The Nazi/appeasement analogy

[Abcdxxxx]

Action AGAINST war?

The poem doesn't address war at all.

[The Good Reverend Roger]

Originally Posted by Courage the Cowardly Dog

We found chemical weapons, we found mass graves, we found a country with no freedom of religon, and we found a country SPONSERING terrorism, not Al qaeda but everyone from Islammic Jihad to Hamas, going so far as to giving publishers clearing house style checks for $25,000 to the families of murderous suicide bombers who killed women and children as their exclusive plot.

Again, please stfu about the nam comparisons. You don't get to make that call unless you know jack shit about either war or served in one.

Chemical weapons? Sure. 500 degraded shells scattered across a country. No freedom of religion? Women weren't required to wear the veil (they are now), Christians weren't murdered in the streets (they are now), and why do I give a damn about Hamas? They never attacked us.

Also, I love that attitude of "if you weren't in the wars, stfu". I served 10 years in the military, and I recognize that it doesn't give me any special credentials as to political analysis of any given war, nor does it give me the right to intimidate other people out of giving their opinion.

Just saying.

[The Good Reverend Roger]

Originally Posted by KevinTheOmnivore

the fact that Persians and Arabs, governments and para-military groups spanning several nations, all bound by a single, fundamentalist view of the world, isn't a sign of unity?

Huh? Ask 9 muslims their opinion on any religious matter, and you'll get 11 answers.

[Abcdxxxx]

If 9 million Muslims can only come up with 11 different answers, then they better try harder and come up with a 12th that involves tolerance, and co-existance.

Since you seem to think asking questions works...

Ask the hundreds of American families who have died at the hands of PLO related terrorism exactly why we should care. Start with Shoshana Greenbaum's family. Ask them to explain to you how Hamas ever hurt their American daughter who was murdered in a Sbarro's pizza.

[mburbank]

Kev, so you're problem with W is that he's soft on terrorism? I can dig it. Since you are listing the army of Iran, a country we are not at war with yet, and the entire male population of Palestine as part of the enemy army, and since you are on board with stuff W is only paying partisan lip service to, you might want to see if Pat Buchanaan is concidering another run.

If the "islamo Facists" have a unified world view, why are Sunnis and Shiites killing each other?

There is no Pan Arab unifying charismatic leader anything like Hitler. That doesn't make it not a problem. It just makes Rumsfelds comparison ridiculous.

If you want to compare anyone to Chamberlain, I believe you can easily find a nice pic of Rummy himself shaking ahnds with Sadaam, sent as an Envoy by the Gipper All Mighty at a time when we knew he was a thug who used torture and rape and after we already knew he'd used chemical weapons. I'll take Moral and intellectual instruction elsewhere.

Pro or anti the war in Iraq, you ought to want Rumsfeld gone. In fact, if you are pro, you should want him gone more, since he is a highly visible whipping boy.

[The Good Reverend Roger]

Originally Posted by Abcdxxxx

If 9 million Muslims can only come up with 11 different answers,

I said 9, not 9 million.

Oops.

[The Good Reverend Roger]

Originally Posted by mburbank

If the "islamo Facists" have a unified world view, why are Sunnis and Shiites killing each other?

Habit.

Historically, they have NEVER gotten along, even in the face of a common enemy.

But why talk about that, when we can just simplify the crap out of everything, even if it means losing sight of a very good method of dealing with them?

[Abcdxxxx]

Then your history doesn't include an Arab League, or an Islamic World Council. It doesn't include these fueding Arab nations joining forces to attack Israel.

Unlike the Nazis, the Islamic fascists "answer" to the call of many leaders... dead ones...Muhammed ring a bell?

[The Good Reverend Roger]

Originally Posted by Abcdxxxx

Then your history doesn't include an Arab League, or an Islamic World Council. It doesn't include these fueding Arab nations joining forces to attack Israel.

Unlike the Nazis, the Islamic fascists "answer" to the call of many leaders... dead ones...Muhammed ring a bell?

No offense, but do you even know the difference between Sunni and Shi'ite Islam?

[Abcdxxxx]

Which one is rejecting the calls for a return of the Caliphite?
Which one of them is excluded from the Arab League, The Islamic World Council, the Muslim Brotherhood, or any of the other Pan-Islamicist, Pan-Arab unions? Ever hear of Al-Banna, or Qutb?

[The Good Reverend Roger]

Originally Posted by Abcdxxxx

Which one is rejecting the calls for a return of the Caliphite?
Which one of them is excluded from the Arab League, The Islamic World Council, the Muslim Brotherhood, or any of the other Pan-Islamicist, Pan-Arab unions? Ever hear of Al-Banna, or Qutb?

First, the pan-Arab unions are a joke. Hell, they couldn't even sustain the embargo in the 70s.

Historically, the Arabs have never been able to stick together, even in the face of a common enemy...even during Saladin's time.

The Sunnis hate the Shi'ites, the Shi'ites hate EVERYBODY (they are the losers of the Muslim world), and BOTH groups hate their own members, based on region.

Hell, having them try to restore the caliphate is the best thing that could ever happen, from our point of view. Everyone capable of doing the job would be assassinated by rival factions, until they were left with some drooling idiot tugged every direction at once by the remains of said factions.

The resulting chaos could only serve our interests.

[El Blanco]

So, current chaos is a bad thing, but future chaos is a good thing?

[mburbank]

"Unlike the Nazis, the Islamic fascists "answer" to the call of many leaders... dead ones...Muhammed ring a bell?"
-abcdgxgsdclsndku


Now if anyone ever puts a gun to my head and says what's the single stupidest thing Abcdx has ever posted, I'll have an answer. I'd been loosing sleep over that possability.

