"Turn The Other Cheek": Appeasement

Desertrat

macrumors newbie
Original poster
Jul 4, 2003
2
706
Terlingua, Texas
mactastic and I have been going around and around on the subject of "Turn The Other Cheek" as to our involvements in the mideast, Iraq, terrorism and suchlike. Between emails and Internet browsing, I've run across various views about today's world.

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/07/15/opinion/15friedman.html?th&emc=th

Firedman's column says in part,

"Also at work is Sunni Islam's struggle with modernity. Islam has a long tradition of tolerating other religions, but only on the basis of the supremacy of Islam, not equality with Islam. Islam's self-identity is that it is the authentic and ideal expression of monotheism."

And

"Part of what seems to be going on with these young Muslim males is that they are, on the one hand, tempted by Western society, and ashamed of being tempted. On the other hand, they are humiliated by Western society because while Sunni Islamic civilization is supposed to be superior, its decision to ban the reform and reinterpretation of Islam since the 12th century has choked the spirit of innovation out of Muslim lands, and left the Islamic world less powerful, less economically developed, less technically advanced..."

"Some of these young Muslim men are tempted by a civilization they consider morally inferior, and they are humiliated by the fact that, while having been taught their faith is supreme, other civilizations seem to be doing much better," said Raymond Stock, the Cairo-based biographer and translator of Naguib Mahfouz. "When the inner conflict becomes too great, some are turned by recruiters to seek the sick prestige of 'martyrdom' by fighting the allegedly unjust occupation of Muslim lands and the 'decadence' in our own."

From World Net Daily comes

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=45277

The article cites speeches from people of the Palestinian Authority, e.g.,

""In 1917 of the previous century, Palestine was conquered by Britain, on whom we place full responsibility for the events in this land. At this opportunity, we put the responsibility on Britain [for the creation of the state of Israel] and say: we will never forget our revenge! We will never forget our revenge on Britain, who cannot escape the burden of its historical, political and moral responsibility because of what it committed on the land of Palestine. ... "Britain [is the one] that promised them [Jews] the establishment of a national homeland on the land of Palestine. Why? Because Britain resented the Jewish presence there, in Britain, and wanted to be relieved of them. ... " – Ibrahim Mudayris, PATV, May 13, 2005."

This is hatred that originated decades ago, long before Iraq/Afghanistan or Desert Storm or even Cold War politics in the mideast.

'Rat
 

Desertrat

macrumors newbie
Original poster
Jul 4, 2003
2
706
Terlingua, Texas
This is from an email. I have no reason to not believe the editorial was published...

"Mathias Dapfner, Chief Executive of the huge German publisher Axel Springer AG, has written a blistering attack in DIE WELT, Germany's largest daily newspaper, against the timid reaction of Europe in the face of the Islamic threat.

EUROPE - THY NAME IS COWARDICE

(Commentary by Mathias Dapfner CEO, Axel Springer, AG)


A few days ago Henry Broder wrote in Welt am Sonntag, "Europe - your family name is appeasement." It's a phrase you can't get out of your head because it's so terribly true.

Appeasement cost millions of Jews and non-Jews their lives as England
and France, allies at the time, negotiated and hesitated too long before
they noticed that Hitler had to be fought, not bound to toothless agreements.

Appeasement legitimized and stabilized Communism in the Soviet Union,
then East Germany, then all the rest of Eastern Europe where decades of
inhuman, suppressive, murderous governments were glorified as the
ideologically correct alternative to all other possibilities.

Appeasement crippled Europe when genocide ran rampant in Kosovo,
and even though we had absolute proof of ongoing mass-murder, we Europeans debated and debated and debated, and were still debating when finally the Americans had to come from halfway around the world, into Europe yet again,
and do our work for us.

Rather than protecting democracy in the Middle East, European
appeasement, camouflaged behind the fuzzy word "equidistance," now
countenances suicide bombings in Israel by fundamentalist Palestinians.

Appeasement generates a mentality that allows Europe to ignore nearly
500,000 victims of Saddam's torture and murder machinery and,
motivated by the self-righteousness of the peace-movement, has the
gall to issue bad grades to George Bush... Even as it is uncovered that the
loudest critics of the American action in Iraq made illicit billions, no,
TENS of billions, in the corrupt U.N. Oil-for-Food program.

And now we are faced with a particularly grotesque form of appeasement... How is Germany reacting to the escalating violence by Islamic fundamentalists in Holland and elsewhere? By suggesting that we really should have a "Muslim Holiday" in Germany.

I wish I were joking, but I a! m not. A substantial fraction of our (German)
Government, and if the polls are to be believed, the German people, actually believe that creating an Official State "Muslim Holiday" will somehow spare us from the wrath of the fanatical Islamists.

One cannot help but recall Britain's Neville Chamberlain waving the laughable treaty signed by Adolph Hitler, and declaring European "Peace in our time."

What else has to happen before the European public and its political
leadership get it? There is a sort of crusade underway, an especially
perfidious crusade consisting of systematic attacks by fanatic Muslims,
focused on civilians, directed against our free, open Western societies,
and intent upon Western Civilization's utter destruction.

It is a conflict that will most likely last longer than any of the great military conflicts of the last century - a conflict conducted by an enemy that cannot be tamed by "tolerance" and "accommodation", but is actually spurred on by such gestures, which have proven to be, and will always be taken by the Islamists for signs of weakness.

Only two recent American Presidents had the courage needed for
anti-appeasement: Reagan and Bush.

His American critics may quibble over the details, but we Europeans
know the truth. We saw it first hand: Ronald Reagan ended the Cold
War, freeing half of the German people from nearly 50 years of terror
and virtual slavery. And Bush, supported only by the Social Democrat
Blair, acting on moral conviction, recognized the danger in the Islamic War
against democracy. His place in history will have to be evaluated after a
number of years have passed.

In the meantime, Europe sits back with charismatic self-confidence in
the multicultural corner, instead of defending liberal society's values
and being an attractive center of power on the same playing field as the
true great powers, America and China.

On the contrary - we Europeans present ourselves, in contrast to
those "arrogant Americans," as the World Champions of "tolerance",
which even Otto Schily (Germany's Interior Minister) justifiably criticizes.
Why? Because we're so moral? No, I fear it's more because we're so
materialistic, so devoid of a moral compass.

For his policies, Bush risks the fall of the dollar, huge amounts of
additional national debt, and a massive and persistent burden on the
American economy - because unlike almost all of Europe, Bush realizes
what is at stake - literally everything.

While we criticize the "capitalistic robber barons" of America because they
seem too sure of their priorities, we timidly defend our Social Welfare systems.
Stay out of it! It could get expensive!

We'd rather discuss reducing our 35-hour workweek or our dental
coverage, or our 4 weeks of paid vacation... Or listen to TV pastors
preach about the need to "reach out to terrorists. To understand and forgive."

Appeasement? Europe, thy name is Cowardice"

I, like many of my generation, was raised on the idea that Chamberlain's "niceness" was absolute folly. When dealing with any form of tyranny, there can be no accomodation, no compromise. Such compromise is comprising of the principles of the ideals of our civilization. Ideals mean you struggle upward to a better world, not downward into political or religious barbarism.

'Rat
 

Thanatoast

macrumors 65816
Dec 3, 2002
1,005
134
Denver
my favorite t-shirt is the one that says, "who would jesus bomb?" sure, he didn't have to deal with terrorists, he just got nailed to a tree by the romans. he refused to resort to violence to "solve" his problems. this works both ways.

are the terrorists right in bombing civilians? no. are we right for bombing them back? no. especially when we've killed more innocents in our campaign than they did to start.

i figure the golden rule is the best. does this mean serving osama tea and cookies? of course not. neither does it mean invading convenient countries and manipulating your followers into giving away their human and civil rights.

