3
   

Bush won't tolerate nuclear Iran

 
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Thu 9 Feb, 2006 02:47 pm
OCCOM BILL wrote:
Sounds good Foxy, and I hope you're right, but I see very little evidence to support your conclusion. Where do you read about this vast majority of Muslims condemning extremists? I would very much appreciate it if you could quantify that. Or is it something that must be taken on faith?


A cousin working mostly in Ankara these days says the Turkish people he works with are disgusted and angry at terrorist attacks committed by al Qaida. There was no rioting in Iraq over those silly Danish cartoons--as some have noted, maybe there is something to this Democracy stuff after all. My own Muslim neighbors earnestly wish Bin Laden and his ilk a speedy trip to hell.

I have seen intermittent reports of various Muslim peoples condemning the terrorism. I have not seen reports of peaceful Muslim peoples commending it.

So my opinion is based on some anecdotal evidence plus what appears to be the case in the larger picture presented by the media. I just figure with estimate of some 1.5 billion Muslims in the world, they would be creating a whole lot more havoc if even a large percentage of them were committed to furthering their religion through violence.
0 Replies
 
freedom4free
 
  1  
Reply Thu 9 Feb, 2006 02:58 pm
Quote:
I just figure with estimate of some 1.5 billion Muslims in the world, they would be creating a whole lot more havoc if even a large percentage of them were committed to furthering their religion through violence.


This makes a whole lot of sense, got to admit.
0 Replies
 
freedom4free
 
  1  
Reply Thu 9 Feb, 2006 03:18 pm
More Bad News -

http://www.newkerala.com/news2_files/nk.gif

Russia confirms missile defence contract with Iran

Quote:

09 Feb 2006

Moscow: Amid the escalating crisis around Iran's nuclear programme, Russia said Thursday that it will still arm Tehran with missiles that can secure nuclear facilities from attacks.

"We concluded a contract for the supply of air-defence systems to Iran and there is no reason not to fulfil it," Mikhail Dmitriyev, the head of Russia's military-technical cooperation agency, told journalists here.

Worth an estimated $700 million, the deal for up to 30 Tor M-1 surface-to-air missiles is the largest since Russia in 2000 withdrew from an agreement with the US restricting the supply of military hardware to Iran.
0 Replies
 
OCCOM BILL
 
  1  
Reply Thu 9 Feb, 2006 05:45 pm
Not assisting doesn't equal condemning. Failure to announce your support of; is a far cry from condemnation. The United States is among the most violent societies on earth. What percentage of its citizen's make this so? Palestinians and suicide bombings are practically synonymous in some circles. What percentage of Palestinian do you suppose would ever even consider doing something like that?

I'm not asking the vast majority of Muslims to stop trying to kill me, Fox. Obviously, they're not. I'm asking for a larger percentage of those who aren't to speak out loudly against those who are. As a proud Green Bay Packer fan I would never stand mute while a small percentage of Packer fans earned us a bad reputation. If I saw one of my fellow Packer fans senselessly attacking a Bear fan, I would immediately assist the Bear fan in repelling the attack. If interviewed after a fatal Packer attack on a Bear fan; I would go out of my way to express my shame and call for the harshest penalty available for the no-good son-of-a-bitch whose actions reflect poorly on the vast majority of Packer fans (who happen to be the coolest people around.)
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Thu 9 Feb, 2006 05:54 pm
But what if you are not there as a witness? What if you are hearing conflicting sources in the media, on the internet, from other Packer fans? If you are hearing that the Packer fans are being unjustly accused, that they were acting in self defense, if they were defending their honor against corrupt, malicious Bear fans, which side do you instinctively take?

And if you are a lone Packer fan surrounded by drunken, crazed Bear fans, do you seriously tempt your fate at that precise moment?

It is my opinion that the majority of the Palestinians are in fact militant insurgents planted in that area precisely for the purpose of making Israel's life miserable. I neither condone what they are doing nor believe they will accept peace if offered. But I know honest, educated Americans who are squarely in sympathy with the Palestinians on that issue. They aren't there and the only thing they have to influence their opinions is what they see on TV, read in the papers, or see on the internet. Look how many people post on these message boards an opinion that the terrorists are simply freedom fighters defending their homeland in the only way they know how.

We can't judge the whole by the actions of a very few. But we sure don't have to tolerate those few.
0 Replies
 
OCCOM BILL
 
  1  
Reply Thu 9 Feb, 2006 06:33 pm
Foxy, to civilized people, there is no second side to suicide attacks on innocent children. There's no rational way to spin that. There's no conflicting stories about who's burning embassies over a cartoon either.

The silly Packer example was created merely to give me a hypothetical soapbox to stand on and rain down my discontent with the unacceptable behavior of my peers. Vince (peace be upon him) wouldn't have me stay quiet while the radical few brought shame on us all... unless of course he wasn't all that displeased.

