• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

We only attack brutal dictatorships

cnredd

Major General Big Lug
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 5, 2005
Messages
8,682
Reaction score
262
Location
Philadelphia,PA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
mixedmedia said:
I believe Iran can transform itself without an American shot fired - and THAT WILL BE a powerful enough impetus for change in the region.
That's a major part of the long-term plan....We'd rather NOT go country-hopping...

Planting a seed and attempting to let nature take its course is a much better proposal...

I am cautiously optimistic about Iran...Now for now, but in 10-20 years...We just have to "wait" the current leadership out and make sure they don't go for a last resort, desperate attempt to keep their power...

It's also fun to watch Europe trip over itself with years of proliferation talks with Iran and getting nowhere...diplomatic idiots...:roll:
 

MSgt

Stabler Genius
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 10, 2005
Messages
26,272
Reaction score
11,627
Location
Highlands Ranch, CO
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
mixedmedia said:
From what I've read about the revolution though, it was made up of fundamentalists and socialists, aligned in the beginning - which side do you suppose America might have taken up with in the early Reagan years? Commies ain't the first group that comes to mind, lol.

Of course, those of them THAT ARE LEFT, might turn out to be, if not our allies, then our best bet. Iran's best bet.

IF we did something, I think we would have indirectly backed who ever was against Khomeini. If this means communists, it would have just gone down in history as another American controversy for the world to throw in our faces. Big wup. We're used to it.
 

MSgt

Stabler Genius
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 10, 2005
Messages
26,272
Reaction score
11,627
Location
Highlands Ranch, CO
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
cnredd said:
That's a major part of the long-term plan....We'd rather NOT go country-hopping...

Planting a seed and attempting to let nature take its course is a much better proposal...

I am cautiously optimistic about Iran...Now for now, but in 10-20 years...We just have to "wait" the current leadership out and make sure they don't go for a last resort, desperate attempt to keep their power...

It's also fun to watch Europe trip over itself with years of proliferation talks with Iran and getting nowhere...diplomatic idiots...:roll:


In the mean time..Russia is getting even more cozy. Europe never learns. They are too busy criticizing us to realize what is going on in front of their faces. They seem to be hell bent to re-learn the same lessons with every couple generations.
 

mixedmedia

iniquitably employed
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 10, 2004
Messages
6,822
Reaction score
373
Location
Naples, FL
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Liberal
cnredd said:
That's a major part of the long-term plan....We'd rather NOT go country-hopping...

Planting a seed and attempting to let nature take its course is a much better proposal...

I am cautiously optimistic about Iran...Now for now, but in 10-20 years...We just have to "wait" the current leadership out and make sure they don't go for a last resort, desperate attempt to keep their power...

It's also fun to watch Europe trip over itself with years of proliferation talks with Iran and getting nowhere...diplomatic idiots...:roll:

I'm not sure it will take 10-20 years. I hope not.

I am coming to terms with the "long term plan." I'm still doubtful that we have gone about this the right way. I think we made alot of mistakes.

And, I'm not counting Europe out. Perhaps they have made a lot of mistakes, too, but several thousand years of history is nothing to laugh at. Everybody has to have their downtime.
 

MSgt

Stabler Genius
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 10, 2005
Messages
26,272
Reaction score
11,627
Location
Highlands Ranch, CO
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
mixedmedia said:
I'm not sure it will take 10-20 years. I hope not.

I am coming to terms with the "long term plan." I'm still doubtful that we have gone about this the right way. I think we made alot of mistakes.

And, I'm not counting Europe out. Perhaps they have made a lot of mistakes, too, but several thousand years of history is nothing to laugh at. Everybody has to have their downtime.


Oh hell yeah, we made mistakes. Of course, there were the obvious ones, but there were others that were made that just surprised us.
 

mixedmedia

iniquitably employed
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 10, 2004
Messages
6,822
Reaction score
373
Location
Naples, FL
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Liberal
GySgt said:
IF we did something, I think we would have indirectly backed who ever was against Khomeini. If this means communists, it would have just gone down in history as another American controversy for the world to throw in our faces. Big wup. We're used to it.