as for mr. dapfner, it's easy to throw charges of "cowardice" against people who don't want to kill. it's harder to throw charges of "vision" at those who do.
 

mactastic

macrumors 68040
Apr 24, 2003
3,647
661
Colly-fornia
I guess I should make clear that 'turning the other cheek' is not a foreign policy, nor is it a guarantee that you will not get pasted on the other cheek for offering it. My point in using the phrase is that we see many purported 'Christians' in our country actively calling for retribution and revenge, as well as justifying unprovoked attacks; selectively interpreting their moral teachings so as to legitimize their own actions.

In my view, (since 'Rat decided to devote a thread to this concept) particularly as it relates to the WoT, turning the other cheek means not holding Muslims at large responsible as we bring to justice those who are. It does not mean sitting around and waiting for another attack to strike the homeland. This is why I believe that police action combined with precision military actions is the way to combat the threat we face. By allowing our rage at being struck on the first cheek to be transformed into violence we have committed one of what I consider to be as close to a Cardinal Sin as I believe in: Never act out of anger. You will almost always regret actions taken under the influence of rage. Actions should be based on intellectual calculation, not emotional reaction. Allowing your emotions to make your decisions is like letting your little head do the thinking at a strip club. Bad News.

Bin Laden got exactly the response he wanted out of Bush. In fact, I doubt bin Laden in his wildest dreams thought Bush would actually invade Iraq because of 9/11. The manipulation of Bush has been superb in this regard. They attack, we predictably spend money protecting things after the fact, then spend more money on a massive military operation that is, by definition, almost unwinnable.

Yoda had it right: "Anger, fear, aggression; the dark side of the Force are they. Easily they flow, quick to join you in a fight."

Sun Tzu also had it right: "He who knows when he can fight and when he cannot, will be victorious."

I hear the same thing in martial arts classes. Don't let your fear or your anger dictate your actions.

Turning the other cheek means acting calm cool and collected as you control the situation in my view. It doesn't mean you stick your head in the sand and wait for your ass to get kicked. At least not to me.
 

takao

macrumors 68040
Dec 25, 2003
3,825
432
Dornbirn (Austria)
actually about the article from Döpfner was rather lousy translated as well.. for example the numbers of people who "died udner saddam" somehow doubled in the version you posted and it is a lot more agressive and harsh than the german version (from my impression)

side infos about Axel Springer Verlag: his most popular newspaper is the 'famous' "Bild" ... it's like the british "SUN".. huge letters, gossip, lots of pictures, slanting articles, naked girls on front page every day, is since 1-2 years distributed through mc donalds restaurants.. it's good to keep that in mind when reading the editorial
at least the bild is not as popular and opinion making like the austrian "Krone" who nearly can turn around elections if they like
 

Ugg

macrumors 68000
Apr 7, 2003
1,985
15
Penryn
I agree with takao that the Springer/Dapfner piece is just a bunch of sensationalist bs. Pretty similar to the Rupert Murdoch/fox non news blatherings.

The first bit you posted, 'Rat, was pretty right on as far as I'm concerned. Muslims are in a prison of their own making, ok to be fair the west's continual support of corrupt and repressive regimes like the Saud's deserves part of the blame as well.

I was doing some reading up on Islam the other day and found a site that listed the historical contributions of Muslims. There wasn't a listing for literature. The only native Muslim writer I know is Naguib Mahfouz. Muslim persecution of writers and artists critical of Islam is more well known than than even their sole Nobel Prize winner, the above-mentioned NF.

Turkey's most famous film makers are undoubtedly those living and filming in Germany. I'm sure the film makers from other predominantly Muslim countries also do their best work outside their own countries, the notable and somewhat ironic exception is Iran. Artistic expression is the ultimate expression of individual freedom, something sorely lacking in Most Muslim worlds.

