He didn't miss the point. He was making a different one altogther.

AKV is right that we aren't Nazis. But it seems he's happy to accept the "good" Nazis.
How did we fix Nazism? We destroyed the ideology through military might.

This was has been going on for 1,400 years.

The success of Israel in the 6 day war caused a long period of self-doubt in the Muslim world...as they believe "Allah controls all" So why did he allow them to get their ass kicked? Because they weren't on the "right path."

What will it take to stop this islamist, totalitarian, supremacist ideology?

I don't know. But giving them a big fat hug and making them feel good about themselves isn't the answer.

T-Rock is seeing things with crystal clear vision.

I see his point, it's noble and honorable - but I'm speaking of Islamic doctrine that oppresses the "Kafir" - the supremacist ideology of what the devout Muslim is to do if they are truly following the example of their prophet. Devout practitioners of Islam have been oppressing and exploiting the "Kafir" for the better part of 1400 years - tolerance and mutual respect is great as long as it is mutual...why defend the Muslims right to exercise Islams doctrine of supremacy and supercessionism ? :confused:

"Muslim chroniclers described the ongoing jihad (holy war), involving the destruction of whole towns, the massacre of large numbers of their populations, the enslavement of women and children, and the confiscation of vast regions. This picture of catastrophe and destruction corresponds to the period of gradual erosion of Palestinian Jewry. According to [the Muslim chronicler] Baladhuri (d. 892 C.E.), 40,000 Jews lived in Caesarea alone at the Arab conquest, after which all trace of them is lost…" ~Bat Ye'or~

We did not destroy Nazism, it still exists. There are pro Nazi rallies across the country every year. We permit them to participate in these rallies, and express their beliefs. Many of which call for the extermination of people based on religion or skin color. We do not, however, permit them to start killing jews, blacks or hispanics. This is where we draw the line.

I am all for allowing Muslims to express their beliefs. If they believe that their religion requires them to attack others though, they need to find another country. Many chose religious paths other then what we call extremism and literal interpretation. This is similar to how I and many Christians chose to behave differently then Charles Martel when he ordered 1200 captured Muslims executed for not converting to christianity (A World Lit Only By Fire, William Manchester).

I do not personally know any Muslim who was happy when they heard the news on 9-11. Most of them have expressed genuine anger at the fact that their religion was used as an excuse.

My personal and religious values go against religious prejudice, as does my oath to the Constitution.

Islam is a very confusing subject, I do not yet really understand my feelings on it. Its mixture of politics and religion is troublesome, especially in a multicultural society, yet we can not allow our fears of Islam force us away from our foundations of freedom.

I don't see these as religious celebrations. I believe that the Palestinians saw 9-11 as a strike back against a seemingly untouchable oppressor rather then a religious victory. Many Palestinians have been kicked out of their homes and treated as second class citizens by Israel, paid for by the United States. I can understand their anger against the United States, regardless of religion. I equate it to watching a school yard rival getting beaten by someone else.

How old were you on 9/11?

Cause I saw mobs of them celebrating in the streets, worldwide.

TR

I was in middle school at the time, so yes quite young. I do not remember any celebrating in or around Seattle. I may have missed it however. I do remember the reports from Palestine and Iraq.

With regards to those that I know personally, I did have a few muslim peers at school at the time. Most however are relationships that have been built up since then, through high school and college. None of whom have I ever seen express an emotion other then anger after any of the more recent terrorist attacks. I have heard many of them reference 911 as a blow against Islam.

- Xavier

I had nephews in Junior High and Highschool over on west side of Columbus, OH who had to deal with their Somali classmates jumping up and cheering "Death to America" when news that the towers fell got to their school. The Somalis didn't like the fact that no one else shared their joy and were furious to discover the 1st Amendment didn't include the requirement of anyone else having to stay around and listen to them.

