« Muslims Get Their Own Restrooms at Australian University | Main | Hunter Defends USA From Kerry's Insults »

I love you!!!!

Liberals have to be in denial about the threat of Islamo-Fascism. If brown non-Christians are capable of massive acts of genocide and America is not the greatest evil on Earth, then everything liberalism believes is wrong.

Using the logic that 3,000 lives lost on 9/11 "isnt that bad" the same guy should say the War in Iraq isnt that bad because we only lost a little over 3,000 lives in 4 years, while during the same period of WW II, we lost over 400,000 when our population was 1/3 the size it is now.

Your posts are classic examples of propaganda with massive contradictions in logic. You seek to incite unrealistic fear with an us-against-them attitude and gross generalisation. If I were a conservative in Briton you would say it would be wrong of me to look at protests in Washington and say all americans are bleeding heart liberals. Yet you look at muslim countries and call them all terrorists.
You slam the german press for generalising and calling american kids fat and lazy, while with the next breath calling Sudan a "backwards ... hellhole".
The fact is the US are the only country to have used an atomic bomb, and yes compared to Hiroshima, where 140 000 people were killed either directly or indirectly, the 3000 at the WTC is only 2% of that number. But those deaths were horrific, and the deaths of civilians should never be countenenced be they american, japenese or iraqi, of which 54 000 have died as a result of the war.
It is bigoted people like you that make the rest of the world want to kill americans, and that's a lot of people who aren't even muslim.

Maybe the radical Muslims will test out their first nuclear weapon on London. What would you say then?

True, all Muslims are radicals, even if only 1% are radicals bent on destroying the Western world (1 billion X .01) You still have 10,000,000 willing to do it. Then if you take 1% of that 10 million, willing and able to use weapons that would kill millions you have 100,000 ultra hard core crazies to deal with.

Ironically if Hiroshima and Nagasaki hadnt been nuked, the world wouldnt have seen the horrors of nuclear war, the Cold War most likely would have turned hot - killing hundreds of millions of people. Unfortunately, Radical Muslims dont fear such consequences as they would view even the deaths of Muslims in retaliation as martyrdom - which is a good thing to them. The fact that 99% of Muslims are peaceful and dont agree with the radicals wont change the outcome.

As for the British during WW II, many consider the Bristish Leaders as War Criminals for the firebombings of Dresden and other German cities in the closing days of WW II which probably killed more people than the A-Bombs did.

Bast, one other thing. As for the Iraqi civilian deaths, 90% of those were people were killed by their fellow peace loving Muslims using car bombs, guns or real torture (not silliness like human pyrammids, standing for long periods and other mind games)

Why arent people protesting against the radical Muslims who are doing most of the killing?

Unfortunately 1 or more cities will likely have to be incinerated in the nuclear hell fire before the Islamic nations get serious about destroying the radicals in their midst. If a city or 2 go up in flames hopefully it will be London or Paris. I doubt it will be anything like the scenario portrayed in the CBS series JERICHO, but then again if they get their hands on stolen Russian nuclear material, who knows.

Again, resorting to complete propaganda, and in the case of the previous post, pure invention, you prove my previous point. Where are earth are you getting figures of 1% radicals?? Those are completly invented.
My point was how none of the statements made here are factual, they are vague and inflammatory, saying things like "many people".
I also noted that the killing of any and all civilians is deplorable, and it is entirely true that the "Anglo-American bombing of German cities claimed between 305,000 and 600,000 civilian lives", which only puts more lives lost at the hands of america.

Your assumption that I am British, merely shows that the only tactics you can use to defend your statments are by attacking a perceived enemy, instead of with facts.

It is the most naive thing in the world to think that bombing cities will end a threat. If I were to bomb NY, Washington or LA, would all US citizens bow down in fear to me and do everything I tell them to? Of course not, they would fight back. Making war against an entire religion is only going to cause even more violence, as americans become the most hated people in the world.

If I were to bomb NY, Washington or LA, would all US citizens bow down in fear to me and do everything I tell them to? Of course not, they would fight back.

