• 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.

What is "victory"?

rainfox,

Don't know that I will or even can "tell you what you want to hear"; can only try to give you my perspective.

But who authorized the U.S. to start the war?

In other words,if Bush makes some mistakes who's gonna to do the same thing as the America's doing to Saddam now?

The U.S. Congress. You mean you haven't been following the attempts by the Dems to derail and denigrate Bush and our effort in Iraq at every turn? Despite being unwilling and/or unable to offer alternatives, the minority party still has a very strong voice in this country - unlike Iraq under Saddam where there was Saddam's way or the hiway (to a reserved spot in a mass grave).

But without any useful proof people can only doubt about original intention of the entire war.

In this country, doubts are allowed. Debate is allowed - as witness this forum. Redress is not only allowed, it is facilitated.

kill the old leaders and put in new one's that will follow your every word...

Saddam is still alive and on trial, last I heard. Furthermore, didn't you read about the elections in Iraq? They are busily writing a new constitution and electing a new government, choosing from among extensive and varied candidtates. What or who they will listen to is up to them.

BTW, these posts may sound like I'm very pro-Bush. I'm not. There are many aspects of the Bush administration that I abhor, particularly some social programs and especially the lack of fiscal discipline. But I do endorse the ME policy, thus far.
 
oldreliable67 said:
Saddam is still alive and on trial, last I heard. Furthermore, didn't you read about the elections in Iraq? They are busily writing a new constitution and electing a new government, choosing from among extensive and varied candidtates. What or who they will listen to is up to them.

Yeah he is alive but the message is still the same...get rid of the leader and apoint a new government that will obey you. And sure they are making their own government but with the U.S. presence there they are probably being prompted to do things our way...

Their new government might be friendlier and happier but was it right for us to make up lies about him having weapons just so that we could attack him? I am all for throwing him out of power but why did we have to lie about it first?
 
goligoth said:
Yeah he is alive but the message is still the same...get rid of the leader and apoint a new government that will obey you. And sure they are making their own government but with the U.S. presence there they are probably being prompted to do things our way...

Their new government might be friendlier and happier but was it right for us to make up lies about him having weapons just so that we could attack him? I am all for throwing him out of power but why did we have to lie about it first?

It is going to be impossible to continue this policy in the near future. How many more "Iraqs" can we afford before we are stretched so thin that we will become ineffectual?
 
Inuyasha said:
It is going to be impossible to continue this policy in the near future. How many more "Iraqs" can we afford before we are stretched so thin that we will become ineffectual?


There doesn't have to be anymore "Iraqs." That was the whole point of Iraq. Get rid of Saddam and his regime and we have effectively gotten rid of the one nation in the Middle East that did not have the power to change on their own. Syria, Jordan, and Iran have this power.

The Islam practiced in the Arab homelands is as brittle as concrete. Don't expect much from Saudi in the near future. Especially not while we are sworn to protect our oil interests, which means protecting those bazaars of terror.
 
goligoth said:
Their new government might be friendlier and happier but was it right for us to make up lies about him having weapons just so that we could attack him? I am all for throwing him out of power but why did we have to lie about it first?


Because doing the right thing is not what nations are interested in. Nor is it what its people are interested. They want current security and they want current peace at the expense of the future. It wasn't so much "lies," but in any case, America doesn't have the moral fiber it once did. America also doesn't understand what goes on outside it's borders and doesn't understand what a failing civilization really looks like that is dominated by an abusive religion. America cannot fathom an enemy that is determined to kill you no matter what you do. The complete truth about this civilization being broadcasted on international TV by the President would not have been in our best interests. Even though, the world is aware of this civilization and the region, the leader of the free world does not need to go on public television and rub in their faces....not while maintaining a sense of oil diplomacy.
 
goligoth said:
Sure Saddam was a bad person but that doesn't mean that we can make stuff up about him having weapons and then invade his country.

