Compared to what?

And please don't give me that "we haven't been hit" Cheneyisim.

-spence

A while ago I made a statement that the muslim fanatics who strip people of thier basic human rights, such as education(females), and refused to let people watch tv or listen to radios and do many other activities were much the same as the nazis in the 30's & 40's, and you said I was, without being able to quote exactly, wrong.

You're right on, although i would actually compare the mindset of the Radical Muslims to the Japaneese of the WWII era, they were total fanatics and never surrendered, they would commit suicude rather than fall into US hands. This was the mindset of the average Japaneese soldier and civilaians alike. Total fanatics. The average german soldier on the other hand,understood when it was time to call it quits and surrender, and they would surrender by the thousands. They were not even close to being as fanatical as the Japs in my opinion. The SS and the high ranking brass were total nut jobs of course, but the average soldier was not.

Radical Islam will not surrender, they have that Japaneese WWII mindset. Only total destruction of the Radicals will prevail. Sorry Spence, i know you dont wanna hear that!

Spence, are you one of the guys who still opposes the use of the atomic Bombs to end WWII? Even though by dropping those babys we saved an estimated 1 million american soldiers lives? And yes, those were estimates for a mainland invasion of Japan. I just have a funny feeling you would've opposed dropping the bombs:hs:

Yeah.......God forbid we dare state a fact.

Any why exactly is it that we haven't?

Is it because of how much tighter Bush hasn't made our borders?

Is it because of the still un-upgraded FBI computers that hindered 9/11?

Is it because of the bloody sectarian civil war in Iraq?

Or is it because they haven't yet chosen the time and place to upstage 9/11?

Listen to the former Bin Laden expert from the CIA and he'll tell you this is precisely the reason. They went 8 years between attacks the last time...what makes you think they're in a hurry?

In fact, with how our country has been behaving the past 4 years, and the current challenges in Iran and North Korea...al Qaeda doesn't really need to hit us at home...yet.

-spence

Search isn't working, but I seem to remember the parallel as being somewhat different. I'll look at it later...

-spence

Skipper, I don't think you really grasp the mindset of these people.

Bin Laden isn't crazy...far from it.

9/11 wasn't an attack to kill infidels simply because they were. It was in their eyes a defensive counterattack. We're not fighting a bunch of mindless fanatics, it's a global insurgency.

-spence

Do you watch the news? Two weeks ago we stopped a potential major attack designed to blow up numerous jetliners over major cities here in the US. And you say nothing has gotten better since 9/11?? I even heard we wire tapped these dirt bags, you know, that stuff you and youe lefty buddies oppose so much. And you wonder why the American people don't trust the left on National Security!?

Yep, and it was a multi-national effort of law enforcement that still (to my knowledge) hasn't been attributed to alQaeda directly...

So much for fighting them over there, so we don't have to fight them over here :rolleyes:

Skipper, it's an INSURGENCY...

-spence

Who cares if thier Al Qaeda or not? Al Qeada, Hezolah, Hamas, local homegrown cells, etc. are all radical terrosist groups, Al Qaeada is but one threat we face, the others are just as dangerous. And of course, they have one thing in common, Radical Islam! The fact is, a major attack that was to be carried out by radical Islam was stopped because of the great work done by the Brits, US and tips from Pakistan. But you still spew your propoganda about how we arent safer. Sounds to me like what we're doing is working buddy!

Skippy, your appreciation for the world as it isn't is quite astounding.

Where exactly do you get your information?

-spence

No he is not crazy, he is a FANATIC. He uses his brains and affluence to kill people at all costs. The reason? Religious fervor. Islam fanatcism.
To some of us, that means he is crazy, a wacko, freak, etc.


Spence, you seem to think there is this consortium of radical islam with a well thought out plan, an agenda based on historical poliycial misjudgements from the west. What you really have is religious zealots, pent on killing and disrupting civilized countries and economies. The failure to recognize this is EXACTLY what the writer of the article above was trying to get at.
If your family is blown up in a Burger King, it will not help the Islamic cause, change goverment policy or spread Islam, however...it will be a succes for radical Islam, people will cheer and celebrate. Its not about Dems or Repubs, its not about righting the wrongs of the past, its about killing you. That is there goal.

