Yes Henderson, there is a lot of bad.
But for me, the Taliban get first place.
Why Muslims would ever consider supporting them is beyond me since the biggest victims of the Taliban are other Muslims. I guess fighting against America gives you a get out of jail free card regardless of what you do (invade a town, steal all the women and give them to your troops as concubines... sodomize little boys... sodomize goats... shut down the food supply that thousands of Muslims depend on... dragging "guilty" folks by tying them behind a pickup truck as a standard execution method... etc.)

Originally Posted by the_13th_redneck

Yes Henderson, there is a lot of bad.
But for me, the Taliban get first place.
Why Muslims would ever consider supporting them is beyond me since the biggest victims of the Taliban are other Muslims. I guess fighting against America gives you a get out of jail free card regardless of what you do (invade a town, steal all the women and give them to your troops as concubines... sodomize little boys... sodomize goats... shut down the food supply that thousands of Muslims depend on... dragging "guilty" folks by tying them behind a pickup truck as a standard execution method... etc.)

It's all about propaganda. The Middle East hates the West... The Taliban advocates hating the West, so they support them without a second thought... I bet the majority of Muslims wouldn't even know why they really hate the West if one was to ask them... They don't know why they hate us, they just do, and they accept it because it was engrained since their birth.

I hate the Taliban and their actions just as much as the next guy, but the fact is that similar circumstances take place all around the world... There are concubines in Africa... The Rwandan genocide for example... If a Tutsi member found a Hutu woman or child... God help them...

Originally Posted by Rob Henderson

It's all about propaganda. The Middle East hates the West... The Taliban advocates hating the West, so they support them without a second thought... I bet the majority of Muslims wouldn't even know why they really hate the West if one was to ask them... They don't know why they hate us, they just do, and they accept it because it was engrained since their birth.

And their hate lists are deliberately indoctrinated in them through childhood, generation after generation, truth has very little , if anything,to do with it.

Originally Posted by Chukpike

So you prefer Saddam Hussein over the Mullahs in Iran.
So you do not believe what you previously posted in the topic:

Topic: Iranian Election: Fraud or sour grapes?

"5.56

Your wrong. Iran isnt a full-blooded democracy but its elections up until now have been much more fair then say countries like Saudi Arabia and Kuwait where there are no elections at all. Iran is a authoritarian religious theocracy but its not a total dicatatorship...yet."

and you would prefer Saddam Hussein,
The same Saddam Hussein who orchestrated the genocide of the Kurds in North Iraq.

The same Saddam Hussein who slaughtered Shiites in the south, after they rose up against him after Desert Storm.

Certainly clarifies your views as to why invading Iraq was such a bad decision.

And once again you take something totally out of context and twist it way out of proportion. What I was CLEARLY suggesting was that Saddam was the lesser of two evils. I never said he was a choir boy or that he should be nominated to the Noble peace prize, did I? DID I???? Your deliberate misrepresentations of other peoples post is getting pathetic, and only proves that you are defending a very WEAK argument.

And Yes Saddam was better than the Mullahs. Since the Gulf War Saddam kept his crap mostly inside Iraq, he wasn't exporting Islamic Fundamentalists to cause trouble all around the world like the Mullahs were since 1979. Saddam was a evil man, but he was dedicated to his own survival which meant he was much saner than his next door neighbors. Saddam was a secularist, he played the good Muslim for show, but in truth He hated bin Laden and all the other religious Fundamentalists whom he viewed as a threat to his rule, and murdered almost every fundamentalist cleric he could get his hands including several of bin Ladens followers in Iraq. The man who prevented al-Qaeda from setting up shop in Iraq and who prevented Iran from becoming a regional power was SADDAM.

The fact he never thought of blowing himself up meant he could be dealt with diplomatically to a certain degree. As opposed to some nutjob who thinks he is fighting for God. Just Try negotiating with one of those and see if he doesn't cut your throat at the very first opportunity because GOD told him to.

Thanks to the brillant idea to remove Saddam because he was a "bad guy" your pals at the Heritage Foundation (and the other people whose idea this was) opened a Pandora's box that unleashed a threat far more dangerous than Saddam.

(Slow Clap...)

Originally Posted by Rob Henderson

It's all about propaganda. The Middle East hates the West... The Taliban advocates hating the West, so they support them without a second thought... I bet the majority of Muslims wouldn't even know why they really hate the West if one was to ask them... They don't know why they hate us, they just do, and they accept it because it was engrained since their birth.

