News-Record.com

Whether they like it or not, their religion will evolve, just like all others have from the dawn of history. Unfortunately, the mindset of far too many Muslims is going to make those changes far more bloody than they need to be.

Now, as to the war of terror (nod to Borat), I think that there is very good reason to compare the US military actions of the past 4 years to the original Crusades. Just ask General William Boykin. Yeah, it's going to be quite interesting in the Muslim sections of the world while we try to find a way to end the war with something that looks even a tiny bit like "victory."

“ . . .the mindset of far too many Muslims is going to make those changes far more bloody than they need to be.” Than they NEED to be! Bloody, period, is too bloody!

General Boykin may have been a bit brash and awkward in his verbal assessment, but he is most certainly correct in pointing out the spiritual dimension to the general War on Terror. It is most assuredly a Muslim thing – directed at the Christian West. Anyone who has read Islamic literature (or even just watched the evening news) on the subject knows this full well.

Undeniably, the Crusades were primitive, ill-directed and clumsy, but had real-world justification in light of the threat and attacks of Islam. The situation is much more clearly defined today, and the attacks of Islam very fresh and vivid. And even though the perpetrators of the attacks have been their shock troops, it does reflect the thinking and passions of a broad cross section of world of Islam.

The attempts of the milk-sop liberal media to veil this truth is born of a concerted attempt to win the next presidential election by utterly discrediting the Bush administration – at ALL costs! - even our national safety and survival.

Even though I didn’t like the invasion of Iraq, per se, from the git-go, we are there – and if it hadn’t been there it would have been somewhere for some confrontational reason or another. It was a strategic misstep, not a philosophical error. Military confrontation is an inevitability in this far-ranging war; and if we retreat and declare failure and loss, we are setting the stage for domino losses in future.

I DO believe we should extricate ourselves from this pit of human depravity (Iraq) and death-mindedness ASAP, but a reasonable degree of success and honor – both of which are limited and relative in today’s whako world.

Anyway, it IS a religious and spiritual conflict; but blind secularists are unable and unwilling to see it. It is in the category of calling a spade a spade. But America and the West are so spiritually confused and compromised today that the handwriting goes unnoticed on the wall of history.

The fact that Muslim groups have gained such social clout on our own Christian soil that we are on the verge of kowtowing to them is ample proof of our bleeding heart frailty in this conflict. Keep up the good work, General!

I just have to wonder: there are pressures all around within Islam tending to evolve toward a more benign form of religion. There are moderate Muslims in several nations all around the world, countries that have female leaders, even a growing movement of "secular" Muslims.

I wonder if America is being used as a "bogeyman" by conservative Muslims -- a tangible, easily-demonized alien force -- to attempt to scare these moderating, progressive people back to the "fundamental" ways. It won't work, but goodness knows, you see that sort of tactic used in other religions all around the world. If you know what I mean...

Yes, you are certainly correct, Eric. But there is no "secular" Islam in true Muslim thinking. It ceases to be real Islam when Sharia does not dominate and form a culture. While we have a sense of separation of Church and State in the good ole USA, they do not. The union of religion and state in their history has been much more an integral part of their theology of culture than in the West; even though it certainly existed here as well, to varying degrees. The Lutherans had one view the Reformed another - and the Romanists quite another.

But I still say that if one is a Muslim in any genuine sense at all, he must believe that Islam is the only pure religion and that it must supplant all others and create a world of Sharia from pole to pole. "Moderate" and compromising voices are anomalies and misfits in the Muslim cosmos.

But no doubt the US is being manipulated and used by the extreme elements to garner support and loyalty. They must have known and foreseen some of the resultant moves by the US/West after 9/11, even if it were just broad stroke reactions. But so what. We have had to do what we have had to do. Wars have always been and are now and will continue to be sloppy, unpredictable and mistake-ridden. Look at the Gallipoli fiasco, that cost Churchill his job. Iraq may not have been the best case scenario, but undercutting our presence and efforts there and cutting an running will only compound is deficits. The only sensible and sane thing to do is to at least attempt to make the best of it and continue the war to a conclusion of victory – over the Islamo-facist horde.