So Clinton made stuff up about him too. Nearly every democrat in the senate made stuff up about him too?


goligoth said:
After we invaded his country we found no weapons but decided that since we were there we might as well take him out of power.

Taking him out of power was the first objective of the invasion.



goligoth said:
Seems to me that democracy is spreading like communism...kill the old leaders and put in new one's that will follow your every word...

Democracy isn't the U.S. putting in leaders, it's allowing the Iraqis to choose their own leaders.
 
GySgt said:
Because doing the right thing is not what nations are interested in. Nor is it what its people are interested. They want current security and they want current peace at the expense of the future. It wasn't so much "lies," but in any case, America doesn't have the moral fiber it once did. America also doesn't understand what goes on outside it's borders and doesn't understand what a failing civilization really looks like that is dominated by an abusive religion. America cannot fathom an enemy that is determined to kill you no matter what you do. The complete truth about this civilization being broadcasted on international TV by the President would not have been in our best interests. Even though, the world is aware of this civilization and the region, the leader of the free world does not need to go on public television and rub in their faces....not while maintaining a sense of oil diplomacy.

So if it wasn't lies, then what was it?

And being that I agree with you, we were "lied" to, why is that we can all talk about it here, but something as monumentally important as this has not broken out into a "liberal" media feeding frenzy? Is there a long term plan, do you think? Or are we just in a wait-see mode?
 
mixedmedia said:
So if it wasn't lies, then what was it?

And being that I agree with you, we were "lied" to, why is that we can all talk about it here, but something as monumentally important as this has not broken out into a "liberal" media feeding frenzy? Is there a long term plan, do you think? Or are we just in a wait-see mode?

Lying is intentionally deceiving. Just because a statement happens to be untrue doesn't necessarily make it a lie.
 
I think the "victory" that we have been talking about can be itself only when most Iraqis consider the entire war the same as the Americans do_Of course,in the short term we can only gain a government under the protect of the American troops,although people can cheat themselvs by announcing that it's built up by election.I hope the government will throw off the influence of the U.S. completely someday in future so that the U.S. and Iraq could benefit each other in an equal way.

The victory shouldn't be a selfish one which only belongs to the Americans but also to the Iraqis .The way people say something like "We'er gonna achieve victory" makes me think they have some other purposes.
 
The Real McCoy said:
Lying is intentionally deceiving. Just because a statement happens to be untrue doesn't necessarily make it a lie.

Maybe you should re-read GySgt's post that I was responding to to see what I am talking about. But you're right about lying beng intentionally deceiving.
 
The Real McCoy said:
So Clinton made stuff up about him too. Nearly every democrat in the senate made stuff up about him too?
No clinton should have kicked saddam's a$$ the first time....invade him or at least do something but that's not what happened.

The Real McCoy said:
Taking him out of power was the first objective of the invasion.
Yeah but why did we invade?????????Was it because he had weapons? Or Was it because he was bad at hosting parties?What?

The Real McCoy said:
Democracy isn't the U.S. putting in leaders, it's allowing the Iraqis to choose their own leaders.

Yes, that's right, but once saddam was overthrown do you think that communism was a choice for their government??

They might choose their leaders but we made sure that the government would be obeidient...
 
goligoth said:
No clinton should have kicked saddam's a$$ the first time....invade him or at least do something but that's not what happened.

Originally Posted by goligoth
Sure Saddam was a bad person but that doesn't mean that we can make stuff up about him having weapons and then invade his country.



goligoth said:
Yeah but why did we invade?????????Was it because he had weapons? Or Was it because he was bad at hosting parties?What?

There was a long list of reasons we invaded including the threat of WMDs, his refusal to comply with weapons inspectors, his refusal to comply with an ultimatum given to him, his use of chemical weapons on his own people and the other mass slaughterings he committed on his own people...




goligoth said:
They might choose their leaders but we made sure that the government would be obeidient...

We're making sure a democracy is firmly in place. Whether or not they choose leaders who are "obedient" is up to them.
 
