ELECTION 2008 | The Pub | The Field Mess | The Staff College | Bookmark WAB



Go Back   World Affairs Board > General Forums > 2008 US Presidential Election
Register FAQ WAB RSS Feed Forum GuidelinesMembers List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Greetings, and welcome to the World Affairs Board!

The World Affairs Board is one of the premier forums for the discussion of the pressing geopolitical issues of our time. Topics include foreign & defense policy, international security, military developments, weapons proliferation, terrorism, international strategic affairs, and politics. Our membership includes many from military, defense industry, and government backgrounds with expert knowledge on a wide range of topics. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so why not register a World Affairs Board account and join our community today?
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
Old 01-23-2007, 18:16 PM   #121 (permalink)
gunnut
Senior Contributor
 
gunnut's Avatar
 
Join Date: 01-27-06
Location: DPRK, Democratik People's Republik of Kalifornia
Posts: 10,274
Country:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Deioces View Post
they make it sound like its a crime to be a muslim even if your not one. its the new red scare.
Muslims have a poor track record.
__________________
"Only Nixon can go to China." -- Old Vulcan proverb.
gunnut is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-23-2007, 20:29 PM   #122 (permalink)
sirpuddingfoot
Regular
 
Join Date: 01-03-07
Location: St. Paul, MN
Posts: 119
Country:
The beauty (or lack thereof) of the situation, is that we (the U.S.) are really between a rock and a hard place.

Sure, the actions of a relatively small proportion of extremists acting in the name of Islam has a much greater effect than the words of many who do speak out against it.

Yes, there are many more Muslims who would rather have world peace than would like to saw the heads off of any/all Americans. But, the actions of the few who would rather saw heads off proverbially speak louder than the words of the many (thank you media--all of you). News is sold on shock and drama: we're more likely to watch a news program reporting atrocities than one reporting the results of a volunteer program; that's just the way it works.

Of course, that doesn't lend credence to the argument that Islam is by and large a religion of extremists. As the product of an evangelical christian church (which I have abandoned and speak out agains), I can certainly speak of the call by Christians to be "intolerant toward world-centric (secular) views" and how the Bible and God are to be the final arbiters. Evangelical Christianity is one of the fastest growing Christian denominations in the world today. It was the evangelical christian (read neo-con) bloc that elected Bush not once, but twice, on the argument that as a "Christian", he would act from faith and truth rather than from secular approval.

But, the other side of the coin lies therein: how bad was the decision to target islamic extremists?

The facts are that it wasn't insane for him to target Al Qaeda and the Taleban. Frankly, despite the arguments that they have their right to freedom of speech, does not mean that we (the secular world) can allow them to commit heinous acts of murder, no matter the cost. It is poor reasoning to judge the value of the actions against these people on a 1:1 basis.

The actions have gone too far in one direction though. The situation in Iraq is largely out of hand. The actions targetting extremists have hit too close to home for many of the Iraqi and other Islamic peoples. It wasn't just "crazy uncle LeRoy" who got taken out by US forces, it was "beloved grandpa Joe". There has been too much emphasis on the military action and 'accomplishments' and not on bridging the gap that exists between those of us who live in a secular society accepting the role of religion to a certain extent, and those of us who live in a religious society who are wary of the intent of people who wish to downplay the importance of religion. If the U.S. had poured half of the cash it put toward military action in Iraq toward developing infrastructure and creating an atmosphere of reconciliation and understanding for the people, I believe much of the current situation could have been avoided.

It would be a travesty if we (again, the U.S) left the region without, at the very least, beginning the process of reconciliation.

While I do not think that military action should be anywhere near the top of the list when it comes to solutions, the world cannot allow the actions of a few become the actions of many. It is apparent that the choice to pursue military action in Iraq has degraded our (the U.S) ability to enact reconciliation and has in fact accomplished just the opposite. A majority in the U.S. has now finally lost hope that reconcilliation can, in fact, take place in the middle east, and they are looking to cut their losses and run; an unfortunate circumstance, but not an unjustified one. Instead, the response should be a call to action by the world-over, not just the U.S. and the U.K.; actions that seek to help the victims of poor choices. It will take far more now than it might have if this had been set in motion long ago. The negative reinforcement of years of hardship enacted upon the Iraqi people indirectly through U.N. sanctions on Saddam Hussein's government have caused the people their to seek out some foundation for value. Unfortunately that foundation has been largely taken over by extremist factions who are not only set against the U.S. (secular ideology in general, of which the U.S. is the prime example) in part, but also against each other. I do not pretend to know in the least how to truly solve this, and I am exceedingly pleased that I do not face the responsibility to do so.