One of those nephews, had an additional incident in school a couple years later. When one of his Somali classmates was vomiting an anti-US diatribe as part of a class project, my nephew packed up his books and began to walk out. The teacher asked where he was going to which he replied "The principle's office." The teacher said she didn't excuse him, at which time the aforementioned Somali got in my nephew's face and demanded why he shouldn't have to listen. My nephew explained how many of his relatives, to include his older brothers, were currently fighting I-slamic militants overseas and pretty much anything this guy uttered was complete BS. When the Somali kid tried to prevent him from leaving, my nephew naturally folded the kid in half and then asked if he could go to the principle's office.

Once the principle gone the whole picture of what had transpired, he quietly took my nephew out to lunch.

That same nephew and I linked up in Mosul 2 years ago, he on his first assignment and I on my last. I was a team daddy and he was a combat engineer doing route clearance twice a day. I assured him there was no envy on my part as to who had the trickier job.

Can you expound on this a little more because if anything, the United States and Israel are the only ones doing anything to help the poor, oppressed Palestinians - even as they‘re launching rockets into Israel, to kill innocent civilians - I’m waiting for archaeology’s “BIG FIND” the treasure trove… LOL - an Arab Palestinian yield of artifacts that show who the first king of Palestine was, when Palestine was founded, and by whom, what the language was, what the name of the currency was, what the religion of ancient Palestine was, and what is demise was…

You may want to take a look at the PLO or the Hamas charter, here’s part of article 7 and article 8, from 1988:

The prophet, prayer and peace be upon him, said: The time will not come until Muslims will fight the Jews (and kill them); until the Jews hide behind rocks and trees, which will cry: O Muslim! there is a Jew hiding behind me, come on and kill him! This will not apply to the Gharqad, which is a Jewish tree (cited by Bukhari and Muslim).

Allah is its goal, the Prophet its model, the Qur’an its Constitution, Jihad its path and death for the case of Allah its most sublime belief.

> http://www.thejerusalemfund.org/www....s/charter.html

And many ......
 

And many do so not because it was a blow against the west but because it was a visable sign of the march of Islam.

Many of the "group hug" people in the west are thinking with their hearts.

Me? I just believe what Islamic people say the Koran says. I take them at their word.

The slow march of Islam? How about Turkey?

Once held as the true model of a secular Islamic nation. The military was able to keep things from going too far. But now? If you've been paying attention over the past few years the radical Islamists have slowly taken over the government - and through appointments the major administration of government and schools. The key leaders in the military have also been replaced.

A few years from now Turkey is going to do something we consider over the top and the "group hug" people are going to say "How did that happen?" and then "Can't happen here."

The slow march of Islam continues - time and population are on their side.

Pete

Islam, the sea in which the terrorist shark swims. It aids and comforts the shark on it's journey.

This.

Personally, I have a huge problem with any group that would make me into a slave or consider me as a lesser human because I refuse to swallow whatever flavor of religious horseshit they're shoveling on that particular day. I think I'm intelligent enough to make my own decisions about what I want to believe, and I have no tolerance for those who would foist their dogma upon me.


In our modern times, show me another religious group other than Muslims that has taken such apparent delight in the bombing of public places with such scale and frequency. Off the top of my head, I can't think of any.

Neither hate muslims nor harbor anger towards them.
Some are benign, others are not.

If a mountain lion came up on my campsite, no hate or anger would be directed towards it, either.
If it appeared to be a threat to my family, I would kill it.

Don't know what the best method is for dealing with foreign threats, whether those threats are rooted in nations or idealogies.
Only care what will keep the threats at bay.

If diplomacy works, fine.
If diplomacy doesn't work, and a little force is required, fine.
If a little force doesn't work, and greater force is required, fine.
Whatever is necessary should be done.

Some 65 years less two days ago, it took strategic nuclear strikes to quash a particular threat across an ocean.

There were powers with imperial ambitions in the first world war.
There were powers with imperial ambitions in the second world war.
There were powers with imperial ambitions in the cold war.
There are powers with imperial ambitions carrying green flags now.

Previous generations kept the barbarians on the other side of the wall.
Different generation, different barbarians.

