Can You Handle The Truth?: Poll Shows The Shocking Reality of Arab Public Opinion

Exactly larrrs. Spot on. I'm waiting for Obama to come back from a summit with a declaration, "peace in our time" like Neville Chamberlain.

larrs, until we realize we can't kill all the Arabs we must try to be as neutral as possible when it comes to the Israeli-Palestinian situation. Perpetual war is not a viable option, no matter what you think. We can't afford it and we cannot win using only a military option.

Tom, and we on the left didn't have to wait too long to see Bush strutting around like a peacock on the deck of a carrier declaring "mission accomplished." Sorry I can't quite compare Bush to any other world leader from the past, he was in a class by himself.

rickg, still getting off bashing Bush? The "Mission" of toppling Saddam was Accomplished" when he was on the carrier.

Now, because of Bush, Obama gets to take the credit despite @!$%#ing Bush over while a Senator.

Laughable. Remaining neutral brought us Adolf. Waving flowers isn't going to work.

rickg,

...we can't kill all the Arabs

Your conflating what I said with you may think some believe in order to make my statement appear extreme...don't do that. Not only is it a foolish and wasteful thing to say, it make it difficult to take you seriously.

Perpetual war is not a viable option, no matter what you think

I don't believe that it is either nor have I stated so; our enemies however are more than willing to carry on a war of perpetuity. I will say that staying neutral is no option in this situation; we need to face our enemies in all arenas. We do not do this because we need oil, we will NOT ALWAYS need oil the way we do now; and, the oil producing regions of the world know this. Many Arab countries have nearly nothing but oil, terrorism and illegal drugs/activities ---once the need for oil dries up so will those countries and their leaders know it. They cannot exist the way they do now for more than another 50-100 years; if they are going to have any success at achieving world leadership they will have to do it by causing enough global conflict so that in any ensuing chaos they may be able to possibly glean power. This is why using Jihadism is so handy; you get hordes of willingly stupid people who will throw themselves on a pike for whatever cause is deemed as"holy".

We can't afford it and we cannot win using only a military option.

You are correct there. We need to put an economic stranglehold on our enemies. We need to continue to infiltrate and confound their intelligence operations. Diplomacy is done on many different levels and while we play the game of the ages we also should support insurgency, propagate propaganda and do whatever is necessary to completely and totally wipe out our enemies.

No grace...

No mercy...

No looking back.

We can't afford it and we cannot win using only a military option.

While I agree with that statement, it should be expanded - we cannot win using only a military option, but there is a chance that we could lose without one.

larrs, the policies you advocate will only continue the current situation. And if I was an Arab I would feel justified in my hatred of the USA. Sorry, but thinking that the USA has the right to determine the fate of other countries or cultures is the reason we find ourselves involved in multiple military operations in the middle east.

What if other countries in the world decide to fight fire with fire, and put a stranglehold on our economy?

support insurgency, propagate propaganda and do whatever is necessary to completely and totally wipe out our enemies.

We have supported policies like these since WWII, and now that we are starting to experience the blow back from these actions, your answer is to continue those policies. Talk about hitting your head against the wall, sorry, I suggest we find a better way to confront these problems.

RV, there are no guarantees, we could lose with a military option.

Brent, yes I'm still tearing into Bush for the "mission accomplished" display, the whole staged event was beneath anything I've ever seen from a President. Strutting around in a flight suit taking credit for bombing a weak opponent into the ground, sorry, but that's the kind of display I would expect from a two-bit dictator, not a President of the most powerful country in the world.

RV, there are no guarantees, we could lose with a military option.

Without a military, I can guarantee that we would lose a battle with any country or group that has an organized military. I realize that we could lose with a military option, but it at least gives us a chance.

RV, I never said we should disarm, what I said was that we should try a very different approach. Because our current policies are only creating more hatred, and this hatred is the breeding ground of terrorism. I say get the hell out of their countries and allow them to determine their own fate, our intervention is not necessary. If continued our current policies will lead to our end, just like every other nation in history who tried to spread their influence around the world at the point of a gun.

Are "they" going to stay out of ours?

All you Americans are racist, teabagging, Christians!" "We neeeed a mosque right where we tried to kill American spirit!

Because you are. Muslims didn't attack America terrorists did. Over simplification and demonization does nothing to advance our cause of peaceful coexistence.

Justin, I believe you mean: MUSLIM TERRORISTS ATTACKED AMERICA.

There, I fixed it for ya!

