Nothing is more annoying to me than hearing the media talking heads, Democrats and the elites and politicians on the Republican side too constantly saying we have to get Muslims to like us and the USA. What the hell is that? What about Muslims and Muslim countries trying to get us to like them? The Muslim countries in the ME could kick ISIS ass anytime they wanted to. They have overwhelming militaries and military equipment. Instead, they have no reason to because WE protect THEM from ISIS, Taliban and the other radicals. WE protect them from their enemies at our expense - as their people curse us and chant DEATH TO AMERICA - and polls show a majority of Muslims in the ME support terrorism and do hate us. We have no obligation to prove they should like US. It's the other way around. IF we stopped protecting those theocratic dictators across the ME - who steal their national wealth from their own populations and run their countries like police states complete with torture chambers - including our so-called allies - their own population would revolt and destroy them. Foreign Muslim leaders and countries have FAR more reason to try to make us like them. Radicals and terrorists can't destroy our country or overthrown our government killing all the leaders and wealthy in the USA. But they sure could do so of those Muslim countries. It is TIME FOR THE USA to end this INSANE foreign policy of begging foreign Muslims to like us. No more going along with the Obama crap of apologizing to everyone and begging the world to like us. Most country's leaders and populations have FAR more reasons why they should be trying to get us to like them. And those foreign Muslims and Muslim theocratic thug dictators are doing a (*)(*)(*)(*) poor job of it.
Nice thread, I am curious to hear answers from both sides on this. Are there any "Bill Maher" Democrats? The wave of anti-PC is just getting stronger and stronger. We have taken a lot of the left social issues so that has taken that argiuemet off the board unless you are as far right as Ted Cruz. I personally put that and Muslims in the ME together. For yyears now the Democats ave heald this incredibly authorian stance with social issues. "You dont agree with me? Well then your a racist/sexist/fascist" or whatever else. The country is so sick of it. Little bit of a tangent but as to the OP more specifically, I completely agree. I would like to see incredibly stringent immigration laws and then leave the ME to Putin. Simple reason WE CANT AFFORD IT
how many Muslim countries have invaded the US, or staged a military coup to uninstall our elected leader with a dictator? Democrats? last time I checked Bush bombed 4 different Muslim countries, Obama has bombed 7
We can't fix the mistakes of the past with appeasement. In fact, I'll be more than willing to admit that we might not be able to "fix" the Middle East at all. Its been a bloodbath for 10,000 years and it won't change just because 'Merica decided to snap its fingers. That said, I already told you I prefer reformation of the Middle East. But we don't have the spine. Since we don't have the spine, Liberals have got to accept protectionism, defining our borders and making it clear who we accept and who we won't accept. Leave the ME to die out on its own. This was actually a Liberal position during the 2008 campaign. What CHANGED? What made Liberals say "We have to accept them and the ME?" Is it that Bush's no longer President? Were Liberals simply taking an Anti-bush stance, and not a Liberal stance?
We don't need to make appeasements, but we could simply stop getting involved and spending our money and lives on problems that aren't ours to begin with. You want to protect our borders, fine.. we don't need military bases in over 130 countries to protect our borders
Agreed, I do believe we're too spread out. A lot of it is from peace treaties and pacts. Putting us in a similar position to Austria in WWI.(The Austrians didn't want to get involved, but treaties pretty much involved them and well all of Europe.) The difference for America is how kick-ass strong we are, and we made sure to pretty much cover almost every base(as you point out.) But I do want to bring our troops back home, to do what's their original assignment: To protect the US Mainland. There won't be any border patrol problems with more of our men back at the front.
Trouble is, the Western(ized) World depends on gas/oil. Cut that dependency into half, and one does not necessarily have to kow-tow to, e.g., the Wahhabi of Saudi-Arabia anymore. Simply discriminating all Muslims generates even more violence on both sides.
I’m not clear what you mean by this? Who is saying there is a need to get specifically Muslims to like you (rather than just people/nations in general)? Are you talking about individual Muslims or Muslim nations and governments? Maybe what you’re hearing is actually just responses to the opposite – people who dislike Muslims just because they’re Muslim, regardless of what they individually do or say. If Americans had the same attitudes towards people and nations that (they think) are Muslim as they do towards people and nations that (they think) aren’t, religious labels would be largely irrelevant and this could be a question about getting on with fellow human beings rather than “them”.
Agreed! US Independence and US Growth are the keys. Now, which party supports the subsidies overseas and is generally lairess-faire economically? It's the Democrats. If the Housing Crisis didn't happen, there would've never been regulations against Fannie and Freddie, since the same Democrats stalwarted against it. If you want US Nationalism, the party will never be the Democrats. They're more wedded than the GOP to big donors. That's why the easy switch to Hillary Clinton.
I don't care whether people in the middle east like us or not. However, it would be useful to us if they don't hate us. Then MAYBE some of them would stop committing acts of terrorism against us. So, we should stop giving them reason to hate us, for example, we should stop invading their countries and meddling in their affairs, arming one faction that we like today, while bombing them tomorrow, and then doing it the other way around again 10 years down the road. The neocons, however, have a very different idea. Of course, if you think they hate us for our freedom, you won't be able to approach the issue with rationality.
I don't think the media is telling anybody that they have to like Muslims. That's pretty ridiculous on its face. I think what people are saying is that it's a bad idea to alienate anybody because all that does is set up barriers and tensions between people, which is true. Lets be honest here, many of us don't like certain groups, and there are others that are cool with everybody. You don't have to like anybody that you don't want to, the only thing I would say is that you have a solid reason for not liking an entire group of people based on something one or a million of them have done because remember, whatever group you're talking about, there's millions upon millions of them, so to dislike the entire lot based on a small percentage from that lot (to me) is just plain stupid. But...............that's how I see things, I like everybody and I don't have a problem with anybody.
Heh. ""Bill Maher" Democrats" I assume you mean liberals who hate all of the right things, like Christians, gun owners, and rural people, but also are worried about Islam? There are a few, but I think it's a minority position on the left.
All we need is one major breakthrough with solar or battery technology and we could kiss the ME good bye and let them all eat each other alive when the money dries up. Then the realization kicks in that their entire existence is based on being lucky enough to to exist on top of a valuable resource bubbling in the ground and not providing anything else of value to this world.
Obama, Democrats, most Republican politicians incessantly tell us that we NEED foreign Muslims to support us so any criticism of Islam is wrong. You can criticize Christianity all you want, but if you criticize the religion of Islam then you are responsible for terrorism and ISIS. It is an outrageous claim.
We could tell the ME to go to hell now, because we could buy their oil regardless anyway. It would only be a matter of whether we buy it directly, buy it indirectly, or buy it from elsewhere than the ME. Oil literally is a worldwide liquid commodity.
Interesting one dimensional perspective on America's role and strategy in global foreign policy. Not many people around here played RISK when they were kids, it seems. TRADE is the lifeblood of civilization. GROWTH and CONSUMPTION are the principles upon which the western economy is based and in particular the number 1 consumer economy on the planet, America. Start writing off whole regions that contain "strategic resources" and a few hundred million people is certainly not conducive to trade or growth or consumption. Start reneging on commitments and pretty soon nobody wants to do business with you. Of course if one wishes to dumb down foreign policy to a single dimension like "they don't like us so we should pick up our ball and go home", its no wonder that clowns like trump have so much traction.
