That tide in the affairs of men, again
 

We do this right, and it will also cause an upsurge in Islamic democracy -- from nothing to several to quite a few, in a region which desperately needs a healthy dose of libertarian political thinking to avoid being condemned to further decades of mismanagement. Let the Islamists try and foment violence -- we come and kill them. And then tell everyone on the planet how fundamentally stupid such fanatics are. Say to the fanatics, "Go ahead! Come to us and get death -- stupid, profitless, sudden, painful, embarrassing death. The more of its idiots, crazies, and jerks Islam can send to immolate themselves on our guns, and the faster it manages to do so, the more the sane, sensible, and peaceable people can influence Islam and keep her on the rightful way."

We have here at least two excellent opportunities: the opportunity to democratize a major oil nation which has surely had a bellyful of how totalitarian regimes do things (and in the belly of a region that contains almost nothing but), and the opportunity to make terrorism the province of losers, not winners. Terrorism must be shown to be the path of the completely shitheaded, of the beyond bashi-bazook. Osama bin Laden isn't getting the groundswell he's looking for -- even if he's healthy enough to try looking for anything. Terrorism is already what it always was -- a try at promoting a "cause" so unpopular on its merits that its adherents have to try violence in its name.

Osama's fighting not only us, but the al-Saud. He took violent exception to their pulling support from the mujahideen in Afghanistan in 1990 and gave the house of Saud such a hemorrhoid over it all that they stripped him of his citizenship just before he left for the Sudan. I'll say this for him; the guy doesn't think small -- but he doesn't think straight, either. If he's not sent swiftly to a long discussion with Allah, he's going to do his coreligionists grave damage with his remarkable ability to make them look bad.

Re: That tide in the affairs of men, again
 

Unfortunately, Islam ("Submission to God") and liberty do not mix.

WOW. G.W.Bush starts/causes the first reformation movement in Islams history. Right up there with Martin Luther....or is it Lex Luther.

Mosques got doors, and nails are not unknown in the Middle East... "Got Theses?"

Re: Re: That tide in the affairs of men, again
 

Hmm... you could say the same thing about, say, Roman Catholicism -- and with about the same prospects of being right. If a people want to be politically and economically free, and are not chained up by sheer governmental force majeure, they will find a way to have that liberty. It seems the natural inclination of the human mind. Unfreedom is an artificial construct. To make a slave, you have to actively keep him from thinking in terms of liberty.

I've heard a lot of this kind of thing about Islam lately -- and I don't buy it. While it is clear Islam is designed to be all things to all men, religion, government, and society all wrapped up in one big package, I stress that it is deliberately designed and constructed so -- and that what is constructed may be deconstructed also, when time and circumstance require a loosening of the joints, as it were. I note that we are not getting this kind of thing from Moslems in America, either the homegrown oddities like the Nation of Islam or from the immigrants. Our determined partition of Throne from Altar has a powerful influence, at least here. I would suspect the Nation also thinks that way, just from having been immersed in the separation of church and state while growing up -- and it may be argued that this is a very successful approach, too. Worldly success -- and we have trillions of dollars' worth of worldly success just in the United States alone, in large measure because our society is not committed to wasting talent -- may be construed as a sign of Divine approval of our undertakings, and it takes a mighty fanatical and blinkered Islamist to think otherwise. Most Moslems are not fanatical and blinkered Islamists. They are the silent majority that by definition we don't hear very much from.

Re: Re: Re: That tide in the affairs of men, again
 

There may be optimism for Iraq as well. Since Saddam's government was secular it could be that among some Iraqis that separation already exists. Maybe Turkey could be a model of sorts.

It seems the wealthy get more secular (or vise versa:D ) and the poor turn to religion for comfort. Most religions accept them like a nanny. But muslims seem to lash out at the wealthy/secular which leads to a constant struggle for power like we've seen in Iran. In order to stave off the clerics and retain power takes despots like Saddam. The Pope and Mussolini coexisted but Khomeini and the Shaw could not. I know a few muslims but they were all Americans first so they understood freedom and democracy before committing to Islam. I don't thing most people in the middle east can grasp what it is to have a separation of church and state. I don't think the muslim clerics would ever accept that willingly.

The war threads have been interesting to read and have added much to my thinking about all of this. The question was posed a few days ago whether any of us changed opinions based on the threads here...Well mine have certainly expanded as the events and discussion have unfolded. So thanks. On the day the war broke out I was outraged and terrified of what this would bring- due to the consequences of "preemption", the thought of urban guerrila warfare and Saddam's sacrifice of civilians and our troops. This fear coupled, with a healthy distrust of the motivations of the Bush Administration, and Bush's lack of skill in convincing me otherwise, made me very wary indeed. I grew up, shaped by watching Vietnam and Cambodia on the TV during dinner. Not that that distrust is gone, but I'm more aware,trying to be openminded, less immediately biased.

This foreign policy is all new, and I'm paying better attention. So thanks all you hawks, doves, and other mixed avians. Now lets get some healthcare support in there.