Originally Posted by DVPGSR
What defines a tyrant to you? Anyone that denies the holocaust and open talks about the destruction of the Jewish state and Jews in general sure sounds like a tyrant to me.
tyrant:
Etymology: Middle English tirant, from Old French tyran, tyrant, from Latin tyrannus, from Greek tyrannos
1 a : an absolute ruler unrestrained by law or constitution b : a usurper of sovereignty
2 a : a ruler who exercises absolute power oppressively or brutally b : one resembling an oppressive ruler in the harsh use of authority or power
that is the dictionary definition...however, how is IRAN who's majority of the population agree with their leader to destroy Isreal make him a tyrant??? Iran is not the only nation that wants to destroy Isreal and it's not just the leaders conviction...it's the people of that country
i don't understand why you focus solely on the heads of state and leadership rather than the people they rule...you can always kick out the head guys...it's the millions of the population that are the biggest problem to your plans...and in Iraq, Iran and many a muslim country we are "evil" and will never be looked at otherwise...when we force them with military might it only invokes them to further hate us...now Iraqi's are signing up to get back at us in droves and it will only get worse
Islamic terrorism has long been around and was previously (prior to 9/11) considered a law enforcement activity. That obviously did not work so now we are trying a new approach, and to me, has so far worked pretty well.
No matter what we do, short of converting everyone to Islam, we will be hated and considered infidels to terrorists and Islamic extremists. If we were a completely secular society they would hate us for not having faith in God, if we were a 100% Christian nation they would hate us for worshipping Gold differently, but they also hate us for our religous tollerance, tollerance of alternative lifestyles, equal treatment of women, etc.
If you look at the US we have fringe wacko groups on both sides...yet most are not militant in their extremism. Sure we have the ELF on the left and McVeigh on the right but those are more isloated incidents and not part of a larger movement. Islamic radicals are never going to come to a table and negotiate a peace, they never have and never will. Law enforcement and placating them in the past has not work...maybe killing every last one of them and pacifying the rest will.
simply put this is the only way we can eliminate the islamic terrorists...that is kill them all and let Allah or God sort them out...however if this is not what Hitler envisioned i don't know what is
my point all along has been leave the middle east alone...it was stable but neither country ever trusted each other...Israel was born in controversy and the hate runs deep...as we have kept on meddling in the middle east it has only made our situation worse and made us the target we are today...recall we used to provide support to Osama in the 80s during the russian occupation of afghanistan and he had contacts with high level gov't until we pulled all support and interfered with his plans...what really upset him was the Saudi gov't preferred US intervention for Desert Storm rather than Osama's legion of mujahideen fresh off of Russia's recent withdrawal from afghanistan...the US all of a sudden was given military base approvals in the middle east including access to the 2 holiest muslim cities
we in fact helped Saddam come to power as he was a thorn in Iran and Russias side...we supported his rise to power to counter Iran's might (they were larger population) and control the influence of communism in the middle east...Saddam was even given a UNESCO award by the United Nations and the US!...it wasn't until he had a complete grip on power in Iraq did we find out how ruthless he was in his quest for power...we started a coup de etat which failed and supported rival factions in Iraq to usurp his power but all failed...we became the biggest enemy as much as Israel and Iran in his and the Iraqis' eyes