Let's not judge one, or even a few, Muslim(s) (or reportedly one who grew up in a quasi-Muslim household) by the actions of Muslim extremists. That is certainly not justified.
sirpuddingfoot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-23-2007, 20:42 PM   #123 (permalink)
Boltonian
Banished
Regular
 
Join Date: 04-23-06
Location: Bolton, Lancashire, Great Britain
Posts: 119
Isn't Obama the leader of Al Qaeda?

He was when I last checked.


Osama


Obama

Last edited by Boltonian : 01-23-2007 at 20:47 PM.
Boltonian is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-23-2007, 20:46 PM   #124 (permalink)
CMartel
Regular
 
CMartel's Avatar
 
Join Date: 11-25-06
Posts: 94
Country:
Quote:
Let's not judge one, or even a few, Muslim(s) (or reportedly one who grew up in a quasi-Muslim household) by the actions of Muslim extremists. That is certainly not justified.
can we judge islam by the actions of its founder, the gangsta mohammed?
CMartel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-23-2007, 21:13 PM   #125 (permalink)
TopHatter
Administrator
 
TopHatter's Avatar
 
Join Date: 09-03-03
Posts: 9,937
Country:
Send a message via AIM to TopHatter
Quote:
Originally Posted by Boltonian View Post
Isn't Obama the leader of Al Qaeda?
He was when I last checked.
Quote:
Originally Posted by CMartel View Post
can we judge islam by the actions of its founder, the gangsta mohammed?
Enough on that! Both of you.
TopHatter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-23-2007, 23:08 PM   #126 (permalink)
dalem
Lord High Hullabalooster
Senior Contributor
 
dalem's Avatar
 
Join Date: 11-23-04
Location: Columbia Heights, MN
Posts: 8,765
Country:
Quote:
Originally Posted by sirpuddingfoot View Post
Let's not judge one, or even a few, Muslim(s) (or reportedly one who grew up in a quasi-Muslim household) by the actions of Muslim extremists. That is certainly not justified.
As I have made clear a dozen times, I do not judge Muslims as a group by the actions of Muslim terrorists, I judge Muslims as a group by their INACTION in response.

They disappoint me.

-dale
dalem is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-24-2007, 00:33 AM   #127 (permalink)
steven lloyd
Regular
 
steven lloyd's Avatar
 
Join Date: 01-19-07
Location: british columbia
Posts: 116
Country:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stan187 View Post
I've never seen anyone seriosuly suggesting to put all American Muslims in internment camps on WAB.
No, I’ve never seen anyone seriously suggesting to put all American Muslims in internment camps on WAB either. What I said though is that it seems that what some posters on this board are “almost suggesting by inference” is the establishment of interment camps. In other words, it is not going to take some posters here too many more steps to make that jump in thinking.

What would I suggest? Well, in the first place I’m not going to pretend that I have some profound answers to the challenges of terrorism that face the United States – and the rest of the world. I do believe some form of military action is often (and currently) appropriate, and despite the mess that exists in Iraq today, I do not believe the withdrawal of American troops at this point would be prudent. Likewise, I believe Canadian troops should stay the course in Afghanistan. At this point I do not see any immediate or easy solution.

It would be nice if some of these people in third world countries had never become so marginalized (by western corporate expansionism) as to be susceptible to the recruitment by extremists, and in the long run, I believe continued efforts to help the regular citizens rebuild their countries and economies is the best and most worthwhile course. Obviously I recognize the challenge in doing this given the continued activities of the extremists. Still, we (the “western” world) need to win (not coerce) these people to our vision of freedom and democracy.

I would suggest that at an individual level, here at home, we not buy into our fears and engage in prejudicial thinking. It is my strong opinion that by doing so and ostracizing and further isolating minority groups we are creating the conditions here on this continent that were (and are) used by extremists to recruit members overseas. By buying into and acting out on our fear, we will contribute to the growth of extremist movements.

Some posters here challenge the inaction of regular Joe, a Muslim immigrant just trying to earn a living, pay his taxes and raise his family. He speaks out against the actions of extremists, but what more would we expect of him? He is also responsible for the welfare of his wife and family. Are we suggesting he quit his job and join the army? Are we suggesting he go back to his homeland to work as an American spy? Is it not enough he publicly renounces the actions of the extremists? What more are we doing? Should he sacrifice more because he is Muslim?

These marginalized groups don’t hate the west because they are jealous. They hate the west because they feel they are being used and exploited by the west – and there is some merit in that assumption. And feeling used and exploited they are easy pickings for extremist recruiters.
steven lloyd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-24-2007, 00:35 AM   #128 (permalink)
steven lloyd
Regular
 
steven lloyd's Avatar
 
Join Date: 01-19-07
Location: british columbia
Posts: 116
Country:
Quote:
Originally Posted by sirpuddingfoot View Post
The beauty (or lack thereof) of the situation, is that we (the U.S.) are really between a rock and a hard place.

