• Cyburbia is a friendly big tent, where we share our experiences and thoughts about urban planning practice, planning adjacent topics, and whatever else comes to mind. No ads, no spam, no echo chambers. Create your FREE Cyburbia ID, and join us today! You can also register through your Reddit, Facebook, Google, Twitter, or Microsoft account.

Iraq prison photo

chrisinmd

Cyburbian
Messages
322
Points
11
What are your thoughts concerning the Iraq prison photos? Should they all be released?


My thoughts about the war in general are:

My thoughts are this is corportate warfare, contractors hired by the Pentagon to make a profit from war. War profiteering has always been a reality in our society but never to the level that this administration has taken it to. The Iraqi war is the epitome of a huge money making scheme for Bush's buddies.
 

Repo Man

Cyburbian
Messages
2,550
Points
25
Indeed they should be released, as should photos of the coffins coming back to the US. America needs to see the real face of war. The media should also have a tally of how many Iraqi civilians we have killed (estimated at 10,000) in our efforts to liberate them.
 

Duke Of Dystopia

Cyburbian
Messages
2,713
Points
24
The beheading video should be shown as well. Let it all hang out.

I find it increadibly condescending that every western news journalist and politician has/can see it but we are "Incapable of processing" what the video means or portrays. BULL****!

Yes, it definatly will increase anger at Muslims on our part, in this country and outside. It also serves as a backdrop to our own present crisis in so far as we can prevent abuse (US in abu graihb), from turning into atrocitty (beheading with a dull kitchen knife).

While I trust the present administration not at all, that is separate from the fact that we face an enemy in islamic fundamentalism that does not distinguish between anybody outside of thier circle of zealots. We would do well to remember that, each and every time the US abuse subject rears its ugly head.
 

BKM

Cyburbian
Messages
6,464
Points
29
I certainly agree with you. Duke, probably as I could be easily tortured by an Islamic fundamentalist regime (although the Christian zealotry of many in the Bush Amdministration would be almost as bad. Christian Reconstructionism is pretty scary stuff). This is one liberal who deosn't buy into the whole "Islam is a Religion of Peace" or "Why don't they love us" regime.

At the same time, I am really bothered by the "They hang corpses, so we have the right to sodomize civillians swept up in a Police Raid" argument that some on the right (I might give kudos for our very own El Guapo for NOT making this argument) have been floating. As scary as some of the Black Block fanatics are, go read Little Green Footballs or Free Republic, and you'll realize we are one or two attackes away from a true fascist state.
 

jresta

Cyburbian
Messages
1,474
Points
23
as i've said to others - if someone did that to my brother i'd be on a plane right now on my way over there to find the people who did it and i wouldn't come back until the score was even. Having said that, the people responsible are the people responsible not whatever dark-skinned people i can line up in my cross-hairs.

not that it matters if they are or not but i don't believe these guys are affiliated with al-qaeda in any real sense. Every new jack has been trying to link himself to al-qaeda since 9/11.

There were no terrorists in Iraq before Bush's invasion. Saddam had them all locked up in Abu Ghraib or 6 ft. under. It's fine that senators are complaining that "Bush never had an exit strategy" but the morons never had an "entrance strategy" aside from "lets go in there and kick this guys ass."

Sen. Patrick J. Leahy (D., Vt.) turned Rumsfeld's words against him. Leahy asked Rumsfeld to answer a question that the secretary posed in an Oct. 13 internal memo: "Are we capturing, killing or dissuading more terrorists every day than the madrassas and radical clerics are recruiting, training and deploying against us?" "Al-Qaeda wasn't in Iraq when we started this war. They are there now," Leahy said. "How do you answer the question you posed last October?"

Sen. Ernest F. Hollings, a South Carolina Democrat, said that Army commanders "were afraid" to ask for more troops and that the situation in Iraq was "a mess." "You don't have security," Hollings said. "In fact, we're bogged down. We're trying to win the hearts and minds as we're killing them and we're torturing them."


As far as terrorists using graphic murder as intimidation?

Are you surprised? WTF was "shock and awe?" the US/Britain have killed over 10,000 civilians in one year. How many of them were decapitated or burned alive or buried in rubble and suffocated? And don't tell me we don't kill civilians on purpose. You don't drop bombs on a city by accident. How many more innocent people can we kill without being worse than Saddam or al-qaeda?

