General discussion


Tyranny of the offended

By MirrorMirror ·
I am looking for understanding, not flames. Seriously. I do not know any Muslims who can explain things to me. My son is putting himself in harms way to help bring freedom to Muslims. I have a serious stake in understanding what is going on.

Muslims around the world are offended by cartoons and are making threats of boycotts and violence. I have been watching this unfold, wondering where it would lead and am very dissapointed at the reaction from the Muslim world.

If the media and the world gives in to the insane Muslim response then we will all have a much more difficult time in the future defending ourselves from anyone else who makes demands because they are "offended". Lots of things offend me, but I know that I cannot go around threatening people and governments over them.

Let me state that I do not believe that the Muslim reaction that is being shown in the media is the norm. However, where are the moderate Muslims denouncing the extremists? Someone, please, give me something to show me that there is reason and tolerance in the Muslim world.

When Pat Robertson stuck his foot in his mouth not too long ago with his insensitive remarks about Ariel Sharon, Christian moderates all over denounced what Robertson said. Is is possible that most Muslims believe that they should kill someone over a CARTOON? Take a look at the signs on Michelle Malkin's site...

I do not understand how Muslims can seriously demand tolerance for themselves but will not tolerate anyone else. That is just plain delusional. All I can say is, support the Danish and anyone else who is not cowering down to threats.

This conversation is currently closed to new comments.

Thread display: Collapse - | Expand +

All Comments

Collapse -

Corbeau, anyone?

by krose In reply to Why is crow on the menu?

Both France and Germany are present and fighting in Afghanistan - Iraq is not the only islamic country under occupation.

N.B. Canada is also in Afghanistan, currently taking over operations around Khandahar.

None of these three chose to go into Iraq, despite being in Afghanistan before the invasion.

Maybe there are reasons for this choice - some related to the manner in which the US conducts operations in Afghanistan - I can think of four: four Canadian soldiers killed when an American jet bombed a Canadian training exercise near Kabul.

Collapse -

nice to hear some american support for her allies

by mjwx In reply to May I also add

I assume this support is not just for demark, but reaches unilaterally across all your allies.

If so might I say cheers.

Collapse -

Australia good ally, also

by Montgomery Gator In reply to nice to hear some america ...

Cheers in return. Yes, I believe the USA should come to the support of our allies, and vice versa.

I am a strong supporter of Australia, also. Your country has been a very good ally of the USA. American and Australian troops have fought together in many wars, from WWI to the current wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

And I am glad we now have Japan as a good ally instead of the situation over 60 years ago, when the USA and Australia (along with the UK, NZ, and a few other nations) had to fight Japan.

Now, lets hope we can continue to develop and strengthen the alliance with India, also. They are well on the way to becoming a major power, and could be a good ally of both Australia and the USA.

And I hope the new prime minister of Canada can help strengthen the strained relations between them and the USA.

Collapse -

The US has a habit of goint to war way too late.

by X-MarCap In reply to nice to hear some america ...

The US with our oceans protecting us for 150 years has now the habit of getting into a war late.

1. We should have stopped Hitler in Poland.
2. We should have stopped Japan at their incursions into China in 1937.
3. We should have aided France in Vietnam.
4. We should have crossed the Yalu river and kicked the North Koreans and the Chicoms into the stone age.

This is in just a 15 year period. The mistakes are being repeated over and over...


Collapse -

Just a small reality check

by neilb@uk In reply to The US has a habit of goi ...

The Germans would have whipped your asses in Poland.

Two things that contributed to the German defeat were the Russians entering the war against the Germans - which they weren't at the time of Poland - and the Battle of Britain which stopped any German invasion of Britain. When you entered the war it was exactly the right time and you had the opportunity to tool up your war materiel factories and train your men with a secure base.

Then you could move into France and beyond. Up against the Wermacht in 1939, you'd have been buried just like we and the French were!

The Vietcong whipped you and the French separately and would have done you together.

The only way to have defeated China would have been to nuke them. There are rather too many of them What you got in treaty terms was the best you could have got.

Dream on...

Collapse -

the only reason

by jdclyde In reply to Just a small reality chec ...

recent battles were lost is because of dumbass politicians armchairing the war and not wanting to look like bullies so they launched a "limited campaign".

