I have another question: How widely available is Newsweek and similar US news sources in Afghanistan and other Islamic countries?
Man, I swear, you would make things so much easier for yourself if you would just lead with your best stuff right out of the box. You have to piss everyone off first (and you love it) don’t you? 
You too!
That all you got? Doggy Knees and me are a couple of big meanies? That’s it?
Why did you bother?
With all due respect Marc, you’re oversimplifying. Some are people who are capable of being held accountable for their actions. Others clearly require adult supervision. The latter, unfortunately, tend to scream the loudest and as a result, draw far more attention.
Fool.
I think you mean “I-hate-all-theists-and-right-wingers-unless-they’re-not-from-the-US” mode.
You’d almost have a point if talking about a specific subset of radicals was the same as generalizing about all Christians. “Fundies” != all (or even most) Christians.
I also said this in a subsequent post:
Notice how I was NOT generalizing?
How about a cite for when I’ve ever said I hate all theists? Even Christian theists?
Let’s not. I hate to bring up an ideologically inconvienent truth, but we happen to be in a war against a group of people that want to kill as many of us as possible. I know that 9/11 has faded into the past and it’s much more fun to pretend that the ACLU knows best, but reality must intrude.
If depriving someone of sleep or other coercion will make them give up information that will save American lives, then fine. Do it. The people we are up against would gladly do worse if they had the opportunity.
The people we are fighting in Afghanistan were the ones that thought the Taliban was just great…and the ones we are fighting in Iraq thought the same about Saddam. That doesn’t even take into account the foreign fighters streaming into Iraq to take a crack at the “Great Satan”. That is fine with me as well…better to kill them there than let them come over here first.
I have come to the conclusion that it will take another horrific act like 9/11 to convince some people in this country that pacificism is an intellectual luxury at the moment…and that the war on terror will be much easier to win if they would worry more about America’s best interest than that of the terrorists.
Does that mean we are “sinking to their level”? Yes. We can climb back up on the pedestal after the people that are trying to kill us are dead.
This is what I love about the SDMB. Even in a shitpile thread like this sometimes someone comes out with some sort of gem.
Really, when is it the Muslims’ turn to start showing some understanding?
-Joe
You missed the intent of my post(?) It was a backwards compliment.
I said you (he) should have led with his best stuff first - insinuating that the post(s) in question was a good point. One he should have led with.
Some poeple!
Maybe they will when we stop trying to shove democracy down their throats.
That’s what the liberals might say anyway. They probably have a point. Islam and democracy don’t necessarily embrace each other. They both need to be tweaked for the relationship to work, meaning one or the other, and likely both, have to concede some finer points to get along. These points of concession are vastly different in each country and each province and each city and each household.
I personally believe that in a democratic nation the gov and the religious folk tend to get along better. We have proof of that throughout most of the free world. We also have proof that, as Dio pointed out, that the more impoverished nations have repressive governments and therefore don’t have as good a working relationship with the people. Makes for an unhappy crowd.
Actually, no, my statement made no implications on what the US should or shouldn’t do. It had NO political motivation whatsoever, just an explanation of why I felt Max was incorrect. Nice try, though.
Possibly. I can’t deny the Iraq invasion has them riled up pre-NW article, but I suspect that they would have reacted the same way had we not invaded Iraq. A better analogy: say that after the next videotaped American beheading, some Americans go about beating the shit out of Muslim-Americans. The beheading added fuel to the fire, but the Americans would still be bigoted fucktards totally accountable for their actions.
Good point. But the same people that are being apologists for the rioting Muslims would be first in line to condemn the Americans for such an action.
And the retraction is in.
Who’s apologizing for the rioters?
Whether it’s a major irony or a major explanation I’ll leave to be debated, but what struck me is this: 15 people were killed over the reports of the desecration of a book in a country with one of the highest illiteracy rates in the world (64%- half of the nation’s men and three-quarters of its women would have been unable to identify what was desecrated had the story been true).
Although I must admit I’m still not quite clear what your point was. It seems to have been a tangential one, though.
So, let’s travel back in time to the year 2000 (in the year 2000… in the year 2000…) (sorry, Conan O’Brien reference). In the year 2000, Newsweek prints an article claiming, with no substantiation, that some random suspected terrorist who is being held by the US was subjected to witnessing-flushing-of-the-Koran. Do you think the reaction would be the same? My non-provable opinion is that while there was certainly a fringe of radical assholes who hated us in the year 2000, it was much less “on people’s minds” than it is now. Joe Middle East Islamic Guy might not have been very kindly disposed to us back then, but it wasn’t a constant, urgent, every-day-is-a-new-outrage kind of thing. It would also have seemed like a FAR more outrageous and likely-fabricated accusation than it does now, what with all the horrible things that US forces HAVE done.
Agreed 100%. But even then… if Iraq wasn’t invaded, no beheadings. If no beheadings, no Muslim Americans getting the shit beat out of them. So, one of the results of the invasion of Iraq, in that hypothetical, was the increased racial hostility at home and abroad, including innocent Americans getting the shit beat out of them. Which isn’t to say that that automatically makes the war capital-E-Evil or capital-W-Wrong. But it’s on the balance sheet.
Yes, because we liberals are all hypocritical opportunistic America-hating cheese-eating idiots who “think” (if you can call it that) with one brain. And even ignoring what a cheap and stupid generalizing shot that is, hasn’t it ever occurred to you that at least part of the reason that some people will be more likely to protest against, say, sexual humiliation in Abu Ghraib than against actual beheadings by terrorists is that, hey, they’re terrorists, we already hate them, assume they’re evil, and want to kill them, but we didn’t used to hate our own fighting men and women, and THAT IS WHY WE’RE SO UPSET???
I like the point about the fact that most of the Afhans are illiterate. So, somebody told them that the evil American flushed the Koran down the toilet.This is what we’re dealing with-a mass of ignorat people who think their holy book is being desecrated. I wonder if they show the same reaction when they stone some poor woman to death, and find out that she WASN’T an adulteror.
Regarding the prisoners at Guantanamo-many of them have been there for several years…I wonder how many of them have any worthwhile information?
We ought to send them back, after first planting stories about how they became apostates, ate pork and drank beer.
I wonder how Sharia “law” would deal with them?