Mosque going up in NYC building

[nicky10013]

Nicky doesn't give a crap about Muslims. He's just anti-American. Muslim's are a convenient scapegoat in realizing his objectives. Muslim's will do all the dirty work for him as he sits piously by talking about freedom of religion.

Where have I said anything anti-American?

Furthermore, I find it actually quite hilarious that you've all been very shadowy regarding Islam, but now I'm the one who is using them for my own nefarious political gain? How ridiculous. I've only had one position and it's never changed. You all are so obviously out of arguments that now you're turning to attack me instead of the message. Sad.

Edited September 10, 2010 by nicky10013

[bush_cheney2004]

Where have I said anything anti-American?

Right here:

Which is why the US army is slinking home reeking of defeat.....The US accomplished nothing.

http://www.mapleleafweb.com/forums//index.php?showtopic=17023&view=findpost&p=576927

Edited September 10, 2010 by bush_cheney2004

[wyly]

The US angered Islamic extremists. 9/11 was a terrorist attack by Islamic extremists led by Osama Bin Laden.

overly simplified smallc...

over a period of a hundred or so years western Imperial powers created a situation that led to an environment that was ripe for the development of extremism...fanaticisms doesn't develop in a vacuum there are reasons for it's development, tipping points that set everything in motion...people just don't get into airplanes and fly them into buildings unless they're really pissed off about something, these aren't random acts of violence they have a cause, they're fighting back against who they see as their opressor...

paternalism, colonialism, economic imperialism, political interference, racial prejudice,ethnic cleansing all fueled the development of Islamic fanaticism...the UK and France started the entire mess and the USA picked up where the other two left off...911 is what happens when governments become arrogant and don't learn from history...

[dre]

Most posters of Nicky10013's stripe were blaming the U.S. for 9/11 because we "angered" Muslims. So, was 9/11 a Muslim attack or wasn't it?

I dont think its a matter of blame, but the west has engaged in some risky behavior in the middle east which is an inherently risky place to do business wouldnt you agree?

The highjackers dont just have religion in common they have something else... they almost all come from the place in the middle east where we do the MOST business. I would say that its driven by geography and geology not religion. Theres muslims all over the world but most of the anti western jihadism is centered around the middle east, in undemocratic countries where have a history of procuring natural resources.

Islam is a common denominator but its the wrong one.

Edited September 10, 2010 by dre

[Guest American Woman]

TORONTO – The Muslim Canadian Congress (MCC) is urging the Cordoba House Initiative to abandon its proposed Ground-Zero Mosque in New York in the face of outrage expressed by large segments of the American population calling the proposal an act of 'fitna' or mischief.

Seems to me it's saying perfectly well that they were for it but are now against it for actually those reasons.

Really? Where does it say they were first for it, and now against it? What I see is them calling it "an act of 'fitna' or mischief." That's not saying they are against it because of fear of reprisal against Muslims, either, as you claimed. It's being against it because they think the Muslims in charge of the project are wrong; because they are engaging in, according to the Muslim Canadian Congress, "an act of 'fitna' or mischief."

They're against it for exactly the reasons I'm against it. Yet you accuse me of blaming all Muslims, and I get called a bigot over and over. If I am blaming all Muslims, if I am a bigot, the same applies to the Muslim Canadian Congress. So there you have it. The Muslim Canadian Congress is a bunch of bigots blaming all Muslims for 9-11.

[GostHacked]

Right here:

Which is why the US army is slinking home reeking of defeat.....The US accomplished nothing.

http://www.mapleleafweb.com/forums//index.php?showtopic=17023&view=findpost&p=576927

So telling you that the war is not going well is being Anti-American? All the generals and politicians who said it was not going well must be anti-american as well. Right?

[Guest American Woman]

So telling you that the war is not going well is being Anti-American? All the generals and politicians who said it was not going well must be anti-american as well. Right?

So you honestly believe saying the US army "is slinking home reeking of defeat" is synonymous with saying "the war is not going well?" Seriously. You think they are one and the same?

I personally see the statement as ignorance rather than anti-American, and for you to come along and say it means nothing more than "the war is not going well" is just as ignorant.

[GostHacked]

So you honestly believe saying the US army "is slinking home reeking of defeat" is synonymous with saying "the war is not going well?" Seriously. You think they are one and the same?

I personally see the statement as ignorance rather than anti-American, and for you to come along and say it means nothing more than "the war is not going well" is just as ignorant.

Well, you tell me, is the war going well?

[Guest American Woman]

Well, you tell me, is the war going well?

That's not the issue. The issue is do you honestly believe saying the US army "is slinking home reeking of defeat" is synonymous with saying "the war is not going well?" Seriously. You think they are one and the same?

Are you going to answer this time?

[GostHacked]

That's not the issue. The issue is do you honestly believe saying the US army "is slinking home reeking of defeat" is synonymous with saying "the war is not going well?" Seriously. You think they are one and the same?

Are you going to answer this time?

