« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

EDITOR OF REDSTATE

David Petraeus And The Koran Burnings

By: Erick Erickson (Diary)  |  September 8th, 2010 at 11:08 AM  | 

RESIZE: AAA

David Petraeus is right.

That church burning the korans in Florida will incite muslims to kill Americans, particularly American soldiers.

Why? Well, in part, because David Petraeus and the media have decided to magnify the event and guarantee it’ll be featured on the front page of every major newspaper in the Middle East.

Ramzy Kilic of the Council on American-Islamic Relations surprisingly sounds wisest here:

“He just wants to provoke the Muslim community,” he said. “Why give him attention? No one pays attention to the drunkard walking down the street.”

Let’s not, however, be fooled by the thinking that this act will incite Islamists in some special way. If Islamists did not have koran burnings to incite them to kill Americans, they would just find something else. Heck, they may go back to soldiers in Iraq using the koran for target practice.

I think it is bad form for the military to start applying pressure to influence the political activities (and this is clearly a form of political speech) of American civilians. Petraeus is essentially attributing direct responsibility for American deaths to the activities of American citizens (and I hasten to point out that he made no similar public pronouncement about the activities of antiwar demonstrators who, at least arguably, caused American deaths by giving the jihadis reason to believe they could drive us out of Iraq given enough casualties).

Ultimately, this issue is not about tolerance of Islam, but about fear of Islam.

The elite in this country have no problem with American flag burnings or Bible burnings. Heck, the American military burned a pile of Bibles lest proselytizing happen.

No Christians went out and beheaded troops or media talking heads. There were no riots in the streets of Washington, D.C. by aggrieved Christians.

Contrast that with the Islamic world. Show a cartoon of Mohammed, you die. Burn a koran, you die. Reject the faith, you die.

Ultimately, and what is too politically incorrect for the media or David Petraeus to say, is that Islam is largely incompatible with Western values when significant portions of the religion — not just the fringe — are driven to riot over koran burnings, cartoons of Mohammed, and the like.

More specifically, Petraeus’s actions teach the same lesson to both us and the Islamists that the Mohammed cartoon did: Islamists learned if they are sufficiently violent Western governments and elites will fold like a cheap suit and we learned that Islam, as practiced by large swaths of the muslim world, is a violent religion that apparently can’t operate in tandem with a civil society.

Now, all that said, I think this pastor in Florida is terribly misguided. The message of Christ is one of grace and hope. Christians are told to “go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, and teaching them to obey everything [Christ] ha[s] commanded.”

Burinng korans does not accomplish that. Neither, I am certain, does it glorify God in any way, shape, or form — particularly knowing with certainty, whether we like it or not, that this act of a Christian church showing not love, but hate, will incite people to violence.

I would encourage this pastor to stand down — but I’m not going to wring my hands over it. If not this, there’ll just be something else causing riots in the “Arab Street.” This is just today’s excuse.

Tags: , ,

COMMENTS

POSTING RULES  |  LOGIN TO COMMENT  |  REGISTER TODAY
  • texasgalt

    into a media event. The MSM loves this story.

  • jaybo

    They did it once before by reporting the false rumor that a Koran was flushed down a toilet At Gitmo. People in the Middle East died as a consequence of that ( Muslims that the media pretends to care about).

    Now the leftist media elevates a “nonstory” and risks the lives of our troops.

    Of course they will never accept the blame for this on their own but it needs to be said and repeated to The American people.

  • stephaniet

    Therefore, I say “Bad idea” and let it sit. Because, really, just like you said–the Islamic world will get its knickers in a twist over something else next week.

    Also, I really don’t mind being called an “Islamophobe.” Of course I fear that which could kill me! But I don’t let that fear consume me and turn me into an irrational human being. Instead, I keep my eyes and ears open, and openly refuse to submit.

    Hm. I should learn how to say that in Arabic. Might end up being my last words someday, though the thought does not cheer me one jot. Instead, it puts a chill in my blood.

  • JadedByPolitics

    if not this then something else! They kill US because they HATE US! there is no rhyme nor reason for their HATE and nothing WE do or do NOT do is going to make them stop, NOTHING!

    That a General in the active duty Military felt comfortable in commenting on something political within the United States says more about the lax way in which this Administration holds the Constitution then anything Obama says or does!

  • josephusmyer

    As a British law student, the Petraeus thing, like Obama’s habit of commenting on local issues (Mosque, Gates, etc.), strike me as prime examples of breaches of constitutional conventions (in the sense of customary constitutional rules that are not legally enforceable, not meetings in Philadelphia)

    Now, because the US has a written constitution, conventional rules are less important than in the UK, but they still exist. They are the intangible things where people feel an official’s action is wrong even though it is legal.

    Here, Petraeus has an official role as a General. He has no power over a church in Florida. So, when he talks about the latter in uniform and using the title “General”, he is using his official role when talking about something outside it.

    Likewise, Obama has an official role as POTUS that gives him no power over New York zoning laws or Cambridge police action. So, it’s improper for him to express his views on these at official Presidential events.

    In each case, had they emphasized that they were just talking about their private views as citizens, there would be less of a problem. But in a government of limited powers, officeholders exceed their powers when they express an “official” view on something in which they have no official business.

    Burning Qu’rans is obviously a stupid thing to do which achieves very little apart from angering Muslims, including many who have done nothing against us. That doesn’t mean that officials should say so, except in their roles as private citizens.

    See my post at
    http://justsayingthat.wordpress.com/2010/09/08/the-obama-petraeus-rule-dont-express-official-opinions-on-things-you-cant-control/

  • JSobieski

    they believe that God tells them to hate us, and that hating us is holy.

  • JadedByPolitics

    …

  • JadedByPolitics

    you can ONLY kill it!

  • briefsynopsis

    A very liberal, (yet not progressive) friend of mine is up in arms about folks discussing the potential that the President may be a Muslim.
    His thoughts were that if in fact he is a Muslim, then Americans will be mad to the point of impeachment, and by that action would upset the African Americans that support him, leading to riots and murder…. And if indeed he was born a Muslim and converted to Christianity, then every Muslim would be duty bound to end his life, especially due to the high profile position that he has attained.
    His solution was to just whistle past the grave yard and let things be. When I asked him about truth vs lies, and if he would rather suffer consequences from truth or lies, he answered “Neither”.
    My opinion is that neither is not a choice, I would rather this issue not be on the table, but I support his right to reject and revolt against what he perceives as Dhimmitude.

  • chihank

    After debating the GZ Mosque, the Left wants to focuson the Quran burning to portray the Right as a bunch of racist Muslim Phobes.

    Haley Barbour and Rick Soctt have condemned the Quran burnings. Good for them. I hope people, who opposed the GZ Mosque, would come out to oppose the Quran burnings.

  • lakecrazy

    Mosque @ Ground Zero ok because they have the Right to build it in America.
    Pastor in Fl wants to burn a book… Violence threatened, General Petraeus says it will cause Death to American Soldiers.
    The Pastor has the Right to burn the book in America. Why is there more outrage at this Pastor than the Imam in NYC?

  • http://www.capitalstreet.net expatuae

    This guy is a disgrace to his countrymen and also to Christians everywhere. A completely dishonorable, classless clown who willingly causes damage to America’s reputation so that he can get 15 minutes of fame.

    His behavior is a couple degrees more classless than the 1980′s Jackson/Sharpton school of race baiting publicity stunts, a remarkable feat in itself. Is a white trash Jerry Springer guest wannabe’s spewings Politcal Speech? Then maybe this is political speech too.

