Don't Complain about your Government

[dawg 0]

Here's to silencing them :clap2:

And the last time I checked, we couldn't "find" Bin Laden to have a discussion. Next time you chat with him, have him give the White House a call. It'd be nice if he didn't block his caller ID when he did it.

I believe the quote that fits that statement is:

Thats funny right thar, I don't care who you are!

I think the most critical point about this is, Al Qaeda has never been interested in negotiation. I think rather than terrorist "fundamentalist" is a more suitable term.

Let's play how the conversation would almost certainly go:

US / The rest of the world: So, Al Qaeda, what would you like from us to settle this peacefully?

Al Qaeda: Your suicide and enternal torment in hell would be good.

US / The rest of the world: Alright. we'll get right on it.

Al Qaeda: Thanks, but we'll take care of it.

Yes, they "nominally" stand for the total disengagement of US (Infidel) involvement in any "Muslim" country.

I'm half inclined to say "lets give it to them". No involvement whatso-ever. No oil purchases. No humanitarian aid. Nada. Close the boarders. No flights out, no flights in.

You want the real irony? When Al Qaeda formed, it was to fight Soviet involvement in Afghanistan. Something which we, the infidel, helped them do.

Hell, we even spent time showing them how to set up IEDs!

When terrorism is founded in religion, negotiation isn't going to cut it. If terrorism was only based on territorial matters, negotiation would be entirely possible.

They don't want us to "leave" the Middle East. They want us to stop living.

[mousecrazy 2]

To further expound on Dawg's outline, and very lucent illustration, it is important to understand that they have no interest whatsoever in pursuing peace. None. A peaceful world in counter productive to their goals.

This is another lesson in reality. Not everyone is interested in pursuing peace. If a country (Iran, Syria, and many others) specifically call for the total destruction of another (Israel), it can be safely assumed that "peace" is not at the heart of it. These groups like Al Qaeda, Hezbollah, Hamas...they work at the bidding of these terror states.

Let's imagine a world free of Israel.

Will they now be happy and peaceful?

[dawg 0]

Will they now be happy and peaceful?

Probably not, considering the Shi'a don't like the Sunni, and vice versa.

But we have digressed somewhat from Tired_old_man's original thread start.

I've decided to agree with him. I'm not complaining about my government.

It's like complaining about the rain. It doesn't stop it raining.

[mousecrazy 2]

You've got a point, there.

I'm not complaining about my government, either.

[Bettina 0]

Speaking of other country's military forces, and speaking of UN peacekeeping "forces", perhaps this would be an interesting illustration of reality:

France is considering providing only a symbolic force for the United Nations contingent in Lebanon, and not the thousands of troops UN officials had hoped, Le Monde newspaper said on Thursday.

If true, such a move could seriously delay the UN mission, seen as vital to securing peace between Israel and Hezbollah guerrillas, or even scupper the whole operation.

Quoting UN and diplomatic sources, Le Monde said France might send just

a dozen officers

and

around 200 personnel from an engineering division

for the

beefed-up

UN Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL).

President Jacques Chirac’s office said the military options “were still under review.”

I understand they would also like "safety guarantees".

I wonder where they think they are going to get safey guarantees...that is pretty funny. US and Britian are the driving forces...and the french want protection..they hate us. ha ha viva la france

[Tired_Old_Man 1]

I noticed that while I was gone, a consensus was formed. It is easy when people of either the same religion, same ethnic or general background get together for them to agree with each other.

I would like to have seen this (electronic) conversation take place with a equal number of Muslims who are neither terrorists nor fanatics nor extremists. Each person here has reinforced the other. That would not have been so easy to do if there had been other points to hear.

Each of you feels sorry for the people on the 4 planes on 911. Each of you feels sorry for the people in the WTC and the Pentagon, But how many would share the grieve of the civilians in Afghanistan who were first pawns as the Soviet Union took over their country and then watched helplessly as the USA's CIA funded Osama Bin Laden and the other members of the Mujahadeen fought the Soviet army, only to see the CIA and USA funding leave Afghanistan while in ruins once the Soviet army retreated. Wasn't in wonderful of the USA to fight their cold war on Afghanistan soil?

