Amy,

I couldn't agree more. That's why President Obama has stopped well short of a military regime change policy. Though the folks at Fox News are acting as though he is offering a mixed message and a muddled foreign policy, he is on exactly the same page as you, I, and Romesh Ratnesar seem to be. I invite you to watch the actual justification for our actions there rather than relying on cleverly edited clips of it that would suggest that we are setting regime change as a military goal.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2011/03/28/remarks-president-address-nation-libya

Then the obvious answer is to nuke the site from orbit.

It's the only way to be sure.

Who elected us to run Libya? The same rationale comes a little too close to justifying a 9/11 to make me comfortable.

It is Libya's problem. Leave us alone, we'll leave you alone. If you don't leave us alone, brian's solution applies.

Let the UN do Libya. I know, they can't. So the next question to ask is "Why do we give them money?"

Don't forget the followup brian - "Nuke 'em till they glow, then shoot 'em in the dark".

After the first Gulf War, a U.N.-sanctioned no-fly zone over northern Iraq kept the country's Kurdish population safe from Saddam Hussein.

A less than convincing example. That went for 10 years - until Hussein was removed by outside intervention. The hoped-for inside coup never happened. Are NATO and the US prepared to provide air cover over Benghazi for the next 10 years? What's the plan?

I'm more of the Andrew Jackson school. Try to avoid fights - but if you get in one, finish it. Don't muck about.

Sadly, I'm starting to believe the "soft bigotry of low expectations" crowd on the hope of representative self-government in the middle east. It seems they are culturally predisposed to live in dictatorships, and until that changes, then it's going to be one failed coup after another.

Great article Amy, however, when you mention the Bosnian conflict, you forgot to mention Canada having "forces" there too. We were there for almost 20 years.

http://www.torontosun.com/news/canada/2010/03/29/13394951-qmi.html

I find it interesting that a nation possesing the international label of "Global PeaceKeepers" has been under so much fire recently for abuses of power while in the countries they fight so hard to "protect", spending billions along the way and not doing much to "protect" anyone, while simaltaneously depending on the U.S. to protect THEMSELVES!

The spread of democracy is almost a cancer, when you consider that aot of the people in most of the countries the U.S. and Canada (cause like it or not we are "America's little brother" when it comes to all things military...)are "liberating" don't WANT to be liberated, have absolutely NO wish to live in a democratic society, and don't understand the ideals of one in the first place.

We're the ones with the problem with the way they live, not them. Sure, there are the rebels, and the peace fighters, and the civilians who are tired of living in a dictatorship. BUT, if they were really so tired of living the way in which they were raised, the whole nation would be rising up, as in Libya.

If they were really sick and tired of thier situation, they'd change it! These people are capable of surviving some of the harshest environmental and political conditions in the world, and they can't oust a dictator? But they can blow the twin towers? Seriously?

Spreading democracy is like giving instant technology to a cave man. You might be able to give the cave man a gun, and explain how to use it, and he might just get the basic jist of it, but you just KNOW the second you turn around he's gonna blow his own head off!

Angel -

The problem here is how do we stop them attacking us because they not only don't want freedom for themselves, but they don't want it for anyone else either?

In other words, how do you motivate a nihilst to leave you the fuck alone?

You don't. They don't even love their own children, so what can you use as motivation, either positive or negative, to keep them from killing innocent people?
Anyone who posits that "of course they love their children!" I call bullshit. Noone who actually loves a child straps a bomb to them and cheers, counts bodies, and throws candies while celabrating the carnage. Noone who loves their child allows their pre-pubescent daughter to be sold into a marriage that is only 1 gnats eyelash away from slavery. Noone who loves their child allows the heinous clitidorectomies that are so common in the islamic world. Noone who truly loves their child would allow a system that abuses and murders rape victims to stand unchallenged.
Brian and LTW have it right. Nuke, high orbit, lather rinse repeat.

The old guys with beards who are running the show are not nihilists. Ayatollah Khomeini died peacefully of old age in his bed after a lifetime spent urging others to die for Allah. Ayatollah Khamenei intends to do the same. If he showed up dead face-down in a pile of dogshit on the White House lawn instead, his fellow diaperheads would learn their lesson.

No they wouldn't Martin. They'd simply use it as further "evidence" of the fundamental unworthiness of the filthy kuffir to live.

Someone burns a koran, they slaughter themselves. Newsweek prints a false story about a koran in a toilet, and they slaughter themselves. Someone draws cartoons of their prophet, and they slaughter themselves.

Lesson: If we want to defeat islamism, burn more korans and bring the troops home.

I just KNOW I'm gonna get flamed for this, but here goes.....

"They don't even love their own children"

Kat, I find this a very simplistic view. It's also generalization in the extreme. I recommend you visit this website.

http://www.wherearethechildren.ca/flash/WATCSiteb.html

Go to the section regarding intergenerational impacts. While they do have two very different sets of problems affecting two very different cultures, I believe this will clarify.

Intergenerational impact deals with the idea that what was done and taught to you, particularily when dealing with drugs and violence, is what will seem normal to you. In essence, the town drunk wonders why everyone else is sober? A very simple explanation that doesn't do it justice, but that's why I included the link.

Most parents in Nations that subscribe to radicalism love thier children, they just don't see things the way we do. To die for Allah in Islam to some is a great honour, and if you believe the dogma, what loving parent wouldn't want thier child to live as a hero with God for all eternity? What they don't understand is that they have been brainwashed.

