Rumsfeld's on Bravery

"Mortimer Schnerd, RN" wrote in message
.com...
B2431 wrote:
Saddam paid the families of suicide bombers, promised to go down
fighting and called on others to fight to the very end. He caved. If
he was really smart he would have made the U.S. soldiers kill him
thereby making him a martyr.


That reminds me of another brave Middle Eastern leader, Yasser Arafat.
After
whining about the Israelis outside his door and how much he wanted to die
and
become a martyr, he refused to open the door. I'm sure the Israelis would
have
been happy to oblige him.

These guys are always braver than hell, particularly when they're talking
about
someone else dying. No sacrifice is too great. Insha'h Allah.

Brings to mind another who when discussing the threat of insurgents to his
troops said "Bring them on", but when he went to the same location he slunk
in and out under cover of darkness like a thief.

weary wrote:

Brings to mind another who when discussing the threat of insurgents to his
troops said "Bring them on", but when he went to the same location he slunk
in and out under cover of darkness like a thief.

And don't forget Roosevelt sneaking off to meet with Churchill in
the north Atlantic?

Those cowardly American Presidents!


SMH

On Thu, 18 Dec 2003 03:30:35 GMT, "Steven P. McNicoll" wrote:


"Alan Minyard" wrote in message
.. .

And you know this how?? From Israeli polls? I am not saying that you are
incorrect, I am simply saying that I, and I believe you, do not really
know.


I base it on adherence to the Camp David Accords by Egypt and Israel. There
has been peace between Egypt and Israel since Egyptians decided to live in
peace alongside Israel. When Palestinians decide they can live in peace
alongside Israel there will be a peaceful Palestine alongside Israel.

Dream on, Israel has violated every accord signed with the Palestinians
(which is not to say that the Palestinians have not). Illegal Israeli
settlements are routinely encouraged by the GOI.

Al Minyard

On Thu, 18 Dec 2003 04:08:07 GMT, "Kevin Brooks" wrote:


"Alan Minyard" wrote in message
.. .
On Wed, 17 Dec 2003 16:05:30 GMT, "Kevin Brooks"
wrote:


"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote in message
ink.net...

"Kevin Brooks" wrote in message
t...

There may also be something wrong with those who take the actions and
rants
of the radical element and ascribe them to the majority.


I don't see much condemnation of the radical element from the majority.

Maybe you are suffering a bit of myopia, then. I guess you consider all
of
the Muslims in Turkey to be radicals? We have garnered the support of a
number of predominantly Muslim nations during our recent fight against
the
Taliban and AQ--Turkmenistan, Kyrgyzstan, Kazakhstan, Pakistan, and
Turkey
all contributed to that fight, as did IIRC Jordan with non-combat
support.
I'd think that qualifies as "condemnation" of the radicals, IMO. Not to
mention that lady who just picked up the Nobel Peace Prize.

Brooks

You mean the "lady" who viciously attacked the US and the west during
her acceptance rant (oops, speech)??

Hardly a peaceful person. The prize was an anti-American statement
on the part of the "committee".

I missed that. Regardless, there are plenty of Muslims who have not joined
the radical bandwagon, and as pointed out above there are quite a few Muslim
nations that have supported us over the last couple of years--add Qatar and
Kuwait to that list, as I apparently left them out. Turning this into a "us
versus Islam-at-large" confrontation does little good, and is in fact
incorrect.

Brooks


Al Minyard

You also left out Bahrain :-) I agree that one cannot characterize an entire
nation/religeon/etc based on the actions of a few, I was merely commenting
on the idiocy of the Nobel committee. Radicals, no matter what their "cause"
do not deserve "peace" prizes.

Al Minyard

On Thu, 18 Dec 2003 05:34:38 GMT, "Kevin Brooks" wrote:


"Gene Storey" wrote in message
news:%Y9Eb.2174$6l1.184@okepread03...
"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote
"Alan Minyard" wrote

And you know this how?? From Israeli polls? I am not saying that you
are
incorrect, I am simply saying that I, and I believe you, do not really
know.


I base it on adherence to the Camp David Accords by Egypt and Israel.
There
has been peace between Egypt and Israel since Egyptians decided to live
in
peace alongside Israel. When Palestinians decide they can live in peace
alongside Israel there will be a peaceful Palestine alongside Israel.

Actually they don't. U.S. Forces are deployed in the Sinai between the
two.
A few years ago they all got killed in a plane crash in Newfoundland on a
cheap two-bit airline because MAC didn't have enough crews to support
the worldwide deployments.

No, they (and it was not "all of them"--the MNF-Sinai is a battalion sized
force, and you are not fitting a battalion on a single DC-8) died in the
crash of that charter DC-8 at Gander because that is the way we routinely
move large numbers of troops--the AMC cargo haulers are better utilized
carrying the heavy boxes and rolling stock. And what's more, had you asked
any of those troops who unfortunately were onboard that aircraft which they
would prefer to make a trans-Atlantic redeployment on, a charter airliner or
a C-141, I guarandamntee you it would have been the former. Having done a
few long range deployments by both methods of conveyance, I'd have agreed
with them.

Brooks

Roger that, the drinks served on military a/c do not even come close to
what the civvies serve :-))

Al Minyard

"Stephen Harding" wrote in message
...
weary wrote:

Brings to mind another who when discussing the threat of insurgents to
his
troops said "Bring them on", but when he went to the same location he
slunk
in and out under cover of darkness like a thief.