They all backed Khomeini in the early days. Until they started trying to get the commie girls to wear the head scarf and locking up dissenters - torture, executions & other standard evil regime business. I don't know, I kind of doubt America would have dared to stick our neck into that one. Especially right after the hostage crisis. It was the socialists who took over the embassy and took them hostage. Which is probably the only reason they were kept alive all that time.
 

MSgt

Stabler Genius
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 10, 2005
Messages
26,272
Reaction score
11,627
Location
Highlands Ranch, CO
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
mixedmedia said:
They all backed Khomeini in the early days. Until they started trying to get the commie girls to wear the head scarf and locking up dissenters - torture, executions & other standard evil regime business. I don't know, I kind of doubt America would have dared to stick our neck into that one. Especially right after the hostage crisis. It was the socialists who took over the embassy and took them hostage. Which is probably the only reason they were kept alive all that time.

Yeah, there wasn't much there for us to play with. It's just a "what if" I toy with. Khomeini brutalized Islam right in front of his people and they let it go until it was too late. Iraq certainly was different. It was easy to seperate his regime from the people.
 

cnredd

Major General Big Lug
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 5, 2005
Messages
8,682
Reaction score
262
Location
Philadelphia,PA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
mixedmedia said:
I'm not sure it will take 10-20 years. I hope not.
Your mouth to my d...I mean, "God's ears"...:2wave:

mixedmedia said:
I am coming to terms with the "long term plan." I'm still doubtful that we have gone about this the right way. I think we made alot of mistakes.
Two correct statements, but here's the difference...

Some people(myself included), acknowledge the mistakes but understand the big picture...

Others thrive on the mistakes with no knowledge of the big picture...

mixedmedia said:
And, I'm not counting Europe out. Perhaps they have made a lot of mistakes, too, but several thousand years of history is nothing to laugh at. Everybody has to have their downtime.
Ah, the kings of the path of least resistance...One would think that the phrase "fool me 876 times; Shame on me" would be ringing in their head...Their "everything is hunky-dory" attitude has bit them in the ass when it comes to their own immigration issues, but the problem is that it hasn't even bit them hard enough to react properly...So they will appease the newcomers(Britain has plans to fund 150 Muslim schools where the Clerics will tell the students they are to hate Britain), and they will continue to appease to where the term "European" will be of geographical importance and nothing more...They're losing their identity at the demands of others, and are willing to abide...

2050 - Welcome to Eurabia...:(
 

MSgt

Stabler Genius
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 10, 2005
Messages
26,272
Reaction score
11,627
Location
Highlands Ranch, CO
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
cnredd said:
Ah, the kings of the path of least resistance...One would think that the phrase "fool me 876 times; Shame on me" would be ringing in their head...Their "everything is hunky-dory" attitude has bit them in the ass when it comes to their own immigration issues, but the problem is that it hasn't even bit them hard enough to react properly...So they will appease the newcomers(Britain has plans to fund 150 Muslim schools where the Clerics will tell the students they are to hate Britain), and they will continue to appease to where the term "European" will be of geographical importance and nothing more...They're losing their identity at the demands of others, and are willing to abide...

2050 - Welcome to Eurabia...:(


Recently, the most grotesque form of this appeasement was Germany’s proposal for a Muslim holiday in a foolish attempt to spare the European people from the wrath of the fanatical Islamists. It's really quite sad. Bringing "unity" to the people is one thing, but groveling and ass kissing is another.
 

mixedmedia

iniquitably employed
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 10, 2004
Messages
6,822
Reaction score
373
Location
Naples, FL
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Liberal
cnredd said:
Your mouth to my d...I mean, "God's ears"...:2wave:

Shame, shame, Mr. c......I hardly even know you.....or your d.... :mrgreen:
Besides, you know about my vow of celibacy.

