stockingfull wrote:I don't subscribe to the "Glenn Beck Armageddon school." I don't believe that 1.3 Billion Muslims are radical, or even destined to be somehow controlled by radicals. That's not to say I don't agree that radical clerics are a problem.
I agree. I had a moment of weakness, forgive me. I'm still thinking that "stocking up" might be prudent insurance, but I'll forgo the gold hoarding and basement construction project.
But people will only follow radicals to their doom when the other choices are no better. If we can make sure that's not the case, the radical voices will be marginalized.
I strongly disagree with this. Short of forcing our oil companies to pay these nations for their product by air dropping bundles of cash and food and classic literature on the people, instead of paying the moola to the government, I'm not sure what we could possibly do. Certainly yanking our troops (and rebuilding efforts and political advisory, since they won't be protected anymore) from Iraq isn't presenting the people a "better choice" than submitting to the will of the radical muslim elements vying for power there. Assume the news breaks in an hour that we've killed Osama and the very highest rung of AQ leadership in a fantastic set of coordinated attacks. What then? We pull out of there too and let Karzai fend for himself? I'm sure the Taliban and the remaining AQ will be impressed with the better choice we've presented to the people and will simply melt away in the face of it.
I'm all for a "better way" but, damn it, before we go dislodging our military from their relatively safe, fortified positions and are forced to abandon our "soft touch" efforts in these nations that operate under the umbrella of security we're providing, I need a lot more from Obama and Hillary besides the promise of a "better way" or the nonsensical talk of unilateral diplomacy efforts and other such peacemaking speckled with missile strikes of Pakistan and the occasional highly targeted spec ops action. Of course, who the hell knows where the intelligence for these actions and missile strikes will come from given our pulling out of these nations and the characteristic democrat intelligence gathering notions of hamstringing our sigint with well intentioned but counterproductive bureaucracy and only acquiring huint through "respectable" channels. And since those high tech GPS bombs and cruise missiles are high explosives and my their very nature kill women and children in startling numbers, we can't really even use them without bringing the wrath of the fanatical militant muslim propaganda machine down upon us, recruiting more and more people to their cause, thus negating any possible benefit from such direct actions.
And I'll say another thing: not that I'm looking for it, but, were I ever faced with the choice to either follow Allah or die, I'd give the old boy a try before falling on my sword for some other God(s) nobody's ever seen. No organized religion is worth mine or my family's life.
?? Huh? Didn't you just get done saying:
You kiddin? Come after my family and I'll gut you like a fish.
But fighting for one phony, unprovable deity over another is so, um, "Middle Ages."
When Osama comes knocking on your door (today, not the middle ages) he, if he knocks or offers you a choice at all, is going to say "Allu Akbar? Or shall I kill you, infidel dog?" So which is it, do you choose death or do you chose a new life of Allah worship and collaboration with those who seek to destroy your great country? I hope I'd have the strength of conviction and character to face my death while lunging for his throat armed with nothing but my stubby fingers.
