Petraeus decries mass Quran burning

Politics International Politics
1

I’m sure that coming from Obama, this would be taken as proof that he’s soft on terror, a closet Muslim, and kicker of puppies. But this time it’s Petraeus. His statement seems reasonable, to me. But it falls far short of the ‘people should be free to do whatever they wish, so long as no direct harm is done’ school of thought.

[quote=“Wall Street Journal”]The top U.S. commander in Afghanistan said the planned burning of Qurans on Sept. 11 by a small Florida church could put the lives of American troops in danger and damage the war effort.

Gen. David Petraeus said the Taliban would exploit the demonstration for propaganda purposes, drumming up anger toward the U.S. and making it harder for allied troops to carry out their mission of protecting Afghan civilians.

“It could endanger troops and it could endanger the overall effort,” Gen. Petraeus said in an interview. “It is precisely the kind of action the Taliban uses and could cause significant problems. Not just here, but everywhere in the world we are engaged with the Islamic community.”

Hundreds of Afghans attended a demonstration in Kabul on Monday to protest the plans of Florida pastor Terry Jones, who has said he will burn copies of Islam’s holy book to mark the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks. Afghan protesters chanted “death to America,” and speakers called on the U.S. to withdraw its troops. Some protesters threw rocks at a passing military convoy.

Military officials fear the protests will likely spread to other Afghan cities, especially if the event is broadcast or ends up on Internet video.

Mr. Jones, head of the 50-member Dove World Outreach Center in Gainesville, Fla., said in a statement that “We understand the General’s concerns. We are sure that his concerns are legitimate.” Nonetheless, he added, “We must send a clear message to the radical element of Islam. We will no longer be controlled and dominated by their fears and threats.”[/quote]

I particularly like that bit about no longer being dominated by fears and threats. Because burning someone’s scripture is such a characteristically positive, self-motivated act.

2

Seriously…WTF is wrong with people?

I am so tired of these self-righteous right wing nut job hacks.

HOW does burning the Quran send a targeted message to extremists? So to stop terrorism…this guy plans to incite terrorists (and millions of non-terrorist Muslims)? It’s like poking a bear with a stick to show it you aren’t afraid of it…you know, send that bear a message :loco: .

They ought to arrest the guy for inciting terrorism-you shouldn’t be allowed to burn the Quran any more than you should be allowed to yell fire in a movie theater.

3

I think it should be allowed, but it’s not the right thing to do.

Oddly, the same logic applies as with the mosque in NY. Only that’s a community center, should do a lot of outreach, and its headed by a mensch who travels the Arab world on behalf of the State Dept. It’ll likely do a world of good, and ought to proceed. These burners looks like a storefront church, although it’s got a nice name: Dove World Outreach Center. Not likely these Quran hawks will contribute anything positive.

4

I think it should be allowed too…if they want to do it, drop their asses in the middle of Kabul. No reason that US Military should be fighting to protect free speech from people who engage in such behavior from a safe distance. Let them get ripped apart if they believe it so strongly. US troops should be protecting those who know how to balance rights and responsibilities.

5

Plus, it’s my understanding that these self-righteous right wing nut job hacks claim to be a church, claim to be followers of Jesus. I guess they missed a few parts of the Bible.

6

Well, they have their reasons. 10 of them in fact

7

Wow, those people are true loons. Believe as they do or burn for eternity

[quote]
One
The Koran teaches that Jesus Christ, the Crucified, Risen Son of God, King of Kings and Lord of Lords was NOT the Son of God, nor was he crucified (a well documented historical fact that ONLY Islam denies). This teaching removes the possibility of salvation and eternal life in heaven for all Islam’s believers. They face eternal damnation in hell if they do not repent.
Eight
A Muslim does not have the right to change his religion. Apostasy is punishable by death. [/quote]
I particularly like these two…so if you are Muslim, you cannot change your religion or you will be killed. If you do not believe as these Christians do, you will face eternal damnation in hell…I choose choice B, Muslim…Guess I just prefer death over eternal damnation…
:astonished:

8

Plus, it’s my understanding that these self-righteous right wing nut job hacks claim to be a church, claim to be followers of Jesus. I guess they missed a few parts of the Bible.[/quote]

And what parts would that be? I’m currently reading the Bible for the first time, by chapter. (should be done in 2044 :laughing: ) And I’m still “stuck” on how David could go around killing everyone but get in trouble for sleeping with another man’s wife. Uh hello God…

9

Plus, it’s my understanding that these self-righteous right wing nut job hacks claim to be a church, claim to be followers of Jesus. I guess they missed a few parts of the Bible.[/quote]

They didn’t miss the part about smiting your enemies and crushing non-believers, that’s for damn sure.