    Rather than using this clown to illustrate some flaw in Islamic culture, take a look at the media whoring hucksterism that has brought him to our attention.

    Is this not a sad commentary on American culture that this idiot has succeeded in focusing our attention on himself by way of a nonsensical stunt routines and shocking bad taste.

    The Jersey shore crowd looks like a class act in contrast.

  • http://www.capitalstreet.net expatuae

    This guy is a disgrace to his countrymen and also to Christians everywhere. A completely dishonorable, classless clown who willingly causes damage to America’s reputation so that he can get 15 minutes of fame.

    His behavior is a couple degrees more classless than the 1980′s Jackson/Sharpton school of race baiting publicity stunts, a remarkable feat in itself. Is a white trash Jerry Springer guest wannabe’s spewings Politcal Speech? Then maybe this is political speech too.

    Rather than using this clown to illustrate some flaw in Islamic culture, take a look at the media whoring hucksterism that has brought him to our attention.

    Is this not a sad commentary on American culture that this idiot has succeeded in focusing our attention on himself by way of a nonsensical stunt routines and shocking bad taste.

    The Jersey shore crowd looks like a class act in contrast.

  • fpete13527

    The Koran burning is stupid, but Gen. P’s comments were inappropriate. He should not have made them.

    Radical Islam will make up ANY thing they want to attack the U.S. and Christianity. This statement just gave CNN, MSNBC, NYT fodder to spend hours and hours on one idiot who does not represent the U. S. .

    If comments are going to be made about what incites Islam….how about seven years of stories from CNN, MSNBC and NYT that downgrade our country daily. Most all Muslims I know, and I know many, will tell you that the radical liberal American media, like CNN, MSNBC, and NYT, and their attacks on their own country, the U.S., are the biggest fuel for radical Islam to preach and demonstrate their terrorism.

    I think highly of Gen P. but it was a very bad call to make this statement. Everyone in the military already knows that burning a religious book or country flag is despicable.

    If there is anything that should be denounced, it is the State Run media such as CNN, MSNBC, and NYT, for almost ANY article they write. They have done more to damage the lives of the military than any 500 incidents such as this rogue, idiot preacher in Orlando.

  • itdiehard

    NT

  • Patricia_C

    Nor do I support the building of a Mosque two blocks from where nearly 3,000 Americans were murdered.

    Were it an American Flag to be burned, the left would be sending bus-loads of liberal activists to show their support and make the good Rev. Terry Jones as another (disposable) useful idiot as they did with Cindy Sheehan.

    One is Freedom of Religion…… the other, Freedom of Expression,,,
    BOTH are extremely bad choices. BOTH have no other purpose than to insight anger and BOTH will bring harmful consequences to innocent people who consider our Freedoms as protection of our individual God Given Rights rather than their personal Liberty to offend others.

  • liandro

    Their church ministry should be to spread God’s message and to spiritually feed their members. This Koran burning directly contradicts their ministry–instead of reaching out and ministering to Muslims and nonbelievers, it creates anger and spreads hate. I do not believe Christ would be proud, or even neutral, about this Koran burning, and neither am I. I think the down there pastor should stay focused on the ministry and the Great Commission.

    As for the secular issues, I don’t think Koran burning does anything to help our battle against extremism. It only stirs up our–and Muslim–passions further than necessary. Erick is right that there will be other excuses, but the more that is piled on the more some will become engulfed in passion and turn radical. Our strategy needs to be more then just battling radicals…we need to prevent adding to their numbers, too.

    That is why the military takes local relations so seriously, and why we don’t just go in with guns blazing. If I, as Soldier in danger, could hold my fire so as to further our mission, I think it is perfectly reasonable to expect a touch more discipline and calm from individuals like this pastor. It’s a free country with free speech, and I can’t stop him. But I can, and will, recognize the foolishness of what he is doing, and point out to others that he is just fanning the flames. It may feel good, but it is not constructive and is potentially dangerous for my brothers over there still.

  • travelguy

    Let’s see… A fringe religious leader wants to do something that offends the vast majority of people in the country. Everyone agrees that the leader has the legal right to do what he wants to do, but morally shouldn’t do it.

    Our government says we should support the religious leader – that the religious freedom principles the country was founded on demand that we support the leader.

    What am I missing?

  • Richard Mullins

    There are things out there that do more damage than a Qu’ran could ever do. I won’t tell what they are, but they are far more damaging.

  • Cheetah772

    This is off topic, but it is interesting to note that there is one example of book burning in the New Testament. In the early part of Apostolic Age, when churches were newly formed, there is one specific occasion where scores of people who became Christians came forward and burnt books (rendered as ‘curious arts’ in Acts 19:19 (KJV)). Those books were on the subject of magic. This took place in Ephesus, a place where idolatry was common and strong as it had the temple of goddess Diana, if I remember correctly. This was a voluntary act of burning their books as evidence of their new Christian lifestyle.

    Nonetheless, it’s wholly unnecessary to provoke the muslims into doing something violent. But it’s not like the religion of Islam does not encourage violence against non-believers, it does. May I remind everybody of this scriptural passage:

    Romans 12:17 Recompense to no man evil for evil. Provide things honest in the sight of all men.
    Romans 12:18 If it be possible, as much as lieth in you, live peaceably with all men.
    Romans 12:19 Dearly beloved, avenge not yourselves, but rather give place unto wrath: for it is written, Vengeance is mine; I will repay, saith the Lord.
    Romans 12:20 Therefore if thine enemy hunger, feed him; if he thirst, give him drink: for in so doing thou shalt heap coals of fire on his head.
    Romans 12:21 Be not overcome of evil, but overcome evil with good.

    All scriptural verses are taken from KJV Bible.

  • luciusacius

    This comment is way over the line. Another general, just like McChrystal and MacArthur before him that thinks he is authorized to get into the political arena in uniform. I don’t know what they teach at West Point anymore, but it used to be an ironclad rule that all officers, especially general officers, stayed out of politics. If Petraeus wanted to make this point, and it is a good one, he should have discussed it with the SecDef and let the civilian leadership make it, expressing the deep concern of senior Army officers. This just erodes the importance of keeping civillain control over the military for no good reason.

  • luciusacius

    This comment is way over the line. Another general, just like McChrystal and MacArthur before him that thinks he is authorized to get into the political arena in uniform. I don’t know what they teach at West Point anymore, but it used to be an ironclad rule that all officers, especially general officers, stayed out of politics. If Petraeus wanted to make this point, and it is a good one, he should have discussed it with the SecDef and let the civilian leadership make it, expressing the deep concern of senior Army officers. This just erodes the importance of keeping civillain control over the military for no good reason.

  • JSobieski

    its more than just convention, its the military code of conduct.

    Burning Korans is stupid, but stupid behavior can sometimes point out hypocrisy better than anything else.

    But for the GZM, I would have no sympathy for the Koran burning. However, in some ways, it is a proportionate response.

  • aesthete

    Both are poor representatives of their faiths and neither of their actions are particularly conducive to amicable relations between religions. (I would argue for a couple of reasons that the Qu’ran burnings are marginally worse than the GZM, but that’s neither here nor there.) Both groups are within their rights, but one is being hailed as a hallmark of moderate sophistication, and the other as a bunch of backwoods hicks.

  • Superheater

    If you burn a flag, that’s free expression protected by the constitution, to be tolerated without comment by elected officials (forget Army brass) other than specious drivel about free speech being designed to protect the most offensive speech.

    If you dip a Crucifix in urine, that’s art to be protected by the constitution, bot only to be tolerated without comment by elected officials (forget Army brass) other than specious drivel about free speech, but to be rewarded with the fruits of the public treasury.

    Now the idiots in Hartford, Connecticut, who have never opened their meetings with prayer and who no doubt wouldn’t (see if the ACLU brigade attacks them as fast as it did when Harrisburg, PA mayor Linda Thompson began conducting meetings with a prayer)

    But burn a Koran (which reminds me of a line from Animal House, about a “truly stupid and futile” act and there’s no free speech, no artistic expression…

    Honestly, the left and its attendent sensitivity brigades really show their illogic and inconsistency on this one.

  • edintexas

    Where the leadership engages in political activity (outside of trying to get more money for their service). I wonder if Petraeus thinks he needs to do this to firm up his standing with the Administration – or if he is just “following orders”? Either way, or some other reason, Eric is correct – Petraeus is dabbling in domestic politics, something which used to be totally beyond the pale.

  • Superheater

    Nonetheless, it?s wholly unnecessary to provoke the muslims into doing something violent.

    Unfortunately, its unnecessary because almost anything suffices as “causus belli”.

  • Superheater

    Nonetheless, it?s wholly unnecessary to provoke the muslims into doing something violent.

    Unfortunately, its unnecessary because almost anything suffices as “causus belli”.

  • aesthete

    in the spirit of that burning, nor of the various burnings in the OT, which were intended to indicate the congregation’s newfound repentance, and their turn towards righteousness. This pastor is burning them as a political statement (note that he’s making a point of burning them on 9/11): one that is needlessly antagonistic towards all Muslims, and which will be an active deterrent to spreading the gospel per the Great Commission.

    This guy has the absolute right to be a jerk about it, and to yank Muslims’ chains. I fully support the use of government to protect and not infringe on that right, and Petraeus’ statement was poorly advised. That doesn’t mean I can’t use my own speech to denounce his expression.

  • mar1n3r

    I never expected to agree with much written on this site–but in this case I agree completely. It’s the man’s right to burn Korans if he wants to, and we do best to ignore it.

    However, Obama and Petraeus and speaking to larger audiences than the U.S. alone. Their statements reassure Muslims around the world that the U.S. is not anti-Muslim. Good international politics is not the same as good domestic politics.

    Mar1n3r

  • mikerazar

    never worries that killing Americans, Christians, Jews, Hindus, Bhuddists, other Moslems, etc. or desecrating their religious places and writings will ever incite anyone else to violence?

    Just asking…

  • http://wadingacross.wordpress.com logus

    Apparently it’s already big hay overseas in the Islamic world. I don’t think the General is trying to magnify the event or to bring it back up – it’d largely died down in the media from a couple of weeks ago. Since he’s over there, he knows and sees what is big news there, in Pakistan and Afghanistan.

    But you are correct, this serves no good. The preacher and his church have a first amendment right to do this, but I think they’re putting pride and self before God. There’s just no sensible reason to do this as a Christian.

    And as for sending a message or “testing” Islam, they’ve been tested plenty enough already and found wanting. We don’t need another test which would just reiterate what we already know.

    Islam is not a religion of peace. And this church is harming their witness.

  • finaljeopardy

    I’m opposed to killing all Muslims, but I support defending our freedom and our national security interests. There are jihadis who want us dead, because they consider themselves taking up the Islamic cause in a holy war. Some of these people live in our country, and some even wield influence with certain officials in leadership positions within our government. I think Islam is evil, but I know there are patriotic Americans and allies who are Muslim and have their own beliefs that are different from what our enemies preach. We are at war with political Islam, not Muslims.

  • finaljeopardy

    It is not our President’s job or a general’s job to reassure the Islamic world that the US is “not anti-Muslim.”

  • onehutu

    Is that these guys should just go ahead an burn the Qu’ran? If so, then please just say so. Your arguments about flag burning and Piss Christ (the name of the work as I recall) are interesting but not really relevant to this issue. Can they burn the Qu’ran? Sure. Should they build a mosque (aka Muslim community center) at (near) Ground Zero? Sure. But only in the former case is it an issue of the safety of American soldiers overseas. Petraeus’ job is to accomplish the mission in Afghanistan with a minimum of casualties. It is completely within his right to say if he believes that this action risks the lives of our soldiers. Do you really want to stand on principle if it costs the life of even one soldier? KR

  • finaljeopardy

    Let’s see who the Muslims are that would attack our troops over some Koran burnings. If it weren’t for these stupid ROE, our troops could take care of themselves just fine. I think this is a disgusting comment from Petraeus that legitimizes our enemies’ propaganda.

    1. Bill Ayers was within his rights stomping on our flag.
    2. The NYT was within their rights running that image on their front page September 11, 2001.
    3. Rev. Jeremiah Wright was within his rights preaching God Damn America.
    4. Imam Faisal Abdul Rauf is within his rights preaching the same thing, but he should not be bankrolled by our State Department.
    5. Mike Bloomberg says the Ground Zero mosque builders are within their rights, and he has cleared all zoning hurdles for them, besides ignoring the project’s financing and other real estate concerns.

    Let them burn Korans then. We hear so much about our way of life, even when it means bowing to our enemies. Well, freedom works both ways.

  • drwallst

    Jesus Christ left one message in the hearts of all people; love thy neighbor. If he strikes you, turn the other cheek. If the Islamic world provokes, is infuriated, kills Americans and each other, then we extend the hand of love. We do not provoke them even more. The initial consequences will be disastrous. But even worse will be the consequences for America as a whole. People will come to view America as a country of racists, And that is exactly what will, a hundred years later, trigger another 9/11

  • http://pocketchangeproductions.net/ anotherindyfilmguy

    Which is it?

    If the church in question changes it’s stated action then we would be showing ourselves to be so in fear of violence from people who would cut our throats then we will have essentially lost our freedom to act as we please.

    The General and the MSM feeding on the story only give the other side an incentive by showing them fear.

    I doubt the pastor of the church will be harmed by extremists. I do not doubt it will be used as recruiting/motivational material for the islamists. Islam has been at war with us since before we were born, no one wants to admit it, but there it is.

    War is not pretty when it comes home, such as it did on 9/11.

    What will ignoring the fact they are at war with us 24/7?
    It will bring more Beslans and worse before we collectively get it. 9/11 was a wakeup call, most of us seem to have hit the snooze button.

  • Right_Again

    Those who oppose the ground zero mosque and oppose this idiot are at least consistent in their logic. The majority of the left appears to favor the former and oppose the latter.

    We have two situations in which people absolutely have the right to do what they are doing. But in each instance the point is to provoke anger. The ground zero mosque and the Koran burning are both intentionally antagonistic. Neither should happen, whether they have the right or not. Common sense dictates stepping back and being more sensitive to others.

    The left and the media (but I repeat myself) love both controversies.

    I strongly oppose both.

  • Superheater

    I think I made my thoughts on the efficicacy of the proposed act clear when I said “?truly stupid and futile”, or is that not clear enough for you?

    The point is about the chattering classes who expect every insult to patriotism or other religions to be disregarded, but who don’t expect the same tolerance of offense from Muslims.

    That having been said, Petraus is out of line. Domestic politics is not in the job classification of the Army, and if he’s really concerned about the potential for offense-and acting at the behest of BHO.the best thing he can do is not publicize it. You know what they say about kicking a heap of cr*p?

    Right now, my judgment would be he needs to be shown the door, In this country, the army listens to the citizenry, not the other way around. He’s a commander, not a diplomat.

  • briefsynopsis

    you are caught bringing a bible through customs?
    agree that his behavior is classless,… but would reserve “shocking bad taste” for the Pork Loin he cooks over the embers.

