Most Republicans think west and Islam are in fundamental conflict

Quote:

---

An overwhelming majority of Republican voters in the United States regard the west and Islam as being embroiled in "a fundamental conflict which only one side can win", according to new YouGov polling seen exclusively by the Guardian...

Overall, Americans rejected the view of a fundamental clash of cultures that can only have one winner – only 39% adopted this view, against 47% who believe that "it is possible for the west and Muslims to coexist in peace"...

But American opinion is beset by a sharp partisan divide. By a near three-to-one margin, of 64% to 23%, Republicans perceive a fundamental conflict. The overall picture of American tolerance emerges only because Democratic identifiers incline even more emphatically towards the hope of peaceful co-existence, by a 68%-18% margin...

The powerful picture of partisan division in the United States is also evident when YouGov asked respondents whether they felt that most Muslims backed the recent wave of anti-American violent protest that swept several countries after an anti-Islamic film made in the US became available on YouTube. The overall balance of opinion in both Britain and America was very similar, with 34% of Britons and 37% of Americans believing the violence had the support of half or more Muslims, against 55% of Britons and 53% of Americans who believed that it only had minority support.

Once again, however, when Republicans were singled out the balance changed: by 59% to 34% they believed that the violent attacks enjoyed majority backing among Muslims. Democrats take the opposite view, by a margin of 68%-18%...

---

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012...-conflict-poll

they're very obedient fear swallowers.

My favortie whine of the week was some of the right wing moan machine was on Obama for not standing up for freedom of speech.... he then mentions that in his speech to the UN and now they are complaining that he continually brings up the video..:lmao

it's win-win-win proposition for the whiners..

again. they already lost the game. they had a chance to turn the election when an ambassador was killed, but then Romney opened his mouf :lmao what a pathetic fuck that guy is

they just getting their engines started for 4 more years of bitching about Obama

Anyone that doesn't think that there is a fundamental conflict between Islamic and Christian culture has no sense of history.

Anyone that thinks an online poll (Self-Selecting anyone?) is representative of anything approaching reality has no sense of polling methodology.

in the 60s we had 10000 nukes pointed straight at us and coexisted.

now these assholes making a big deal of a few thousand putrid flea infested extremists.

what a bunch of pussies

Personal experience:

Southeast Asian Muslims -- nice people, no problems
Pakistani Muslims -- nice people except for the whole seething Jew-hate thing. Often really smart.
Iranian Muslims -- nice people, no problems
Lebanese Muslims -- secular, nominal
Turkish Muslims -- secular, nominal
Arab Muslims -- every single one I've ever met was seriously fucked in the head. Might be civil at first but upon examination, admit they hate you and regard you as kufr.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FuzzyLumpkins

Anyone that doesn't think that there is a fundamental conflict between Islamic and Christian culture has no sense of history.

---

The question is whether or not there can only be one "winner" or whether they can co-exist.

Right-wing Americans for whatever reason have this compulsive need to unite against a common external enemy as part of their national identity. Right now there's no really strong enemy, so Muslims serve as a proxy. If we could get the right-wingers to view left-wing Americans as the common enemy, we could get some real work done, but right-wingers struggle to hate English-speaking white people the way they hate powerless brown people.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FuzzyLumpkins

Anyone that doesn't think that there is a fundamental conflict between Islamic and Christian culture has no sense of history.

---

Just because there is a fundamental conflict doesn't mean the conflict needs to be resolved. The Muslim societies that produce terrorists are all pretty weak. They can offer up mosquito bites from time to time. They are too dysfunctional to offer much of an existential threat to the West unless and until the West self-destructs. The elements in the West that are working to make it self-destruct, i.e. leftists, represent the real existential threat.

The biggest problem posed by Muslim society is that it will tend to go to war with itself and destabilize a region with a lot of oil.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Homeland Security

Personal experience:

Southeast Asian Muslims -- nice people, no problems
Pakistani Muslims -- nice people except for the whole seething Jew-hate thing. Often really smart.
Iranian Muslims -- nice people, no problems
Lebanese Muslims -- secular, nominal
Turkish Muslims -- secular, nominal

---

Mostly non-Sunnis

Quote:

---

Arab Muslims -- every single one I've ever met was seriously fucked in the head. Might be civil at first but upon examination, admit they hate you and regard you as kufr.

