Petraeus Condemns U.S. Church's Plan to Burn Qurans

Wall Street Journal ^ | September 6, 2010 | JULIAN E. BARNES And MATTHEW ROSENBERG

[Kaslin]

KABUL—The top U.S. commander in Afghanistan said the planned burning of Qurans on Sept. 11 by a Florida church could put the lives of American troops in danger and damage the war effort.

Gen. David Petraeus said the Taliban would exploit the demonstration for propaganda purposes, drumming up anger toward the U.S. and making it harder for allied troops to carry out their mission of protecting Afghan civilians.

"It could endanger troops and it could endanger the overall effort," Gen. Petraeus said in an interview with The Wall Street Journal. "It is precisely the kind of action the Taliban uses and could cause significant problems. Not just here, but everywhere in the world we are engaged with the Islamic community."

[Kaslin]

It sure is

[Dr. Marten]

Yeah, we wouldn’t want them to be angry at us! When did this guy become such a p*ssy?

That's a pretty bold and idiotic statement to make from the safety of your computer chair. Perhaps you'd like to make that statement from the front lines?

[Dr. Marten]

You have obviously have never served in the Military or otherwise you would know that the safety of the troops are the first concern of the general, especially General Petraeus

My thoughts exactly.

[ThePackLeader]

Since when have Americans lost their balls?

[kenmcg]

“Patreaus is trying to convince the locals not to support the Taliban. The more locals who don’t supoport the Taliban, the fewer US troops need to patrol and guard roads and get killed.”

All the more reason to get out of Afghanistan now as nation building in the “cesspool of Afghanistan” is a fruitless cause. Our military’s purpose used to be kill combatants and destroy targets. Now we have become a sort of “meals on wheels” and God help us if we don’t accept their “Allah”.

[rollo tomasi]

Then they should resign and tell the American people why they did.

This particular system of civilian military leadership has been around in the United States since the AOTC/Constitution were ratified. Generals need to be answerable to civilian command, but their is an unbalanced on who controls tactics/strategy. For instance, the State Dept. needs to get the hell out of the way when diplomacy goes into the aggression stage. Let the military take the diplomatic role then, after the killing and breaking of people/things etc..., the State Dept. can assume control again.

[rollo tomasi]

Sorry, their=there

[HereInTheHeartland]

I would say Florida churches should listen to a general, if he says his troops would be put in unneeded danger.

[af_vet_rr]

I think the lesson is, don’t get involved in fighting insurgencies in the middle East. The sad thing is, that’s a lesson that has been proven time and time again, long before we began our own misadventures, only we chose to ignore it.

I agree that Iraq was something we should have avoided in hindsight, and I say this as a huge supporter of it originally, but we could not have avoided Afghanistan, not after 9/11, and I would much rather we fight them over there than over here.

[Kaslin]

Exactly and many on this thread don’t seem to get it

[af_vet_rr]

The “church’s” idea of burning the Korans is %100 infantile stupidity .I hate these bastards as much as the next guy but this is a stupid ass idea.

This "church" has worked with Westboro Baptist Church in the past and has "taken a stand" with them, which makes me wonder what their real ulterior motive is. Anybody who allies themselves with a group whose motive is to inflict more pain and suffering upon families who have lost loved ones in the military is very circumspect, and a part of me thinks you'll find the pastor leans to the left and is trying to discredit Christians.

At first I didn't realize the ties to Westboro Baptist Church when I first heard about this, but now that I've seen the ties myself, on the Dove World Outreach Center's website, it's pretty clear what's going on.

[ilovesarah2012]

They are already here. Haven’t you heard of the so-called “home-grown terrorists”? They are in mosques across America and on the internet and in our prisons. Afghanistan is just a small part. You have Pakistan, North Africa, Yemen, Lebanon, Iran, Syria. Do we go to war with all of them? How man soldiers have to die and be maimed for life before we realize islam is the problem, not a geographic location?

[af_vet_rr]

Most of the rest of America isn’t and are more than willing to make a sound sensible protest even if they must hide their identity, they will burn the Koran regardless of who tries to reason that it will damm their soul.

Burning a book is silly, sinks to the level of those who would burn our flag, and is completely and utterly lazy and about what you'd expect out of people who would never think of giving up a cushy job and cushy home in order to go serve their country or serve God.

If somebody wants to fight radical muslims, they should man up and join the military.

If they are too old, too much of a fatass, too ill, or too much of a coward, they should join an organization that helps out the families of those soldiers who are fighting radical muslims.

If they want to spread the Word of Christ, they should become a missionary or join a Christian aid organization and head to Africa or the Middle East and work on converting these people.

The fact that out of 120 million people who are eligible age-wise, we only have 3 million in the active duty military, the reserves, and the national guard and that at times we've had problems filling the quotas speaks volumes. There are far fewer than 3 million who are missionaries out spreading the teachings of Christ. Most people are unwilling to give up a comfy life for a life of hardship serving in the military or as a missionary or Christian aid worker, and for them I can see the appeal in burning a book.

[jessduntno]

“Perhaps you’d like to make that statement from the front lines?”

I don’t think I’d like it a bit. Most sane people don’t. But we keep kissing their asses and I’ll find out. And so will you. Because we won’t have to go anywhere to be at the “front lines.” What is this a WWll movie to you? THERE ARE NO FRONT LINES.

And that was pretty much the point, wasn’t it?

My tune won’t change, I know that about myself, but I don’t know about what you’ll do, since I know nothing about you. As far as the rest of your nasty little message goes, consider this; you just did to me what you so disapprove.

