If I may add....
Sep 13th, 2003, 08:37 AM
#21
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 1,705
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It would be very hard for so called Old Europe to do something under these circumstances. The politicians are responsible to their voters, and voters were almost 100% against the war. Even in Hungary (one of the New Europe) 96% of the people opposed (same in Spain). Plus it would be against German constitution to send troops.
Sep 13th, 2003, 12:28 PM
#25
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 374
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
For me, as an American, the saddest thing is the way honest disagreement with the war and the president is so quickly painted as "unpatriotic" by others who support the war.
America has surrendered so many things to the terrorists. Our ability to discuss things rationally seems to have been the first to go, along with much of our privacy.
Followed quickly by our ability to laugh at ourselves while feeling the need to kneejerk defend "Americans" behavior while travelling.
America has surrendered so many things to the terrorists. Our ability to discuss things rationally seems to have been the first to go, along with much of our privacy.
Followed quickly by our ability to laugh at ourselves while feeling the need to kneejerk defend "Americans" behavior while travelling.
Sep 13th, 2003, 03:05 PM
#26
Guest
Posts: n/a
koshka, you can disagree with the war and the Prez all you want, but when you go public, and we are at war, then it starts giving aid and comfort to the enemy.
What amazes me is how many Democrats will bad mouth the Prez and second guest every decision purely for political gain. They don't have any better ideas or ways to proceed, just a quick slam to win votes from the liberal left who votes in primary elections. Thier personal interests of getting elected goes before the national good of standing united when we are at war.
Vote for who you want in 2004, but until then, zip it.
What amazes me is how many Democrats will bad mouth the Prez and second guest every decision purely for political gain. They don't have any better ideas or ways to proceed, just a quick slam to win votes from the liberal left who votes in primary elections. Thier personal interests of getting elected goes before the national good of standing united when we are at war.
Vote for who you want in 2004, but until then, zip it.
Sep 13th, 2003, 03:53 PM
#27
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 1,815
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: <i>I find fundamentalist Islam frightening and incomprehensible as a mindset - but don't you think that religion is not really the issue here (as it isn't in Northern Ireland). It's economic.</i>
Don't kid yourself that religion -- specifically, a radical fundamentalist strain of Islam -- has nothing to with Islamists who hate the West.
I'd suggest you begin by reading Paul Berman's excellent article in the The New York Times Magazine from back on March 23, 2003 (reprinted at the website below) about Sayyid Qutb, who Berman calls...
"The Philosopher of Islamic Terror"
http://www.mail-archive.com/foib@ian.../msg00102.html
Berman writes...
And at the heart of that single school of thought stood, until his execution in 1966, a philosopher named Sayyid Qutb -- the intellectual hero of every one of the groups that eventually went into Al Qaeda, their Karl Marx (to put it that way), their guide. . . . Qutb is not shallow. Qutb is deep. "In the Shade of the Qur'an" is, in its fashion, a masterwork. Al Qaeda and its sister organizations are not merely popular, wealthy, global, well connected and institutionally sophisticated. <i>These groups stand on a set of ideas too, and some of those ideas may be pathological, which is an old story in modern politics; yet even so, the ideas are powerful.>/i> We should have known that, of course. But we should have known many things.</i>
Don't kid yourself that religion -- specifically, a radical fundamentalist strain of Islam -- has nothing to with Islamists who hate the West.
I'd suggest you begin by reading Paul Berman's excellent article in the The New York Times Magazine from back on March 23, 2003 (reprinted at the website below) about Sayyid Qutb, who Berman calls...
"The Philosopher of Islamic Terror"
http://www.mail-archive.com/foib@ian.../msg00102.html
Berman writes...
And at the heart of that single school of thought stood, until his execution in 1966, a philosopher named Sayyid Qutb -- the intellectual hero of every one of the groups that eventually went into Al Qaeda, their Karl Marx (to put it that way), their guide. . . . Qutb is not shallow. Qutb is deep. "In the Shade of the Qur'an" is, in its fashion, a masterwork. Al Qaeda and its sister organizations are not merely popular, wealthy, global, well connected and institutionally sophisticated. <i>These groups stand on a set of ideas too, and some of those ideas may be pathological, which is an old story in modern politics; yet even so, the ideas are powerful.>/i> We should have known that, of course. But we should have known many things.</i>
Thread
Original Poster
Forum
Replies
Last Post
DebitNM
United States
63
Jan 5th, 2007 10:33 AM