I hate the Taliban and their actions just as much as the next guy, but the fact is that similar circumstances take place all around the world... There are concubines in Africa... The Rwandan genocide for example... If a Tutsi member found a Hutu woman or child... God help them...

Actually they hate the West because they feel uncomfortable about the looseness of Western society. This I know is true. There's a lot of things that we allow that they at least publicly think is unacceptably horrible (usually the whole having premarital sex, bearing children out of wedlock thing). You are also right in that they also conveniently ignore all the benefits they have gotten through Western influence (more freedom).
Most Muslims I've known would say that they hate America because it is morally corrupt and find it insulting that a country so morally corrupt preaches about morality and tries to impose its views/culture into theirs and therefore contaminate their people's minds with trash.

There is also a us-versus-them sort of mentality. They will hate other Muslims but the instant even the most hated Muslim gets into conflict with a non Muslim, they will back the Muslim. Regardless of who is right or wrong. They think that is being obedient to their faith and to God.

The Taliban have been systematically destroying the many different cultures that used to be in Afghanistan, also killing people of different ethnicities in large numbers. Although it doesn't quite hit the definition of genocide, it's pretty damn close and I personally don't see the big difference between a bunch of dudes who go around doing mass killings regardless of ethnicity and a bunch of dudes who go around targeting a specific ethnicity (except for the fact that the latter has a precedence with the Jews being victims).
Not only that but they managed to twist a religion into their own form. They claimed everything was through Sharia law but that isn't the case. Half the stuff they do is stuff they just made up. It's a blanket oppression of an almost unprecedented scale.

I'm well aware of what happened in Rwanda but I still put that behind Afghanitan. The fact that the conflict in Rwanda is largely over and Afghanistan still seems to have no end in sight is another factor as well.


Mmarsh, very well put.
You know what's funny? People knew about that in the 90's. What happened?

Originally Posted by the_13th_redneck

Actually they hate the West because they feel uncomfortable about the looseness of Western society. This I know is true. There's a lot of things that we allow that they at least publicly think is unacceptably horrible (usually the whole having premarital sex, bearing children out of wedlock thing). You are also right in that they also conveniently ignore all the benefits they have gotten through Western influence (more freedom).

Well, yes, there's that too... But is premarital sex REALLY enough to want to blow someone up? (Actually... Don't answer that one... LOL)

Originally Posted by the_13th_redneck

Most Muslims I've known would say that they hate America because it is morally corrupt and find it insulting that a country so morally corrupt preaches about morality and tries to impose its views/culture into theirs and therefore contaminate their people's minds with trash.

An excellent point... But there is a fine line between "morally corrupt" and "open-mindedness" that will always be different for us... But that is no reason to hate... They shouldn't hate us because we see things differently, no more than we should hate them for the way they feel... (I mean obvious things like women being treated like normal citizens is something I would argue to death, but different sets of morals aren't bad... They're just different.)

Originally Posted by the_13th_redneck

There is also a us-versus-them sort of mentality. They will hate other Muslims but the instant even the most hated Muslim gets into conflict with a non Muslim, they will back the Muslim. Regardless of who is right or wrong. They think that is being obedient to their faith and to God.

It's unfortunate... I'd be interested to see what happened when a Muslim was faced with a peaceful non-believer. Someone who WOULDN'T argue with them. I think that's what Obama's doing. He's trying to talk to them... They're so used to seeing America blow up first, ask questions later...

Originally Posted by the_13th_redneck

The Taliban have been systematically destroying the many different cultures that used to be in Afghanistan, also killing people of different ethnicities in large numbers. Although it doesn't quite hit the definition of genocide, it's pretty damn close and I personally don't see the big difference between a bunch of dudes who go around doing mass killings regardless of ethnicity and a bunch of dudes who go around targeting a specific ethnicity (except for the fact that the latter has a precedence with the Jews being victims).
Not only that but they managed to twist a religion into their own form. They claimed everything was through Sharia law but that isn't the case. Half the stuff they do is stuff they just made up. It's a blanket oppression of an almost unprecedented scale.

I'm well aware of what happened in Rwanda but I still put that behind Afghanitan. The fact that the conflict in Rwanda is largely over and Afghanistan still seems to have no end in sight is another factor as well.