Ironic isn’t it?

Let’s hope we don’t have to find out, but do you REALLY think having leaders that worry about a bunch of folks in FL instead of killing the pr*cks dictating our behavior like school marms while the enemy drags people through the street, hangs them from bridges and town squares and sets them on fire is the SMART move? Is the Taliban going to start waving our flag and pledging allegiance?

You seem pretty well informed, tell me; why was the Mosque in NYC on Petreaus’s “no comment” list and this isn’t?

This craven political shite shouldn’t be involved. But it is and we need to pay attention to it. Something wicked this way comes.

[Polybius]

Both have the same basic religion but only one takes it to an extreme.

Do you know anythng about either of these religions?

Yes, I do. All the branches in my family tree go directly back to Spain and my ancestors were fighting radical Islamists since 711 A.D. Let's just say that my family has a little more experience with Islamist fanaticism than yours does.

My family tree is filled with officials and even a Grand Inquisitor in the Spanish Inquisition and, if you like, I can provide a list of names of people who were burned at the stake at the order of the brother of one of my X times-great-grandmother in 1559 in the "auto de fe" in the city of Valladolid.

Let's just say that my family has a little more experience with "Christian" fanaticism than yours does.

And, yes, the Protestant fanatics in Calvinist Geneva were acting the same way. It was a 16th Century thing. We've mellowed considerably since then.

In a given population, the religious activity tends to follow a path from Fanaticism to Less-Fanatic to Observant to Non-Observant to Decadent. Then, after the population is sickened by Decadence, the cycle can repeat.

Iran is a good example of that cycle. It is now back in the Fanatic stage and will be until the younger population that has know nothing but religious oppression rises up and strings up the ayatollahs from lamp-posts. Then, they may jump directly to the Observant to Non-Observant stage of the cycle.

The initial waves of Muslim invaders in Spain were ALWAYS Islamist Fanatics. After a while, they settled down, their sons started enjoying the "Good Life" and their grandsons became merely Observant. By then, they would even be your allies to fight off the next wave of crazy Islamist nutjobs flooding in across the Strait of Gibraltar to take away their "Good Life".

Take Massachusetts, for example. No matter how conservative and pious you believe yourself to be, the Fanatic Puritans would consider your present lifestyle as that of an abominable heathen and you would be lucky to escape with your life. Now, Massachusetts, is mostly Non-Observant to Decadent.

Today, if resurrected Puritans tried to reestablish their theocratic government, the Massachusetts Liberals would start joining the NRA by the hundreds of thousands.

By the 1960's, most Arab countries were at the Observant stage. Study Nassar. Study the Baath Party rule in Syria. These guys were Muslims in name only. Their appeal was nationalism, not religious fanaticism and religious fanatics were severely dealt with.

Our enemy is the Taliban .... not the entire population of Afghanistan that also happens to be Muslim.

We bombed factories full of innocent civilians and prisoners during WW II, and as far as I know neither Atomic Bombs were dropped on real military targets, it was war, and we had to remove the enemies ability to wage war, and destroy their will to fight.

This is not about "civilians". This is about "allies".

This is about Friendly Fire.

We Atomic Bombed Hiroshima and Nagasaki and fire-bombed Dresden and Tokyo.

We did not carpet-bomb Paris. During Vietnam, the hawks yelled "Bomb Hanoi". They did not yell "Bomb Saigon".

Most of the Afghan population is not composed of radical Fanatics. They are merely Observant.

Insulting EVERY Muslim because the Fanatics are evil is as counterproductive as insulting EVERY Catholic during World War II because both Hitler and Mussolini were raised Catholic or insulting EVERY Korean during the Korean War because the North Korean were over-the-top Commie fanatics.

One of our best Aliies during the Korean were were the Turks. By that point in History, the Turks were Observant to non-Observant Muslims who, at home, were fighting the extreme Islamist Fanatics at home, since the 1920's, when most of Western Civilization did not know what an "Islamist" was.

In war, you must remember who your enemy is and who your allies and comrades are. Just because Hitler was raised Catholic does not mean that corporal O'Hara in the same foxhole with you is your enemy.

[dagogo redux]

Wow! The military scared of “all sorts of chaos”! How in the world will you handle that?! Certainly wasn’t part of any operation I was ever in or ever heard about at any time in history.

And, MY GOSH! Attorneys at risk! Yikes!

I tell you what, you warriors come on back home where you can serve safely until you’re eligible for your pension, and meanwhile we’ll just turn the place into a glass parking lot like we should have originally.

[Abundy]

Blow it out your @ss.

and I used to think like you, parking lot and all, until I met the people - the good ones - who want to do the right thing. the big bombs don't discriminate between the good and the evil

and I'm accustomed to a certain level of risk, however some moron who wouldn't understand the Word of God if it fell on his head elevating the risk level is unacceptable.

[dagogo redux]

“Blow it out your @ss.”

Consider it blown, and thank you for your kind “Word of God”. I obviously have a lot to learn about such things from you.

[longtermmemmory]

no one is asking: “why is General Petreaus doing the dirty POLITICAL work of the Obama administration?”

since when do generals take political stands with civilians?
this is a first amendment political issue.
did Obama wheel out Petreaus for the Ground Zero Mosque?

[jessduntno]

See post #274

And several others throughout the thread. The problem is that the gung-ho are not considering the excellent points ... that a General ... especially THIS General, with a distinguished record, is now more concerned about PC AMERICAN rights than killing the enemy ... well, read the whole thread and you will see plenty being written ... most of it is shouted down, however.