The implication being, it's not all right to fight back until this happens.

I also don't worry so much about being "hated." Little children "hate" their parents for not letting them drink those tasty beverages under the sink. Drunk drivers hate cops for arresting them and taking their licenses away. Criminals hate cops for preventing them from committing crime.

The same thing happens to those of us who point out that there are radical Islamists out there. 13% of Young Islamic Males in Britain support terrorist organizations like Al Qaeda. Naturally, those of us who point out these unpleasant truths, and want to do something about it, will be hated by those who want to live in denial.

"as americans become the most hated people in the world."

You obviously hate yourself. I suggest you visit Dr. Jack Kevrokian to solve your problem.

Somehow I thought the US was a christian nation?

Why does its people seem to follow the exact opposite to the guy who created this particular religion in the first place?

Love thy neighbour and forgive the sinners for they are misguided and the whole philosophy that is the foundation of the religion, not just some commas in the text.

I don't think religion allows you to choose the parts you like (gays are teh suck) but leave out the inconveniences.

It's not as if war or anything causing massive death was somehow among the things christians are not supposed to do according to some list of very important criteria.

There ought to be some sort of list. Some principles that people should follow and thrive on for the mutual survival of all. Maybe a small list, say with 10 items that would make sense to any sane adult.

Personally, I don't care what the rest of the world thinks about me. I don't base my own self worth on whether a Frenchman likes me or not.

But I WILL defend my way of life. And if it means I have to attack the other guy before he kills me and my family, I will choose me and my family every time.

That's the main difference between us and liberals. The liberals have an uncanny knack of siding with those who would rather destroy us, and of defending them when they do, and of not being able to interpret a ligitimate threat for what it is, and of waiting until it's too late, and then turning their backs on the situation, and of later blaming the U.S. for starting it in the first place instead of doing something about it.

Grow some balls, man! I'd hate to have your kind in charge of defending us! Whether you want to believe it or not, the world is a hard, terrible place. Us claiming we're a Christian nation might save our souls, but not our lives.

Rich I was directing my comments at the poster before you, that Bast guy.

As for your comments...if we DID follow these 10 rules as you suggest, and not everyone in the world decided to go along, I'd say it's pretty much a guarantee that the people who decided it's okay to kill others could run the show, don't you think?

I'd go along with it if the entire human race would, and all of their descendants for the rest of eternity. We could have ourselves a love fest and a group-world-hug. But just as soon as someone DOESN'T go along, just as soon as some power hungry leader rises up and throws off the shackles of these 10 rules and decides he CAN kill anyone who doesn't follow him, what do we do? Die?

When someone gets out of line we act rationally. We especially avoid going psycho ourselves on the psychos because the whole process quickly becomes pointless and self-destructive. Luckily, only a few people actually try stupid things. The rest of us want to live according to the very principles on which the US was founded: life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

Cancer, tobacco, alcohol and bad drivers each kill more each month than all combined acts of terrorism in the past 100 years. That was the point of the article and one which I almost had a heart attack reading from a major US newspaper. It was so obvious for everyone outside the country and for so nany years that 9/11 was blown out of every proportion, least of which is the 100-200, depending on body count, million dead in the wars of the 20th century, all of which, like previous wars of humankind, were entirely avoidable from at least one side and pointless from any perspective you would want to address. War is inherently destructive, least of which in economic terms, and certainly not a policy that will significantly expand anyone's power.

Point all you want to every single event in which empires grew vast and wide on war and pillage, it doesn't really matter. Those tyrants and warlords are all dead and nobody gives a damn about them except to deride their foolishness or pass an exam. There is a reason why the most admired people in human history, with very few exceptions in twisted cultures, are those who built nations through constructive policies, inventions and peace: it's our best chance of survival. It does so happen that most people actually like surviving.

Tyrants make more interesting narratives but they are unequivocally hated with very few exceptions from any brown-nose close enough to hope replacing the great booboo of the week.