The Real McCoy said:
Originally Posted by goligoth
Sure Saddam was a bad person but that doesn't mean that we can make stuff up about him having weapons and then invade his country.


I suppose your trying to say that I was contradicting myself......yeah I kinda did....my bad....but that is like saying he did something several years ago let's get him now.....My opinion is that either do something about it immediatly or let it slide and clinton chose the later so......I don't think we can compile a whole bunch of things he's done in the past if in the past we knew about it and let it slide then...

The Real McCoy said:
There was a long list of reasons we invaded including the threat of WMDs, his refusal to comply with weapons inspectors, his refusal to comply with an ultimatum given to him, his use of chemical weapons on his own people and the other mass slaughterings he committed on his own people...

I thought that weapons inspectors searched him several times.....

The Real McCoy said:
We're making sure a democracy is firmly in place. Whether or not they choose leaders who are "obedient" is up to them.

So we can spread democracy by overthrowing a regime but communism can't??? Huh....

(by saying what I just did I am not in any way insinuating that communism is better than democracy I am just saying that it is a bit hypocritical to simply know that your form of government is better than others and that we can install our government where others can't.)
 
Victory only comes with a surrender.

I am highly skepical that when we leave Iraq that they will have a normal democracy. All the terrorism and battling in the Middle East is normal for them. I'm not saying ALL Muslims are bad, because that is definitely not the case, however there are too many radicals. Perhaps, there is hope as 60% is Shea's. In addition, that 40% could be a disaster as that is a fairly large number. All it takes is a few bad apples anyway. Look at 9/11 for an example, a small group of terrorist caused major destruction in many different ways to the US. It hurt our economy, caused many deaths and caused a major split between political parties etc.... Bin Laden knew what the out come would be. I do believe he is still alive and well plotting another attack. If he is not, his right hand man is.

There is no such thing as victory in this case folks.
 
mixedmedia said:
So if it wasn't lies, then what was it?

And being that I agree with you, we were "lied" to, why is that we can all talk about it here, but something as monumentally important as this has not broken out into a "liberal" media feeding frenzy? Is there a long term plan, do you think? Or are we just in a wait-see mode?


Diplomacy. Careful dancing around sensitive issues. It's what we should always expect from our President. Imagine the leader of the free world on TV blasting away at this civilization and the nessecity for them to change their religion to reflect the Islam in the vast majority of the rest of the world. He would sound like that idiot in Iran that is blasting away at the "Zionist threat." This would definately give credit to the propagandous machine inside the Middle East. Al-Jazeera and every Mullah from Syria to Iran to Saudi would rub that into their youths faces daily and at every prayer.

The "liberal" media hasn't keyed into this because there isn't anything concrete to display for paying viewers. This is more reserved for commentators. The media stands for the mundane details of our lives.

There most definately is a long term plan. However, it is not a plan that we can carry to the end. It is not something that is concrete like you would find on a battle field. (Even though no battle plan can be followed perfectly, because the batlefield is ever changing.) As I've said before, the intel world has been studying over this for two decades. There have been plenty of books writen and countless commentaries and studies made by professors and military analysts that have had intimate dealings with the Arab Middle East for a long time. The Middle East is unlike any place else on earth. It is unique. There will be generations of Muslims in the Middle East that will have to shape their own futures. They will have to hold strong to their own democracies. They will have to roll up their sleeves and build schools, Universities, libraries, infrastructure, and industry. History has shown tbat religions change because men change them. They must adapt their concrete brittle religion into something that is more reflective of a progressing society instead of the one that currently has them stagnated. Most of this long term plan will require diplomacy and a "wait and see" mode. All we can do is spark a change. We've done that. This is why removing the figure head of defiance against the great satan and allowing the Iraqis to form whatever democracy they see fit was and is so important. Sooner or later, a nuclear explosion was (still might) going to occur on our soil. Who wil be at governmental fault? Syria, Iran, Saudi, Iraq? Certainly not, because no government would ever declare responsibility. The immediate culprits will be some Islamic extremists that will come from any of these countries within this failing civilization.