How many feel sorry for the innocent Iraqi civilians who did not elect Saddam Hussein, nor supported him as the USA reined bombs down on their homes? Hussein was also kept in power by the USA when they needed him to fight Iran in years past.

I agree, "When terrorism is founded in religion, negotiation isn't going to cut it. If terrorism was only based on territorial matters, negotiation would be entirely possible." But when we say, "The Bible CLEARLY indicates that we are ALL sinners and that we have no HOPE, other than through the blood of Jesus Christ, to be anything but" then we are as intransigent as they are. When the USA is headed by a president who thinks he gets his marching orders from Jesus and leads a fight against people who think they are fighting for Allah, then peace is impossible.

Allah is the same God as the God of the Old and New Testaments. The Qur'an says that Christians, Jews and Muslims have equal rights to Heaven. Many people who claim to be Christians are blind to the teachings of Jesus Christ. Where in the Bible did Jesus praise war? Jesus said "blessed be the Peace-maker". Where do the Muslim fanatics get their cries to "kill the infidel" when the Qur'an definitely states that Jews and Christians are not infidels.

This war is not based on religious beliefs. It is based on religious misconceptions and misperceptions. We have Christian ministers who think that Israel should take over the Palestinian state in order to bring on Armageddon. Who is the anti-Christ in that scenario? The Christian ministers?

It was mentioned earlier in the thread about how hard it is to talk to Bin Laden and it was also mentioned which countries fund Bin Laden, Hamas and Hezbollah. So why isn't the USA talking to those countries who are funding these terrorist groups? Because we would rather kick butt. But how many people are we going to lose before we realize that we are on the wrong path? How many more 911's are we willing to have? Are we going to invade Iran and Syria? Or should we just nuke'em?

What is the USA going to do about the North Korean underground nuclear test that the intelligence agencies are saying is coming up? The USA warned them that a test will be considered provocative. The USA warned them that firing their ICBM would be provocative, so they fired it on the USA's birthday and also fired 6 more shorter range rockets to stick it up BuSh's nose. The USA threatens and does nothing. The USA might have tried negotiation. The USA could not have done any worse.

The USA sent 150,000 troops to Iraq in 2003. The USA sent 15,000 troops to Afghanistan in 2002. Iraq had never attacked the USA, had no weapons to attack the USA and no means to get the weapons to the USA if they had any. So the USA invaded with 150,000 troops. Afghanistan was the country where the attack on the USS Cole was launched from. Afghanistan was the country where both of the attacks on the WTC and the Pentagon were launched from. So the USA invaded with 15,000 troops.

Of the those 165,000 troops, instead of sending a split of 150,000/15,000. The USA should have sent a split of 0/100,000 and then maybe they could have caught Osama Bin Laden and they would have 65,000 just in case something else came up. The USA should not have destroyed Afghanistan towns and villages with B52 carpet bombing. They should have used ground troops with fighter, fighter-bomber and helicopter gun-ship support. The USA had a right to invade Afghanistan because the government was protecting people (Al-Quiada) who had attacked the USA. The USA had no right to do to the innocent civilians of Afghanistan what Al-Quiada had done to the USA's innocent civilians.

In neither the Bible nor the Qur'an do two wrongs make a right.

[Tired_Old_Man 1]

BTW, I am not saying that Al-Quiada, Hezbollah, Hamas, Syria, Iran or North Korea are right. I am just saying that the USA is not right either in their dealings.

It is getting difficult to distinguish between quotes of Jerry Falwell, Pat Robertson and Osama Bin Laden. Take this Quiz and try to guess which of those 3 said each of the 20 quotes.

[gadgetlady 4]

I agree, "When terrorism is founded in religion, negotiation isn't going to cut it. If terrorism was only based on territorial matters, negotiation would be entirely possible." But when we say, "The Bible CLEARLY indicates that we are ALL sinners and that we have no HOPE, other than through the blood of Jesus Christ, to be anything but" then we are as intransigent as they are. When the USA is headed by a president who thinks he gets his marching orders from Jesus and leads a fight against people who think they are fighting for Allah, then peace is impossible.

