BF2S Forums Neo-Cons: Allies of Terrorism

IG-Calibre wrote:

Lowing bleating on again about personal responsibility, yet in his "world" everything is the fault of the liberal left - here's a reminder of personal responsibility lowing..

http://www.discourse.net/archives/pix/w … -thumb.gif

Yes I know, personal responsibility is like fucking KRPTONITE  to you isn't it??

but to answer your post, no I do not blame the worlds problems on liberals, I blame an INDIVIDUALS problems on themselves. It just so happens, so it seems, that the only people that are sooooooooo fucking needy from the rest of us or support using private money to fund their pet social programs are liberals.

anyway, back to the thread.

CameronPoe wrote:

Neo-Conservatives: I largely blame YOU for the surge in terrorism on this planet.  Pull your heads out of your fucking arses.

Amazing.  And who was responsible for the terror attacks when Clinton was in office?

CameronPoe wrote:

Some Preliminary Facts:

- A lot of Arabs do not like the USA, its government and what it stands for. A lot of them do not even like ordinary Americans, despite possibly never having even met one.

- A lot of Muslims do not like the USA, its government and what it stands for. A lot of them do not even like ordinary Americans, despite possibly never having even met one.

True, but you could say the same for Americans.  A lot of Americans don't like Arabs, even if they've never met one or have met very few.

Still, I agree with a lot of your post.

Wow.  I can't believe Cam made a derogatory post about Bush and the US...  Say it ain't so.  I'm shocked.  All this time we thought you a friend to the US.  Radical muslims dislike us?  Noooo....  News flash bra -they don't like you either.  You are still on the people to kill list, just not up as high as we are.. But if they have it your way and defeat us, it is a matter of time before they kill you too.

You philosophy of complacency toward radical muslims is at best (how can I put this politely) -retarded.

san4 wrote:

Second, I think an important reason many muslims hate the US (and other western nations) is that western culture is undermining Islam. Western movies, books, ideas, music, TV shows etc. can change how people think. Western culture can make people less devoted to their strict religion and more interested in individualistic pursuits. It is difficult for muslim societies to avoid Western influences and I'm sure many muslims find that threatening.

Very true...  but they seriously need to chill out.  I think 9/11 clearly showed that any form of attack on us unleashes one hell of a vengeance.

This is why I feel somewhat sorry for the average moderate Muslim.  Their extremists are directly putting them in danger by pissing us off.

Ridir wrote:

The Islamic Religion does not mesh at all with freedom.  Plain and simple, until there is a compromise of some sorts between the two, which I doubt will ever happen there will be a struggle between the two.  There can't and won't be a great wall big enough to keep the two cultures seperate and even if there was the capitalist nature would always want to go over to try and make a fast buck from the Muslims that don't agree with all of the ideals of the religion.  The Muslim radicals would try and cross over the barrier to either spread the word of Islam or destroy the non-believers as per the Koran.

These two prinicipals are the CURRENT driving factors in the war between cultures.  As long as the West survives there will be attacks on it by the Muslim extremist and as long as Western Culture influences and undermines the Islamic beliefs and religion.

Pretty much...  but we can lessen this through promoting better wealth distribution in the Middle East.  We currently support governments that are aristocratic and keep the people poor and mostly disenfranchised (like in Saudi Arabia).

Ridir wrote:

The Islamic Religion does not mesh at all with freedom.

Islam = submission
Submission and freedom together, now that's funny.

Last edited by Kmarion (2007-04-12 22:14:25)

usmarine2005 wrote:

djphetal wrote:

usmarine... there will always be terrorism... I think the key word in that quote is "surge"

Where is the "surge" pf terrorism against the US since 9/11 not including Iraq?

Terror against soldiers doesn't count?...

usmarine2005 wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

usmarine2005 wrote:

Where is the "surge" pf terrorism against the US since 9/11 not including Iraq?

Terror against soldiers doesn't count?...

That is called war.  Name terrorist attacks against US civilian targets since 9/11.

I disagree.  Most of the time, war is conventional.  Soldiers are really meant more for defending against a conventional enemy.  To me, guerrilla warfare is still terrorism.

Just because we have now made our soldiers targets, that doesn't mean we should be happy that our civilians are safer because of a state of comparison.  Our soldiers certainly aren't safe, and while it is their duty to be willing to die for us, I really don't see this operation as being the most worthwhile thing they could be doing.

I'd rather we use our troops for border security.

usmarine2005 wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

I'd rather we use our troops for border security.

Agree.  But no attacks yes?

So far...

But seriously, are you suggesting that the way to keep our civilians safe from terror is to keep invading Islamic countries?...

Great post as usual Cam. The problem of course is, some people will never admit that anyone might have a legitimate grudge against the US or that the US has ever in any way dealt badly with anyone during the course of its global chess game against the USSR. They murdered and tortured and destabilized governments because they were evil through and through; we murdered and tortured and destabilized governments for the greater good and freedom! And your post has made it to two pages with only two "Hurrrr, yer terrist buddies would cut yer head off" nonsensical responses from the shallow end of the gene pool, bravo.

san4 wrote:

Second, I think an important reason many Muslims hate the US (and other western nations) is that western culture is undermining Islam. Western movies, books, ideas, music, TV shows etc. can change how people think. Western culture can make people less devoted to their strict religion and more interested in individualistic pursuits. It is difficult for Muslim societies to avoid Western influences and I'm sure many Muslims find that threatening.

Good point. It is reasonable to believe that not everyone of the Islamic/Muslim religion is a radical; there is a spectrum. However, as persuasive and incredibly widespread as our media is (as in movies, book, etc, not Katie Couric) it is possible everyone not a radical is pulled more towards our views, be that left, right, up or down.
Just by process of elimination, that leaves the suicidal radicals. So while I'm sure there ranks are growing due to certain "mismanaged actions", it might also be that the radicals are the only ones left. And they sure as hell shout to be heard.

Last edited by Protecus (2007-04-12 22:45:16)

Cam:

You brought too much into this one - to truly discuss it:
-Has every US president's foreign policy included good relations with Israel?  Are they all Neo-Cons?
-Has every other country that has been an Israeli ally since its start been a Neo-Con as well?
-Generally is it a good idea to ditch your allies?
-How do you choose sides when two allies are opposed to each other?
-If 9/11 is due to US support, then we should blame ourselves and not the muslims...which leads directly into aren't we eventually going to talk about who's right/wrong re: Israel/Palestine?
-Did we really enjoy Saddam killing thousands upon thousands of people?  Or its okay as long as Arabs kill each other?  If so, why is it okay for Arabs to kill each other but not okay for a Arab to kill a Jew or vice versa?  After all aren't we trying to be isolationists?

Too broad, too many topics.

I would have stuck to the WTF Iraq bit, cuz it's a strong argument.  But on the other hand, terrorism is unacceptable.  What exactly are the arab countries doing to prevent it?  If diplomacy is the answer, then who exactly do we negotiate with?  And, if we do then what's the chance of creating another Israel-like issue (you can't side with both the Shia's and Sunnis)?

Signing off from this thread.

Last edited by Pug (2007-04-12 23:14:56)