Archived material Access restricted Article
Rantburg

Today's Front Page   View All of Sun 11/19/2006 View Sat 11/18/2006 View Fri 11/17/2006 View Thu 11/16/2006 View Wed 11/15/2006 View Tue 11/14/2006 View Mon 11/13/2006
1
2006-11-19 Home Front: WoT
Islamic militancy 'can lead to third world war'
Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.
Posted by Fred 2006-11-19 00:00|| E-Mail|| Front Page|| [618 views since 2007-05-07]  Top

#1 WW3 is on. And this time there are huge 5th column and appeasement movements within the democracies.
Posted by Sneaze Shaiting3550 2006-11-19 04:57||   2006-11-19 04:57|| Front Page Top

#2 Nuke 'em. It's the only way to be sure.
Posted by MU 2006-11-19 05:32||   2006-11-19 05:32|| Front Page Top

#3 Not a very original thought, General John Abizaid reasoning is a carbon copy of the reasoning that led the “Soviet Union” to invade Afghanistan all those years ago……
It a pity that the west didn’t leave them to do the job instead of training / financing & arming Bin Laden to combat the Soviet Unions troops in Afghanistan ………
Posted by Burry 2006-11-19 06:29||   2006-11-19 06:29|| Front Page Top

#4 We're in the market for a House Troll. From the quality of your work I'd say you come cheap. I'll check with management.
Posted by Shipman 2006-11-19 07:25||   2006-11-19 07:25|| Front Page Top

#5 Reposting some quotes

John F. Kennedy School of Government, recognized the reality of souring public opinion in America about the war, but hastened to add, "We have not failed yet."

"I think we can win this fight," he said. "I think we are winning this fight."

Sarah Sewall, director of the Carr Center for Human Rights Policy, which sponsored the talk, introduced the general. She described Abizaid's "uniquely valuable perspective" and cautioned against blaming military leaders for executing decisions made by political leaders.

Referring to the way the Vietnam War polarized the country and crippled the military, she said: "We have been down that road before."

At his address at the Kennedy School forum, Abizaid was asked on several occasions why American public opinion had turned so decidedly against the war, and he consistently said that the despair he felt in Washington was not reflected in the field among American or Iraqi soldiers and officials.

He pointedly blamed the American media for its criticism of the US military in Iraq and said coverage of the war had led to the perception of a failed policy.

"We can't worry about the 24-hour news cycle; we've got to worry about where we come out in history," he said.

"We absolutely are in the stage where we have got to make this work," he said. "We need to start having better effect against the sectarian violence within six months."

Abizaid said the stakes were high in Iraq and in the global struggle against the rise of violent Islamic extremism, which he has dubbed "the long war."

"I believe our failure to address the major problems of extremism can lead to World War III," he said.

At the end of a grueling week in which he was barraged on Wednesday by the Senate Armed Services Committee on Capitol Hill with questions and criticism about the war, Abizaid joked with the audience about why he wore camouflage fatigues instead of his green dress uniform for the evening.

"I usually wear my green uniform," he said to a polite round of laughter. "But there was so much blood on it, I had to come in this uniform."

As he spoke, a knot of several dozen protesters gathered outside the gates of the Kennedy School. As Abizaid prepared to exit, the crowd chanted louder: "Abizaid is a liar. No more war for empire."

"Put on the shields, boys," Abizaid quipped to his fellow officers as they bounded into the vehicle and drove through the crowd.

One of the protesters, Nick Giannone, 31, of Quincy, who works for Boilermakers Union Local 906, said: "I am against this war. I came here to remind the world that Abizaid has a lot of blood on his hands."
Posted by KBK 2006-11-19 09:47||   2006-11-19 09:47|| Front Page Top

#6 We are already in it. Countries are falling and no one seem to be paying attention. Somalia is gone to them, Thailand is fighting the beginnings of the end, as are the Filipino's. France and England are battle grounds of insurgency growth. Even his statement of safe haven is a bit late. Iran, Somalia, Malaysia, Indonesia, Pakistan, etc... are safe havens and training grounds for both their soldiers and propagandists. In my opinion he is ten years too late for the "pay me now or pay me later" speach. We are in the paying later and deep into WWIII and we won't even admit it. Abizaid is a great general, but he is not being as straight, or blunt, as he needs to be.

Wait! Let me stick my head back in the sand, maybe it will all go away.
Posted by 49 Pan 2006-11-19 10:14||   2006-11-19 10:14|| Front Page Top

#7 He pointedly blamed the American media for its criticism of the US military in Iraq

But didn't reproach academia for its rampant anti-Americanism that instructs the media? He should have blasted the eggheads with both barrels when he had the chance.
Posted by Nimble Spemble 2006-11-19 11:50||   2006-11-19 11:50|| Front Page Top

#8 Abizaid said the world faces three major hurdles in stabilising the Middle East region: Easing Arab-Israeli tensions, stemming the spread of militant extremism, and dealing with Iran.

All three of these issues converge at a single answer; Killing a large number of Muslims, doing it quickly and in a fashion that the remaining ummah cannot ignore.

One adaptation of this might be to green-light Israel on expelling all Palestinians from Gaza and the West Bank. Simply kill them or send them to Egypt and Lebanon or Jordan, respectively. Declare the conflict over and tell the Arab world that it must now proceed to resolve the many issues whose resolution were made contingent upon the ongoing Palestinian-Israeli conflict's outcome.

With this one festering sore out of the way, many other issues could be forced into the open for examination. The MME (Muslim Middle East) has relied upon the Palestinian-Israeli conflict as a whipping boy for far too long. That ruse must be ended permanently.

The one single titanic balloon payment looming in our future is Iran. Never has "pay me now or pay me later" been writ any larger. Tehran's theocratic regime must be taken offline along with its nascent nuclear weapons program. No occupation, no boots on the ground, just a crushing meatgrinder of an aerial assault which leaves their weapons R&D, military and government in total ruins.

By comparison, Syria could be addressed at our leisure. With these two huge issues addressed, Iraq would almost resolve itself. Lacking the constant influx of Iranian weapons and recruits, the Iraqi conflict would be reduced to more managable terms.

More importantly, a vital message would have been sent to the remaining MME that this "death of a thousand paper cuts" strategy of theirs is over with for once and all. Either begin demonstrating genuine dedication to resolving your own domestic terrorism issues of face immediate intervention of a most nasty kind.

If we cannot summon the courage to do this, Iraq must be abandoned and our focus redirected upon some sort of isolationist "Fortress America" scheme, however doubtful the value of such a stopgap policy might be.
Posted by Zenster">Zenster  2006-11-19 18:17||   2006-11-19 18:17|| Front Page Top

#9 It all boils down to another clue as to why so many have no awareness of the mess happeniong around the world every day.
He never mentioned Algeria, Nigeria, Somalia, Sudan, Indonesia, Thailand, the Philipines, Australia, Chechnya, Paris, London or Denmark.
World War 3 is upon us and our leaders can't even make that statement.
Are they waiting for us to kick their ass in a full blown takeover ? Fucken awaken poleeze ! Do your job, but first figure out what you are doing.
Posted by wxjames 2006-11-19 18:19||   2006-11-19 18:19|| Front Page Top

#10 Lotsa "must"s in there.
Posted by .com 2006-11-19 18:20||   2006-11-19 18:20|| Front Page Top

#11 What do you prefer, .com, the death of a thousand paper cuts? That's what is happening right now and it sure as hell isn't a roadmap to victory.

tell the Arab world that it must now proceed to resolve the many issues whose resolution were made contingent upon the ongoing Palestinian-Israeli conflict's outcome.

The MME (Muslim Middle East) has relied upon the Palestinian-Israeli conflict as a whipping boy for far too long. That ruse must be ended permanently.

Tehran's theocratic regime must be taken offline along with its nascent nuclear weapons program.

If we cannot summon the courage to do this, Iraq must be abandoned and our focus redirected upon some sort of isolationist "Fortress America" scheme, however doubtful the value of such a stopgap policy might be.


All four (three really) of these imperatives are just that and widely regarded around here as essential to obtaining some sort of stability in the MME.
Posted by Zenster">Zenster  2006-11-19 18:35||   2006-11-19 18:35|| Front Page Top

#12 "a single answer; Killing a large number of Muslims"
Wrong answer. The correct answer is, as you propose, "a crushing meatgrinder of an aerial assault [on Iran] which leaves their weapons R&D, military and government in total ruins."

"expelling all Palestinians from Gaza and the West Bank. Simply kill them..."
Big on genocide, aren't you.