Two correct statements, but here's the difference...

Some people(myself included), acknowledge the mistakes but understand the big picture...

Others thrive on the mistakes with no knowledge of the big picture...

And for whoever is making mistakes there is someone there to dwell on them. Welcome to American politics. And now for a little softshoe....
I'm starting to believe that all this partisan brouhaha is a conspiracy between the two parties to maintain the two-party system. Am I going crazy?

Ah, the kings of the path of least resistance...One would think that the phrase "fool me 876 times; Shame on me" would be ringing in their head...Their "everything is hunky-dory" attitude has bit them in the ass when it comes to their own immigration issues, but the problem is that it hasn't even bit them hard enough to react properly...So they will appease the newcomers(Britain has plans to fund 150 Muslim schools where the Clerics will tell the students they are to hate Britain), and they will continue to appease to where the term "European" will be of geographical importance and nothing more...They're losing their identity at the demands of others, and are willing to abide...

Do you have some reason other than speculation to believe that these 150 British Muslim schools are going to teach their students to hate Britain?
 

Mancunian

Member
Joined
Jul 19, 2005
Messages
72
Reaction score
2
Location
Manchester, England
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
cnredd said:
“Ah, the kings of the path of least resistance...One would think that the phrase "fool me 876 times; Shame on me" would be ringing in their head...Their "everything is hunky-dory" attitude has bit them in the ass when it comes to their own immigration issues, but the problem is that it hasn't even bit them hard enough to react properly...So they will appease the newcomers

Our immigration policy has a lot of problems but immigrants play an important role in our economy. We are fortunate that there are more than enough jobs to go around but thanks to fast food and computer games we have a lazy indigenous population who doesn’t want to go to work. We need immigrants to do the jobs that our own citizens won’t or can’t do. Asylum is a different issue. We are a rich country (in comparison with most) so if someone genuinely needs asylum, we should open our doors to save their lives, though we do need to be harder when filtering out the genuine from the thousands of applications!

cnredd said:
(Britain has plans to fund 150 Muslim schools where the Clerics will tell the students they are to hate Britain)

Ruth Kelly (Education secretary) isn’t a competent politician and I don’t agree with this because of the secular society it will create but laws have been passed to make glorifying terrorism illegal.

cnredd said:
...and they will continue to appease to where the term "European" will be of geographical importance and nothing more...They're losing their identity at the demands of others, and are willing to abide...

I can’t speak for the rest of Europe but yes, we are a cosmopolitan country. One where many nationalities and creeds can integrate with one another. We accept Americans too ;) In fact, many American businessmen find the UK very profitable. I would argue that the identity of Europe is changing, evolving. It’s not going to get lost. It is what it is, it’s been civilized for a long, long time and it’s not a bad place to live!

cnredd said:
2050 - Welcome to Eurabia...

That’s not a bad idea. By 2050 the whole of the Middle East will practice democracy western style and we can merge into one giant supercontinent and all live peacefully … can’t we?

Back to the subject matter. I understand the logic of your argument with regard to the big picture but I’m just not convinced that what you are saying is the real reason we are in Iraq or whether or not it will actually work. I think the fact that Iraq's one of the major oil producers in the world with the second largest reserves is the main reason we’re there; that and the fact that it was pretty defenceless. Your view on why we’re there means it will take generations to complete that kind of mission. You’ve made a start you say. Well, yes, but GWB isn’t going to be around for much longer (politically!) and who’s to say your preferred party will be in power in just a few years time, never mind generations. The whole plan could go wrong very quickly. But wait, someone with a similar mindset to GWB may gain power at a later date and we can start over again….. Only time will tell who’s right.

Lastly….

cnredd said:
Two correct statements, but here's the difference...
Some people(myself included), acknowledge the mistakes but understand the big picture...
Others thrive on the mistakes with no knowledge of the big picture...

The trick is not just to acknowledge your mistakes but learn from them. You might say thriving, I would say there is a place for people who remind others of their mistakes to ensure they don’t happen again. Can you imagine a population that agreed with everything their government did?
 