  • chihank

    Surprise, surprise. The FL church that wants to burn the Quran, has ties to Fred Phelps.

  • Superheater

    Nice speech, Neville.

  • Right_Again

    Nowhere in his post does Superheater express his views (for or against) the book burning. Yet you proceed to attack those unexpressed views.

    A more careful reading will reveal that he is mocking the inconsistent logic regularly employed by the left.

    Just so you don’t assign views to me, I am strongly opposed to the book burning as well as the stick-in-our-eye provocation that is the planned ground zero mosque. In each case there is legal precedence for allowing the planned action, but both the mosque builders and the book burner should really be more sensitive.

  • jannicc30

    … it’s just a book. The bible is just a book. The flag is just a piece of cloth.

    It’s a symbol. They’re not beheading people, or stoning women and children. No one is hurt by this activity, yet the Jihadis will use it to justify their killing civilians here the next time they pull it off…

    What kind of people get “offended” so easily? If someone comes up to me and calls me a dirty, worthless, dago-guinea-wop-goombah-greaseball, am I gonna cry about it?

    I don’t understand. When did everyone on the planet turn into a four year-old?

    As long as they are burning their own prperty, on their own property, move along. Nothing to see here… If you do have a problem with it, bring a tanker truck to their church and soak the books, or put out the fire.

  • constitutionalconservative

    Those who are burning the Korans or those “folding up like a cheap suits” to the Islamists.

    But I wouldn’t encourage the “Pastor” to stand down. To acknowledge his idiocy is to give him more attention than he warrants, which plays into the Islamists hands.

  • JSobieski

    You have a general in the US telling American citizens not to make a political statement within the US to protect the lives of our soldiers over seas.

    What ever happened to fighting them over there to protect our rights over here? It looks like we are being asked to shut up over here to protect lives over there.

    I think this entire incident shows why the War on Terror was poorly conceived. A Cold War framework would have been superior to what we have. Chasing folks into caves was a mistake. Better to let them operate in the open with a monthly airstrike. This would have preserved our flexibility to operate in a relatively normal manner.

    For example, we have been dancing around Iran—and for what? to take pressure off of our troups in Iraq and Afghanistant. A lot of tail wagging the dog going on.

    If the lives of our troops are going to be referenced to as hostages, seems to me we need to pull the plug.

  • Green_Lantern

    Mind your own business General.

    Burning the Quran is a sharp stick in the eye, designed purely for provocation.

    Sort of like the Ground Zero Mosque.

    The idea that we, in this country, have to be careful about what we do to avoid offending a violent, murderous, Stone Age culture on the other side of planet is ridiculous.

    That said, it will absolutely increase recruitment and embolden the enemy. But the enemy is emboldened by many things, and until we decide to just crush them with superior firepower without regard for collateral damage (which is what they have traditionally respected throughout history), or just leave, then the cycle will repeat.

    My 6 year old knows just how to push my buttons, so guess what? He pushes the hell out of them to get a reaction. If it wasn’t this guy in Florida it would be someone else.

    This “hearts and minds” crap must stop. We need to destroy the enemy and come home. If we’re not going to do that, we are risking our kids needlessly.

  • Green_Lantern

    none of those things are what put us on top. We didn’t have sit-ins to protest British taxation.

    Draw. Them. Out. Everybody already thinks we’re a country of racists. Everyone, that is, except the millions each year trying to come here for a better life.

    And the Europeans aren’t going to put their noses in the air quite so quickly this time. They’re dealing with it at home. They know.

  • JSobieski

    GZM goes away, so does this preacher,

    If he just wanted to cause insult, he wouldn’t have picked 9/11 as the date.

  • JSobieski

    GZM goes away, so does this preacher,

    If he just wanted to cause insult, he wouldn’t have picked 9/11 as the date.

  • JSobieski

    However, if the guy backs down at this point, the message will be just as negative as if he doesn’t.

    Make lemonade out of the lemons and let the nutjobs reveal themselves.

  • JSobieski

    However, if the guy backs down at this point, the message will be just as negative as if he doesn’t.

    Make lemonade out of the lemons and let the nutjobs reveal themselves.

  • emaberk

    If we take the possibility of militarily engaging directly with Iran off the table and take a “ColdWar” approach much as we have, we end up with Iran that much closer to nuclear weapons.

  • JSobieski

    and fight when you need to.

    A big reason why we have not bombed Iran to take out their nuclear capability is that we don’t want Iran to retaliate against our troups in local theaters (i.e. Iraq, Afghanistan) or destabilize our nation building activities.

    Classic tail wagging the dog, just like this Koran burning incident. We have to give in over here because our troups are over there?!?!?!?

  • JSobieski

    and fight when you need to.

    A big reason why we have not bombed Iran to take out their nuclear capability is that we don’t want Iran to retaliate against our troups in local theaters (i.e. Iraq, Afghanistan) or destabilize our nation building activities.

    Classic tail wagging the dog, just like this Koran burning incident. We have to give in over here because our troups are over there?!?!?!?

  • JSobieski

    and they definitely remember Reagan.

  • cactusjack

    still willing to give General P one last benefit of the doubt about why he said this. Until advised b y good intel otherwise, I am assuming what the general did here was a “Colonel West” thing. You know, the colonel who (now running for Congress I think) put his career on the line (and it was required of him by the spineless politicians in DC) and used *creative interrogation* on a terrorist captive to procure information which did save the lives of some of his men. Paraphrasing, he said I’ll do anything for the lives of my men, and he really did. Maybe Petraeus was just doing something whatevr the cost, he thought might actually save a few lives of those wonderful soldiers and Marines on the line. I hope. One other takeaway from this, it looks like things may be tougher in Afghanistan for the good guys, than I thoguht.

  • realskinny

    The Iranians have been providing weapons, training and combatants to kill American troops in Iraq and Afghanistan for several years. They keep their activities just low enough the appeasers running our operation can pretend they don’t see it. American commanders said the Iranians were responsible for most American casualties in 2007. Since that time most roadside bombs are made in Iran

    The reason we haven’t bombed the enrichment sites is we haven’t had the cojones for a new theater of operations. This might make some sense except once the Mullahs have the Bomb, a war(with nukes) is guaranteed within 5 years. This will be the choice: Abject Surrender anywhere they push or War—and they will use their nukes.

    Ego driven men bubbling with ambition have sought the power and honors that come with leading the nation. But when called upon to make the hard and dangerous decisions, their moral and physical cowardice gets the better of them. Once the cheering stops, they shrink from the unpleasant but necessary actions for which they were placed in power. Though several of his predecessors put off the problem, Obama will bear the major responsibility for what promises to be a very expensive lesson.

  • jdw4america

    When freakin’ Castro is more worried about a nuclear-powered Iran – and criticizing their anti-Jewish ravings more than our narcissist-in-chief OR our democrat politicians, it’s time to build the shelters in our backyards again.

    These maniacs are going to build themselves an arsenal of nukes, fire the first one into Jerusalem, and dare the U.S. to do something about it. And who doubts for a second that barry and company, professional cowards all, will do anything but cave in? And the MSM will undoubtedly praise his compassion, his tolerance and his genius for avoiding doing anything about this daily-growing threat.

    Erick is absolutely right about whether this Koran burning makes a difference to our enemies – no matter what we do or don’t do will change their desire to see us all dead. As long as the talking heads continue to claim that “they are just like us,” instead attending to the historical and on-going realities of what our enemies are really like, we live with the very real possibility of nuclear war.

