Theory of peace: Don't cross the line.

[MrPatriot1776]

The title pretty much says it all. It is my firm belief that peace can be achieved when the people and nations who cross the line (i.e. fight wars of aggression) are put out of power and defeated.

As the American President Franklin D. Roosevelt said during World War II, "We fight not for the lust of conquest: we fight to end conquest."

So should be the same for us. We will be fighting to end fights started by a belligerent enemy bent on destroying us. We will fight defensive wars, and never offensive ones - except in the cast of preemptive strikes

We will also operate under the belief that the end justifies the means. For example, many of you would agree that the Israeli 2008-2009 attacks on Gaza were justified. They were justified because Hamas was a belligerent enemy that indiscriminately fired rockets at civilians.

If our goal is to gain dominion over the Arabs, consider me out. That would make us no better than the Muslims who parade the streets chanting "One day, we will conquer Rome" and "Bomb, Bomb USA!" If our goal is to protect Western civilization from threats, I'm with you all the way.
When this war is won, we can all dance.
 

[GoIsraelGo!]

Nobody wants to take over the Middle East.

Problem we have here is the Muslims not respecting our lands including Israel.
Muslims are spreading around the Globe starting wars and making outrageous demands to the Host Countries they invade.
The only way to solve this problem is to deport every muslim back to muslim Countries in the Middle East.
Muslims do not have, nor deserve any Western rights whatsoever!

[MrPatriot1776]

Nobody wants to take over the Middle East.

Problem we have here is the Muslims not respecting our lands including Israel.
Muslims are spreading around the Globe starting wars and making outrageous demands to the Host Countries they invade.
The only way to solve this problem is to deport every muslim back to muslim Countries in the Middle East.
Muslims do not have, nor deserve any Western rights whatsoever!

Agreed. We should deport any Muslim that comes to the West just to cause trouble. But, I really think that we should allow Muslims who are open to the idea of freedom and G-d given rights to say here. As John F Kennedy said,
"There is little value in opposing the threat of a closed society by imitating its arbitrary restrictions."

[GoIsraelGo!]

I must disagree with you regarding the peaceful muslims being allowed to stay. Peaceful muslims breed and as their population rises, so do their demands. Take Dearborn Michigan for example, the muslims took over Dearborn with 1, then 2, then 3, and so on and so on.
You get the picture. Muslims in small numbers are no threat, but only if you sterilize them and since that is against the law they will breed and breed until there are so many you have more and more Dearborn type Cities popping up all over our Country.

The only way to stop the spread of muslims to not allow them to come in the first place, and those that are here here must be forced to leave, willing or not.
There is no other alternative.

[arksis]

Nobody wants to take over the Middle East.

Problem we have here is the Muslims not respecting our lands including Israel.
Muslims are spreading around the Globe starting wars and making outrageous demands to the Host Countries they invade.
The only way to solve this problem is to deport every muslim back to muslim Countries in the Middle East.
Muslims do not have, nor deserve any Western rights whatsoever!

Agreed. We should deport any Muslim that comes to the West just to cause trouble. But, I really think that we should allow Muslims who are open to the idea of freedom and G-d given rights to say here. As John F Kennedy said,
"There is little value in opposing the threat of a closed society by imitating its arbitrary restrictions."

For these so called peace loving muslims.........why don't they STAY in their homeland and CHANGE it if they don't like it? Why leave and go to other countries? This country is a melting pot, but now that word must change to WAS a melting pot, because now people from other countries come here and do NOT learn ENGLISH and keep their Sharia law. That is NOT the principles this country was founded on. Too much tolerance has turned this country upside down and I refuse to be a part of that.

[Kahane-Was-Right BT]

If our goal is to protect Western civilization from threats, I'm with you all the way.

But part of our goal is that of the Jewish people which has nothing to do with Western civilization, although our success is in the interest of western civilization.   That goal is to destroy the enemies of the Jewish people that seek to destroy us.   It doesn't matter if it is "preemptive" "defensive" "surprise" "offensive" "lightning" or any other term.  What needs to be done will be done to protect our own survival, whether it looks pleasant to the west or not.  And all the terrorist organizations and terror supporting Jew-hating states will not be spared. 

You say  about the Gaza war last year that "the ends justifies the means."  Why resort to such pandering?   The means were also justified.  There was NOTHING, not a single thing, that was not justified about that war.  The only problem with it was that they did not destroy more of Gaza and they did not conquer/annex it for Israel's keeping for good...