I don't know what the solution is but i'm positive it's not going to be found in madrassas' under Sharia law.

edit note: added Iran
 

Xtremehkr

macrumors 68000
Jul 4, 2004
1,897
0
Appeasement has little to do with it 'Rat. As long as we have a presence in the ME, they are going to attack us to try and get us out.

The US simply does not have the personnel numbers or financing to control an area that large.

Given the level of money the military consumes before it even goes to war, it is basically the most inefficient organization in the world.

At this point, the only guaranteed way to stop terrorism is to remain within our borders.

I don't buy all the AM Newstalk radiospeak about how they hate our freedom etc. That argument is basless at best and only serves the purpose of those who are pushing it.
 

takao

macrumors 68040
Dec 25, 2003
3,825
432
Dornbirn (Austria)
side thing: i just the recent statistics about muslims in austria (in an article where the head of the austrian muslim "glaubensgemeinschaft" distanced themselves from the attacks and had harsh words towards certain mosques in austria/vienna as far as i remember... and they)

since 1990 we've got an increase of more than 100 percent in muslims.. actually in my 'state' with 8.4 percent (more than vienna) they just overtook the protestants and are 2nd biggest group... and i've seen it all.. from the scarf wearing to the see-through top wearing girl and from the beer drinking-pig sausage-eating boys to kebap selling guy around the corner.... perhaps growing up with islam in the neighborhood and inside of the school class males a difference .. i simply don't see how the islam should be more terroristic than something else ... how many crisis regions with terror groups have there been in europe alone ?.. let's see from the top of my head: north ireland (IRA), northern spain (ETA), the Balkan, belgium (old ... cooled down language conflict), south tyrol (same but still some conflict potential), neo-nazis (mail bombing series in austria during the 90-ties), the RAF finished their businesses just a few years ago.., the french with their north african problems (old one ;) ) i think the list could go on and on
 

skunk

macrumors G4
Jun 29, 2002
11,745
3,997
Republic of Ukistan
I think this is a pretty comprehensive reply to that piece of intolerant racist crap, and it's from a Frenchman.
http://www.axisoflogic.com/artman/publish/article_16040.shtml
Letters from France

Reply to Matthias Dapfner
By Robert Thompson
Mar 3, 2005, 11:06


Matthias Dapfner, Chief Executive of the Gerepmanf publishing house Axel Springer AG has written the following attack on Europe in the German daily newspaper Die Welt, to which I have added my comments in italics after each paragraph.

EUROPE - THY NAME IS COWARDICE

(Commentary by Mathias Dapfner CEO, Axel Springer, AG)

A few days ago Henry Broder wrote in Welt am Sonntag, "Europe - your family name is appeasement." It's a phrase you can't get out of your head because it's so terribly true. Appeasement cost millions of Jews and non-Jews their lives as England and France, allies at the time, negotiated and hesitated too long before they noticed that Hitler had to be fought, not bound to toothless agreements.

We have to remember that both the United Kingdom (of which England is only part) and France had to build up their forces before they could react to the expansionist moves by Hitler and his millions of followers within Germany. We should now abandon appeasement and stand up to the Zionist invaders of the Holy Land.

Appeasement legitimized and stabilized Communism in the Soviet Union, then East Germany, then all the rest of Eastern Europe where for decades, inhuman, suppressive, and murderous governments were glorified as the ideologically correct alternative to all other possibilities.

After the war, France and the United Kingdom were shattered by the efforts which they had put forth over the six years of war, and the people of the USA should remember that their country only came into the war half-way through. On the other hand, the western allies did fight against the Communists who tried to take over in Greece, but unhappily only to install extreme right-wing politicians in their place.

Appeasement crippled Europe when genocide ran rampant in Kosovo, and even though we had absolute proof of ongoing mass-murder, we Europeans debated and debated and debated, and were still debating when finally the Americans had to come from halfway around the world, into Europe yet again, and do our work for us.

This is a curious amendment of historical fact, since the bulk of the forces which went in (and are still there) came from Europe.

Rather than protecting democracy in the Middle East, European appeasement, camouflaged behind the fuzzy word "equidistance," now countenances suicide bombings in Israel by fundamentalist Palestinians.

There has been too much support given to the invading Zionists who, having learnt from the former Nazi persecutors of ther Jews, decided to use repression and terrorism to try to drive the indigenous people out of their homes and off their land. Murders by suicide are as evil as are cold-blooded killings, such as those of the eight strawberry-picking children several days before the recent Tel Aviv murders. Fundamentalist Zionists have created the terrorists among the invaded and oppressed people of Palestine. We Europeans do not approve or "countenance" either, but we consider that the Zionists could easily end all this trouble either by going back to their countries of origin, or by being willing to live in a secular non-confessional Palestinian state.

Appeasement generates a mentality that allows Europe to ignore nearly 500,000 victims of Saddam's torture and murder machinery and, motivated by the self-righteousness of the peace-movement, has the gall to issue bad grades to George Bush... Even as it is uncovered that the loudest critics of the American action in Iraq made illicit billions, no, TENS of billions, in the corrupt U.N. Oil-for-Food program.

George W. Bush's refusal to wait until the time was ripe to deal with the régime of Saddam Hussein has created the on-going war situation in today's Iraq. Furthermore, the USA were largely to blame for the framework of the Oil-for-Food programme, since they refused to help to overcome the starvation and other suffering of the ordinary Iraqi people.

And now we are faced with a particularly grotesque form of appeasement... How is Germany reacting to the escalating violence by Islamic fundamentalists in Holland and elsewhere? By suggesting that we really should have a "Muslim Holiday" in Germany.

Why should the Muslim inhabitants not enjoy their special holidays? As a Catholic Christian, I respect my Jewish and Muslim brothers and sisters and their respective faiths. I wish them well on such ocasions as these.

I wish I were joking, but I am not. A substantial fraction of our (German) Government, and if the polls are to be believed, the German people, actually believe that creating an Official State "Muslim Holiday" will somehow spare us from the wrath of the fanatical Islamists. One cannot help but recall Britain's Neville Chamberlain waving the laughable treaty signed by Adolf Hitler, and declaring European "Peace in our time". What else has to happen before the European public and its political leadership get it? There is a sort of crusade underway, an especially perfidious crusade consisting of systematic attacks by fanatic Muslims, focused on civilians, directed against our free, open Western societies, and intent upon Western Civilization's utter destruction.

Showing respect is a better way of outmanoeuvring the Islamist fanatics, who themselves refuse to follow the teachings set out in the Qur'an. I prefer to see to it that Muslim citizens come to know what is in the Qur'an, and such education can break the power of those who misuse religion to spread hate, such as the Bush régime in the USA, the Zionist régime in the Holy Land and those behind al Qaeda who prey on ignorance. There is no sense in pretending that by pandering to and appeasing the bloodthirsty greed of the Zionists, or any other tyranical régime, we do anything to help those who suffer, or have suffered, under any other form of oppression.

It is a conflict that will most likely last longer than any of the great military conflicts of the last century - a conflict conducted by an enemy that cannot be tamed by "tolerance" and "accommodation" but is actually spurred on by such gestures, which have proven to be, and will always be taken by the Islamists for signs of weakness.

Weakness is exactly what the Bush régime shows when it fans the flames of fear and hatred within its own people, and uses such men as Oussama bin Laden as the enemy, as Eric Arthur Blair (aka George Orwell) explained so clearly in his "1984". Supporting true Islam is the only way to destroy the power of the Islamists, who reject the clear teachings of the religion in whose name they make their false claims.

Only two recent American Presidents had the courage needed for anti-appeasement: Reagan and Bush. His American critics may quibble over the details, but we Europeans know the truth. We saw it first hand: Ronald Reagan ended the Cold War, freeing half of the German people from nearly 50 years of terror and virtual slavery. And Bush, supported only by the Social Democrat Blair, acting on moral conviction, recognized the danger in the Islamic War against democracy. His place in history will have to be evaluated after a number of years have passed.

