What is wrong with religion?

[Mike182]

I don't even think its that specifically. I think people are generally turned off by the "my way is the only way" and the "more moral than thou" attitudes.

that as well!

 

[TashaN]

For many Muslims, it means virtually the same thing. Islam and Muslims become inseparable and synonym.

I tell you when they will be the same. For example in Palestine, it's mainly against Muslims as i told you before and also about Islam because of the holy land (Al-Aqsa mosque).

Therefore, sometimes it's about Muslims and sometimes it's both. My fiance is an Arab-Israeli and she told me that anyone from Israel or from outside Israel can visit AlAqsa Mosque but the Muslims in Palestine are not allowed to do so, and sometimes they only allow so old people to visit it.

Since you associate Islam with former empires -

then Islam have invaded other kingdoms and have incorporated into their empires. There were no such thing as international law, but if you look at from today's standard, then past empires have broken international laws when they conquered Eastern part of Europe and in Spain, destroy the Byzantine empire, overrun India, and lot of north African kingdoms.

Wrong, if you want to talk about the past, then judge based on the past, and i don't think anyone is naive to judge what happened in that political environment with the current international law.

If you equate past empires with Islam, then it was done so through conquests and invasions. You are quibbling over separation from what Muslims today and what Muslims have done in the past. You condemn on the one hand that anyone invading Muslim countries today, but you condone Muslim empires crushing and annexing kingdoms that don't belong to them is nothing more than double-standard and hypocritical.

You either condone or condemn invasions, but you can't justify it if the same thing happen when your country is invaded.

I think there is some misunderstanding and i guess this link will clarify that for you.

Muhammad's Sword:
http://www.religiousforums.com/forum/showthread.php?t=39491

That's not to say I am in favour of Israel invading and occupying Palestine after WW2 or Bush invading Iraq. What happened in Israel/Palestine happened a little before more time, so anything I say would matter little because I don't really know the situation.

Cool. So you don't know what happened just on 1948 and you seem to know well about the situation since more than 1000 years a go?!

Just .. amazing.

I have condemned Bush's invasion whole-heartedly, but something must be done to fix Iraq, and I don't see any solution from either side (eg. Americans and various factions of Iraqis, Muslims and non-Muslims). The Americans leaving Iraq would not solve the crisis in Iraq, and only fools believe it would solve it, because Sunni and Shiite are killing each other as much as they are killing Americans.

The American started this problem between the brothers, so don't worry, nothing will happen to them anymore if the Americans just could leave them alone.

Personally, I think Iraq should be divided into 3.

This is excatly what Israel and America wanted to do in Iraq and all the other Muslim countries and this will never happen.

 

[TashaN]

they require faith in that which cannot be proven. and that is, perhaps ironically, its biggest problem.

i attach my issues with religion largely to christianity because that is what i know. and i'm pretty confident that if i had been brought up islamic i would have felt the same way, albeit with a slightly different spin.

What i know for sure is that you are not talking about Islam, because in Islam, faith comes after reason but not vice versa. Therefore, you will never know what is Islam just based on what you know about Christianity, i'm certain about that.

the point is, anything that asks you to believe in something as infallible truth without proof is ludicrous and illogical.

I totally agree with you.

that is one of the biggest problems with religion. whatever you choose to call it. and the fact that people use it as a means to justify certain actions and behaviours only makes things worse.

Now i can say for sure that you have a problem with Christianity, but not with religion, and most definitely, not with Islam, because you don't know yet what is Islam rather that what you have been told about it in media if i'm not mistaken.

 

[TashaN]

dogma.

many people who are not religious are put off the mainstream, organised religions because of anti-gay, anti-abortion dogmas.

So are you telling me now that all secular countries gives rights to gays and for those who want to do abortion as well?

 

[daemonikus]

Autho billah, the only thing that will help them is true Islam, what Muhammed and his blessed companions brought, nothing else.

that is one of the biggest issues right there. thank you for posting that. the version of islam you hold to is right, right? 'true islam'. you say things like that and then you wonder why no one even cares anymore what 'true islam' is (if there is such a thing).

What i know for sure is that you are not talking about Islam, because in Islam, faith comes after reason but not vice versa.

faith and reason too often do not mix. faith is not logical.