Sure, the actions of a relatively small proportion of extremists acting in the name of Islam has a much greater effect than the words of many who do speak out against it.

Yes, there are many more Muslims who would rather have world peace than would like to saw the heads off of any/all Americans. But, the actions of the few who would rather saw heads off proverbially speak louder than the words of the many (thank you media--all of you). News is sold on shock and drama: we're more likely to watch a news program reporting atrocities than one reporting the results of a volunteer program; that's just the way it works.

Of course, that doesn't lend credence to the argument that Islam is by and large a religion of extremists. As the product of an evangelical christian church (which I have abandoned and speak out agains), I can certainly speak of the call by Christians to be "intolerant toward world-centric (secular) views" and how the Bible and God are to be the final arbiters. Evangelical Christianity is one of the fastest growing Christian denominations in the world today. It was the evangelical christian (read neo-con) bloc that elected Bush not once, but twice, on the argument that as a "Christian", he would act from faith and truth rather than from secular approval.

But, the other side of the coin lies therein: how bad was the decision to target islamic extremists?

The facts are that it wasn't insane for him to target Al Qaeda and the Taleban. Frankly, despite the arguments that they have their right to freedom of speech, does not mean that we (the secular world) can allow them to commit heinous acts of murder, no matter the cost. It is poor reasoning to judge the value of the actions against these people on a 1:1 basis.

The actions have gone too far in one direction though. The situation in Iraq is largely out of hand. The actions targetting extremists have hit too close to home for many of the Iraqi and other Islamic peoples. It wasn't just "crazy uncle LeRoy" who got taken out by US forces, it was "beloved grandpa Joe". There has been too much emphasis on the military action and 'accomplishments' and not on bridging the gap that exists between those of us who live in a secular society accepting the role of religion to a certain extent, and those of us who live in a religious society who are wary of the intent of people who wish to downplay the importance of religion. If the U.S. had poured half of the cash it put toward military action in Iraq toward developing infrastructure and creating an atmosphere of reconciliation and understanding for the people, I believe much of the current situation could have been avoided.

It would be a travesty if we (again, the U.S) left the region without, at the very least, beginning the process of reconciliation.

While I do not think that military action should be anywhere near the top of the list when it comes to solutions, the world cannot allow the actions of a few become the actions of many. It is apparent that the choice to pursue military action in Iraq has degraded our (the U.S) ability to enact reconciliation and has in fact accomplished just the opposite. A majority in the U.S. has now finally lost hope that reconcilliation can, in fact, take place in the middle east, and they are looking to cut their losses and run; an unfortunate circumstance, but not an unjustified one. Instead, the response should be a call to action by the world-over, not just the U.S. and the U.K.; actions that seek to help the victims of poor choices. It will take far more now than it might have if this had been set in motion long ago. The negative reinforcement of years of hardship enacted upon the Iraqi people indirectly through U.N. sanctions on Saddam Hussein's government have caused the people their to seek out some foundation for value. Unfortunately that foundation has been largely taken over by extremist factions who are not only set against the U.S. (secular ideology in general, of which the U.S. is the prime example) in part, but also against each other. I do not pretend to know in the least how to truly solve this, and I am exceedingly pleased that I do not face the responsibility to do so.

Let's not judge one, or even a few, Muslim(s) (or reportedly one who grew up in a quasi-Muslim household) by the actions of Muslim extremists. That is certainly not justified.

This is an excellent post. Very well thought out.
steven lloyd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-24-2007, 00:44 AM   #129 (permalink)
Parihaka
Moderator
 
Parihaka's Avatar
 
Join Date: 11-10-04
Location: Te Ika a Maui
Posts: 10,016
Country:
Quote:
Originally Posted by steven lloyd View Post
No, I’ve never seen anyone seriously suggesting to put all American Muslims in internment camps on WAB either. What I said though is that it seems that what some posters on this board are “almost suggesting by inference” is the establishment of interment camps. In other words, it is not going to take some posters here too many more steps to make that jump in thinking.
:Sighs: Would you care to actually highlight which posts "infer" internment camps, and which posters you are claiming would make 'that jump"? Or are you simply posing strawmen?
Parihaka is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-24-2007, 01:42 AM   #130 (permalink)
Officer of Engineers
Military Professional
Moderator
Scotch taster
 
Join Date: 08-06-03
Posts: 17,113
Country:
So basically, Steve L and Sir Pudding don't got the convictions to act but to lecture.
__________________
Chimo
Officer of Engineers is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-24-2007, 03:06 AM   #131 (permalink)
TopHatter
Administrator
 
TopHatter's Avatar
 
Join Date: 09-03-03
Posts: 9,937
Country:
Send a message via AIM to TopHatter
Quote:
Originally Posted by Officer of Engineers View Post
So basically, Steve L and Sir Pudding don't got the convictions to act but to lecture.
*shrug* Which one is safer?


