Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Pistias
if we "agree on rules" and duke it out, so long as we play by them the al-Qaeda are justified in defending their culture from "disruption?"

Absolutely -- they can, for example, send us Muslim missionaries (and in fact they do) or ask us to keep our religion completely out, as the Saudis do, -- and the same goes for any other grievance real or imaginary that the militant Islam has voiced. If they don't like American bases in Saudi Arabia they can get the Saudi government to ask us to leave, or they can get Canada ask them to come and set up a training camp in Nova Scotia, whatever. Arafat could demonstrate statesmanship given so many opportunites he was given by the West, and negotiate his way to Palestinian statehood. Those agreed upon rules are internationally recognized norms of conflict resolution, but the militant Islamic civilization organically cannot abide by them and retain its identity.

35 posted on 12/03/2001 3:45:39 PM PST by annalex
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies ]


To: annalex
Those agreed upon rules are internationally recognized norms of conflict resolution, but the militant Islamic civilization organically cannot abide by them and retain its identity.

Q: If one's culture (or one's regime) is threatened with extinction or a change that would be equivalent to it, would one be justified in breaking "rules of conduct?" Likewise, what are two incompatible cultures to do if there are no rules of conduct in place?

47 posted on 12/03/2001 9:06:49 PM PST by Pistias
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson