[billybudd]

What, exactly, do you wish to bring religion into? My point is, and has been, that the poster of this post and many people on this forum wish to make the current conflict into a religious war, when in fact a religious war doesn't exist. Yes, the Islamic radicals care about religion - that's no reason we need to, except as it relates to the Islamics' desire to harm us. This I do agree with. What I disagree with is trying to relate the present conflict to historical conflicts between the West and Islam based on the superficial labels "West" and "Islam". The "West" and "Islam" do not mean the same thing today as they did 1000 years ago. Nor are the military conflicts today anywhere near the ballpark of what they were before.

Here's what it boils down to: people here want to feel comfortable with themselves and their country in the war on terrorism. The way they do this is by appropriating the very broad, very sweeping, very superficial terms "West" and "Islam" to say "The West was better than Islam before, so we'll beat them again." or "The West has advanced while Islam has declined, therefore we'll win." Of course, none of these comparisons actually say anything about how we'll solve the problem of terrorism, or any political question in the Middle East. But they are comforting thoughts.

[Burdened White Man]

What I disagree with is trying to relate the present conflict to historical conflicts between the West and Islam based on the superficial labels "West" and "Islam".The "West" and "Islam" do not mean the same thing today as they did 1000 years ago. Nor are the military conflicts today anywhere near the ballpark of what they were before

Sparta can correct me if I'm wrong, but I think the original intent of the thread was merely an historical exercise to bring a little encouragement to the war on terror.

And isn't it at least great that we all agree on WHO the enemy is?