More specifically Arab terrorists attacked America .
I noticed that Justin couldn't resist the broad brush accusation
even though el did not say that .

Wassa matta Justin ; running out of material ?!

If they were merely Arabs and not declaring Muslim jihad against our homeland you'd have a point nonSZ. You don't however, since your post is based upon a false presumption and semantics. I wholeheartedly agree with Robyn on this one. Perhaps you can explain to all of us at the blackboard how you have come to the conclusion that jihad is an Arab concept that is not derived from Islam. Got nothing? Then sit your a$$down.

They didn't seek to kill American spirit; they counted on it for the vast over-reaction that followed. Now the Taliban is stronger than ever, as is A.Q.

I wholeheartedly agree with Robyn on this one.

I don't .

Perhaps you can explain to all of us at the blackboard how you have come to the conclusion that jihad is an Arab concept that is not derived from Islam.

Sure . Listen up . You might learn something .

Islam is itself an Arab concept . It started in that region with their "prophet" . The koran is written in Arabic except for translations that came much later . Furthermore , Islam is NOT a centralized religion . There is no one religious authority that speaks for the entire 1.4 BILLION muslims . Yes that number is right . Think about that . You are demeaning 1.4 BILLION people by your accusations and by your "guilty until proven innocent" approach .

The vast majority of terrorist attacks have been perpetrated by Arabs .
911 was done by a bunch of Saudis . Many if not most of them receive their
funding from petrodollars from Arab countries .

The way Islam is practiced varies greatly from country to country .
It is most extreme in Saudi Arabia and a little less in much of the Arab region . Iran is its own disaster . However , as you move geographically away it gets much less extreme . The Asian versions are comparatively tolerant of non-Isalmic religions . Indonesia and Malaysia are good examples and are very populous nations with advanced western style economies and governments .

Got nothing? Then sit your a$$down.

Nice . Ignorant and crude . If you bothered to read my explanation , you are no longer ignorant . I can't do anything about the crude part .

Although I do believe that Islam is a danger to many of our freedoms, I would agree that the "Asian" variety is somewhat more tolerant, although we have certainly seen problems in the Phillipines, Indonesia, and other countries in the area.

The good news is that the conversion of many is relatively recent and that relatives and/or friends may be of other faiths. An additional factor is that they don't want to be "under" the Arabs.

Clint, please give me an example of Arab countries trying to change our culture. Sorry, I live in Dearborn, Mi, we have a very largeArab population in Dearborn, in fact percentage wise I think we have the largest in the country. I have lived here most of my life, and I have never had a person of Arabic descent ever approach me about changing my beliefs or trying to change the way I live. However, I have been approached many times by various Christian churches urging me to join their cause. So your paranoia about the Arabic people wanting to change our culture is just that, paranoia, and not backed by anything factual.

Remember those two real tall buildings in NY?

Clint, what the hell does that mean? Yes, I remember those two tall buildings in NY. Do you remember hundreds of thousands dead Palastinians and Iraqis? How about overthrowing the democratically elected government of Iran? How about our military bases in just about every arab country? Sorry, but arab countries have a lot of reasons to dislike the USA.

However, a small group of fanatics brought those buildings down, not the entire arab population of the world.

rickg-, The reason no Arabs have asked you to join their religion is because they want you DEAD. They could care less about having infidels joining their ranks.

Actually based on some passages in the koran there seems to be a
mandate for the believers to attack "idolators" and kill them but allow
some of them the chance to convert and pay what amounts to extortion .

Now I'll grant you that not all Muslim sects practice that but is in their "holy book" .

robyn,

I think they judge who they wish to convert based upon how much explosives you can fit in your shoe. AT first I thought some of them had a foot fetish when they were eyeballing my size 14s.

Tom and Robyn, sorry, but there is no possible way to respond to so much bigotry and ignorance. Keep up the hate, but don't be surprised if people respond in kind.

Do you say the same thing to your Muslim friends?

geez rickg,

Look around and read some of the other posts. I don't see too many people in here looking to Mecca.

How is it that lobotomized Newsviners can expend so much energy posting criticisms of Christianity when Christianity and Christians have been responsible for more humanitarian work, charity and progress in Western civilization than any other entity, but when we speak about a religion that has been in a fog for hundreds of years that relies on butchery and coercement to fill their ranks, you cry foul?