Of course, you took what I said completely out of context. You were the one who brought up the Bible in your discussion of communism, disparaging Christians by implying that if all Christians were as perfect (pure) as they purported to be, communism would be possible. It is quite common for non-Christians to misinterpret, misrepresent, and mislead others about Biblical issues, so I was clarifying what the Bible REALLY says (for anyone who might believe your implication).

A theoretical argument about communisim and sin is wholly different from the reality that the terrorists are attacking non-Muslims because their holy book commands them to do so. Specifically, it says "fight and slay the pagans wherever you find them?" (9:5). Bush has never claimed, nor do I think he believes, that Jesus has commanded him to kill all non-Christians. He certainly wouldn't need to go to the other side of the world to do so.

[gadgetlady 4]

BTW, I am not saying that Al-Quiada, Hezbollah, Hamas, Syria, Iran or North Korea are right. I am just saying that the USA is not right either in their dealings.

OK, then, WHAT IS RIGHT? What should we, instead, be doing? How do we solve this problem? Go ahead, earn your Nobel Peace Prize. Tell us how to fix it.

As Tony Blair rightly said (paraphrased), one of the best gauges of the success of a country is how many people want in, and how many people want out. I don't see a huge influx of immigrants into the Middle East. And I don't see a bunch of Americans running across the border into Mexico.

[mousecrazy 2]

T.O.M., I read with interest your continuing theoretical confusion. Try as I might, I cannot find where you would draw a line...or if you would draw a line. You are worried about N. Korea. Me, too. Would pre-emptive action be warranted here? Spying? Wire-tapping? Neutralization? Of course, this has nothing to do with Islamic radicalism. Does it?

What do you do when there are no more conversations? When the bottom line is: You exist, and we do not want you to exist. Only Muslim countries shall exist. Muslim countries where no more religious freedom will exist, where women will be subjected to honor killings, stonings, and God knows what else, where children are raised to aspire to suicide. There's a bright and shining future.

Earlier I asked only a couple of questions. No one has answered them. I think that is interesting, too.

Also interesting is that there have not been any Muslims speaking here...they are certainly welcome. It would be refreshing to hear from that perspective if they are happy with the radical Islamists taking over their religion.

Criticism isn't all that difficult, is it? I extend the invitation to enter the world of reality, and grabble with these issues. What would be the perfect plan, sir? And remember, no one here in the U.S. is trying to kill all the non-Christians, so let's not go there.

[TommyO 5]

My Thoughts and mine alone,

1. Helping someone who does not want your help especially when that help is only given when it is in your best interest seems less than helpfull. Imagine then wondering why they don't like you and even better it's almost comical that you would suggest they pay you back.

2. The only comman thread in the aforementioned conflicts is the American presence. Things that make you go HHHMMM!

[Tired_Old_Man 1]

Of course, you took what I said completely out of context. You were the one who

brought up the Bible in your discussion of communism, disparaging Christians by implying that if all Christians were as perfect (pure) as they purported to be, communism would be possible.

I didn't disparage Christians. I stated that Communism would me possible if Christians were as pure as the Bible wants them to be.

Because human nature is greed. If people were as pure as the Bible wanted them to be, Communism might work.

I am sure that Jesus wants Christians to be pure, though he knows that they can never achieve that goal.

Jesus may have been the world's first and best Communist. When he fed the multitudes with the 2 fish and 5 loaves of bread, didn't he give to each based on their individual needs? And when Jesus ministered to the sick, poor and needy, didn't he also give to each as their needs required? That is the main tenant of Communism, each gives according to his ability and each receives according to his needs and since Jesus didn't have the human frailty of greed, he was able to work and give without the motive of capitalism.

It is quite common for non-Christians to misinterpret, misrepresent, and mislead others about Biblical issues, so I was clarifying what the Bible REALLY says (for anyone who might believe your implication).

I am a Christian, though I might not be the same type as you. I have seen Christians on TV shows and spoke to others in person who say that only their type of Christian will enter the kingdom of Heaven. These so-called Christians claim that Baptists, Catholics and other types of Christians plus Jews will not go to Heaven. They tell me it is in the Bible, word for word.

A theoretical argument about communisim and sin is wholly different from the reality that the terrorists are attacking non-Muslims because their holy book commands them to do so. Specifically, it says "fight and slay the pagans wherever you find them?" (9:5).

