Quote Originally Posted by 120mm View Post
"My" prejudice on the issue is that I want the western world to win. It would be nice if their culture would change peacefully, but I doubt it. It would even be nice if we could build a "cultural wall" that allowed them to continue to be who they are, without changing, but that ain't going to happen.
Quote Originally Posted by 120mm View Post
The reason most suicide bombings involve western invasion is simple: As a relatively primitive culture, they have to have an enemy present to strike them. Invaders = more available enemy to strike.

I would not get too worked up over "which" part of the tribal world we're involved in a conflict with. I'm generalizing by necessity.

Do you NOT think that the largely disparate cultures are a significant part of the reason we fight?

Idea that “Western Culture” need to win sounds to me way to imperialistic and colonialistic, to agree with it. And, idea that every single one in the Word just waiting to be “liberated” (and in that process they country invaded either culturally either military) for saggy Mac Donald’s burgers and calorie full Coke is just -wrong.

Why they culture need to change in the first place? Because they are not same like yours?

Source of problems Islamic culture (countries) have with West have anything to do with freedom, liberty, and democracy, but have everything to do with Western policies and actions in the Muslim world. Everything will be different and better if Muslims did not believe their faith, brethren, resources, and lands to be under attack by the West.

To quote Scheuer:

“Right or wrong, Muslims are beginning to view the United States as a colonial power with Israel as its surrogate, and with a military presence in three of the holiest places in Islam: the Arabian peninsula, Iraq, and Jerusalem. It is time to review and debate American policy in the region, even our relationship with Israel.

"No one wants to abandon the Israelis. But I think the perception is, and I think it's probably an accurate perception, that the tail is leading the dog - that we are giving the Israelis carte blanche ability to exercise whatever they want to do in their area. And if that's what the American people want, then that's what the policy should be, of course. But the idea that anything in the United States is too sensitive to discuss or too dangerous to discuss is really, I think, absurd."
And from Imperial Hubris:

• U.S. leaders refuse to accept the obvious: We are fighting a worldwide Islamic insurgency—not criminality or terrorism—and our policy and procedures have failed to make more than a modest dent in enemy forces.

• The military is now America's only tool and will remain so while current policies are in place. No public diplomacy, presidential praise for Islam, or politically correct debate masking the reality that many of the world's 1.3 billion Muslims hate us for actions not values, will get America out of this war.

• Bin Laden has been precise in telling America the reasons he is waging war on us. None of the reasons have anything to do with our freedom, liberty, and democracy, but have everything to do with U.S. policies and actions in the Muslim world. Islamic religion. He could not have his current—and increasing—level of success if Muslims did not believe their faith, brethren, resources, and lands to be under attack by the United States and, more generally, the West. Indeed, the United States, and its policies and actions, are bin Laden's only indispensable allies.


The military is now America's only tool and will remain so while current policies are in place. No public diplomacy, presidential praise for Islam, or politically correct debate masking the reality that many of the world's 1.3 billion Muslims hate us for actions not values…
And calling someone primitive or hating them for being different is almost same in value, if you ask me.