I think they judge who they wish to convert based upon how much explosives you can fit in your shoe

...or your PANTIES!!! Don't forget the "Christmas Day Panty Bomber"! He was trying to bring Muslim goodwill and Cristmas cheer to Detroit in his panties!!!

BS, this is really nothing more than a fund raiser, and this is being sponsored by the State Dept, and the trip is being paid by taxpayer money

Calm down Jerry.

From a Fox News article on Rauf:

State Department spokesman P.J. Crowley praised the Imam, calling him "a distinguished Muslim cleric," who is part of a program where "we send people from Muslim communities here in this country around the world to help people overseas to understand our society and the role of religion within our society."

That sounds like a pretty good idea to me. I'd bet that a lot of them think that the US is some christian country out to do battle with islam.

Crowley also said that fundraising on the Imam's trip for the Islamic Center would not be allowed.

It turns out that this government supported trip will be the Imam's third with the State Department. Crowley said the first was in 2007, during the Bush administration, and that Rauf went to Egypt this past January.

"We have a long term relationship with him," Crowley explained. "His work on tolerance and religious diversity is well known and he brings a moderate perspective to foreign audiences on what it is like to be a practicing Muslim in the United States."

All of that sounds like a pretty damned good idea to me. Might lead to some people in that part of the world changing their minds.

We can't kill every muslim on the planet guys.

I agree; we have not backed away (1") from Israel, and continued to rattle our "Iran" sword. Is it any wonder that "Change" doesn't include the middle East and their hope is waning?

The tyrants and the clerics vehemently oppose change and they'll kill anyone who does.

The Arabs wanted Barack to abandon Israel. They thought he would.

Quite frankly it's not over yet. The fat lady hasn't sung yet folks. Look at history.

Weak leaders like Neville Chamberlain could actually watch as Austria, Czechoslavakia were annexed by Germany at gunpoint and still tried to appease the Deutsche Chancellor. Then they took Poland while the Soviets seemed satisfy to carve it up with the Germans. Then the defecation contacted the rotary oscillator.

You do not appease tyrants. Period.

Barack's plan may be to force the Israelis to act alone and deal with a situation in the country once called Iran.

Do you mean that 600,000 sq. mile parking lot?

The parking lot formerly known as Iran. Previously known as Persia.

The religion is as unimportant as the race of the terrorists, terrorism is a tactic that anyone of any ideology could use. No one has ever said that Islamic countries were beaming examples of progressive thought. However not everyone who comes from there wants to do harm to this country, and acting as if they do won't cause them to come out of the dark ages any sooner.

Trying to appease the Arab countries is a lot like dealing with a pack
of wolves . By showing appeasement you become just one of the pack
and then the rest must determine if you are the alpha male or something less .

By showing appeasement you become just one of the pack
and then the rest must determine if you are the alpha male or something less .

One of the best determinations I have come across yet.

Trying to appease the Arab countries is a lot like dealing with a pack
of wolves . By showing appeasement you become just one of the pack
and then the rest must determine if you are the alpha male or something less .

Well said nSZ.

If Yassir Arafat had listened to Prince Bandar of Saudi Arabia and President Clinton and taken the sweet deal at the Oslo Accords instead of deciding to wage war on Israel's citizenry, Palestine would have their own state and Yassir Arafat would have his big fat swarthy unshaven mug in a portrait hanging in their capital building. He brought more pain and suffering upon his people for no rational reason. What a shmuck!

He brought more pain and suffering upon his people for no rational reason.

Um , except for the fact that his people would have killed him for taking
a deal with Israel . The hatred doesn't come from the "government" in that
region . It comes from the religion .

Trying to appease the Arab countries is a lot like dealing with a pack

This is a really base reactionary argument. When diplomacy is directed at a people or country one has already decided to hate, then it gets labeled as "appeasement".

Yeah , like diplomacy has worked so well in the Gaza strip .
/sarc

decided to hate

Are you saying it is easy to get along with the Wahabbis ?

Yeah , like diplomacy has worked so well in the Gaza strip .
/sarc

Yeah, like we've had so much evidence of diplomacy.

Are you saying it is easy to get along with the Wahabbis ?

Wahhabi are one sect in one nation. They're not singularly representative of the "Arab world". But that doesn't appear to matter to the right. Wahhabi attack on 9/11 -- attack Iraq. Wahhabi attack on 9/11 -- kill a Sikh because he's wearing a turban. Then we're shocked, SHOCKED that there are negative polls regarding the U.S. How dare they deny our exceptionalism!