To them, it isn't unloving behaviour, as they are more concerned for thier children's eternal souls rather then their bodies, which is where the gap between ideals lies. Intergenerational impact, culture, and good old fashioned brainwashing leads the parents to do the, to us, inexcusable, which to the radicals seem normal.

Notice I say radicals. I'm sure there are many many many men and women in Iraq and Libya that would rather slice out thier own spleen then see harm come to thier children.

Also, it wasn't so very long ago, less then a hundred years, that Western and European children were NOT valued even half as much as today. Parents had large families assuming that some of their children would die and they needed extra hands for the homestead. Also, in 19 century Europe, children of the poor were sent to workhouses, the idea bieng that they should be grateful to perform slavery in return for a cold floor to sleep on and maggot ridden food to eat. Some were orphans, but most had parents! Did thier parents not love them, or was it a case of the parents following the norm? In the website I shared it discusses the abuse of native children. Did the parents who sent thier children not love them, or were they doing what was normal to them?

Just as in the case of Womens Rights, radical Islamists are WAAAAAY behind the curve, but will get there eventually, if we don't force it on them. If we push them, they will push back.

"Noone who truly loves their child would allow a system that abuses and murders rape victims to stand unchallenged. "

Well what do you do when they bring bazookas and all you have is a butter knife?!?!

Even the parents who WANT to change things know better then to rock the boat. What good does a dead parent do for thier child? What good is a father to his child if that child has to fend for the father because the militia cut off both his legs and an arm? Your opinion is simplistic in that it implies that they have the choice, means and ability to fight.

Tell you what, you bring your NAVY SEALS, I'll bring my Mounties, and we'll see who wins. Your SEALS would hand my Mounties their ass on a platter, and it wouldn't be because my Mounties didn't want to fight. It would be because your SEALS outman, outgun, and out-train my Mounties, because my government is run a bunch of sissy-assed pacifist Liberals (even tho technically it's the Tories now...)who would rather pay to make all of our construction workers bilingual and keep the surplus while contracting our Military out to you guys, then to decently arm and train our military. (Green Camo in the desert anyone?)

And Brian, my husband has the same view. I disagree with him too. I think that if North America stopped trying to shove our culture down everyone's throats, and stopped interfering in things we have no business in, then they wouldn't feel a need to attack us in the first place. I think this is a case of defence through offence, just as North America is trying to do.

"Someone burns a koran, they slaughter themselves. Newsweek prints a false story about a koran in a toilet, and they slaughter themselves. Someone draws cartoons of their prophet, and they slaughter themselves."

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! Too funny! Love it!

If we can't justify going big, and I mean "brian" big, we ought not go. Like Viet Nam, politicians will pussy foot around while good young men die. You too Obama.

"This is a sick "religion,"

I am not a fan of religion -- the irrational and evidence-free belief in god -- but of all the religions out there, Islam is the worst -- poisonous, deadly, and against most of the values I hold dear.

Aren't most religions sick? As in terminally ill? Look to the Vatican if you need proof.I disagree with Islam bieng "the worst" as Roman Catholicism is responsible for most of the atrocities committed in Gods name. E.G. the Crusades, Residential Schooling, and rape in the name of a "good marriage" (Non consumation clause, anyone?). They go way back in time, not just in recent history. And Islam is not the only religion to treat women as chattel. The Catholics, Anglicans, and Protestants are all guilty of the same thing, except in our society it was deemed as "chivalry".

Yes, to us Islam is disgusting and reprehensible, but my point is that if we were born and raised as Muslim, none of this would seem sick to us, rather just normal everyday happenings. It isn't some deviant gene that causes them to act this way. It's the Nature vs Nurture argument all over again.

Wow. Angel, really? Catholics. Which century do you live in?

Kat, I find this a very simplistic view. It's also generalization in the extreme. I recommend you visit this website.
Angel, just so you know, I stopped reading at the word "simplistic". I don't give a flying, flaming rats ass if you think I'm being "simplistic". Because some things really are 'simple'.
Psychobabble doesn't impress me, I don't care if you were raised to believe that tinfoil hats are the height of fashion, that doesn't make it so. Same as what ever emotion that suicide bombers dear old Mum is feeling as she double checks his vest, she may call it 'love', but it ain't. It's hatred, hatred of anything and everything that she isn't, or maybe, of what she is, but there is nothing left but hatred.

Angel, just so you know, I stopped reading at the word "simplistic". I don't give a flying, flaming rats ass if you think I'm being "simplistic". Because some things really are 'simple'.
Psychobabble doesn't impress me, I don't care if you were raised to believe that tinfoil hats are the height of fashion, that doesn't make it so. Same as what ever emotion that suicide bombers dear old Mum is feeling as she double checks his vest, she may call it 'love', but it ain't. It's hatred, hatred of anything and everything that she isn't, or maybe, of what she is, but there is nothing left but hatred.

So what do you call whatever it is you just babbled at me? You didn't read my whole post, as you just said, so step off and find someone else to rant YOUR hatred at.

And if you hate psycho babble what the hell are you doing on the site, which deals with a helluva lof of psycho babble? You just hate psycho babble that doesn't prove your point.

And Dave B, I just happen to BE a Roman Catholic. Most French Canadians are, about 98% of us. I geuss that makes me old fashioned? I geuss that means I can't use a page from my own cultures history to prove a point cause it isn't the Religion of the Day?

Nice. As we say up here...

Mange le Merde Tapet!

And Brian, my husband has the same view. I disagree with him too. I think that if North America stopped trying to shove our culture down everyone's throats, and stopped interfering in things we have no business in, then they wouldn't feel a need to attack us in the first place. I think this is a case of defence through offence, just as North America is trying to do.

