Special forces on standby over nuclear threat

I don't think query comprehends that our allies, the progressive democrats of Pakistan, have been disarmed by Musharraf and are going to be the ones getting killed in the largest numbers in a civil war. Letting the chips fall where they may with regard to Pakistan is going to leave America deep in debt to the house.

I dunno, how many suicide bombers does it take to do meaningful damage?

More suicide bombing will only lead to more animosity and aggression against muslims in general. How tolerant do you think people will be when they know muslims will be self-destructing on every street corner? Eventually people will be talking about eradication.

And when the world sees that we'll smack a country around whether they play ball or not, then what will keep them in line?Don't be so sure.

Taking away the WMDs from a volatile, backwards and dangerous state like Pakistan is a prudent decision-its not "smacking" anyone around. The world will breathe a sigh of relief and thank America for doing it, even if they don't-who cares, its still a smart move.

Pain and suffering are the breeding grounds of terrorism. It makes no sense at all to go around creating more enemies, we already have more than we can handle.

If that was the case why don't we ever hear about masses of Chinese or Indian terrorists wreaking havoc? They suffer, but they aren't running around killing people over it. No the "breeding grounds of terrorism" are mosques and places where people are indoctrinated into the violent ideology of Islam and Jihad.

Quite the contrary, many terrorists tend to be well-educated and well-financed. Osama is a billionaire, but instead of living a lavish lifestyle, he wages war from a cave. The only logical explanation is that he's motivated by religious zealotry.

Letting the chips fall where they may with regard to Pakistan is going to leave America deep in debt to the house.

Well if a civil war happens in Pakistan, I doubt much can be done to stop it and its not worth wasting US lives on unless that war has potential for spilling over into places like India and Afghanistan.

I think its becoming increasingly clear to Americans and democracies in general that the global jihad is not going to simply go away on its own. Democratic countries like US, Israel, India, UK, France, etc have been forming closer ties because they realize they share common interests and enemies. The stars are aligning and WW3 against Islam appears inevitable.

The world will breathe a sigh of relief and thank America for doing it

You mean like the world is thanking us for Iraq?

If that was the case why don't we ever hear about masses of Chinese or Indian terrorists wreaking havoc?

Because we didn't cause their pain and suffering.

Osama is a billionaire, but instead of living a lavish lifestyle, he wages war from a cave. The only logical explanation is that he's motivated by religious zealotry.

Thats nonsense. Its not his personal suffering that he's waging war against, its the suffering of the population he represents. Hes smart, so he uses religion to stir people to his cause, but his primary motivation is to get us out of the middle east.

Eventually people will be talking about eradication. ... The stars are aligning and WW3 against Islam appears inevitable.

Thats an astonishing overreaction. The lives lost to terrorism just don't justify anything near what you're talking about. Jihad is a nuisance, not something to kill millions of people over. 3,000 people died in 9/11. Thats a tragedy to be sure, but its a tiny speck compared to the people who died from say, traffic accidents that year, or cancer, or heart disease. Lets also not forget its less than the number of Americans who've died in Iraq thus far, and not even in the same ballpark as the number of Iraqi's who've died since we engaged in that country.

With the number of Iraqi dead between 80,000 and 500,000 (depending on how you count) how many new terrorists do you think we created while ravaging their country? I'd bet it was more than the 9 that caused 9/11. Why would you want to repeat such a colossal mistake on an even larger scale? You're just guaranteeing that that the cycle continues another generation.

I should extend my point on democratizing muslim countries. The West should work with those groups in any Islamic state that genuinely want democracy-as in Iran and Pakistan, which means that Islam must be taken out of politics, with the eventual goal of eliminating it altogether. Obviously those who oppose Islam in these countries are our allies and deserve our greatest support.

It can also help to see it from the muslim perspective-to them there is only muslim and non-muslim in this world. If you're the latter, you must convert, be subjugated or die. This war can only be ended when this false division of humanity is annulled, that is by eradicating the death cult of Islam as I've stated.

You mean like the world is thanking us for Iraq?

Depends on who you ask. Those of us who believe freedom/democracy should reign supreme do thank the US. Those who prefer the rule of religious tyranny like yourself are obviously upset. The rest are just brain-dead idiots (liberals) who, like jihadists, believe the only evil in this world is America.

