Islam: a Plan for World Domination?

[Heracles 417]

Like many lefties out there every action is met by negativity

The only comment I have is, that's the consequence of making sweeping generalisations, you end up making statements that are nonsensical. Every action is met by negativity? What on earth can you possibly think you mean by writing that?

Any steps the current administration has take from day one have been met with negativity from your hardcore lefties. Show me once where a Michael Moore has said I stand by the president. The difference between you and I is that if Hillary for example was elected as president I would cheer her on rather than put her down everyday and wait for her demise. While I may not agree with her on many things, she would be the president and needs people support. Whereas lefties remind me of a group of people constantly telling someone they are no good. Do you think this person will succeed?

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Like many lefties out there every action is met by negativity

The only comment I have is, that's the consequence of making sweeping generalisations, you end up making statements that are nonsensical. Every action is met by negativity? What on earth can you possibly think you mean by writing that?

Any steps the current administration has take from day one have been met with negativity from your hardcore lefties. Show me once where a Michael Moore has said I stand by the president. The difference between you and I is that if Hillary for example was elected as president I would cheer her on rather than put her down everyday and wait for her demise. While I may not agree with her on many things, she would be the president and needs people support. Whereas lefties remind me of a group of people constantly telling someone they are no good. Do you think this person will succeed?

Gee - yet another Grand Narrative. I feel like I'm in Alice in Wonderland...

[Peikko 1,575]

Any steps the current administration has take from day one have been met with negativity from your hardcore lefties. Show me once where a Michael Moore has said I stand by the president. The difference between you and I is that if Hillary for example was elected as president I would cheer her on rather than put her down everyday and wait for her demise. While I may not agree with her on many things, she would be the president and needs people support. Whereas lefties remind me of a group of people constantly telling someone they are no good. Do you think this person will succeed?

I guess this is the fundamental problem, Boo-Yah cannot see me as an individual with independent thought, he can only see me as part of some left wing group. You know nothing about my political affiliations, or even if I have any, and yet you identify me with whomsoever you wish. This discussion isn't going to go anywhere if you say things like 'your hard core lefties'. Its a nonsense and I don't buy it.

[Peikko 1,575]

Any steps the current administration has take from day one have been met with negativity from your hardcore lefties

It's also not even remotely true. There are many areas where both sides of the House/Senate have common ground, how on earth do you think legislature is passed if no one agrees on anything?

[Heracles 417]

Any steps the current administration has take from day one have been met with negativity from your hardcore lefties. Show me once where a Michael Moore has said I stand by the president. The difference between you and I is that if Hillary for example was elected as president I would cheer her on rather than put her down everyday and wait for her demise. While I may not agree with her on many things, she would be the president and needs people support. Whereas lefties remind me of a group of people constantly telling someone they are no good. Do you think this person will succeed?

I guess this is the fundamental problem, Boo-Yah cannot see me as an individual with independent thought, he can only see me as part of some left wing group. You know nothing about my political affiliations, or even if I have any, and yet you identify me with whomsoever you wish. This discussion isn't going to go anywhere if you say things like 'your hard core lefties'. Its a nonsense and I don't buy it.

I never meant you in person but there are a lot of people out there with hardcore views, be it left or right. People who you cannot get a word in edgewise when discussing issues.

[Caladan 19]

So what do you recommend we do if or when a US or UK school is attacked in a similar fashion.

I think holding a group accountable is just dandy. But even accountability has to be proportional and aimed at the right targets. That means when a Sunni extremist group attacks you, invading a secular Shi'ite power is the wrong way to go about it. That's why blowing up an entire city as opposed to finding and executing the perpetrators is the wrong way to go about it.

If a U.S. school is attacked I would hope our response would be more than to blow up a bunch of school full of kids who had nothing to do with the attack.

You have beaten around the bush without answering the question. What actions should be taken to prevent, as well as punish, such actions?

There isn't a one-size fits all solution, like 'Harming an American child means we'll kill ten Saudi schoolchildren.' Sometimes the answer is war (like Afghanistan.) Sometimes warring is a very bad idea (Iraq). Sometimes you don't need to war because the government of the country where the bad guys are hiding will arrest them themselves (like the homegrown guys in the UK and Germany).

But operating under the assumption that if we only had more vicious policies the bad mens would go away is just straight-up fantasy. Do you think Iraq would be going better now if we'd nuked Baghdad?

[Heracles 417]

Like many lefties out there every action is met by negativity

The only comment I have is, that's the consequence of making sweeping generalisations, you end up making statements that are nonsensical. Every action is met by negativity? What on earth can you possibly think you mean by writing that?

Any steps the current administration has take from day one have been met with negativity from your hardcore lefties. Show me once where a Michael Moore has said I stand by the president. The difference between you and I is that if Hillary for example was elected as president I would cheer her on rather than put her down everyday and wait for her demise. While I may not agree with her on many things, she would be the president and needs people support. Whereas lefties remind me of a group of people constantly telling someone they are no good. Do you think this person will succeed?

