It reminds me of the joke “I must be a lesbian too”. I’d like the US to pull put of the ME as well. The only hesitation I have is that I’d hate to see Israeli’s slaughtered, which is what I fear would happen. Sometimes it all seems so hopeless.
-
Reduce oil use in the United States to the point where we do not require any Middle Eastern oil. (We still need to buy some or the lack of our business will piss some people off and be seen as an economic attack, we just need to avoid dependence and the inevitable political entanglements it causes.)
-
Remove all troops from every Muslim nation and their enemies, whatever their purpose. (Fighting a war, manning a base, or even working with UN peace keepers - no matter the reason, their presence will piss off someone)
-
Avoid political and economic connections with any Islamic nation or their enemies. (Need to keep an embassy to maintain basic recognition of the countries or that will piss off people, but do not directly support any nation, particularly ones that oppress their citizens, and for the love of God do not topple any governments. Also, Israel is right out. We’d have to leave them to fend for themselves.)
-
Avoid making any statements about any Islamic nation. (There are factions everywhere and no matter who you say something positive about, it will piss off someone else).
-
Keep a low profile. (Bush was, regrettably, correct that some of them do hate our freedom as based on their own statements. They will still want to do us harm so long as we exist in our current secular state. If, however, we stayed out of their business there would be more pressing issues for them to blow themselves up over.)
I don’t think these methods are likely, feasible, or desireable, but I do think they are the only way we are going to see an end to Islamic fundamentalist terrorism on America and Americans any time in the near future.
So, in other words, suck it up and wear a helmet.
You forgot:
6) Do not “invade” other nations culturally. Do not allow broadcast of American shows abroad.
7) Do not “invade” other nations economically. Do not allow Coca-Cola, McDonald’s, Starbucks etc. branches abroad.
You also forgot:
- Force your women to wear burkhas
- Eliminate secular government
- Kill or imprison homosexuals
- Outlaw alcohol
- Eliminate the modern stock market
In essence, return with us to the fourteenth century.
Regards,
Shodan
Actually, if they specifically targeted the people who are directly oppressing them (the post to which you were replying referred to “tak[ing] out a few sheiks”, which I interpret to mean the people in power) they wouldn’t be terrorists – they might (depending on your views about tyrannicide) even be legitimate freedom fighters.
Nope. Wrong track, I suspect. These folks are not angry with us because of what we did, they are upset because of what we are. Nothing will really make them happy but our extinction as a culture. If need be as people, OK that too.
Further, they do not really want to get along with us. They have no interest in holding hands and singing Kumbaya. They want war. Only through war can they reach the martyrdom they seek.
But wait, that ‘seeking martyrdom’ thing is just hyperbolae you say. Nope. They mean it. They want to die fighting. Peace would mean defeat of their death-worshiping cult.
Any evidence that those are among the actual casi belli for aQ’s actions against the United States? Because I’m pretty sure you don’t know what you’re talking about.
Cite?
Rather than isolation, as suggested in #22, why not a technological embargo? Shut off all shipments of manufactured goods (let consumer products like Coca-Cola through, though), block all Middle-Eastern Arabs from western universities, and basically seal them off? If they want a 14th-century government, let them run it with 14th-century tech. No AK-47s, no computers, aircraft, cars, etc. Destroy all their radio and telecommunications stations, factories, etc.
I mean, as long as we’re spitballing, here.
AK-47s are self-manufactured, most famously in the Afghan/Pakistan border areas. As for the rest, can you say “China”?
Well, you gotta make sure no-one else lets tech in, too, natch.
Wow, it’s really wonderful how you have total insight into a group as diverse as various terrorists, coming from different backgrounds, fighting for different aims, under different leaders, etc.
Logically, if your opinion was right, then the only solution would be a total genocide of all Muslims. Oh wait, Bush is already on a crusade against everything anti-American and non-Christian…
Of course, even if we went with that, and killed all muslims (since the True Christians TM/ignorant Americans 
can’t be bothered to differentiate between moderate muslims and fanatics), this doesn’t prevent political terrorists like the IRA or the Basque seperatists. Or right-wing extremists, trying for anarchy/overthrow of the US govt. Or left-wing terrorists. Or people who convert into Islam, because they are disadvantaged in modern society because of their skin colour and heritage/they disagree with the money-only orientation of the west. Or…
So the only solution to wipe out all terrorism is: kill the whole human race.