Appeasement is exactly the crime committed by successive Presidents of the USA - appeasement of Zionism, whose only aim is to dispossess the indigenous people of the Holy Land, by all means including murder. Ronald Reagan may have had his virtues, but he certainly did not cause the Soviet Empire to implode - it did it on its own with a helping hand from such men as Mikhail Gorbachov, Alexander Dubcek and Lech Walesa among others.

In the meantime, Europe sits back with charismatic self-confidence in the multicultural corner, instead of defending liberal society's values and being an attractive center of power on the same playing field as the true great powers, America and China.

I am surprised that Mr Dapfner believes that China defends "liberal society's values", since in my view it has started along the road towards them, as have the USA, but both nations still have some way to go. Why is Mr Dapfner so frightened of other cultures ? This is exactly the kind of attitude which brought the late unlamented Adolf Hitler to power.

On the contrary - we Europeans present ourselves, in contrast to those "arrogant Americans", as the World Champions of "tolerance", which even (Germany's Interior Minister) Otto Schily justifiably criticizes. Why? Because we're so moral? I fear it's more because we're so materialistic, so devoid of a moral compass.

The arrogant people among the population of the USA are those who back Mr Bush and his handlers, backers and supporters. They have a strange belief that wholesale killing complies with the Ten Commandments and the Beatitudes. At least genuine followers of Judaism, Christianity and Islam (as well as those of many other faiths) have a sense of morality which helps them to combat materialism.

continued
 

skunk

macrumors G4
Jun 29, 2002
11,745
3,997
Republic of Ukistan
For his policies, Bush risks the fall of the dollar, huge amounts of additional national debt, and a massive and persistent burden on the American economy - because unlike almost all of Europe, Bush realizes what is at stake - literally everything.

Mr Bush's policies can be summed up very briefly as being to give huge financial benefits to his handlers, backers and supporters, including the Bible-benders. These latter are as bad as men like Oussama bin Laden for their constant misuse of religion for their own ends. What is at stake is our civlisation and our future, and the Bush régime seems to ignore this by refusing to condemn every single form of terrorism, especially Zionism. Everything is indeed at stake, including our environment.

While we criticize the "capitalistic robber barons" of America because they seem too sure of their priorities, we timidly defend our Social Welfare systems. Stay out of it! It could get expensive! We'd rather discuss reducing our 35-hour workweek or our dental coverage, or our 4 weeks of paid vacation... Or listen to TV pastors preach about the need to "reach out to terrorists. To understand and forgive".

I prefer the Beatitudes to Mr Dapfner's unbridled capitalism, one of the greatest scourges of the world - he is obviously too well off to care about the poor and needy.

These days, Europe reminds me of an old woman who, with shaking hands, frantically hides her last pieces of jewelry when she notices a robber breaking into a neighbor's house.

Here we seem to agree, but Mr Dapfner does not seem to have noticed that the robber is the Bush régime and its acolytes, and the most conspicuous neighbour is the people of the Holy Land, which needs our help.

Appeasement? Europe, thy name is Cowardice.

Europe has indeed shown some worrying signs of wishing to join the Bush régime in appeasing the Zionist thieves and murderers, and, if it does, I fully agree that it would then be guilty of culpable cowardice. The most servile and cowardly leaders, such as Mr Blair and Mr Berlusconi, have been largely disowned by their own people for obeying Mr Bush's illegal and evil orders. We must indeed avoid such cowardice and show that we can stand up to this tyrant, and all his handlers, backers and supporters in Washington D.C.
 

tuartboy

macrumors 6502a
May 10, 2005
750
13
skunk said:
I think this is a pretty comprehensive reply to that piece of intolerant racist crap, and it's from a Frenchman.
wow. you get the award for contradicting yourself in less than a sentence!

you called it intolerant racist crap. that sounds pretty intolerant to me.