My brother is 6 km from the Iranian border prepping a base for an invasion of that country after the next election. He's known this war was bogus from the outset and is counting the days 'til he comes home in November. I blame all the armchair generals for him being there just as i do for nick berg's beheading.

It honestly is your fault for lending truth to a lie. Because as we all learned from Goebbels "repeating something over and over again does make it true."
And as the saying goes, "you can fool some of the people all of the time"
 
Last edited:

tsc

Cyburbian
Messages
1,905
Points
23
Repo Man said:
Indeed they should be released, as should photos of the coffins coming back to the US. America needs to see the real face of war. The media should also have a tally of how many Iraqi civilians we have killed (estimated at 10,000) in our efforts to liberate them.
I agree.

The whole situation is so sad for everyone involved. I think they need to change the tag line from a "Free Iraq" to "A Peaceful Iraq"..or world for that matter. September 11th was tragic... I could see the smoke from where I live... but this war is a sadder situation... because of our governments involvement.
 

otterpop

Cyburbian
Messages
6,655
Points
28
The photos of the Iraqi prison abuses should be shown, as well as those of the beheading of the U.S. citizen or any others that come down the pike in the future. That is part of the press' job - to bring to light those things that our government and other government's don't want or would rather we not see or know about.

The media is getting justifiable accused of paying too much attention to this story. We no longer need quite so much air time devoted to it, but by all means keep on the story and keep the public informed of new developments.

Those speaking out against the disclosures and media attention on these horrible act by our own people have argued that in a democratic society like ours at least when things like this happen we deal with them in the open. Hussein abused prisoners in that very prison. And now, so did we. Wouldn't it be great if we all just didn't do it at all?
 

Gedunker

Moderating
Staff member
Moderator
Messages
11,209
Points
36
I just can't understand why the hell anybody would want to watch this poor man's beheading. Isn't it enough to just know that it happened?
 

Duke Of Dystopia

Cyburbian
Messages
2,713
Points
24
jresta said:
as i've said to others - if someone did that to my brother i'd be on a plane right now on my way over there to find the people who did it and i wouldn't come back until the score was even.....

....Every new jack has been trying to link himself to al-qaeda since 9/11.

.....As far as terrorists using graphic murder as intimidation?

Are you surprised?

...WTF was "shock and awe?" the US/Britain have killed over 10,000 civilians in one year. ......

It honestly is your fault for lending truth to a lie. .....

1) No problem with them resisting an occupation. If they were in down town CHI or Dabuque, I would be taking pot shots too. Resistance comes at a price.

2) Al-Qieda set a new watermark for success, anything less is judged to be amaturish and less successful. Of course others are trying to copy or excede this new mark.

3) Not surprised at all that they would post this video on the net or anywhere else for that matter.

4) Shock and Awe was a failure. The war in general has/is/will be a failure. "IF" they had found the WMD they screamed about, there is a good chance it may have panned out ok. They will never find them because they don't exist, therfore, I don't see how we can be anything but an illegal occupying force.

5) I didn't understand the last one or who it is directed at.


This whole conflict is about more than just corporate profit or dislike for brown skinned people. It is a cultural war in no uncertain terms. Islamic fundementalists do understand this. They understand that thier mideavil way of life and outlook is threatened by other occurances and trends world wide. It is make a stand now or loose.

Were not white knights on horseback, nor are we perfectly clean in our dealings with the rulers of other nations, but we certainly should not take this to mean we asked for 9/11 or that we should sit back and do nothing. Guilt for having plenty is meaningless in this context.

Were in a world of hurt now, hopefully we can figure out how to make the best of a bad series of decisions. One way or another, we have to deal with whatever comes along.

Just tell your brother to be carful and keep his head down. Even boring days speed along fast enough. War is about getting back home again.
 

Duke Of Dystopia

Cyburbian
Messages
2,713
Points
24
Gedunker said:
I just can't understand why the hell anybody would want to watch this poor man's beheading. Isn't it enough to just know that it happened?
Because what everyobody saw was sanitized, and sanatized methods of dealing with a crisis or events leads to a lack of conviction or action. It is the face of conflict. If you can't deal with the artifacts of conflict, how can you support or suggest engaging in conflict?

Because you need to know the enemy. Also, in order to show us what we should NOT become.
 