  • aesthete

    if they are rational actors is that they will use the bomb to bully other countries in the region, such as the Sauds and the other Arabian Peninsula states, into acceding to their wishes, while dealing more indirectly with our proxies in the region (Israel, Jordan and Kuwait). Using the bomb to play power politics in the region, and to assure potential investors of their stability and rise as a regional power, would be the sound move.

    However, there’s always the chance that they are not rational actors and that they will simply cause as much damage as possible with the bomb before they’re bombed back to the stone age. That alternative seems more unlikely to me than the first, but is still on the periphery of options.

    At any rate, I agree with JSob: it is foolish to assume that countries with no successful democratic experiences (and a raft of social and political problems with that paradigm) will take to it readily and without incident. Afghanistan will never be a democracy under current conditions, and will remain a failed state. For crying out loud, this is a country whose GDP is overwhelmingly comprised of foreign aid (about 30%, last I checked), bribery (10% GDP) and opium trade (slightly more than 1/3rd of GDP), harbors a largely illiterate (80-90% illiteracy) and unemployed (40% unemployment) populace, and which is riddled with God knows how many ethnicities, tribes, and factions with their own grievances, all vying for supremacy. Corruption in the highly centralized Afghan government (which in theory governs all of Afghanistan, but really only presides over Kabul and a few other urban centers in any realistic sense) is pervasive, and faith in the government and in the Afghan national police is at subterranean lows: so much so, that it allowed the Taliban to do relatively well in the ballot box. This is a country that, even now, doesn’t come close to respecting human rights, having sentenced women to horrible fates and enacted capital punishment for Muslim apostates.

    And even if we could salvage Afghan democracy, what do we gain? While I wish Afghanistan the best of luck in democratization, why should Americans die to preserve democracy in a backwater border region with little in the way of natural resources or human capital as an ally, in a very tense part of the world? If you think having Israel, a prosperous, westernized country, as an ally is difficult (and it is, though it’s worth the cost), just imagine having to mediate conflicts between Afghanistan and Pakistan, India, China, and Iran, all of which are (or will be) nuclear states! Having Afghanistan as an ally actually weakens us as a nation, when seen in that light. The abject foolishness and naivette in assuming that Afghanistan can even approach being a good investment would be laughable if it weren’t for those currently dying, Afghan and American alike.

    It is far preferable to leave the Afghan people to their fate and to use predator drones and special forces to deal with national security concerns, than to maintain the status quo. Not only is OEF untenable as currently constructed, going back to the Cold War mentality will leave our troops and supply lines free to engage other threats, if necessary (such as Iran). Looking at the cost/benefit analysis of our nation-building foray into Iraq is disappointing, as well, and should serve as a lesson that nation building overseas is just as damaging and absurd as nation building here in the USA is.

  • dajeeps

    It might be that I just heard about it in reverse order of which it actually ocurred, but there was no mention of Petraeus at first blush, at least I don’t recall it.

    I don’t agree with the plan in any event. It goes against the grain of who we are as a nation and what we are spiritually. Christ commanded us to spread the gospel and a pile burning Korans is going to send them ALL the other way with hearts hardened, likely to be lost to Him forever. Some need to remebember the quote, “Forgive them, Father, for they know not what they do” and rethink what they are planning.

  • aesthete

    Given that the US is a secular democracy entrusted with protecting Christian, Buddhist, and atheist citizens alike, it tells us nothing about what the US should do.

  • JadedByPolitics

    did I or ANYONE else say all?………hmmm?………ummmmm NO! I do believe that “insanity” was used, now if you think ALL Muslims are insane well that is your problem now isn’t it? move along nothing to see here except a person who is in their own head making large assumptions.

  • tomato

    I think Gen. Petraeus should concentrate on winning the war by killing the enemy rather than monitoring a citizen’s activities. The Pastor T. Jones is an obscure, unknown, genuine crackpot. He lives in his own little world. Let him disappear in it.

    Are we so afraid of Islam that we must elevate this man? If he were to write Koran with crayon on blank pieces of paper would it appease anyone? No, it wouldn’t and we all know it.

    To me, he’s burning paper – that’s it. I don’t condone what he’s doing, neither would I participate. P.T Jones is granted his infamy. Is he a symbol of intolerance towards Islam or our fear of it.

  • tomato

    The enemy is emboldened when our woman vote and walk around uncovered in make up, jewelry, and speak too loud in public.

    The enemy is emboldened when “honor killings” are frowned by law.

    The enemy is emboldened when pork is on a menu or available in grocery stores.

    The enemy is emboldened when any of us buy with credit.

    The enemy is emboldened each day the flag of Israel flies over unscortched earth.

    Then we get to our culture covering, abortions, gay-marriage, interracial dating, interfaith dating.

    And I’m asked to care about what someone feels when they’re out to kill me and take my liberties?

  • http://www.libertytreehugger.com reverelth

    instead of the Quran burning, and Petraeus said that American opposition to the mosque, too, would endanger American troops, would that invalidate the weeks and months that the majority of Americans have stood against it?

    How many more appendages of government does Barack Obama need to turn into his political arms?

  • http://www.libertytreehugger.com reverelth

    If Jones burns the Quran and Islamists retaliate and blow the church or the town to smithereens, does it validate the premise that the buring was wrongheaded, or the premise that Islamists are vindictive, incorrigibly violent, and not compatible with the western concept of free speech?

  • skorrent1

    I’ve never seen a more ahistoric sentence than your title.

    No “nation building” during the “Cold War”? Only throughout most of Europe. You have heard of the Marshall Plan? “Building” the nation of Israel was in that context. Attempting to build “nations” from the colonies throughout Africa and the Middle East was the scene of much Co;d War struggle. Rebuilding Japan and building the nations of Philippines, Taiwan and South Korea were part of the Cold War. Don’t they teach history anymore?

  • Superheater

    I drafted this in MS word and failed to pick up the initial paragraph..

    I meant to include the following:

    “This act reminds me of the grand final in “Animal House”, where there’s a scene where the Deltas are up against an imminent end and decide top go out with a bang. They decide on a “stupid and futile” act. This “pastor” is engaging in a similarly stupid and futile act.

  • JSobieski

    That is my point. I make it in hindsight (it became self evident around 2006 or so), but it is true.

    I share your frustration, all of the tail wagging the dog stuff is tragic.

  • JSobieski

    We only used ground troups to pacify a hostile population a couple of times. Technically speaking, Germany and Japan happened during WWII. South Korea had a population that welcomed us. Vietnam was a bit more questionable.

    In the other places you mention, we supported governments—we did not build countries up from the ground up. Maybe a CIA assassination here or there, but that is different.

    I stand corrected.

    Its one thing to help a friend rebuild when they aren’t shooting at you. Its another thing to create a country from the ground up when they are. The closest thing to nation building in that sense was Vietnam, but Vietnam was not rebuilt from the bottom up–its just that the pro-US human infrastructure degraded over time.

  • bobmontgomery

    …who also made some bizarre comment about “reconciling’ with the Taliban. What about whupping their butts and saving the lives of a whole bunch of Afghan girls? Is Petraeus saying he cannot protect his forces because of what somebody in Florida says? These generals and admirals and service chiefs, with the exception of the Marines, seem to be so PC and combat-abhorrent these days that it makes you wonder. They even considered giving medals to soldiers in Afghanistan for NOT ENGAGING THE ENEMY. When you understand that most of these people matriculated since Viet Nam, when “Duty, Honor, Country” began to be snickered at, and sometimes spat upon, you consider that Patton, Washington, Perry, et al would not have recognized these guys. When George Casey said that the loss of diversity would be worse than the loss of those thirteen warriors, he should have been fired on the spot. That was a despicable remark coming from a General Officer of the United States.