MSgt

Stabler Genius
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 10, 2005
Messages
26,272
Reaction score
11,627
Location
Highlands Ranch, CO
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Mancunian said:
Back to the subject matter. I understand the logic of your argument with regard to the big picture but I’m just not convinced that what you are saying is the real reason we are in Iraq or whether or not it will actually work. I think the fact that Iraq's one of the major oil producers in the world with the second largest reserves is the main reason we’re there; that and the fact that it was pretty defenceless. Your view on why we’re there means it will take generations to complete that kind of mission. You’ve made a start you say. Well, yes, but GWB isn’t going to be around for much longer (politically!) and who’s to say your preferred party will be in power in just a few years time, never mind generations. The whole plan could go wrong very quickly. But wait, someone with a similar mindset to GWB may gain power at a later date and we can start over again….. Only time will tell who’s right.

Lastly….



The trick is not just to acknowledge your mistakes but learn from them. You might say thriving, I would say there is a place for people who remind others of their mistakes to ensure they don’t happen again. Can you imagine a population that agreed with everything their government did?

I love paragraphs like this. I call them launching pads, because my mind starts flooding itself with commentary and then I start pecking away. You bring up very good points.


Clinton, Bush Sr. and Reagan were all very well aware of the escalading threat this civilization was posing. The reports are clear, the books have been written, and the experts have studied. They chose to do nothing, because forcing change on a civilization is a near impossible thing to embark upon, not to mention political suicide. For one, how do you convince Americans who know nothing about the Middle East and think that terrorists are just a bunch of rogues of Islam and two, how do you make your intentions public to the world and still not infuriate the Muslim masses where we receive oil? Only twice did we have the opportunity presented to us. Both times were from Saddam, and we allowed the first chance to slip away. A democratic Middle East is not just in American interests, but to the whole world, especially so for the Muslims in the Middle East. They are the ones who are suffering and we are the ones they are lashing out at. We're an imagined enemy.

Make no mistake...this will take generations, but not necessarily violent action. The Middle East is something that we must stay engaged with, but not be consumed by. Our fight is with the few, but our struggle must be with the many. Iraq is just Iraq. Iran is just Iran. Syria is just Syria. Saudi is just Saudi. Together, they make a civilization that must change. They must meet the demands of the 21st century, because their treasured values and inherited behaviors simply do not work in today's world of global progress. Their extremists and terrorists are making a gory mess of their religion. When an entire civilization embraces such butchers, both the civilization and the religion are in trouble. When the rest of the world chooses to tolerate such behavior rather than face it, they are doomed to be consumed by it.

It's not a matter of if we should force a change. This civilization and the terrorist that break away from their millions of extremist within, is giving us no choice. They are determined to hate us and kill us no matter what we do. We largely ignored this problem throughout the 90's and it did us no good. The attacks worsened and it wasn't Al-Queda persay. This is just a name among hundreds of other names where Muslims from all over the Middle East have been a part of against the west and in their own region. Al-Queda was seen as winners to the teenage masses every time they dealt a blow to the "Great Satan" where there was no retaliation. This is a war on attrition. One where we must continue to break the back of terror organizations and dictators that encourage said activity if we are going to win. It is far easier for Muslim states to purge themselves of their terrorists if they are on the losing side. While doing this, we must encourage democracy, the free flow of information, push education, industry, and everything else that will give the futurless masses a better choice than killing for "Allah."

No single President and no 8 year period can accomplish what must be done. What was necessary to give the Iraqis a chance to progress beyond their plight is not necessary for Iranians. Syria may be only in need of a punitive strike on it's military and their Baathist Party masters to allow the Syrians to progress. The next President may (and should) do very minor military action and spend most of his time nurturing what is already occuring in other Muslim countries surrounding Iraq. He will have no choice, because a determined enemy will make you face him one way or the other. Most everything that must occur in ours and our childrens futures will entail aggresive diplomacy. The diplomatic talks with Syria regarding Lebanon, Israel's recent pull from the Gaza Strip, and Europes talks with Iran are very much a part of this "War on Terror." Though not a part of the Middle East, even talks with North Korea can be a part of it. This is why the "War on Terror" is said to be a "global" war.