"...or send them to Egypt and Lebanon or Jordan, respectively"
Righto. Like that will make all the problems go away. You'd inflame the whole region instead of just the West Bank and Gaza. Brilliant.

I do agree with you that if we don't whip Iran and do it soon, then we may as well redirect to some sort of isolationist "Fortress America" scheme. Iran has been provoking us for over a quarter of a century and they're on the path to H-bombs and ICBMs. If we can't deal with that and deal with it sooner than later, we are doomed.

Posted by Darrell 2006-11-19 18:35||   2006-11-19 18:35|| Front Page Top

#13 You forgot to play the race card.
Posted by Zenster">Zenster  2006-11-19 18:54||   2006-11-19 18:54|| Front Page Top

#14 Been there about a "thousand" times, now. Your message is pungent old hat "around here" and Bush has said he will not allow Iran to have nukes. The only problems, as far as reality intrudes upon your endless repetitive pneumatic lectures, are:

1) You're not in charge, so you have to watch and wait, which you're apparently not equipped to handle.

2) Your personal list of actions and timetable haven't been met.

Same here on the latter. The former requires meds.
Posted by .com 2006-11-19 18:55||   2006-11-19 18:55|| Front Page Top

#15 Forget the race card -- genocide is your biggest character flaw.
Posted by Darrell 2006-11-19 18:56||   2006-11-19 18:56|| Front Page Top

#16 Last night I posted a request that anyone interested should go to Atlas Shrugs blog to view pictures of Christian's heads. These are pictures of the heads of once living Christian men, women, and children.
Genocide.
Zenster is just fed up with the unilateral slaughter going on in the world. So am I. I don't know what to do about it, but I do know nothing is being done. It is frustrating to sit by and wait and read as chatoic debate circles the issue. Islam is actively killing civilians around the world, but only a few people give a shit.
I thank Zenster for attempting to awaken you to the horrors of Islam. I support the conclusion that Islam must be eliminated. If there is a devil, Islam is the devil's religion. What is gained by allowing Islam to continue, to florish, to expand ? Some fucking oil ?
What is to be gained by ducking this debate ? Time does not favor civilization, it favors Islam.
Posted by wxjames 2006-11-19 19:11||   2006-11-19 19:11|| Front Page Top

#17 If you would resort to genocide, you're no better than they are.
Posted by Darrell 2006-11-19 19:16||   2006-11-19 19:16|| Front Page Top

#18 "It is frustrating to sit by and wait and read as chatoic debate circles the issue."

I believe I pointed out, in #1, where circle-jerking leads - and the resolution.

When, pray-tell, has the world worked perfectly to anyone's satisfaction?

And when, pray-tell, will the repetition stop?
Posted by .com 2006-11-19 19:24||   2006-11-19 19:24|| Front Page Top

#19 How many Christians have been beheaded this year? I dare say that killing thousands of Muslim clerics or hundreds of millions of people in the Muslim Middle East is, shall we say, overkill. Yet Zenster pushes these two options routinely.

What you and Zenster are embracing is genocide. We didn't have to resort to that with the Nazis, we didn't have to resort to that with the Japanese, and we don't have to resort to that with Islam. Wiping out Iran's nuclear facilities, military, government, and theocracy will make it clear to the world that we are not submitting to Islam.

Now take your evil genocidal fantasies, shove 'em where the sun don't shine, and join the rest of us in the real world.
Posted by Darrell 2006-11-19 19:27||   2006-11-19 19:27|| Front Page Top

#20 To defeat an enemy you MUST meet him on the battlefield, you MUST defeat him, we are doing neither. You must make the cost of fighting higher than any reward, again, we are not. If our enemy is a genocidal group of people that have no problem using their own people as shields and weapons, their own wives and kids, then the death of those women and kids is not killing of innocents and it is not genocide, it is just war. This group of people are bent on eleminating the West, not conquering it, they want us dead. In WWII we burned Dresdin to the ground, killed everyone there with very little military gain except to raise the ante for the enemy to the unacceptable level, read we will commit geonicide to win this war. We did the same by fire bombing Japan, and then to nuke Japan not once but twice. The point is we have tried to wage war against radical Islam in a "managed" manner, and are failing. They don't care for their own and we must win. Raising the level of war to total war is something we must do. We do not want to kill every believer of Islam. But every person that is supporting this war in Teheran will deserve the burning fury of the nuke when it arrives. Then and only then will the leaders of Islam stop this progression of hate and murder. The alternative is stay the course, more of the same, further decline of our freedoms, and another attack on US soil.
Posted by 49 Pan 2006-11-19 19:40||   2006-11-19 19:40|| Front Page Top

#21 I dare say that killing thousands of Muslim clerics or hundreds of millions of people in the Muslim Middle East is, shall we say, overkill...We didn't have to resort to that with the Nazis, we didn't have to resort to that with the Japanese, and we don't have to resort to that with Islam.