  • minncon

    Seriously, I asked a friend tonight what she thought about the “pastor in Florida who is going to burn the Koran on 9/11?” She didn’t quite hear me, and a few seconds after a quizzical look came across her face, she said, “OH, you said KORAN!”

    I told her that initially it WAS about crayons, but the thing didn’t get the traction the pastor had hoped for, so he went with the Islamic holy book instead.

    Perhaps that is the pastor’s plan – to pull a bait-and-switch at the last minute and immolate a 64 Jumbo Box instead!

  • aesthete

    Initially, yes, but the military occupation was extremely traumatic for the S Koreans. We essentially installed their same Japanese oppressors in their same lofty posts, let them do their thing, and brutally put down the various revolts that occurred as a result. That, and the penchant for Korea as a political and social entity to indulge in exaggerated xenophobia, explain why they dislike Americans so much. Ironically, the Korean War and the increased attention that Korea got as a result made things better for the Koreans, because it made incidents of American-Japanese collusion much rarer after the ceasefire.

    There are several reasons why “nation-building” in S Korea turned out so well, but most of them aren’t applicable to our current situation: there, we were talking about an extremely homogeneous population with little interest in dealing with the outside world. In addition, there was significant selection bias involved; most of those who went to S Korea were already at least somewhat sympathetic to capitalism; those who preferred communism had already gone to the North.

    As for the rest (“the rest” being Japan, Europe, and the Pacific islanders), we basically tossed a wad of cash their way, rather than building government institutions from the ground up. This was so blatantly the case, that it required some glossing over of the complicity of civilian populations of the Axis powers so that we wouldn’t have to create a country from scratch.

  • http://www.examiner.com/x-1597-Charlotte-Law--Politics-Examiner Mike gamecock DeVine
  • http://xmmlbchat.blogspot.com katesmith

    The Ground Zero mosque Imam apparently agrees with Petraeus that before we speak we must always consider that a Muslim might kill us as a result. Imam Rauf was on Larry King show with Soledad Wed. night. He said that moving the mosque away from Ground Zero would be a national security issue for America. From the CNN report, “Moving the project to another location would strengthen Islamist radicals’ ability to recruit followers and will likely increase violence against Americans, the imam said.” So the heretofore ‘peaceful’ Imam representing a ‘peaceful’ religion is threatening the US with violence (and likely death) in retaliation for certain speech. The trips to the middle east we gave him to get them to like us didn’t work. Or, Rauf is incapable of such a job, as he openly states that mere discourse is equal to deliberate physical violence and harm.

  • davesinsanantonio

    depending on whether we became Sunni or Shiite, or some other branch of Islam, some other Muslims would still be trying to kill us off! Islam is a religion of peace only if you are subservient to their brand of Islam. And even if we are their same brand of Islam they would still be looking down on us and not treating us as equals because we had to be conquered into it.
    Let us stop pussyfooting around Islam and fully be Americans, and whatever our individual religion is, and stop trying to please everyone else. If we are doing what is right, everything else will work out eventually.

  • davesinsanantonio
  • davesinsanantonio

    if other nutjobs give it to them. If we ignore them, they will soon go away, because they are not getting the attention they crave. So, in this case we can blame the idiot who does it and the media idiots who give him any attention.

  • davesinsanantonio

    encourage Muslims to kill us. But, so are his critics correct–building the mosque will encourage Muslims to kill us. That is because Muslims believe killing infidels is the right thing to do if you cannot get them to convert to Islam. So, we need to stop worrying about the Muslims and start doing what is right for us. The first thing is to secure our borders against infiltrating terrorists, because they believe it is their religious duty to kill us.
    It does not matter if a majority of Muslims, and even a majority of their imams, do not believe or teach this. What matters is those who will be terrorists, and the imams they follow, believe it. And, we will never be able to change their minds about that. So, we need to do what is right and protect ourselves from them, and stop worrying about offending their sensibilities!

  • blaze422

    German View of Islam
    This is by far the best explanation of the Muslim terrorist situation I have ever read. His references to past history are accurate and clear. Not long, easy to understand, and well worth the read. The author of this email is said to be Dr. Emanuel Tanay, a well-known and well-respected psychiatrist.

    A German’s View on Islam

    A man, whose family was German aristocracy prior to World War II owned a number of large industries and estates. When asked how many German people were true Nazis, the answer he gave can guide our attitude toward fanaticism. ‘Very few people were true Nazis,’ he said, ‘but many enjoyed the return of German pride, and many more were too busy to care. I was one of those who just thought the Nazis were a bunch of fools. So, the majority just sat back and let it all happen. Then, before we knew it, they owned us, and we had lost control, and the end of the world had come. My family lost everything. I ended up in a concentration camp and the Allies destroyed my factories.’

    We are told again and again by ‘experts’ and ‘talking heads’ that Islam is the religion of peace and that the vast majority of Muslims just want to live in peace. Although this unqualified assertion may be true, it is entirely irrelevant. It is meaningless fluff, meant to make us feel better, and meant to somehow diminish the spectre of fanatics rampaging across the globe in the name of Islam.

    The fact is that the fanatics rule Islam at this moment in history. It is the fanatics who march. It is the fanatics who wage any one of 50 shooting wars worldwide. It is the fanatics who systematically slaughter Christian or tribal groups throughout Africa and are gradually taking over the entire continent in an Islamic wave. It is the fanatics who bomb, behead, murder, or honour-kill. It is the fanatics who take over mosque after mosque. It is the fanatics who zealously spread the stoning and hanging of rape victims and homosexuals. It is the fanatics who teach their young to kill and to become suicide bombers.

    The hard, quantifiable fact is that the peaceful majority, the ‘silent majority,’ is cowed and extraneous.

    Communist Russia was comprised of Russians who just wanted to live in peace, yet the Russian Communists were responsible for the murder of about 20 million people. The peaceful majority were irrelevant. China ‘s huge population was peaceful as well, but Chinese Communists managed to kill a staggering 70 million people.

    The average Japanese individual prior to World War II was not a warmongering sadist. Yet, Japan murdered and slaughtered its way across South East Asia in an orgy of killing that included the systematic murder of 12 million Chinese civilians; most killed by sword, shovel, and bayonet.

    And who can forget Rwanda , which collapsed into butchery. Could it not be said that the majority of Rwandans were ‘peace loving’?

    History lessons are often incredibly simple and blunt, yet for all our powers of reason, we often miss the most basic and uncomplicated of points:

    Peace-loving Muslims have been made irrelevant by their silence.

    Peace-loving Muslims will become our enemy if they don’t speak up, because like my friend from Germany , they will awaken one day and find that the fanatics own them, and the end of their world will have begun.

    Peace-loving Germans, Japanese, Chinese, Russians, Rwandans, Serbs, Afghans, Iraqis, Palestinians, Somalis, Nigerians, Algerians, and many others have died because the peaceful majority did not speak up until it was too late. As for us who watch it all unfold, we must pay attention to the only group that counts–the fanatics who threaten our way of life.

    Lastly, anyone who doubts that the issue is serious is contributing to the passiveness that allows the problems to expand. So, extend yourself a bit and send this on before it’s too late.

  • melatr7

    that Petraeus’ comments WERE run by the Sec of Def AND Obama…

    Perhaps encouraged by them, and maybe even INSTIGATED by them.

  • lakecrazy

    The Imam gives a threat to USA/NYC if the Cordoba House (GZ Mosque) is not built and yet we worry what they will think of us. They never worry what we will think of them..I wonder why?http://www.cnn.com/video/?/video/bestoftv/2010/09/08/lkl.imam.mosque.cnn

  • Brian Hibbert

    Those that aren’t don’t keep their jobs long.