Means aren't the problem, it all comes down to political will.
We either have the political will to survive as a nation, and pass the blessings of liberty to posterity, or we do not.

Too many citizens looking for handouts have put weaklings in charge of our government.
Votes matter.

Please forgive me, but I've sure become more suspicious and prejudicial since 9/11.

If I hear Arabic being spoken anywhere in my vicinity I take a good look at the folks, especially if they're young males.

A month or so ago I was browsing in one of my favorite gun stores when four college age Arabic speaking men pulled up in a brand new Mercedes. They were interested in looking only at M-4 style firearms. I stood and watched them the entire time that they were in there and they knew I was looking at them. In retrospect I probably should have written down the license plate number of the vehicle and given it, as well as a SALUTE report, to the FBI.

Common Sense
 

Mr. Paine,

"Good Nazis" would seem to be an oxymoron for anyone with common sense. People in Italy joke that at least Mussolini made the trains run on time, but other than providing comical villains for Mel Brooks movies, there is little silver lining to the Fascist cloud. A day spent at Auschwitz weeping over the ceiling high pile of baby shoes would cure any delusions of an absence of evil in this world. Interestingly given the massive crowds cheering Hitler's speeches in the old black and white newsreels of 1939, astonishingly there apparently wasn't a single Nazi in Germany the day after Berlin fell. Religious folks might see this as a miracle, akin to turning water to wine, agnostics might also see it as a miracle, though one of TAC AIR and boots on the ground, finally pragmatists may explain away this transformation as simple fear among the German people. Ironically it was this same fear that Hiltler took advantage of in 1932, and IMHO remains our greatest challenge. If there is a lesson to be learned from the Nazis, it is we should never forget how they came to power, how they suspended civil rights bit by bit, how they turned on subsections of their own citizenry, the evils they perpetuated by manipulating fear, and most importantly how it ended for them.

I agree with your signature, John Adams has a beautiful quote about enduring hardships so our grandkids have a better life. We must win this war on terror, it would be convenient if AQ or similar thugs would line up and face us in conventional battle as the Nazis did, but they wouldn't last a week and they aren't stupid. Given their guerilla tactics, we have to kill them, and only them, the way white blood cells attack an infection without destroying the surrounding healthy tissue. A .45 with Le Mas ammo isn't the best remedy for a staph infection.

IMHO the difference in our beliefs, is you think of Islam as a disease, that once exposed turns you into a mindless zombie, which supercedes everything else in life, character, family, tribe, ethnicity, nationality etc. it doesn't matter if you are a man, woman, or child, once exposed you are fockered forever, period.

I see it as just another operating system. I'm amazed at folks who believe they are privy to the true thoughts and intentions of men, woman, and children they don't know or of a particular faith they don't share. I don't think I can selectively interpret the true meaning of their scripture, or give them lectures on the evils of their faith, nor am I omnipotent enough to identify crocodile tears from condemnation of violent acts perpetuated in the name of their faith. You can argue talk is cheap, yes but that is a double edged sword. I don't imagine most Muslims like being told they are all terrorists anymore than Christians would appreciate being reminded men of your faith started WW2 and perpetuated the Holocaust.

Our constitution is something to believe in, and sets us apart, we can't bend it in instances when we find it's freedoms and protections distasteful, history has shown us where that can lead. We have good fair laws for the most part, if a citizen breaks them then bust him.

I don't believe in hugging America's enemies I believe in killing them, and only them. The fact "this is hard" is no excuse, if we truly are the good guys, there is no other course. I would extend the you are responsible for every round fired from your gun rule Mr. Howe teaches as an analogy to this issue. I suppose I wouldn't make a very good Christian since I don't believe in redemption for violent criminals or pedophiles either, IMHO this is their true incorrigible nature, however I don't extend such absolute beliefs across the board to Islam or whatever the faith is of the group we have to fight next. If every Muslim converted to Christianity tomorrow could we all put away our guns and work on our golf game? Or would there still be war and competition for resources as part of human nature? Maybe the Russians will get their malevolent act together again and we can go back to them being the obsessive great threat, they aren't Muslims, Eastern Orthodox Christians I believe and they have nukes and quite a track record.