Sorry, that's got nothing to do with it. We've been under attack by muslims since the 1790s (see: Barbary Wars), and we weren't exporting a whole lot to the middle east back then.

Have you read the Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy? The closest parallel to the resurgence of fundamentalist islam that I have ever seen is Krikkit. This was a planet that existed inside a dust cloud, and had no idea that there was a universe. One day they found out that the universe existed and said "Yep. It'll have to go."

That's islam in a nutshell.

And what draws western progressives to their side is the one and only thing they share: their unbridled hatred of existence.

Anel, Islam has been on a militaristic expnstion since they day it was invented. Islam has no just recently risen up with terrorist tactics, Its been going on for centuries - most of the crusades were in response to mulsim expansionism

brian, liberals dont hate existance, they hate themselves and their percived 'privilage'

Angel, I think you got some of your smug on my interwebs, 'cause all I can see of your posts is "blahblah you guys are so stupid blah". I wasn't the one who started my post by calling me names, and then intentionally missing my point, not once, but twice. OK, you want to play dat? here goes.

A pedophile is abused as a child, it's all he knows, thinks it is normal and loving. He grows up to abuse other children. Does he truly "love", or is he a sick, twisted fuck that deserves to go to prison because what he is doing is wrong and just incidentally has no actual relationship to real love?

Does it even matter? Real love is when I would take a bullet before I would let my child come to harm. Their idea of love is sending their kids out to blow up. Real love vs their sick, twisted concept of love. Not even close.
In today's world, there are almost *no* examples of Arab, Muslim or Persian people going on record against Islamist jihadis. Every time someone says "I'm sure they exist" I say other than Ayaan Hirsi Ali, Salman Rushdie, and the less than handfull of others, who are also now considered apostate, WHO ARE THEY? Every single one is under a death sentence, and because of that, and the (here I go being simplistic again) I think, laziness and unconcious agreement of most of the muslim populace, There Are No Others. There Will Be No Others. Whether the majority has been cowed into silence by fear, or is just hedging their bets waiting to see who wins, OR is secretly rooting for the bad guys, I dunno, but we will not see a muslim reformation, ala' Martin Luther. Any poor schmuck that tries will probably end up nailed to the door of the mosque along with his proclamation.
BTW, people who need to go back to the Crusades to justify comparing the Catholic Church to Islam, that's just lame. So much worse than being simplistic, don't you think?

"So, today, here and now, is the Catholic next door yanking your child over the fence, boiling him with a little Swiss chard and eating him for dinner?"

Noooo, the Catholic (priests, nuns, Sunday school teachers, pianists, practically anyone heavily involved in the church) next door is too busy convincing my and any other child he can find that all little boys and girls show him their privates, and of COURSE thats what you do to that thing. See my first post with the "where are the children" link. THIS is why I feel Catholics world wide should band together and lynch mob the pope's ass!!

Brian, haven't read it, but I for sure will look into it. However, my point isn't that Islams are just poor misunderstood little freedom fighters and not the terror inducing irrational mob that they are. And it isn't that they haven't always been. My point is that I feel that the Western World shouldn't be so quick to point it's collective finger, when there are many religions closer to home whose culture, dogma and rituals perpetuate evil in the cloak of God's name. Glass Houses, and all that.

Also, here in Canada we have a large Muslim population due to our PM's inability to change the immigration laws. About half of those are Shiite Muslims and subscribe to Sharia law. The big debate in Canada is whether we should allow them to follow thier own religious laws, or make them follow ours. Most people I've spoken with and articles I've read have the opinion that if you don't want to follow our laws, stay the eff home. The Muslims that do follow Sharia law do make concessions, and try to live within the Charter if it does not affect Sharia law. I've found most Muslims in CANADA (REPEAT CANADA AND NOT IRAQ, IRAN etc...)are very nice, reasonable people, if a little weird.

None of them are demanding their sons sacrifice themselves in the name of Allah, and none are demanding we cleanse Canada of thier enemies. We do have the occasional honour killing in accordance with Sharia law, but we also have the occasional wife who shoots out her husbands kneecaps after that third affair.

You can't generalize, and you can't demand people act according to your own sensibilities.

When the people of Islam tire of living under oppression and tyranny, they will do something about it. Until then, it would behoove us to mind our own effin business. If not, we might just get blown back to Baghdad.

Wow, a french canadian who just happens to be a liberal, what a surprise. It's nice to see the canadians loving their islamic immigrants who, if they have their way, will slowly begin to shape your sociery in their image. Good luck on that future theere angel baby. I prefer we have the holy way now and start kicking these pricks back to saudi arabia where they belong

"french canadian who just happens to be a liberal"

My ronc, you do have a wonderfully ignorant view of the world! If you read my post, I ATTACKED the liberals you idiot! I JUST HAPPEN to be a staunch CONSERVATIVE!

Don't forget your Pepsi and poutine tapet!!

When the people of Islam tire of living under oppression and tyranny, they will do something about it. Until then, it would behoove us to mind our own effin business.

What do you think the constant attacks on Israel and the West are?

They blame the Jews and the West in general for their state of affairs. It's not their fault that they have corrupt autocratic leaders, it's our fault somehow.

How do you combat that?

We do have the occasional honour killing in accordance with Sharia law, but we also have the occasional wife who shoots out her husbands kneecaps after that third affair.
Honestly, I don't believe I have to even address this, but here goes.
Wife shoots husband in western society = illegal, strongly discouraged and frowned upon.
Man kills wife/daughter/sister for 'dishonoring' the family in muslim sharia law culture = not only legal, but demanded.