10

Plus, it’s my understanding that these self-righteous right wing nut job hacks claim to be a church, claim to be followers of Jesus. I guess they missed a few parts of the Bible.[/quote]

And what parts would that be? I’m currently reading the Bible for the first time, by chapter. (should be done in 2044 :laughing: ) And I’m still “stuck” on how David could go around killing everyone but get in trouble for sleeping with another man’s wife. Uh hello God…[/quote]

[quote] “You have heard that it was said, “An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth”. But I say to you, do not resist an evildoer. If anyone strikes you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also.” (Matthew 5:38–39, NRSV)

This saying of Jesus is frequently interpreted as criticism of the Old Testament teaching, and often taken as implying that “an eye for an eye” encourages excessive vengeance rather than an attempting to limit it. It was one of the points of ‘fulfilment or destruction’ of the Hebrew law which the Church father St. Augustine already discussed in his Contra Faustum, Book XIX.[4][/quote]-- Wikipedia

A lot of confusion out there. This just might be our cue to cut our losses and get out of Afghanistan because we no longer even remotely have the moral authority to win over the hearts and minds of the people there in some nation-building exercise. Just leave some clandestine special ops groups to do what we should have done in the first place and hunt down and capture Osama bin Laden and Mohamed Omar and bring them to trial.

11

Plus, it’s my understanding that these self-righteous right wing nut job hacks claim to be a church, claim to be followers of Jesus. I guess they missed a few parts of the Bible.[/quote]

And what parts would that be? I’m currently reading the Bible for the first time, by chapter. (should be done in 2044 :laughing: ) And I’m still “stuck” on how David could go around killing everyone but get in trouble for sleeping with another man’s wife. Uh hello God…[/quote]

[quote] “You have heard that it was said, “An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth”. But I say to you, do not resist an evildoer. If anyone strikes you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also.” (Matthew 5:38–39, NRSV)

This saying of Jesus is frequently interpreted as criticism of the Old Testament teaching, and often taken as implying that “an eye for an eye” encourages excessive vengeance rather than an attempting to limit it. It was one of the points of ‘fulfilment or destruction’ of the Hebrew law which the Church father St. Augustine already discussed in his Contra Faustum, Book XIX.[4][/quote]-- Wikipedia

A lot of confusion out there. This just might be our cue to cut our losses and get out of Afghanistan because we no longer even remotely have the moral authority to win over the hearts and minds of the people there in some nation-building exercise. Just leave some clandestine special ops groups to do what we should have done in the first place and hunt down and capture Osama bin Laden and Mohamed Omar and bring them to trial.[/quote]

What does an “eye for an eye” have to do with burning the Q’uran? We could go back and for quoting Bible verse from Leviticus, Deteronomy, etc and not get anywhere. Anyway, how can/could we hold a nation of people responsible for the actions of 19 attackers?

12

I agree, only except to say that I’m not sure we ever had the moral authority.

How can we possibly overcome violent religious zealots who are willing to kill people and believe they are righteous with religious zealots who ultimately believe the exact same thing?

Right wing Christians and Islamic extremists are essentially cut from the same cloth. Each can justify anything by twisting their religious books to fit their preconceived ideas. Each of these two groups thinks this is a religious war-I say, ship over the Bible thumpers and let them battle it out. Our troops need have nothing to do with a religious war and I think it’s sick that this particular ‘church’ is quite willing to risk other peoples’ lives, but not their own.