Oil and other such material gains are just perks. The same type of perks that come with every war. Even during WWII, we also protected our trade partners. It wasn't just about liberating Jews and taking out a tyrant. Receiving incentives and securing interests doesn't make the effort any less noble.
 
Last edited:

mixedmedia

iniquitably employed
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 10, 2004
Messages
6,822
Reaction score
373
Location
Naples, FL
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Liberal
GySgt said:
This civilization and the terrorist that break away from their millions of extremist within, is giving us no choice.

Sorry to narrow down such a large post to this one statement, but I've seen you write this before. Do you really believe that the extremists, and I mean people of action not sympathizers - for its not inconceivable for someone to sympathize with the philosophy but not condone the violence - do you believe the number of active Islamic extremists - those who support waging war on the West - really number in the millions? Or, maybe I'm just reading this wrong.
 

MSgt

Stabler Genius
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 10, 2005
Messages
26,272
Reaction score
11,627
Location
Highlands Ranch, CO
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
mixedmedia said:
Sorry to narrow down such a large post to this one statement, but I've seen you write this before. Do you really believe that the extremists, and I mean people of action not sympathizers - for its not inconceivable for someone to sympathize with the philosophy but not condone the violence - do you believe the number of active Islamic extremists - those who support waging war on the West - really number in the millions? Or, maybe I'm just reading this wrong.

No..no. You are reading it correct. It is not a matter of what I believe. This is the reality. The Middle East has three types of sentiments.

1) Those that are indifferent, but were raised to hate and blame Israel and their American slaves. A single example of this group would be a Jordanian that was interviewed after their recent bombings. He stated that he "used to agree with Al-Queda because they fought Muslim enemies, but when they started targetting Muslims....he stopped". He said that he "doesn't understand it anymore." Keep in mind that this is Jordan....not Syria, Iran, or Saudi. This menatlity is what allows them to see American civilians as legit targets for terror.

2) Those that support groups like Al-Queda, because they are doing "Allah's" work on earth against infidels, which are Israel and the west. These would be the extremists that you see cheering for their "Martyrs." This is also the group that graduates some of its members to the next group.

3) Those that take their extremism to the next level and become desperate terrorists.

This civilization is very much a threat to us and they number in the tens and tens of millions. They are spread all over the above mentioned groups. The numbers are more in group 1 than 2 and group 2 is much larger than group 3. Group 3 is actually very small compared to the whole civilization. Their televisions air commercials and videos that show "martyrs" on their way to destroy citizens in Israel. I don't mean to paint a picture of "doom," but this is very much what is there. In the Middle East, blame, is the narcotic of choice and they blame us for the ruin of their societies.
 

Iriemon

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 10, 2005
Messages
19,405
Reaction score
2,187
Location
Miami
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
GySgt said:
No..no. You are reading it correct. It is not a matter of what I believe. This is the reality. The Middle East has three types of sentiments.

1) Those that are indifferent, but were raised to hate and blame Israel and their American slaves. A single example of this group would be a Jordanian that was interviewed after their recent bombings. He stated that he "used to agree with Al-Queda because they fought Muslim enemies, but when they started targetting Muslims....he stopped". He said that he "doesn't understand it anymore." Keep in mind that this is Jordan....not Syria, Iran, or Saudi. This menatlity is what allows them to see American civilians as legit targets for terror.

2) Those that support groups like Al-Queda, because they are doing "Allah's" work on earth against infidels, which are Israel and the west. These would be the extremists that you see cheering for their "Martyrs." This is also the group that graduates some of its members to the next group.

3) Those that take their extremism to the next level and become desperate terrorists.

