No one asks nor cares.
Posted on 08/13/2006 6:50:11 PM PDT by semaj
Sorry folks, but I can no longer lend my support to the War on Terror. I'm tired of being lied to by our elected leadership. What am I talking you about, you ask? Specifically, when I'm a told by the President of the United States, that Islam is a "Religion of Peace".
How am I supposed to square that statement with reality? How am I supposed to support the decision and policies of our government in waging war when our leaders can't even begin to tell the truth about the enemy we're fighting?
If the president fears he may offend someone by telling it like it is, namely that we are at war with Islam, then we may as well pack up and send our troops home.
Although not a great fan of Louis Farrakhan (just between you and me, I think the man is nuts) I viewed a video of the man giving a talk in Fresno some years ago. He made a comment concerning truth, and I paraphrase, "If you're hurt by the truth, then you must be the guilty party".
If the Islamic community is hurt by the truth of their so-caled religion of peace, then they are the guilt party, and until our leaders start telling the truth abou this gutter religion, I'll have to refrain from supporting the cowardly facade they call the War on Terror.
P.S. And for any assclowns who might bemoan and decry that my argument is not supportive of the troops, kiss my grits.
"You make a good argument for your position.
I respect that."
I share a very similar sentiment to semaj. I was in Europe on 9/11/01. I stated to my wife, who was stateside, that if they call this a "war on terrorism"; like the "war on drugs" and the "war on poverty", and then appoint a "Czar", we are totally screwed. The only part that was missed was the word terrorism. Americans have given up many liberties and rights for the WOD and WOT. And we have turned against each other instead of the islamic enemy. That is a disgrace. I do respect a man that will state his position, and how he arrived there, with civility.
You waited until now to get yourself zotted?
That line just jumps right out doesn't it?
The fact that the government hasn't named the enemy "properly" in no way changes the fact that they are our enemy.
Regardless of the label bestowed by the government, Islamic Facsists are still our enemy. They still want to kill us. They are the enemy, no matter what you declare or what the government says. Whether or not you decide to "support the war on terror" or not is of no consequence -
Islamic terrorists are our enemy no matter what you - or the government - thinks or says.
If you are actually posting from SA I can assure you that SOMEONE is looking through your monitor. The Saudis are very touchy on things like you are saying. I am not saying you shouldn't say them but you could get yourself in a real bind over there.
I, for one totally agree with your statement.
IMHO, the fraction is that which is not radicalized. If Islamists were really moderate, there would be marching in the streets with protests signs against the jihadist terror cults of Al Qeida, Hezbollah, Hamas, Army of God, Islamic Jihad, etc., etc. I have yet to see any!
And while perhaps not all Islamists are terrorists, we know that all terrorists have been Islamists. I pray the world, led by America, marginalizes this gutter, slime, religious organization the same way we led the world in marginalizing Nazis.
bttt
I agree with your point. The President I think would have a lot more support now had he not continued to utter that stupid inaccurate phrase. The President needs to show with his rhetoric, not passivity, but strength and strength isn't telling sweet lies about the nature of the enemy whether it be abroad or at home.
If the pope were advocating terrorist attacks would anyone be calling Catholicism a religion of Peace? The one thing we have to accept is the singular fact that the most influential clerics in the Islamic world are not just tolerant of but are openly supporting terrorism. I still support the War on Terror(a.k.a radical islam) I also support the President because all things being equal he has made the best of a bad situation and he hasn't allowed himself to be bullied into retreat. I do fault him because he has not used his office to protect the honor of our soldiers and our country against the relentless attacks from the left and the propaganda from abroad.
I think that is what many Americans hunger for. I know I do.
I hunger for a President who says things that speak to America and our future and our dominion over the evil which wishes to destory us. We do not need ambiguous language meant to salve the egos of moral lepers and hypersensitive adult babies, who can't pass a depiction of Christ in a hallway without going into hysterics, yet offer endless apologetics for the worst Muslim atrocities.
