When will we start protecting our borders. Already the presidential candidates are stumping for the Mexican vote, how long before they start stumping for the Islamic vote. The greatest country in the world being brought down by it’s own greed and stupidity. What a shame.

need some clarity here. Are you saying that “jihadists and non-violent Muslims are nearly indistinguishable from each other” or are you saying that that is what Ed is saying?

MikeZero on July 7, 2008 at 7:45 PM

I am certainly not saying what Ed is saying, but that being said, I want to know how you differentiate Jihadists from regular ol, Muslims.

Let’s see how fast you can make yourself irrelevant, thankfully, in my estimation?

I am starting the moron line. Rally around me, all you morons.

Maybe a nuke will wake up the west…..maybe not.

MikeZero on July 7, 2008 at 6:30 PM

That was merely Ed grandstanding about how the use of the word jihad was inappropriate. jihadists and non-violent Muslims are nearly indistinguishable from each other.

If we follow the logic of the two articles presented, we should withdraw forthright after the last 1200 stronghold AQ forces are eliminated, unless of course you believe that 150K + boots on the ground indefinately from our volunteer military is a good idea.

I asked Bishop for his definition of the enemy. I assume he meant AQ in Iraq and the Taleban in Afgghanistan. I would love to hear what you believe a defined tangible mission objective in this war is or should be.

Anyhoo we can’t stay and we can’t leave, I suppose this is the point where things really get sticky.

“Barbaric” as in Taliban and their cohorts. Don’t bother about making a semantic argument over the word, just go with it.

Or we can give them time to get their own house in better order even though they face an enemy as barbaric as any which have ever trod the earth.

No, better we just hightail it out of there and write them off as incapable of anything more involved than dictatorship. Liberals love peace no matter the cost.

Please link to an article that puts forward the idea that the War on Terror is nearly over.

MikeZero on July 7, 2008 at 1:44 PM

http://hotair.com/archives/2008/07/06/on-the-cusp-of-the-most-spectacular-victory-against-al-qaeda/

awake on July 7, 2008 at 2:00 PM

Victory over al-Qaeda in Iraq (one of the factions in that country) does not mean the WoT is nearly over.

LOL, Awake must have been asleep during history class yesterday.

Only time will tell. Anyway, like I said, it couldn’t have come at a better time. We need to get re-focused on Afghanistan. Maybe we can toppel that puppet regime and establish another failed Islamic democracy there?

Choices choices.

LOL, Awake must have been asleep during history class yesterday. The thread you reference doesn’t talk about the end of the WOT, but rather the impending demise of AQI. Just as the battle of Midway didn’t end the war against Japan, neither does this victory mean the end of the WOT. Try reading your reference a bit deeper before offering it as evidence.

Here is what you seemingly missed:

-”Did you know that the US and Iraq will shortly conclude one of the most spectacular victories of the war on terror?”

-”The Times of London has this right: the victory in Mosul gives the West the most spectacular victory of the war.”

Breaking: Terrorist attack on Indian embassy in Kabul kills 41

And the “religion of peace” keep doing what it does best…kill, kill, kill innocent people!

Since 9/11, Islamofascist terrorists have committed 11,390, or more atrocities: The Religion of Peace

My god, I just don’t know what to say to that!

Watchman on July 7, 2008 at 2:01 PM

What is so hard about that statement. If treason and sedition are committed then the treasonist and seditionist should be tried.

Sorry peski I have to disagree with you here, while British were indeed a factor, the tension between Hindus and Muslim goes back to centuries.Partition was a result of Islamic identity crisis. I am simplifying here but emerging Muslim middle class could need bear lagging behind Hindus who just centuries ago were dhimmis and hence according to them their inferiors.

Gaurav on July 7, 2008 at 1:59 PM

I agree that it’s not simple, and of course major tensions have always existed, and yes the Peacock Throne treated the Hindus as dhimmis, but the India/Pakistan partition solution after X-hundred years of rule (and exploitation) by the British East India Company forced a completely unnatural division based on religion rather than culture.

I bet if you started to try a few of them for sedition and treason it would really put a damper on the enthusiasm of the followers that are mostly there for a groovy time.

jmarcure on July 7, 2008 at 11:35 AM

My god, I just don’t know what to say to that!

Please link to an article that puts forward the idea that the War on Terror is nearly over.

MikeZero on July 7, 2008 at 1:44 PM

http://hotair.com/archives/2008/07/06/on-the-cusp-of-the-most-spectacular-victory-against-al-qaeda/

The whole India/Pakistan fiasco is the fruit of 200+ years of British Imperialism
peski on July 7, 2008 at 12:42 PM

Sorry peski I have to disagree with you here, while British were indeed a factor, the tension between Hindus and Muslim goes back to centuries.Partition was a result of Islamic identity crisis. I am simplifying here but emerging Muslim middle class could need bear lagging behind Hindus who just centuries ago were dhimmis and hence according to them their inferiors.

To general ,

I think you may find this helpful

http://www.rediff.com/news/2008/jul/07raman.htm

It never ceases to amaze me, the violence of MUSLIM ON MUSLIM. As always, if they are killing each other over there, they are not killing anyone over here… If you have a RABID dog running the streets of your neighborhood, you do not cage it, you do not treat it with medicine, the only thing to do is KILL it. It must be eliminated for the safety of ALL!!! We must have the same attitude for ALL RADICAL MUSLIMS in this world. THERE ARE MANY RELIGIONS IN THE WORLD, BUT ONLY ONE RELIGION OF PEACE…

pueblo1032 on July 7, 2008 at 11:36 AM

Nice rant pueblo, but ignorant. Most Indians are NOT Muslim, but Hindu. The whole India/Pakistan fiasco is the fruit of 200+ years of British Imperialism. I share your feelings about radical Islam, but your statements are a perfect example of the kind of reckless and ignorant attitude that conservatives are trying to avoid being tarred with.