Do you really think Americans are the only ones these I****ic fanatics have problems with? What about within their own religion? Sunni & Shiite cause more harm to each other than the USA and all other Westerners combined. What about all the attacks in Nigeria of late? No, there is only one common denominator around the globe for this problem - I***m.

No, I don't think anybody does. But what they do to each other is their business as far as I'm concerned. Among Western nations, it is almost always the US which is targetted. I think Meadish Sweetball had it right; it's largely because Americans have meddled far too much with Middle Eastern affairs.

As for your suggested solution, it's too much like George W, Bush targetting WMD in Iraq.

As I said if they can't see the reasons then maybe they are part of it.

Among Western nations, it is almost always the US which is targetted.

The US has been considered the leader of the free world for quite a while now. It is not a coincidence that they would be the main target of these despots.

Among Western nations, it is almost always the US which is targetted.

The US has been considered the leader of the free world for quite a while now. It is not a coincidence that they would be the main target of these despots.

Deleted as too provocative

Do you really think Americans are the only ones these I****ic fanatics have problems with? What about within their own religion? Sunni & Shiite cause more harm to each other than the USA and all other Westerners combined. What about all the attacks in Nigeria of late? No, there is only one common denominator around the globe for this problem - I***m.

No, I don't think anybody does. But what they do to each other is their business as far as I'm concerned. Among Western nations, it is almost always the US which is targetted. I think Meadish Sweetball had it right; it's largely because Americans have meddled far too much with Middle Eastern affairs.

As for your suggested solution, it's too much like George W, Bush targetting WMD in Iraq.

As I said if they can't see the reasons then maybe they are part of it.

As far as Libya is concerned, the reasons are simple to see; we killed an al Qaeda leader with a drone not long ago so they killed our ambassador.

And, "meddling in Middle Eastern affairs" IS NOT an American invention, not by a long shot. Face it, the region is a problem. It will not go away on its own. If ALL western countries pull out of the MENA region, what will happen? One tiny country will probably be forced to nuke a few neighbors after being attacked. Then there will be a massive humanitarian crisis which will not end for decades because the West will no longer get involved in their matters. Hundreds of millions will die as a result.

Hmmm, you two might be on to something there, get the West to mind its own business and there will be no need for the US to drop a time machine on them.

The world’s policeman must not retreat from the world’s most dangerous region; indeed America should do more

With their

[America's]

troops now mercifully out of Iraq, their efforts to push the Israeli-Palestinian peace process going nowhere and shale gas reducing their dependence on Arab oil, surely it is time for them to leave the world’s least grateful people to make a mess of their lives by themselves?

This is a seductive narrative—and no doubt it will play even better on the campaign trail after Mr Stevens’s death (see

Lexington

). But it is deeply wrong in both its analysis and its conclusions. Many parts of the Arab world are in fact heading in the right direction. And in the parts that are not, notably Syria, the United States is more needed than ever.

In general, America should do more in the Middle East, not less.

http://www.economist.com/node/21562914

Do you really think Americans are the only ones these I****ic fanatics have problems with? What about within their own religion? Sunni & Shiite cause more harm to each other than the USA and all other Westerners combined. What about all the attacks in Nigeria of late? No, there is only one common denominator around the globe for this problem - I***m.

No, I don't think anybody does. But what they do to each other is their business as far as I'm concerned. Among Western nations, it is almost always the US which is targetted. I think Meadish Sweetball had it right; it's largely because Americans have meddled far too much with Middle Eastern affairs.

As for your suggested solution, it's too much like George W, Bush targetting WMD in Iraq.

Having spent some 30 years in the Middle East let me bore you with some personal observations on the matter.

The first five years in the Middle East was spent working in Tehran, Kermanshah and Isfahan on a non-classified defense contract. I lived on the economy, interfaced with locals each and every day and thoroughly enjoyed my life there. The golf course was quite good and my Fridays were filled with enjoyment. The hating of America hadn't begun yet as we were liked and respected, but not because we were Americans. The Iranians simply were generally nice people That this was during the reign of the Shah goes without saying. Then 1978 came to visit us, along with Jimmy Carter and things were never the same after his visit. The Shah began to lose his grip on control and emotions became more open and hostile because of the pending return of Khomeini and the expected fall of the Shah. In other words, the radicals began taking power. Things were hectic around the cities in the second half of 1978 and turned into utter chaos in 1979, where it remains to this day.