1) 70 percent of the Iranian polulation is below thirty and disenchanted with their Mullahs and government. They have wanted a more democratic nation years before our endeavor into Iraq.

2) Refomists in Syria are speaking out against their current Baathist leaderships and are being imrpisoned for it. They do not want American boots on their soil, but they understand Bush's sense of change for the Middle East.

3) The Jordanian King has voiced to his people and political leadership that he wants Jordan to move from a monarchy to a democracy. He recognizes that his country must progress into the 21st century.

4) Saudi? Don't hope against hope. The rest of the Middle East will change long before the most absolute greedy Arab elite in that land decides to share their wealth with their people and lift them from their oppressions. "Oil" drives that situation. As long as we need it and they are supplying it we continue to turn a blind eye to what they are doing to their society at our expense.

This is where a long term "plan" is taking us. In the end, the only thing that can fix Islam and the Middle East is Muslims. We provided a bike. Now they must remove the training wheels.
 
alphieb said:
Victory only comes with a surrender.

I am highly skepical that when we leave Iraq that they will have a normal democracy. All the terrorism and battling in the Middle East is normal for them. I'm not saying ALL Muslims are bad, because that is definitely not the case, however there are too many radicals. Perhaps, there is hope as 60% is Shea's. In addition, that 40% could be a disaster as that is a fairly large number. All it takes is a few bad apples anyway. Look at 9/11 for an example, a small group of terrorist caused major destruction in many different ways to the US. It hurt our economy, caused many deaths and caused a major split between political parties etc.... Bin Laden knew what the out come would be. I do believe he is still alive and well plotting another attack. If he is not, his right hand man is.

There is no such thing as victory in this case folks.


This is exactly why this will take generations. Iraq will end. The favorable ramifications that a future Iraq, Syria, and Iran will not be immediate. Iraq will never be a Vermnont and Afghanistan will never be a Wyoming. They will not reflect a democracy as we would like to see them, but a democracy none the less. The threat to our securities is an Islamic extremists with a nuclear bomb. This region is determined to hate us no matter what we do. We tried to ignore them and the problem got worse. Sparking a democracy and re-shaping the Middle East is a logical step. Focusing on mundane details that every war offers is not constructive. Your great grand children may look at TV and see an entirely different face to the Middle East because of our current attempts. One thing is sure....if we hadn't done Iraq and just wasted our time chasing terrorists around the globe while ignoring the civilization from where they continue to come from....your great grandchildren would see the Middle East in far worse shape than we see it today and their securities would be that much more vulnerable.
 
GySgt said:
This is exactly why this will take generations. Iraq will end. The favorable ramifications that a future Iraq, Syria, and Iran will not be immediate. Iraq will never be a Vermnont and Afghanistan will never be a Wyoming. They will not reflect a democracy as we would like to see them, but a democracy none the less. The threat to our securities is an Islamic extremists with a nuclear bomb. This region is determined to hate us no matter what we do. We tried to ignore them and the problem got worse. Sparking a democracy and re-shaping the Middle East is a logical step. Focusing on mundane details that every war offers is not constructive. Your great grand children may look at TV and see an entirely different face to the Middle East because of our current attempts. One thing is sure....if we hadn't done Iraq and just wasted our time chasing terrorists around the globe while ignoring the civilization from where they continue to come from....your great grandchildren would see the Middle East in far worse shape than we see it today and their securities would be that much more vulnerable.

Maybe so, and I hope so. I don't believe this will go without a civil war though and our mission is far from over. The radicals will become even more enraged and then perhaps the nuclear bomb will become realilty.

Also, will we have to contend with Iran's hatred for Israel? That is a time bomb waiting to happen.
 
alphieb said:
Maybe so, and I hope so. I don't believe this will go without a civil war though and our mission is far from over. The radicals will become even more enraged and then perhaps the nuclear bomb will become realilty.