Now i can say for sure that you have a problem with Christianity, but not with religion, and most definitely, not with Islam, because you don't know yet what is Islam rather that what you have been told about it in media if i'm not mistaken.

i'm really tired of this argument. just because christianity is what i am most familiar with, doesnt mean that i just havent been exposed to the right religion in the right way or whatever. i oppose religion for greater reasons than that (see above). tell you what. i'll make an effort to learn more about islam if the religious people would quit telling me that i'm just a bitter ex christian who's taking my frustrations out on the whole of religion. my motives go far beyond that.

 

[TashaN]

that is one of the biggest issues right there. thank you for posting that. the version of islam you hold to is right, right? 'true islam'. you say things like that and then you wonder why no one even cares anymore what 'true islam' is (if there is such a thing).

I believe, he was trying to point out that the true Islam is the one taught by prophet Mohammed himself and his companions, as we can say that the root if Christianity can be found true in the teaching of Jesus Christ himself because it's original. I don't think he was claiming that he is the true muslim and the rest are not muslims, but rather, trying to point out the measure you can hold to defferntiate between what is true and what is not in Islam, which is clearly, the original teaching of prophet Mohammed "peace be upon him".

faith and reason too often do not mix. faith is not logical.

I'm trying to say that, you will definitely have faith in something which you examined by your reason, to believe in it.

i'm really tired of this argument. just because christianity is what i am most familiar with, doesnt mean that i just havent been exposed to the right religion in the right way or whatever. i oppose religion for greater reasons than that (see above). tell you what. i'll make an effort to learn more about islam if the religious people would quit telling me that i'm just a bitter ex christian who's taking my frustrations out on the whole of religion. my motives go far beyond that.

Just because you want to learn about other religions so that doesn't mean you have to convert to them. I have a KJV of the bible in my room and i know alot about Christianity and many other religions, and about philosophy as well much more than you can imagine.

If you want to know more about Islam so you can start asking questions in our Islam forum in here, and i'll be glad, with the others to answer all your questions whatever its.

http://www.religiousforums.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=11

A visit won't harm, isn't it?

 

[Random]

Religion, once it abandons its roots in counterculture and goes "mainstream", is forced to compromise its integrity and founding principles to survive the competition for the hearts and minds of people.

When the Mystery dies, so will religion. But as it persists, so does religion.

 

[gnostic]

Cool. So you don't know what happened just on 1948 and you seem to know well about the situation since more than 1000 years a go?!

Just .. amazing.

It's not so much ignorance of the 20th century history as the lack of interest. I am more likely to do more in-depth researches on something if I had interest them than if I don't have it.

Last century history bores me. In fact, even the last 2 centuries bores me. The further back in history I go, the more interest I would show. That's not to say that I totally in the dark (ignorant) with 20th century. Just lack of interests, and without the motivation to go in-depth on history of this period.

I even find prehistorical periods to be far more interesting than the 20th century. General knowledge of 20th century is good enough for me. You will find that I know far more about the 20th century in general than the average fellow, but I lack the in-depth knowledge to make me an expert on the subject.

Much of my interests centre around the europe and middle east, but not of recent history. I have interests in the far east, but I far more captivated with E & ME. Australian history is the most boring. I am also not too keen on American history as well (not just the US, both continents, North and South are completely boring), though I do find pre-Columbian civilisations-cultures to be far more interesting than the Europeans arrivals on the New World.

Are you interested in World War 1 or 2, TT? Korean War? Are you interested in everything that happened during the Cold War? I am not. So why should be interested in what war Israelis/Palestinians fought in. Why should I be interested in every single damn war and bl#@dy battle, TT?

Do you do in-depth research on everything, TT? Even those that don't interests you?

The American started this problem between the brothers, so don't worry, nothing will happen to them anymore if the Americans just could leave them alone.

That's crap and you know it.

The Sunni and Shiite have been killing each other and persecuting one another long before the American involvement in the Middle East. The US staying or leaving won't stop the violence in Iraq.

This is excatly what Israel and America wanted to do in Iraq and all the other Muslim countries and this will never happen.

Actually that's not true. The US are divided in opinions over keeping the united Iraq or dividing Iraq. The main goal of the US administration have keeping it altogether. Only a couple of them in Bush's camp support the divided Iraq. So what you are saying is not really true.

As to Israel. I don't give a sh@# what the Israelis think, because they cause as much as trouble as Syria and Iran with their neighbors, so I don't give a damn what the Israelis, Syrians and Iranians think.

You should also know that the US around about little less than half the American population didn't want to go into war Iraq before the invasion. Now more than 2/3 of the Americans think it is mistake. So it rather nonsense to think all Americans were beating the war-drums about going into Iraq.