Mr. Paine as I express my opinions I remind myself I have not walked in your shoes as a military officer, however Major Gant has, he has lived among Muslims, eaten their salt, played with their kids and fought their insurgent enemies. Sir, what are your views on his experiences, beliefs, and suggestions? I believe he is brave, and insightful, am I wrong?

Common Sense ?
 

The Qur'ans Islamic Doctrine codified by sharia, as well as Mein Kampf are political treatise, should Nazism be elevated to religious status?

----------------------------------------

* "The Day of Judgement will not come about until Muslims fight the Jews {Kafir} (killing the Jews), when the Jew will hide behind stones and trees. The stones and trees will say O Muslims, O Abdulla, there is a Jew behind me, come and kill him. Only the Gharkad tree, would not do that because it is one of the trees of the Jews." (related by al-Bukhari and Muslim).

* "...fight and slay the Pagans {Kafir} wherever ye find them, an seize them, beleaguer them, and lie in wait for them in every stratagem (of war); but if they repent, and establish regular prayers and practise regular charity (Jizya), then open the way for them: for Allah is Oft-forgiving, Most Merciful" (Sura 9:5)
http://www.usc.edu/schools/college/c...n/009.qmt.html

* "You should know that seeking to kill Americans {Kafir}and Jews {Kafir} everywhere in the world is one of the greatest duties [for Muslims], and the good deed most preferred by Allah, the Exalted," (UBL)
http://www.raymondibrahim.com/7326/a...and-mein-kampf

* The penalty for Kufr (unbelief) & the Kafir (non-muslim) = DEATH

c2.5 (3) and unbelief (Kufr), sins which put one beyond the pale of Islam (as discussed at o8.7) and necessitate stating the Testification of Faith (Shahada)…

f1.3 Someone {Kafir} (who knows Islamic Jurisprudence) or denies something…which there is scholarly consensus…is executed for his unbelief…
o4.17 There is no indemnity for killing a non-Muslim {Kafir}…
o8.7 (7) to deny any verse of the Koran or anything which by scholarly consensus (def: b7) belongs to it, or to add a verse that does not belong to it;

(2) to intend to commit unbelief, even if in the future…

(3) to speak words that imply unbelief…

(20) or to deny that Allah intended the Prophet’s message (Allah bless him and give him peace) to be the religion followed by the entire world (dis: w4.3-4) (al-Hadiyya al-Ala’iyya (y4), 423-24)
(Reliance of the Traveller - A Classic Manual of Islamic Sacred Law)


-----------------------------------------


* Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day {Kafir}, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book {Kafir}, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued. (Sura 9:29)
http://www.usc.edu/schools/college/c...n/009.qmt.html

* "In fact, Muslims are obligated to raid the lands of the infidels {Kafir}, occupy them, and exchange their systems of governance for an Islamic system, barring any practice that contradicts the sharia from being publicly voiced among the people, as was the case at the dawn of Islam,"

http://www.raymondibrahim.com/7326/a...and-mein-kampf

* The Objectives of Jihad

o8.7 (20) ... the Prophet’s message (Allah bless him and give him peace) to be the religion followed by the entire world (dis: w4.3-4) (al-Hadiyya al-Ala’iyya (y4), 423-24)

o9.0
(O: Jihad means to war against non-Muslims {Kafir}, and is etymologically derived from the word mujahada, signifying warfare to establish the religion.

o9.1 Jihad is a communal obligation (def: c3.2). When enough people perform it to successfully accomplish it, it is no longer obligatory upon others.
(Reliance of the Traveller - A Classic Manual of Islamic Sacred Law)

No need quoting the peaceful Sura because:

* al-Nasikh wal-Mansoukh

* “None of Our revelations do We abrogate or cause to be forgotten, but We substitute something better or similar: Knowest thou not that Allah Hath power over all things?" (Surah 2: 106)http://www.usc.edu/schools/college/c...n/002.qmt.html

* “When We substitute one revelation for another, and Allah knows best what He reveals (in stages), they say, "Thou art but a forger": but most of them understand not." (Surah 16:101)http://www.usc.edu/schools/college/c...n/016.qmt.html

* o22.1 ( I )
(9) those (nasikh) which supersede previously revealed Koranic verses;
(10) and those (mansukh) which are superseded by later verses.
(The Reliance of the Traveler. Pgs 625, 626)


--------------------------------------

He poisoned the sources of human felicity at the fountain, by degrading the condition of the female sex, and the allowance of polygamy; and he declared undistinguishing and exterminating war, as a part of his religion, against all the rest of mankind.
THE ESSENCE OF HIS DOCTRINE WAS VIOLENCE AND LUST: TO EXALT THE BRUTAL OVER THE SPIRITUAL PART OF HUMAN NATURE
~John Quincy Adams~

I've been off line for a while, but grateful to see some PASSION behind this issue finally. :D

I was infuriated when I first heard about it, and am simply in stunned disbelief that NYC is actually thinking of allowing this for PC's sake.

We need to stop being PC and finally get some balls and be Americans with national defense as a first priority. Where did "defend her from all enemies foreign AND DOMESTIC" go? Starting with our CinC.

I love the sign I saw on the news yesterday - "We'll build a mosque in NYC when you build a synagogue in Mecca".

As one of Lebanese ancestry, I must admit that I'm a bit sensitive to this, so I've gotta ask - What's your definition of a "{deleted}" - a Muslim or an Arab? Keep in mind that they are not interchangeable groups. Many Arabs are Christian and most Muslims are not Arab - in fact only 1 in 4 are. That said, most Lebanese don't really consider themselves Arab.

AKV
 

Glad we can agree on one point. Have you studied the doctrine of islam enough to know that is or is not evil. Clearly not given your remarks. And let’s not make this a theological discussion of the significant differences between the Judeo-Christian God and the prince of darkness known as Allah (yes, the Allah of islam was/is the pagan moon god.)

My point exactly. And what do you know of the Muslim Brotherhood. Al Qaeda and their ilk are NOT the only enemy. Yet you seem solely focused on those who would pull triggers or plant bombs. What about the financiers? What about those engaged in legal warfare as an active method of advancing sharia law? And those involved in political warfare and cultural warfare?

Shall we ignore ALL of the other aspects of jihad?

You claim not to know the doctrine in one breath, yet unwilling to accept the possibility that when you pick up that rock there will be snakes under it. Read the sharia. Read their doctrine. Study it. Until you do, STFU.

I have never said that. There are some, few, who have escaped the evil grip of islam. Nonie Darwish is one whom I admire deeply. Ayaan Hirsi Ali is another. Dr Zuhdi Jasser is a muslim whom I believe has the best of intentions, but his personal opinions simply cannot overcome the weight of the doctrine he is attempting to reform. The laws surrounding scholarly consensus simply do not allow for the reformation of islam.
Do you even know what scholarly consensus is?
What the requirements are to reach scholarly consensus?
What the implications are?
How can you change scholarly consensus? You can’t. End of discussion.

I NEVER claimed to be privy to anyone’s thoughts. This is an analysis of their doctrine as they have written and confirmed it’s translation as true and accurate. If you want to talk about someone who claims to know the thoughts, lets talk about Georgetown’s John Esposito, who wrote an entire book on a survey without including a copy of the survey or the methods which it was administered.

Not discussion faith here. Islam is a political doctrine. Faith deals with what one has to do to get to heave. The preponderance of islam is focused on how muslims should deal with non-muslims. And that is political, not religious.

I don’t care what muslims do or don’t “like” being told. If they don’t like being told that their faith makes them adherents to an evil ideology, perhaps they should renounce that evil ideology.

