Talk:Richard J. Maybury
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page. | ||||
| Start | This article has been rated as start-Class on the Project's quality scale. [FAQ] (If you rated the article, please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.) |
||||
|
More information about this article...
|
|||||
i subscribed to EWR for many years but finally had to cancel it when I just couldn't take Mr. Maybury's tendency to blame the US for all the world's ills. I am no pie in the sky fantasist; I understand how US policy had made mistakes; I understand the temptation to say how we've alienated other nations. But I also think Mr. Maybury contradicts himself. He blames US meddling in the middle east but he himself says that this is a 1000 year war. Indeed, it is, stemming from the birth of Islam. Islam's history writes itself; it does not get along with anyone, including its neighbors and its own sects. It is the most atavistic religion on the planet. So how can 100 years of US meddling be responsible for the bad relations Muslims have with the entire planet? Furthermore, he himself says that the laws of the west - his two laws - were never received or honored by Chaostan. They're pretty basic laws and I'm sure the guys who gave us algebra have run across them. If so, then it seems that therein lies the problem; not with our ill advised foreign policy.
I think Mr. Maybury has value in his war countdown, in some of his libertarian approaches, etc. But I think he essentially demonstrates that Islam is the problem then goes on to blame us for it. Mr. Maybury, whether or not we are in Chaostan, whether it is Bush (and I think your portrayal of him as a zealot is a bit of a stretch, but that's personal opinion) or Clinton making the decisions, whether we load them with petrodollars or not, the world's billion Muslims have been declaring war on US (both the United States and us) since the 30's. It may have been antagonized by intervention, but that is a bit of the pot calling the kettle black; Israel may be the spark, but it seems that a goodly number of the very same nations who now denounce Israeli zionism were probably there in the late 40's voting to make Israel a state - I think Islam would be causing the very same problems now whether it was us or France they decided to hate. Islam has managed to thrive on hate and violence, and I have read the Qu'Ran several times - and has spread itself not like Mormons - white shirts, ties, and bikes - but by the sword, from Spain to Indonesia. To blame us entirely for their hatred of us defies credibility. They haven't exactly cozied up to the Hindus or Buddhists, now, have they. Now, how we go about the war is debatable; I feel we should lock up the store; mine the borders, deport every Muslim who lives here including some of the recently naturalized citizens); bug the mosques; and use profiling liberally at the airports and borders. I do think there may be a place for big iron, because if these pesky little gnats keep blowing up plane and subways I think we may exact a big tit for tat - perhaps taking out a city or Ka'aba a week until they get the message. I'd be happy to isolate and let them rot. But they were fed and trained by the Russians as part of their proxy war against the US and Israel, and they are very shrewd and feeling very good about themselves. There needs to be a war; it is just a matter of debate how, when, and where it is fought. And he is correct - the only way to win it is with ethnic cleansing. Since that is taboo esp. to a post Holocaust Jew, then we need major major relocation. Get them out of our front and backyard.
Thank you for your kind editorial; however this does not seem to have much to do with review of this article. Johnzw 21:43, 4 October 2006 (UTC)