Even in Australia, the decision to go into Iraq was mixed and divided evenly. The only real strong supporter of the war was Australian federal government. None of the state premiers supported the war, but Howard hold the power to command the military. Now less than 30% support the war.

In the UK it was completely different, more than 2/3 of the Brits didn't want another war in the ME, but Blair had blindly followed Bush, regardless of what the people said at home.

So you are speaking a lot of craps about everyone in these countries wants to go into war in Iraq, when opinions are divided between pro-war and anti-war.

 

[Mujahid Mohammed]

that is one of the biggest issues right there. thank you for posting that. the version of islam you hold to is right, right? 'true islam'. you say things like that and then you wonder why no one even cares anymore what 'true islam' is (if there is such a thing).

There is not other version of Islam. That is it. Islam is not like Christianity where you can interpret the words however you feel. You can reject this and take that.

Islam is that. The prophet said this is what is Islam. Who is anyone to say what Islam is other then the one who brought it. Bill Gates started Microsoft I tell you what lets just call it something else and change everything he stated about the company, how his employees do their job, how they get paid everything. Lets just do and change everything he established and defined about his company.

faith and reason too often do not mix. faith is not logical.

Based on your interpretation. Faith is logical if it is based on an evidence.

i oppose religion for greater reasons than that (see above). tell you what. i'll make an effort to learn more about islam if the religious people would quit telling me that i'm just a bitter ex christian who's taking my frustrations out on the whole of religion. my motives go far beyond that.

I have said none of those things but in all matters of discussion shouldn't you know what it is before you make a opinion about it. I mean how can you really talk about or try to say what Islam is or muslims when you know very little about it. I do not think you are bitter i just thought in the matters of Islam you were speaking without knowledge or sufficient knowledge. for you may have some about it but there is so many things one must know to get the context. That is why it is incumbent on us as muslims to learn.

Man I am not trying to argue with you but when you talk about Islam try to provide an evidence that all. If you say this is what Islam is then give a statement of the Messenger of Allah. See my signature at the bottom. this is the statement of the messenger to describe the behaviour of a muslim. Are the people really doing that today, are muslims doing it today. Not really so they are not an example. the Messenger is telling you what is a muslim. So if you do not see it and he is the one who gave it to you, he is the one who called his people muslims. He is the one who recieved the Quran, He is the one who was recieving the word of Allah. He is the one who understood it best. So he defines it. So if you want to know what Islam is and how muslims should be acting you should see what he says, and what his companions did. Because they obeyed him, without hesitation. If you learn more about them it will become more clear to you.

i pray in your studies you will seperate the behaviour of some muslims with that of the perfect religion which is Islam. I do not want to argue and maybe we got off on the wrong foot. I would like to help you in your understanding if you need assistance I will be glad to lend a hand. i am posting the history of Islam or a bigraphy of Muhammed soon I will begin his life in the post it may help in your understanding of islam for you can't know Islam without knowing the Messenger.

Peace.

 

[Mujahid Mohammed]

That's crap and you know it.

The Sunni and Shiite have been killing each other and persecuting one another long before the American involvement in the Middle East. The US staying or leaving won't stop the violence in Iraq.

So are you saying there is less violence there then before. Do you know anyone who is from Iraq and lived there before the war.

Actually that's not true. The US are divided in opinions over keeping the united Iraq or dividing Iraq. The main goal of the US administration have keeping it altogether. Only a couple of them in Bush's camp support the divided Iraq. So what you are saying is not really true.

What it is and always has been about money and resources. The oil, the construction and weapons contracts, medical, etc. War is big business and the international bankers and those in power of the worlds finance know this.

You should also know that the US around about little less than half the American population didn't want to go into war Iraq before the invasion. Now more than 2/3 of the Americans think it is mistake. So it rather nonsense to think all Americans were beating the war-drums about going into Iraq.

but our elected officials went in anyways with no basis, other then claims of weapons of mass destruction which were never found by the way. they completely dismantled the infrastructure of the country and the martial law they enforce is what is causing most of the tension.

it doesn't matter what we want as people if the majority said no, then someone needs to explain to me what happen to democracy.

Our country can do whatever it wants. Did they even once ask the Iraqiis if they wanted them to come.

Even in Australia, the decision to go into Iraq was mixed and divided evenly. The only real strong supporter of the war was Australian federal government. None of the state premiers supported the war, but Howard hold the power to command the military. Now less than 30% support the war.

In the UK it was completely different, more than 2/3 of the Brits didn't want another war in the ME, but Blair had blindly followed Bush, regardless of what the people said at home.