The Muslims that do follow Sharia law do make concessions, and try to live within the Charter if it does not affect Sharia law.
That's not making concessions, that's keeping your head down til you have enough power to force everyone to do what you want them to do.

Angel, go lay down before you hurt yourself, sweetheart. You seem a little aggitated.

As far as Israel goes, again, that is not our concern. Israel has an army. If they wished to, they could invade any country they chose. They
actually have a VERY LARGE, VERY WELL TRAINED army. They can defend themselves. This is not the case in Libya, where the rebels are so incompetent they are firing bazooka's BACKWARDS! Israel, as far as I'm concerned, can fight it's own battles. We did. We won the first and second world wars (admittedly with some help...)
and we repelled the US army when it tried to invade a century or two ago, with no modern weapons.They can't? The have a better army then we do!

As far as the West, I'm not so sure. I didn't start this thread to defend Islam, merely to point out that Kats opinion was short sighted and a case of "she who is without sin...."

I do agree that the west did have a need to defend itself, but after the initial attacks, and after Hussien was rousted, what reason did the West have to stay? Ostensibly to protect the civilians, but to what end? They eventually need to defend themselves.

Also, as far as I know, and I may be wrong, there have been no major incursions into the West since 2001. None succesful anyway. (Unless you count the underwear bomber, he was very successful at making me laugh. As Jon Stewart said, "Even if the bomb works, there are going to be 72 dissapointed virgins.)

I think we should put Ghaddafi and his ilk in a locked room, give them all rifles, and when they sort it out the winner can go free.

Kat;

Bite me. I work at a computer all day, but
you are rude and ignorant and this is probably why you stay on the internet all day, no one wants to listen to your tripe face to face.

I don't give a sh*t what your opinion is, I've ceased speaking to you and am now debating with civilized, rational members of society. You seem to feel as if I'm attacking you, when I'm merely attacking your illogical opinion that smacks of bigotry. This just shows your limited level of intelligence.

Go play with the kiddies honey, the adults have work to do.

"The Church may, most reprehensibly, look the other way and hide these cases, but it is not church policy to molest children. It is Islam to stone raped women and gays. See the difference?"

Yes I do Amy, and you make a good point, however I feel it IS Church policy. What can they expect when they force the congregation to live in un-natural celibacy? Prisoners rape each other, so is it really such a leap that a Priest, having no recourse, would force himself on a little boy or girl who has no say in the matter?

Angel - you're missing the forest for the trees. It doesn't matter that Israel can take care of itself.

We didn't start this fight. Israel didn't start this fight. We can end it, but nobody is going to be happy with the results.

The problem, in a nutshell, is that 1.5 billion people are living in a pan-Arab "religion" that is really nothing more than a codified totalitarian society predicated on strongmen controlling tribes by pitting them one against the other.

The invasion of Iraq was based upon the idea that if we could upset the applecart and get rid of tribalism, then maybe we would have a possible westernization in the middle east. What's happened instead is that every attempt to create a society based upon individual liberty has resulted in the people voting to be slaves to their tribal overlords.

You can't fix stupid. And in this case, since they are living in the throes of a death cult, you can't contain them either.

Which brings us back to the original question - if we disengage tomorrow, how do we prevent any future attacks? Or are we simply supposed to tolerate it like BOTU wants us to?

Wow, French Canadians won WWII, who knew?
As for no successful incursions, I live in the Southwest, I see the successful incursion every day. I see the stories of korans and prayer rugs found in the desert along our borders, and I can see what illegal immigration has done to our border states, hell even our not so border states.

Yep, I'm a sinner, so I can have absolutely no valid say in the matter. Pffft, I can't even keep a straight face typing that. I really, really can't take serious the fucking "Israel is a big boy, let them take care of themselves, but the Libyans are just scared little savages, we need to SAVE them!" arguement. OH PLEASE!?!?! How about Israel is the only free, democratic, honest to goodness civilized country and our best ally in the armpit of the hellhole of the universe, and as such has earned our respect and every ounce of our defense? How about Libya is the ass end of nowhere and has become what it is because the people there made it what it is, and the only reason to go there is because of it's natural resources?

"The invasion of Iraq was based upon the idea that if we could upset the applecart and get rid of tribalism, then maybe we would have a possible westernization in the middle east"

That was one of my points. The whole Western invasion of Iraq WAS based on Westernizing the East, which is really what's pissing them off in the first place. At least, the war lords and radicals anyway. In my view, the whole "Westernization of the East" is a VERY convenient way to get a hold of the resources while looking like saviours to the civilians. That is, the civilians we don't bomb to hell and back. Really, can you honestly say the Dubya had any reason to give a flying f*ck what happened to little Amir and his family? That he really gives a sh*t who lives and dies in another country when he doesn't care about the people suffering and dying in the streets in his own country?

We CAN'T prevent any future attacks. Just as laying a fire trench in advance won't stop forest fires, bringing the fight to them won't do anything to stop it, it will just escalate it. We can defend ourselves, but since when has starting a war ever ended in anything remotely resembling peace? (Disregarding WWII)

You can't douse a fire with gas. There has GOT to be a better way.

Kat honey, I never would have geussed you were from the south! Such lady like manners you have! Go take a pill and lie down before you have an aneurism. And maybe read a history book.