(I seem to be shrugging a lot lately, my apologies)
TopHatter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-24-2007, 03:49 AM   #132 (permalink)
dalem
Lord High Hullabalooster
Senior Contributor
 
dalem's Avatar
 
Join Date: 11-23-04
Location: Columbia Heights, MN
Posts: 8,765
Country:
Quote:
Originally Posted by steven lloyd View Post
...long post...
How about our discussion sir? Which of my points or positions do you consider ill-informed or ignorant? Let's get specific.

-dale
dalem is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-24-2007, 04:59 AM   #133 (permalink)
Parihaka
Moderator
 
Parihaka's Avatar
 
Join Date: 11-10-04
Location: Te Ika a Maui
Posts: 10,016
Country:
Quote:
Originally Posted by TopHatter View Post
*shrug* Which one is safer?


(I seem to be shrugging a lot lately, my apologies)
I thought it was a twitch
Parihaka is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-24-2007, 08:58 AM   #134 (permalink)
TopHatter
Administrator
 
TopHatter's Avatar
 
Join Date: 09-03-03
Posts: 9,937
Country:
Send a message via AIM to TopHatter
Quote:
Originally Posted by dalem View Post
How about our discussion sir? Which of my points or positions do you consider ill-informed or ignorant? Let's get specific.

-dale
I've already asked him to respond to specific points and positions. Perhaps you'll have better luck. *shrug*

Quote:
Originally Posted by Parihaka View Post
I thought it was a twitch
It is. I grabbed a live wire a few days ago.
TopHatter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-24-2007, 13:47 PM   #135 (permalink)
sirpuddingfoot
Regular
 
Join Date: 01-03-07
Location: St. Paul, MN
Posts: 119
Country:
Quote:
Originally Posted by dalem View Post
As I have made clear a dozen times, I do not judge Muslims as a group by the actions of Muslim terrorists, I judge Muslims as a group by their INACTION in response.

They disappoint me.

-dale
I certainly hope that you did not take my post as an accusation that you (specifically) did!

I might go as far as to say that you, too, are a victim of the 'news', e.g. that you haven't done your homework on this.

There are a significant number of organizations that have spoken out against the actions of extremist Islamic sects. One potential link for this is Muslims against terrorism and extremism: Free Muslims Coalition. Like I pointed out in my previous post, it is quite obvious that the 'words' of many have been quashed by the actions of few. Is a greater response (and even action) on their part desirable? Certainly. Just as greater action toward reconcilliation is desirable on ours.

The vapid and vacuous misconstrual of the Islamic mindset and their expected reaction to intervention by the current U.S. administration, who to-date have maintained that military action (whether building infrastructure or providing security) alone should create stability, strikes me as largely close-minded, authoritarian, and makes me wonder whether or not the purported reasons are in fact the actual reasons. It is as if the Islamic world is simply to look at the U.S. and automatically believe that the U.S. not only has the answers, but also is the answer to all their problems. Whether or not this is actually the case, though, is not the point. The point is that they are not obligated to view the U.S. intervention in this light.

Quote:
So basically, Steve L and Sir Pudding don't got the convictions to act but to lecture.
To a certain extent you are correct. The initial actions in Afghanistan were, for the most part reasonable. The extended actions, spurriously connected-though not without being thoroughly pounded into our minds, in Iraq were not.

Quote:
can we judge islam by the actions of its founder, the gangsta mohammed?
Only to an extent. Would you agree that the viewpoints of any religion/culture can change over time? Taken in a cultural context and updated for today's world, Islam is not extremist by any means. The fundamentalists are the ones you need to watch out for... the same goes for Christianity (Just watch "Jesus Camp" if you don't believe me).
sirpuddingfoot is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply




Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Mullah, Mosque & State Abisafyan International Politics 16 05-08-2007 12:25 PM
Video Documentary: Do You Know Who Barack Obama Is? jetsdonwankey Pics & Videos 0 03-05-2007 00:45 AM
Sure, Barack, you didn’t vote for war in Iraq. That was the easy part Shek 2008 US Presidential Election 11 02-24-2007 08:54 AM
Obama declares he's running for president MrFirst 2008 US Presidential Election 44 02-22-2007 02:23 AM
Mullah Omar 'hiding in Pakistan Jay Current Affairs 5 01-24-2007 17:52 PM


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 22:04 PM.


Rochen is the business hosting sponsor of World Affairs Board and a provider of reseller web hosting serv