If you wish to force your worldviews on others, don't be so insensitive to their beliefs. What that German said was his opinion and was about himself and his own people. He has the right to say it. I don't think you have the right to judge him like that.
 

Xtremehkr

macrumors 68000
Jul 4, 2004
1,897
0
tuartboy said:
wow. you get the award for contradicting yourself in less than a sentence!

you called it intolerant racist crap. that sounds pretty intolerant to me.

If you wish to force your worldviews on others, don't be so insensitive to their beliefs. What that German said was his opinion and was about himself and his own people. He has the right to say it. I don't think you have the right to judge him like that.
Would you say that those who did not agree with Hitler were intolerant of his views?
 

skunk

macrumors G4
Jun 29, 2002
11,745
3,997
Republic of Ukistan
tuartboy said:
wow. you get the award for contradicting yourself in less than a sentence!

you called it intolerant racist crap. that sounds pretty intolerant to me.
I'm not intolerant of anything except intolerance.

If you wish to force your worldviews on others, don't be so insensitive to their beliefs. What that German said was his opinion and was about himself and his own people. He has the right to say it. I don't think you have the right to judge him like that.
Of course he has the right to say it. And I have the right to express my opinion of what he says.
 

mactastic

macrumors 68040
Apr 24, 2003
3,647
661
Colly-fornia
BTW, where is iGary to give us his patented eye-roll for use of biased sources, regarding World Net Daily? I mean, if he's gonna eye-roll in total dismissal of any writing contained in the LA Times, you'd think WND would make his eyes spin round like pinwheels...

Skunk, excellent response. I once got into an argument with an ignorant lefty when my home town was thinking about implementing a 'hate free zone' in response, I think, to Columbine. When he wouldn't believe me that there were things in this world worth hating I told him if they passed the resolution they'd find me down there screaming that I hated intolerance, and homophobia, and racism, and stupid politicians, along with a laundry list of other human failings that I despised. I think it began to sink in for him then... ;)
 

tuartboy

macrumors 6502a
May 10, 2005
750
13
mactastic said:
BTW, where is iGary to give us his patented eye-roll for use of biased sources, regarding World Net Daily? I mean, if he's gonna eye-roll in total dismissal of any writing contained in the LA Times, you'd think WND would make his eyes spin round like pinwheels...

Skunk, excellent response. I once got into an argument with an ignorant lefty when my home town was thinking about implementing a 'hate free zone' in response, I think, to Columbine. When he wouldn't believe me that there were things in this world worth hating I told him if they passed the resolution they'd find me down there screaming that I hated intolerance, and homophobia, and racism, and stupid politicians, along with a laundry list of other human failings that I despised. I think it began to sink in for him then... ;)
this will be my last post here, because I think that politics has more to do with emotion than logic these days, but anyway...

I find it odd that you are saying it's ok to hate some things and then turning around and saying that it is not okay for this german to hate the ambivalence that he feels Europe has shown to terrorists. Where are you going to draw the line? In other words, it's only ok for people to hate things if you feel they should be hated?

Before you start getting angry at Americans for their imperialistic and intolerant ways, understand that my friends and family are out there dying for freedom, no matter where it is being infringed upon. My mother's first husband died in Vietnam because stupid politicians sat on their asses and ran it like an election. I have many friends and relatives in Iraq fighting for people who have never had the luxury of speaking what they feel. They would have been brutaly murdered for saying half of what has been said here. All the troops I know hate this mess but are willing and eager to help the Iraqi people because they want to save not only their lives, but their existence and meaning as a people. How can you critisize this?

Screw the oil and WMDs and all that other nonesense. People are alive because of what has happened. If we would have sat back during WW2, that frenchman would be speaking German and so might the rest of you Europeans. So might I. Sometimes freedom has to be defended with blood. It's sad. I mean that. but you have to stand up against the tyrants and bullies of the world. And America understands that. I don't know what you all think, but we here may not all like what is happening, but we support our troops and have a respect for freedom. We may not all agree on politics, but we love our country and the freedom it was founded on and we will fight for it.