But THEY CAN’T!

Why?

That evil ideology REQUIRES them to be KILLED for apostacy in renouncing their faith.

Nice huh?

You are wrong. But not about MAJ Gant. This is an interesting attempt at a digression towards getting me to denigrate a Special Forces Officer. I will not take the bait. MAJ Gant is as brave and as patriotic as any American willing to put on a uniform and cross the pond to face our enemies. He is well intentioned and may have had luck on a LOCAL basis.

This is a GLOBAL threat. It’s an evil, racist, supremacist ideology that was promulgated by a 6th century mass-murdering gangster pedophile.

And it MUST BE STOPPED.

Efficacy?
 

Mr Paine,

I admire your passion, and am grateful for your service to our country. I have the deepest respect for Major Gant, I think he has the best solution out there on this topic, which is why I asked your opinion. I would think less of anyone who denigrated him. I think he is a dynamic warrior, yet still a humble rational man who is destined for great things. Folks here enjoy healthy debate and learn from one another, if I have offended you in expressing my opinions, that was not my intent. At the same time hypersensitive abrasive rants are rarely convincing, and the realm of those consumed by fear, which seems a tough way to go through life...

Are you talking about.......
 

Are you talking about TP's posts?

Just wondering.

Can you name one Muslim country that is moving to a more liberal (in the classic sense) stance? Or does it seem that all are slowly coming under the tighter and tighter grip of Islam?

It is not the people - it is the religion. Once it hits a critical % it drops it's "nice face" and takes over. There is no share and be nice in the Koran.

Old beliefs die hard even when demonstrably false.
- E.O. Wilson

McPrayer - one prayer for all appetites.

Richard :munchin

Historically the only times Muslim expansion has been slowed/temporarilly halted is when enough of them were killed that they had to regroup/rethink their strategy. Tours and Vienna come instantly to mind. That's why jihad has two faces - war for periods of strength, stealth for periods of weakness. (Weakness doesn't mean the same in "oriental" parleyance - it's actually more along the lines of "not prepared/positioned to fight".)

I will not go quietly into the dark.

And Malta.

Yet as a people, we fail to understand the history behind the Crusades, and the Islamic invasions of Europe.

TR

By stating that Islam is a political religion that mandates violence and intolerance towards the “Kafir” - constitutes fear ? I don’t get it. It doesn’t make any sense.

Why slander those who have legitimate concerns about the implications and the consequences of the fascist teachings of Islam? Doing this merely prevents legitimate criticism and debate about an important global problem. It’s not fear, it’s legitimate criticism.

Is it not OK to point out that the Catholic church frowns upon birth control, or that communism and free enterprise are incompatible?

Since Islam itself is relentless about prohibiting any criticism of Islam, and the death penalty is imposed on Kafir for doing so, isn’t that one of the most appropriate things to abrasively rant and criticize Islam for ?

The longer the issue of this cancer is ignored, the larger the problem will be when someone finally has the balls to tackle it…appeasement isn’t working…

I have the deepest respect for Major Gant as well, and for Major Stephen Coughlin too...
http://www.carlisle.army.mil/DIME/do...emistJihad.pdf

Since everyone likes........
 

Since everyone likes to through Major Gant's name around in this thread lets ask a question.

Nobody has ever said Muslims as a whole don't treat guests and visitors well.

Would Major Gant have been treated differently if he said "Guys, I just love this place. I'm getting out of the Army, coming back here and opening up a church"? Would his friends treat him the same? Would they protect him - or just stand by? Would the church do well?

Not so much an operating system as a part of an OS. And, since we are not omniscient, we cannot know their thoughts. Fortunately, we don't have to. At a conceptual level, we can replace the group with a black box.

What goes into the box? What comes out? Knowing exactly what the processes involved are may be nice, but is not necessary. When we apply this to Islamic societies, the answers suggest to me that they are a threat to us. Please notice that I refer not to individuals, but rather to the societies in aggregate, as well as the members. So long as their OS, particularly the Islamic component, remains the same, they will continue to be a threat. And, from their perspective, we will remain a threat to them.

