Had to squeeze in a last one, Noah - great response.
Submitted by Michel (United States), Jan 15, 2007 at 22:11
Noah – I tip my hat once again in salute.
Our debate was refreshing and a testimonial for the quality of our system allowing us to disagree at times profusely, but never leave the realm of mutual respect. I really do not intend to "have the last word", but your excellent response, which made me smile, oftentimes nod in agreement and otherwise reflect and doubt some of my own logic, motivated me to iron my own wrinkles out a bit further. I will try hard to not repeat myself, but add a couple of other, fresh aspects.
Yes, it has been refreshing. And certainly a lot more interesting than debating people like Avenger or Mo, who know nothing outside of the propaganda they've been indoctrinated into.
I actually applauded Avenger for at least trying to give it a shot with more than just the cliché one –liners.
Now - Look at all the responses, man. Left a bitter taste in my mouth - talking about the so often proclaimed civility. ......not.
The thing is, I simply don't see how to avoid adjectives like "demented" and "depraved", because the teachings of Islam and the practice thereof are just that...demented and depraved by any civilized standard.
I wish I could listen to our local Imams during their "sermons" in their mosques. Are they still applying the Koran to the letter? Has anyone here actually had a chance to do that? I really hoped to hear from an average US practicing Muslim. If I saw for myself, then maybe I'd go and use the vocabulary you mention.
I don't agree that it would take 50-100 years. I'd say more like 15-20 tops.
No, I'd say the migratory attack is by far the greater threat. Here's why.
I accept your entire rationale as plausible and for the sake of the argument as fact. Having said that, you belay your own strategy of banning and deportation. Your paragraph quite actually mounts a ton of evidence for my position, declaring the above strategy as not feasible or pragmatic.
Not to mention that such a strategy would outright dismiss the current political, legal, cultural frame conditions, upon which such drastic action would have to be initiated.
Just one aspect: Our own legal system could and will in such a situation be successfully used to prevent such. Decades of lawsuits would ensue, instigated no just by Muslims, but by ACLU and the likes. And that is just our own legal system. Noah – I could write a book as to why banning and deportation is surreal.
There is a distinction between them, but not one of utter relevance, from where I'm standing. Saudi Arabia for example may seem positively benign compared to Iran, but in reality they are doing as much as or perhaps more then even Iran when it comes to supporting and spreading terror. We claim Jordan is our "ally", but all that means is that Jordan's somewhat secular government is cooperating with us to some small degree. Polls taken there show that the people in the street hate us, they hate Israel, and 88% of them believe in committing violence against civilians. It's a matter of degrees, but evil is evil!
Yipeehh, there is an inch of concession. Let me work with it.
Relevance is in the eye of the beholder, since, depending on the strategist evaluating the "other side", one tiny crack in the armor can be considered as entry point or irrelevant. The gap between our views is not that huge - I simply see Jordan or Turkey as entry point for my strategy of applying some sort of positive domino theory. I do not argue your polls or facts, as even these countries have a long way to go still.
And – by the way - I personally consider Saudi Arabia as one of the most dangerous and hideous of the middle eastern governments, deserving a very decisive and strong, if not intrusive approach almost to the level of what I promote vs. IRAN. I won't go into detail, why I feel so strongly about them, but offer a distilled one liner instead: I'd rather see an open, straightforward, predictable enemy and know what I am dealing with, than a so called ally who says one thing and does another.
A vast majority of terrorists originate from there and I dare to venture that >50% of the financial support for terrorist networks or militant ISLAM could be traced back to this so wonderful friend. The regime should be toppled and fundamentally and intrusively "reformed", as many root causes for fundamental ISLAM originate from right there. The Macchiavellism demonstrated by Western Govs towards this decadent regime makes me sick.A breeding ground for rich spoiled decadent Osamas. There is no excuse and no applicable rational explanation for such Muslims developing into mass murderers.Those were no kids experience poverty or oppression or indoctrination. They represent the absolute worst human kind has to offer - scum sucking bottom feeders.
Using your analogy, I'd say because Japan prides itself on honor and upholding its word, whereas the Muslims are mandated by their religion to lie to us, and they have proven to be totally without honor and actually proud of breaking their word and lying. They simply cannot be trusted.
You make a good argument here. Will you however also accept as historical fact, that the prevalent feeling of the Japanese before and during WWI bordered hate towards the US to the extent of fanatism? How could that general feeling (lets not forget Hiroshima) be converted towards a fundamentally positive acceptance of democracy and western world core values? I am not just talking about "honoring their word", but more so about a 180 degree turnaround in their general population. All that only via a couple of decades of "counter-conditioning". I used that as evidence for our potential to implement the very same for instance in Jordan.
That's my point. It is starting already. Has been for at least 6 years now. We have schoolbooks paid for by Saudi Arabia and kids in our public schools are forced...yes, forced...to fast, dress up like Muslims, and say Muslim prayer in school for Ramadan, in order to "learn about Islam".
I resent such as passionately, as you do, Noah. All the talks about re-establishing the school prayer, the many financial freedoms, any church, cult or religion gets here to build expensive schools and indoctrinate their children, to the extent that some of them enter college, denying evolution and science any merits and still chanting that human kind started with Adam and Eve. Lack of public school support with schools here in South LA reminding me of third world countries….the silent erosion of separation of church and state as a fundament of a stable democracy especially here in the US is sickening indeed.
I advocate: eliminate all tax incentives for any such entities. Monitor any Church for the contents of its preachings. You'd be amazed how easy that could be done with our technology.
True, but we all did come from oppressive cultures, and many were sounding off even before they came to America. The Muslims enjoy plenty of emotional, political, and executive support.
Something doesn't add up here.
Heck - I could not agree with you more. Our own political system is corrupt in the true sense of the word. Spoiled, perverted. It opens the doors wide for radicalization, indoctrination and intolerance.
The problem here is that in no way do we have the resources to bug the homes of 2 to 6 MILLION Muslims, all the various restaurants..., all the mosques and madrassahs, and the parks where their kids hang out, etc. It's just too much. It would be more effective to simply force them to leave. Where the enemy is not, he cannot hurt you.
Allright – a) I think we have the resources and technology, b), I'd like to see a doable way to "force them out". This time I challenge you to outline a feasible campaign to that effect. How would you deport, ban?
They can easily be denied access. Closing our borders is within our power, if we had people in charge willing to do what's needed. Removing them can also work. We rounded up the Japanese in WWII. We can easily round up the Muslims and the illegal Mexicans. Would some insist on remaining and resist? Yes. Would some have to be killed in the process? Absolutely. Tough. It's called "personal responsibility". You take responsibility for your actions. We give them 30 days to get their things and get out, or they will be arrested and forced out. If any of them choose to stay and fight, they chose their own fate. Freedom of choice.
Really? How do you suggest to protect a border of rugged terrain, thousands of miles long? Not even the Eastern Germans, massively walling of the land, were able to prevent people from leaving or entering, and they shot to kill. Ideas can not be stopped at the borders.
Look, we split the atom, we put a man on the moon, we've re-routed giant rivers and terra-formed entire areas of land. We've sent probes to the far reaches of the universe. We defeated the greatest military machine in modern history (Hitler's Nazis). We can surely round up a group of people and get rid of them.
Okay – How do you suggest to "round up a (HUUUGE) group of people to entertain such drastic measures, if we can't even round up a representative group for any standard ballot or proposition? Average voter participation in the political process throughout the Western World around 10 - 25%? It does not reflect reality, I am afraid. Not gonna happen. It would take visionary leaders with immense charisma to turn that ship around.
As for forcing them to change, that's up to them too. If they have the guts and the brains, they can fix their religion once they arrive back in their homelands. If they reform and civilize their death cult into a normal religion, they are welcome back. If they don't, then let them all live in Islamic countries and kill one another. Like Susan said, pass the popcorn! ;-)
Forgive me, but I'd rather eat my popcorn during a funny movie.
I am going to go on a limb here and take a risk, Noah………….I am using my real name here, so ...
PTSD is caused mainly by that. The smell, sound and visions of that haunt witnesses of such for the rest of their days. If one can do anything, even denouncing to let Shiites and Sunni massacre each other, to avoid ever again to have to see it, such people will take a stand…….they are in a way unable to do anything else, other wise they lose any remaining belief in themselves or their principles. A matter of self-preservation and maintenance of some level of sanity.
It is why they try to ask to use caution and consideration, when calling for war or misery. There is nothing pure, heroic or great about killing. Its ugly, it stinks, is a monster which must be avoided at all cost. Where the ultimate weapon in our arsenal of our civilized world must be used to protect the lesser evil or the greater good, , it must be done serenely, humbly and with the appreciation of the fact that there will be no victors, but only losers.
They are not willing to sacrifice one single innocent child throughout the middle east as collateral damage, unless all other means have been exhausted first. The day we (or Israel) may be forced to nuke IRAN is going to be a day of historic tragedy. A day of global sorrow and most definitely no reason for any jokes.
They're definitely workable and effective. Best solution we have. The problem is of course, having the will to do so. That's why no solution will work...we do not acknowledge reality and we do not have the guts or the will to do what needs doing.
For above argumentation, I'd put a bullet through my head, if that was true. The vicious circle of action and reaction, violence and revenge we experience for instance in the middle east can simply not be broken by adding insult to injury. Noah – just my personal feeling.
No slamming at all. It's been nice talking with you. I hope you keep an eye on these forums, and if I get any information, I'll be sure to send it your way. :-)
As Swiss living in the US ( and in a few months proudly accepting citizenship) I kind of follow the CH principle of "Armed Neutrality". I light of that I will continue to educate myself, learn and grow, while stocking up on food, water and oiling my weapons.
In other words: While I will refrain from telling people what they should think or believe in, I'll never be a passive subject to any form of indoctrination from any direction, cult, movement or religion.
My Definition of Democracy: My freedom ends, where yours begins. Ideally with a buffer zone in between.
Ironically I fenced off several acres of my property, including surveillance and sensors .Feels darn good - I must admit. Insofar, - I seem to share some of your concerns, haha.
Guess, Susan and the likes will call me now a paranoid schizophrenic, relativist mumbo-jumbo, pacifist, Muslim lover. Oh well.
Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".
Reader comments (2097) on this item
Comment on this item
You can help support Daniel Pipes' work by making a tax-deductible donation to the Middle East Forum. Daniel J. Pipes