Because we didn't cause their pain and suffering.

By that logic all Iraqis should've attacked US forces instead of killing each other en masse. You might be able to fool the fat liberal Star Trek fanboys with that argument but intelligent people know the engine of muslim terrorism is Islam.

Thats nonsense. Its not his [Osama's] personal suffering that he's waging war against, its the suffering of the population he represents. Hes smart, so he uses religion to stir people to his cause, but his primary motivation is to get us out of the middle east.

LOL, is that why Sunni insurgents turned against his group Al Qaeda in Iraq? Or was it because they realize that Osama and his band of filthy murderous savages where terrorizing their population and decided they had enough? Well if the West is smart, we're in the mideast to stay-the only people that will be leaving (to their paradise) are the jihadists and Islamists.

Jihad is a nuisance, not something to kill millions of people over. 3,000 people died in 9/11. Thats a tragedy to be sure, but its a tiny speck compared to the people who died from say, traffic accidents that year, or cancer, or heart disease.

Its funny how you try to label Holy War (Jihad) something other than war. Do you think we're that stupid? Yes we'll just sit around and wait for muslims to continue killing us and take over our country as they have sworn to do.

Traffic accidents/cancer, etc are unintended deaths. Terrorism/Jihad is a deliberate, planned, intention by groups of people to cause death and suffering to their targets and it is completely preventable. If there were no Islam or muslims in the world, 9/11 and global jihad would never exist/happen (aside from unrelated groups attacking us, say the Chinese for other reasons).

Yes it is worth waging war against those (muslims) who declared war on us. I know you muslims would love to destroy and enslave us without being attacked in return but we're not going to make it that easy for you. God bless Bush for attacking Iraq and Afghanistan in retaliation for 9/11.

With the number of Iraqi dead between 80,000 and 500,000 (depending on how you count) how many new terrorists do you think we created while ravaging their country? I'd bet it was more than the 9 that caused 9/11. Why would you want to repeat such a colossal mistake on an even larger scale? You're just guaranteeing that that the cycle continues another generation.

Oh you mean the people (muslims) that hate us and attacked us on 9/11 are going to hate and attack us even more for fighting back? Ya keep dreaming that you can get away with your Jihad against us without an aggressive/lethal response.

If attacking Iraq and Afghanistan breeds more terrorists, I think that's awesome-because we get to flush them out and eliminate more of the bad guys. We need jihadists in the world like we need venereal disease. The "cycle" will end once Muslims surrender, like the Nazis and Japanese did in the past and we eliminate their genocidal ideology of Islam and democratize their countries. Islam was beaten before, it will be beaten again mark my words.

Those who prefer the rule of religious tyranny like yourself are obviously upset.

You're putting words in my mouth, which is not polite. I don't support religious tyranny, and I like democracy but I don't believe you can shove it down someones throat at the point of a gun and be successful. Regardless you won't find squashing religious tyranny among the reasons Bush used to invade Iraq. The world is not thanking us for directly or indirectly causing the deaths of over 500,000 people for the sake of nuclear weapons and blocking Al-Quaeda (who wasn't even in the country until after Sadam fell)

Its funny how you try to label Holy War (Jihad) something other than war. Do you think we're that stupid?

I never said they weren't fighting a war. I'm saying that we don't have to dedicate billions of dollars and thousands of lives to fighting every tom dick and hairy who declares war on us. 3000 people dead is a lot, but in the grand scheme of what causes Americans pain and suffering, it is nothing. More than 3000 Americans dead, and over 500,000 dead Iraqi's, and over 500 billion dollars on the other hand is rather significant. If the cure is worse than the disease, live with the disease.

Oh you mean the people (muslims) that hate us and attacked us on 9/11 are going to hate and attack us even more for fighting back? Ya keep dreaming that you can get away with your Jihad against us without an aggressive/lethal response.

Ever hear of Jesus or Ghandi? Turn the other cheek? Does the eye-for-an-eye approach appear to have worked for Israel with respect to Palestine or Iran or Syria? We have no need to in these people's countries pissing them off. Lets leave them alone and let them cool off, let them see that we aren't an evil country, and that we don't have to ravage their countries any time a handful of their population goes off tilt.