The Qur'an does not consider Jews or Christians as Pagans. And the Qur'an only allows the killing of Pagans in defense. Not going over 8,000 miles to defend and kill pre-emptively, but when the pagans are attacking.

The misinterpreting of the Qur'an is on a par with the misinterpreting of the Bible which allowed for the Inquisition and Salem Witch Hunts.

Bush has never claimed, nor do I think he believes, that Jesus has commanded him to kill all non-Christians. He certainly wouldn't need to go to the other side of the world to do so.

But BuSh has done a pretty good job of killing non-christians, with or without the permission of Jesus.

T.O.M., I read with interest your continuing theoretical confusion. Try as I might, I cannot find where you would draw a line...or if you would draw a line. You are worried about N. Korea. Me, too. Would pre-emptive action be warranted here? Spying? Wire-tapping? Neutralization? Of course, this has nothing to do with Islamic radicalism. Does it?

Again I say negotiate with your enemy. Talking to your friends gets you little, just as preaching to the choir gets few converts. And the USA has few friends left since BuSh took office.

As far as spying goes? Nothing wrong with it.

Torture: NO!!

Wire-tapping? As long as there are court orders. The Republicans try to paint Liberals and Democrats as soft on security because the Liberals and Democrats want the administration to follow the constitution and the laws of the land. There is a special court set up that is open 24/7 for these cases. They have approved all but 4 of over 20,000 requests by the government for wire-tapping permission since the court was set up. And there is a 72 hour retroactive clause which says that if you accidentally hear anything without a wire-tap, you have 3 days to apply for a wire-tap and when approved, all of the last three days will be legal. Not good enough says BuSh, Cheney and Gonzalez.

Is the president's name BuSh or Big Brother?

Neutralization? What's that? A euphemism for killing leaders? Of course not. How would we feel if BuSh was Neutralized? I do not like BuSh, but I would not want him killed by the people the USA is fighting.

In WWll, we knew the war was over when the Japanese and Germans signed peace treaties and surrendered. Ask yourself this: How will we know when the war on terror is over? When 1.2 billion Muslims are dead? When Bin Laden is dead? Did putting Hussein in jail solve the Iraqi Problem?

OK, then, WHAT IS RIGHT? What should we, instead, be doing? How do we solve this problem? Go ahead, earn your Nobel Peace Prize. Tell us how to fix it.

What is right? To always strive for peace and the protection of life. I am not speaking about pin sized embryos, but live breathing humans. I am not talking about peace through war.

How do I solve the problem? I already stated my solution above: Negotiate. Bin Laden would be hard to talk to because the USA has put a price on his head, and even if the USA arranged a truce with him (which Bin Laden offered earlier this year) the US credibility outside of the USA is too low for him to accept a meeting place, but Syrian president Al-Assad, Iran's president Ahmadinejad, Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah, Shiite Militia leader Muqtada al-Sadr and Kim Jong-il are all available for negotiation, as is Fidel Castro.

The reason I bring up Castro while speaking about negotiation is this: China has some oil rigs off the coast of Cuba, so now Castro can feed his people and China will take oil that the USA thought was theirs.

I could (as a Liberal and Democrat) blame this situation on BuSh, but as a human Earthling, I will place the blame where it really belongs: On all the US presidents and the congresses since JFK. They were never willing to negotiate with Castro. Maybe if the USA had taken a stance of lets give him something he wants for something we would like (one more right at a time for Cubans), we could have avoided this situation. We can't throw China out of Cuban waters. We can't nuke them. They have ICBM's and nuclear warheads. Even if we could destroy China with no retaliation, Wal-Mart and Home Depot would go bankrupt and the US public would have no consumer goods to buy.

I wonder what BuSh will do?

Nothing, because these are not Muslim terrorists.

TOM

Dear Ms. Gadgetlady: Please do not take anything personal. We can disagree and still be civil.

[Tired_Old_Man 1]

More of my solution:

I wrote this over a week ago and e-mailed to my address book. I posted it at some forums, maybe even here:

If Israel was losing this war, I wonder: "How long would it take the USA to get a cease fire resolution passed and implemented?

For all those that complain about the logistics of a cease fire, how about this proposal?