Gedunker

Moderating
Staff member
Moderator
Messages
11,209
Points
36
Duke Of Dystopia said:
Because what everyobody saw was sanitized, and sanatized methods of dealing with a crisis or events leads to a lack of conviction or action. It is the face of conflict. If you can't deal with the artifacts of conflict, how can you support or suggest engaging in conflict?
When did I say anything about being unable to deal with the artifacts of conflict? I asked why anybody *would want to watch* a man being beheaded. I for one do not. I believe I can conjure the image from the descriptions I have heard from those that have seen it. And for me, that it enough. I do not need to be a witness.

Duke Of Dystopia said:
Because you need to know the enemy. Also, in order to show us what we should NOT become.
I agree that we need to know the enemy. I agree that we should not become what the enemy is. I am not convinced that broadcasting a beheading is the way to achieve it. That is my opinion. You and others are free to have a different opinion.
 

BKM

Cyburbian
Messages
6,464
Points
29
Duke Of Dystopia said:
1) It is a cultural war in no uncertain terms. Islamic fundementalists do understand this. They understand that thier mideavil way of life and outlook is threatened by other occurances and trends world wide. It is make a stand now or loose.
I'm not sure what "making a stand" means. The Islamofascists are engaged in a battle with "us," certainly, but they are even more engaged in a struggle in their own nations. (Vergin on politically correct, European countries who have allowed a high enough level of immigration that is now muttering darkly about imposing Sharia in London is another issue that we, thankfully, don't have to deal with yet)

I would add that it is a mistake to assume that our values and our culture is the "only" legitimate one. We've done nothing but strengthened the hand of the Islamofascists in the Middle East.

Were not white knights on horseback, nor are we perfectly clean in our dealings with the rulers of other nations, but we certainly should not take this to mean we asked for 9/11 or that we should sit back and do nothing. Guilt for having plenty is meaningless in this context..
True, we did not "ask" for 9/11-but can we honestly express "surprise" about it? (not that I am a believer that the "Arab Street," fed on a diet of propaganda by our "allies' government controlled media, is "right). It is beyond "clean hands." Running a commercial empire means that a lot of people get stomped on. They eventually fight back-and not always through the cleanest methods. And, religion always seems to be there to pick up the torch of violence.
 

Duke Of Dystopia

Cyburbian
Messages
2,713
Points
24
Gedunker said:
When did I say anything about being unable to deal with the artifacts of conflict? I asked why anybody *would want to watch* a man being beheaded. I for one do not. I believe I can conjure the image from the descriptions I have heard from those that have seen it. And for me, that it enough. I do not need to be a witness.
It was not an acusation, if you misunderstood, my fault and sorry. I am trying to keep post length down. :)

Nobody said you have to watch, nor should it be shown indiscriminatly. Nobody can know everything or even stay current on everything, but we as a whole need to do a much better job of paying attention to events. My point is that sanatized events do not inform well.
 

Duke Of Dystopia

Cyburbian
Messages
2,713
Points
24
BKM said:
........European countries who have allowed a high enough level of immigration that is now muttering darkly about imposing Sharia in London is another issue that we, thankfully, don't have to deal with yet)

I would add that it is a mistake to assume that our values and our culture is the "only" legitimate one.

.....They eventually fight back-and not always through the cleanest methods. And, religion always seems to be there to pick up the torch of violence.
Requests (read as demands and then followed by terrorism) for Sharia Law in the US will follow soon enough. Just wait and see.

No, our culture is not the "only" legitimate one, but that does not mean that all cultures are equal. Ours vs Islam? I have no problem deciding and placing a value judgement there. Sharia Law vs the US Constitution? That one should be a gimmee.

No argument on the fighting back. I mentioned I would do the same. My objective was to say that if we see what is happening in an unsanitized way, we can better make choices on how we want those in our public employ to make decisions and policy. As opposed to listening to a lot of spin designed to confuse and obscure the issue.

ps: post is not suposed to be hostile, sorry if it sounds that way, its just a very serious subject to deal with. :-\
 

jresta

Cyburbian
Messages
1,474
Points
23
Duke Of Dystopia said:
5) I didn't understand the last one or who it is directed at .
That last one was directed at the people who supported the war, caricatured in the accompanying picture. A lot of people see the goings on in Iraq right now as hindsight. A good 35-40% of us have been saying all along that it was a lie and that it would go badly. The people who were foaming at the mouth for this are just as responsible as Bush et al.


