Solution

[carlfense]

I'm asserting that this video is an excuse for failed policies of this administration............not the least of which is an unbelievably inexcusable failure to be doubly prepared on a symbolic day like 9/11

Which failures in particular and why did they spark riots?

 

 

(as for your side question.........Yes, still confident)

What's that confidence based on?

[Comish]

I'm asserting that this video is an excuse for failed policies of this administration............not the least of which is an unbelievably inexcusable failure to be doubly prepared on a symbolic day like 9/11

Which failures in particular and why did they spark riots?

 

I believe it was about a year ago, when preening at a presser, he declared that HIS method of engagement in the Middle East proved that violence was a thing of the past. As much as it would be nice to believe that, it's simply not reality. There are some bad folks in the world who wish us harm. Strength is a deterrent. All the theoretical wishing in the world can't change that. Riots can ensue when you are perceived as weak or uncommitted.

 

(as for your side question.........Yes, still confident)

What's that confidence based on?

 

First, faith in the American people that they will see this administration as being woefully inadequate for the job.

Secondly, the scrambling by team Obama to re-direct resources to states they never intended to signals to me their internal polls show this is much different than we are told.

Third, the polls that really count don't show up until the last 2 weeks before the election.

[carlfense]

I believe it was about a year ago, when preening at a presser, he declared that HIS method of engagement in the Middle East proved that violence was a thing of the past.

Do you have a link for that?

 

Strength is a deterrent. All the theoretical wishing in the world can't change that. Riots can ensue when you are perceived as weak or uncommitted.

Oh. The GOP talking point. Which proposed President Romney policies would change the status quo in the middle east?

 

("It's all because Obama apologized for America!" <---- He didn't. A certain predecessor did though . . . several times.)

 

First, faith in the American people that they will see this administration as being woefully inadequate for the job.

Secondly, the scrambling by team Obama to re-direct resources to states they never intended to signals to me their internal polls show this is much different than we are told.

Third, the polls that really count don't show up until the last 2 weeks before the election.

Which states would those be?

 

Agreed about the polls. They show a general direction . . . but they can change. Sure looks like a tough climb for Romney at the moment. We'll see.

[knapplc]

Sure looks like a tough climb for Romney at the moment.

 

Wait until he gets on stage with Obama at the debates. You haven't seen a tough climb yet.

[BigRedBuster]

As a perfect example of why this country is in a mess, this thread started off with a serious question which faces our future and it took less than 20 posts to delve into nothing more than my guy is better than your guy.

[knapplc]

BRB, did you seriously expect an answer to the question of what to do with the Middle East? The region has been a hotbed of war and strife for 10,000 years. What could we possibly say here that would solve that?

[carlfense]

Sure looks like a tough climb for Romney at the moment.

 

Wait until he gets on stage with Obama at the debates. You haven't seen a tough climb yet.

Maybe . . . but I don't expect the debates to move the needle in either direction.

[strigori]

Clearly, these people in the middle east do not have the ability to understand our freedoms in this country and understand that this low life minister's actions are not condoned by the government.

That's the biggest problem. They truly don't understand that the US government can't stop these messages. Since they think that the US government has the power to stop them (which they don't, thank goodness) they believe that the US government is endorsing the message.

 

I am so sick and tired of having to deal with the middle east.

Me too. If we weren't all so dependent on oil we wouldn't have to deal with their medieval BS.

 

 

Edit: I don't see any solution. How can you deal with irrational religious fanaticism?

A solution besides "Kill 'em all"? Or at least make Jerusalem into a giant crater uninhabitable by human life for 10,000 years.

 

Its a problem of culture. To start with the US is really the only country that has free speech written into its foundation. Every other country on earth has a form of censorship board (often called 'ratings boards' but failing to 'rate' something means it can't be sold in the country) Its not just a religious issue, Muslims are not out burning cars around here.

 

The nations having the biggest problems are also among the most uneducated on the face of the earth. They are poor, stupid and little more than sheep to whatever priest they follow. Many religious leaders in these nations have more power than most government officials. The priest whips the sheep up into a fervor and out to riot they go.

 

The religious organizations want to keep it that way too. These people are the ones that actually know how western governments work, and they do not want to lose their power. The closest comparison would be the Catholic Church through the dark ages. Keep the masses poor and stupid and they are easy to manipulate. The people are then given a scapegoat to focus their frustrations from being kept that way. The US and Israel are the scapegoats.