You can't generalize, and you can't demand people act according to your own sensibilities

Why not? That's what MacArthur did in Japan in 1945 and the Allies in Germany. I think the problem is that this did not happen in Iraq or Afghanistan.

Wow. Just went down to feed and water the horses and all hell breaks out (hell - get it Angel?).

Angel. Bullshit. I have the indelible mark on my soul, as the Catholics say, but I dropped the god bit, therefore, my Catholicism in a fox hole in Viet Nam. Your opinion on abusing kids is bullshit. Actually, there were a few nuns and available ladies in the parish to handle the priest's needs. Most don't do children, just like the rest of society.

K, just noticed some posts right now that I didn't before.

"Angel. Bullshit. I have the indelible mark on my soul, as the Catholics say, but I dropped the god bit, therefore, my Catholicism in a fox hole in Viet Nam. Your opinion on abusing kids is bullshit. Actually, there were a few nuns and available ladies in the parish to handle the priest's needs. Most don't do children, just like the rest of society"

Follow. The. Link.

"Why not? That's what MacArthur did in Japan in 1945 and the Allies in Germany. I think the problem is that this did not happen in Iraq or Afghanistan."

So we should blow up Afghanistan and all it's civilians so they act just like us and stop killing each other?

"The invasion of Iraq was based upon the idea that if we could upset the applecart and get rid of tribalism, then maybe we would have a possible westernization in the middle east."

This is exactly what is pissing all the war lords and radicals off. They don't WANT to be Westernized, and unless they attack us, should be left to thier own devices. Let them blow themselves to hell and back, and we'll pick up the pieces.

"You need to make your arguments at length because you need to huff and puff to defend these distortions."

Actually, Amy, I make my arguments at length cause there isn't anything to do at work today!:D

"They blame the Jews and the West in general for their state of affairs. It's not their fault that they have corrupt autocratic leaders, it's our fault somehow.

How do you combat that?"

You don't. You let them blow themselves all to hell and go pick up the pieces. I doubt sincerely that in the post 9/11 world we live in, that ANYONE would ever be succesful.(AT ATTACKING THE US KAT- NOT PRAYING! And if you have a problem with bieng called ignorant, might I suggest that it is offensive to liken someone communing with thier God (Allah, Budda, Jehovah)
as attacking Western culture. I DARE you to try and come to Canada and say that very same thing. You'd be lynched! T'aint PC, see?!?!)

I disagree with Islam bieng "the worst" as Roman Catholicism is responsible for most of the atrocities committed in Gods name. E.G. the Crusades, Residential Schooling, and rape in the name of a "good marriage" (Non consumation clause, anyone?).

Ah yes, there it is, the trope of the evil Catholic Church ... usually uttered by one with little to no understanding of the history of Europe or of the Church.

Easy targets for righteous zeal, those Catholics.

So, the Crusades were an atrocity? Really? Which ones?

There were many. The list includes the Albeginsian Crusade, the Teutonic Crusades, the Swedish Crusades, the Wendish Crusade, the Stedinger Crusade,the Balkan Crusades, the Mahdian Crusade, the Alexandrian Crusade, the Aragonese Crusade, the Hussite Crusade, the ... well, you get the idea.

Some were atrocities, nothing more than Church crackdowns on dissenting belief systems. But others were military conquests disguised as religious crusades, and some were pan-European responses to military incursions by non-European powers (e.g., the Muslim pirates in the Mahdian Crusade).

The early Crusades to the Holy Land were a military response to the Muslim conquest of Jerusalem (under the Rashidun Caliphate), the harassment (by Muslims) of Christian pilgrims to the Holy Land, and the destruction (by Muslims) of the Church of the Holy Sepulchre. Though the Church was later rebuilt and the harassment of the pilgrims was stopped, the damage had been done.

The Byzantine Empire was in near-perpetual warfare with the Abbasid Caliphate (as it had been with the Rashidun and the Umayyid Caliphates) and called to Western Europe for aid. Unfortunately for the Byzantines, Western Europe was engaged in battling Viking, Slav, and Magyar incursions and couldn't spare fighting men. The Byzantines even appealed as far away as China for military help.

After the Christianization of the Vikings, Slavs, and Magyars effectively stopped their raids into Europe, the continent found itself with a large group of armed men who now had no one to fight. So, they fought each other. In an effort to reduce the violence tearing Europe apart and to provide aid the Byzantines, Pope Urban II called for a Crusade to recapture the Holy Land.

Kat honey, I never would have geussed you were from the south!

The Southwest is NOT the South.

"The invasion of Iraq was based upon the idea that if we could upset the applecart and get rid of tribalism, then maybe we would have a possible westernization in the middle east."

This is exactly what is pissing all the war lords and radicals off. They don't WANT to be Westernized, and unless they attack us, should be left to thier own devices. Let them blow themselves to hell and back, and we'll pick up the pieces.

Causality inversion. We wouldn't have invaded Iraq were it not for 9/11. Bin Laden himself said that 9/11 was because we weren't muslim, among other things. None of them had to do with "cultural imperialism". Read his letter to the west sometime. It's all in there.

You are entitled to your own opinions, but you are not entitled to your own facts. The facts are in direct contradiction to your opinion. Please take that into account.

