One who kills non-combatants sitting at religious banquets, or kills a sleeping 5 year old girl (just yesterday), is not a person. They are animals who deserve to be eliminated from the face of the earth before they kill you and I!
Posted on 04/28/2002 11:06:53 AM PDT by xvb
One who kills non-combatants sitting at religious banquets, or kills a sleeping 5 year old girl (just yesterday), is not a person. They are animals who deserve to be eliminated from the face of the earth before they kill you and I!
You misdiagnose the actual problem. The reason why some people are capable of killing innocent non-combatants in such a calous way is that they are believing in an ideology which is dehumanizing the perceived enemy, which instruct them to treat other people like a dirt and which is giving the perpetuators the imagined superior moral status.
When the perpetuators are desperate, feeling wronged and humilated it can be considered as mitigating circumstances. But we may not fall into the same trap.
The installation of a democracy in Iraq, with it's attendant economic growth, will indeed weaken the legitimacy of Arab dictators. And Europe will be the primary benefactors, of a larger Iraqi economy, and the likely changes in government, from authoritarian to growing democracy's, in the region's nations. The Islamic culture is a dying failure, and must be replaced, the sooner the better. If it wasn't for the oil wealth proping them up, the Islamic authoritarian governments, would have already lost, as they have in south america. Democracy's rarely have any reason to fight, and since democratic institutions encourage economic growth, they make excellent trading partners, futher encouraging growth. So what's in it for the Europeans? In a word "MONEY".
If the totalitarian socialists weren't in control of the media and governments in Europe, the European street would be singing a different tune, with respect to the authoritarian governments in the Islamic world. Socialists seek government control at least as pervasive as that of authoritarians, an so they oppose any cultural movement, which might curtail their drive for power. They know a US sponsored democracy in the Iraq, would highlight the lack of freedom, and failures of government, not only in the Middle-east but also in Europe. None of the other so called developed democratic nations, is as free of socialism as the US. Any US built democracy in Iraq, would be fashioned in the US's image. And so it would likely grow at a phenomenal rate(I think the 10-13% rates obtained in asia, will be made to seem slow). Without socialist programs holding them back, and with a likely free trade policy(a la Hong Kong), the European socialists and Islamic authoritarians, will both be faced with their own failures.
You are lumping together Syria and Iraq with Turkey?! You cannot be serious.
Overthrow one of those secular regimes will help militant Islam, contrary to what some claim.
Who advocated overthrowing the Turkish government?
In addition I claim that Christians in Iraq and Syria are treated much better than in Saudi Arabia
How many times do I have to tell you? Saudi Arabia has no Christians, the only Christians there are visitors, guest workers and U.S. military; none may practice their Christian faith
(which is not a regime to be overthrown).
As far as I'm concerned, the sooner the Sod-Off Princes are kicked out the better.
Of course I DO! The reason why you put Turkey apart from Syria and Iraq is that Turkey is closely aligned with United States while Syria and Iraq are more or less in opposition. You are so conditioned by the official positions that you cannot see the actual reality. This neurotic divorce between the official worldview and reality led to such blunders as "surprising" fall of shah of Iran.
Turkey is ruled by militant secularist regime founded by Young Turks and Kemal Pasha Ataturk who tried to marginalise Islam and westernize Turkey. The Baath party (founded by a Christian - Michael Aflaq) had somehow similar character. Instead of pan-turkism contains pan-arabism and instead of autoritarian corporatist capitalism promotes mixed state regulation with a market economy.
All those three countries have an objective of europeization, modernization, westernization etc ... Far cry from Saudi Arabia.
Iran "surprisingly" again for some is rather closer to the securalist regimes than Saudi Arabia. Islamic Revolution in Iran was created to large extent by westernised intellectuals who wanted to utilise Islam to secure independent modernization of their country while preserving cultural identity. Far cry again from crazed Saudi Wahhabites who want to bring the world back to the time of Muhammad.
Overthrow one of those secular regimes will help militant Islam, contrary to what some claim.
Who advocated overthrowing the Turkish government?
Not me. Why?
In addition I claim that Christians in Iraq and Syria are treated much better than in Saudi Arabia
How many times do I have to tell you? Saudi Arabia has no Christians, the only Christians there are visitors, guest workers and U.S. military; none may practice their Christian faith (which is not a regime to be overthrown).
Well, yes. I see your point. Saudies are not less tolerant to the Christians, the same way as Australians are not less tolerant to the Tasmanians (because they are extinct). But in fact there are some secret Christians and they are in great danger everyday like Jews in Nazi Germany.
As far as I'm concerned, the sooner the Sod-Off Princes are kicked out the better.
Maybe better, maybe not. Nobody knows.
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.