News-Record.com

... paper today says China is headed to the moon ...

`

It would be nice if we could move away from our current "shoot first" policy toward some form of diplomacy. Is it 2009 yet??

`

This is what OBL wrote:

"As to the relationship between Muslims and infidels, this is summarized by the Most High's Word: "We renounce you. Enmity and hate shall forever reign between us — till you believe in Allah alone." So there is an enmity, evidenced by fierce hostility from the heart. And this fierce hostility — that is, battle — ceases only if the infidel submits to the authority of Islam, or if his blood is forbidden from being shed, or if Muslims are at that point in time weak and incapable. But if the hate at any time extinguishes from the heart, this is great apostasy! Allah Almighty's Word to his Prophet recounts in summation the true relationship: "O Prophet! Wage war against the infidels and hypocrites and be ruthless. Their abode is hell — an evil fate!" Such, then, is the basis and foundation of the relationship between the infidel and the Muslim. Battle, animosity, and hatred — directed from the Muslim to the infidel — is the foundation of our religion. And we consider this a justice and kindness to them."

How do you strike a deal with a group such as this? What do you offer them? The Literal Coward will surrender, just as he has in the past.

Hillbilly,

The LTE writer didn't say "let's strike a deal with OBL." He said that as national policy our government would be better served by a willingness to establish diplomatic relations with countries that we don't agree with on every issue, instead of invading them.

And, OBL isn't a country to establish diplomatic ties with, anyway.

Don't take what I've said to mean that we should bend over to whomever confronts us. I acknowledge that there are bad people in the world. I just don't think that it's in the US's best interest to kill all of them preemptively.

Astro, I believe diplomacy should ALWAYS be the starting point. Hopefully, it will be the ending point as well!

However, as you can recall, diplomacy on these blogs is often wasted. That is due to one party not believing in seeking peaceful resolution to differences. I guess those people spend quite a good deal of time in jail and in the courts! If they act in public the way they do on the blogs anyway!

Good LTTE by the way!

Shalom

HillyBilly illustrates a key problem .. most in America have not troubled to learn the difference between the Crazy Islamic Fundementalists - according to the CIA there were about 3000 in 2001 - and the rest of the Muslim world.

`

First of all, thank you Astro boy and Darryl for jumping in there on Hillbilly's ridiculous post. Seems the "kool Ade" drinkers are so confused as to what OBL represents vs. negotiating with members of the world of nations, that it is no wonder we are in such a fix. Bush/Cheney convinced them that al queda and Saddam were bosom buddies, which is so far from the truth it is laughable. Now they want to point the gun at Iran rather than work on stabilization of the region. No wonder poor ol' Hillbilly doesn't know which end is up! I imagine he subscribes to the same blog that neocon uses, judging from his post.

Fact: Iraq was a secular nation before our occupation.
Fact: There is NO proof of al queda operating in Iraq prior to our occupation.
Fact: From being greeted as liberators to mission accomplished, this administration has gotten EVERYTHING wrong in this war.

So now we have to pick up the pieces and hope that we don't make the same mistake in Iran.

Bush bungled everything from 9/11/2001 on. His high water mark was when he climbed the debris pile and put his arm around an old man with a bullhorn. Ever since, he has set new lows with his arrogance, and his incompetence.
Folks like Hillbilly want "victory" in Iraq but can't string two sentences together to tell us what "victory" looks like! They get too caught up in the soundbites of Sean Hannity and Rush Limbaugh to think about the consequences of the failed Bush policies. Sad. Very sad.

`

"It would be nice if we could move away from our current "shoot first" policy toward some form of diplomacy."

It wouldn't be so bad if we we're always aiming at our foot.

I mean weren't always aiming at our foot.

TLC, let me make clear that while "hillbilly's" post was one that I was thinking of when I made my initial post; there are others as well.

If more diplomacy were used in the blogs, things would be much nicer. Sometimes a word left unsaid may be best. I am very guilty of speaking too soon, too harsh, unkind, etc. So I know that I have areas in which to work. I would only hope that others would do likewise.

Shalom

Darryl said:
"TLC, let me make clear that while "hillbilly's" post was one that I was thinking of when I made my initial post; there are others as well.

If more diplomacy were used in the blogs, things would be much nicer. Sometimes a word left unsaid may be best."

Agreed Darryl, let's start with these comments from just yesterday as an example:

THE LIBERAL CONSERVATIVE said:

"I could never be a Republican, because I would have to hate black people, Mexicans, and gay people."

Dan: "You are the worst kind of racist, one who won't admit he was pre-loaded with racism by his parents and hasn't changed much since."

Posted on October 3, 2007 12:28 PM

Thanks for your wise words Darryl. I would surely assume you do not condone such statements and rather would advocate for more diplomacy and a word left unsaid in these instances.

`

Seems like the shoe fits you Dan. Guess you'll just have to wear it!

`