Posted on 05/18/2007 8:13:13 AM PDT by traviskicks
Wasn’t the first WTC attack an Al Qaeda operation?Not necessarily. From what knowledge I have of the attack it was based on a cell that had more issues with America's support for Israel.
He should read this article:
The textbooks paint an alarming picture of a regime that divides the world between "good" and "evil" forces that are destined to clash until a victory is reached. Since the evil and arrogant West seeks to destroy Iran, a war is inevitable. Iranians are hence tasked with a religious mission of fighting "evil" until the latter's final eradication, or, until the "good" camp is wiped out. In Ayatollah Khomeini's words, reproduced in an eleventh-grade textbook: "Either we shake one another's hand in joy at the victory of Islam in the world, or all of us will turn to eternal life and martyrdom.
The Iranian school textbooks reveal a frightening vision of an extremist regime that prepares its school children for another such episode -- an Armageddon-like global war against the West.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/op-ed/20070214-093525-3000r.htm
The Ayatollah's words make it quite clear -- either they win or they win anyway.
But for the most part it’s their own chose.
But Ron Paul is NOT right...Our first FOUR Presidents had problems with ATTACKS from the Barbary Pirates (MUSLIMS) who would take our ships, make slaves of the “Christian” seaman, and demand ransoms and “protection” bride monies.
Jefferson finally had to send the military to put an end to it. (do the math, this was BEFORE we invaded Iraq in the early 1990’s) and it was UNPROVOKED....The Muslim leaders of the day said it was the duty to make “war” with the “Chritain” nations of America, England, Demark, etc”.
In 1799, Winston Churchill wrote of the Mullahs desire to kill ANY western leader to avenge the Crusades...
Ron Paul is wrong....we have more than three hundred years of Muslims attacking the west JUST becuase they think it the right thing to do.
“Ron Paul=Idealogue”
Ron would like that. It beats ideologue every time.
I think it’s a good time to unsubscribe from TCS’s mailing list, if they’re jumping on Paul’s “Blame America” bandwagon.
I do not disagree. But what he said implies that it was the sole cause or even the major cause of it and I call BS on that. It would happen whether we were there, had been there or not.It's certainly not the *sole* cause. Islamic fundamentalists *do* hate the American way of life and it's cultural influence on the ME. That's undeniable. However, people underestimate the rationality of AQ and other terrorist groups. They are *evil* but at the same time they are also calculating and patient. They know America is the strongest player in the region and that to assert their own influence they will have to displace America as the regional power.
No, isn’t their own choice. That’s why there are libertarians and liberals.
I agree. But what I saw on Tuesday night was not that interpretation. He came across like Michael Moore to me.
You are right. Paul misses the big picture that many of the other candidates and most conservatives grasp ---> the Islamic radicals want to establish a world-wide caliphate regardless of whether we are in Iraq or staying locked up at home twiddling our thumbs waiting for them to come here.You misinterpret Paul's statement. Again it's a matter of cause and effect. Where did radical Islam come from? Two groups mainly, Iranians against the shah and Saudis fighting against the Ruskies. There is a common denominator there. US projection of power(overthrowing Mossadegh and funding radical Islamists to take out the Ruskies).
He is partially right and partially, dangerously wrong.
See post eleven and answer your own question.
“No, isn’t their own choice. That’s why there are libertarians and liberals.”
So let me get this right: Social conservatives are forcing people to live a certain way? Not the last time I checked. For the most part social conservatives just want to ban abortions and maintain marriage. Other than that, they just wish to promote moral values.
Again, most of the choses are still left to everyone.
Paul’s right as far as the reason OBL and company gave for attacking us. He’s very wrong to believe it’s the real reason (not to mention utterly naive).
See my post #34 on that thread. I’ve been up since 4AM, Ultra. :o)
I agree. But what I saw on Tuesday night was not that interpretation. He came across like Michael Moore to me.Hey even a stopped clock is right twice a day ;)
He is partially right and partially, dangerously wrong.Okay, this is what I'd like an American politician say for once: "You know we screwed up, our actions have contributed to the current set of problems, but radical Islam is now a threat to us and we must respond, without repeating the mistakes of the past".
Are people really this uninformed or are they just pretending to be?
I admit to a certain inability to view them as anything but irrational demons, especially considering what happened to Daniel Pearl, Nick Berg, those 4 Blackwater employees hanging off the Fallujah bridge, etc. etc. I had a friend that bought the farm on 9/11. He had an office in the basement of the Pentagon in the section that was hit. He left behind a wife and two kids, one of whom is a "special needs" child.
I don't quite see why I have to understand them. I want to defeat them; vanquish them; destroy them utterly.
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.