This civilization is very much a threat to us and they number in the tens and tens of millions. They are spread all over the above mentioned groups. The numbers are more in group 1 than 2 and group 2 is much larger than group 3. Group 3 is actually very small compared to the whole civilization. Their televisions air commercials and videos that show "martyrs" on their way to destroy citizens in Israel. I don't mean to paint a picture of "doom," but this is very much what is there. In the Middle East, blame, is the narcotic of choice and they blame us for the ruin of their societies.

Group 4) Those who were indifferent or liked Americans and what America stood for, but are disillusioned by an America that locks people away in secret torture prisons without charges or proof; who are outraged that America would invade a Muslem country based upon false pretenses, claiming to come in for a limited purpose but staying for an indefinite period; and who are outraged at American killing Muslems daily. An America which is acting just like the Islamic radicals proclaim -- as puppets for the "zionists."

Group 5) The thousands or tens of thousands of those who were indifferent or liked America, but who have now lost their mom, their dad, their brother or sister or their child to American bombs, or terrorist attacks caused by America's erroneous war, who now blame America for it, and vow revenge.

These are the categories we should be worried about.
 

mixedmedia

iniquitably employed
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 10, 2004
Messages
6,822
Reaction score
373
Location
Naples, FL
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Liberal
GySgt said:
No..no. You are reading it correct. It is not a matter of what I believe. This is the reality. The Middle East has three types of sentiments.

1) Those that are indifferent, but were raised to hate and blame Israel and their American slaves. A single example of this group would be a Jordanian that was interviewed after their recent bombings. He stated that he "used to agree with Al-Queda because they fought Muslim enemies, but when they started targetting Muslims....he stopped". He said that he "doesn't understand it anymore." Keep in mind that this is Jordan....not Syria, Iran, or Saudi. This menatlity is what allows them to see American civilians as legit targets for terror.

2) Those that support groups like Al-Queda, because they are doing "Allah's" work on earth against infidels, which are Israel and the west. These would be the extremists that you see cheering for their "Martyrs." This is also the group that graduates some of its members to the next group.

3) Those that take their extremism to the next level and become desperate terrorists.

This civilization is very much a threat to us and they number in the tens and tens of millions. They are spread all over the above mentioned groups. The numbers are more in group 1 than 2 and group 2 is much larger than group 3. Group 3 is actually very small compared to the whole civilization. Their televisions air commercials and videos that show "martyrs" on their way to destroy citizens in Israel. I don't mean to paint a picture of "doom," but this is very much what is there. In the Middle East, blame, is the narcotic of choice and they blame us for the ruin of their societies.

Providing your synopsis is accurate, then what in your opinion is the likelihood of convincing the masses in category one that there are no "Muslim enemies"? Assuming that most in the other two categories will never accept the concept of Islam without an accompanying enemy.

Personally, I think there is another large category, perhaps equal to or larger than your first category, and that is the group - much like we have here in America - that doesn't have an opinion for or against Al Qaeda, etc., because they are too busy trying to make sure they have something to put on the table that day. This is a group that it might be well worth it for us to help accomplish that small daily goal.
 
Last edited:

Mancunian

Member
Joined
Jul 19, 2005
Messages
72
Reaction score
2
Location
Manchester, England
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
GySgt said:
A democratic Middle East is not just in American interests, but to the whole world, especially so for the Muslims in the Middle East.

Agree. My reservations lie with the way we convince Muslims this is the way to go. It's crucial that the majority of Iraqi's feel they themselves are better off with a system of representative government; great care must be taken to ensure mistakes don't happen. Some are lashing out at us because mistakes have been made and lives lost have been dismissed by some as a consequence of war. Maybe so, but each mistake makes winning people's minds that bit harder.