Some folks think Arab tyrannies operate the same way that Western democracies do.

Some folks think Arab tyrannies operate the same way that Western democracies do.

Well, I suppose that's ... interesting? But not really relevant.

spudpundit #11.8 ,

Wahhabi attack on 9/11 -- attack Iraq.

You do like to oversimplify . Don't you recall that it wasn't simply
an attack . It was a repeat attack . The 1st time was to save Kuwait .
The second time it was because , quite frankly S. Hussein was becoming
a PITA . You might not perceive that it was a good idea but there are many
who would disagree among them the kurds .

link

But since the fall of Hussein€™s government, Kurdistan has seized its own destiny.

Yes, spud, it is.

The second time it was because , quite frankly S. Hussein was becoming
a PITA .

Well there's a confession. I think my neighbor is a PITA -- does that give me license to take over his house?

There were a ton of lies concocted to cover up the PITA motive -- yellow cake uranium, centrifuges, non-existant wmds, use of chemical weapons (that we provided). So now the conservatives want to attack the Arab world because of their general PITA-ness. Yipee.

Backroads:

No, it isn't. We maintain diplomatic relations with lots of non-democratic countries, including China (which is distinctly non-Muslim).

Well there's a confession. I think my neighbor is a PITA -- does that give me license to take over his house?

On a nation to nation level being a PITA involves some very serious actions . Are you aware that S. Hussein attempted to have George Bush senior assassinated while he was the prez ?
That is only one of many similar acts . See my links in #11.11
If your neighbor tried to have you killed , what would you do ?

Some folks think Arab tyrannies operate the same way that Western democracies do.

Spud , let me clue you in . He's talking about you .

On a nation to nation level being a PITA involves some very serious actions . Are you aware that S. Hussein attempted to have George Bush senior assassinated while he was the prez ?

I'm aware that G.dub claimed that during the rush to war.

That is only one of many similar acts . See my links in #11.11

I'm familiar with all those issues. I'm also aware that the Chinese do similar things to Tibetans. But we don't care about Tibet because they're not sitting on oil.

If your neighbor tried to have you killed , what would you do ?

Make sure the guy who was telling me about it didn't have an ulterior motive.

But we don't care about Tibet because they're not sitting on oil.

You do love to oversimplify .

If your neighbor tried to have you killed , what would you do ?

No no ; You're not getting off that easily . What if your neighbor made
an attempt on your life but "missed" ?

If you don't like what Bush did , how about what Clinton did ?
U.S. Strikes Iraq for Plot to Kill Bush

No no ; You're not getting off that easily . What if your neighbor made
an attempt on your life but "missed" ?

Yes yes, because I'm not getting into a neighbors=nations metaphor that you designed.

If you don't like what Bush did , how about what Clinton did ?
U.S. Strikes Iraq for Plot to Kill Bush

Nicely done, wasn't it? Now you're making me wish Clinton had gotten a third term. We'd still have a budget surplus and be minus one Asian land war.

I hope you enjoy talking to yourself .
When you refuse to answer questions , you have already
given up honest discourse . I don't enjoy arguing for its
own sake as your answers clearly show .
Goodbye .

When you refuse to answer questions , you have already
given up honest discourse

You gave up honest discourse when you devolved the issue down to a faulty metaphor.

What if you were a baby, and the baby next to you stole your rattle?

What if you owned a dog kennel and a pit bull from a neighboring dog kennel killed your poodle?

What if you were the last person in New Jersey and Martians attacked?

Iraq and the U.S. are not next door neighbors. So what I would do on an interpersonal dispute with either my neighbor Nate or my neighbor Jim has nothing to do with what the U.S. should do in international relations.

If the Palestinians think that the Jews took their land, why have they been purposely trying to destroy any archeological evidence that has long confirmed the existence of King David and King Solomon's reign on the Temple Mount? Could the reason the Muslims do this is for the same reason they built the Mosque of Omar directly over the ruins of Solomon's and the Herodian temple?

Now they wish to build a Mosque in the approx. location of the ruins of the twin symbols of American progress and commerce built in the 1970s and destroyed less than three decades later by Muslim extremists.

Perhaps they believe they were there first.

Since Judaism and Christianity predate Islam by millenia and 6 centuries respectively someone should give them a history lesson.

That is of course unless the Muslims wish to change their minds on the abrogation of the Satanic Verses (Salman Rushdie) and claim that their moon-god Allah is as old as the Hebrew's monotheistic G-d. I didn't think so....