You really should care about what other people think because as you may have noticed, things almost unquestionnably go wrong when you don't. Not a single voice was heard in the months after 9/11 questionning the reasons why it happened and what it means. As a result, more mistakes were made and the situation worsened in every possible way.

Cultures matter as much to people living in caves as they matter to those living in palaces. You cannot change people's mentality at the point of a gun. You certainly can kill them, but that would only get you so far as to save your own ass. Luckily for us north americans, there are 3000 miles of water on one side and 5000 miles to the other with very little danger coming either from the north of the south. The idea of any military even getting more than a million soldiers on the continent is barely thinkable. And even that would not come even close to controlling 20,000 square miles.

There is no such thing as evil, murderous tyrants and madmen of unlimited cruelty. These are characters from stories, tales and exagerations or demonizations. Everyone has a reason to do what they do and nobody who is capable of doing anything does so without thinking about the reasons to do it.

We even have a marvelous inventions for those people who actually think that way: prison. There they can go on as long as they like fantasizing how great it would be for everyone to die. They can even yell about it while we go on with our pursuit of life, liberty and happiness.

And the last thing the article meant was that 9/11 was no big deal. Simply that there much more dangerous, much close dangers around and that it would be wiser to take interest in them rather than waste time and money on idiots who want to one of the things that has failed systematically in human history: change a culture through fear.

Force can manage that to some degree, but luckily the forces of peace and reason have immensely more power than the lunatics will ever achieve as long as we can act rationally.

How many times have we read of horrible things happening in other parts of the world? An earthquake kills thousands, a ferry sinks and kills hundreds, storms, mudslides, bombs, genocide. There's an awful lot of bad stuff happening all over.

To us, we read about it, then get on with our lives. The reason? It didn't happen to us, and it doesn't affect us. I feel horrible when I read about it, but two and three years later I don't want to still be reading about it.

If a tragedy happens to someone I know, I feel bad for them, but not nearly as bad as they feel. The closer you are to the situation, the more it touches you, the more you want to remember it, and remind others of it.

The rest of the world was not attacked on 9/11, and I can understand that they want to get past it. They've got their own problems, sometimes worse. They've got tidal waves destroying entire villages, they've got genocidal maniacs murdering families in their huts. They've got their own problems.

But 9/11 happened to MY country. To me, it is a big deal. The idea being put forth is that because it didn't effect the rest of the world, we should put it into perspective. But perspective is relative. To me, my family is the most important thing in the world. But Some guy in China might not want to hear about my kids.

To say we should get past 9/11 because others in the world are tired of hearing about it is putting their concerns above mine. I don't want them to stop talking about or writing about their problems, and I have the same view towards my problems.

9/11 was an American problem. Many Americans actually see themselves as part of a sort of One World Nation, and actually put that loyalty before their American loyalty, but not me. As a citizen of the world, I put my loyalty to my U.S. citizenship first.

9/11 wasn't a big deal to many people, but it was to me.

Rich, when you say "change a culture through fear" doesn't work, I have to point out that crazy dictators have been doing it for thousands of years. Look at the history of many of the ancient cultures of the middle east. They were taken over by Islam, and through fear of harsh penalties, they gave up their previous cultures. Egypt is a perfect example.

That's just one scenario. Ancient Rome used fear of harsh penalties to change many cultures they conquered. I won't say it always worked, but it often worked.

Also, when you said "There is no such thing as evil, murderous tyrants and madmen of unlimited cruelty", that's a very odd statement. To speak in absolutes that cover every leader the world has ever seen, why you must have great powers.

Saying they all have a reason to do what they do doesn't somehow negate that they are evil, murderous tryants. History if full of evil, murderous tyrants. Don't revise history and hope the world will suddenly be a peaceful place. That's a dangerous attitude.

Power is a strong aphrodisiac. The world is full of people who would kill you for the lust of killing you. Denying it doesn't change reality.