Traffic accidents/cancer, etc are unintended deaths. Terrorism/Jihad is a deliberate, planned, intention by groups of people to cause death and suffering to their targets..

Agreed, so what?

...and it is completely preventable.

Also agreed, but then again cancer, heart disease and traffic deaths are preventable. Ill bet you dollars to dough nuts I can prevent more car/heath related deaths with 500 billion than the 3,000 you can get revenge for with the same amount.

Oh you mean the people (muslims) that hate us and attacked us on 9/11 are going to hate and attack us even more for fighting back?

Leaving aside the fact that the Iraqi's and Pakistanis weren't involved in 9/11, the answer is yes. You can't punish an entire population for the acts of a few and expect that you'll somehow make friends eventually.

The "cycle" will end once Muslims surrender, like the Nazis and Japanese did in the past and we eliminate their genocidal ideology of Islam and democratize their countries.

The difference is that in this case we're the ones sending people to their graves en-masse, not Islam. Just look at the body counts, its not even remotely similar. You're here posting about mass exterminations and you think your enemy compares to the Nazi's?

If attacking Iraq and Afghanistan breeds more terrorists, I think that's awesome-because we get to flush them out and eliminate more of the bad guys.

You want to make enemies just so you can kill them? Is your definition of bad anyone who is against you?

If you were an Iraqi parent and you saw one of your kids killed by a cluster bomb during "shock and awe", then the other one died at the hospital because it didn't have any power (because the US bombed it) who would you think was the bad guy? Would that parent be evil for wanting to strike back at America? When you're killing people's families religion doesn't have anything to do with it, they have legitimate reason to want Americans to experience similar amounts of pain. (If for no other reason so that Americans have a more personal understanding of what they're doing to others.) You want to create more people in that position just so you can label them bad guys and shoot them? If thats true you really should seek help. Life is not a big video game.

framed:

The difference is that in this case we're the ones sending people to their graves en-masse, not Islam. Just look at the body counts, its not even remotely similar. You're here posting about mass exterminations and you think your enemy compares to the Nazi's?

This is the most prescient and important thing you said. query is nothing more than a bigot against Islam that apparently wants to kill them all to every last man, woman and child. Query doesn't understand the following:
1) It is morally wrong to kill people en masse just because of their religion
2) To want to do that makes him a psychopath and no better than the Nazis
3) Islam has the same God-sanctioned notion of violence that the Old Testament has, it is simply worded more directly in the Koran

framed

I don't support religious tyranny, and I like democracy but I don't believe you can shove it down someones throat at the point of a gun and be successful.

Yes you can, as you can see by the success in Afghanistan and Iraq. Your hero Osama's been beaten and humiliated and his band of serial killers have been decimated or are on the run. Practically all Iraqis now are on the side of US forces and they're very grateful we're there.

By arguing against democracy you are defending the status quo-basically turning back the clock to put Saddam back in power. I'm sure the millions of (85%) of Iraqis who risked their life in free elections will strongly disagree with you.

Ever hear of Jesus or Ghandi? Turn the other cheek? Does the eye-for-an-eye approach appear to have worked for Israel with respect to Palestine or Iran or Syria?

Ya remember what happened to them? Jesus got tortured and nailed to a cross, Ghandi was assassinated. Their passive views are fine as long as all humans live by them. If your enemy believes in eye-for-an-eye, guess who's going blind first? People like that only understand force.

You want to make enemies just so you can kill them? Is your definition of bad anyone who is against you? Would that parent be evil for wanting to strike back at America?

These enemies were always there-as soon as they were forced to believe their god Allah wants them to wage an endless war against 'unbelievers'. Some lowly desert pedophile-terrorist thug had the brains to turn his criminal organization into a cult/religion, force it only those he conquered and now his multitudes of slaves are carrying on his savagery.

If Americans actually attacked civilians deliberately in Iraq-they wouldn't be helping us now assuming there were any left. This is probably the greatest but easily dispelled lie muslims like you spread. Those 80,000 lives (not 500k) were all due to muslim on muslim violence.

Islamic insurgents tried to stoke the flames of civil war and nearly succeeded if not for the excellent work of Gen David Patraeus. You should be thanking America for getting rid of Saddam, bringing freedom/democracy to a place that would've never had it otherwise. You know the truth is that Al Qaeda/Osama are responsible for all these deaths, the 3k Americans and the 80k muslims. If he didn't wage his jihad we wouldn't have retaliated.