I'm sorry you feel opposite. Please understand that we really do want to help. It may be masked by the sleazes in goverment, but actions speak louder than words. Sorry I can't be more convincing. I guess I will never truly understand your stance until I experience it how you are.
 

mactastic

macrumors 68040
Apr 24, 2003
3,647
661
Colly-fornia
tuartboy said:
We may not all agree on politics, but we love our country and the freedom it was founded on and we will fight for it.

I'm sorry you feel opposite.
Look, I appreciate the fact that you tried to be nice in your post, but I find this highly offensive. I don't question your love of your country, how dare you question mine?

I suggest you make one more post here retracting the assertion that because I don't support this war that I somehow hate our troops or our country.
 

Xtremehkr

macrumors 68000
Jul 4, 2004
1,897
0
I think the main objective was to turn you away from making your point Mactastic. If he really believes that you are trying to work against your country, it is probably his problem and not yours. Nothing you have said leads me to think that you are doing anything other than arguing for what is in our best national interest.

But then again, it is another person who doesn't understand that people can advocate being tolerant while not being tolerant of everything that may cross their paths.

A backhanded compliment only sounds nice.
 

solvs

macrumors 603
Jun 25, 2002
5,693
1
LaLaLand, CA
tuartboy said:
wow. you get the award for contradicting yourself in less than a sentence!
Actually, I find that the more tolerant people won't tolerate intolerance. And tolerance doesn't mean you have to like what you tolerate. For instance, I am tolerant of your opinion, but I can still disagree with it. I can also be disgusted by an intolerant statement, and can speak out against it. I think the people who keep saying things about how intolerant we are need to look up the meaning of the word.

And you people are still misusing the term Turn The Other Cheek. It's just as misunderstood as "tolerance". Or that what we're doing in Iraq has anything to do with 9/11 or "freedom".
 

skunk

macrumors G4
Jun 29, 2002
11,745
3,997
Republic of Ukistan
tuartboy said:
this will be my last post here, because I think that politics has more to do with emotion than logic these days, but anyway...
Good. (Edited for courtesy and restraint).

Before you start getting angry at Americans for their imperialistic and intolerant ways, understand that my friends and family are out there dying for freedom, no matter where it is being infringed upon. My mother's first husband died in Vietnam because stupid politicians sat on their asses and ran it like an election.
Obviously killing 3 million wasn't enough. Shoulda had some BALLS and nuked the pinkos (or were they yellow? I get so confused)
I have many friends and relatives in Iraq fighting for people who have never had the luxury of speaking what they feel.
On the contrary, Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld have had plenty of opportunity to express themselves.
They would have been brutaly murdered for saying half of what has been said here. All the troops I know hate this mess but are willing and eager to help the Iraqi people because they want to save not only their lives, but their existence and meaning as a people. How can you critisize this?
So. The truth is out. It's not WMDs, Regime Change, Liberation or Bringing Democracy: it's to save their existence and meaning as a people. That's so cool. You should have said so before.

Screw the oil and WMDs and all that other nonesense. People are alive because of what has happened.
It has clearly escaped your notice, but people are actually dead.
If we would have sat back during WW2, that frenchman would be speaking German and so might the rest of you Europeans. So might I.
....Ah, forget it.
Sometimes freedom has to be defended with blood. It's sad. I mean that. but you have to stand up against the tyrants and bullies of the world. And America understands that. I don't know what you all think, but we here may not all like what is happening, but we support our troops and have a respect for freedom. We may not all agree on politics, but we love our country and the freedom it was founded on and we will fight for it.
Ooops! Sorry. Must have stumbled into an alternate universe.

I'm sorry you feel opposite.
I'd hate to think you agree.
Please understand that we really do want to help. It may be masked by the sleazes in goverment, but actions speak louder than words. Sorry I can't be more convincing.
Good God! Where do you people come from?