Duke Of Dystopia said:
Were not white knights on horseback, nor are we perfectly clean in our dealings with the rulers of other nations, but we certainly should not take this to mean we asked for 9/11 or that we should sit back and do nothing. Guilt for having plenty is meaningless in this context.
Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11. I don't understand why people keep making this indirect association when it's just as patently false as the WMD claim.

As a 9/11 survivor i understand the consequences. I'd also like to see the people responsible brought to justice. Bombing and torturing Iraqis is not justice and it's going to do nothing to stem terrorism.

There's no difference between extremists in Oklahoma City or Jasper, Texas and those in Karbala or Fallujah. In both cases their common thread is poverty, an unhealthy dose of local hatred, and illiteracy (in the functional sense of being able use their limited education to relate to the world around them.) In both cases they're likely to strike when they feel their world is being threatened. It has little to do with spirituality but religion is a great organizing tool nonetheless.

Bush is one of these people. He jokes about executions. He's on a crusade and he said so himself. He's been quite effective at rallying people who believe a crusade is what we need.
 

vaughan

Cyburbian
Messages
335
Points
11
Slightly off-topic question here (mods, feel free to split):

Seymour Hersh, who wrote the original New Yorker article on this, has just published part two in this week's New Yorker. He has talked to many different people who say that Rumsfeld's military policy and, by association, what is happening in Iraq is, essentally, "broken". Things like consistently underestimating the number of troops needed, refusing to acknowledge that things seem to be going poorly, poor training of the folks that are over there, farming out many jobs to contractors, not having any real exit strategy (or entrance strategy, for that matter, other than "let's go in there and kick the crap outta them"), and downplaying stories of prisoner abuse are what everyone seems to be talking about.

So, the question: if Rumsfeld, and his policy directives, seem to be responsible for setting up situations in Iraq that have led to prisoner abuse, should he resign? Be tossed out on his ear? Forgiven? Or is he not to blame at all?
 

jresta

Cyburbian
Messages
1,474
Points
23
vaughan said:
Slightly off-topic question here (mods, feel free to split):

Seymour Hersh, who wrote the original New Yorker article on this, has just published part two in this week's New Yorker. He has talked to many different people who say that Rumsfeld's military policy and, by association, what is happening in Iraq is, essentally, "broken". Things like consistently underestimating the number of troops needed, refusing to acknowledge that things seem to be going poorly, poor training of the folks that are over there, farming out many jobs to contractors, not having any real exit strategy (or entrance strategy, for that matter, other than "let's go in there and kick the crap outta them"), and downplaying stories of prisoner abuse are what everyone seems to be talking about.

So, the question: if Rumsfeld, and his policy directives, seem to be responsible for setting up situations in Iraq that have led to prisoner abuse, should he resign? Be tossed out on his ear? Forgiven? Or is he not to blame at all?
Privatization of the military rapidly accelerated after the first Gulf War. As a former Army wrench i can attest that anything that was out of our league in terms of service was "3rd Shopped" and the guys at 3rd Shop were more than half civilian. That was '93-'96 and i know as time went on we saw more and more civilian truckers. This is turning out to be a huge liability.

As far as poor training, it's more like "no training." My brother's unit failed their trial run at JRTC (Ft. Polk, LA) and were sent right on schedule anyway.

As far as any atrocities that might've been committed? My time in the Regular Army soured me enough but it was my time in the National Guard afterwards that sealed it for me. It was literally a collection of drunks and rednecks. If they didn't drift in and out of unemployment it was because they were cops or prison guards.
It was pretty much the same when i transfered to the SC Guard. I tried to get out of AT every summer because i was honestly scared for my life. If one of them didn't forget to clear their weapon they'd surely forget to set the e-brake and chock block and i'd get run over in my sleep. Needless to say I'm really not surprised at all about the pictures we've seen so far, especially considering these were NG MPs - many of whom worked in the prison industry in the hills of Pennsyltucky.

I think the RA guys are capable of much worse. The lifers in the infantry units talk about killing to an unhealthy extent. We have no business having a professional army - it's the hallmark of an imperial state, let alone a security state. Universal conscription is the only way to democratize the military. Look at Scandinavia, Switzerland, etc.