Look at Iran today, every friday they have their hate rallies shouting "Death to America/Israel", etc. Are we doing that to Iran here? Did we attack them? This is clear evidence that they're brainwashed by their crazy religion which teaches them to wage war against the 'infidels' until they conquer us. So if we bombed the hell out of the Iranians that want to destroy us, wouldn't they deserve it? Of course they would.

America is the biggest stumbling block for Islam on its way to world domination-this is why muslims hate us. They hate our values/democracy, envy our wealth/power and hate their own lives. It couldn't be any more obvious that Islam is this century's Nazism.

jak68-great points

----

Dennis

Are you an expert on the "Muslim perspective?" Do you even know any Muslims?

Let's say I have a keen understanding of Islam/muslims and how political ideologies like Islam and Nazism work. Yes I know muslims personally-they actually reinforced my view that there really is no such thing as a "moderate" muslim. Our friends also do not represent a global, fascist totalitarian movement. Muslims that reject jihad/drink alcohol, etc are considered infidels by true muslims.

Here's what your president stated himself:

Speaking at Kanal D TV's Arena program, PM Erdogan commented on the term "moderate Islam", often used in the West to describe AKP and said, 'These descriptions are very ugly, it is offensive and an insult to our religion. There is no moderate or immoderate Islam. Islam is Islam and that's it."

Source: Milliyet, Turkey, August 21, 2007

query is nothing more than a bigot against Islam that apparently wants to kill them all to every last man, woman and child. Query doesn't understand the following:
1) It is morally wrong to kill people en masse just because of their religion
2) To want to do that makes him a psychopath and no better than the Nazis
3) Islam has the same God-sanctioned notion of violence that the Old Testament has, it is simply worded more directly in the Koran

For someone who doesn't like having words put in his mouth you sure have no problem doing it to others, hypocrite. A typical net-jihadist tactic used when they realize they can't win an argument, resorting to ad hominems and character-assassination.

1) A religion that teaches its followers to wage war and kill all non-followers, unless they convert, is morally wrong and it is right to kill them in self-defense as well as eliminate their dangerous religion/cult/ideology.

Don't preach about morals when you have none.

2) covered by first point.

3) Actually Islam is the only religion in the world that mandates the forcible conversion of all 'unbelievers' under the threat of death. Don't try to bring Christians down with you, when clearly they're genuinely peaceful. I'm an atheist so don't waste your time quoting the bible at me muslim.

query:

Yes you can, as you can see by the success in Afghanistan and Iraq. Your hero Osama's been beaten and humiliated and his band of serial killers have been decimated or are on the run. Practically all Iraqis now are on the side of US forces and they're very grateful we're there.

How much blood has your family spilled in war for America? I'm curious if you and your family's history matches your "superpatriot" song & dance.

If Americans actually attacked civilians deliberately in Iraq-they wouldn't be helping us now assuming there were any left. This is probably the greatest but easily dispelled lie muslims like you spread. Those 80,000 lives (not 500k) were all due to muslim on muslim violence.

Clearly you don't understand a whit about military operations. Some civilian casualties were due to Muslim sectarian violence, others were collateral damage by coalition military operations. Believe it or not, we don't always kill the people we're aiming for and tham & them alone.

Islamic insurgents tried to stoke the flames of civil war and nearly succeeded if not for the excellent work of Gen David Patraeus. You should be thanking America for getting rid of Saddam, bringing freedom/democracy to a place that would've never had it otherwise. You know the truth is that Al Qaeda/Osama are responsible for all these deaths, the 3k Americans and the 80k muslims. If he didn't wage his jihad we wouldn't have retaliated.

Hey, "Superbad," it's your president that refuses to enlarge the size of the military and give smart generals like Petraeus the resources they need to help move Iraq forward.

Look at Iran today, every friday they have their hate rallies shouting "Death to America/Israel", etc. Are we doing that to Iran here? Did we attack them?