We did kill thousands of Nazis and about 10% of the German people were killed in WWII. We killed somewhat fewer Japanese, due, primarily, to the use of atomic bombs on population centers that theretofore had not been considered military targets worthy of aerial bombardment.

You may not call that genocide. I know I call it war. But the same measure applied to the MME would result in about 100 million casualties. Lots of them clerics. I'd call that war also. And it's what they're going to get. Because we won't take effective measures now, they'll kill a lot more American civilians for raisins, and then the rage of the American people will be so great they will forget genocide is a word. That's the way we fight our wars every 80 years. And the muzzies are pressing in right on schedule.

Zenster is just at the front of the wave. He has a low threshold for dingbattery. But it's coming.
Posted by Nimble Spemble 2006-11-19 19:46||   2006-11-19 19:46|| Front Page Top

#22 Zenster is just at the front of the wave

I don't know NS. I think WX and Frank can give him a run for his money. Besides Muzzies don't surf!LOL
Posted by 49 Pan 2006-11-19 19:50||   2006-11-19 19:50|| Front Page Top

#23 So what do you do Darrell, to stop the killing of innocents in Nigeria or Indonesia ? I don't want to kill them all, I just want to kill their religion. In fact, I would kidnap the kids and attempt to save their souls. I would do the same for the women, but many would go nuts. Some of the men may also be saveable, but without labels, it would be dangerous to trust them.
This death cult thrives on brainwashing the kids into accepting the word of the Imam as law. They beat it into them. We have known this for some time, but we do not force the closing of their madrasses.
Our politicians are looking for a negotiated way out. They are our biggest enemy. They will sell us down the river for their own aggrandizement.
But don't forget Islam intends to kill ALL of the jooos. We should be ready to act in kind.
I can't say I'll feel good about it, but I'll show up.
Posted by wxjames 2006-11-19 19:53||   2006-11-19 19:53|| Front Page Top

#24 "Tehran...nuke... the alternative is to stay the course."
[sigh] What is it with you all-or-none people? Another alternative is to wipe out Iran's nuclear facilities, military, government, and theocracy. But no, you feel a compelling need to kill as many civilians as possible.

You think your approach will spare us another attack on U.S. soil? Nonsense. You will provoke attacks from within and attacks from every part of the Muslim world that you do not incinerate. You will kill hundreds of millions, be no better than they are (worse, in fact), and provoke extensive retaliation. Brilliant.

Here I am, lingering in a thread with people who want to save the Judeo-Christian world by tossing all of its values to the wind and murdering hundreds of millions -- because thousands have died. You guys need Prozac.

Posted by Darrell 2006-11-19 19:58||   2006-11-19 19:58|| Front Page Top

#25 people who want to save the Judeo-Christian world by tossing all of its values to the wind and murdering hundreds of millions

People like Roosevelt, Stimson, and Marshall?

You guys need Prozac.

I don't know. We're not the one's afraid to deal with the reality that confronts us.
Posted by Nimble Spemble 2006-11-19 20:09||   2006-11-19 20:09|| Front Page Top

#26 Now now, stay with the arguement and back off my mental health, doc says I'm fine, and its lithium not prozac. LOL Saying that taking out the terrorist headquarters will incite more violence is a bit innocent. It will stop the funding, leadership, training etc... It will also let the rest know we will deal with them in as violent a fassion as they do and will work as a deterent. I do not want to kill one single child, or woman, or man for that matter. Killing is not a game to me or anyone here at the Burg. Neither is our democracy and our way of life. But if you don't believe our nation is at stake here you are as mistaken as the Jews that stayed in Germany because they thought the Nazi party was passing fad. The radical Islam attacks have stripped us of our freedoms, some minor and some major. Airports and cameras being minor and the Patriot act as a major. The death toll to Americans is over 6,000 already and if we stay the course it will certainly climb. There are not many left from my OBC class, most lost here and there to radical Islam. If you have a better plan let it out. Tell us please.
Posted by 49 Pan 2006-11-19 20:19||   2006-11-19 20:19|| Front Page Top

#27 We're not the one's afraid to deal with the reality that confronts us.