I can think of few petitions easier to sign than a denouncement of suicide attacks on civilian innocents, regardless of their motivation. This isn't the kind of denouncement that should offer "ya, but's". If you are correct, and the vast majority of Muslims condemn the perpetrators of such crimes, they are doing themselves a grave disservice by not making that abundantly clear.

Muslims: Say it loud!

Another chink in the theory of "vast majority": If that were so, why doesn't it get stamped out internally before the rest of the world even has to consider stamping?
0 Replies
 
gustavratzenhofer
 
  1  
Reply Thu 9 Feb, 2006 06:40 pm
Occom Bill wrote:
I would go out of my way to express my shame and call for the harshest penalty available for the no-good son-of-a-bitch whose actions reflect poorly on the vast majority of Packer fans


I am quite surprised by that, Bill. I was under the impression that you were a Bush fan.

Good to see that you've finally seen the light.
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Thu 9 Feb, 2006 08:56 pm
OCCOM BILL wrote:
Foxy, to civilized people, there is no second side to suicide attacks on innocent children. There's no rational way to spin that. There's no conflicting stories about who's burning embassies over a cartoon either.

The silly Packer example was created merely to give me a hypothetical soapbox to stand on and rain down my discontent with the unacceptable behavior of my peers. Vince (peace be upon him) wouldn't have me stay quiet while the radical few brought shame on us all... unless of course he wasn't all that displeased.

I can think of few petitions easier to sign than a denouncement of suicide attacks on civilian innocents, regardless of their motivation. This isn't the kind of denouncement that should offer "ya, but's". If you are correct, and the vast majority of Muslims condemn the perpetrators of such crimes, they are doing themselves a grave disservice by not making that abundantly clear.

Muslims: Say it loud!

Another chink in the theory of "vast majority": If that were so, why doesn't it get stamped out internally before the rest of the world even has to consider stamping?


You used the Packers as an analogy and so did I. I took that example no more seriously than you did except that a principle of human nature works in both. The Iran leadership, for instance, is putting out stupid propaganda that the Holocaust was a hoax. You are hearing rumbles of protest about that in the United States, but where is the outrage from Europe where it actually happened? I'm not hearing or seeing much, mostly because of the underlying anti-Israeli sentiments you find there these days.

Ask any Muslin on any American street if they condemn hostage taking, beheadings, and bombing innocents and I would bet a week's pay that the response would be 9 to 1 that yes, they condemn it all. Ask a peace loving Muslim in the midst of angry militant Muslims in Europe the same question and he might think it prudent to not answer or hedge his answer. That ties in with my analogy too.

Then go to the Bush-supporters thread and read Ann Coulter's column I posted there today. Whatever you think of Coulter, she absolutely nailed it on this issue.

I'm just saying that our appropriate targets both in the war of words and the war of bullets should be targeted at those Muslims or anybody else who thinks murdering innocent people is a proper way to express themselves. I think to assume that the vast majority of Muslims are of that ilk is a grave mischaracterization of the people of Islam.
0 Replies
 
old europe
 
  1  
Reply Thu 9 Feb, 2006 09:00 pm
Foxfyre wrote:
The Iran leadership, for instance, is putting out stupid propaganda that the Holocaust was a hoax. You are hearing rumbles of protest about that in the United States, but where is the outrage from Europe where it actually happened? I'm not hearing or seeing much, mostly because of the underlying anti-Israeli sentiments you find there these days.


Nope. Mostly because you can't be bothered to pay attention to international politics...
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Thu 9 Feb, 2006 09:06 pm
old europe wrote:
Foxfyre wrote:
The Iran leadership, for instance, is putting out stupid propaganda that the Holocaust was a hoax. You are hearing rumbles of protest about that in the United States, but where is the outrage from Europe where it actually happened? I'm not hearing or seeing much, mostly because of the underlying anti-Israeli sentiments you find there these days.


Nope. Mostly because you can't be bothered to pay attention to international politics...


It is precisely because I have been paying attention to international politics, or at least to the international media, that I made the comment OE. And why did you think it necessary to make your comment personally insulting instead of showing the evidence to show how my perception is wrong? I would appreciate being directed to some pro-Israel European press. I have looked and haven't found much.
0 Replies
 
old europe
 
  1  
Reply Thu 9 Feb, 2006 09:13 pm
Foxy,

I'm sorry if you thought this was personally insulting. It was not intented to be. But given the attention the media, politics and the population in general have been paying to Iran and, especially, Ahmadinejad's utterings about the Holocaust and Israel, I found your comments ("where is the outrage from Europe where it actually happened? I'm not hearing or seeing much, mostly because of the underlying anti-Israeli sentiments you find there these days.") to be more than a bit insulting.

I could try to find some sources (in English) about that, but the general tone of your post wasn't very inspiring to provide any...
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Thu 9 Feb, 2006 10:35 pm
old europe wrote:
Foxy,

I'm sorry if you thought this was personally insulting. It was not intented to be. But given the attention the media, politics and the population in general have been paying to Iran and, especially, Ahmadinejad's utterings about the Holocaust and Israel, I found your comments ("where is the outrage from Europe where it actually happened? I'm not hearing or seeing much, mostly because of the underlying anti-Israeli sentiments you find there these days.") to be more than a bit insulting.

