Muslim Apologists?

[monte]

I saw this on another forum. How do I respond to it?


"Radical Muslim's find a reason to kill people all over the world. Their reason for killing American's is the "interventionism". Their reason for killing Indians is their right to Kashmir. Their reason for killing Australians in Bali is there stopping of the genocide in East Timor. Their reason for violence against the Dutch, a cartoon portraying Muhammand. You catching the pattern here? Everywhere you turn on the planet they are bellyaching about something."

[Wren]

Not a troll

[pcosmar]

:rolleyes:
:(

[angelatc]

A lot of of us used to think like you do, then we educated ourselves, and now understand that it certainly isn't nearly as simple as Pam Geller makes it out to be. There are aggressions on both sides. Radical democracy-spreading has a much higher body count so far.

You really need to do a lot of non-internet reading, as well as explore the proper use of apostrophes, before you'll be perceived as actually conversingly intelligently.

Before you go around advocating for holocausts, maybe read something by Michael Scheuer. Please?

[specsaregood]

So uhm, what excuse do the "christian" radicals use?

[monte]

No I am not a troll! This is a typicall response I get when I try and explain a non interventionist foreign policy, and how our governments meddling in the ME is at the root of the terrorists motivation. Just curious as to how you guys handle a response to the one I posted? You guys are awesome, here!

[ibaghdadi]

Radical Muslim's find a reason to kill people all over the world. Their reason for killing American's is the "interventionism". Their reason for killing Indians is their right to Kashmir. Their reason for killing Australians in Bali is there stopping of the genocide in East Timor. Their reason for violence against the Dutch, a cartoon portraying Muhammand. You catching the pattern here? Everywhere you turn on the planet they are bellyaching about something.

You talking to me?

[angelatc]

No I am not a troll! This is a typicall response I get when I try and explain a non interventionist foreign policy, and how our governments meddling in the ME is at the root of the terrorists motivation. Just curious as to how you guys handle a response to the one I posted? You guys are awesome, here!

You can't change their minds, because most people are not capable of admitting they could be wrong. Avoid that topic and focus on economics.

[teacherone]

Radical Muslim's find a reason to kill people all over the world. Their reason for killing American's is the "interventionism". Their reason for killing Indians is their right to Kashmir. Their reason for killing Australians in Bali is there stopping of the genocide in East Timor. Their reason for violence against the Dutch, a cartoon portraying Muhammand. You catching the pattern here? Everywhere you turn on the planet they are bellyaching about something.

http://www.sabinabecker.com/images/not-another-dumbass.jpg

[monte]

This was actually the response I got, when I posted an article on another forum by Michael Scheuer.

[amy31416]

A lot of of us used to think like you do, then we educated ourselves, and now understand that it certainly isn't nearly as simple as Pam Geller makes it out to be. There are aggressions on both sides. Radical democracy-spreading has a much higher body count so far.

You really need to do a lot of non-internet reading, as well as explore the proper use of apostrophes, before you'll be perceived as actually conversingly intelligently.

Before you go around advocating for holocausts, maybe read something by Michael Scheuer. Please?

+rep


No I am not a troll! This is a typicall response I get when I try and explain a non interventionist foreign policy, and how our governments meddling in the ME is at the root of the terrorists motivation. Just curious as to how you guys handle a response to the one I posted? You guys are awesome, here!

So, perhaps there's a better way to make your point to us.

Good luck and welcome to the forum. Angela's advice is sound if you are having trouble arguing the non-interventionist viewpoint.

[jmdrake]

So uhm, what excuse do the "christian" radicals use?

Word.

http://markhumphrys.com/Bitmaps/plo.ira.jpg

[Anti Federalist]

No I am not a troll! This is a typicall response I get when I try and explain a non interventionist foreign policy, and how our governments meddling in the ME is at the root of the terrorists motivation. Just curious as to how you guys handle a response to the one I posted? You guys are awesome, here!

Cancel the Troll Patrol call out...

Iran and the revolution of 1979 is the modern day starting point of Islamic Jihadism.

Research "Operation Ajax" - see how the UK and the USA violently overturned a peaceful pro western government in order secure access to oil fields.