---

Sunnis

now explain to me why most of the time US sides with Sunnis vs. Shiites???

my short answer: those dogs are mose easily controlled and dominated

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cheguevara

Mostly non-Sunnis



Sunnis

now explain to me why most of the time US sides with Sunnis vs. Shiites???

my short answer: those dogs are mose easily controlled and dominated

---

No, the only ones among those I listed who weren't Sunnis were the Iranians. They were part of this very Westernized branch of Shi'a, I forget the name.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ploto

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012...-conflict-poll

---

Poll performed by Captain Obvious Consultants, LLC.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RandomGuy

Poll performed by Captain Obvious Consultants, LLC.

---

Actually, self-selecting polls are performed by Confirmation Bias Consultants, LLC.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Homeland Security

No, the only ones among those I listed who weren't Sunnis were the Iranians. They were part of this very Westernized branch of Shi'a, I forget the name.

---

hmmm not sufi...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Homeland Security

No, the only ones among those I listed who weren't Sunnis were the Iranians. They were part of this very Westernized branch of Shi'a, I forget the name.

---

well I was talking more in the racial sense than the branch of Islam they follow.

for example I can convert to Judaism, does not mean I have Jewish blood

those Arab lands have been always at war, so the people from those lands come from a long line of fighters. at the same time, they are primitive and easily controlled by a handful of so called "kings" with the backing of West.

Nations like Iran have long moved past that stage, thus why they are the "enemies"

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cheguevara

well I was talking more in the racial sense than the branch of Islam they follow.

---

That doesn't make a lot of sense. If you were talking about Arabs, you could have just said "Arabs" rather than calling them "Sunnis, but in a racial sense."

I think it's more likely you just didn't know what the fuck you were talking about and now are backtracking for whatever reason.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cheguevara

those Arab lands have been always at war, so the people from those lands come from a long line of fighters. at the same time, they are primitive and easily controlled by a handful of so called "kings" with the backing of West.

Nations like Iran have long moved past that stage, thus why they are the "enemies"

---

Except for the parts about Arab lands always being at war, the long line of fighters, the part about being easily controlled, the part about Iranians having "moved past that stage," and the part about that being the reason "nations like Iran" (which ones are "like Iran?") are the enemies, you really hit the bulls-eye. Indeed, they are primitive, and some of them are ruled by "kings."

Did you really think you can just make shit up on the fly like this and get over on me?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RandomGuy

hmmm not sufi...

---

Found it. Ismailis.

Conflict? From my 40+ years on the planet, Islam and the West have lived in complete harmony.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Homeland Security

That doesn't make a lot of sense. If you were talking about Arabs, you could have just said "Arabs" rather than calling them "Sunnis, but in a racial sense."

I think it's more likely you just didn't know what the fuck you were talking about and now are backtracking for whatever reason.

---

not really, the Sunni branch has a lot more propensity to jihadism, and holy war. Thus why Alkhaeda and most other terrorist "holy warriors" are sunnis. That trend comes directly from the bloodlines of its ancestors, the warring Arab tribes.

Quote:

---

Except for the parts about Arab lands always being at war, the long line of fighters, the part about being easily controlled, the part about Iranians having "moved past that stage," and the part about that being the reason "nations like Iran" (which ones are "like Iran?") are the enemies, you really hit the bulls-eye. Indeed, they are primitive, and some of them are ruled by "kings."

Did you really think you can just make shit up on the fly like this and get over on me?

---

it is common knowledge that nations that refuse to being controlled by the west were labeled as "evil" :rolleyes

thus why west had habit of installing puppet governments (egypt, saudi, iraq, libya) and when the puppets would rebel, (saddam/ghadafi) they were eliminated.

god forbid a nation wants their resources to be controlled by their people and for their people.

god forbid we have to tell fat americans and their fat gas guzzlers that those people probably deserve a few cents per gallon

god forbid we have to break to the military complex that there is really no need to spend so many billions there. they can take care of themselves

but oh, the times are a chaning

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cheguevara

not really, the Sunni branch has a lot more propensity to jihadism, and holy war. Thus why Alkhaeda and most other terrorist "holy warriors" are sunnis. That trend comes directly from the bloodlines of its ancestors, the warring Arab tribes.