 

Until the general population goes through the equivalent of the Renaissance and throw off religious rule and law, we will never get past the 14th century cultures with 20th century weapons.

[carlfense]

Clearly, these people in the middle east do not have the ability to understand our freedoms in this country and understand that this low life minister's actions are not condoned by the government.

That's the biggest problem. They truly don't understand that the US government can't stop these messages. Since they think that the US government has the power to stop them (which they don't, thank goodness) they believe that the US government is endorsing the message.

 

I am so sick and tired of having to deal with the middle east.

Me too. If we weren't all so dependent on oil we wouldn't have to deal with their medieval BS.

 

 

Edit: I don't see any solution. How can you deal with irrational religious fanaticism?

A solution besides "Kill 'em all"? Or at least make Jerusalem into a giant crater uninhabitable by human life for 10,000 years.

 

Its a problem of culture. To start with the US is really the only country that has free speech written into its foundation. Every other country on earth has a form of censorship board (often called 'ratings boards' but failing to 'rate' something means it can't be sold in the country) Its not just a religious issue, Muslims are not out burning cars around here.

 

The nations having the biggest problems are also among the most uneducated on the face of the earth. They are poor, stupid and little more than sheep to whatever priest they follow. Many religious leaders in these nations have more power than most government officials. The priest whips the sheep up into a fervor and out to riot they go.

 

The religious organizations want to keep it that way too. These people are the ones that actually know how western governments work, and they do not want to lose their power. The closest comparison would be the Catholic Church through the dark ages. Keep the masses poor and stupid and they are easy to manipulate. The people are then given a scapegoat to focus their frustrations from being kept that way. The US and Israel are the scapegoats.

 

Until the general population goes through the equivalent of the Renaissance and throw off religious rule and law, we will never get past the 14th century cultures with 20th century weapons.

+1

[HSKR]

Bash the Muslim religion and you start riots worldwide and have to go into hiding the rest of your life fearing death. Bash Christianity or Mormonism and you either get a top rated show on Broadway, a NYT's best seller or a highly rated tv show. This guy chose poorly, that's for sure.

[sd'sker]

Bash the Muslim religion and you start riots worldwide and have to go into hiding the rest of your life fearing death. Bash Christianity or Mormonism and you either get a top rated show on Broadway, a NYT's best seller or a highly rated tv show. This guy chose poorly, that's for sure.

so are you saying that free speech should be revoked and nothing ill should be said about religions? what?

[HSKR]

Bash the Muslim religion and you start riots worldwide and have to go into hiding the rest of your life fearing death. Bash Christianity or Mormonism and you either get a top rated show on Broadway, a NYT's best seller or a highly rated tv show. This guy chose poorly, that's for sure.

so are you saying that free speech should be revoked and nothing ill should be said about religions? what?

LOL!

[carlfense]

Bash the Muslim religion and you start riots worldwide and have to go into hiding the rest of your life fearing death. Bash Christianity or Mormonism and you either get a top rated show on Broadway, a NYT's best seller or a highly rated tv show. This guy chose poorly, that's for sure.

Yeah . . . Christians in the United States would never threaten violence over perceived attacks on their religion.

[Mavric]

You can prosecute the guy for the ramifications of his speech. Speech is free, but if that speech has consequences, you should be punished for it. I can tell carlfense to go jump off a bridge, but if he does, I should bear some responsibility for his actions. Inciting people to violence should have consequences.

Wow, that is one slippery slope on which you're standing.

[knapplc]

You can prosecute the guy for the ramifications of his speech. Speech is free, but if that speech has consequences, you should be punished for it. I can tell carlfense to go jump off a bridge, but if he does, I should bear some responsibility for his actions. Inciting people to violence should have consequences.

Wow, that is one slippery slope on which you're standing.

 

You are correct, which is why I back-pedaled from that statement a few hours after I posted it:

 

You can prosecute the guy for the ramifications of his speech. Speech is free, but if that speech has consequences, you should be punished for it. I can tell carlfense to go jump off a bridge, but if he does, I should bear some responsibility for his actions. Inciting people to violence should have consequences.

 

On what legal grounds could this guy be prosecuted? Now, maybe the families of the American victims could sue him personally but I doubt if he has anything worth going after.

 

Don't know. Just thinking out loud. Probably none.

 

 

It wasn't one of my more lucid moments. I'll beg forgiveness, and ask everyone to forget my error.