Now, about WW2 and the Holocaust - those, too, represent an element of the OS. And they should be considered carefully - but, perhaps, not for the same reason you suggest. The Holocaust, in particular, has formed a background which has substantially modified Western thought, behavior, and policy - and, in many instances, those changes are counter to the West's best interests.

Because the West recoils from the Holocaust, it retreats, tail between its legs, when accused of racism. It refuses to press its values as true or correct, lest it be accused of intolerance. Whether in Europe or the US, we will not profile despite good reasons to do so. Thus, we see self-destructive absurdity piled upon self-destructive absurdity.

Collective aggression is an element of Islam. Collective guilt seems to be an element of the Western view. The interaction of these guarantees conflict as Islam expands and the West refuses to check that expansion. At some point, either Islam will win and the West we know will fall, or the West will conclude that tolerance can be overdone and will decide to resist. In my opinion, it is getting late in the day to choose resistance, so Islam just may win.

Recall the black box I mentioned? Look at the economy of Islamic states. Not very robust, are they? Their science doesn't seem to be cutting-edge, either. So if they win, we may have consigned the world to quite an unpleasant future.

MOO, YMMV,

Pete,
Ya hit the nail on the head with that question. It is one I have been asking for years and I get blank stares. At the end of the day, is your muslim friend (when forced to choose) still your friend or will he be your judge and killer if it is decreed?
I believe I know the answer to that question. I will admit that there might be a smattering of them that would stand their ground against that ideology and stand by their nonmuslim friends/family members but that would be like a needle in a haystack.
IMO

MOO, it is a mistake of monumental proportions to assess the threat of radical Islam primarily upon perceived intentions. Capabilities matter.

IMO, many of the broad references being made in this thread to Nazism, the Second World War, and the Holocaust are historiographically sustainable only if one willfully ignores entirely the majority of research and debate over these topics that has occurred over the last forty or fifty years.

My $0.02.

What did we as a nation believe them capable of on September 10, 2001?
IMO, not recognizing, and learning from, our own intel gaps in regards to Nazism and the rise of the third reich, will only cause us to repeat those same mistakes. Forty or Fifty years from now...what do you believe the research and debate will show regarding radical islamists.

I'll give you a hint...we choose to ignore the first attempt on the WTC, we choose to ignore the attack on the Cole, and we choose to forget attacks on Marines.

AMEMB, Tehran?

Beirut Barracks?

WTC 1?

Khobar Towers?

USS Cole?

9/11?

Is there a pattern here?

We intervened to protect Muslims from Christian (Bosnia) and Islamic (Iranian) aggression/oppression, and liberated Afghanistan from the Taliban. What did we get for it?

TR

Intentions + capabilities = problem. True.

Intentions + demographics = bigger problem. (IMO)


Consider the population characteristics and growth of predominantly Islamic nations, factor in their intentions, then compare the demographics of Western nations.

Demographics is destiny.

Pete and T-Rock
 

Sir,

Yes, my fear comment was directed toward Mr. Paine and only him. For the simple reason, while folks here often disagree on issues, debate is thought out and respectful. I freely admit I have learned from both you and T-Rock, and will go read up on Major Coughlin as per his suggestion.

Specifically, I question the efficacy of citing pagan moon god references, claiming I read Islamic text, thus I have the answer, and emotionally telling another man to STFU for disagreeing with you. Given the depth and intellectual firepower of this forum there are better ways to make one's point.

I don't know the answer to your question about Major Gant. I do know it took guts for him to write that paper, and he is one of the few people articulating a solution on a topic we are all concerned with.

FWIW, in the spring of 1999, after India test fired an Agni II, my forecast was that a coalition of states (what Bush the Elder latter labeled "the axis of evil") was going to drag the planet into a global war after Pakistan and India nuked each other. In this scenario, Iraq would use WMDs against Israel and the United States, someone was going to detonate something in Eastern Europe, and the DPRK was going to attack ROK.

