• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

What strategy is best to deal with Islam? (POLL)

What policy is best to deal with Islam?

  • Nothing. Islam is not a threat.

  • Kill'em all and let Allah sort 'em out.

  • More Bush-style regime change

  • Containment

  • Engagement (like we do with China despite human rights abuses)

Results are only viewable after voting.
I

Infohawk

Lifer
I'm a fan of aggressive containment. It worked for the USSR. Sure Islam is different but ultimately to harm the West, Muslims have to have to actually cross borders and oceans. We need to let muslims have dominion over their backwards corner of the world. The downside is we might have access to less oil, but that is something we have to come to terms with anyway. "We" fight muslims in proxy wars in border areas like Chechnya, Bosnia-Herz and sub-saharan Africa to let them know they can't expand without a fight.

I think the policy of engagement we have right now is unlikely to work and involves greater risk. Like with the USSR, there is more likely to be change if we let them collapse / fester from within as opposed to our current policy of intervention.
 
ppatin said:
Keep them out of the US.
Click to expand...

Yep. It's pretty much that simple. You think that's messed up? Apparently the alternative is to invade their countries and make them collateral damage. I think THAT is messed up. We used to ask (Maybe still do) if people were a member of communist party before we allowed them in. Not that hard.
 
What exactly are you trying to Contain? The Soviet Union had a Military to match or possibly even exceed(certainly Europe, numerically the US in some cases) the West. "Islam" has?

You Engage them as you can't Contain an Idea.
 
US Border Control: Are you a muslim?
Muslim: Nope
US Border Control: Proceed.


This cannot be a serious post.
 
sandorski said:
What exactly are you trying to Contain? The Soviet Union had a Military to match or possibly even exceed(certainly Europe, numerically the US in some cases) the West. "Islam" has?

You Engage them as you can't Contain an Idea.
Click to expand...

People and weapons. Very simple.
 
MrEgo said:
US Border Control: Are you a muslim?
Muslim: Nope
US Border Control: Proceed.


This cannot be a serious post.
Click to expand...

You are being purposefully obtuse. The US already has rules about people originating from certain countries. Expand this. If you are from Saudi Arabia, you don't get to come in. Is any system perfect? Of course not.
 
Going into Afghanistan (which was because we were going after OBL) and then into Iraq (because we wanted to foment political change in the Arab countries of the ME) does not make our policy of dealing with Islam (actually, not Islam, but radical Islam) one of engagement. If we had a real policy of "engagement" we'd be in Iran, Lebanon, Syria, Sudan, and probably a few other Islamic countries right now. We aren't. You distort what the US policy actually is.

btw, you sure seem hung up on the whole Islam thing.

There is no good policy or one standard policy to adopt where religious fanatics are concerned. The only policy we need to adopt is one of flexibility. Sometimes containment is demanded, sometimes engagement is required, and occassionally even direct confrontation. All options must be kept open and dealt with on a case-by-case basis because one size does not fit all and imagining that we should adopt one single policy is being a political simpleton, at best.
 
I'd say engagement on the level of dealing with China. Mostly that just means not going overboard with the political correctness and allowing relative morality to take hold. Sure, you can have the laws you want in your country, but don't expect us to say they're fine when we think they're barbaric or outdated. We should never be afraid to speak out about something we feel is wrong.

Otherwise you seem to think Islam is a real threat to the world. Just FYI from someone who knows a lot more about it than you: It's not. The odd successful terrorist aside, the vast majority of people who consider themselves Muslims also like capitalism, Hollywood and football. They're people like us. There's no giant lurking shadow to be afraid of.
 
Infohawk said:
You are being purposefully obtuse. The US already has rules about people originating from certain countries. Expand this. If you are from Saudi Arabia, you don't get to come in. Is any system perfect? Of course not.
Click to expand...

Sorry, if we can't even keep illegal Mexicans out, forget about it.
 
Infohawk said:
You are being purposefully obtuse. The US already has rules about people originating from certain countries. Expand this. If you are from Saudi Arabia, you don't get to come in. Is any system perfect? Of course not.
Click to expand...

What's your plan for dealing with Muslims already here or Muslims that are not arabs that simply lie about their faith?

This thread is dumb, but here I am posting in it. Shame on me.
 
If you go after Islam you are hunting in your backyard. You might want to nail Catholicism too for their pedophilia, that's destroyed 1000's of innocent lives.
 
There is but one absolute truth and it covers everybody. Nobody can resist the Will of God because all opposition to His will is exactly how He decided. If Islam is the Will of God then nothing can contain it or stop it but if it is not it can't possibly win. Now that one and only absolute truth can be know by an individual then only that individual will know that he knows, except if there are others like him. But that one and only truth, if it is Love as I suspect it is, then it applies only to the individual who loves. He will love no matter what the world believes and they won't be able to stop him if it is the Will of God that we love.

No harm can come to a good person, in this life or the next. It is only the ego that has religion and the Lover has died to his ego.
 
I didnt vote coz nothing reflects my personal opinion, which is, leave them be until they break the law, or there is evidence they will break the law. Like we do for all citizens. At least within the borders of the USA. Now, our foreign policy with islamic countries is another story.
 
blackangst1 said:
I didnt vote coz nothing reflects my personal opinion, which is, leave them be until they break the law, or there is evidence they will break the law. Like we do for all citizens. At least within the borders of the USA. Now, our foreign policy with islamic countries is another story.
Click to expand...

Mostly this.

I refuse to believe the OP was being serious, it is hard to fathom someone being so stupid.
 
If nothing else I voted the minority yllus position, even if I think all options are deeply flawed. To some extent this thread seems based on the assumption that its the USA v Islam, and in the end only one will be left standing. Bad odds when we talk 1.4 billion Muslims and only 320 million Americans.

But truth be told all those us's Vs. them groups will still be there, and in a better world both the us's and the them's will change with changing times, until we ALL realize its more about the desirability of having social diversity and the tolerance of the same, and at the same time we can ALL start to realize we do better by realizing our commonalities rather than being stuck in only our differences.

Do I as a human male, say the world would be a better place if all females got that sex change operation and became as Human males like as possible?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top