Gun Nuts

[pointster]

[techno900]

I guess Mac's premise is that, if the US had not ventured into the middle east after 911, there would be fewer Islamic terrorists world wide then we are currently seeing. While I would agree that this is possible, I also believe that it's just as possible that we could be witnessing and experiencing more terrorism than we currently have.

So what is the left's solution at this time? Pull out of the ME all together and leave it to the UN? If Hillary wins, what would you want her to do? In addition, when Iran gets a nuclear bomb and a delivery system (which they will). What do you suggest we do at that time? Have we just postponed a war, or do we keep our fingers crossed and hope that Iran somehow see's the light and the folly of using the bomb?

Name calling is really nothing more than third grade antics, and in most eyes, reduces credibility to a port-a-potty level. If you think someone is uninformed, or misinformed, present your side and let it be. In regards to spelling, we ALL make mistakes, and for the most recent bout, I can only say, "those in glass houses shouldn't throw stones". There was a recent misspelling by someone mentioned in this post that I ignored, simply because pointing it out serves little purpose other than exhibiting childish behavior - in my opinion.

[mac]

Techno--this is not that hard. What I said is that the straight military approach, which was practiced with a conscious De-baathification strategy backed by the Bushies, has increased, not decreased, the presence of terrorism. I didn't say that the furor in the Middle East is solely a result of the US presence. Violence has kept a lid on sectarian and tribal conflicts. Saddam kept control with violence, I certainly didn't support his regime. But in Egypt, Iraq, and Libya it is clear that violence is more out of control than it was before the Iraq war. Perhaps we should take stock, and not simply do the insane--more of the same and expect a better result.

Someone who either doesn't understand the difference between "allude" and "elude", and posts that with an ad hominem attack on Obama cannot possibly be taken seriously. That is not a spelling error.

[GURGLETROUSERS]

Sorry, but forced to split this up owing to internet problems.

Mac. A fine semi=detached speech of yours, which ignores the points I raised.

By what right do you accuse me of being in favour of the past misadventures. But, I suppose, being a conservative is, in your view tantamount to being a retard. Better include the present Conservative British government and Prime minister then, for their latest 'talking point' and therefore ignorant outburst against the danger we are facing from militant Islam.

(will continue.)

[isobars]

[GURGLETROUSERS]

(continued)

After all, they are now proposing, along with American forces, to start striking at the 'wasps nest' of IS in Syria. That, I AM in favour of! It may well create more terrorists but it is too late now just to ignore a growing threat.

I have no need to 'side' with anybody. I merely note that instinct (probably subconsciously) plays a part in thge response to issues, of many people.

I note that you deflect (to creating terrorists) from my point that militant Islamic states, even ordinary Islamic practice also, threatens (and carries out) death to those who attempt to exercise their free will and question, or renounce, their belief, as they also do to homosexuals, not to mention women being denied their basic human rights. (I thought the last two were special concerns of yours - but only in 'safe' countries it seems.)

(Will continue.)

[GURGLETROUSERS]

(Continued.)

I'll give you a specific issue to address. In somr Muslim communities here in England, young Pakistani girls often just disappear from attending school, with the bland assurance that they are merely temporarily visiting relatives in Pakistan.

Most people in authority suspect that they are forcibly being sent 'home' against their will, for genital mutilation. Such is illegal in England, for ALL British citizens, but the authorities are loathe to press the issue further for politically correct reasons, and fear of 'offending' Muslim sensibilities.

Some women in authority are now demanding an investigation, and prevention of allowing these young girls from being sent there against their will.

Perhaps, instead of accusing me of merely ranting, and spouting right wing talking points you would address this issue. What would you do in these cases, if you were in authority, bearing in mind you could, by enforcing prevention, be stirring up an Islamic storm?

[swchandler]

As I see it, the core problem in the Middle East is the basic schism between Sunni and Shia religious ideologies. Mix in a bit of primitive tribalism to pit one community against another, and the divisions and mistrust multiply. Then, add Jews into the mix the way that occurred in the late 40s, and the problems only grow and metastasize further. Finally, we and other developed nations step in to protect the Jews and tap into and leverage all the oil riches, the recipe becomes more and more complex and toxic as we dance between sides.

Think about all the weapons that we and others have sold in the Middle East. It's no small wonder that the Middle East is on fire and has become unstable as hell. The idea that we can militarily come in and kick ass on the stew of problems is a fool's dream.

[techno900]

Mac said:

[nw30]