So you are speaking a lot of craps about everyone in these countries wants to go into war in Iraq, when opinions are divided between pro-war and anti-war.

Whether or not people wanted them to do in or not. They went in anyways with or without the consent of its constituants. They went there on false pretenses and false promises. they lied, it is plain as day. they lied to us to try to make an excuse to go over there and steal the natural resources and lives of the muslims.

 

[gnostic]

What it is and always has been about money and resources. The oil, the construction and weapons contracts, medical, etc. War is big business and the international bankers and those in power of the worlds finance know this.

No, that not completely true.

The true motive is that Bush have become arrogant and the stupid fool that he is. When he had successes in Afghanistan, he thought others would follow him into Iraq as well. Wealth is only part of it.

He truly had a simplistic fool with a cowboy mentality. He think he can act like a cowboy in the Wild West, thinking he can win a war by simply flashing his sheriff's badge and whip out his big guns, and that everyone would follow him. His confidence was far too high after the successes in Afghanistan, because he was riding high in the opinion poll back home. Why? Because he think he a war hero.

I think he serious believe in all this crap Hollywood propaganda about the Americans being the hero of World War 2. He had fool illusion of being a war-hero. He is a fool, a quack, arrogant jerk and a whole lot of unsavory names that I can think of, but I don't think any moderator would tolerate them.

Thankfully, many Americans now believe that the war in Iraq is a mistake and was poorly managed in strategy, tactics and in intelligence gathering. The Americans really didn't have any plan, when Saddam's regime fell so quickly.

 

[daemonikus]

There is not other version of Islam. That is it. Islam is not like Christianity where you can interpret the words however you feel.

and yet many of the issues rising between people of the same religion (regardless of what it is) is because of exactly that.

I have said none of those things but in all matters of discussion shouldn't you know what it is before you make a opinion about it. I mean how can you really talk about or try to say what Islam is or muslims when you know very little about it

i know you never said those things. it was a statement to everyone. i get it all the time and it gets frustrating. i dont know a lot about islam and i dont claim to either. but i can use what knowledge i have to establish a basic understanding that it is a religion that has just as many problems as any other. muhammad recieved this book from the angel gabriel and it is supposed to be the lieral words of god (allah, whatever) which muhammad memorized and eventually had it written down. and to make sure everything was still accurate, once a year (and twice in his last year of life) he went over it with the angel. wow. i'm convinced. this still requires illogical faith. sorry. i'm learning more about it but its still all the same. and of course, feel free to correct me on info as i strive to learn about it. i dont want to get the wrong info from the wrong interpretation.

 

[Cynic]

I met alot of people who don't believe in God, and when i engage in a discussuin with them about religion, they jump into conclusions saying that religion is the source of evil in the world and they start giving me some examples.

I think that what they saw about what religion's influnce on people did was not quite accurate, because people *used* religion to gain power, money and more land, because human beings found out that religion is the most effective tool in order to control their nation. Nevertheless, just because someone used fire to burn buildings so that doesn't mean fire is no longer a source of light, heat, and feeling warm.

The question which is begging to be answered now is, as we can see that religion "in general" is not the source of evil and human beings just used it in the wrong way, so then, what's wrong with religion?

Well, in my personal experience, the following usually leaves a negative impression:
"My Holy Gobbledygook is THE truth. Do not question the Holy Gobbledygook. Everything outside the Holy Gobbledygook is wrong..."

Have you heard the quote, "I reject your reality and substitute my own?"

 

[TashaN]

It's not so much ignorance of the 20th century history as the lack of interest. I am more likely to do more in-depth researches on something if I had interest them than if I don't have it.

Last century history bores me. In fact, even the last 2 centuries bores me. The further back in history I go, the more interest I would show. That's not to say that I totally in the dark (ignorant) with 20th century. Just lack of interests, and without the motivation to go in-depth on history of this period.

I even find prehistorical periods to be far more interesting than the 20th century. General knowledge of 20th century is good enough for me. You will find that I know far more about the 20th century in general than the average fellow, but I lack the in-depth knowledge to make me an expert on the subject.

Understood.

Much of my interests centre around the europe and middle east, but not of recent history. I have interests in the far east, but I far more captivated with E & ME. Australian history is the most boring. I am also not too keen on American history as well (not just the US, both continents, North and South are completely boring), though I do find pre-Columbian civilisations-cultures to be far more interesting than the Europeans arrivals on the New World.