And why I think they're missing the point. 9/11 wasn't an act of religious zealotry, it was a political response. That's not to say that Islam doesn't influence the actions of some terrorists, but the expression is has to do with political elements of human nature.

Terrorists attact because of rage, humiliation etc...not because the Koran made them do it.

I'd wager that the threat has been characterized this way for a simple reason...it's easier for people to swallow.

Skipper is a perfect example of this. To group alQaeda, Hezbollah and Hamas together as threats because of their religious extremism defies observable fact. It's prepackaging done for domestic consumption to distract the people from the real nuances of the situation, which require more effort to change than we're being told.

-spence

I think you're way off. Political response? Whose? What political group is being represented?

The Democrats

Take a deep breath Spence, about to prove you are WAY wrong You said 9/11 was NOT an act of religious zealotry? Here is an exceprt from ole' Osama himself. I guess he failed to mention the political aims of the attack or his plans for peace and prosperity. I'd post the whole thing but the 99% of it was "Praise Allah, Infidels" Allah...blah blah

UBL: (...Inaudible...) when people see a strong horse and a weak horse, by nature, they will like the strong horse. This is only one goal; those who want people to worship the lord of the people, without following that doctrine, will be following the doctrine of Muhammad, peace be upon him. (UBL quotes several short and incomplete Hadith verses, as follows): "I was ordered to fight the people until they say there is no god but Allah, and his prophet Muhammad." "Some people may ask: why do you want to fight us?" "There is an association between those who say: I believe in one god and Muhammad is his prophet, and those who don't (...inaudible...) "Those who do not follow the true fiqh. The fiqh of Muhammad, the real fiqh. They are just accepting what is being said at face value."

UBL: Those youth who conducted the operations did not accept any fiqh in the popular terms, but they accepted the fiqh that the prophet Muhammad brought. Those young men (...inaudible...) said in deeds, in New York and Washington, speeches that overshadowed all other speeches made everywhere else in the world. The speeches are understood by both Arabs and non-Arabs-even by Chinese. It is above all the media said. Some of them said that in Holland, at one of the centers, the number of people who accepted Islam during the days that followed the operations were more than the people who accepted Islam in the last eleven years. I heard someone on Islamic radio who owns a school in America say: "We don't have time to keep up with the demands of those who are asking about Islamic books to learn about Islam." This event made people think (about true Islam) which benefited Islam greatly.

Not sure where you're going with the quotes...you're not proving much of anything.

Several of the 9/11 hijackers were are strip clubs boozing it up before the attacks...these don't sound like religous zealots to me.

Bin Laden was very clear that 9/11 was (in their mind) a defensive attack in response to negative Western influence in the Islamic world. It's about the Palestenians, Chechens, Iraqis and supporting the Saudi Regime etc...

Their aims are political, but wrapped in the Koran. The desire to establish a caliphate and central Islamic state is a political goal driven by what they see as failures in democratic and socialist systems. They are fighting to give Muslims a better way...in this they are like Trotskyites.

The war is political, but the opponents fight as devout Muslims. Hence Bin Laden offering for Americans to convert etc...it's in the Koran. Concepts like jihad are abstract and subject to wild interpretation.

I could go on and on...but I'd suggest reading some good literature that presents a wildly different point of view. The truth as is often the case lies in the middle.

-spence

here s swhere I am going with the quotes.

1. "I was ordered to fight the people until they say there is no god but Allah, and his prophet Muhammad."
2. "This event (9/11) made people think (about true Islam) which benefited Islam greatly."

It's my understanding that strict adherance to the Koran dictates you must give your enemy the chance to surrender before you attack them...In essence that's what Bin Laden was saying in 1. Come on over, let's just get along...

But this shouldn't be confused for what it isn't. It's a procedural matter, but not the justification for the attack in the first place.

As for number 2...9/11 did get people to think about Islam. I'm not sure it's benefited Islam as much has hurt in the short run. But as they say, there's no such thing as bad PR :)

-spence