Jihad needs scientists
in [Design]
|
From: T Wake on 3 Oct 2006 18:44 "Eeyore" <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote in message news:4522E61D.EA28E065(a)hotmail.com... > > > T Wake wrote: > >> "Eeyore" <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote >> > lucasea(a)sbcglobal.net wrote: >> >> "Eeyore" <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote >> >> > lucasea(a)sbcglobal.net wrote: >> >> > >> >> >> Ahmadinejad hasn't made the mistake of genocide like Saddam did, >> >> >> he's >> >> >> just not very popular. >> >> > >> >> > How did he get elected then ? >> >> >> >> The glib answer is "Just like Bush." Look at how popular *he* is. >> >> >> >> The honest answer is, I don't know. I have to admit I'm not familiar >> >> with >> >> the workings of the Iranian government. What I do know of the >> >> situation >> >> comes from the writings of several scholars of the Middle East, who, >> >> to a >> >> man, say that Ahmadinejad is not popular with his constituency, and >> >> will >> >> be gone presently if we don't stir the pot too much. >> > >> > I agree about not stirring the pot. >> > >> > He was popularly elected though. Probably because Bush had pissed off >> > lots >> > of Iranians with the axis of evil business. >> >> His election was heavily assisted by the Religious leaders though... > > Do you have any cite for that ? I will endeavour to find a relevant one, a quick slightly relevant one is - http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/06/16/AR2005061601056.html. The Guardian Council vetted the presidential candidates to ensure no one too "reformist" would be on the bill. > My understanding was that his electoral success was a surprise to most > observers. Yes. It was. The last president was a secular reformist. Still does not mean the elections were fair and open democratic process showing the will of the people.
From: Eeyore on 3 Oct 2006 18:45 T Wake wrote: > "Eeyore" <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote > > T Wake wrote: > >> "Eeyore" <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote > >> > John Fields wrote: > >> >> On Mon, 02 Oct 2006 23:50:11 +0100, Eeyore wrote: > > >> >> >So, are you saying it's possible to win a 'war on Islamic extremism' > >> >> >? > >> >> > >> >> We won the one on German extremism so who's to say it's not possible > >> >> to win this one? > >> > > >> > The Nazi party was genuinely popular. > >> > >> In the Early Days, then when popularity showed signs of wavering the > >> "Enemy" appeared. > > > > Eh ? > > The Nazi party propaganda blamed the economic crisis on the Jews etc. This > helped to shore up popular support for the government and ensure that all > manner of draconian legislation could be brought in to what was previously a > free and democratic society. I see what you mean. Not just the Jews though. Communists too for mexample. > >> Labour party.... > >> > >> Scarily, they are a socialist party which have grown strong nationalistic > >> tendencies.... > >> > >> (OK, I will stop now. I will probably even vote Labour at the next > >> election....) > > > > You think labour is Socialist ???? > > Yes. In parts. Graham
From: Eeyore on 3 Oct 2006 18:47 T Wake wrote: > "Eeyore" <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote > > T Wake wrote: > >> <jmfbahciv(a)aol.com> wrote in message > >> > In article <452197A3.17CCE793(a)hotmail.com>, > >> > Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > > >> >>So, are you saying it's possible to win a 'war on Islamic extremism' ? > >> > > >> > This mess is about changing a mindset; either Western civilization's > >> > mindset is changed or religious extremists' mindset is changed. > >> > >> I agree completely. > > > > How about removing the either and replacing the or with and ? > > Also an option. Any one of those three will work. > > (simplistic examples) > > If westerners are more concerned with staying alive than having their > freedoms eventually they will convert and the conflict will end. Why would they ever convert and why do you even consider that this is what it's about ? > If the population in the Middle East become enticed by freedom and it's > potential then the support for terrorists will dry up and the conflict will > end. > > If both happens the conflict will end. (In an odd way though :-)) I suspect both are needed. Graham
From: T Wake on 3 Oct 2006 18:50 "Eeyore" <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote in message news:4522E760.E113D773(a)hotmail.com... > > T Wake wrote: > >> "Eeyore" <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote >> > T Wake wrote: >> > >> >> The key is removing the lifeblood of the terrorists. Without this, it >> >> will never end. >> > >> > Their lifeblood is quite simply injustices ( real or perceived ). Can >> > you >> > remove them ? >> >> It isn't always their lifeblood and if you don't the conflict will last >> for >> eternity. >> >> You can disable a terrorist group by stopping the local people from >> supporting them. This is where removing the perception of injustice comes >> from. > > How are you going to persuade the locals of this ? I never said it was easy. This is what a hearts and minds campaign consists of. You only asked could this be done. The answer is yes. >> Look at the [expletive deleted] from Leeds who blew up the underground. >> For >> them to function there has to be places where they can exist and move >> about. > > Their homes it would seem and the streets in the places where they live. Yes. Because the local people support their fight. How can this be the case in a developed country with a democratically elected government and low unemployment? If I disagree with a government policy I dont blow myself up to make a point. >> Educate people that these are not "Fighting for a cause" and you make it >> a >> little bit harder for them. Educate people that they (bombers) are evil >> criminals and you make it harder yet. > > How are you going to educate them about this idea ? Why should they > believe you? They don't have to. I never said it would be successful. You asked could it be done. Previously you refered to Borneo as a success story. This is how it happened. The education begins with teaching the people what a democracy is and what is good about it. By educating people to be a part of society not separate themselves. If they chose not accept this then the conflict will continue. Eventually one side will die out. >> Alternatively you could put every mosque under armed guard and provide >> them >> with no end of support.... :-) > > Whose 'support' are you referring to ? Well, mine for a start, if the government ever took such a measure. I will redirect the questioning - how to you propose to disable and disarm the current terrorist threat?
From: Eeyore on 3 Oct 2006 18:52
T Wake wrote: > "Eeyore" <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote > > T Wake wrote: > >> "John Fields" <jfields(a)austininstruments.com> wrote > >> > On Mon, 02 Oct 2006 20:01:40 +0100, Eeyore wrote: > > >> >>Afraid of what exactly ? > >> > > >> > Convert or die. > >> > >> Which is most important to you, your life or your way of life? > > > > Moot since it's never going to happen. > > Really? Every day your way of life is threatened - more so by our own > country than any external threat. There's no threat of being forced to convert to Islam for sure ! > Do you intend to carry an ID card if they get brought in? Probably although I'd prefer not to see them anyway on balance. Simply an expensive waste of time. > What have you done to prevent the detention of suspects for 14 days > without access to legal counsel? But they do have ! > I am not asking should you convert which may well never happen. I am asking > which is most important to you, your life or way of life. That's very hypothetical but I reckon I'd fight against any tyranny suppressing important freedoms. Graham |