  • etexfisherman48

    Although well done I rebuke you for your deceptive efforts you put in your column. You have allowed yourself to be appeased as have so many others. This religion is straight out hell and you better get this understanding. This is not a religion of peach it is a religion that by their own book demands forcing the entire world to be Muslim.

    Everything you said was good until you cowered at the end. Did you not hear what the preacher said was his reason for burning the Quran? It was to illustrate how blind the American public is because of the brainwashing of the media and government to the real threat facing Americans to the goals of Islam. His point is to get people to see they are not even close to being prepared for what Obama and the globalist have planned for America by instituting “Sharia Law” in America. That was the point and you should be all over this.

    Instead of cowering down to the barbarians we should all stand up and tell the Muslims their religion is incompatible with our constitution that doesn’t allow for theocracy and if they don’t like take their rag head families and go back to where they came from. We don’t accept their use of force to scare us into being Muslims. As Reagan said, the only thing these people understand is the use of force. Take a good look at Europe and don’t let your pea brain ever forget how far along Islam is to taking over the last form of gentile world power before the rapture of the church.

  • clariancall

    The threat from Muslims is real. It has been for centuries. There is no question about it. Given the extent of the war on terror, is enough to show that this cannot be taken lightly. There may be moderate Muslims who are not speaking out as they should. There are three reasons for this: they are in the minority; they fear for their lives if they do or they want to see which way the wind will blow before making a commitment. All of these reasons only strengthen the idea that we are in a war in which one side or the other must win. There is no co-existence; there is not quarter. Wake up before you are looking East five times a day!!!

  • mriggio

    but this was a bit much! You’d think he has his hands full as it is, without commenting on Stateside political happenings. Isn’t their threat level pretty much maxed out, burning or not?

    Cheers!

  • etexfisherman48

    You are the one showing your ignorance. How do you know God didn’t tell him to do this? Extreme Actions require extreme response. You are on the verge of wearing burbas, and saying brainwashing prayers five time a day whether you know it or not . Open your sleepy little eyes and look around you. If you are a woman I would like to be there when your husband beats the stuffings out of you with no charges laid at his feet because that is allowed in Islam. I would laugh at you so hard my belly would probably burst. Europe is implementing “Sharia Law” as I write and the U.S. is next if ignorant people like you don’t wake up and see what is happening. Some of you people are so stupid its scary. Didn’t Jesus rebuke and call the deceivers in his day names that were forcing false teaching on the populace. Wake up Dummies before it is too late.

  • etexfisherman48

    Yea I reckon he was because he took a whip into the building the theocrats were in which means politicians and clergy and beat the you know what out them and ran them out of his house of prayer. Yep he’s crazy about theocracy!

  • ihateliberals

    this asinine administration and their inept abilities. If Petraeus had kept his mouth shut most of the world would not even have know about the planned burning.

    Muslims already have all the reasons for killing anyone that is not of Islam. It is in their sick little minds that they have a right and a duty to kill. I heard someone the other day use the term peaceful Muslim. There is no such Muslim. there are only Muslims that have not been called to serve yet.

  • scullymj

    It was easy to tolerate Mohammadanism when it was over in some Middle East sand pile but now it is here and using our rules against us. If Nazism or Communism had masqueraded as a monotheistic religion, would we have not confronted and fought it? Why is islam any different? One of the world’s “great” religions? Besides having a billion plus followers, what exactly has islam contributed positively to the greater good of mankind? I am sick and tired of people saying it is a religion of “peace”, that it has been hijacked by radicals and most moslems are moderate. Anyone saying this has not read the Koran, the Hadiths or the Sira. Islam is extreme and Bin Laden & Company practice it just as Mohammed demanded. The “moderate” moslems simply do not wish to get their hands dirty at this moment in time but that does not mean that in the privacy of their homes they do not agree with the radicals doing the bloody work. But when they are 3% or 5% of our population, you will hear their true voice. The German people were silent too when the Brownshirts beat up Jews. By not acting, they allowed the Nazis to come to power and they burned in the inferno of wartime Germany with the radical Nazis. If “moderate” moslems wish to continue believing in a 1400 year old fairy tale, fine, but they had better clean their own house of these radicals or burn in the fire with them.

  • emaberk

    In what way? Containment and the domino theory in regards to Communism was an active component to foreign policy and it put troops on the ground in Vietnam, there is nothing “questionable” about the Vietnam War.

  • JSobieski

    ou will see that the word “questionable” refers to whether the phrase “nation building” is applicable to Vietnam.

    On one extreme is a situation like Iraq, where we build a government from the ground up with boots on the ground.

    On the other extreme is France, where the population was in favor of us, and we just provided police and money.

    The discussion was about “nation building” and the Cold War. It was suggested that the Cold War was all about nation building, and in a fiscal restorative sense, 1945-50 was all about that. However, I was referring to use of ground troups in hostile territory without an invitation from some autonomous legitimate authority (Korea for example) to build a government from the ground up, not merely to protect/assist an existing government.

    Vietnam I identified as questionable because the government was not as strong as Korea’s and the population was not as pro-US either.

    Vietnam fell somewhere between Iraq and Korea, and thus I said it was “questionable” whether Vietnam involved nation building as I define it.

    Of course, you could have just read the previous comments. If you are going to comment on a nested comment, best to read the preceding comments first.

  • aesthete

    in such a discussion, as we never really got the chance to see how it developed. There also wasn’t nation-building in the sense that new cultural, political and social institutions were being designed of whole cloth as in Afghanistan/Iraq; South Vietnam was essentially the remnant of French Indochina turned anti-communist police totalitarian state, and was run accordingly. Though the US certainly intervened in its domestic politics, it did not involve itself overmuch in the creation or changing of institutions for the country.

  • JSobieski

    My point was that the Cold War framework would be better suited for the War on Terror (I never liked that description, but . ..). By that I meant, surgical military activities, with beefed up propaganda/media operations, looking for genuine allies–ie no nation building in the middle of an insurgency.

    Then someone said something about how the Marshall Plan was nation building. Maybe true, but not in the way I was using the term.

    Then someone said something about Vietnam being a justified war, which I never disputed, but only referenced in talking about “nation building in the Cold War” (see prior comment).

    Your point about Vietnam not being nation building supports the premise that the Cold War was not a time of nation building. But we are so far off the original track that I am befuddled.

  • jimmydxyz

    Scullymj, I have been saying this all along that muslims are using our constitutional laws against us and to their advantage, vis-a-vis “freedom of religion” and others! I agree that there are no peaceful or moderate muslims. Their religion requires them to answer the call to jihad and if it comes to that, most will. The only way for them to avoid answering that call is to renounce islam for Christianity and that exposes them to the likelihood of being murdered as an infidel.
    We are in a war, a war against radical leaders in DC as well as against islam and anyone who doubts that, well I have this bridge in Arizona…..
    Wake up America, the assault against the constitution and our properous way of life is real and proceeding at an ever increasing rapid pace. I expect that the lame duck congress will attempt to pass legislation for more job killing policy. Watch for it!!

  • drwallst

    We all know that America is the least racist country on Earth. But do the lunatics of Al-Qaeda know that, even if we show them we aren’t? Give the Muslim World propaganda; lie to them, ban media coverage of the burning. Anything to simultaneously keep freedom of speech and stop the lunatic extremists from killing Americans

  • emaberk

    is a bit misunderstood and is causing the confusion about your comments.

