Osborne Russel
12-19-2005, 04:24 PM
The President says terrorists are hijcking Islam to fulfill their real i.e. un-Islamic aims.
I see a global terrorist movement that exploits Islam in the service of radical political aims — a vision in which books are burned, and women are oppressed, and all dissent is crushed. Terrorist operatives conduct their campaign of murder with a set of declared and specific goals — to demoralize free nations to drive us out of the Middle East to spread an empire of fear across that region and to wage a perpetual war against America and our friends. These terrorists view the world as a giant battlefield and they seek to attack us wherever they can. This has attracted al-Qaida to Iraq, where they are attempting to frighten and intimidate America into a policy of retreat. I can't figure out how many interest groups he's referring to here:
1. People who hate freedom, oppress women, burn books, hate the U.S., etc. not because they are muslim fundamentalists, but because they are terrorists.
2. People who hate freedom, oppress women, hate the U.S., etc. because they are muslim fundamentalists, and have been this way for decades, but they are being exploited by terrorists who want exactly the same things but aren't muslim fundamentalists, they're only pretending to be, by holding precisely the same views and advocating precisely the same strategies.
3. Al Qaeda, which was attracted by "this" (which?) to Iraq.
Do we have to defeat all of these enemies? Let me guess, the fundamentalists are off the hook in view of their close religious affiliations to us, "people of the book" and all. The terrorists will have to go, of course, because they aren't fundamentalists, even if they say they are, and we can tell -- but how? Anyway, Al Qaeda has to go because we know they are terrorists because they say, but not fundamentalists, even if they say so.
How'm I doing? I'm trying to grasp the plan for victory.
I see a global terrorist movement that exploits Islam in the service of radical political aims — a vision in which books are burned, and women are oppressed, and all dissent is crushed. Terrorist operatives conduct their campaign of murder with a set of declared and specific goals — to demoralize free nations to drive us out of the Middle East to spread an empire of fear across that region and to wage a perpetual war against America and our friends. These terrorists view the world as a giant battlefield and they seek to attack us wherever they can. This has attracted al-Qaida to Iraq, where they are attempting to frighten and intimidate America into a policy of retreat. I can't figure out how many interest groups he's referring to here:
1. People who hate freedom, oppress women, burn books, hate the U.S., etc. not because they are muslim fundamentalists, but because they are terrorists.
2. People who hate freedom, oppress women, hate the U.S., etc. because they are muslim fundamentalists, and have been this way for decades, but they are being exploited by terrorists who want exactly the same things but aren't muslim fundamentalists, they're only pretending to be, by holding precisely the same views and advocating precisely the same strategies.
3. Al Qaeda, which was attracted by "this" (which?) to Iraq.
Do we have to defeat all of these enemies? Let me guess, the fundamentalists are off the hook in view of their close religious affiliations to us, "people of the book" and all. The terrorists will have to go, of course, because they aren't fundamentalists, even if they say they are, and we can tell -- but how? Anyway, Al Qaeda has to go because we know they are terrorists because they say, but not fundamentalists, even if they say so.
How'm I doing? I'm trying to grasp the plan for victory.