Also, will we have to contend with Iran's hatred for Israel? That is a time bomb waiting to happen.


Civil war? Maybe. Despite the violence, it might be in their best interests and ours. Especially if we can shape the victor. Like I said, they are determined to hate us. We liberated Muslims in Iraq from a ruthless dictator. We liberated Muslims in Kuwait from that same dictator. We currently give more financial aid to Palestinians than any other nation, including Muslim ones. W have come to the aid of Muslims in Pakistan and India in the recent earthquake. We have come to the rescue of Muslims in Indonesia over the Bali bombings. We offered a refused unconditional help to Iran during their recent earthquake. None of this matters to them. They are determined to hate and use us as the scapegoat for what they have done to themselves. We had to do something and ignoring them would have still encouraged them to develop or purchase nuclear arms for their extremists who are determined to kill an imagined enemy.

They can hate all day, but they will not be allowed a nuclear weapon. We will certainly act in Europe's absence before that occurs. I hope Israel doesn't do it. There will be hell to pay then. The best thing would be if Europe bombed their sites before we or Israel get involved directly and do it. The Middle Eastern civilization will still blame us for any Muslims that get killed in a bombing though.
 
GySgt said:
Civil war? Maybe. Despite the violence, it might be in their best interests and ours. Especially if we can shape the victor. Like I said, they are determined to hate us. We liberated Muslims in Iraq from a ruthless dictator. We liberated Muslims in Kuwait from that same dictator. We currently give more financial aid to Palestinians than any other nation, including Muslim ones. W have come to the aid of Muslims in Pakistan and India in the recent earthquake. We have come to the rescue of Muslims in Indonesia over the Bali bombings. We offered a refused unconditional help to Iran during their recent earthquake. None of this matters to them. They are determined to hate and use us as the scapegoat for what they have done to themselves. We had to do something and ignoring them would have still encouraged them to develop or purchase nuclear arms for their extremists who are determined to kill an imagined enemy.

They can hate all day, but they will not be allowed a nuclear weapon. We will certainly act in Europe's absence before that occurs. I hope Israel doesn't do it. There will be hell to pay then. The best thing would be if Europe bombed their sites before we or Israel get involved directly and do it. The Middle Eastern civilization will still blame us for any Muslims that get killed in a bombing though.


They just LOVE to HATE us. Why is that, Israel, religion or jealousy or all of the above. Is there any other nation full of so much hate?
 
alphieb said:
They just LOVE to HATE us. Why is that, Israel, religion or jealousy or all of the above. Is there any other nation full of so much hate?
How would you feel if 10 million people on a spit of land have turned the place into a 21st century while you and your Middle Eastern neighbors are still languishing in the 6th century?

How would you feel if saw them living in the only open and free society within 1000 miles while the Clerics and Mullahs tell you everything is their fault when its really theirs?

America is a friend to Australia, no one says a peep...

America is a friend to Japan; nary a word...

America is a friend to Isreal...Everyone gets their burqas in a bunch...:roll:
 
alphieb said:
They just LOVE to HATE us. Why is that, Israel, religion or jealousy or all of the above. Is there any other nation full of so much hate?


No. There is no other region on earth like this.

