Should the Pope apologize??

[DawnCt1]

About the media, I dont know how much western media affects the middle east but I DO think that more should have been done to investigate the practices of Al-Jazeera since it seems to be the middle east's biggest news source.

There is nothing to investigate. We know how Al-Jazeera works and the level of instigation that they indulge in. Perhaps we should pull the plug on Al-Jazeera.

 

[JoeEpcotRocks]

please tell me then, is it oil? to make daddy Bush (the smart one) proud? nevermind it isn't important, the outcome has become obvious to anyone who has intelligence enough to see a problem and those who are able to think for themselves

Another "war for oil" troll.

You're thinking for yourself?? Just another leftist conspiracy theory.

 

[DawnCt1]

Another "war for oil" troll.

You're thinking for yourself?? Just another leftist conspiracy theory.

Yup, there are certain dead givaways; "daddy bush, war for oil", can't miss em.

 

[Fitswimmer]

This may be a simplistic thought-but then I'm a simple person.

We had Kuwait, when Saddam's troops left, we could have just said, "ok, well we chased Saddam out, now you owe us cheap oil". When Baghdad fell, couldn't we have just moved in and said, we're setting up a protectorate, it's our oil now and if you don't like it we'll make a glass parking lot out of the whole place and nobody will have anything. Now, that would have been going to war for oil. (gas would have been about 50 cents a gallon if we'd done that)

The only way I can think of make the Gulf wars primarily about oil is that the instability makes prices go up and the oil companies make more money, but that was going on in the 70's and we weren't fighting wars over there. A strong hurricane season can produce the same results.

No blood for oil makes a nice protest chant, but I think there's more to it than that.

 

[ChrisFL]

Another "war for oil" troll.

You're thinking for yourself?? Just another leftist conspiracy theory.

No, I was asking Charade that, I never said that was my opinion. As I stated it doesn't really matter anyway, we're stuck now and the middle east hates us more than it ever did before

 

[Galahad]

So now nuns are getting killed in retaliation for an academic speech. I'm quickly losing any sympathy for their position on this at all.

 

[dcentity2000]

So now nuns are getting killed in retaliation for an academic speech. I'm quickly losing any sympathy for their position on this at all.

I would contest that the Pope needed to apologise, but I in no way compare a speech to murder and death threats.

A number of people give a particular party bad rep, but sadly it looks as if one party is more burdened with them than t'other. Nevertheless, we must remain as detached as possible in the name of civility.



Rich::

 

[Galahad]

I would contest that the Pope needed to apologise,

Rich::

Unquestionably he does/did.

A number of people give a particular party bad rep, but sadly it looks as if one party is more burdened with them than t'other. Nevertheless, we must remain as detached as possible in the name of civility.

Agreed. Losing sympathy, but I agree. I'll bet Salman Rushdie and a Dutch cartoonist or two would be right there with us.

 

[Kendra17]

Nevertheless, we must remain as detached as possible in the name of civility.

Rich::

Detachment in the face of a murderous, expansive, intolerant ideological and political movement whose goal is your conversion or death seems unwise.

Detachment implies a denial of our humanity that is under threat when innocent nuns are murdered, embassies are torched, planes are destroyed, and schoolhouses filled with children are attacked. Detachment tends to remove the responsibility for action in the face of a growing menace.

In a war in which innocent Americans, Jews and Westerners in ANY country are considered valid targets of Jihad, there can be little room for detachment.

Killing of innocent people-- purposefully targeting civilians for political and/or religious purposes is the very definition of uncivilized behavior. This is barbarism and anti-civilized behavior on the part of the enemy. I'm not suggesting that we target their innocents-- I am suggesting we need to deal with them vigorously to make them stop targeting ours. It is civilized to care and involve ourselves. It is patently uncivilized to detach.

 

[LukenDC]

Now that the Pope has apologized for quoting a historic source, I would like to see Saudi Arabia apologize for teaching hatred of "infidels" to generations of Muslim children.

 

[eclectics]

Detachment in the face of a murderous, expansive, intolerant ideological and political movement whose goal is your conversion or death seems unwise.

Detachment implies a denial of our humanity that is under threat when innocent nuns are murdered, embassies are torched, planes are destroyed, and schoolhouses filled with children are attacked. Detachment tends to remove the responsibility for action in the face of a growing menace.

In a war in which innocent Americans, Jews and Westerners in ANY country are considered valid targets of Jihad, there can be little room for detachment.

Killing of innocent people-- purposefully targeting civilians for political and/or religious purposes is the very definition of uncivilized behavior. This is barbarism and anti-civilized behavior on the part of the enemy. I'm not suggesting that we target their innocents-- I am suggesting we need to deal with them vigorously to make them stop targeting ours. It is civilized to care and involve ourselves. It is patently uncivilized to detach.