Yeah okay, easy now, killer. Because you are the only ones with a firm grasp on reality? And the rest of us dumb folk just don't get it.

Consider that if you commit unprovoked genocide, you will have to deal with Muslim sympathizers as well. It's up to you to figure out what unprovoked genocide is if you don't understand the distinction.

What is it with you all-or-none people?

It's usually those who've never had a taste of humble pie in their life.
Posted by Slereper Ulosing9249 2006-11-19 20:29||   2006-11-19 20:29|| Front Page Top

#28 Because you are the only ones with a firm grasp on reality?

I didn't start handing out the psychiatric diagnoses, but it's not a solo game if you want to play.

As 49pas says, If you have a better plan let it out. Tell us please.
Posted by Nimble Spemble 2006-11-19 20:37||   2006-11-19 20:37|| Front Page Top

#29 If you have a better plan let it out. Tell us please.

How about...learn to live with it? Isolate yourself if you feel it will work. Halt immigration. Ban the practice of Islam. Re-write the Constitution.
Posted by Slereper Ulosing9249 2006-11-19 20:38||   2006-11-19 20:38|| Front Page Top

#30 That's the better plan you're advocating or something you think might stick to the wall?
Posted by Nimble Spemble 2006-11-19 20:41||   2006-11-19 20:41|| Front Page Top

#31 How about...learn to live with it?

Why should we learn to live with the constant threat of violent death?

Isolate yourself if you feel it will work.

Oh sure, run and hide under the bed. That's a workable solution! And what do you do when the monster drags you out and eats you?

Halt immigration. Ban the practice of Islam.

Wouldn't we love to! Our moonbat politicians though gasp in horror at the thought!

Re-write the Constitution.

NO! Why should we have too? You must be an European! You sound like one.

Posted by Mick Dundee 2006-11-19 20:49||   2006-11-19 20:49|| Front Page Top

#32 What is it with you all-or-none people?

We're facing an "all-or-none" culture, that has stated bluntly that it intends to destroy us. What it is with you "head-in-the-sand" types? Huh? What do YOU not understand?

Posted by Mick Dundee 2006-11-19 20:52||   2006-11-19 20:52|| Front Page Top

#33 Gentlemen, this is getting a bit silly. If we were solely genocidal, we would launch a large nuclear attack on multiple targets including Iran, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia and probably Somalia...as starters. Obviously we are not going to do that and I don't think anyone here is advocating that.

But what is being advocated is the use of the non-nuclear force that we have at hand. We should arc-light the Paki tribal areas. We should be hitting major military, government and theocratic targets in Iran. We should hit Damascus. And, of course, we should find Tater and drag his ass behind a HMMWV for about 10K then hang him in a public square. Now that is being serious. And yes, it could provoke a bigger attack on the US.
But the underlying problem is that the US and the West have not been hit hard enough for the population to take this seriously. We won't fight hard until we are hit hard. That is a reality that Zen, 49Pan, WXJames, me and many others are just going to have to accept.
Posted by Remoteman 2006-11-19 20:53||   2006-11-19 20:53|| Front Page Top

#34 That's the better plan you're advocating or something you think might stick to the wall

I think it's something you might like. There's no point in discussing my plan because: 1) we have different belief systems 2) I'm not at the same point you are, I'm still dhimmi-free, you seem to think you've already lost.

Why should we learn to live with the constant threat of violent death?

Because violent death can come in the form of an asteroid tomorrow but you don't seem too worried about that, are you? The only time I live in constant fear is when I'm flying. That's because I don't trust airport security and airlines' maintenance practices and catering companies.

Oh sure, run and hide under the bed. That's a workable solution! And what do you do when the monster drags you out and eats you?

Are you saying you won't defend yourself when that monster comes? You'll let yourself be eaten? I won't let myself be eaten. I don't taste good. Too much fat.

Wouldn't we love to! Our moonbat politicians though gasp in horror at the thought!

Then you have weak powers of persuasion (or your argument just sucks). But I'm sure you can find someone to represent you. Work on electing people who share your stance.

NO! Why should we have too?

To ban Islam of course! And to create a new republic in your own image.

You must be an European! You sound like one.

You sound like a person born yesterday.
Posted by Slereper Ulosing9249 2006-11-19 21:09||   2006-11-19 21:09|| Front Page Top

#35 What it is with you "head-in-the-sand" types? Huh? What do YOU not understand?

We understand probably more than you, that's why it seems to you we have our head in the sand.

Otoh, you don't seem to understand that words are just words unless backed up by action. I don't give a fuck if someone shouts "death to everyone" all day. I prefer to react to actions rather than words. If they act on their irrational hate then they better be prepared to lose. Simple as that.
Posted by Slereper Ulosing9249 2006-11-19 21:17||   2006-11-19 21:17|| Front Page Top

#36 I personally support the selective anihilation of certain islamic government and religious officials in the most expeditious yet brutal manner possible. In the mean time I'll still beat the dead horse about many mesopatamian tribes needing to be eradicated. Play the rest off each other, divide and conquer it. They grudingly respect that and prolly wonder why we have not done it. The west calls it having a sense of "decency", the muzzies look at it as "weakness."
Posted by Broadhead6 2006-11-19 21:17||   2006-11-19 21:17|| Front Page Top

#37 If we were solely genocidal, we would launch a large nuclear attack on multiple targets...Obviously we are not going to do that and I don't think anyone here is advocating that.

I disagree. I think many people here want that. That's the impression I get. Otherwise you'd see a much more varied discussion here on Rantburg. The preface "if they attack us first" is only a smokescreen.
Posted by Slereper Ulosing9249 2006-11-19 21:29||   2006-11-19 21:29|| Front Page Top

#38 I see, Darrel has cloned himself. ;-)
Posted by twobyfour 2006-11-19 21:43||   2006-11-19 21:43|| Front Page Top

#39 There's more than just two of us, unfortunately for you.
Posted by Slereper Ulosing9249 2006-11-19 21:48||   2006-11-19 21:48|| Front Page Top

#40 Slereper Ulosing9249, withing a decade, you would deny your own words in #37. Unless you happen to be at the time on more sublime pastures or utter shahada.
Posted by twobyfour 2006-11-19 22:00||   2006-11-19 22:00|| Front Page Top

#41 I disagree. I think many people here want that. That's the impression I get. Otherwise you'd see a much more varied discussion here on Rantburg. The preface "if they attack us first" is only a smokescreen.

Then you should hang around here more often. Perhaps then you would understand that the comments about using nuclear weapons only have a first-strike tone to them when it comes to Iran.
There are several who think islam should be eliminated, but that does not necessarily go hand in hand with elimination of the people who follow the "religion".
Posted by Remoteman 2006-11-19 22:13||   2006-11-19 22:13|| Front Page Top

#42 You will provoke attacks from within and attacks from every part of the Muslim world that you do not incinerate.

Equals: Killing terrorists will only make more terrorists. Equals: Bullshit!

Here I am, lingering in a thread with people who want to save the Judeo-Christian world by tossing all of its values to the wind and murdering hundreds of millions -- because thousands have died.

Equals: If we fight the terrorists on their level, we become the terrorists. Equals: Again, BULLSHIT. We fought the Nazis using collective punishment and disproportionate retaliation and, somehow, DID NOT become the Nazis. Defeatist logic is just that, defeatist.

Darrell, when you stop using outright lies in your arguments, I'll take time to respond to you. Otherwise, I'll just ridicule you like you deserve.

.com, take a minute and think about how important it is that some people here are gathering critical tools and verifiable facts that can be used to go out and change public opinion. One person at a time. Sure, maybe it's boring for you. Guess what? This site is not all about you. Too boring? Permit me to suggest that you stop wasting your time by posting in this thread. Wandering in periodically to yawn open-mouthed says more about you than it does those who participate in this ongoing process.

Posted by Zenster">Zenster  2006-11-19 22:21||   2006-11-19 22:21|| Front Page Top

#43  There's more than just two of us

Chew toys for everyone. Yipee!!!
Posted by Zenster">Zenster  2006-11-19 22:23||   2006-11-19 22:23|| Front Page Top

#44 zenster, if you cared about anyone else, you would cut to the chase and save the puffery for your soufflés.

