Foreign policy analyst Norman Bailey claims that all across the Middle East Shia and Sunni Muslims are fighting each other. They still are battling in Iraq, even after the U.S. spent $1 trillion dollars and ten years trying to impose America's version of government on the people there. The truth is that there is nothing the U.S. can do to stop the religious war in Syria. Baily says: "The only entities the Sunni and Shi’a Arabs hate more than Israel and The United States, are each other."
http://www.worldtribune.com/2013/04/29/ … t-threats/
Best stand back and let them knock seven bells out of one another. Interfering will only bring them back together to use you (or us) as target material. They don't mix here either, so we finish up with double the number of mosques dotted around big UK cities. Don't forget all these other Islamic minorities who also have their own meeting places. If push came to shove they'd all like to get together and biff us.
Now, I get the UKIP political party thing. I did not understand it, alancaster149, until you put it into perspective--a circling of the U.K. cities with mosques and with people unwilling to assimilate. In the U.S. it is a different story. There are 11 million undocumented immigrants but by the second generation they're running for public office!
What about the radicalised idiots who bombed the Boston Marathon. The story was they were keen on US women, and then the older one starts wanting his girlfriend to wear a burka(?) Did the younger brother go along with it because he was weak-minded, or did he think it might be 'fun'? The mother, speaking from Chechnya maintains they were 'framed'. The father had plans to go to the US but thought better of it and claims he stayed away 'for health reasons'.
The Indians and West Indians/Africans here do a reasonable job assimilating, but the likes of Abu Qatada want to establish Sharia Law here and hang everyone who 'insults' islam. We have 'honour' killings as well, where worshippers of one brand of Islam don't want their daughters going out with worshippers from another sect and 'bump them off'. We have several different grades of Pakistani immigrants, the 'burka' bunch, with just a slit to look out of, the headscarf bunch who don't mind showing their faces, and the liberals who walk about like the Indians and do a better job of assimilating. The Bangladeshis are grouped similarly but all seem to live in the same part of the big cities, swamping schools and changing the rules because they're the majority. I could go on all day...
Did they bomb the boston marathon or was it the FBI? It is too easy to put the blame on amateurs that was said that triggered the bombs with a toy remote control. The problem is that cookers act like a Faraday cage therefore it would be impossible.
It is also too easy to claim the FBI did it (is there any killing in the US you don't blame on them?) without providing a shred of evidence.
Of the two (too easy) answers, I'll take the one with evidence. And without fake "science". (Remove once handle screw and dangle an insulated wire out the hole it was in - there goes the Faraday cage).
The FBI knew them and they did nothing? It doesn't trouble you? And by the way, which evidence do you have besides the lies of the mainstream media?
If I have to remove everything where's the point of using a cooker?
I prefer they do nothing until they have absolute evidence that will stand up in court. Not a guess (like "we know the FBI did it because US government is evil"). You may feel differently, that authorities should jail people based on nothing more than suspicion.
Your proof that the media is lying, please?
Somehow, I never would have thought of a single handle screw (there are typically two) as "everything". It still leaves the other screw, the handle, the lid and the regulator on top. You could, I guess, even use that hole and would have done nothing but tip the cooker upside down and allowed the regulator to fall off.
Why is it that you never think of these things? Because it ruins a perfectly good conspiracy theory?
I think terrorism is a new, worldwide meme--a behavior that's communicated through cultural outlets and the news. So I think the Boston Boys picked it up in Dagestan and thought it would be cool to try in the U.S.
Calls for sharia law just would not make it in America. Women are too free. So you don't even hear about it. Rather, you hear Sheryl Sandberg, the COO at Facebook. telling women to "Lean In." She means that you lean into your future in business not lean away from it. So much advice from a self-made billionaire.
The united states should not get involved. Not unless their 'private war' threatens the united states. The US, contrary to some peoples opinion, is NOT the worlds policeman!