What is your definition of "vigorous"?, keeping in mind our available manpower is otherwise engaged at the moment. Are you advocating the use of the UN for a united world effort against this threat, or are they still a useless institution?

 

[Charade]

Now that the Pope has apologized for quoting a historic source, I would like to see Saudi Arabia apologize for teaching hatred of "infidels" to generations of Muslim children.

And Iran and Syria and...

 

[Kendra17]

Are you advocating the use of the UN for a united world effort against this threat, or are they still a useless institution?

Hhahahahha, what a sense of humor! Hahahahahah.
The UN is totally a failed and useless institution.
They are only good for keeping their building in good repair for its inevitable conversion to upscale condos.

I did not mention the UN at all in this thread so I am not quite sure why you suggest that I am suggesting using this pathetic non-institution for anything.

 

[Kendra17]

What is your definition of "vigorous"?

I think that you probably already know my reply.

 

[LuvDuke]

Well, and I know it's a shock to you my friend , I say it's more like "Open mouth.... tell truth".

I don't give a crap if it's the truth or not. That's not the point. The point is not to throw gasoline on a fire. And when you're that high up on the food chain, you think twice and understand what you say has consequences.

 

[eclectics]

Hhahahahha, what a sense of humor! Hahahahahah.
The UN is totally a failed and useless institution.
They are only good for keeping their building in good repair for its inevitable conversion to upscale condos.

I did not mention the UN at all in this thread so I am not quite sure why you suggest that I am suggesting using this pathetic non-institution for anything.

I mentioned the UN because I was just wondering if this new campaign you are advocating would be another "go it alone" deal or not. I'll be nice and not even inquire where you suggest we get the money and manpower for this "super hemi" version of the war on terror that I believe you are saying we should undertake on foreign soil for the world's behalf.

 

[Froggyswife]

This is going to be another religious war just as in the past. In religious history people were killed. Temples were burned. Idols were distroyed. Priest and Priestess were tortured and murdered as examples. It isn't anything new. Killing in the name of GOD is wrong whomever that GOD is.

To answer the op's question If the Pope appologises it won't make any difference to the religious radicals. They want a war... they want to bend the world to their beliefs and be under their controll.

As for Bush. My Mom always told me if you couldn't say something nice about someone then don't say anything at all..... thank you

 

[bsnyder]

Refreshing:

AUSTRALIA'S Muslim leaders have been "read the riot act" over the need to denounce any links between Islam and terrorism.

The Howard Government's multicultural spokesman, Andrew Robb, yesterday told an audience of 100 imams who address Australia's mosques that these were tough times requiring great personal resolve.
Mr Robb also called on them to shun a victim mentality that branded any criticism as discrimination.

"We live in a world of terrorism where evil acts are being regularly perpetrated in the name of your faith," Mr Robb said at the Sydney conference.

"And because it is your faith that is being invoked as justification for these evil acts, it is your problem.

"You can't wish it away, or ignore it, just because it has been caused by others.

"Instead, speak up and condemn terrorism, defend your role in the way of life that we all share here in Australia."

 

[Kendra17]

I mentioned the UN because I was just wondering if this new campaign you are advocating would be another "go it alone" deal or not. I'll be nice and not even inquire where you suggest we get the money and manpower for this "super hemi" version of the war on terror that I believe you are saying we should undertake on foreign soil for the world's behalf.

No, we don't want to go it alone, but we will if we have to. We are the United States-- that is what we do, that is why we are a light unto the world. That's why we're not Britain or France or Germany.

We would prefer the help of our allies. When I use the term vigorous, what I meant is this: We need to deal with our current in the same way that we dealt with our last existential enemy-- Imperialist Japan and Nazi Germany. They must be utterly defeated and learn that ANY attack on our citizens, military, or soil will result in such a devastating response against them on our part, that no repetition of an attack against us, by them, can be conceivable.

Your arguments and the arguments of your Leftist friends are essentially about non-response in the face of aggression against us. Lack of response on our part or a small inconsequential response is seen by our enemies as weakness and emboldens them.

You've said (or those on the left have said) that there are too many to fight and that we can't afford to 'go it alone'. Guess what? We have NO OPTION. We MUST fight. This is an existential conflict. Your contrary opinion is really of no moment and does nothing to change the minds of those that want to kill all of us.

The UN cannot rescue anyone. Our allies have been almost worthless with one exception, Israel-- and to a lesser extent, Britain. After Blair leaves, Britain will likely be in the camp of the enemy for all their lack of assistance to us and themselves.

If we must do it alone, we will. There are no other options.

 

[LiLIrishChick63]

Well, perhaps he should apologize to the MANY MILLIONS of Muslims who aren't savages.

i agree.