If you were introducing something new, I would certainly not begrudge the effort, the requisite volume, to make it clear. BUT... You haven't had anything new, anything that hasn't been posted by 10 other people numerous times before, in ages. That you keep repeating your opinion is not For The Children™ - it's for your massively over-inflated sense of self. You post mountains of shit. Must be because you have so fucking much to spare, since no one prompts you with, "Well, I wonder what Zen the Grate has to say about it?" They know. Everyone knows. The whole fucking world knows. Already. Long ago.

"Guess what? This site is not all about you."

LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL. Coming from you, that's simply beyond precious, lol.

"Permit me to suggest that you stop wasting your time by posting in this thread. Wandering in periodically to yawn open-mouthed says more about you than it does those who participate in this ongoing process."

Permit me to suggest that you get your own blog and "pontificate" there 40 or 50 times per day, or whatever you call your chronic self-aggrandizing onanism.

What it says about me to post here is that I am unimpressed with the New Aris. And you owe Fred big-time for the wasted bandwidth. And that it would be novel to hear what others, besides you, think. For a fucking change. You're the most diarrhetic dipshit EVER, lol.

I remember when. I've watched you evolve. It's ben ugly. Should've killed you in your crib back in the Shrub Daze.
Posted by .com 2006-11-19 22:49||   2006-11-19 22:49|| Front Page Top

#45 Perhaps then you would understand that the comments about using nuclear weapons only have a first-strike tone to them when it comes to Iran

Again, I think this is only a smokescreen.

There are several who think islam should be eliminated, but that does not necessarily go hand in hand with elimination of the people who follow the "religion".

I agree, but I think this is just another smokescreen because there doesn't seem to be much discussion here about how to go about taming Islam (or reacting to it), other than killing Muslims on a massive scale.

Someone asked for a workable solution. I'd suggest declaring Islam incompatible with western civilization and acting accordingly, i.e. bans on building mosques, etc. But how do you do that and still keep your western values? You can't, or it's damn near impossible. That's why you focus on actions, as lotp argued not too long ago.

My other suggestion is to introduce little "compatibility tests" into western culture. For instance, I'm not sure how many of you have noticed, but the citizenship exam has changed in the US, just the other day. Instead of a trivia-based exam (dates and historical facts), you now have to answer questions like "How does the elecion system work and why is it important in a democratic society?", "What kind of values are representative of a free democracy?" etc etc. If at some future time you find a person incompatible with western values, then you have grounds to do whatever you like with them, perhaps send them to Gitmo.
This covers the newcomers to the country. For internal converts to Islam, you have the rule of law, unless you change the Constitution to deal with Islam in some other way.

That's for the internal threat. For outside threats the case is even simpler.
Posted by Slereper Ulosing9249 2006-11-19 22:54||   2006-11-19 22:54|| Front Page Top

#46 Preserving Judeo-Christian purity in lieu of victory is overrated. Just ask the Jews and Christians of Arabia, Mesopotamia, Syria, Byzantine empire, the Balkans, the Levant, Egypt, Tripoli, Tunis, Algiers, Rabat. Ask the Buddhists of Afghanistan, the Indus Valley and the Spice Islands (Indonesia). Oh, you can't? They don't exist anymore.
Posted by ed 2006-11-19 22:58||   2006-11-19 22:58|| Front Page Top

#47 Preserving Judeo-Christian purity in lieu of victory is overrated.

Good point. Then make your case to the people. You might even convince me once certain conditions are met. Right now though, you won't find a large enough following (I hope) because we're not at that point yet. Right now, there are other, smaller steps that can be taken.
Posted by Slereper Ulosing9249 2006-11-19 23:06||   2006-11-19 23:06|| Front Page Top

23:36 DMFD
23:33 Old Patriot
23:33 Zenster
23:32 DMFD
23:28 Zenster
23:28 Leigh
23:12 Sock Puppet of Doom
23:06 Slereper Ulosing9249
23:03 trailing wife
22:59 Old Patriot
22:58 ed
22:58 Zhang Fei
22:57 Zenster
22:54 Slereper Ulosing9249
22:53 .com
22:52 JosephMendiola
22:51 Zhang Fei
22:49 .com
22:48 RD
22:44 RD
22:44 Zenster
22:37 gorb
22:37 trailing wife
22:29 Madonna
Merry-Go-Blog










Paypal:
Google
Search WWW Search rantburg.com