You don't. You let them blow themselves all to hell and go pick up the pieces. I doubt sincerely that in the post 9/11 world we live in, that ANYONE would ever be succesful.(AT ATTACKING THE US KAT- NOT PRAYING! And if you have a problem with bieng called ignorant, might I suggest that it is offensive to liken someone communing with thier God (Allah, Budda, Jehovah)
as attacking Western culture. I DARE you to try and come to Canada and say that very same thing. You'd be lynched! T'aint PC, see?!?!)
They aren't sneaking across the border to pray. You ever hear of a terrorist? They do nasty, nasty things like blow up innocent people, and the first thing they have to do is get to their target. One of the ways they do that is by sneaking across a border illegally. I see an illegally crossing person of arab descent as a problem. I see an illegally crossing person with a prayer rug and koran and I have to ask, what *other* baggage is this person carrying? I don't see using common sense as bad, like you "PC" types.
They also change their tactics. Maj Nidal Malik Hasan shot and killed 13 people at Ft Hood Tx. I would say he was successful.
As for letting them blow themselves up and sorting things out after, that AIN't GONNA HAPPEN. They are going to come for us, repeatedly, because that is how their leaders stay in power. Blameshift all the fucktards problems onto the US Great Satan, and send them running off to blow themselves up for Allah. We will always be the target, so WE have to do something about it. The Really big, hairy question is WHAT?
(oh, gloating about your lack of freedom of speech is so 14th century, the Pope would be proud http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Index_Librorum_Prohibitorum)

I disagree with Islam bieng "the worst" as Roman Catholicism is responsible for most of the atrocities committed in Gods name. E.G. the Crusades, Residential Schooling, and rape in the name of a "good marriage" (Non consumation clause, anyone?)

???

That's it? Timur Lenk/Tamarlane and the Muslim conquest of India generated 30 million dead, more than the spanish/portuguese conquest of central and south america

They [Israel] actually have a VERY LARGE, VERY WELL TRAINED army.

Well-trained? Yes.

Large? Welllll let's see about that.

Some simple Internet searches show that Israel has about 175,000 active duty military personnel.
- Egypt - 468,000
- Iran - 525,000
- Syria - 325,000
- Saudi Arabia - 233,000
- Iraq - 192,000
- Lebanon - 60,000
- Libya - 76,000

So, Israel's military is VERY LARGE?

Israel's enemies tend to attack in concert with each other (Egypt and Syria coordinated their attacks in the 1973 Yom Kippur / October War).

Israel does boast a larger force of reserves than its neighbors (every Israeli citizen is required to be part of the reserves). But reservists take time to mobilize, organize, and deploy.

That means that at any given time, Israel is outnumbered by its enemies four or five to one.

"That's it? Timur Lenk/Tamarlane and the Muslim conquest of India generated 30 million dead, more than the spanish/portuguese conquest of central and south america"

Those are just to name a few......

"I see an illegally crossing person with a prayer rug and koran and I have to ask, what *other* baggage is this person carrying? I don't see using common sense as bad, like you "PC" types. "

So, if I were illegally crossing your borders with a Bible and a rosary, would you suspect I was carrying high grade explosives?

"Large? Welllll let's see about that."

When you compare it with the armies of their neighbors, yes.

"We will always be the target, so WE have to do something about it. The Really big, hairy question is WHAT?"

Historically speaking, world powers have always been attacked as they ARE the world power, and once you conquer/defeat them, the rest of the world is easy. What to do? Defend yourselves accordingly, but that does NOT mean taking the fight to them, which only escalates matters. If you were fighting with your spouse, would you smack them before they smacked you?

"(oh, gloating about your lack of freedom of speech is so 14th century, the Pope would be proud"

Nice typing there Kat, and may I simply say WTF?!?! I never said anything about freedom of speech......and he's not MY pope, just like Obama/Dubya wasn't YOUR president. Just cause I'm Catholic doesn't mean I subscribe to the hypocritical bullshit the Church spews out. Just like the KKK doesn't speak for America, the pope doesn't speak for all Catholics, and the radical Islamic's don't speak for all Muslims, which is a big point you seem to forget. Are you going to go to the Black Panthers next for Black History Month?

"Ah yes, there it is, the trope of the evil Catholic Church ... usually uttered by one with little to no understanding of the history of Europe or of the Church."

Conan, I went to Catholic school, was a practicing Roman Catholic for close to twenty years, and did my internship with the Ottawa Archdiocese. Actually read the post before you debate with someone.

"Causality inversion. We wouldn't have invaded Iraq were it not for 9/11. Bin Laden himself said that 9/11 was because we weren't muslim, among other things. None of them had to do with "cultural imperialism". Read his letter to the west sometime. It's all in there."

The US already at war in Iraq once before 9/11. You mean to tell me that pissed NO ONE off? Ever notice you never see anyone on TV shrieking "DEATH TO CANADA!!!"?

"So, the Crusades were an atrocity? Really? Which ones?"

Name one. They were all started for the same of two reasons. Money, or the whole "MY RELIGION IS BETTER THEN YOUR RELIGION!!!!" thing.

People People People, can't we all JUST GET ALONG!?!?!

I'm pretty much done, but I have one more thing to say.
(AT ATTACKING THE US KAT- NOT PRAYING! And if you have a problem with bieng called ignorant, might I suggest that it is offensive to liken someone communing with thier God (Allah, Budda, Jehovah)
as attacking Western culture. I DARE you to try and come to Canada and say that very same thing. You'd be lynched! T'aint PC, see?!?!)
I did not have half as many typos, nor did I make the barely veiled threat of bodily harm because of un-PC speech that you did Angel. That is all I need to know about your cheese-eating, surrender monkey genes showing through. You are a Libtard trying to convince us otherwise, and failing. Your anti-Israel BS, your anti-US "just lay back and take it, then they'll go away" shit, and your "The Catholics started it!" are all so blatantly false and stupid I feel dumber for having read them.
Stay in your nice, safe little hidey hole in Cannuckistan, maybe the jihadis won't notice you till they have wiped the rest of us out. I promise, it'll take a while because we are gonna fight tooth and nail to see it never happens, but if it does, at least you'll have that smug, morally superior attitude of yours to keep you happy.