GySgt said:
Make no mistake...this will take generations, but not necessarily violent action. The Middle East is something that we must stay engaged with, but not be consumed by. Our fight is with the few, but our struggle must be with the many. Iraq is just Iraq. Iran is just Iran. Syria is just Syria. Saudi is just Saudi. Together, they make a civilization that must change. They must meet the demands of the 21st century, because their treasured values and inherited behaviors simply do not work in today's world of global progress. Their extremists and terrorists are making a gory mess of their religion. When an entire civilization embraces such butchers, both the civilization and the religion are in trouble. When the rest of the world chooses to tolerate such behavior rather than face it, they are doomed to be consumed by it.

Perhaps they must change but most of the values that they hold are down are religious beliefs they aren't going to give up. I know a few Muslims who would admit to bending the rules a little (say, by drinking alcohol) but they live in fear of being caught by their parents and I'm not talking about kids here. I'm straying away slightly but my point is that the pressure on the young to abide by what is written in the Koran will be great. Those that have embraced democracy have moved away from the area but even then most still abide by traditional Muslim values. The Islamic extremists need be dealt with because of the suffering they cause but remember that extremism exists in all religions and political ideologies. I'm sceptical that the thought processes of such people can be changed. Isolating them will be difficult as well because by their very nature they are likely to go to extremes to get noticed.

GySgt said:
No single President and no 8 year period can accomplish what must be done. What was necessary to give the Iraqis a chance to progress beyond their plight is not necessary for Iranians. Syria may be only in need of a punitive strike on it's military and their Baathist Party masters to allow the Syrians to progress. The next President may (and should) do very minor military action and spend most of his time nurturing what is already occuring in other Muslim countries surrounding Iraq. He will have no choice, because a determined enemy will make you face him one way or the other. Most everything that must occur in ours and our childrens futures will entail aggresive diplomacy. The diplomatic talks with Syria regarding Lebanon, Israel's recent pull from the Gaza Strip, and Europes talks with Iran are very much a part of this "War on Terror." Though not a part of the Middle East, even talks with North Korea can be a part of it. This is why the "War on Terror" is said to be a "global" war.

Why couldn't the aggressive diplomacy have taken place before the Iraq invasion? Was removing Saddam covertly an option?

GySgt said:
Oil and other such material gains are just perks. The same type of perks that come with every war. Even during WWII, we also protected our trade partners. It wasn't just about liberating Jews and taking out a tyrant. Receiving incentives and securing interests doesn't make the effort any less noble.

I don't think this can ever be proved. You show good conviction with your points above and it's natural that you don't think the question of profit was near the top of the agenda when discussions were taking place regarding the invasion of Iraq . My view is that the invasion wouldn't have happened if there was no personal gain (in the business context).
 

Iriemon

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 10, 2005
Messages
19,405
Reaction score
2,187
Location
Miami
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Mancunian said:
Agree. My reservations lie with the way we convince Muslims this is the way to go. It's crucial that the majority of Iraqi's feel they themselves are better off with a system of representative government; great care must be taken to ensure mistakes don't happen. Some are lashing out at us because mistakes have been made and lives lost have been dismissed by some as a consequence of war. Maybe so, but each mistake makes winning people's minds that bit harder.

How can we "win people's minds" without credibility?
 

Mancunian

Member
Joined
Jul 19, 2005
Messages
72
Reaction score
2
Location
Manchester, England
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Iriemon said:
How can we "win people's minds" without credibility?

Not exactly sure what you mean here. I was suggesting that if we are at war, we should take prescious care of civilians. I think that earns more credibility. At the moment, I'm not sure we even count the dead.
 

Trajan Octavian Titus

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 17, 2005
Messages
20,915
Reaction score
546
Location
We can't stop here this is bat country!
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
Connecticutter said:
I agree - but let me ask you a direct question: do you believe that we still would have gone into Iraq if there was no documented brutality of Saddam Hussein's regime against the Iraqi people? I just don't see it happening.

Interventionalism is not the way of a Republic, while it's true that Saddam was a genocidal maniac that is no reason for the U.S. to intervene, I support the war but on a totally different set of principles, I just like to bring up the genocide thing to expose liberal hypocricy.