And don't forget Roosevelt sneaking off to meet with Churchill in
the north Atlantic?

Those cowardly American Presidents!

Dont't try to put words in my mouth. I wasn't generalising, I was being
specific.


SMH

"weary" wrote in message
...

"Stephen Harding" wrote in message
...
weary wrote:

Brings to mind another who when discussing the threat of insurgents to
his
troops said "Bring them on", but when he went to the same location he
slunk
in and out under cover of darkness like a thief.

And don't forget Roosevelt sneaking off to meet with Churchill in
the north Atlantic?

Those cowardly American Presidents!

Dont't try to put words in my mouth. I wasn't generalising, I was being
specific.

Specifically off-target, you mean...

Brooks



SMH

Kevin Brooks wrote:
"George Z. Bush" wrote in message
...

"John Keeney" wrote in message
...

"C Knowles" wrote in message
om...
What's amazing is that some in the Arab world are amazed he surrendered.
They must have really bought his line of BS.

The tendency to buy in to the glorious myths of individuals is
pretty common amongst Muslims and Arabs in particular
it would seem.
Hmm, probably the case for most dictatorially governed people,
what they are raised to.

When you stop and think about it, might it be nothing more than an
expression of an inferiority complex of an entire culture? Can you think of
a Muslim/Arab who made a recent contribution in the world of science?

How about the 1999 Nobel Prize winner in chemistry, Dr. Ahmed Zewail? And he
is the SECOND Muslim Laureate in the chemistry field from the 1990's.

Medicine? Technology?

Two Nobel Laureates in medicine (1960 and 1998).

The historical Islamic impact on those fields cannot be slighted. Muslim
doctors were at one time significantly advanced over their European
counterparts, and some of their advances were adopted by western
practitioners during the middle ages. They also made some significant
headway in the area of mathematics (life would be hard without "zero"),
astronomy, etc., and IIRC they were one of the early users of gunpowder,
well before Europeans stumbled upon it.

Music?

Music is dependent upon the listener's ear--there are plenty of contemporary
Islamic musicians who are all the rage to their listeners. You really need
to be careful here--unless you consider Michael Jackson a wonderful example
of our own musical artists?

Art?

Salman Rushdie ring a bell? And FYI, there is that pesky Nobel thing
again...yep, two Muslim Nobel Laureates in Literature (1957 and 1988). As to
other artists, that would be another field you might wish to stay clear
of--a couple of the more notable western artists of late are that whacko who
enjoys draping fabric over vast distances of countryside and the other bozo
who has been traveling around the world taking photos of naked people laying
in streets, etc. Neither exactly make me want to beat my chest with pride in
their accomplishments.

Do you know of anyone of them by name who's accomplished anything
in recent years that's made life better, easier or more comfortable in any
way for people as a whole?

What, you don't consider a Nobel good enough? Three Nobels in the Peace
category, including the 2003 Peace Prize, won by Shirin Ebadi of Iran.


Other than Queen Noor of Jordan, who's an American by birth and who happens
to be a bright, compassionate and gracious lady, not to mention beautiful,
the only thing that comes to mind by way of answer is a bunch of old,
radical Muslim farts sitting around a hovel somewhere teaching a dumb kid
how to commit suicide by blowing up a car bomb, or maybe just himself or
herself. How sad that the only thing they seem able to claim credit for
doing well is destruction.

Perhaps they just delude themselves to keep from having to look at themselves
realistically.

Perhaps you are just not looking in the right places. Nine Nobel Laureates
since 1957 have been Muslims. Your whole post here is rather nauseating in
terms of its bigoted tone.

You're probably right.....I haven't been looking in the right places. OTOH,
nine Muslim Nobel Laureates during the last almost half century is a totally
unimpressive accomplishment coming from a people who make up roughly one third
of the human beings on earth. You can look for more if that's what it takes to
keep your nausea under control, but I think I can rest my case on the numbers
you furnished. You can call it bigoted if you wish, but I prefer to think of it
as being painfully realistic.

George Z.

On Fri, 19 Dec 2003 11:14:00 GMT, "weary" wrote:


"Stephen Harding" wrote in message
...
weary wrote:

Brings to mind another who when discussing the threat of insurgents to
his
troops said "Bring them on", but when he went to the same location he
slunk
in and out under cover of darkness like a thief.

And don't forget Roosevelt sneaking off to meet with Churchill in
the north Atlantic?

Those cowardly American Presidents!

Dont't try to put words in my mouth. I wasn't generalising, I was being
specific.


SMH


No, you were being an idiot, and you still are.

Al Minyard

"Kevin Brooks" wrote in message
t...

Maybe you are suffering a bit of myopia, then.


No, that's not it.



I guess you consider all of the Muslims in Turkey to be radicals?


Nope.



We have garnered the support of a
number of predominantly Muslim nations during our recent fight against the
Taliban and AQ--Turkmenistan, Kyrgyzstan, Kazakhstan, Pakistan, and Turkey
all contributed to that fight, as did IIRC Jordan with non-combat support.
I'd think that qualifies as "condemnation" of the radicals, IMO. Not to
mention that lady who just picked up the Nobel Peace Prize.


I said I don't see much condemnation of the radical element from the
majority, I didn't say I saw none.