And that's why as soon as we invaded Iraq, we put ourselves into the biggest black hole we could have... There's no good way to end this thing... I'm just about convinced that the Middle East will have conflict until the end of time... I see no easy way to claim something positive, other than "liberating" Iraq. I don't know... I just don't see any way of justifying any of it... Sometimes it comes down to what's worse, losing American lives or losing Middle Eastern lives? But then I'm ignoring the human plight, and that's against what I think... So I can't do that... But there's some people you just can't convince.... It was just a bad move all around to invade Iraq... It might not have been any better with Afghanistan, but we'll never know....

Originally Posted by mmarsh

And once again you take something totally out of context and twist it way out of proportion. What I was CLEARLY suggesting was that Saddam was the lesser of two evils. I never said he was a choir boy or that he should be nominated to the Noble peace prize, did I? DID I???? Your deliberate misrepresentations of other peoples post is getting pathetic, and only proves that you are defending a very WEAK argument.

And Yes Saddam was better than the Mullahs. Since the Gulf War Saddam kept his crap mostly inside Iraq, he wasn't exporting Islamic Fundamentalists to cause trouble all around the world like the Mullahs were since 1979. Saddam was a evil man, but he was dedicated to his own survival which meant he was much saner than his next door neighbors. Saddam was a secularist, he played the good Muslim for show, but in truth He hated bin Laden and all the other religious Fundamentalists whom he viewed as a threat to his rule, and murdered almost every fundamentalist cleric he could get his hands including several of bin Ladens followers in Iraq. The man who prevented al-Qaeda from setting up shop in Iraq and who prevented Iran from becoming a regional power was SADDAM.

The fact he never thought of blowing himself up meant he could be dealt with diplomatically to a certain degree. As opposed to some nutjob who thinks he is fighting for God. Just Try negotiating with one of those and see if he doesn't cut your throat at the very first opportunity because GOD told him to.

Thanks to the brillant idea to remove Saddam because he was a "bad guy" your pals at the Heritage Foundation (and the other people whose idea this was) opened a Pandora's box that unleashed a threat far more dangerous than Saddam.

(Slow Clap...)

Took nothing out of context. You just made a stupid statement

Seems like the pot's calling the kettle black there Chukpike...

Originally Posted by Chukpike

Took nothing out of context. You just made a stupid statement

Only to you. The intent of my post was clear enough to everyone else. I am not responsible for your lack of basic reading comprehension skills.

Open mindedness and moral corruption:
The line between morally corrupt and open mindedness... if you allow it, it means you think it is right and therefore anything questionable must not be allowed at all. To be open minded is to condone moral corruption. I'm sure you get the point. That's how a lot of folks see it.

Peaceful non believers:
Are still infidels and must be either converted or killed. Period. In the case of the Taliban that would be true. As for other Muslims, it really depends on them individually. Others from more open societies don't mind so much but others from more religiously fundamentalist socieities would see that person as the lowest form of life on earth.
Peaceful or not peaceful would be irrelevent.
Actually, being peace loving and non violent is actually seen as a sign of weakness by many.

Originally Posted by Rob Henderson

I'm just about convinced that the Middle East will have conflict until the end of time... I see no easy way to claim something positive, other than "liberating" Iraq. I don't know... I just don't see any way of justifying any of it... Sometimes it comes down to what's worse, losing American lives or losing Middle Eastern lives? But then I'm ignoring the human plight, and that's against what I think... So I can't do that... But there's some people you just can't convince.... It was just a bad move all around to invade Iraq... It might not have been any better with Afghanistan, but we'll never know....

This is a very difficult question and I sometimes think the only answer comes with either success or failure.
Vietnam was obviously considered "the wrong war" but the Korean War which was fought for identical reasons is hardly called "the wrong war." The difference is in Vietnam, the US failed to preserve South Vietnam whereas in Korea, the US and other UN forces managed to save South Korea.
To say that America must stay out means you tolerate oppression wholescale. To say America must intervene, we aren't sure where to draw the line in terms of respecting other people's sovreignty. Is it right to say "We will tolerate all countries as long as they're exactly like us"?
Had America chosen not to intervene in world matters after World War II, I'd probably have starved to death at some point or if still alive, severely malnourished and living a very miserable existence under tyranny.