Oh, and then installed a puppet dictator that unleashed a 25 year reign of terror on the country.

Then research the Iran/Iraq war. See how the USA funded Saddam Hussein in a bloody 8 year border war with Iran that killed 3 million Iranians.

Then you'll know why they "hate us".

Hint: it ain't because of "freedom".

[Wren]

No I am not a troll! This is a typicall response I get when I try and explain a non interventionist foreign policy, and how our governments meddling in the ME is at the root of the terrorists motivation. Just curious as to how you guys handle a response to the one I posted? You guys are awesome, here!


Edit: nevermind, now i get it lol. should have made it clear in the first post

[amy31416]

You talking to me?

I laughed!

+rep.

[jmdrake]

This was actually the response I got, when I posted an article on another forum by Michael Scheuer.

Ah. Ok. Well welcome to RPF. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt. It would have been helpful if initially you'd said something to the effect of "How do I respond to this?" But water under the bridge.

Here's a possible response. "If interventionism is the answer to 'radical Islam' then do still you think overthrowing a secular dictatorship in Iraq and helping an Islamic Republic that is ideologically wed to Iran was a good idea"?

Or just ask them what they think of this video.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zZ0Ndr3KoCQ

Cliff notes:
* Saddam was a stabilizing force in the middle east. He kept Iran in check.
* Nobody can tell me why we are in Afghanistan
* It could turn out that Iraq was the greatest military blunder in U.S. history.

And before someone chimes in with "We can't trust Michael Savage", I do not trust him. But please think strategically. Nobody on the planet can accuse Michael Savage of being an "apologist for Islam" and keep a straight face. So if this guy can say on the radio that our military adventurism in Iraq and Afghanistan has caused more trouble than it's worth, then anyone should be able to figure that out.

[klamath]

Cancel the Troll Patrol call out...

Iran and the revolution of 1979 is the modern day starting point of Islamic Jihadism.

Research "Operation Ajax" - see how the UK and the USA violently overturned a peaceful pro western government in order secure access to oil fields.

Oh, and then installed a puppet dictator that unleashed a 25 year reign of terror on the country.

Then research the Iran/Iraq war. See how the USA funded Saddam Hussein in a bloody 8 year border war with Iran that killed 3 million Iranians.

Then you'll know why they "hate us".

Hint: it ain't because of "freedom".

Use most of this with the exception of the bolded. This will discredit most of the other valid arguments. By a vast majority the Soviets, Germans and French funded the Iraqi war machine. Unless you have been to iraq and seen what Iraqs military was really made of you might get confused by internet stories that the US mainly funded the Iraq Iran war.

[libertybrewcity]

Imagine China coming over to the United States. China uses its power to gain economic advantage. They disrupt democratic reforms taking place. They influence and bribe government officials and leaders to pass legislation and give contracts and natural resources to Chinese companies. These companies now control the country because they control the production, transportation, and sale of water, natural gas, oil, minerals, wood, etc, etc. The people have no say because the government is effectively bought and paid for Chinese officials.

Now the American people are getting pissed. They protest and try to revolt. Chinese sends in its military to control the situation and protect its interests. They bomb buildings, cities, towns. They kill people you know including friends and relatives. You are not alone because everyone else in America is a victim too. They are pissed and want China out.

Get the picture? This happens throughout the world, but China in my story is America and America in my story is a very large number of countries today.

[__27__]

My father drones on to me about the muslims constantly, hes really quite libertarian outside of this issue. The bottom line is you aren't going to change their minds on this one issue ao instead try to open their eyes to a similar and larger issue.

The last time my father was lecturing me about all the people Muslims have killed I showed him the death figures for democide (death by state). Then I added the totals for state run wars and told him that if he helped me to stop democide and state run wars first, id be glad to discuss islqm with him after. He hasn't said so much as a word to me about muslims since.

[Anti Federalist]

Use most of this with the exception of the bolded. This will discredit most of the other valid arguments. By a vast majority the Soviets, Germans and French funded the Iraqi war machine. Unless you have been to iraq and seen what Iraqs military was really made of you might get confused by internet stories that the US mainly funded the Iraq Iran war.

