leisuremuffin wrote:sir, you talk about ideology being the problem while excluding your own from scrutiny.
all i can say is this:
use whatever you want to justify the violence, but i can tell you this: Violence will never end violence unless it is so great that it snuffs out every last life.
examine your motivations, examine our motivations as a nation and you may find that they are not without flaw either. that's what i'm saying.
look, i know what you're going to say next. You'll say, OK, well you're living in a fantasy world, in the real world violence does solve problems. Well, we've fought the war to end wars twice now. Are you ready for the third?
.lm.
well, you are clearly not reading what I wrote. How can one win the war of ideology through violence except by mass genocide of those that believe differently than you?
You can't. And this is an approach that is abhorrent to me - killing those that disagree with you based on different ideas.
You know, the old saying: I may disagree with you, but I will fight to the death for your RIGHT to disagree with me.
I believe in that whole heartedly. The problem is, the radicalized islamic jihadists do not agree with that principle. They would rather wipe out a way of life than allow it to continue (re: Taliban blows up ancient buddhist statues in Afghanistan, when they clearly are historical artifacts and not threatening religious symbols, etc.). This wiping out also includes at best, segregating those who aren't adherents to their islamic belief, and at worst, killing those who don't convert.
Examine my own beliefs? I didn't realize that my own beliefs were worth examining - unless you think my beliefs that support enfranchisement, liberalized democracy, principles of equality and tolerance of others who would do me no harm are subject to examining. By all means, I guess, go ahead - but I find that examining the motivations, causations, and principles of those who WOULD KILL ME for being who I am quite worth critical examination.
As a general rule, U.S. and western based democracies are internally fighting TOWARDS making a better life for all within based on increasingly progressive values like the one's I mention above.
Where in Sharia law does this occur except for true believers? Where does this progressive stance take place with people that will blow themselves up and kill others around them (in the name of their cause) exist? Are they fighting for the rights of those around them? Do they care if their women work or go to school or get equal pay? Do they protect the rights of those that practice a different religion than them? Are the tolerant of Jews, Christians, and citizens of other countries that are not muslim?
Clearly the answer is no. But this applies to a small number of muslims who have politicized their religion and have decided that they are at WAR with western values and the countries that uphold them.
And the great sadness to all of this, is that what we call western values, really are human values worth promoting and supporting and protecting - and spreading since they are, at heart, about finding ways to live amongst each other even with our differences.
That has been the great American experiment in self rule and, although not perfect by any stretch of the imagination, we've done a lot within our country to try to reach those ideals over the last 230+ years. Is that worth protecting?
Yes.
Is it worth hoping that others can live a life based on those principles?
Yes.
Is it worth fighting against those who would eliminate those gains we've made and wish to share?
Yes.
The question is HOW? I'd love to hear what you think about that.
rob.
)... 