From the stares I received from a classroom of undergraduates, I got the sense that people didn't really care what I thought. (How little things have changed.:()During the Cold War there was a running debate among diplomatic historians that America's responses to international events after 1945 were too narrowly focused on the 'lessons' of the Second World War. (In general, the ups and downs of 'summitry' [i.e., personal diplomacy], in particular the conferences held in Munich, Tehran, Yalta, and Potsdam.) Similarly, American military historians frequently pointed out that the United States seemed intent on refighting its last war, that the general public placed too much emphasis on World War II as 'the Good War,' paid too little attention to the Eastern front, romanticized the military effectiveness of Nazi Germany, and under appreciated the military effectiveness of the United States.
I have no idea.

One hot spring day in the early 1990s, Robert Divine, while going over page after page of a bibliography/reading list on the history of American foreign relations, pointed out how the Spanish Civil War, once the most contentious topic of political and historical debate among Americans, had since faded into obscurity in the United States.

His graduate students looked up from their furious note taking, confused frowns on their faces. He did not specifically mention Chevy Chase's running joke on Saturday Night Live, but that's what came to at least one student's mind. The moment of levity quickly vanished as the stress of understanding his comments (is he saying we do or do not have to read this particular book) was compounded by the thought that what is vitally important today may not be tomorrow.Of late, I wonder when was this choice made? After these attacks occurred? Or was the choice made when the American people picked Ronald W. Reagan over James E. Carter, Jr.? (The greatest 'failure' of his presidency was Carter's inability to make a convincing case for his vision of American power. If one plows through his public remarks dating back to the 1976 presidential campaign, one can find ample evidence that he envisioned the geostrategic environment that America faces today.)

Lots of words by lots of politicians.
On April 15, 1986, 300 bombs and 48 missles spoke loudly.

Didn't have too many problems from gaddafi thereafter.
Some people don't understand anything but force.

For better and for worse, American strategy is formed largely in the arena of political culture. Does dismissing this influence help or hinder one's ability to understand and to influence American strategy?
IMO, your assessment of Operation ELDORADO CANYON over looks both the operation's diplomatic and political contexts* as well as the destruction of Pan American flight 103 in 1988.

__________________________________________________ ________
* Edward Schumacher, "The United States and Libya," Foreign Affairs 65:2 (winter 1986/86); Robert Oakley, "International Terrorism," Foreign Affairs 65:3 (special issue, 1986); Mark E. Kosnik, "The Military Response to Terrorism," Naval War College Review (spring 2000): 13-39.

I suppose people such as this soldier don't count in your view?

True.

And others held candlelight vigils for those that were killed.

http://www.time.com/time/europe/photoessays/vigil/

Nidal Malik Hasan
 

Nidal Malik Hasan was an American Soldier who was also a Muslim.

Going tit-for-tat is a useless game.

I agree that it is useless. It's just as useless as saying 1.2 billion people should be judged as a whole due to the actions of those who we are actually fighting.

Judging people as individuals, based on their specific actions, seems like it would be much more helpful.

If we accept the notion that we can judge the many by their silence over the actions of the few, are we willing to accept similar judgments passed on us?

Individual people with a............
 

Individual people with a collective religion that does not allow them to be individuals - religion related.

In a world with complete and accurate information, perhaps. In one with incomplete, contradictory, and ambiguous information, the approach remains an unavailable ideal.

If I can say that 90% of a hypothetical group are a problem, then 10% are not a problem, then we are faced with the problem of how to filter out the different subgroups. As matters stand, we are unable to do this.

Keep in mind that even in a courtroom environment, some innocent people are convicted, and some guilty ones escape justice. It seems impractical to pursue even that level of accuracy.

So...MOO, YMMV...we either fight and accept that some innocents will be inconvenienced, hurt, and killed, or we embrace defeat. I suspect defeat will be remarkably uncomfortable. Therefore my conclusion is clear.