The USSR and the Europeans supplied a great deal of the weapons after we "officially" broke ties with Iraq after the Six Day War.

No question about that at all.

However, starting in 1982, our support for Iraq greatly increased, due specifically to the fact that Iran appeared to be "winning":


Starting in 1982 with Iranian success on the battlefield, the United States made its backing of Iraq more pronounced, normalizing relations with the government, supplying it with economic aid, counter-insurgency training, operational intelligence on the battlefield, and weapons.[3][13]

President Ronald Reagan initiated a strategic opening to Iraq, signing National Security Decision Directive 4-82 and selecting Donald Rumsfeld as his emissary to Hussein, whom he visited in December 1983 and March 1984.[14] According to U.S. ambassador Peter W. Galbraith, far from winning the conflict, "the Reagan administration was afraid Iraq might actually lose."[15]

In 1982, Iraq was removed from a list of State Sponsors of Terrorism to ease the transfer of dual-use technology to that country. According to investigative journalist Alan Friedman, Secretary of State Alexander Haig was "upset at the fact that the decision had been made at the White House, even though the State Department was responsible for the list."[3] "I was not consulted," Haig is said to have complained.

Howard Teicher served on the National Security Council as director of Political-Military Affairs. He accompanied Rumsfeld to Baghdad in 1983.[16] According to his 1995 affidavit and separate interviews with former Reagan and Bush administration officials, the Central Intelligence Agency secretly directed armaments and hi-tech components to Iraq through false fronts and friendly third parties such as Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Egypt and Kuwait, and they quietly encouraged rogue arms dealers and other private military companies to do the same:

[T]he United States actively supported the Iraqi war effort by supplying the Iraqis with billions of dollars of credits, by providing U.S. military intelligence and advice to the Iraqis, and by closely monitoring third country arms sales to Iraq to make sure that Iraq had the military weaponry required. The United States also provided strategic operational advice to the Iraqis to better use their assets in combat... The CIA, including both CIA Director Casey and Deputy Director Gates, knew of, approved of, and assisted in the sale of non-U.S. origin military weapons, ammunition and vehicles to Iraq. My notes, memoranda and other documents in my NSC files show or tend to show that the CIA knew of, approved of, and assisted in the sale of non-U.S. origin military weapons, munitions and vehicles to Iraq.[17]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_support_for_Iraq_during_the_Iran%E2% 80%93Iraq_war

[Brian4Liberty]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zZ0Ndr3KoCQ

Cliff notes:
* Saddam was a stabilizing force in the middle east. He kept Iran in check.
* Nobody can tell me why we are in Afghanistan
* It could turn out that Iraq was the greatest military blunder in U.S. history.

And before someone chimes in with "We can't trust Michael Savage", I do not trust him. But please think strategically. Nobody on the planet can accuse Michael Savage of being an "apologist for Islam" and keep a straight face. So if this guy can say on the radio that our military adventurism in Iraq and Afghanistan has caused more trouble than it's worth, then anyone should be able to figure that out.

Just one note on that segment: like the vast majority of the left-wingers, Savage supported the war on Iraq before we went there. Like the left-wingers, there is some revisionist history going on now...

[Imperial]

Haven't really studied up on Australia, but Kashmir the answer is much easier. Kashmir was an independent kingdom for hundreds of years. When the British left India, they idiotically split what was once hundreds of states into two- Pakistan and India. It was a mess and precipitated the conflict we see today.

[Southron]

Radical Muslim's find a reason to kill people all over the world. Their reason for killing American's is the "interventionism". Their reason for killing Indians is their right to Kashmir. Their reason for killing Australians in Bali is there stopping of the genocide in East Timor. Their reason for violence against the Dutch, a cartoon portraying Muhammand. You catching the pattern here? Everywhere you turn on the planet they are bellyaching about something.

Perhaps if we stop our interventionism, they will kill less Americans. The rest of the violence is out of our hands and I don't believe you can morally kill someone before they have attempted violence.