I cannot see what a moral person could possibly take issue with about that war except to condemn hamas's behavior in it.

[muman613]

If our goal is to protect Western civilization from threats, I'm with you all the way.

But part of our goal is that of the Jewish people which has nothing to do with Western civilization, although our success is in the interest of western civilization.   That goal is to destroy the enemies of the Jewish people that seek to destroy us.   It doesn't matter if it is "preemptive" "defensive" "surprise" "offensive" "lightning" or any other term.  What needs to be done will be done to protect our own survival, whether it looks pleasant to the west or not.  And all the terrorist organizations and terror supporting Jew-hating states will not be spared. 

You say  about the Gaza war last year that "the ends justifies the means."  Why resort to such pandering?   The means were also justified.  There was NOTHING, not a single thing, that was not justified about that war.  The only problem with it was that they did not destroy more of Gaza and they did not conquer/annex it for Israel's keeping for good...

I cannot see what a moral person could possibly take issue with about that war except to condemn hamas's behavior in it.

Right on KWRBT!

I too wish Israel had finished the job in Gaza and removed the murdering enemy from the land.  Because of politics and obama Israel had to hurry out. When Israel truly cares about safety for its citizens then the enemies will know the power of our forces.

[Ultra Requete]

MrPatriot1776 don't worry Arab muslim will never stop to supply us with just couses belli; and furthermore if Roosvelt realy said this he's either fool or hipocrite given that USA and other alies anexed teritory of axis after the war; and rightly so. Beside this site is for Greater Israel  after all.   

[Yonah]

The title pretty much says it all. It is my firm belief that peace can be achieved when the people and nations who cross the line (i.e. fight wars of aggression) are put out of power and defeated.

As the American President Franklin D. Roosevelt said during World War II, "We fight not for the lust of conquest: we fight to end conquest."

So should be the same for us. We will be fighting to end fights started by a belligerent enemy bent on destroying us. We will fight defensive wars, and never offensive ones - except in the cast of preemptive strikes

We will also operate under the belief that the end justifies the means. For example, many of you would agree that the Israeli 2008-2009 attacks on Gaza were justified. They were justified because Hamas was a belligerent enemy that indiscriminately fired rockets at civilians.

If our goal is to gain dominion over the Arabs, consider me out. That would make us no better than the Muslims who parade the streets chanting "One day, we will conquer Rome" and "Bomb, Bomb USA!" If our goal is to protect Western civilization from threats, I'm with you all the way.
When this war is won, we can all dance.
 

So you don't want to "cross the line", but you're content to draw it?

[MrPatriot1776]

The title pretty much says it all. It is my firm belief that peace can be achieved when the people and nations who cross the line (i.e. fight wars of aggression) are put out of power and defeated.

As the American President Franklin D. Roosevelt said during World War II, "We fight not for the lust of conquest: we fight to end conquest."

So should be the same for us. We will be fighting to end fights started by a belligerent enemy bent on destroying us. We will fight defensive wars, and never offensive ones - except in the cast of preemptive strikes

We will also operate under the belief that the end justifies the means. For example, many of you would agree that the Israeli 2008-2009 attacks on Gaza were justified. They were justified because Hamas was a belligerent enemy that indiscriminately fired rockets at civilians.

If our goal is to gain dominion over the Arabs, consider me out. That would make us no better than the Muslims who parade the streets chanting "One day, we will conquer Rome" and "Bomb, Bomb USA!" If our goal is to protect Western civilization from threats, I'm with you all the way.
When this war is won, we can all dance.
 

So you don't want to "cross the line", but you're content to draw it?

I think the lines should be drawn where they historically have been. That means Israel does have a right to exist. And so do Muslim countries. And so does America.

[Yonah]

Historical borders? Are you saying we should give Israel back to the Italians? I don't think I much like the idea of Amerindians getting back Manhattan so they can trade it to the Chinese for an oil tanker filled with Everclear, either.

[GoIsraelGo!]

What right have muslims to be in any Country other than an islamic Country?

[Dr. Dan]

The title pretty much says it all. It is my firm belief that peace can be achieved when the people and nations who cross the line (i.e. fight wars of aggression) are put out of power and defeated.

As the American President Franklin D. Roosevelt said during World War II, "We fight not for the lust of conquest: we fight to end conquest."

