(Untitled)

Apr 13, 2005 00:11

Really at a loss for words ( Read more... )

Leave a comment

Comments 13

cwoxviii April 13 2005, 06:09:19 UTC
Here I should pose the question: why should we not have a war on Islamic Fundamentalism, or rather its most extreme sects, and their cult of death that lives only in order to kill? Do you really think Osama bin Laden's objectives are merely local and merely political? That if we entirely left the Middle East, became an absolute non-presence there, he would stop flying planes into buildings?

Reply

taoofashnod April 13 2005, 19:13:37 UTC
Violence begets violence.

How do we intend to bring peace with bombs?

I am not saying that we should leave the Middle East. Never have I advocated such a thing. The United States cannot turn isolationist because it would leave such a power vaccuum that only chaos would be left.

Instead of taking a unilateralist approach in an attempt to reform Islam through bombs, we might consider an approach in conjunction with a world community, in an attempt to build a New World Order that the first President Bush mused about when the Cold War was ended.

Why is it that we must meet violence with violence always? It does nothing but ensure that there will be future violence. At what point do people understand that?

Reply

cwoxviii April 13 2005, 20:21:15 UTC
The goal of Islamic fundamentalists of the bin Laden variety is not so quaint as to destroy our "way of life", as many politicians at both ends of the political spectrum have put it. It is, in fact, much simpler: the total annihilation of every man, woman and child who does not subscribe to their particular (and particularly insane) brand of Muslim theology.

There have been many wars that were wastes of American lives, because we could have exercised the options you list here. (Vietnam comes to mind - Ho Chi Minh was one of the most reasonable "enemies of the state" we've ever combatted. But then, the Kennedies fucked that up.) This is not one of them. This is a new enemy, one that cannot be sated by accords, and summits and "approaches in conjunction with a world community", whatever the fuck that means.

There is a word for these people, people who have an innate desire to kill and thus cannot be stopped by any kind of reasoning: sociopaths. What we do with our own domestic sociopaths is lock them away. If we could find ( ... )

Reply

taoofashnod April 14 2005, 14:52:51 UTC
You're assuming that we can get rid of them by doing the things that pissed them off in the first place.

How, exactly, is giving them more excuses to recruit disaffected youths fighting terrorism?

I'm also amused by your assumption that you know what bin Laden thinks. I don't think you have him right. I think you've bought too much into the propaganda spewed forth regarding the 'War on Terror.'

Libertarians are idiots. No offense, but your philosophy has so many gaping holes its amusing.

Reply


trexsandwich April 13 2005, 20:32:27 UTC
::ahem:: FRENCH LESSONS.

That is all.

Reply

taoofashnod April 14 2005, 14:53:23 UTC
I love you Jen.

<3

Reply

trexsandwich April 14 2005, 17:04:00 UTC
Oh, do you now???? ;)
So.. when are you coming to visit us again, loser?

Reply


Leave a comment

Up