Lecturing Rumsfeld or even getting rid of him will do nothing b/c he'll still have an undue influence. He's been on the scene since Ford. He's not going anywhere. Besides, they've got the echo chamber working in their favor. Rumfeld is good man, he's got a tough job, these pictures aren't that bad, etc. Just keep repeating something and it eventually becomes the truth.
 

vaughan

Cyburbian
Messages
335
Points
11
So what is the answer then? Are we talking a major overhaul of the military? There is a small minority in congress that is pushing to reinstate the draft... scarily, it does make some sense- when its truly "our boys" over there getting shot, zipping up the body bags, and scrubbing the potatoes, it will be much harder to go to war than when a growing percentage of the folks in the line of fire are contractors getting paid boatloads of money to do the dirty work.

(Before getting too involved in this, let me qualify all of my statements by saying i've never been in the military and that I very well may be getting in over my head... )
 

BKM

Cyburbian
Messages
6,464
Points
29
Duke Of Dystopia said:
Requests (read as demands and then followed by terrorism) for Sharia Law in the US will follow soon enough. Just wait and see.

No, our culture is not the "only" legitimate one, but that does not mean that all cultures are equal. Ours vs Islam? I have no problem deciding and placing a value judgement there. Sharia Law vs the US Constitution? That one should be a gimmee.

No argument on the fighting back. I mentioned I would do the same. My objective was to say that if we see what is happening in an unsanitized way, we can better make choices on how we want those in our public employ to make decisions and policy. As opposed to listening to a lot of spin designed to confuse and obscure the issue.

ps: post is not suposed to be hostile, sorry if it sounds that way, its just a very serious subject to deal with. :-\
No. I didn't take it as that way at all. We agree on many of these points.

My main reasons for opposing the war is the sense it would involve us in a quagmore, allow elements in our own society that frighten me to obtain more power, and would financially bankrupt us-and would nto easily accomplish any of the aims expressed. Sadly, the anti-war movement has been proven largely right (at least the rational end of the movement. I have no patience for the "We Love Sadaam" crowd.)

As a confirmed agnostic, I am always very frightened of religions that are all-encompassing and absorb the State. Islam has never really had a Reformation, or a secularization. No, I am not saying that every Muslim is a terrorist. People are people, and Muslims vary, too, in their devotion to their faith. But, the faith does seem to be more demanding than post-Renaissance Christianity (although elements of the Bush Administration would disagree strongly. Again, that Dominionist theme runs strong.
 

Duke Of Dystopia

Cyburbian
Messages
2,713
Points
24
jresta said:
That last one was directed at the people who supported the war, caricatured in the accompanying picture. A lot of people see the goings on in Iraq right now as hindsight. A good 35-40% of us have been saying all along that it was a lie and that it would go badly. The people who were foaming at the mouth for this are just as responsible as Bush et al.

Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11. I don't understand why people keep making this indirect association when it's just as patently false as the WMD claim.

.......It has little to do with spirituality but religion is a great organizing tool nonetheless....

1) I was just asking for a clarification. I guess it was directed at me, as I will openly admit to supporting the war initially. I did understand that if we didn't find the WMD's that we would have huge egg on our face and have massive repercussions.

My anger at being dupped by my own leaders has political ramifications for the party that had my vote. My vote is the legal means to replace them, and it is non-violent.

side-note: What happens in the next election when all the new and easily abused electronic voting machines, do not reflect the same results as the exit polls. By historical record, we know that exit polls are nearly dead on. When a hotly contested precinct(s), can't be recounted, and the exit poll does not match the voting tally, we may see the death of the trust in the electoral system.

2) I never said Iraq had anything to do with 9/11. I intended to say that there are some who would believe that this is only about western oppression, economic gain, and empire. It is not, I restate it has as much if not more to do with culture. The world is intruding on us all, and fundamentalist religion is attempting to retrench in order to prevent change. Futile, but dangerous.

This is a conflict that has no single issue to define it. It has many issues interlinking with each other. As bad as our own leadership is, I don't feel overly sorry for the islamic world or its denizens. The fact they dispise women in general and in specific is enough to turn my stomach. A horse apiece, one might say

At least the arabs understand this is about culture. Unfortunatly, they do not distinguish between outsiders on thier side, and outsiders not on thier side. You could be the biggest peacenick to ever walk the planet, but that same peacenick is the same target as anyone else to blow up. As it stands now on this planet it is muslims vs. everyone. One can hope for change though.

3) Yup, religion is a great organizer and motivator.