So should be the same for us. We will be fighting to end fights started by a belligerent enemy bent on destroying us. We will fight defensive wars, and never offensive ones - except in the cast of preemptive strikes

We will also operate under the belief that the end justifies the means. For example, many of you would agree that the Israeli 2008-2009 attacks on Gaza were justified. They were justified because Hamas was a belligerent enemy that indiscriminately fired rockets at civilians.

If our goal is to gain dominion over the Arabs, consider me out. That would make us no better than the Muslims who parade the streets chanting "One day, we will conquer Rome" and "Bomb, Bomb USA!" If our goal is to protect Western civilization from threats, I'm with you all the way.
When this war is won, we can all dance.
 

So you don't want to "cross the line", but you're content to draw it?

I think the lines should be drawn where they historically have been. That means Israel does have a right to exist. And so do Muslim countries. And so does America.

Correction:  No muslim country has the right to exist..but since they do, then all of the Muslims should move to Saudi Arabia where they can live in peace wtih each other..

and I say no Muslim country has a right to exist because Islam has no right to exist...because of its belief to destroy everythign good in this world..

[Dr. Dan]

The title pretty much says it all. It is my firm belief that peace can be achieved when the people and nations who cross the line (i.e. fight wars of aggression) are put out of power and defeated.

As the American President Franklin D. Roosevelt said during World War II, "We fight not for the lust of conquest: we fight to end conquest."

So should be the same for us. We will be fighting to end fights started by a belligerent enemy bent on destroying us. We will fight defensive wars, and never offensive ones - except in the cast of preemptive strikes

We will also operate under the belief that the end justifies the means. For example, many of you would agree that the Israeli 2008-2009 attacks on Gaza were justified. They were justified because Hamas was a belligerent enemy that indiscriminately fired rockets at civilians.

If our goal is to gain dominion over the Arabs, consider me out. That would make us no better than the Muslims who parade the streets chanting "One day, we will conquer Rome" and "Bomb, Bomb USA!" If our goal is to protect Western civilization from threats, I'm with you all the way.
When this war is won, we can all dance.
 

So you don't want to "cross the line", but you're content to draw it?

I think the lines should be drawn where they historically have been. That means Israel does have a right to exist. And so do Muslim countries. And so does America.

Historically Israel's borders are from the Nile to the Eupraties..you said it..let's draw the borders and conquer...

[MrPatriot1776]

Historically Israel's borders are from the Nile to the Eupraties..you said it..let's draw the borders and conquer...
[/quote]

Yeeee-haaaaa!

[arksis]

So you don't want to "cross the line", but you're content to draw it?
[/quote]

I think the lines should be drawn where they historically have been. That means Israel does have a right to exist. And so do Muslim countries. And so does America.
[/quote]


Correction:  No muslim country has the right to exist..but since they do, then all of the Muslims should move to Saudi Arabia where they can live in peace wtih each other..

and I say no Muslim country has a right to exist because Islam has no right to exist...because of its belief to destroy everything good in this world..
[/quote]

I could not agree more Dr. Dan!

[Manch]

But part of our goal is that of the Jewish people which has nothing to do with Western civilization, although our success is in the interest of western civilization.   That goal is to destroy the enemies of the Jewish people that seek to destroy us.   It doesn't matter if it is "preemptive" "defensive" "surprise" "offensive" "lightning" or any other term.  What needs to be done will be done to protect our own survival, whether it looks pleasant to the west or not.  And all the terrorist organizations and terror supporting Jew-hating states will not be spared. 

You say  about the Gaza war last year that "the ends justifies the means."  Why resort to such pandering?   The means were also justified.  There was NOTHING, not a single thing, that was not justified about that war.  The only problem with it was that they did not destroy more of Gaza and they did not conquer/annex it for Israel's keeping for good...

I cannot see what a moral person could possibly take issue with about that war except to condemn hamas's behavior in it.

Well said! 
Also - who are peace loving muslimes? I've never met one. I've never met peace loving nazis as well. If a muslime really cherishes peace, then he/she is not a practicing muslime or an ignorant one. Don't forget, there is also a chance for regression

You want to mingle with peace loving muslimes? Please find, even one, at:


or


Would you be comfortable living and raising your family among them? These are all very peace loving muslimes. So, please stop kidding yourself about the nature of the enemy.