'semaj' has not left the building.
Oh, by the way, he's been a Freeper since 9/14/99 (longer than you(7/2/04) or me(9/29/00)
I can no longer lend my support to the War on Terror. I'm tired of being lied to by our elected leadership. What am I talking you about, you ask? Specifically, when I'm a told by the President of the United States, that Islam is a "Religion of Peace".
How many times have the names of wars included the name of the enemy? Wonder if this guy doesn't like the name World War II either.
You are silly.
My SIL is Muslim and she wouldn't hurt a flea. Stop being a bigot and realize that those perpetrating terrorism are in the Islamic minority. Geez, they are targets too.
Absolutely true.
However, that would be several thousand out of a billion-and-a-half.
Admittedly, there are probably only several thousand "moderates" among that billion-and-a-half, too.
But, then, there is the 95%-or-so who haven't made a decision yet, one way or the other.
What purpose is served by making all of them your enemy?
Sorry, to me you are not against the WOT, but against the half butt fight against it. Basically your against WOTINO (in name only).
Marine
Employee of Defense contracter
A bit of downtime and bored
How's the fishing?
Such thinking is the problem. This is asymmetrical warfare. Suppose that we had worried about making global enemies when we nuked Japan. The rest of the world still condemns us for that. So what? Some of us know that we must be ruthless and fearsome toward this enemy. Half measures only prolong the suffering of innocent Muslims as well. Ponder that.
You can't mean what you say if you don't say what you mean.
We're at war against the ones with the bombs. The ones who have connections to known terrorists who would kill you, your parents, your nieces and nephews.
If for whatever reason we refuse to or cannot do this, then we shouldn't send our young men and women into harms way on a false premise.
Sorry your hatred for Bush and apologies for Clinton doesnt allow you to see that there is a global jihad against western civilization. False premise? Ask your beloved Clintons, Kerry, Edwards, Biden, Schumer, et al about that. Oh yeah! I forgot, that idiot doofus Bush out-smarted them even with access to the same intel. lol
Don't ge tme wrong, I dance a jigg whenever a dirty jihadist is sent to allah. I can't remeber if it was MacArthur or Patton, that commented on the immorality of limited warfare.
I don't remember the saying but it sounds like it would've been from MacArthur because of this desire to take Japan, too, when Truman called him off.
If we are to engage in warfare, sending are young men and women to possibly die or be gravely injured, in the process, than we should have the guts to call out our enmey by name and kick the living shit out of him, until he cries uncle or until he is dead.
Don't know about "calling out our enemy by name," but I do agree with kicking the shit out them. This war should've been over a year ago.
But the global jihad continues and we need results (dead/imprisoned terrorists) far above just naming them.
Hey James (semaj backwards), I guess you missed Bush finally calling them Islamo fascists. The left all have their panties in a wad over this. I agree with you that we must call our enemy by their proper names. And their religion is a cult of death. Mosques are not religious buildings, they are terrorist plotting and financing centers. Let's really piss off the left and wiretap ALL mosques.
To hell with you and your semantics.
BTTT
How about supporting A war on islamofacism, instead of THE war on terrorism? It can be a cold war at that. We need to bring back the asassination squad or just start kidnapping these clerics and imams and throwing them in Gitmo. The radical muslims will fight each other if we leave them alone. They must fight - it's their nature. They're quicker to fight amongst themselves, if we would get out the way. They hate infidels, but what they really hate is someone who calls himself a muslim AND has the audacity to fly a kite.
One major difference:
Much of the military success we have enjoyed to date has been achieved by waging war specifically on the Taliban, not on Afghanistan. By identifying Saddam Hussein as the enemy, not all Iraqis.
Today, the vast majority of Iraqis want us to stay in-country until the job is done. Are these people "enemies"?
If most Muslims were jihadists, they'd already be blowing themselves up in the streets of our cities.