The odd thing is, you and I are agreeing, its how we got to that point that differs. Might as well enjoy it while it lasts :-D
 

Michele Zone

BANNED
Messages
7,657
Points
29
Like Gedunker, I probably wouldn't want to watch any of this stuff. But Duke is right: sanitizing the war for public consumption is a source of evil. It is one of the things that allows atrocities and abuse to occur while so many people comfortably look the other way and pretend it isn't so bad.

When they did those famous psychological studies, it was easier for people to escalate the (imaginary) shocks to the point of "death" for the victim if they didn't have to face them, see them, etc. The percentages of people who would not go that far rose significantly when they had see up close who they were hurting and face directly what they were being asked to "do". Comfortably numb does not usually lead to Doing The Right Thing.
 

Gedunker

Moderating
Staff member
Moderator
Messages
11,209
Points
36
Is there anybody out there that does not believe the CIA is behind this? That a bunch of National Guard/Reservist troops (who admittedly used bad judgement) are going to take the fall for the spooks in DC? Troops that will be sacrificed to protect the CIA from yet another intelligence-gathering screw up? I can't seem to shake the feeling that there's more here than meets the eye.
 

Duke Of Dystopia

Cyburbian
Messages
2,713
Points
24
Gedunker said:
Is there anybody out there that does not believe the CIA is behind this? That a bunch of National Guard/Reservist troops (who admittedly used bad judgement) are going to take the fall for the spooks in DC? Troops that will be sacrificed to protect the CIA from yet another intelligence-gathering screw up? I can't seem to shake the feeling that there's more here than meets the eye.
Agreed, but the neat thing is, they are already going down fighting. They will go down, but they will identify who told them to do this crap. Not being political aperatchicks, they are not going to willingly become fall guys.
 

jresta

Cyburbian
Messages
1,474
Points
23
Duke Of Dystopia said:
1) I was just asking for a clarification. I guess it was directed at me, as I will openly admit to supporting the war initially. I did understand that if we didn't find the WMD's that we would have huge egg on our face and have massive repercussions.

My anger at being dupped by my own leaders has political ramifications for the party that had my vote. My vote is the legal means to replace them, and it is non-violent.
That wasn't directed at you, personally. It was just a general statement but hey, if the shoe fits . . .

The thing about "being duped", though, and again this isn't personal is that all the info you needed to come to todays reality was already out there. What's his name, Wilson, went to Niger and debunked the Uranium lie. His wife the CIA agent was "outed" for it.

The BBC sent a reporter to the "Chemical Weapons Training Camp" (the pictures Colin Powell was showing the UN) and broadcast live from the site. It was fairly obvious that no one had been there in years.

Former UN weapons inspector Scott Ritter, an American, said in front of every microphone and camera that was turned on for him "you're making a huge mistake"

And of course, Richard Butler, who suspected the anthrax scare of 2 years ago was possibly the work of Iraqis later said that an attack would be a huge political mistake.

And that's just on WMD side (by the way WMD is nice and scary for propaganda purposes but in the military and the Pentagon they're called NBC. Nuclear, Biological, Chemical.) The warnings on the fallout, consequences, and problems associated with invading an arab country and toppling its dictator were just as dire and of course, were given their 15 seconds to say their piece and then soundly written off as some "lunatic fringe that hates America." I give them credit, it's a great tactic, it gives the appearance of a free and balanced press, at least on the surface.

Duke Of Dystopia said:
At least the arabs understand this is about culture. Unfortunatly, they do not distinguish between outsiders on thier side, and outsiders not on thier side. You could be the biggest peacenick to ever walk the planet, but that same peacenick is the same target as anyone else to blow up. As it stands now on this planet it is muslims vs. everyone. One can hope for change though.
Just to clarify, i'm not a pacifist, i've never considered myself one. In the words of Emiliano Zapata, "It's better to die on your feet than live on your knees." I really have no desire to befriend the "arab street" and i'm sure it's reciprocal. I do think, however, that we can at least come to an understanding that "you leave us alone we'll leave you alone" and that i think, is very reasonable and feasible. It startes with ordering American Christian missionaries out of the Middle East, getting US troops out entirely and no more tanks, bombers, and helicopter gunships to Israel. It also means that US firms doing business over there are not allowed to hire mercenaries to defend their property. If the local police or military can't/won't do it they have no business being there. I know this won't stop the fanatics but if all we had to worry about was the fringe at this point we wouldn't be knee deep in **it right now.
 
Top