They are similar in a way, but different. However, I don't think either is being anti-american. Is saying that the US is getting their ass kicked the same? Is that anti-american, or just a harsh reality for those who support the war. For me, I never supported the wars, and I had a feeling they would get to this stage. So no it's not anti-amercian. If your emotions get in the way, I guess it can seem like that, but when you look at it objectively, the statements are true and a reality and not anti-american.

Now will you answer my question?

[Shady]

They are similar in a way, but different. However, I don't think either is being anti-american. Is saying that the US is getting their ass kicked the same? Is that anti-american, or just a harsh reality for those who support the war.

It's not necessarily anti-American, but it's definitely not reality. I'm not sure how a stalemate is equal to getting your ass kicked.

[Guest American Woman]

They are similar in a way, but different.

"Different," being the key word there. It's sort of like the difference between "I see you're having a difficult time dealing with your teenager" and "your parenting techniques reek of failure, you should be hiding your head in shame."

Why you would even try to pass the two sentiments off as "the same" is difficult for me to understand.

However, I don't think either is being anti-american.

I already said I thought it was ignorance, not anti-American.

Is saying that the US is getting their ass kicked the same? Is that anti-american, or just a harsh reality for those who support the war.

I don't think it's so much a harsh reality for those who support the war as it is gloating for those who don't and feel the need to present their views in that way. Would people have said Canadian troops are getting their asses kicked when they didn't think things were going so well for the allies during WWII? Or would they have said "things aren't going well right now?" There is a big difference between the two and the difference usually says a lot about where the person saying it is coming from.

For me, I never supported the wars, and I had a feeling they would get to this stage. So no it's not anti-amercian.

I did support the war in Afghanistan, believing we would put the lives of Afghan civilians first. I didn't support going to war in Iraq. But I recognize that there are a lot of troops in both places doing a lot of good, too. And if things aren't going well, I don't say "they are getting their ass kicked" as that's usually the way one speaks when one is glad someone/a team/whatever is losing.

If your emotions get in the way, I guess it can seem like that, but when you look at it objectively, the statements are true and a reality and not anti-american.

Again, I never said they were anti-American. I said they are ignorant. And clearly the emotions of the person making the statements are "getting in the way" of stating it differently.

Now will you answer my question?

So "similar in a way, but different" is answering the question? In that case, I'll answer your question the same manner -- I think the war is going well in some respects, but not well in others.

[GostHacked]

"Different," being the key word there. It's sort of like the difference between "I see you're having a difficult time dealing with your teenager" and "your parenting techniques reek of failure, you should be hiding your head in shame."

Why you would even try to pass the two sentiments off as "the same" is difficult for me to understand.

They still elude to the same problem. The teenager is being problematic at the same time the parenting methods are failing.

I already said I thought it was ignorance, not anti-American.

You are right, I missed that. But, how would it be ignorant to say the war is not going well? Top US commanders and politicians are also saying it's not going well. Are they ignorant as well? Top commanders have been saying the war has not been going well for a couple years now. I seriously fail to see that this is ignorance on my part OR the commanders telling us so.

I don't think it's so much a harsh reality for those who support the war as it is gloating for those who don't and feel the need to present their views in that way. Would people have said Canadian troops are getting their asses kicked when they didn't think things were going so well for the allies during WWII? Or would they have said "things aren't going well right now?" There is a big difference between the two and the difference usually says a lot about where the person saying it is coming from

.

I'll use a sport analogy. I like hockey, I like watching the Sens play. I support them. I watch a game where they get crushed in a game 10 nothing. Yes the Sens got their ass kicked. Now is that ignorance? Does this mean I am anti-sens ????

If the Canadian troops were getting their ass kicked, then that is a reality. It means we failed in some aspect to really understand what the hell we were getting into with Iraq and Afghanistan.

I did support the war in Afghanistan, believing we would put the lives of Afghan civilians first. I didn't support going to war in Iraq. But I recognize that there are a lot of troops in both places doing a lot of good, too. And if things aren't going well, I don't say "they are getting their ass kicked" as that's usually the way one speaks when one is glad someone/a team/whatever is losing.

What was the major difference for you to support the war in Afghanistan but not in Iraq? Because I had not supported the war in Iraq, but at first I did support the war in Afghanistan.

So "similar in a way, but different" is answering the question? In that case, I'll answer your question the same manner -- I think the war is going well in some respects, but not well in others.

When it comes to this I agree with you. In some ways it is going well, but maybe not in the areas that are going to make the difference. I do think it's not a black/white issue .. there are many gray areas. But I am getting my information from the same soucres you are... and those sources are quoting the generals in those theaters. Do we take notice of what they are saying or ignore it?

[DogOnPorch]

Reeking of defeat in reality...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t0M_nicGUGU

[Guest American Woman]

They still elude to the same problem. The teenager is being problematic at the same time the parenting methods are failing.

They both elude to the same problem, but the mindset is completely different; and that's what's being discussed here. Do you truly not get that, or are you purposely avoiding addressing the real issue?

You are right, I missed that. But, how would it be ignorant to say the war is not going well?

Nicky10013 didn't say "the war is not going well;" therefore, I didn't say it's ignorant to say the war is not going well.