"I did not have half as many typos, nor did I make the barely veiled threat of bodily harm because of un-PC speech that you did Angel."

Pardon? I never made any threat, barely veiled or otherwise. I was making the point that your statement that prayer rugs and the Koran equals a threat to America would be met with a HELL of alot of anger, scorn and derision, and could possibly land you in front of a judge for inciting hate crimes! That stuff doesn't fly in Canada, we are a mixed salad rather than a melting pot,all cultures are equally valued for the diversity they bring to the country, and most don't feel that they need to follow Canadian culture to bring value to Canada. They must follow our laws for the most part yes, but as for the rest, whatever!

"You are a Libtard trying to convince us otherwise, and failing. Your anti-Israel BS, your anti-US "just lay back and take it, then they'll go away" shit, and your "The Catholics started it!" are all so blatantly false and stupid I feel dumber for having read them."

I'm not trying to "convince" anyone of anything. I'm stating MY opinion. I'm not anti ANYTHING, YOU ARE! Read your posts, then read my posts, and then you tell me who of us is the more aggressive when it comes to foreign policy. I really don't give a flying ****** about Israel, US foreign policy, Catholics, pedophilia, or any of the other BS. I was using all that as a base to state to YOU, that your opinion is illogical, bigoted, racist,hurtful, inflammatory, arrogant, and doesn't really do anyone any good, but rather keeps fanning the flames of intolerance, which is what got us here in the first place.

Boy, you really DIDN'T read my posts if you think that I said the Catholics started it! A true sign of intelligence, snap opinions! My reason for using Catholics at all in the first place was to point out that there are many religious atrocities in the world, and not all of them started with Islam! Unless you want to go to the KKK for the "moderate, informed opinions of America" on interracial marriages, I suggest you rethink your statement that all Islamic people do not love their children. Or do you have Daddy issues?

Canadians are known pacifists. That's why people like to slap our flags on their backpacks when they travel to an Islamic nation, or any other political hot spot. As I asked another poster, when was the last time you heard someone on TV shouting "DEATH TO CANADA!!!" Because we don't fight doesn't mean we can't. Look to the US invasion of Canada, then shut your trap.

Oh, and Kat, before you snap judge all Canadians as pussy's, I might remind you we won WWI, WWII, and have backed up the US in every almost every foreign conflict since WWI, excluding Nam. So, should we have followed the US into Nam and gotten our boys killed for nothing too?

"I was born a Heeb (now a godless harlot) and my peeps didn't fare well under Christianity, but I can't worry about what was happening several centuries ago, and it seems ridiculous to bring that stuff up now in response to real and existing abuses by Islam that are part of the religion and endangering humans alive today."

Amy, Sorry, you were born a WHAT? This is a term I haven't heard before. Do you mean Jewish? As for bringing up things that happened "several centuries ago", the Residential School system (see 1st link) was sanctioned by both the Church and the Canadian and US governments. I can't speak for the US, but I can tell you personally that the Canadian Residential School system was not abolished until 1998. I say personally because I was a crisis worker during the scandal and ensuing carnage, and had to personally record many of the statements of the Survivors and in some cases alerting the authorities because the retelling of their victimization upset them to the point of attempting suicide.

Also, you can look to what happened in such places as Mt. Cashel, Alfred Ontario, The Mushbowl, and even Ireland, in recent history, as current examples of the Church victimizing it's followers.

As for the Crusades, they just came to mind.

And you're right, it doesn't make a difference in the present age, at least in regards to foreign policy. I simply cannot tolerate the generalization that Islamic parents do not love their children as a result of the religion they follow.

Really, I cannot stand racial generalizations at all. No one can say Islamic people do not love their children, just as no one can say that black people have large appendages or that the Irish are all alcoholics.

This is what leads to intolerance, which leads to war. In reality, the Islamic Radicals are just as guilty of generalizing America, and if we are going to "Westernize" them, (which to me is akin to "breeding the Indian out of the child") we must lead by example.

Conan, I went to Catholic school, was a practicing Roman Catholic for close to twenty years, and did my internship with the Ottawa Archdiocese. Actually read the post before you debate with someone.

I did read it. And it drips with blind loathing for the Catholic Church. Now I know where you get it.

I went to Catholic school, too. And was a practicing Catholic for close to twenty years. Today I am, at best, a lapsed Catholic (only time in 25+ years I've been inside a Catholic church was for my mother's funeral).

Still, you never quite get rid of that Catholic guilt they install in you at birth, do you?

I was using all that as a base to state to YOU, [sic] that your opinion is illogical, bigoted, racist,hurtful, inflammatory, arrogant, and doesn't really do anyone any good, but rather keeps fanning the flames of intolerance, which is what got us here in the first place.

So, you make blanket inflammatory statements to show somone that you're better than they are because they're illogical, bigoted, racist, hurtful, inflammatory, arrogant etc. - and you know this because they make blanket inflammatory statements?

Oh, and Kat, before you snap judge all Canadians as pussy's [sic], I might remind you we won WWI, WWII....

You had a little help with those.

While Canadian pacifism and militant multiculturism may be frustrating at times, I'll always remember that they rescued six American diplomats during the Iranian hostage crisis.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canadian_Caper

I like angel, she doesnt have the hogh ground in this debate, but at least she hasnt stormed off vowing never to return again

And where the hell is crid?