Forced to fight a jungle war by city rules. Never work.

Collapse -

The main reason but not the only reason.

by mjwx In reply to the only reason

The US suffered from extremely bad intelligence during the Vietnam war. The NVA/VC on the other had had an expensive spy network and a hidden base right under a US regional HQ. This combined with the restrictions you spoke of made Nam a lost cause (IMO).

P.S. the province the Aussie?s protected in Vietnam has one of the lowest levels of guerrilla activity throughout the entire war. 1st, 2nd or 3rd out of 47 at any one time. I was also told it was the most secure place during the Tet offensive (I don?t know how accurate my info is because it came from an Aussie Vietnam vet I met when I was working at a RSL club). Reason why Aussies were more effective than yanks in Vietnam, we were trained jungle fighters.

Collapse -

dumbass politicians armchairing the war

by JamesG In reply to the only reason

Yeah, now we have "real men" like Mr "****" "How many deferrments can I get?" Cheney, and George "got bored and stopped showing up" Awol Bush? Now go ahead and tell me how I support terrorists because I don't worship at the altar of right wing nonsense.

Collapse -

On Vietnam and more

by maxwell edison In reply to Just a small reality chec ...

I'm not a war historian by any stretch of the imagination. But I do know (or believe) this. With 100 percent support at home, I don't believe there's any enemy we couldn't defeat. We did not have 100 percent support at home during Vietnam, nor do we have it against radical Islam.

And don't misinterpret my meaning, either. By saying there's no enemy we couldn't defeat, I don't say that in the sense of attempting to dominate and/or oppress, and/or permanently occupy a land. We just don't do that.

If Vietnam had been waged with the same resolve that the USA and Britain showed in W.W.II, the outcome would have been vastly different. And if the current war against radical Islam were waged with the same resolve the USA and Britain showed in W.W.II, things would be different even today.

Opposition at home actually results in the unintended consequence of providing an ally to the very enemy we're fighting. And we can't fight an enemy with unwavering resolve if we're fighting amongst ourselves.

When a war becomes yet another pawn on the chess board of political expediency, there's going to be a lot of losers. And if we don't win this war against radical Islam, it won't be because we couldn't, but because we didn't want to do it at the expense of overlooking political expediency. Without the 100 percent resolve, the best we can hope for is a stalemate. (And it's not too late to rally behing the "cause" of defeating radical Islam.)

Collapse -


by Tony Hopkinson In reply to On Vietnam and more

I've said it before and I'll say it again. Your late arrival into to the war was a masterful piece of statemanship. The fact that you entered both world wars when you were in no major danger yourselves apart from a potential future one from a united europe is something I'll be forever grateful for. Would have been nicer if you came in earlier, maybe I'd have had a chance to meet my maternal grandfather for instance. May be it would have been over quicker. There again, maybe the phoney war would gave been the end of that part of the conflict, and Adolf could have devoted his entire force against those nasty commies (more than possibly with american help) and we could have been next door to a homicidal racist f'wit sociopath ruling the entire eurasian contintent.

Vietnam was a whole 'nother ball game. The russians must have been laughing their tits off when you went in there. Not sure that was a war you could win militarily either, not unless genocide was an option. Those guys weren't going to meet you toe to toe, and there is no way you could have forced them to do so.

Worse problem with radical islam, war is not the answer. Never seen any large group of people forced to be moderate by sticking a gun in their face. If we trundled across the water, stuck a gun in your face and told you it was for your own good because constitutional monarchies were a better way of doing things, what's the chance of you giving more than lip service to the idea before I took the rifle out of your face ?
Not a deal, I should think. What would you think of the interim government we installed while we threw away that written constitution foolishness ?
Not a deal I should think.
We would have used force to impose our beliefs on you and took away something that you place a high value on. Whether we were correct about monarchies would be immaterial, how long would it take for you to show gratitude for us 'helping' you out.
Silly example I'll admit, but I don't understand why you think tactics that wouldn't work on you would work on them. They may not see a chance to own a car, watch friends and give some lying self serving git a chance to bury his face in the public trough as that much of an improvement.

Related Discussions

Related Forums