Well I must go see the 3-ring circus of liberal "debate." Should be interesting to see who out-doves the others.

"But I still say that if one is a Muslim in any genuine sense at all, he must believe that Islam is the only pure religion and that it must supplant all others and create a world of Sharia from pole to pole."

Who are you, exactly, to define "genuine" Islam? Would you sit idly by if a Muslim (or other Infidel such as myself) was to try and define "genuine" Christianity? You haven't so far. So what gives you the right to tell Muslims how to define or interpret their religion?

What right? Their OWN words and writings!!!!! It is THEY who have made it an open discussion with all their violent and hateful crimes. It is THEY who have provoked retaliation by their wanton and super-aggressive terrorist attacks. I think anyone who darn well pleases has the right to define, critique and condemn such a malevolent force.

And, please, define away, my friend: I haven't tried in any way to stop or hinder you. In THIS free land you still have the opportunity to do so. I may not agree with you, and freely say so. But I would die to protect your right, and others, to do so. Try it in Teheran!!!!! It isn’t my place to judge or sentence you. “Vengeance is mine, I will repay saith the Lord.” We will all stand before the supreme Judge of the universe in due time. Until then, the duty of Christians is to fight the good fight of Gospel presentation, love and support our nation by seeking good and godly governance, defend the innocent (making war if NECESSARY) and suppress evil with just laws and civil authority.

And I freely admit that Christianity has the same view to world conquest as Islam: "The kingdoms of this world have become the kingdom of our God and of his Messiah." “Go therefore and make disciples of ALL the nations . . .” Note: “make disciples,” not burn or blow them up! The question is not whether or not there will someday be a world-wide SPIRITUAL Kingdom, but whose it will be. NOT the US’s or Britain’s, Iran’s or China’s etc., but Messiah's. And if it is attmepted in a violent and military manner it will not be the real thing. Islam would gain hegemony by any violent and subversive means available. The world-wide War on Terror makes the Cold War look like a Sunday School picnic. Wake up and smell the Jihad!

"What right? Their OWN words and writings!!!!! It is THEY who have made it an open discussion with all their violent and hateful crimes."

I'm merely saying that as time goes on, the Islamic religion will change, just as all others (including yours) do. You seem to be assuming that the fundamentalist stance is the only one that will or should ever hold sway among Muslims. The history of religion indicates that its nature is one of change over time. Eventually, today's hard-liners will die out and be replaced with other Muslims with less caustic views, just as the Christian Inquisitors and public-whipping Puritans of our past are (more or less) no more.

All you are doing is letting your prejudice roam freely and ignoring the fact that even in this city, there are many Muslims who don't fit this militant view that you appear to think is the only one possible.

I never said that ALL Muslims were the attack dog variety.I have had peaceable and viable realtionships with individual Mulsims in the past. I'm merely saying that one size does not fit all when it comes to religions: that they have very different views as to how they will propagate their faith. The idea of Jihad is built into Islam. Not all advocate a super-aggressive militant approach. But regardless of the violence quotient, they are intent on ultimate take over.

Like I said, Chirstainity has the same objective; only it MUST be Gospel-conveying and peaceful to be in line with Jesus MO and admonitions. To the extent that Christian nations have fallen into the violence thing they have misssed the point entirely.

This is not true with Islam. Its literature and its history clearly advocate military, or otherwise aggressive conquest of infidel cultures. Their propagation impulses are not born of love, forgiveness and peace, but of insituting grace-less Sharia everywhere. They are legalists of the worst sort.

I do not think that religions really change in terms of their essential ethos and MO. To the extent that Christainity has changed into milk-sop liberal relativism it has ceased to be the Apostolic Faith - likewise with the TV manipulators. One can only hope, and pray, that the deomincally inspired jihadists will find outlets other than mass-murder bombings to advance thier cause and commend thier "faith."