Since the Israeli attacks have cut off all roads in South Lebanon, and since the Israeli and US administrations are worried about Hezbollah re-arming if Israeli pulls out of South Lebanon, how about if the USA uses troop carrying helicopters to move Lebanese army personal into South Lebanon? And for every Lebanese soldier that is transported into South Lebanon, one Israeli soldier can be helicoptered out by Israeli helicopter. Then there will be no vacuum in which Hezbollah could be resupplied or regroup.

Nah, that would never work. Right Ms. Rice? Right Mr. BuSh?

I guess it is better to just let the civilians are each side die and suffer.

Isn't it a shame that we don't have a "Right to Life" president?

[Tired_Old_Man 1]

I wrote this just before the USA invaded Iraq in March, 2003. It may be dated, but the point may still be valid.

One day while baby-sitting my 4 year old great-grand-daughter, I put Sara on my knee and told her how I became a war hero 28 years ago in the year 2003:

You see Sara, The bulk of the US Armed Services were still mopping up in Iraq, when the MooLongs arrived from outer-space in their terrifying spacecraft. They were humanoid in appearance, but were at least 200 or 300 years ahead of us in weapons and communications technology.

The first thing they did when they arrived was to take over all our frequencies and tell us that they were upset by Earth's war-like policies. Cell-phone, TV, radio; no matter what you tried to use, you got the same message. "We will replace your leaders at every level in every country. We will put an end to war. We will give you medical and food production advancements beyond your wildest dreams. But, we will be in charge."

Well, I had voted for Gore in 2000, but George W. was still our president, so of course, we were not going to stand for this. Even though, the Stock Market had crashed, jobs were diappearring and the country had gone into the toilet since George W. had become president, he was still our elected leader. Well, at least as close as you could get. Those other countries, cowards that they were, gave in, but the USA was not going to capitulate. (Sorry, honey, that means give up.) Well, first they leveled the White House and most of Washington DC's governmental structures. Then they did the same in every state capital and in the big cities. I almost cried when I saw Mike Bloomberg; homeless!

With their advanced systems, they were able to suspend the planes, carrying our service-men, in mid-air so that the Gulf War ll heros could not come back to defend us. After a month of relentless bombardment, we would still not give-in. I had big arguments with some of my neighbors, because the countries that did surrender their governments were now living a picturesque disease free life. But, I would not let my country down. When the MooLong's ground assault started, there was just police and armed citizens left to fight.

On that fateful day, we had barricaded our block with cars which we pushed into place since they were without gasoline. The humanoid MooLongs in their eery bullet-proof armored suits marched towards us. Behind my Toyota stood myself, my next door neighbor Russel and a police patrolman. We only had pistols, but were ready to die for our country. Russel, at least as scared as I, said, "Why are we fighting them? We have no chance to win. Our lives will be better under them. And besides, I voted for Gore!" With that he hurdled my Camry and yelled, "Don't shoot! I surrender!"

I had never shot a man, but I figured I needed to stop Russel, so I screamed, "Russel, come back or I'll shot you in the back!" Now, I knew that I could never kill a man, but I figured, I would shot him in the lower leg and save him from his terrible mistake. As I was in the process of shooting, Russel stumbled and my bullet meant for his leg found his spine instead. I started to cry as I saw his body explode.

But, the police officer told me, "You are a true hero. He was a traitor. We would have hung him!" It did little to make me feel better at first, but the more I though about it, the better I felt. I realize now 28 years later that I was a war hero. Anyway, George W. stayed in hiding until the battle was over. The MooLongs took over the Earth, but what the MooLongs didn't know was that a disease that they had never found a cure for, had just started in Asia. SARS as we call it now had just starting killing humans. The MooLongs had invented vaccines for every known disease, but not knowing about this one when they left their home-planet, they died like the rats that they were. We put George W. back into power. Too bad that the MooLongs' technology died along with them.

After the war, the patrolman, who fought at my side on that fateful day, put me in for a medal. I was awarded the "Red Star", a medal designed for fighting alien invaders. Barbara Bush designed it herself. So you see, Sara, "Great-Grand-Pa is an American Hero".

[Telly 4]

*sighs................................*