We can only control who is allowed in this country, and must deal with the homegrown terrorists as they commit crimes.

[MelissaWV]

Thank goodness this is in General Politics, eh?

* * *

I don't care if /more/ Americans are killed, honestly. The ends don't justify the means. I do believe it's unlikely that somehow minding our own business and keeping boots off the ground in foreign nations is going to inspire people to want to kill us. It seems like it would be incredibly hard to recruit people to taunt us into going to war with them. There are few people who benefit from war outside of the US.

What's right is to stop stealing from businesses and citizens to fund these "righteous" wars overseas. It's been going on for ages, and that doesn't make it any more just. There are plenty of organizations that try to offer assistance to those who are suffering, and just think of how much money we could contribute as individuals if we weren't taxed into the ground. Think of the time we might spare for them. Think of the good that could be done without marching through neighborhoods with guns and grenades, and setting up "checkpoints" on foreign soil.

Instead, we have what we have now. Who the hell really prefers this?

[klamath]

One thing you start with is not trying to excuse every wrong action of the muslims as ours or someone elses fault. You are arguing with someone that has bee educated to believe that the USA can do nothing wrong and that everything we have done around the world is for good. Tell them that everything the USA has done is evil you are not only wrong but will never convince them. Muslims are people with the same failings as the rest of the world. It is a two way street on violence and interference. Our interference around the world is greater than anyone elses because we are the biggist economic power and therefore our footprint is going to be bigger plus a lot of the world pushes us and expects us to be the policemen of the world. When the Iraq war was at its lowest and the world could see the american people were getting sick of it I remember reading comentaries from Europe of all places, hoping that it wasn't driving the Americans away from our responsibilities of keeping order!
For every obviously wrong action of a muslim nation such as salman Rushdie point out US interference. When people start to realize that it is a two way street then hammer the idea that WE need to back off and quit agravating the world problems. There will always be violence in the world but the less we stick our nose into other peoples fights the less likely it is going to get popped.

[BlackTerrel]

I think it's a complex issue and it's never so black and white as good and evil which is how most people like it to be. There are over a billion Muslims in the world - most of them just want to live their life, raise their families, and worship their God in peace.

[Vessol]

I think it's a complex issue and it's never so black and white as good and evil which is how most people like it to be. There are over a billion Muslims in the world - most of them just want to live their life, raise their families, and worship their God in peace.

This.

Also if you look at the history of radical Islam, it starts with the Muslim Brotherhood which arose directly as a result of U.S interventionism in Egypt. That's like saying that the Americans were just using the "excuse" of the British occupying them when they started the revolution.

[jmdrake]

Just one note on that segment: like the vast majority of the left-wingers, Savage supported the war on Iraq before we went there. Like the left-wingers, there is some revisionist history going on now...

Michael Savage a "left-winger"? http://forums.sgusucks.com/images/icons/icon_rotflmao.gif

Anyway whether he is or not (most including myself consider him a right winger) is totally irrelevant. Yes Savage supported the war in Iraq. That's what makes his attack on the Iraq war all the more potent! He has credibility with the "turn them into a glass parking lot" crowd. Yes it would be wonderful if everyone could wake up after watching a well thought out and impassioned Ron Paul speech. But, there are some really emotional people in this world that just can't get it. If one of their "heroes" shatters their illusion that the Iraq war was somehow a good idea, all the better for that. You can expose Savage for a shill after their eyes are open.

[klamath]

I read it that way at first. Brian actually said "LIKE" the left wingers.

Michael Savage a "left-winger"? http://forums.sgusucks.com/images/icons/icon_rotflmao.gif

Anyway whether he is or not (most including myself consider him a right winger) is totally irrelevant. Yes Savage supported the war in Iraq. That's what makes his attack on the Iraq war all the more potent! He has credibility with the "turn them into a glass parking lot" crowd. Yes it would be wonderful if everyone could wake up after watching a well thought out and impassioned Ron Paul speech. But, there are some really emotional people in this world that just can't get it. If one of their "heroes" shatters their illusion that the Iraq war was somehow a good idea, all the better for that. You can expose Savage for a shill after their eyes are open.