You don't seem to know anything about history. How old are you, 15? We (the CIA) deposed the Iranian leader Mossadegh in 1954 and Iranians remember this and are still unhappy about it. We put the Shah of Iran in power and the hate of him was so rife in Iran that they overran our embassy taking our people hostage when Carter allowed him into the US for treatment for his cancer. Iranians themselves are pro-democracy and pro-America but they are also very wary of us because of the history we have with them of deposing their elected leaders, etc.

Let's say I have a keen understanding of Islam/muslims and how political ideologies like Islam and Nazism work. Yes I know muslims personally-they actually reinforced my view that there really is no such thing as a "moderate" muslim. Our friends also do not represent a global, fascist totalitarian movement. Muslims that reject jihad/drink alcohol, etc are considered infidels by true muslims.

So if it's true that Islam says you should kill all infidels and you are an infidel and you know Muslims: why are you still alive?

For someone who doesn't like having words put in his mouth you sure have no problem doing it to others, hypocrite. A typical net-jihadist tactic used when they realize they can't win an argument, resorting to ad hominems and character-assassination.

The "Muslim" framed made the comment about putting words in his mouth... learn to read.

1) A religion that teaches its followers to wage war and kill all non-followers, unless they convert, is morally wrong and it is right to kill them in self-defense as well as eliminate their dangerous religion/cult/ideology.

So Judaism is morally wrong since God commanded that they kill everyone in cities like Jericho when they took over Canaan militarily? And my religion, Christianity, is morally wrong because it is an offshoot of Judaism?

Don't preach about morals when you have none.

Christians don't have any morals? Comes as a shock to me since I spent 12 years in Catholic school learnings about my religion's moral principles and tenets.

3) Actually Islam is the only religion in the world that mandates the forcible conversion of all 'unbelievers' under the threat of death. Don't try to bring Christians down with you, when clearly they're genuinely peaceful. I'm an atheist so don't waste your time quoting the bible at me muslim.

You're mentally disturbed is what you are. So I guess since you believe there is no God the wholesale slaughter of all Muslims is permissible to you? No force that isn't temporal to punish you so just wipe them all out?

You're incorrect as well. Many religions that preceded the Big Three monotheistic religions mandated the same thing. It's apparently just the only one you're aware of and, as your posts shows, your worldview is rather narrow and uninformed.

Aren't you running late for your John Birch Society meeting? ;-)

Hey, "Superbad," it's your president that refuses to enlarge the size of the military and give smart generals like Petraeus the resources they need to help move Iraq forward.

I'm sorry, I don't recall Bush not giving the soldiers the resources they need. Can you give me an instance?

awinter:
The extra soldiers are the resources. Never has a general been asked to do so much for so many with so few. I pity him trying to control a country the size of California with approximately 26 million civilians with approximately 150,000 soldiers at best. It's a thankless and difficult task. The administration has staunchly refused to enlarge the military since 9-11 and all growth in size has come from Congress and been enacted over the administration's disagreements. I think we should radically enlarge the military.

I'm sorry, I don't recall Bush not giving the soldiers the resources they need. Can you give me an instance?

Its actually one of the main reasons Don Rumsfeld resigned. His vision of the modern military was one of leaner sleeker efficiency. It sounded cool until there weren't enough soldiers in country to get the job done, and the ones who were there found out they weren't adequately supplied.

If Americans actually attacked civilians deliberately in Iraq-they wouldn't be helping us now assuming there were any left. ... Those 80,000 lives (not 500k) were all due to Muslim on Muslim violence.

This is nonsensical on several levels. America has acknowledged killing Iraqi's, therefore its not possible for all deaths to have been Muslim on Muslim. Further, the 80,000 number are main stream media published individual direct kills. Their causes of death are known. The 500,000 number is an estimate of people who died from secondary causes (like not having water because the US bombed the water purification center, etc.)

...Muslims like you...

I'm an atheist. You might want to consider that people can disagree and not be emissaries of "the enemy", it might help you to be a little more empathetic.

most ignorant, hateful dribble i have ever read and a major cause of the problem.
I cant imagine what it's like to live in your would query.
SO misguided, so full of hate.
But one thing i agree with, church must always be separate from state.
And i hope you fight just as hard for that here.

well said Ranch

cute.. but history shows your breif version of the story is full of holes..
16 words
alluminum tubes
'swift boating of ritter
ignoring powell
I could go one but just listing bush's screw up leading up tot he war would fill the page.