---

Hizbollah. Please, just stop digging. You don't know what you're talking about.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cheguevara

it is common knowledge that nations that refuse to being controlled by the west were labeled as "evil" :rolleyes
thus why west had habit of installing puppet governments (egypt, saudi, iraq, libya) and when the puppets would rebel, (saddam/ghadafi) they were eliminated.
god forbid a nation wants their resources to be controlled by their people and for their people.
god forbid we have to tell fat americans and their fat gas guzzlers that those people probably deserve a few cents per gallon
god forbid we have to break to the military complex that there is really no need to spend so many billions there. they can take care of themselves
but oh, the times are a chaning

---

I'm pretty sure now that your understanding of the Middle East comes from what you've read on leftist websites, and that you don't understand the region at all. I don't necessarily disagree with the conclusion that the protracted military presence all over the region does more harm than good, but I'm pretty confident that I understand the ramifications of pulling back whereas you don't having the first fucking clue.

No, the people who rule those countries probably aren't going to use their natural resources "for their people" of the nation. For themselves? Sure? Their families? Yep. Their tribe? Uh-huh. The whole "nation?" :lmao

They can "take care of themselves?" Sure, if by that you mean that a handful of the powerful states like Iran, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, and Egypt escalate tensions and arms over the next several years and eventually have a huge war with one another to decide who gets to rule the caliphate this time. Maybe in the long run that's the best option since the jihadis all focus on killing other Muslims rather than killing us. Oil supplies will be really unstable for a while and whipsaw the global economy, but since a global collapse is baked in anyway, why not let the Middle East go to shit simultaneously? Do it all in one fell swoop. But make no mistake, it's certainly not going to be all "yay, happy noble brown people live together in peace now that evil America is gone."

Aside, you deserve a slow, painful death, communist swine.

"eventually they will lead us to WWIII"

:lmao the fear mongering is strong in this one. Again that is pussy thinking, we had 10000 nukes pointed straight at us and nothing happened. The US army can have presence anywhere in the world within hours. There is no need for bases, occupation, and "nation building" that is all BS to suck those fuckers dry off their oil and resource. How is the regular lybian or Iraqi better off in a "free Iraq" :lol

"only the US can save the world from armageddon"

:lmao you must believe in Santa Claus too

wake up. If there is to be a war, there will be sooner of later. The corporations and banks have the world by the balls and they decide, their puppet, the US Military and government do their bidding.

The system will ultimately feed from the people wether they are Iranian or American. That is of course until the wheels of the financial system start falling off.

wake up. there is no right or wrong, black or white. :rolleyes

Homeland, a question for you. Do you think we would cause more terrorism against us by pulling out in most areas (thereby leading to collapse and dangerous extremists likely taking over) or do we cause more terrorism through long-term settlement and expansion (thereby being a common enemy that locals can unite against?)

I'm guessing both are roughly equal, with the former being cheaper at least, at the moral cost of mass slaughter of innocents.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cheguevara

"eventually they will lead us to WWIII"

:lmao the fear mongering is strong in this one.

---

Fuck you, you sniveling piece of shit. Point to where I said anything about WWIII, motherfucker.

You can't argue against what people who know anything actually say, so you construct strawmen so you can stay secure in your little world where you can maintain your illusion of enlightment without ever actually having to expend the effort to learn anything.

You fucking leftists don't know shit about anything. The best thing for the world is to exterminate you. I would love to laugh in your face as I watch you slowly die.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cheguevara

How is the regular lybian or Iraqi better off in a "free Iraq" :lol

---

Point me to where I said anything defending the war in Iraq, fucking moron.

"only the US can save the world from armageddon"

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cheguevara

The system will ultimately feed from the people wether they are Iranian or American. That is of course until the wheels of the financial system start falling off.

wake up. there is no right or wrong, black or white. :rolleyes

---

Fucking idiot, you talk about black and white when all your pitiful piece of shit mind is capable of doing is pigeonholing people into two sets of opinions, red or blue. Most of the shit you're lmaoing I don't even believe in.

What I primarily believe in is a world where you and your kind suffer and die and those who remain alive celebrate your death. I don't give a fuck about the outcome of elections or any of the other shit you subhuman slime consume yourselves with. The Muslims are an ancillary bother.