All of the above. We are a threat to their religion in that we have progressed and prospered. We have done this despite the fact that we are "infidels." This is a smack to them. Imagine if Christianity's God taught us that all non believers are doomed to failure, yet we watch all others prosper as we suffer decade after decade. Our support of Israel is a factor, however when a democratic nation supports the single democratic nation in the region...I don't think we are doing anything we shouldn't. But the most encompassing and wide sentiment in the Middle East is jealousy. It is a natural human condition for all of us to feel jealousy from time to time. But when an entire civilization embraces it..it is tragic - likewise when they embrace the butchers that have made a gory mess of their religion. Their civilization cannot compete with the west on any front and it is thrown in their faces daily. There is no trade...industry...pride. There is a low value placed on education. Aside from Israel, there isn't one world class university in the Middle East. The free flow of information is confined to what "holy" men and Al-Jazeera tells them. Though it doesn't do it justice..a very simple reference would be if America only had FOX news to watch and thousands of Pat Robertsons taking the most cruelest junctions in the Bible and dictating what "God" wants to us with absolutely no other means of information or influence of other cultures and religions - not praying is a crime. They are domineered by a brutal religion. It is not the Islam that is reflected in the rest of the world. They suffer the subjegation of women. This is about power and the complete equality of gender is a direct attack on the Arab's sense of self. Ironically, Muhammed preached equality between man and woman. What is also ironic is how the hardliners of the Middle East preach against "infidels" attacking their religion, but in fact, it is them and their extrermists who are the true blasphemers against Islam and Muhammed.

When celebrities and well meaning officials say that Islam is not the problem...they are utterly wrong. All religions have gone through desperate and dark times. Christianity did it during the 16th century in Europe. Jews waged war over the contents of the communion cup. America has conquered, for the most part, religious persecution in our lands, but we forget that in the beginning the word of God was brought to the people by a breach loaded rifle. Islam is struggling for an identity today. Islam is as diverse as Christiandom, but this particular civilization has embraced the notion of the sanctity of their "martyrs." We can no longer accept that all religions go through a struggling period and wait for them to figure things out for themselves - not when the weapon of choice has gone from the sword or rifle to the bomb of nuclear bomb. We forget that Islam is one of the youngest of the world's great religions and no time in history has a religious crisis been so dangerous to other cultures and we are foolish if we do not give this religion every chance to survive into a peaceful religion rather than the image of a hang mans noose. Their passed down traditions simply do not work in the 21st century. Instead of rolling up their sleeves and going to work, they want everybody else to digress to them and their extremists are determined. This civilization has not digressed because of progress, but in spite of it. Religions change because men change them. All civilizations have had to deal with changing their religions to reflect progress within our societies. We no longer believe that the world is flat or that the planets are Gods. The Muslims in the Middle East refuse to let go of their past and progress their faith, thereby, stagnating their society and blaming us for the result.

Despite all of these truths, they are unable to accept responsibility for it. In the Middle East, "blame" is the narcotic of choice. It allows them to place responsibility on other's shoulders. To them, it is not their Arab elite, Khomeinis, Khudafis, Saddams, etc. that have done this to them. We are. We are the ones that have hijacked their religion. We are the one's that told the Arab elite to squander their people's resource money on themselves. We told them to refrain from building schools, infrastructure, and technology. The Middle Eastern populations have blown it. In a hundred years they are a civilization that cannot even build a car and there is no good reason for it. The truth is that our only guilt in this is that we have looked the other way while all of this has occurred. We have ignored the hate speech taught to their children by the duplicity of men we call insist are our "friends." As long as the oil flowed, we have allowed them the use of us as a scapegoat. Greed drives the Arab elite to ignore their people and their lands. If the Middle Eastern Arab could, he would steal the air itself and charge the poor for breathing. I find it poetic justice that they have had to chase down their own creations in their own country over the last few years. These words are harsh, but by no means racist. There are much more good Muslims in the Middle East than there are bad, but make no mistake, the amount of bad is large and they are all, good and bad, subjected to the above. It is the reality of this region. Saddm, Bin Ladden, Khomeini, and all terrorists and terror groups are mere symptoms of decay. The result of all of this is Islamic extremism focused on an imagined enemy.
 
Last edited:
GySgt, whilst I tentatively agree with most of that last post I can't help but think that you have taken a "I art holier than thou" thought process. You say things about them like they aren't happening to us....

GySgt said:
Greed drives the Arab elite to ignore their people and their lands. If the Middle Eastern Arab could, he would steal the air itself and charge the poor for breathing.

Substitute in the words 'politicians' for 'Arab' and 'Government' for 'Middle Eastern Arab' and another true statement is said......

Like I said before your last post is fairly accurate....and I agree, everyone needs someone else to blame...


GySgt said:
The result of all of this is Islamic extremism focused on an imagined enemy.

I can't help but wonder if you think that we really aren't a threat to them? We are an enemy of theirs even if it is not our wish to be....we threaten the power structure of their government.....we threaten to weaken their religion....we threaten to bring about new thoughts.....and all of these are dangerous to those who are currently in power. Because they could lose their peoples trust, they bend their religion to mean that we are all destined to hell or other bad place(I'm not really up-to-date on Islamic beliefs)....they make us into great beasts to protect themselves from us....I can't blame them for that......but I can definitly blame them for trying to kill me....so something must get done......
 
goligoth said:
GySgt, whilst I tentatively agree with most of that last post I can't help but think that you have taken a "I art holier than thou" thought process. You say things about them like they aren't happening to us....



Substitute in the words 'politicians' for 'Arab' and 'Government' for 'Middle Eastern Arab' and another true statement is said......

Like I said before your last post is fairly accurate....and I agree, everyone needs someone else to blame...




I can't help but wonder if you think that we really aren't a threat to them? We are an enemy of theirs even if it is not our wish to be....we threaten the power structure of their government.....we threaten to weaken their religion....we threaten to bring about new thoughts.....and all of these are dangerous to those who are currently in power. Because they could lose their peoples trust, they bend their religion to mean that we are all destined to hell or other bad place(I'm not really up-to-date on Islamic beliefs)....they make us into great beasts to protect themselves from us....I can't blame them for that......but I can definitly blame them for trying to kill me....so something must get done......


Sure you can replace words, but our civilization is one of progress and one that embraces religion. Civilizations can do both. The Middle Eastern civilization has stagnated. They are holding onto passed down traditions that do not allow for a society to progress in today's world. The Muslim extremist from the Middle East has one consistent message: Return to the past, for that is what God wants. Beware, no matter his faith, of the man who presumes to tell you what God wants. It cannot be accomplished, of course, this longed-for return to a golden age of sanctity and success, that is mostly myth, is gone. But the bloody-handed terrorists and their mentors are determined to pay any price to frustrate those Muslims who believe that God is capable of smiling, or that it is possible to change the earth without challenging Heaven.

In the Middle East, the heavens are falling, and the Earth is wracked by failure. The result was predictable, had we been willing to open our eyes. History has seen human beings react to cultural crises by fleeing into cults that sought revenge. Instead of returning to a "pure" Islam, the terrorists are building a blood cult, a deformed offshoot of their faith that revives the most primitive and grotesque of religious practices that many other religions have partaken throughout history. Behind these terrorists, there are millions of Muslims that call them "martyrs."

Your last paragraph was in the black (on target). This civilization must change and so far they haven't even lifted a finger. All be it bumpy, In Iraq, they are traveling down the right road. Iran's youth make up 70 percent of their country's population and they have been wanting a more democratic government and they are disenchanted with their Mullahs. Syria is imprisoning their reformists, because they want Bush's sense of change for the Middle East. The king of Jordan has publicly spoken to his government and declared a wish for Jordan to be a democratic nation.

The Saudi elite is as brittle as concrete. They will not allow their societies to progress beyond their oppressive control easily.
 
cnredd said:
How would you feel if 10 million people on a spit of land have turned the place into a 21st century while you and your Middle Eastern neighbors are still languishing in the 6th century?

How would you feel if saw them living in the only open and free society within 1000 miles while the Clerics and Mullahs tell you everything is their fault when its really theirs?

America is a friend to Australia, no one says a peep...

America is a friend to Japan; nary a word...

America is a friend to Isreal...Everyone gets their burqas in a bunch...:roll:

That is why I stated on another post that perhaps they should move over here. I know thats not feasible though.
 
Back
Top Bottom