13

Plus, it’s my understanding that these self-righteous right wing nut job hacks claim to be a church, claim to be followers of Jesus. I guess they missed a few parts of the Bible.[/quote]

And what parts would that be? I’m currently reading the Bible for the first time, by chapter. (should be done in 2044 :laughing: ) And I’m still “stuck” on how David could go around killing everyone but get in trouble for sleeping with another man’s wife. Uh hello God…[/quote]

[quote] “You have heard that it was said, “An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth”. But I say to you, do not resist an evildoer. If anyone strikes you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also.” (Matthew 5:38–39, NRSV)

This saying of Jesus is frequently interpreted as criticism of the Old Testament teaching, and often taken as implying that “an eye for an eye” encourages excessive vengeance rather than an attempting to limit it. It was one of the points of ‘fulfilment or destruction’ of the Hebrew law which the Church father St. Augustine already discussed in his Contra Faustum, Book XIX.[4][/quote]-- Wikipedia

A lot of confusion out there. This just might be our cue to cut our losses and get out of Afghanistan because we no longer even remotely have the moral authority to win over the hearts and minds of the people there in some nation-building exercise. Just leave some clandestine special ops groups to do what we should have done in the first place and hunt down and capture Osama bin Laden and Mohamed Omar and bring them to trial.[/quote]

What does an “eye for an eye” have to do with burning the Q’uran? We could go back and for quoting Bible verse from Leviticus, Deteronomy, etc and not get anywhere. Anyway, how can/could we hold a nation of people responsible for the actions of 19 attackers?[/quote]

“This saying of Jesus is frequently interpreted as criticism of the Old Testament teaching” is a generally true statement about his views towards the Law of Moses (“Old Testament”).

14

And what parts would that be?[/quote]

“Love thine enemy”, “Blessed are the peacemakers”, “Do good to those who hate you”, and “Turn the other cheek” come to mind.

Notice how many right-wingers who purport to be Christians do not follow the words of the Big Jeeze.

Best way to become an atheist: read the Bible in its entirety.

15

I find this mass Quran burning repulsive based simply on practicality. The only possible goal such actions have are to antagonize a group of people. You aren’t striking any kind of blow against the ideology in question in any practical manner. It’s as about effective and pointless as giving someone the finger. I do admit I’m a little unsympathetic towards the Islamists though. After all, burning symbols of the West be it flags or likenesses of political figures is almost a national pastime in the Muslim world. It’s just sad to see the fact that we are not a far above them as many seem to think we are laid bare.

I also don’t think much about such an event doing much to incite hatred towards the West. I think invading foreign countries, having a strong military presence in the region and supporting Jewish occupation of certain territories (rightly or wrongly) is enough. It may serve and the excuse d’jour to throw rocks but really there are as many excuses to do so as there are actual rocks to throw.

16

Do Muslims burn the Bible? That would be an apples-to-apples comparison. I realize many Muslim countries ban the Bible but burning it seems to be even lower by comparison.

17

Do Muslims burn the Bible? That would be an apples-to-apples comparison. I realize many Muslim countries ban the Bible but burning it seems to be even lower by comparison.[/quote]

I think some of the burn actual human Christians. For sure they burn churches, and tear down centuries-old Buddhist temples and statuary.

18

I saw this article today and couldn’t believe how stupid these people have to be. And I am Christian. “Vengence is Mine,” sayeth the Lord.

But I’m also shocked at what a huge thing this is–just fifty or so confused folks. If fifty or so Muslims got together and burned a few Bibles, I doubt anyone would even know–much less people all around the world talking about it.

Then again, Christians all over the world would be very unlikely to go on retaliatory killing sprees. The world is in a bad way. A bad bad way.

19

Funny how people never want to burn, or get upset by the burning of, the works of the Brothers Grimm or Disney DVDs, and yet they’re just as accurate metaphysical accounts. Frankly, why the hell is America even in Afghanistan? Would America try to win the hearts and minds of a nation of people who thought Mickey Mouse really did exist and had a friend who was a walking, talking dog (whilst simultaneously owning a dog) and a duck that wore a shirt but no trousers? How would you reason with such people? This is all crazy shit and it’s a poor reflection upon American foreign policy that it even gets caught up in this nonsense.

20

Here’s the wak fuk now.

Damn, this freedom of speech thing can be a bitter mistress, ya? Aren’t there prosecutable exceptions to this “freedom” when you are spewing hate? Can’t this clown be charged with a hate crime?

Or better yet…treason?