Gee - yet another Grand Narrative. I feel like I'm in Alice in Wonderland...

A five second google search suggests otherwise. Or how about that video I posted above when a democrat actually went to Syria to talk ####### about the current administration. The reason I had the video in the first place was from someone I know of, who is Syrian, who sent CC it in an email saying look at how stupid Americans are. Which proves a previous point of mine that democrats and liberals do not understanding that the rest of the world does not care about republicans or democrats. When one side is criticized abroad, people there look down on America as a whole. It would be like talking ####### about your partner to someone else. People will think you are the idiot and not your partner..

Edited September 13, 2007 by Boo-Yah!

[Heracles 417]

There isn't a one-size fits all solution, like 'Harming an American child means we'll kill ten Saudi schoolchildren.' Sometimes the answer is war (like Afghanistan.) Sometimes warring is a very bad idea (Iraq). Sometimes you don't need to war because the government of the country where the bad guys are hiding will arrest them themselves (like the homegrown guys in the UK and Germany).

But operating under the assumption that if we only had more vicious policies the bad mens would go away is just straight-up fantasy. Do you think Iraq would be going better now if we'd nuked Baghdad?

Well maybe some of you need to get your head out of the sand and realize that there are lots of people out there who only understand the language or violence; much like the people currently committing genocide in Dafur.

You see... I think this is the problem a number of Americans (and I suppose the U.S. government) has with the whole "international community" argument: we're going to do what is in our country's best interests, whether or not it falls in-step with everyone else or makes anyone else (besides Americans) happy in the end.

The U.S. government has a duty and responsibility to the citizens of the United States -- not to the United Kingdom, Canada, Germany, Mexico, France, Italy, or any other nation. It's nice when the goals set by the U.S. line up with that of other countries, but it's not a necessity nor is it a requirement in the least. I think this is something that many people from other countries have difficulty understanding and I'm not quite certain why.

After all, isn't it every country's duty and responsibility to it's own citizens, above all else? I would tend to think so. It's good to get another nation's input -- to hear a different viewpoint -- but at the end of the day, it's up to that country to decide for it's own citizens.

This doesn't mean every American will agree with every plan created by the U.S. government (I know I certainly don't), but I would be absolutely furious if another country's government made a decision for this country (just as I'm sure any other country would be angry if the U.S. ordered them to do something). Countries may offer suggestions, of course, or propose agreements and treaties, but they can never order another country to do what they want -- unless the country was conquered directly or indirectly through war, which does give another country the right to do whatever they wish with the land.

The point of this post is that while the U.S. does make some use of the "international community" (mostly for business-related purposes), the U.S. does not and will not go crawling to any other nation and beg them for permission to do what it feels it needs to do. If that makes others angry, then so be it. You can't please everybody, but then again, the U.S. isn't aiming to please everybody -- just it's own citizens.

Some seem to advocate this is a imperialistic mentality..

Edited September 13, 2007 by Boo-Yah!

[Caladan 19]

"They only understand the language of violence..." Is Rudyard Kipling running our foreign policy now?

[Hematoma 0]

Do you think Iraq would be going better now if we'd nuked Baghdad?

It worked in Japan. Of course thousands of people died, but it did work.

[Caladan 19]

Do you think Iraq would be going better now if we'd nuked Baghdad?

It worked in Japan. Of course thousands of people died, but it did work.

Very different situation, a nuke at the end of a world war that had drained Japan versus a nuke to.... help liberate the Iraqis?

[Heracles 417]

"They only understand the language of violence..." Is Rudyard Kipling running our foreign policy now?

Well then why don't you and your liberal buddies go and have a talk with Osama and anyone else currently using violence to get their way. Maybe you can prove me wrong and show me how diplomacy works with people adamant on killing..

Edited September 13, 2007 by Boo-Yah!

[Hematoma 0]

Do you think Iraq would be going better now if we'd nuked Baghdad?

It worked in Japan. Of course thousands of people died, but it did work.

Very different situation, a nuke at the end of a world war that had drained Japan versus a nuke to.... help liberate the Iraqis?

The reason for dropping a nuke is moot. The outcome would be the same.

Edited September 13, 2007 by Hematoma

[mRx 16]

Do you think Iraq would be going better now if we'd nuked Baghdad?

Iraq would be better if we nuked Iran.

Edited September 13, 2007 by matt85

[Caladan 19]

"They only understand the language of violence..." Is Rudyard Kipling running our foreign policy now?

Well then why don't you and your liberal buddies go and have a talk with Osama and anyone else currently using violence to get their way. Maybe you can prove me wrong and show me how diplomacy works with people adamant on killing..

I realize you're mostly talking to yourself here, but no one is advocating pacifism only, just that saying 'if you kill an American child we'll nuke your town' isn't going to make Osama slap his head and say 'oh! that's what I needed to behave.'