[Abcdxxxx]

Originally Posted by The Good Reverend Roger

Historically, the Arabs have never been able to stick together, even in the face of a common enemy...even during Saladin's time.

The Sunnis hate the Shi'ites, the Shi'ites hate EVERYBODY (they are the losers of the Muslim world), and BOTH groups hate their own members, based on region.

So their failures void out their existance? Their incompetence changes history? The Middle Eastern Islamic world is preoccupied by the vision of Al-Banna at the moment. Of course they'll eat each other alive if they ever were to succeed... of course they hate each other...and really, most of this stems from self hate and inferiority to begin with. So what? Should their deep seeded hatred towards Palestinians be an assurance to Israelis ? 'Course not. Even if Arabs are their own worst enemies, it doesn't change the threat to outsiders.

[mburbank]

BUT IT DOES INTERFERE WITH RUMSFELDS STUPID ASS ANALOGY WHICH IS WHAT THS THREAD IS ABOUT.

[Abcdxxxx]

It's not an analogy, you bozo.

Besides, Rumsfeld just repeated a point being made more and more frequently.

[The Good Reverend Roger]

Originally Posted by El Blanco

So, current chaos is a bad thing, but future chaos is a good thing?

Pretty much, because the current chaos is directed at us.

[The Good Reverend Roger]

Originally Posted by Abcdxxxx

So their failures void out their existance? Their incompetence changes history? The Middle Eastern Islamic world is preoccupied by the vision of Al-Banna at the moment. Of course they'll eat each other alive if they ever were to succeed... of course they hate each other...and really, most of this stems from self hate and inferiority to begin with. So what? Should their deep seeded hatred towards Palestinians be an assurance to Israelis ? 'Course not. Even if Arabs are their own worst enemies, it doesn't change the threat to outsiders.

Sure it does, if we'd be smart enough to manipulate it, rather than blunder around swinging blindly.

[The Good Reverend Roger]

Originally Posted by Abcdxxxx

It's not an analogy, you bozo.

Besides, Rumsfeld just repeated a point being made more and more frequently.

The point is incorrect, however.

These clowns are more like the situation in Yugoslavia than Nazi Germany.

[Abcdxxxx]

Yeah, I remember the days when people would sit around talking about how stupid Arabs are. What's happening is very calculated, and orchestrated. They're not blundering idiots.

There were Islamic countries with work camps during WWII. Life in most all Islamic countries is a life under totalitarian rule. Islamicism and all the other nicknames for it describe religious fascism with militaristic methods towards obtaining their goals of world domination. Am I wrong? Then when did acknowleding the truth become incorrect?

[The Good Reverend Roger]

Originally Posted by Abcdxxxx

Yeah, I remember the days when people would sit around talking about how stupid Arabs are. What's happening is very calculated, and orchestrated. They're not blundering idiots.

There were Islamic countries with work camps during WWII. Life in most all Islamic countries is a life under totalitarian rule. Islamicism and all the other nicknames for it describe religious fascism with militaristic methods towards obtaining their goals of world domination. Am I wrong? Then when did acknowleding the truth become incorrect?

No, they're as smart as anyone else, but they can't stop bickering with each other.

There were plenty of European countries with work camps. Romania, etc. Are they Nazis today because of acts more than 60 years ago?

The comparison is meaningless. The Islamics aren't Nazis, and this isn't WWII.

[KevinTheOmnivore]

Originally Posted by The Good Reverend Roger

Huh? Ask 9 muslims their opinion on any religious matter, and you'll get 11 answers.

Uh, yeah, but where does this stand in the face of the Zionist/Christian/Western Crusader infidel threat?

You seem to work under the assumption that Sunni and Shiite, and Persian and Arab have never united under one cause for the sake of greater Islam. This simply isn't consistent with history. As abc said, of course they will rip each other apart once they can. I'm guessing the Germans, Italians, and Japanese would've done the same had they managed to wipe out every single Jew and conquered continental Europe and most of Asia. Is that a consolation to you?

[Abcdxxxx]

Totally meaningless.

[The Good Reverend Roger]

Originally Posted by KevinTheOmnivore

Uh, yeah, but where does this stand in the face of the Zionist/Christian/Western Crusader infidel threat?

You seem to work under the assumption that Sunni and Shiite, and Persian and Arab have never united under one cause for the sake of greater Islam. This simply isn't consistent with history. As abc said, of course they will rip each other apart once they can. I'm guessing the Germans, Italians, and Japanese would've done the same had they managed to wipe out every single Jew and conquered continental Europe and most of Asia. Is that a consolation to you?

1. Same as usual. You'll notice that only about 1/3 of the ME gives a damn that we're in Iraq, for example.

2. Difference is, the Arabs can't wait.

[The Good Reverend Roger]

Originally Posted by Abcdxxxx

Totally meaningless.

Yep. Totally meaningless.

A few retarded palis who want to piss Israel off, and events and alliances of 60+ years ago do not make a pack of feuding theocrats into Nazis.

This is the problem wirh Rumsfeld. Instead of trying to view the problem as it IS, he wants to make it fit an old, recognized pattern (preferably one with loads of propaganda value, of course).

This isn't a smart thing to do. Instead of looking at the enemy as he IS, you start seeing everything he does in a way that makes it fit the preconceived pattern. Same as he did at the end of the invasion of Iraq, when he refused to admit that there was a burgeoning insurgency...it was "just a few dead-enders", as I recall.

It seems Rumsfeld never learns.