Conan,

"I did read it. And it drips with blind loathing for the Catholic Church......Still, you never quite get rid of that Catholic guilt they install in you at birth, do you?"

I know exactly what you mean. However, I am now a practicing NOTHING. I believe in faith. I feel no guilt NOW because I know from whence the bullshit springs. The guilt I do feel, however, is that my faith is directly responsible for the plight of so many.

"So, you make blanket inflammatory statements to show somone that you're better than they are because they're illogical, bigoted, racist, hurtful, inflammatory, arrogant etc. - and you know this because they make blanket inflammatory statements?"

Which blanket statement did I make? I stated my opinion of her opinion. I didn't say that all Americans have this opinion, which IS a blanket statement.

"Oh, and Kat, before you snap judge all Canadians as pussy's [sic], I might remind you we won WWI, WWII....
You had a little help with those."

Actually, we had ALOT of help with those. And I said as much. And on behalf of my country to yours, Thank You. I merely wanted to point out we were known in WWI to send the German units scrambling for cover when they heard the "Fighting Canucks" were coming. Look up Vimy Ridge and Juno Beach. We definitely can kick some ass when we need to, but we prefer to let you guys do the fighting. We just mop up. (Supposedly. Personally, I don't think we're as squeaky clean as the boys in Parliament would have us believe.)

Thank you, Conan, it was impressive wasn't it? Very proud o' me boyo's. We do our part. We're like you're kid brother, we hide behind you in a fight, but you hit our big brother and we're gonna come at you with a baseball bat, all our buddies, and a dog!

Actually, on your last point, I would like to ask the posters at large:

Why is Canadian pacifism frustrating? Why is this a problem to some people? We do fight when we see need to. We are, or were, in Iraq and Afghanistan with you, as well as most recent conflicts. Why is it our attitude equated with cowardice?

.

Wow, the comments are coming in faster then I can type.

Amy, I'm sorry, till today I have never in my life heard the terms "heeb" or "yid". It must be a strictly American term?

And again, I didn't start this thread with the intention of defending Islam. Personally, I think the radicals all deserve castration before a long and painful hanging. The same applies to all religions that follow their tactics.

I just wanted to point out that Kat's opinion to me, was offensive and illogical.I think our argument is the same, except now we are arguing over the degree of evil. I disagree with the notion that one religion is more evil then the other, as ALL of them are evil. Some are more blatant in their evil, but the underlying culture of intolerance is the same in all religions, excluding perhaps Buddhists.

Thank You, lujlp, I think?

Was I supposed to?

Angel -

The broader Arab world wanted us to take Saddam out. The Saudis want us to bomb Iran.

Where you're stumbling on this is that you are assuming that muslims are acting rationally from our perspective. They are not.

What's rational to muslims looks like applied madness to westerners. And what's normal and logical to us is the height of perversion to them.

We have mutually irreconcilable worldviews. The major difference in our attitudes (thus far) toward each other is this: we don't give a fuck as long as you leave us alone; they have a burning desire to destroy everything that does not bend to their will and comport with their view of the proper order of things.

You might be one of those who believe that we had 9/11 coming to us because of our interventions in the middle east. You could not be more wrong. As I said, go back and do some historical research. In the 1790s, we had to bomb the fuck out of Libya because they were hijacking our ships and demanding tribute for the sole reason that islam commands them to receive tribute from the infidels or kill them.

This was also among Bin Laden's justifications for the 9/11 attack. He also wanted us to stop supporting the Saudi monarchy so he could take over the country and control the holy land. Oh, and kill all our jews and homosexuals. And then convert to islam.

And then MAYBE they'd stop attacking us, but probably not.

His words, not mine.

Pay attention - there's going to be a quiz later.

The quiz is life. You fail, you die.

Israel does boast a larger force of reserves than its neighbors (every Israeli citizen is required to be part of the reserves). But reservists take time to mobilize, organize, and deploy.

Not only that Conan, but it plays hell with their civilian economy any time they call up significant numbers of reserves. And they can only keep them in the field for so long.

This is EVIL.
http://pajamasmedia.com/tatler/2011/04/06/32-of-palestinians-support-infanticide/

Generalizations are not necessarilly wrong. Or else the social sciences would be SOL.
And no, not all religions are evil, some are just stupid, like the Eco-weenie church of Gaia. They hug trees and spout their mantras about saving the earth, but I don't see them stoning anyone. Oh, and the nice ladies from the Jehovahs Witness who come to my door. Talk about screwed, only 600k of them can go to heaven, yet there they are still trying to save me, now that's dedication.
Scientology, tho, I'm with you on that. That's just pure, capitalist pig evil.
Lujlp, I really hope you don't mean me with that "storming off" comment 'cause I didn't storm, and I returned. Real life does happen in between our ab-fab discussions. It does get old having what you say deliberately misread, and great horking chunks ignored to change the meaning, but so it goes. I feel better after dinner and a movie, tho.

So, back to the interference in Libya.

Would you welcome French cruise missiles today, against the US Army defending Washington, DC, if the South rose again?

(Yes, I know, but don't bother whining about the South. Focus.)

The French helped Washington's troops. Why wouldn't they back rebels motivated by the exact same shit King George did?

But thinking about it happening here should make you think differently, if not more clearly.

No Kat I was talking about the people who show up, get offended and declare theyre never comming back

*hug* that's good sweetie, we usually get along so well I was afraid I had done something to mess that up!