[jmdrake]

I read it that way at first. Brian actually said "LIKE" the left wingers.

Oh. :o Still I think we can use this video against our detractors.

[Brian4Liberty]

Yes Savage supported the war in Iraq. That's what makes his attack on the Iraq war all the more potent! He has credibility with the "turn them into a glass parking lot" crowd. Yes it would be wonderful if everyone could wake up after watching a well thought out and impassioned Ron Paul speech. But, there are some really emotional people in this world that just can't get it. If one of their "heroes" shatters their illusion that the Iraq war was somehow a good idea, all the better for that. You can expose Savage for a shill after their eyes are open.

In the clip, Savage is trying to infer that he was always against the Iraq war. Many left-wingers have revised their history, not so many neo-conservatives have. In other words, Savage is behaving in a similar fashion to all of the left-wingers who have claimed that they have always been against the Iraq war.


I read it that way at first. Brian actually said "LIKE" the left wingers.

That's they way it was intended, perhaps the wording was not the best.

[jmdrake]

In the clip, Savage is trying to infer that he was always against the Iraq war. Many left-wingers have revised their history, not so many neo-conservatives have. In other words, Savage is behaving in a similar fashion to all of the left-wingers who have claimed that they have always been against the Iraq war.



That's they way it was intended, perhaps the wording was not the best.

Yes. I know Savage supported the war before and is a rat jumping off a sinking ship. But a lot of other people don't yet realize the ship is sinking. So he's useful to us in that capacity.

[monte]

The foreign policy debate just frustrates me to no end. If your neighbor/friend/family member/daughter is blown to pieces, by a drone, or a suicide bomber, or whatever, how are you not going to want to retalitate? The cycle of aggression just never ends.

I didn't mean to start off here, looking like a troll, looking for digs. I am just sad, my friends. Noone wants to sacrifice their own child, but it seems too many just give the government carte blanch to sacrifice other peoples children. Why?

[monte]

Good ole Savage. lol. Yeah, I shoulda said, "How do I respond to this." I'm no rookie on the subject of intervetionism, and it's consequences, it's just that I was really frustrated the day I posted that. You know sometimes it just seems like you are treading water. How some people think our government is incapable of tying their own shoes, yet think they can do no wrong overseas, amazes me.

*Sorry, the Savage comment was in reply to the post with the video. I should have quoted it.*

[Vessol]

The foreign policy debate just frustrates me to no end. If your neighbor/friend/family member/daughter is blown to pieces, by a drone, or a suicide bomber, or whatever, how are you not going to want to retalitate? The cycle of aggression just never ends.

I didn't mean to start off here, looking like a troll, looking for digs. I am just sad, my friends. Noone wants to sacrifice their own child, but it seems too many just give the government carte blanch to sacrifice other peoples children. Why?

Our foreign policy is uneconomical and we will be forced to rescind it soon enough. There will be animosity for awhile against the United States and any from it, but over time it will recede.

Think about it like the UK and the USA. You ask a patriot American colonist what they thought of the British back in the day and they won't paint a pretty picture. Ask an American a hundred years later they might have a negative view, but no great loathing. Now adays, most simple-minded Americans love British people for the sake of their freaking accent.

Also, I'm sorry that some here thought that you were a troll. We're kind of wary sometimes as we do get some really obvious trolls sometimes, but looking at your posts I'm not really sure how they came to that conclusion.

I'm guessing they just saw your thread title and then assumed, makes them look the assholes.

Regardless, welcome to the forums! I hope you won't take this rude introduction too negatively.

[moostraks]

Noone wants to sacrifice their own child, but it seems too many just give the government carte blanch to sacrifice other peoples children. Why?

They sacrifice them because they are not their own children. Seems like many of the loudest supporters are over the age of having themselves much less their own children killed in these wars. Then you have the religious zealots inspired by some sort of holy war that are raising their children with hate in their hearts because they can't seem to fathom they are being played. Throw around the term conspiracy theory to all those who feel justified in killing others in these wars and they just tune you out when you try get them to understand how wrong their stance is and detrimental to all involved...