:rolleyes:
Anyone who can say what you did above is not someone who needs to be taken seriously.
If you take other people to task for their over-simplified world views, maybe you should refrain from posting this sort of ridiculousness.
Careful, there. That would amount to sanctions against Islamic countries, which would surely be grounds for jihad.
Here is a short overview about the London bombers.
(Bolding mine)
Oh, and Paul: we don’t know if living side by side with Muslims is possible or not, because the western world, esp. the US, hasn’t tried it yet. All they have done is look after their own interests, using the people in the Middle East and their countries and resources, as pawns on the board of geostrategic chess. So currently, I find it natural that many muslims don’t trust the west to let them live.
If we are judging extremists by their public statements only, then the terrorists are defending their countries and religion and culture from the crusade that Bush has mounted against the muslims (and while I can grasp that Bush is too ignorant to know what the crusades were like from a muslim point of view - a senseless slaughter of civilians when re-taking Jersualem, for example, using religion as a rallying point in the power struggle between the pope and some kings in Europe - I wonder why nobody else seems to consider how this must feel like). And Wolfowitz and his think tank have laid out in the 90s their strategy paper of which countries are to be attacked and conquered; Afghanistan and Iraq are already checked, Iran is next. Do you expect the muslims just to sit around and wait meekly till they are bombed, or can you understand that it might be attractive for some youngsters to die gloriously to stop this?
Well, Bush has said publically he’s on a crusade. How’s that oversimplicification? And isn’t a large part of the pro-war propaganda from the US govt. about bringing freedom, democracy, and the American way of life to the Middle East? What was all this “everybody who criticiszes the admin. in any way is Anti-American; everybdoy who isn’t with us a 100% is against us” etc. rhetoric coming from the admin? Or should I not take seriously what Bush says, because he doesn’t mean it?
Wow, it’s really wonderful how you have total insight into a group as diverse as various terrorists, coming from different backgrounds, fighting for different aims, under different leaders, etc.
Logically, if your opinion was right, then the only solution would be a total genocide of all Muslims. Oh wait, Bush is already on a crusade against everything anti-American and non-Christian…
Of course, even if we went with that, and killed all muslims (since the True Christians TM/ignorant Americans can’t be bothered to differentiate between moderate muslims and fanatics), this doesn’t prevent political terrorists like the IRA or the Basque seperatists. Or right-wing extremists, trying for anarchy/overthrow of the US govt. Or left-wing terrorists. Or people who convert into Islam, because they are disadvantaged in modern society because of their skin colour and heritage/they disagree with the money-only orientation of the west. Or…
So the only solution to wipe out all terrorism is: kill the whole human race.
plus…don’t eat bacon sandwiches (means a BLT will be a LT) :dubious:
say prayers umpteen times each day :smack:
grow a beard :eek:
- Don’t do cartoons! That really gets their burqas in a twist.
Maybe you realize that in the English language “crusade” does not neccesarly mean a religious war? Yes, it CAN mean that, and yes, it was a gaffe for him to use the word. But for you to believe that his gaffe was a glimpse behind the mask into the horrifying real goals of the Bush administration? Lame.
Yeah, a large part of the pro-war propaganda is about bringing freedom and democracy to the Middle East. And this is a bad thing? How is that a war against everything Anti-American? How is that a war against everything non-Christian? Freedom and democracy are not exclusive to the USA, you know. Freedom and democracy are not exclusive to christian countries. Maybe you’ve noticed that there are these other places? That aren’t the US? And aren’t christian? That have freedom? And democracy? And this is a good thing? Promotion of democracy, or more precisely lip-service to the goal of promotion of democracy, can hardly be taken as a declaration of war against everything not American and Christian. Criticism that Bush only gives lip service to promotion of democracy is one thing, to declare that promotion of democracy is a bad thing is fatuous.
George Bush is not a fanatic Christian intent on conversion by the sword and conquest in the sacred name of Jesus. He is an incompetant second-rater trying desperately to deflect well-earned criticism. And your hysterical ranting and raving help him accomplish his goals.