Rich, you are an idiot.
Your whole theme is "do nothing and the muderers will not hurt you". They ARE killing THOUSANDS right now. Have you no brain? not resisting only means that the murderer has an easy time of it AND also by not resisting or even VOICING AN OBJECTION, you have given them the RIGHT TO KILL.

And as for the oceans "protecting" us, that was only true in the first half of the ninteenth century. The steamship negated that "protection", the airplane made it a pipe dream:
In 1942, a Japanese sub surfaced and fired several shells at a shore battery in Washington. Later it TWICE launched an AIRPLANE to fire bomb a national forest in an attempt to start a wild fire that could have burned millions of acers and several towns. The Japanese then went further south and fired FOURTY SEVEN shells at an oil refinery.
AND ALL OUT SHORE BATTERYS, BEACH PATROLS AND AIR PATROLS COULDN'T DO A DAMN THING ABOUT IT!

Get a REAL life Richie-boy!

Only 13% of Muslim males in Britain support Al Queda? That isn't as many as normally found. Muslim men sympathize with bin Laden and terrorism by much higher margins in most Muslim nations. In the West Bank/Gaza Strip for example, 90% responded yes to the question of support for Israel's destruction and jihad.

Thousands of miles of ocean didn't stop 19 guys from killing 3000 people on 9-11-2001.

Of all the moonbat rationalizations to "Don't Worry, Be Happy" about Islamo-fascism, the "we don't have to worry because we've got our mighty oceans to protect us" is probably the dumbest.

Also, Muslims in the US are already beginning to radicalize, in case one hasn't noticed, and make demands. It begins when cab drivers refuse to take people with alcohol or seeing eye dogs (Minneapolis) and radicals demand that women remain veiled even when establishing identity is legally important (Michigan and Florida). The demands will only get worse.

Who said do nothing?

I merely said be more intelligent and don't go on psychotic hunting trips (please don't shoot anyone in the face). Act rationally (i.e. no vengeful bloodlusts) like civilized people do. There is a world of difference between not reacting at all (stupid) and reacting with equal or greater force and indiscreminate brutality (also stupid and in every sense completely contradictory with all christian teachings).

In absolute terms, terrorism is somewhere between the 30th and the 40th most pressing dangers on the planet, if not lower. You have thousands of times more chances of being hit by a drunk driver going to the grocery store than even coming within 100 miles of a terrorist incident. These people are criminals and are neither worse nor better than the thousands of mob bosses, dictators and all-around jackasses who wanted to own everything within their grasp in the past century alone.

Government abuse, especially if unchecked by a slumbering and complacent population, is a much more systematic, much more murderous and effective slaughtering machine than any stateless group has ever achieved.

Ego is by far the most dangerous force in the world and there is plenty of ego that goes around when people are calling for the murder of thousands of innocents.

As my first comment said, the US is supposed to be a christian nation. I don't care much for religion, my moral virtue is innate and I do not need a system of beliefs to strenghten it. Many people are misguided but we went a far way from our barbaric past, back when everyone would be considered psychotic and mentally unstable by today's standards.

But as a founding principle for what over 90% of the people here are supposed to believe, you set them aside very quickly and engage in very much the same stupid mistakes people in the Middle East do when they think Osama is just darn awesome for sticking up to the people who keep wanting to control them and have bombed them for decades.

my moral virtue is innate and I do not need a system of beliefs to strenghten it

Every person I've ever known with that philosophy has been a complete, self-centered jerk.

Good for you.

Luckily not all people correspond to stereotypical and predictable attitudes.

I just don't need to be scared into acting towards all people the same way I would like them to act towards me (like calling other people idiots... ahem...).

Way to focus on the splinter by the way.

Over the last few months, I've lost all respect for libertarians. They're just as batty and obnoxious as the left-liberals these days. So, when a libertarian begins ranting that we're on the verge of a police state because the government is monitoring enemy communications in wartime, and terrorism is no big deal because it mostly happens to other people, I tend to give him about as much credence as I give the "Mossad flew remote controlled aircraft into the WTC" crowd.