    Fundamentally how the Cold War “framework” that existed between two global super powers with nuclear weapons relates to asymmetrical warfare and non-state terrorist actors is apples and oranges so when you conflate the Cold War and simply nation building it doesn’t jive.

    But I do agree that this is way off topic now, interesting but off topic.

  • JSobieski

    actual military was secondary.

    Propaganda–radio free Europe broadcasting about liberty and freedom

    Calling out our adversaries for their ideology. We identified international communism as a global threat.

    Stood up for dissidents. Reagan was great at this. Use the bully pulpit and stick up for people in prison, being stoned to death, etc.

    Work through proxies whenever possible.

    Leverage military power in concentrated bursts, a la Libya bombing.

    Force people to chose sides, but avoid putting troups on the ground.

    Basically, imagine how Reagan would approach the Jihad issue, and do that.

  • dambama

    What is likely to help recruit more terrorists in Irfukistan?

    A. A nutcase pastor of 30 in Bumfuk Nowhere who wants to burn Korans/Q’uroans/Quo’rans?

    Or:

    B. Oor soldiers blowing the crap out of their fellow-future-suicide-bomber-brothers in Irfukistan?

  • http://impudent.edublogs.org/ kyle8

    I have seen it as Quaddaffi, Kadaffi, and even Ghaddaffi.
    Why can’t they make up their damn minds?

  • simplyright4me

    I don’t agree with burning korans and I don’t believe in burning Bibles more. But it is the phylosophy of the Muslims to raise hell and kill over the slightest indifference. We are fighting the last crusade against people that believe in the Anti Christ ( Muhamed). The very thought of killing someone over the destruction of any book is ridiculous to any Christian, yet to a Muslim they will kill over a drawing of someone that nobody even knows what he looked like. Our troops lost their Bibles when they got to the Middle East and yes they were burned. I do believe that our government had a lot to do with this. I would say that Jones has made a point and has proven what Islam is in reality. Remember 911, we were not bothering anyone yet they killed some of us. They need no reason for theirs is a religion of hate that celebrates death, we celebrate life and the freedom to enjoy it. They praise the hereafter with a never ending orgy, we praise God for our life and how much better it will be. Sooner or later this war is going to bring us to an end if we continue to cow down to every whim of those who love to hate us. Jones has as much right to burn the koran as Raulf has to build the Mosque in our hallowed ground, yet neither should do it because it is not right.

  • budparker

    Strange as it may seem, murderous fanatics need very little to nudge them into action. Americans, and other civilized cultures, have a true conundrum; Balancing survival instinct against our ideological beliefs that all people have an inherent right to freedom of religion. Islam has a long history of complete and absolute intolerance for anything not Islamic. If you don?t believe that your life is at risk. The difference between being right and being dead right is one wrong decision away.

  • finaljeopardy

    “Agreed, except there is a ‘reason’ why they hate us they believe that God tells them to hate us, and that hating us is holy.”

  • shorty

    It’s bad state of affairs but the above post is credible; especially the part about “Sharia Law”. We already have a jihadist Muslim in the US Congress, Karim “Keith Eddison” Muhammed, from MN. and a radical communist from Mexico, Raul Grigalva…AND he is the leader of the Progressive Caucus!!!

    We are quickly being invaded by jihadists building thousands of mosques, recruiting, training, and who knows what else goes on inside those mosques…ie: building suicide bombs or manufacture of chemical WD’s??? Who really knows since noone enters these mosques except Muslims? [especially our law enforcement even if ist is suspected.

    But most likely, they are attempting to invade this country, attempting in become a dominate force in our Congress and implement Sharia law…Which Obama is assisting by refusing to securing our borders to put a halt to all illegals.

    We must stop the insanity of the OBAMA, REID/ PELOSI MACHINE for all the commonally talked about reasons (economy, Obamacare, cap & tax etc,) and the above included!!!

    Socialism, communism or Sharia law are all unacceptable in America. We should pay attention to what’s happening in all states and donate to the individual “conservative” candidate of our choice after researching their history, especially voting history. More Rhinos not needed!!!

  • greyhawk

    This morning on Red State, they were talking about how the Radical Muslims through Violence and Threats of Violence have Cowed Us Down Once Again. This is the same thing they have done in France, Denmark, Germany, England and other European nations, and now they are bringing Their Radical Threats of Violence and Acts of Violence To America. The following are my comments to this: Thanks–Jerome

    “So folks, welcome to the Kinder, Gentler America since we elected a president who is revered by Radical Muslims the world over, revered by Communist Dicatators the world over, revered by the Russians because he took down the nuclear shield that was in place in Eastern Europe as a reminder to the Empire Building Russians that they better not dare invade their neighbors.

    Now, we are going to go the way of France and England and other European Nations where they have allowed Muslims and Their Sharia Laws to supplant their civil laws. Where Rule is By Violence or Threats of Violence.
    Is it not pathetic that if you threaten to punch your next door neighbor in the nose that your neighbor can go and file a charge against you and you will be arrested for making terroristic threats, but if you are a Terrorist Religious Cult, you can Threaten To Murder American Citizens, and our government Does Absolutely Nothing, and in fact appeases the Radical Muslims.

    The Muslims have basically laid down the gauntlet that says: “If any American or Anybody Else dare Offend Us, We Will Terrorize You.” And, what is really sickening about this is the fact that our own government and mainstream media is on the side of the Radical Muslims, and will use all the power of the U.S. Govenrnment and All the Power Of The Mainstream Media to Squash Anybody or Any Group that dares challenge them.

    Welcome Folks to the New United Fascist States Of America. Fascism defined means “No opposition allowed.” This, my friends, is what our government has just told us. Also, look at what they are doing to Arizona and other States Who Dare Defend the Legitimate Laws of the Land.

    Better wake up folks and rally Conservative Voters on November 2, 2010. At the rate the Obama-Pelosi Regime Dictatorship is moving, there may never be any elections ever again. If they will not tolerate basic First Amendment Rights of Speech and Expression, how long do you think they will tolertate the rest of the Bill of Rights and the U.S. Constitution, which one of the Communists in the Congress, Al Cee Hastings recently said when he was asked about the constitutionality of the Socialized Medicine Bill which they call Obama Care, Hastings replied: “What, the Constitution?? WE, The U.S. Congress do not care anything about the Constituton.” Al Cee Hastings was speaking for All of Congress and the President of the USA.

    If you care about your freedoms and you do care about the Constitution, you need to get Out The Vote and Take America Back, and Totally Ignore the Mainstream Media, because they have just shown us how far they will go to Aid and Abet Our Enemies while Squashing A U.S. Citizen who dares express his Displeasure with Islam and With This Government and the Obama Regime. That little preacher in Florida had 50 members. Who would have ever heard of this guy had it not Been for The Mainstream Media and Our own Government Who Made it An International Event. Whose Side Is Our Government On?? Whose Side is our Mainstream Media on??? If you have been paying any attention at all at what is going on in America, you already know the answer to this question. Thanks—Jerome Ennis

  • notthenews

    is absolutely correct, but, it will incite NO MORE so than they are already incited, which therefore means that 1. the burning of the Korans is nothing more than what it is, freedom of speech, and 2. that the General staff in DC is required to support, back and defend the administration, regardless of who that administration is. It was no different under Marshall than it is today.
    France faced the same problems a few years ago and they knuckled under. Look where they are today, trying to rid themselves of a problem that has magnified itself ten fold.
    Erick is right, “I would encourage this pastor to stand down ? but I?m not going to wring my hands over it. If not this, there?ll just be something else causing riots in the ?Arab Street.? This is just today?s excuse.” I concur completely.