Are you interested in World War 1 or 2, TT? Korean War? Are you interested in everything that happened during the Cold War? I am not. So why should be interested in what war Israelis/Palestinians fought in. Why should I be interested in every single damn war and bl#@dy battle, TT?

I think its important to understand the situation if you are willing to invlove in a discussion about it, otherwise, it won't be fair to make assertions without knowing the history of such a conflict.

Nevertheless, of course you don't have to know about all wars unless you want to be an expert, or maybe writing a book. Did i go so far?

Do you do in-depth research on everything, TT? Even those that don't interests you?

Only in things i would like to discuss about with others because i'll show only my ignorance and lack of knowledge if i tried to engage in a discussion without finishing my reading.

The Sunni and Shiite have been killing each other and persecuting one another long before the American involvement in the Middle East.

Can you please help with providing any historical record which show that Sunni and Shiite were fighting each other in the past?

Or at least in Iraq, before the happy American troops *visited* their land?

The US staying or leaving won't stop the violence in Iraq.

There was no violence before that, so it will stop if they just left.

Actually that's not true. The US are divided in opinions over keeping the united Iraq or dividing Iraq.

But bush have got the last word, so their opinions doesn't matter to him as long as his gang agree with him.

The main goal of the US administration have keeping it altogether. Only a couple of them in Bush's camp support the divided Iraq. So what you are saying is not really true.

We will see about that.

As to Israel. I don't give a sh@# what the Israelis think, because they cause as much as trouble as Syria and Iran with their neighbors, so I don't give a damn what the Israelis, Syrians and Iranians think.

You should do, because the Jewish lobby can do alot in the Congress decision making.

You should also know that the US around about little less than half the American population didn't want to go into war Iraq before the invasion. Now more than 2/3 of the Americans think it is mistake. So it rather nonsense to think all Americans were beating the war-drums about going into Iraq.

Did i ever make such a claim?

You don't need to tell me about that because i know, but does it really matter?

When something happen in the Muslim world so everybody will jump saying where are the Moderate Muslims and why don't they condemn terrorism and with all that crap. Nevertheless, when it comes to the war in Iraq, they condemn it in America, but they don't do anything about it. They just watch the TV while eating their dinnder saying, how sad !!!

Then they go to sleep and forget about it. Why can't they stop Bush?

If they can't, then they should shut up when something happen in the muslim world and stop accusing the muslims with being silent, because we are doing alot, but no body seems to see it because we do it for ourselves, and for our own good, not for show off and being hypocrite.

Now less than 30% support the war.

Cool. So we have got 70% who condemn this war, then you can stop it, no?

So you are speaking a lot of craps about everyone in these countries wants to go into war in Iraq, when opinions are divided between pro-war and anti-war.

Show me where did i make any claim concerning the americans or whatever country supporting the war in Iraq?

I always mention governmts but not people.

 

[rojse]

I have a lot of problems with religion. Although I do feel that in some respects, religion is helpful to people, there is a lot more about them that I find repulsive and wrong. In no particular order:

1. Religious wars - not merely Islamic religions, other religions are guilty of this too.
2. Religion trying to answer scientific questions - science does not try to answer the questions of God, or address moral problems, so why does religion have to try and answer scientific questions such as evolution or the age of the earth?
3. Religions that damn all people that do not adhere to their set of beliefs
4. People that force their children to go to church or the equivalent thereof before they are old enough to make a rational decision about what they wish to do religiously
5. People that do not allow their children to learn about science because it clashes with their religious ideas
6. Religions that apply one ruling across all situations, no matter what the results or complications could be - contraceptives, abortions, and so forth. There are sound reasons to allow these, even on a restricted basis.
7. Religions that force followers to conform to rules that they do not wish to.

Just a few points.

 

[gnostic]

I would add another few, Rojse.

8. Religions trying to force or impose religious policies agenda on political and legislative issues. They tried to blur the line of separation between State and Religion.
9. Religions that intimidated people for leaving the religion or often facing being ostracized from their families and communities.

 

[gnostic]

I think its important to understand the situation if you are willing to invlove in a discussion about it, otherwise, it won't be fair to make assertions without knowing the history of such a conflict.

Agreed. However, I think it depends on the degree of how serious you take the issue, which should be directly proportional to how much you are willing to research.

My main interests are mythology and ancient history. All these debates and discussions on religions are really only side-interest to me. The history of Christianity and Islam are just side-interests.

Can you please help with providing any historical record which show that Sunni and Shiite were fighting each other in the past?

