If they're using it with you so consistently, then there might be a lesson in it for you. I use it only when it is exactly what I want to say.
I certainly wasn't evading anything. I don't talk appeasement or surrender. I never have. I'm trying to make you see that banging your head against a brick wall is not the smartest way to achieve an objective, unless the objective is a bloody head. You want to take on the whole Muslim world, it seems. Head on. Have you seriously thought about this? I doubt it.
This is the religion of peace! 1165Not when you offend every single one of them simultaneously, which, if you work hard enough at it, isn't that hard to do. You may have noticed. You mean, refuse to side with...
I'm saying that whatever you decide to do in your relationship with Muslims and Islam, you better have a better plan than direct confrontation. The US has been trying that for 15 years now, and exactly where has it got them? The money they have spent on war since then - trillions of dollars - could have been used to solve the fundamental problems in the underdeveloped world in a positive way, instead of the way that has made them so hated in so much of the Muslim world and has achieved nothing but more liquidateous violence that will go on and on until these policies are changed.
It's a lot easier for deadheads such as Bush to go to war than to eradicate the problems that have caused confrontation in the first place. It's a lot easier to conquer a country than to rule it. Bush and his puppetmasters have taken the easy option, from their point of view, and now they have not a blind clue as to how to get themselves out of the mess they have chosen to make. They have no idea of the alternatives. Nor, it seems have you.
Demagogue Staged Arab RiotsMr Bush, you see what happens if you make me give my people democracy? It is better to pay me to keep them under control." Unfortunately, we have the...
Rifty
-- Academic and Computing Help