want to.

ok, so it seems like I’m just ranting so far. What I’m getting to is that ‘these people’, not just the Middle East but all of them, South America, Africa, and those parts of Asia that are just starting to get their act together, need to be allowed to make their own way in the world. True some will continue to make mistakes, but others won’t and don’t. The main thing the developed world needs to do is to stop getting in their way. If it really needs to be spelt out, may I suggest my favourite personal gripe - agricultural protectionism of the US, Europe & Japan. It’s one thing to say you want the world to embrace democracy, kittens, puppy dogs and all things nice… if you want them to believe you, you need to prove it.
If you really want to fight terrorism, then I suggest you support outsourcing.


As for sectarian violence, hmmm…
Forget Ireland, I get the distinct impression that most people here don’t realise that Serbians are overwhelmingly Orthodox, while Croats are Catholics - this is at the heart of their centuries of conflict. What’s more the Bosnian majority are (were?) Islamic, so if you take the time to ask a muslim how they view the Balkan war, it won’t be in antiseptic terms of Serbia vs Croata vs Bosnia. Instead it would be about Muslim men being starved to death in concentration camps, Muslim civilians being picked off by snipers in Srebrenica, and Muslim women being rounded up, then gang raped by Christian (orthodox serbian) soliders until they were deliberately impregnated as some kind of sick version of genocide. If you are running a tally of who is doing more bad to the other between Christians & Muslims (and you shouldn’t be), it doesn’t seem to me like Muslims would be winning.
I apologise for the graphic language, but while I’m sure people here are all of good will (even with all the partisanship), the ignorance is just way too depressing for me. So consider that last part a good old fashioned wake-up! slap in the face.

Posted by: loki at March 7, 2006 12:54 AM
Post a comment