Thanks for the comment.
I keep thinking that the U.S. should not be the world's policeman. And now that you bring it up--that unless there is a threat, stay out--I'm now thinking that the debate on these things is generally about the threat, and that debate is often exaggerated. You know, if the current regime did not use their chemical weapons against the U.S., why would the next regime in Syria use them against the U.S.?
We're in the same boat, you and us. Afghanistan is our 'ring' at the moment and the fight's more like Thai Boxing. I daresay there are hawks in or around Whitehall itching to get to grips with Assad. Syria was France's responsibility up to WWII, maybe they should send in their Foreign Legion on this, after all the 'Legion' is a sort of UN in itself!
Brilliant idea--sending in France's Foreign Legion. I've been following the Guardian, off and on, but I did not realize Whitehall was taking this war in Syria as serious as some of the reactionary members of the U.S. Congress--who want war now, immediately.
Who said that there were religious wars in the middle east? Isn't it a propaganda to justify our intervention? A propaganda justifying our loot?
It's already starting, the rationalization.
It's not that Syria is a direct threat to the US.
But to our Mideast BFF Israel.
Which has already struck on Syria.
Obviously the US now HAS to rush in behind Israel in support.
I mean, that's obvious.
Maybe you have to be an Israel Firster (which I am not) to get it.
If I'm wrong acribing motives,
I'd be very, very interested in hearing from anyone who is hawking war because they care
about the Syrian people.
Senator McCain pretended to care about the Syrians at first. Now he has become a fear monger,, saying that if the U.S. don't stop 'em there they'll bring their poison gas to the U.S. But that's the same nonsense we heard about Saddam Hussein and the non-existent nukes.
But the idea of religious wars....10,000 protestors on May 1 in Indonesia fighting the police, wanting the secular government to impose Islamic Law.
Then there's the daily suicide bombings in Iraq, Sunni Moslems bombing the Iraqi Shiite Moslem government buildings and police.
Then there's Al Qaeda in Yemen battling the moderate Islamic government.
And there's religious battles all over Pakistan, with regular bombings in Karachi.
by Daniel J. Neumann 7 years ago
Should the United States enter into a new civil war?My answer is no. It'll bring suffering to America (the whole continent). Explain your stance.
by VC L Veasey 22 months ago
Should States Be Allowed To Secede From The Union of the United States Of America?Which Could Effectively End The Union That So Many died during the Civil War to maintain.
by Don W 36 hours ago
"I have been sitting here looking in the federal code trying to find collusion as a crime . . . Collusion is not a crime".(Rudy Giuliani )(1)The federal law code says:"whoever. . . being a public official or person selected to be a public official, directly or indirectly, corruptly...
by Rhonda D Johnson 4 months ago
What did the US use for collateral when we borrowed money from other countries?We know that the US government has borrowed billions of dollars from China, Japan and other countries. But what did we use for collateral? I've been told that the United States is actually a...
by Deforest 5 years ago
Given it was not proven that the Syrian government was involved in the Ghouta attack, why would they have to dismantle their chemical arsenal whereas few miles away a greater danger is shadowing the whole middle east (Israel's arsenal) without measures to be taken? In a futuristic peaceful vision...
by bigeddie06385 6 years ago
Would the United States have become involved in the Viet Nam War if Richard Nixon had won in 1960?Do you think that Nixon's peace-loving Quaker beliefs would have had any influence on his decision, (should a president's religious beliefs influence his decisions?) or would he have done the...
Copyright © 2018 HubPages Inc. and respective owners. Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners. HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc. HubPages and Hubbers (authors) may earn revenue on this page based on affiliate relationships and advertisements with partners including Amazon, Google, and others.
|HubPages Device ID||This is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.|
|Login||This is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.|
|HubPages Traffic Pixel||This is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.|
|Remarketing Pixels||We may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.|
|Conversion Tracking Pixels||We may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.|