From what I understand, the Sunni-Shiite conflict originated with 'Ali between 656-661, who was involved in several wars before his murder. Husayn, 'Ali's son refuses to recognize the legitimacy of Yazid. The Battle of Karbala in 680 (I think; I am not of dates). Since then the Shiite have great resentment to the Sunni.

When something happen in the Muslim world so everybody will jump saying where are the Moderate Muslims and why don't they condemn terrorism and with all that crap. Nevertheless, when it comes to the war in Iraq, they condemn it in America, but they don't do anything about it. They just watch the TV while eating their dinnder saying, how sad !!!

I am not an American, so I can't say. But I have condemned Bush, his war and his foreign policies plenty of time. But I understand that the US is split only between these 2 parties. As Commander-in-Chief, there is very little either party can do, if the president choose to go to war. The only way to rid of Bush is to vote in the next election. Unfortunately he got re-elected.

What do you want the Americans to do, TT? Have a military coup? Start a revolution or civil war? Have someone assassinate Bush? Is that what you want? How many coups successfully transit into a stable, reliable government that everyone would like?

There is constitutional in place for the president to have only 2 terms in office. There are several options, which don't involve any bloodshed: don't vote for him so that he don't win the election; wait for him end his 2 terms; or have him indicted for corruption of some sort. As much as I hate his gut and preferred to see him dead, if he was to be assassinated, the last thing I want is for him to have a hero's or martyr's funeral.

You should know that Bush refused to let go of Iraq, as much out of his stupid pride than anything else. He doesn't want the troops to leave Iraq, until after his term is finished, because withdrawing troops now would be the ultimate defeat. So he is leaving to his mess with his successor, whether that be Republican or Democrat.

 

[lillitruthseeker]

whats wrong with religion is that as you learn more and more about it - how it started what its based on you realize that its just not necessary anymore and that it is the poison that affects and ruins everything - i still think we need a space invasion or a meteor to threaten the whole earth and human life itself to bring people together to fight for human existence - forget all the biases and poison and work together knowing that no god is gonna save us - only we can save ourselves -- wishful thinking i know

 

[rojse]

That's a bit drastic, and I still think that that would do nothing. Some would say that it was vengeance from God, or some such folly. Others would try to pray to find a solution to it. Other would embrace it - they believe they would go to heaven. Me? I'd build an underground shelter.

 

[Mujahid Mohammed]

No, that not completely true.

The true motive is that Bush have become arrogant and the stupid fool that he is. When he had successes in Afghanistan, he thought others would follow him into Iraq as well. Wealth is only part of it.

As if Bush has any true say. He answers to a higher authority. Besides Afghanistan was about the same thing oil and drugs.

He truly had a simplistic fool with a cowboy mentality. He think he can act like a cowboy in the Wild West, thinking he can win a war by simply flashing his sheriff's badge and whip out his big guns, and that everyone would follow him. His confidence was far too high after the successes in Afghanistan, because he was riding high in the opinion poll back home. Why? Because he think he a war hero.

Sorry they had a hidden agenda. Read a book called the politics of heroin. it is at Amazon. Amazing book on the drug trade and the cia, and certain cartels connections with war, drugs, governments, secret ops. etc. etc.

I think he serious believe in all this crap Hollywood propaganda about the Americans being the hero of World War 2. He had fool illusion of being a war-hero. He is a fool, a quack, arrogant jerk and a whole lot of unsavory names that I can think of, but I don't think any moderator would tolerate them.

So as a fool as you say it is impossible to think that Bush junior has any say in policy. No one ever talks about the trilateral commision. the cfr. No one is following where the money is coming from to fund this war and every other major war. No one is looking at how many of our big time corp who are all allied with the bushes and their comrades of villians are profiting huge off of this war. No one is looking at who are the leaders of the military industrial complex. no one is paying attention to any of the real issues concerning this war.

Thankfully, many Americans now believe that the war in Iraq is a mistake and was poorly managed in strategy, tactics and in intelligence gathering. The Americans really didn't have any plan, when Saddam's regime fell so quickly.

they had a plan. this government gets what it pays for. You must remember that and they do not make mistakes. Everything they do is carefully calculated. Do you really think they want stability in Iraq they put Saddam in power in the first place, sold him the weapons and everything. This is public knowledge. they have a hidden agenda that does not really concern what you and I think, you should try and find out what that is. it may help in your understanding of the true nature of what is going on.

Think outside the box. Go above Bush and follow the money. It will lead you to alot of your answers.