I could try to find some sources (in English) about that, but the general tone of your post wasn't very inspiring to provide any...


Well, we sure don't accomplish much by sniping at each other.

I didn't intend to be insulting either, but do you believe Europeans are generally pro-Israel and take their side in much of anything? The left tilted US media sure doesn't. I read through the European sources available to me and I see a lot of negative press about US politics, etc. and other stuff about the Iranian nuclear problem, but haven't found indignation about Iranian threats against Israel or any indication that much of Europe would be prepared to defend Israel. It was just an illustration of how different emphasis can be reflected in a whole group of people and fit in my discussion with O-Bill.

I'll take your word for it if you say that my perception is wrong on these matters. No need to go spending a lot of time digging up stuff.
0 Replies
 
revel
 
  1  
Reply Fri 10 Feb, 2006 08:15 am
Foxfrye wrote:
Quote:
It is my opinion that the majority of the Palestinians are in fact militant insurgents planted in that area precisely for the purpose of making Israel's life miserable.


Do you really believe this? Do you have any kind of evidence to at least give an inkling as to how you reached this conclusion?
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Fri 10 Feb, 2006 08:18 am
revel wrote:
Foxfrye wrote:
Quote:
It is my opinion that the majority of the Palestinians are in fact militant insurgents planted in that area precisely for the purpose of making Israel's life miserable.


Do you really believe this? Do you have any kind of evidence to at least give an inkling as to how you reached this conclusion?


It is my opinion, Revel. You are welcome to show how it is wrong. Do you have any kind of evidence for that?
0 Replies
 
Steve 41oo
 
  1  
Reply Fri 10 Feb, 2006 08:22 am
Foxfrye wrote:
Quote:
It is my opinion that the majority of the Palestinians are in fact militant insurgents planted in that area precisely for the purpose of making Israel's life miserable.
Thats quite funny seeing as the Palestinians were there first.
0 Replies
 
John Creasy
 
  1  
Reply Fri 10 Feb, 2006 08:38 am
Steve (as 41oo) wrote:
Foxfrye wrote:
Quote:
It is my opinion that the majority of the Palestinians are in fact militant insurgents planted in that area precisely for the purpose of making Israel's life miserable.
Thats quite funny seeing as the Palestinians were there first.


Actually the Caananites were there first. Anybody that came after that is an illegal immigrant.
0 Replies
 
revel
 
  1  
Reply Fri 10 Feb, 2006 08:41 am
Foxfyre wrote:
revel wrote:
Foxfrye wrote:
Quote:
It is my opinion that the majority of the Palestinians are in fact militant insurgents planted in that area precisely for the purpose of making Israel's life miserable.


Do you really believe this? Do you have any kind of evidence to at least give an inkling as to how you reached this conclusion?


It is my opinion, Revel. You are welcome to show how it is wrong. Do you have any kind of evidence for that?


So your opinion is not based on any kind of evidence, just pulled out of thin air? An opinion is not worth much if you don't at least have some kind of background to back it up.

There were people who lived in that area long before Israel existed as a State, they were not planted there to make Israel's life miserable. This is a baseless opinion.
0 Replies
 
freedom4free
 
  1  
Reply Fri 10 Feb, 2006 08:51 am
Quote:
Actually the Caananites were there first. Anybody that came after that is an illegal immigrant.


So does that make G.W.Bush an illegal immigrant, because the Red-Injuns
were here (USA) first ?
0 Replies
 
old europe
 
  1  
Reply Fri 10 Feb, 2006 08:51 am
What revel said.

Oh, and Foxy, if it is your opinion that the Palestinians were "planted" there - who would have done that? And where did the Palestinians come from?
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Fri 10 Feb, 2006 08:58 am
revel wrote:
Foxfyre wrote:
revel wrote:
Foxfrye wrote:
Quote:
It is my opinion that the majority of the Palestinians are in fact militant insurgents planted in that area precisely for the purpose of making Israel's life miserable.


Do you really believe this? Do you have any kind of evidence to at least give an inkling as to how you reached this conclusion?


It is my opinion, Revel. You are welcome to show how it is wrong. Do you have any kind of evidence for that?


So your opinion is not based on any kind of evidence, just pulled out of thin air? An opinion is not worth much if you don't at least have some kind of background to back it up.

There were people who lived in that area long before Israel existed as a State, they were not planted there to make Israel's life miserable. This is a baseless opinion.


Revel, I TEACH ancient history of that area. The Palestinians who are claiming the land now cannot trace their ancestry back to the Canaanites who lived there 4000 years ago when the Israelites first moved in there. The huge majority of the Palestinians who are there now can't even identify relatives who lived in that area at the time Israel was re-created. There were a handful of "Palestinians" there at the time the UN carved out a small county-sized area to be the Nation of Israel. There has not been time for that small group to have produced the Palestinian population that is there now.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.22 seconds on 12/22/2024 at 11:57:30