Let me put it to you another way. If I were to say "there are some extremists within Islam causing problems that need to be resolved," would you perceive it the same way if I instead said, "those ignorant cowardly Muslims should be wiped off the face of the earth?" Both statements, after all, "elude to the same problem." Yet I'm guessing you'd think the second statement was ignorant, and if I had said that, and you called it ignorant, and I came back with "what's wrong with saying 'there are some extremists within Islam causing problems....,'" what would your reaction be?

Top US commanders and politicians are also saying it's not going well. Are they ignorant as well? Top commanders have been saying the war has not been going well for a couple years now. I seriously fail to see that this is ignorance on my part OR the commanders telling us so.

See above. I'm not going to be side-tracked by a completely different statement from the one I was actually commenting on, and I'll await your response to my question above -- then I'll address the rest of your post; but until then, I'm sick to death of responding to something completely different from what was actually said.

So I'll just say this: if top US commanders and politicians were to "also say," which they most definitely have not, that "the US army is slinking home reeking of defeat.....The US accomplished nothing," yes, I would think it was very ignorant. Extremely so.

[Shady]

See above. I'm not going to be side-tracked by a completely different statement from the one I was actually commenting on, and I'll await your response to my question above -- then I'll address the rest of your post; but until then, I'm sick to death of responding to something completely different from what was actually said.

You'll notice that when discussing something with GostHacked or someone of his ilk, it quickly turns into a shell game.

[nicky10013]

See above. I'm not going to be side-tracked by a completely different statement from the one I was actually commenting on, and I'll await your response to my question above -- then I'll address the rest of your post; but until then, I'm sick to death of responding to something completely different from what was actually said.

So I'll just say this: if top US commanders and politicians were to "also say," which they most definitely have not, that "the US army is slinking home reeking of defeat.....The US accomplished nothing," yes, I would think it was very ignorant. Extremely so.

I find it hilarious that again and again you refuse to answer questions that are specifically related to the topic at hand (the connection between the war not going wel and defeat) and you bring up your own examples you expect others to discuss that have even less to do with the topic than what you've accused them of doing (parenthood).

Furthermore, what is so ignorant about the comment that the US hasn't accomplished anything? Every goal the US set, with the exception of leaving, wasn't achieved. Every goal the US has set, and they've changed to try and change the political channel, hasn't been accomplished. The government is corrupt to the core when they actually have one (Iraq currently doesn't even have a government). The army, some Iraqi politicians are pleading, can't operate on their own. To add insult to injury, the army is also corrupt.

So, what we're dealing with here is a country with no government, a corrupt bureaucracy, a shoddy army which is also corrupt and you're willing to call this some kind of victory while decrying detractors as ignorant? Nice.

As for DogOnPorch, now, I don't have the video but it seems to me these two things are pretty similar.

Soviets Leaving Afghanistan

Americans Leaving Iraq

[naomiglover]

Having contempt for the stupid war is not anti-American. Wanting a group of Americans to not build a place for themselves based on their religion is anti-American.

Edited September 10, 2010 by naomiglover

[bloodyminded]

I suspect that American Woman and Pliny come closer to having it right. Leftists (other than myself) seem to support Radical Islam though it believes in degrading women, gays and other minorities.

Whew! You Bravely Stand Alone.

[naomiglover]

So, what we're dealing with here is a country with no government, a corrupt bureaucracy, a shoddy army which is also corrupt and you're willing to call this some kind of victory while decrying detractors as ignorant? Nice.

Not to mention that Iran's influence on Iraq has multiplied.

[nicky10013]

Not to mention that Iran's influence on Iraq has multiplied.

Good call. If Iraq doesn't devolve into another bloodthirsty dictatorship negating the sacrifice of all those people's lives, it'll probably turn into an Iranian vassal state.

[bush_cheney2004]

....So I'll just say this: if top US commanders and politicians were to "also say," which they most definitely have not, that "the US army is slinking home reeking of defeat.....The US accomplished nothing," yes, I would think it was very ignorant. Extremely so.

...and it is fundamentally anti-American with respect to the US Government's policy and stated objective in Iraq. It's OK to be "anti-American", but don't pretend otherwise just for the sake of appearing "fair and balanced".

The "reeking of defeat" only confirms an added disdain for the American military. Look what happened with Fox's "Red Eye" when the host or guest made insulting quips about Canada's military.

Edited September 10, 2010 by bush_cheney2004

[Shady]

Having contempt for the stupid war is not anti-American.

Also, having contempt for a very violent religion isn't anti-Muslim.

[bush_cheney2004]

Furthermore, what is so ignorant about the comment that the US hasn't accomplished anything? Every goal the US set, with the exception of leaving, wasn't achieved...

Again...this is patently false. As stated in US Public Law, it was the policy of the United States to remove Saddam Hussein and establish a democratic government in Iraq.

[DogOnPorch]

nicky santoro: As for DogOnPorch, now, I don't have the video but it seems to me these two things are pretty similar.

Yeah...hit me on the head with a telephone. Stalingrad was a much deeper "Circle of Hell" than any soldier today can imagine. Canada's casualties in Afghanistan amount to one good machinegun burst at The Somme. Regretable? For sure. In the top ten of history's kill-fests....nope.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anthony_Spilotro