OK NEM, we know, we've had plenty of Iraq war threads. What about the answer to the question. Who is the Republican candidate that you would mind the least? Ron Paul maybe? As an aside I think he shouldn't count for Dems answering about the Republican side, he does have an R next to his name, but really he is a libertarian not a Republican.

Well, you certainly have some POWERFUL opinions on this war issue. I would heartily and sincerely recommend you do a little research into the issue that's been brewing among the world-wide Islamic community since before WWII: the establishment of a world-wide caliphate (a single world government and culture dominated by an Islamic head and Islamic sharia law).

Turkey got into WWI over this, you know. They were siding with Kaisar Wilhelm and the old Autrian-Hungarian Empire to try to snuff out free Europe. Each had their own selfish motivations, but all three worked for the common defeat of England, France, and, eventually, America. For the radical Muslims, the old Ottoman Caliphate was the key to their view of an emerging world-wide dominance of Islam. For the most radical, the use of arms is never a problematic issue, as we have seen these past 50 years.

Something that you might want to consider. Israel would be swept away as it was so many times in the past by the new caliphate, if it ever emerged as some would have it (bin Laden, al qaeda, the taliban, Saddam/RIP, and others).

Best regards. Fogbuster.



<to scott c: sorry about the hijack, back to regular programming>

//

__________________
"All that is required for evil to triumph is for good to do nothing."

Not even close.

First of all, at the time, there was no Turkey.
It was the Ottoman Empire.

And the Ottoman Empire never had a goal of world-dominance of Islam.
Heck, they never even forced Islam on their own population or on the people of lands they conquered.

The Ottomans had Christian and Jewish Ministers, Cabinet members, generals, admirals, etc. unlike the Christians of Europe who would not even speak of such "blasphemy", who slaughtered, burnt at the stake, raped and pillaged in the name of Christianity, sometimes even their own.

Look at the English - French wars and see how many nunneries were attacked by the English during these wars, by soldiers fighting with crosses on their chests. They raped all the nuns and burnt them to death, hundreds of times, all over France, Spain, and Portugal.

Had the Ottomans had such a goal of Islamic dominance, they would have issued fatwahs and got their Arab, Persian, Afghani, etc. Muslim brothers behind them, for such a goal. As I recall, the Arabs foolishly sided with the English, against the Turks, in those days of WWI, only to regret it to this day.

So, how about a bit more research, before you advise others to do the same.

As to how this all relates to Israel, what you say is exactly their talking point, it is standard verbage.
Use scare tactics to justify ethnic cleansing and crimes against humanity. Nice.

By the way, where was all this Islamic caliphate threat during say the 50's, 60's, 70's?
Why are we seeing it now, all of a sudden, now that the Cold war is over.

Please guys,try and stay focused........

NEM I would have thought you could at least stand someone like McCain, I mean I understand if you don't like any of his policies, but at least he is a decent guy, experienced, not overly religious or conservative. Not even him?

Seems sensible........

.


NO Third Parties!!



//

__________________
"All that is required for evil to triumph is for good to do nothing."

With all due respect, Turk, the Ottoman Empire was a caliphate, was it not?? And did it not fight against the Engish/West during WWI in order to expand its realm of dominion?? I mean, why else do countries/empires fight wars? Didn't the Kaisar, an Ottoman ally then, desire to create a world under the sway of the new "Caesar" (Kaisar)?? I believe so.


//

__________________
"All that is required for evil to triumph is for good to do nothing."

I never said anything in my post was wrong... on either left or right

__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

I hope this is small enough. (happy face goes here, I ran out of pictures.)

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


If your interested, I have designed my own forums. Please join the discussion:
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

I wouldn't buy into that and I agree with Stokes on Lieberman.

__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

I hope this is small enough. (happy face goes here, I ran out of pictures.)

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


If your interested, I have designed my own forums. Please join the discussion:
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.