I support the WOT; however, I do wish the President would fight this war like we fought against the Germans and the Japanese. Liberal political-correctness is tying our hands behind our back.
Bush has not said that for a long time has he?
Obviously, the poster's comments have some grain of truth to them, because he still has an account and haven't been zotted.
I am so sorry I clicked on this thread.
Good grief man, get a grip or get out of the way. Sounds like you can't be counted on in any real fights. I suppose it's better for us to know that about you.
So what are going to do now that you can't support the war against, as the President has called them, Islamic facists, vote Democrat?
I haven't called for a zot but I am perplexed by the post. What purpose does this carping about the name "Religion of Peace" serve?
Your argument is merely devoid of reason and understanding. It is apparent that the requirements of the War on Terror call for Moslem allies such as those who are bearing the brunt of the deaths from the Terrorists, such as those who risk their lives merely by joining the armed forces of Iraq or Afganistan. Such as those who endanger their families as well as themselves by joining the police forces of the Iraqi or Afgani government.
We are getting great assistance from Moslems powers and forces such as that from Pakistan which allowed the Brits to bust up the recent plot.
If you hope to understand such complex issues as this perhaps you would start by reading The Art of War by Sun Tzu. It would help to remove the contradictions and lack of understanding within your ill considered post.
Tactics require the President to speak of Islam in such a way but our strategy is based upon other ideas.
Let me ask you a qwexion: take a look at your paycheck stub, and how much more are you willing to cut out of there (you do have a paycheck stub for the last 5 years right?).
With respect to right now, well, clearly one of the biggest things that can be addressed is the military budget. So let me ask you: is the attack on WTC because of our collective strength or weakness?
So you can no longer support the "war on terror" because...
Inquiring minds desire to know: was it the attacks by Hex-ebola against Israel? Was it the commentary by Brian Williams? Did Senator Murtha swing you? Did your Mom swing you that way (threatening to cut you off if you didn't dissavow you support). What was it?
Your anwer is highly appreciated (else we'll just have to push the 'abuse' button).
See above.
Sax and violins.
The "Cloying Nicety On Terror"?
Does that mean that although not a great fan, you are a fan of his?
Yes, they referred to "Afghanistan" and "Iraq". But neither declared a state of war between U.S. and either of the two nations. Instead, the clear targets were the terrorist elements within each state.
Read the clear language of the declarations. Read the President's even clearer statements.
Just like all of Germany, Italy, and North Africa were at war with us. Even the children and 100% of the civilians. Think about it. Sometimes "innocent civilians" die in warfare.
So, you grant that the entire population of Japan was at war with us? Guam and Okinawa would seem to support that notion.
There was a time when we had no way to discriminate between the guilty and the innocent. Now we do. "Innocent civilians" still die, but in far fewer numbers than in WW II. Isn't that a good thing?
Still, though, I simply do not understand the thinking that concludes we're better off if we have a billion-and-a-half enemies instead of several thousand (or even several millions). Isn't that asking for trouble?
Do you subscribe to the "nuke Mecca" school, as well?
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1666578/posts?page=16#16
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1665647/posts?page=41#41
Quit whining
Islam is not a religion of violins!!!!
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
http://www.islam.tc/ask-imam/view.php?q=12923
Is it very haram to watch t.v and listen to music?
1. According to Shariah, it is not permissible to watch TV due to the many un-Islamic issues in it.
2. It is also prohibited to listen to music. Rasulullah (Salla Allahu alayhi wa sallam) said, There will be a nation from my Ummah who will make music their lot one day while enjoying their music and alcohol they will awake with their faces transformed into swine. In fact, Rasulullah (Salaa Allahu Alayhi wa sallam) said, I was sent to destroy all musical instruments. Instead of music rather listen to the Holy Quran.
and Allah Ta'ala Knows Best
Mufti Ebrahim Desai
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.