"America does not go abroad, in search of monsters to destroy. She is the well-wisher to the freedom and independence of all. She is the champion and vindicator only of her own." - John Quincy Adams
 

stsburns

American Infidel
DP Veteran
Joined
May 8, 2005
Messages
1,297
Reaction score
46
Location
Pergatory
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
Iriemon said:
How can we "win people's minds" without credibility?
So let the media should decide on how credible the US is? Right? :confused: Because they are the ones making us not credible, right?
 

Iriemon

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 10, 2005
Messages
19,405
Reaction score
2,187
Location
Miami
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
stsburns said:
So let the media should decide on how credible the US is? Right? :confused: Because they are the ones making us not credible, right?

How is the media not making the US credible?
 

stsburns

American Infidel
DP Veteran
Joined
May 8, 2005
Messages
1,297
Reaction score
46
Location
Pergatory
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
Iriemon said:
How is the media not making the US credible?
Because they "report" how we are doing, how well we are doing, how bad we are doing. They tell us what to think. What to feel. They have to power to manipulate our emotions. They can choose on how they want to use that power, even if it is for their own perposes.
:rwbdonkey :rwbelepha
 

MSgt

Stabler Genius
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 10, 2005
Messages
26,272
Reaction score
11,627
Location
Highlands Ranch, CO
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Iriemon said:
Group 4) Those who were indifferent or liked Americans and what America stood for, but are disillusioned by an America that locks people away in secret torture prisons without charges or proof; who are outraged that America would invade a Muslem country based upon false pretenses, claiming to come in for a limited purpose but staying for an indefinite period; and who are outraged at American killing Muslems daily. An America which is acting just like the Islamic radicals proclaim -- as puppets for the "zionists."

Group 5) The thousands or tens of thousands of those who were indifferent or liked America, but who have now lost their mom, their dad, their brother or sister or their child to American bombs, or terrorist attacks caused by America's erroneous war, who now blame America for it, and vow revenge.

These are the categories we should be worried about.


Imagining groups to make you feel warm inside does not constitute reality. Your groups are inside group one. These people are raised to hate Americans. Whether they pick up a bomb or hijack an airplane is irrelevent. The civilization needs to change and ******* some off along the way is inevitable. Doing nothing only allows them to further digress and the problem to get far worse.
 

MSgt

Stabler Genius
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 10, 2005
Messages
26,272
Reaction score
11,627
Location
Highlands Ranch, CO
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
mixedmedia said:
Providing your synopsis is accurate, then what in your opinion is the likelihood of convincing the masses in category one that there are no "Muslim enemies"? Assuming that most in the other two categories will never accept the concept of Islam without an accompanying enemy.

Personally, I think there is another large category, perhaps equal to or larger than your first category, and that is the group - much like we have here in America - that doesn't have an opinion for or against Al Qaeda, etc., because they are too busy trying to make sure they have something to put on the table that day. This is a group that it might be well worth it for us to help accomplish that small daily goal.

Their opinions still must come from a certain upbringing. That upbringing preaches that they are not to blame for their failures. Their failures are your fault. Their indifference to the issue is still accompanied by a violent doctrine. Their concept of education is enough schooling to survive and the Koran.

This group you speak of is considered in the larger group 1. This is the focus. The impossibility of changing current adherents to hate and blame would be like trying to change the cultural upbringing of the racist south in the mid 1800s. The focus is future generations. This must start with education and the free flow of information. The current adherents must be given the chance to prosper. The only chance they have is our interference because they weren't lifting a finger to do it themselves. The current nuclear issue in Iran is going to force us to act also. The end result will be about our securities. It's not a matter of what we want to do anymore. We can no longer ignore their more violent adherents. The escalading attacks up to 9/11 and the Iranian President and his "quest" to destroy other democratic nations allows us no choice. If it involves military deaths along the way....so be it. It's why our miserable paychecks exist. We die so that our people can be safe and this civilization, that we are up against, is not determined to be at peace with the west....no matter what we do.
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom