[quote=Dust Bunny][quote=mikebutler222]

[quote=BondGuy] Fighting terrorism is about hearts and minds, not guns and bombs. Terrorism is tool used to force political change. Want to win against terrorism? Show them that our way is better than their way. [/quote]<?:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /><?:NAMESPACE PREFIX = O />

Ok, I'm a member of Al Qaeda, give me your evaluator speech.   

[/quote]

Bond Guy is assuming that we are dealing with rational people who have a similar world view as we do, instead of dealing with people who have been brainwashed since youth to hate, who are certifiably insane and who have no intention of listening to anything we say.

The more we talk, the weaker they percieve us to be.......and they are right.

[/quote]

I agree. Yet I still want to hear that elevator (not "evaluator", gezze) speech.

[quote=mikebutler222][quote=BondGuy][quote=mikebutler222]

[quote=BondGuy]And those who say we are fighting terrorist in <?:namespace prefix = st1 ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" />Iraq are right. Terrorist are among those we are fighting in Iraq. They weren't there when we got there, but they're there now. [/quote]<?:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" />

Actually, that’s not true. Not only was Al Qaeda present in Iraq before we invaded, the terrorists that plotted the first WTC bombing in 1993 and the hijackers of the Achille Lauro , murderers of American Leon Klinghoffer, though Saddam’s Iraq was a great place to retire.

You left out Timothy McVeigh and Terry Nichols.

No, I didn't leave them out. But if you'd like to equate those two, fugitives from the law, with known terrorirts living openly in Saddam's Iraq, fine.

[quote=BondGuy] Think about this: Their side wants everybody to live in the seventh century in shackles. Our side wants to give everybody a BMW, Ipod, and flatscreen TV with a life lived in complete freedom. And still we are losing. That's how bad our leaders are. How could we lose this? [/quote]

What a profound misunderstanding of the enemy. And it’s funny you should make that suggestion while being critical of the war in Iraq, since giving them that freedom, the BMW, the iPod, etc, is what was behind overthrowing a murderous dictator.

Don't you mean invading a sovereign nation on bogus evidence?

The fact that the entire world's intelligence agencies figured wrong, and confused Saddam's refusal to allow the open and free weapons inspections he had agreed to for Saddam having WMDs doesn't change the fact that opening Iraq to freedom and the other Western values you mentioned was part of the reasoning.

I misunderstand nothing. Their side uses religious fervor to control the masses , our side uses dollars.

Come on, Bondguy, that simply makes no sense. The radical Islamists aim to install a Taliban caliphate along the entire map where Islam once held sway. That's the Middle East to Spain and they've been very, very open about it.

To those who would kill us (and they’ve been plotting and carrying out attacks against us long before your favorite political target came to office) your BMW, iPod, flatscreen TV and what you call “freedom” is exactly why they want to kill you. The fact that your women go unveiled, that your decedent culture has infected theirs, your music, your non-belief, your support for “monkey” Jews in their homeland, those are the reasons they want to kill you. They, the radical Islamists, are convinced that you and I are a cancer on Earth, and the only way they’ll get their faithful back right with Allah is to kill us. No compromises, no debate, no negotiation.

They want to kill us because they want control.

Control to establish the Caliphate.

Everything you mention in your diatribe is their recruiting propaganda. Their leaders do not live the lives of pius men.

Radical Islamists aren't driven by their vision of Islam? Bin Laden did live in a cave and plot to destroy the WTC because of a twisted vision of Isalm?

 They can't oppress us.

Been to the hole where the WTC was, lately? Seen the pictures of the US Embassies in Africa? The USS Cole? The Kobar towers?  What is it they can't do, short of occupying the country?

We know them for the thugs that they are. That's why we have to go.

Huh?

We are a threat that they can't control. They use religion only to control their uneducated masses. They're as much about Islam as Brittney Spears is about Catholicism.

Amazing....

Our biggest mistake, underestimating them.

No, it's thinking they're not genuine about their religious agenda. These aren't people looking for peaceful co-exisitance, these are religious zealots who want to kill you for being a non-believer.

You make the mistake you claim others have made, of overlaying Western attitudes over an Islamic culture. It’s just that lack of understanding of what motivates the radical Islamic faction that is the real risk to our safety.

You're talking about the Bush team here. Big part of the current problem. That and creating a terrorist state. Like I said, dumbasses. Dumbasses all around, the Bush team ,and us, for letting him do it.

No doubt about it, this fixation that it's "all about Bush plays" into the hands of the Islamists. They know they planned against us and attacked us prior to Bush. They know they don't give a rat's ass who's in the Whitehouse. They couldn't care less if Obama was there. But they do, no doubt, enjoy all this "it's all about Bush" stuff. The war against us was on before the 2000 election, it will continue long after the 2008 election. They know it's about their twisted view of Islam.

[/quote] [/quote] [/quote]

Please give me a web address for the religion entitled "Radical Islam"

Do they have their own seperate Qur'an?

I can find Islam. It's got quite a following. And it's got some pretty heady stuff, as do all great religions.

And I can find all sorts of information about the ideaology of radical islam. But nothing that points to it as a religion.

The people who want to kill us are not religious zealots. I should say the leaders of this group are not religious zealots. Zealots,yes. Zealots who are using religion to acheive their goal of world domination. Confimation? Look no further than Taliban leader Mullah Omar. He lived the life of a king in a posh home while enforcing strict Sharia law on those he oppressed. Cut me an effin break about it being about religion. It's about power and money. Isn't it always?

[quote=Dust Bunny][quote=mikebutler222]

[quote=BondGuy] Fighting terrorism is about hearts and minds, not guns and bombs. Terrorism is tool used to force political change. Want to win against terrorism? Show them that our way is better than their way. [/quote]<?:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /><?:NAMESPACE PREFIX = O />

Ok, I'm a member of Al Qaeda, give me your evaluator speech.   

[/quote]

Bond Guy is assuming that we are dealing with rational people who have a similar world view as we do, instead of dealing with people who have been brainwashed since youth to hate, who are certifiably insane and who have no intention of listening to anything we say.

The more we talk, the weaker they percieve us to be.......and they are right.

[/quote]

Bunny, I don't see how 70% of Americans could even understand what you are saying here.

Having lived overseas and visited Jordan, and many developing countries, I am prepared to be strong and compassionate.

Mistakes have been made, who knows what bigger mistakes the mealy mouthed opportunistic opposition will sell us. Honestly, if I had to choose an opportunistic " liberal", I think Hillary would be the most ruthless against the Muslim anarachists. Looks like the whiners are going to get what they wanted, their cake and eat it.

[quote=Dust Bunny][quote=mikebutler222]

[quote=BondGuy] Fighting terrorism is about hearts and minds, not guns and bombs. Terrorism is tool used to force political change. Want to win against terrorism? Show them that our way is better than their way. [/quote]<?:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /><?:NAMESPACE PREFIX = O />

Ok, I'm a member of Al Qaeda, give me your evaluator speech.   

[/quote]

Bond Guy is assuming that we are dealing with rational people who have a similar world view as we do, instead of dealing with people who have been brainwashed since youth to hate, who are certifiably insane and who have no intention of listening to anything we say.

The more we talk, the weaker they percieve us to be.......and they are right.

[/quote]

Actually you're right and wrong about what i said. First, I'm not the one who came up with the win'em over strategy. It was Wolfowitz. And it was embraced by Rice, Cheney et al. The good news there is that it shows that our leaders had a firm grasp of what was needed. Even with the ongoing debackle, much if not most of the region is populated by rational reasonable people who are down with our game plan of economic prosperity. Unfortunately the strategy took a tragic turn when it was decided we could force our view on people we don't understand. As for the crazies, and extremist, we're not reaching them in any way. And as i reread my comments i didn't say we could.

[quote=mikebutler222][quote=Dust Bunny][quote=mikebutler222]

[quote=BondGuy] Fighting terrorism is about hearts and minds, not guns and bombs. Terrorism is tool used to force political change. Want to win against terrorism? Show them that our way is better than their way. [/quote]<?:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /><?:NAMESPACE PREFIX = O />

Ok, I'm a member of Al Qaeda, give me your evaluator speech.   

[/quote]

Bond Guy is assuming that we are dealing with rational people who have a similar world view as we do, instead of dealing with people who have been brainwashed since youth to hate, who are certifiably insane and who have no intention of listening to anything we say.

The more we talk, the weaker they percieve us to be.......and they are right.

[/quote]

I agree. Yet I still want to hear that elevator (not "evaluator", gezze) speech.

[/quote]

Ok you wanted it, here it is:

Come to America and get your 72 virgins without blowing yourself up! We will search high and low to find each and everyone of you 72 virgins. We'll even throw in some wine and a free nite at the motel 6 on I-75 in Sarasota. It will be heaven on earth. Can life get any better?

Yeah, I know the plan has one flaw. But hey, these guys aren't that smart.

[quote=BondGuy][quote=Dust Bunny][quote=mikebutler222]

[quote=BondGuy] Fighting terrorism is about hearts and minds, not guns and bombs. Terrorism is tool used to force political change. Want to win against terrorism? Show them that our way is better than their way. [/quote]<?:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /><?:NAMESPACE PREFIX = O />

Ok, I'm a member of Al Qaeda, give me your evaluator speech.   

[/quote]

Bond Guy is assuming that we are dealing with rational people who have a similar world view as we do, instead of dealing with people who have been brainwashed since youth to hate, who are certifiably insane and who have no intention of listening to anything we say.

The more we talk, the weaker they percieve us to be.......and they are right.

[/quote]

Actually you're right and wrong about what i said. First, I'm not the one who came up with the win'em over strategy. It was Wolfowitz. And it was embraced by Rice, Cheney et al. The good news there is that it shows that our leaders had a firm grasp of what was needed. Even with the ongoing debackle, much if not most of the region is populated by rational reasonable people who are down with our game plan of economic prosperity. Unfortunately the strategy took a tragic turn when it was decided we could force our view on people we don't understand. As for the crazies, and extremist, we're not reaching them in any way. And as i reread my comments i didn't say we could.

[/quote]

But I think you agree that it comes down to a behavioural problem. We have interests, we protect them. Have you stood at Ground Zero, if not, you need to, especially working the capital markets.

We have taken control of a situation. Saying we are out of control is not accurate - it is still the Muslim and Arab world that is unable or unwilling to provide some leadership or support here.

Our behaviour is rational and self interested. Recognizing the management mistakes of Bush, we need to keep our eye on the big picture. This problem is never going away, rather, it is a process of containment. There is now plenty of time and room for feel good cooperation. If solutions (amongst the world community) do not emerge out of where we are right now, then it will still be about protecting American interests. Be prepared for a decline in our quality of life if the citizens of the world choose mediocrity.

[quote=BondGuy]Please give me a web address for the religion entitled "Radical Islam" [/quote]

Please don't tell me you doubt they exist....

[quote=BondGuy]

Do they have their own seperate Qur'an? [/quote]

They have their own reading of it.

Again, seriously, tell me you're kidding.

[quote=BondGuy]And I can find all sorts of information about the ideaology of radical islam. But nothing that points to it as a religion.[/quote]

Not a religion? Wat do you think it is, a misunderstood Rotary Club?

 [quote=BondGuy]Look no further than Taliban leader Mullah Omar. He lived the life of a king in a posh home while enforcing strict Sharia law on those he oppressed. Cut me an effin break about it being about religion. It's about power and money. Isn't it always?

[/quote]

If you have proof that Omar was violating Shira law, a lot of people would love hearing about. So far as I know, there's no vow of poverty involved. Is your point that the heads of this radical strain of Islam enjoy being the big guys? Well, so what? It's still the ideology they're living by and recruiting with.

[quote=GolFA] Honestly, if I had to choose an opportunistic " liberal", I think Hillary would be the most ruthless against the Muslim anarachists.  [/quote]

Huh?

[quote=BondGuy][quote=mikebutler222][quote=Dust Bunny][quote=mikebutler222]

[quote=BondGuy] Fighting terrorism is about hearts and minds, not guns and bombs. Terrorism is tool used to force political change. Want to win against terrorism? Show them that our way is better than their way. [/quote]<?:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /><?:NAMESPACE PREFIX = O />

Ok, I'm a member of Al Qaeda, give me your evaluator speech.   

[/quote]

Bond Guy is assuming that we are dealing with rational people who have a similar world view as we do, instead of dealing with people who have been brainwashed since youth to hate, who are certifiably insane and who have no intention of listening to anything we say.

The more we talk, the weaker they percieve us to be.......and they are right.

[/quote]

I agree. Yet I still want to hear that elevator (not "evaluator", gezze) speech.

[/quote]

Ok you wanted it, here it is:

Come to America and get your 72 virgins without blowing yourself up! We will search high and low to find each and everyone of you 72 virgins. We'll even throw in some wine and a free nite at the motel 6 on I-75 in Sarasota. It will be heaven on earth. Can life get any better?

Yeah, I know the plan has one flaw. But hey, these guys aren't that smart.

[/quote]

It would be interesting to hear you flesh out your theory with a realistic example.

[quote=mikebutler222]

[quote=GolFA] Honestly, if I had to choose an opportunistic " liberal", I think Hillary would be the most ruthless against the Muslim anarachists.  [/quote]

Huh?

[/quote]

I mean, Hillary is mealy mouthed and opportunisitic in her war postion, but (when) elected, she'll just build on the work of Bush. She'll take the credit for an aggressive foreign policy while she taxes the piss out of us and makes us all consider working for someone else so we can "enjoy" her particular brand of Socialism.

[quote=GolFA][quote=BondGuy][quote=GolFA]

Unfortunately- The Wolfowitz Doctrine outlining a new world order and embracing pre-emptive military strikes was adopted by Bush 2 and has become the Bush Doctrine. The deep thinkers who knew better either weren't there or weren't able to stop the blunderers from making one of history's most colossal mistakes. And here we sit, mired in a civil war, with our borders wide open, and terrorist running free world wide.

We cannot fight an Idealogy with an army.

Bond Guy, since you are one of the smartest people in the room, what do you think about this;

1. Implementation of the strategy has been poor and the results (more) tragic, partly due to Rumsfeld's optimism about containing American casualties through the use of techology.

Agree, poor implementation. Deeper than technology. Rummy beleived we could do more with less. He hated the military buracracy and with blinders on fought his own military advisors when they told him Iraq would take more troops than he wanted to commit. The real truth is, had Ruumsfeld, Cheney, Wolfowitz and Bush listened to real numbers they couldn't move forward. The amount of troops necessary to do job was more than we could commit.

Yep.

2. History will judge the outcome, but so far this is a sort time frame for judgement.

Disagree. Invading Iraq was a wrong move. There was no need to invade. At least not at that time, for that reason. If we apply our reasons for invading Iraq to Iran we should be invading Iran. Iran is a real problem now. A clear and present danger. Yet, no invasion? As for Iraq, it wasn't a threat. There was no need to invade. The rest of the mess there is of our own doing. We destablized an incredibly volatile area of the world.

No, for example, North Korea is contained through multilateral pressure. Pragmatism dictates taking each situation separately.

We invaded iraq because we believed they had weapons of mass destruction. Iran is developing the ultimate WMD. That is my point.

You may be right about the invasioin being a mistake, but looking at the situation right now, I'm not sure about that conclusion.

I'm sure the action and timing has as much to do with a lack of resolve of the American people ( there was a window) - which seems to be born out now. Ironically, this lack of resolve becomes a self fulfillment.

The lack of resolve will become self fulfilly. That's what happens when you botch the job. Moreover, the invasion should never have happened.

Maybe 9/11, with its implications of fundamentalist (Saudi) support, or at least the Saudis being out of control, fused part of my brain.

3. Let's not kid anyone - " terrorists" blew up Wall Street, and the " Arab World" is being put notice and being held accountable. Of course it is about oil, and stability in the Middle East. It is about moving a giant American base from Saudi to Iraq, taking " the game " off our own playing field through a projection of power, and the lessons we have learned - the learnings - are what will ensure our survival.

What lessons have we learned? That an army can't defeat ideaology?

I was thinking more about the military experience - my guess is the American military has learned a lot, and having the capability to project power - not always use it, but to be clear about the potential in the future - that we have learned a lot.

Maybe relearned. They seem to have forgotten the lessons learned in Vietnam. Powell, one of the few Vietnam vets advising Bush, had it right. He was the lone voice against invading. he warned of exactly the outcome we face today  They couldn't get rid of him fast enough.

4. I'm not buying this crap that the fundamentalists or even the moderates like us any less now than before 9/11. If you don't project when you are in a position of power, you are weak.

Kinda like a bully flexing his muscles? Wolfowitz would love you. Essentially we've become the imperialist forcing our ideaology upon the world. This doesn't sit well with the fence sitters, makes us look bad to our friends, and let's the extremist say "See i told you they were no good." Does this spread hatred? I don't know, but it sure doesn't spread love.

You're right, this does not spread love, or maybe it is tough love. It seems like you are being logical, but you don't fully extend your logic: our role is to maintain the (potential) to project military power. The French role is to sell weapons to anyone they want. The Chinese role is to secure oil in any manner possible, to prevent economic and social disruption.

Logically, if you never exercise power, you don't really have it. My impression is, there was a lot of self interest ( including the stability of a society that includes a large Muslim population), and economic self interest, around support of our actions.

Not whining, because Hilary or whoever will just pick up the ball and keep running. But there is so much hypocracy, people say, this is just about oil. Of course it is about oil. People say, we are just projecting force and pissing off the entire Muslim world. Yes, that's right. Think it through.  

There is nothing wrong with projection of power to protect our interests. There is nothing wrong with swinging that stick when all other channels prove fruitless. That's not what the Bush admin did or is doing. Iraq was not a threat, terrorist or otherwise. Iraq was a vendetta. A score to settle. If anything, strategically, looking at it's impact on the region, destablizing iraq was a mistake.

5. Where are our good friends the Saudis in terms of leadership of the Arab world - including Palestine? Trying to stay in power as dicators, they profit from the suffering of the Palestinian people. There is no leadership, because the Musline world at large is a diaspora, victim of corruption and repression.

Yup, and we're helping them do it. For oil of course!

Of course. If the world goes into a dark recession, we are all screwed. More children in Indonesia will go to bed hungry if the global economy gets shut down by a few people.

6. Point is, America is calling the shots, rightly or wrongly about this chapter, and all of the "free" analysis and discussion in this country is a good thing. If Hillary takes the helm tomorrow, our relationship with the Muslim world will not change quickly, and the fruits of our efforts will continue to grow. And the French and the Chinese will continue to profit from whoever they can, while mocking U.S. policy.

7. You above others, working on Wall Street, understand that this is about economic stability. Keeping a stream of oil supertankers streaming around the world, to maintain economic stability while we develop alternatives. Bush has made a lot of mistakes, history will remember him as having set a workable course of action following 9/11.

Agree that our presence in the middle east is purely strategic in nature, to protect our interest. We can thank Wolfowitz for his important work in this area. Prior to Wolfowitz our middle east interest were completely unprotected.

Disagree about Bush setting a workable course. Bush completely dropped the ball. We are not safer today than we were in 2003. The middle east is not a more stable place, it is a less stable place.

You may be right.

8. The whole thing really is about the freedom to watch American movies and listen to French rock music - the freedom for individuals and markets on every single square inch of earth to choose. Too bad, our culture sweeps over the past and destroys many beautiful traditions and cultural liturgical and social customs. This is the price of globalization, there is no turning back. The part about Capitalism with a heart needs to be better developed, but we see that happening through the Gates Foundation, and even Bush's optimism.

9. I don't care who gets elected next, let's just not be hypocrital about the meaning of free markets and free choice, and our responsibility to commit to leadership.

Free markets are the key to economic prosperity. Unfortunately for this one region of the world, millions of people are a long way from the starting gate of free markets.

Too bad about the meltdown of American resolve. It comes from complacency. Most Americans have never visited a developing country. The real implication is that our own existence here is more threatened, and you can thank people of average intelligence everywhere for confusing the important issues.

Or maybe it's not within our power, whatever, to be able to get these people to the starting gate. We'll just have to take it as it comes. The current threat is much less faceless than an entire nation of people.

I believe the american people are fed up with the half assed way we've prosecuted the war. If we had to invade, why not do it right? As the truth behind the quagmire is exposed more and more people say enough is enough. Had Bush gone in with a well executed plan and enough troops, even if a draft had been needed, i think he would have gotten the support he wanted, and Iraq would be a very different place today. That support would still be there.

[quote=mikebutler222]

Is your point that the heads of this radical strain of Islam enjoy being the big guys? Well, so what? It's still the ideology they're living by and recruiting with.

[/quote]

My point is that there is no such religion as "A radical strain of Islam"

There is only Islam.

They are using a misreading of the Quran to recruit the weak, poor, and uneducated. They are using religious oppression to keep themselves in power. Power being the key word.

As an Irish Catholic I'm practicing as much Islam as they are.

[quote=BondGuy][quote=mikebutler222]

Is your point that the heads of this radical strain of Islam enjoy being the big guys? Well, so what? It's still the ideology they're living by and recruiting with.

[/quote]

My point is that there is no such religion as "A radical strain of Islam"

There is only Islam. [/quote]

Gee, given that both the radical Islamic terrorists and representatives of "moderate" Islam (the ones that don't feel compelled to kill non-believers) disagree with you, perhaps you should reconsider. It’s like arguing that abortion clinic bombers aren’t driven by their twisted view of Christianity.

[quote=BondGuy]

They are using a misreading of the Quran to recruit the weak, poor, and uneducated. They are using religious oppression to keep themselves in power. Power being the key word.

As an Irish Catholic I'm practicing as much Islam as they are.

[/quote]

No one's arguing that they haven't perverted the religion. OTOH, it IS that perversion that they're pursuing. Arguing whether or not it's "really" Islam is rather pointless, and it gets you no closer to determining how to overcome it. In fact, it leads you in the wrong direction. Again, Al Qaeda couldn’t be clearer about their aims, and the methods they plan on using.

[quote=GolFA][quote=mikebutler222]

[quote=GolFA] Honestly, if I had to choose an opportunistic " liberal", I think Hillary would be the most ruthless against the Muslim anarachists.  [/quote]

Huh?

[/quote]

I mean, Hillary is mealy mouthed and opportunisitic in her war postion, but (when) elected, she'll just build on the work of Bush. She'll take the credit for an aggressive foreign policy while she taxes the piss out of us and makes us all consider working for someone else so we can "enjoy" her particular brand of Socialism.

[/quote]

You could be right about that. One thing's pretty certain, whoever is elected, unless he/she is simply brain-dead, will continue on Bush's foundation. Oh, they’ll deny it, and try a “clean break” with Bush in the interest of improving world opinion of the US, but he/she will do it anyway.

It's one thing to rant and rave and hug Michael Moore and try to do the "I'm with you" with the Bush-hating, there-are-no-terrorists, I-heart-Rosie crowd. It’s another, when the weight of the office is on you to try close your eyes to what Al Qaeda really says they’ll do, and what they’re planning to do, all in the name of a very, very real strain of radical Islam.

It’s like Carter saying he’d pull US troops from South Korea if elected. Once he got in office and saw the facts, up-close and personal, the real North Koreans, what they’d do to South Korea had we left, even a softy like Carter couldn’t do it.

I understand we can't place links here, but here's some information from a reformed Jihadi;

By HASSAN BUTT

When I was still a member of what is probably best termed the British Jihadi Network - a series of British Muslim terrorist groups linked by a single ideology - I remember how we used to laugh in celebration whenever people on TV proclaimed that the sole cause for Islamic acts of terror like 9/11, the Madrid bombings and 7/7 was Western foreign policy.

By blaming the Government for our actions, those who pushed this "Blair's bombs" line did our propaganda work for us.

More important, they also helped to draw away any critical examination from the real engine of our violence: Islamic theology.

[quote=BondGuy][quote=mikebutler222]

[quote=Amazon]Too true... I meant the Salem witch trials.

...

You get the idea of what I meant.[/quote]

Actually, the Salem witches didn’t survive the Salem witch trial, but that’s the least of the problems with you poor analogy.

There were witches in Salem? Wow, did I have this screwed up. I thought I read that there were people believed to be witches, which caused hysteria and led to innocent people being killed by their neighbors. An example to us all of the dangers of small thinking, gossip, and jumping to wrong conclusions. OR, if one believes they were witches one of great intolerance. Still, i thought they were people accused of being witches, not real witches.

[/quote]

Ok, I guess my mind was just completely confused on that entire subject. My point , without an example, being: You can't kill an ideology with a gun.

And, yes, the holocause is comparable because one faction took arms up against another faction to try and destroy it. (Be it Nazis against Jews, or Americans against radical Muslims.)

You can't kill an ideology with a gun.

Sure you can. 

"Too bad about the meltdown of American resolve. It comes from complacency. Most Americans have never visited a developing country. The real implication is that our own existence here is more threatened, and you can thank people of average intelligence everywhere for confusing the important issues. "



Americans need only look in their own backyards to visit a developing country. While we completely obsess with the loss of life in aiding a fledgling democracy, we appear to overlook the ills of our own society - just look at the murder rates in our cities! First stop on the developing country tour? How about Oakland, CA, then straight (outta) Compton, Detroit, you name the rest.



We need to help the Iraqi government in any way as long as they continue to ask for our help. Screw this screwed up media in our country!

[quote=Dust Bunny]

You can’t kill an ideology with a gun.

Sure you can. 

[quote=Amazon] [quote=Dust Bunny]

You can't kill an ideology with a gun.

Sure you can. 

[/quote]

I guess you can... but it's nearly impossible. If you want to crush an ideology your best bets are temptation/propaganda. Essentially, offer them something they can't get where they are currently (or more likely, make it only seem like that) and make it seem as though your way is the right way by any means necessary. Sound immoral to you? Well, it's try and gun them down, miss a few, they plan revenge and probably cause another 9/11 incident; or try and weaken the will to join the terrorists among the general populace and try to convince terrorists that there views are somehow wrong.
[/quote]

Same offer;

I'm an Al Qeada member, let's hear your elevator speech.