Why do the Iranian people hate us? Well, to be blunt, the average Iranian doesn't hate us. The ones that hate us are the Revolutionary Guard and the Khomeini supporters and they hate us because Khomeini told them to. Iran dropped off the map of viable nations on 1 February 1979 when Khomeini flew back into Tehran.

Most of the rest of my years in the Middle East were spent in Saudi Arabia on defense contracts. I was in middle management and senior management and was in daily contact with Saudi naval officers for all those years. I found they had a great deal of respect for the US, many of them having been to Lackland in San Antonio for English training and navy bases around the US for additional training and quite a few even had anchor babies by having children born in the US, thus having dual nationality. Generally we were well liked and respected.

Life became a little more difficult when the Khobar Towers were bombed in June 1996. That's when the Saudi Security forces became very concerned about the welfare and well being of the US citizens and we began closing ourselves off from the rest of the community, so to speak. I was charged with turning our housing compounds from soft targets to hard targets. Up went the compound wall another two meters, concertino wire was added in abundance and I must have bought 200 one meter tall concrete barriers, along with an air conditioned guard house and a covered parking place for a Humvee with a .50 cal on the roof. Life in Saudi changed nearly overnight.

Still the Saudi's liked us. Not the suicide types but the others, those with families, careers, homes, cars and futures. The others we were seldom in contact with and when we were, we probably didn't know it.

Up to and after 9/11 life continued as normal but the subject of US support for Israel became topics for discussion in some meetings and conversations. I was never railed at by any officer about the subject but more and more of them were asking how I felt about the "unfair" approach in our support of Israel. I explained as best I could, always remembering I might be talking to the next CNO, and we moved forward. I never felt pressured by these conversations and never felt reproached by the participants when I answered.

What's the subject again? Oh yeah, I remember. Why do Arabs hate the US.

In Iran I found the reason for hatred towards the US was because Khomeini told them to hate the evil Satan. That helped ease the pain for the failing economy and the loss of nearly all forms of freedom after he took control. In other words, it was a political ploy to deflect attention from his failing leadership. Sound familiar to anyone around here?

As for Saudi, I don't think there is any great discontent with the US. Some of the young men hate us but that might be penis envy more than anything else. The more educated ones dislike how we are handling the Israeli situation, but they don't hate us.

The Bedouins don't care about anything but their families and camels, not necessarily in that order.

As far as the other nations of the middle East?

We meddled in Kuwait and that was good.

We meddled in Iraq and that might be turning out not so good.

We "led from behind" in Libya and recent events have told us that might not have been such a good idea.

We didn't meddle in Egypt and kicked Mubarak under the bus, ala the Shah, and we now have the Muslim Brotherhood to play with.

We didn't meddle in Syria and what a fine mess that is turning into.

We have yet to decide what to do with Iran and when we do, it will be mucked up.

We meddled in Afghanistan and, if the politicians will get out of the way, we can win that and make the country viable again.

So do they hate us for meddling too much? I don't really think so but others may disagree. They hate us because they need to hate somebody and we are everything that Islam doesn't agree with. Blondes, wet tee shirts and pork spare ribs.

PS: I know Iranians are not Arabs so don't bother telling me.

So do they hate us for meddling too much? I don't really think so but others may disagree. They hate us because they need to hate somebody and we are everything that Islam doesn't agree with. Blondes, wet tee shirts and pork spare ribs.

Good piece.

I would say that in addition to needing to hate, there is also a deep seated need to live under tyranny.

ChuckD - out lives have run along similar lines, although I also spent ten years in Libya. (Plus time in the UAE)

The people I mixed with (managers, engineers and other similar persons) did not hate any Westerner, although many did not want to live the life we would go back to. They were content in their own lives. It is the masses of barely-educated that are the problem, wearing their proclaimed religion as a standard to be followed and also follow the vitriolic declamations from the minbar on Fridays.

Regrettably I think most of our politicians only meet the upper echelons of the countries, who are not the people who are carrying out all the attacks.

It is the masses of barely-educated that are the problem, wearing their proclaimed religion as a standard to be followed and also follow the vitriolic declamations from the minbar on Fridays.

With a sea of credulity at their fingertips, it's little wonder why those willing to take advantage of others are able to do so. For those who want power, such as politicians and religious leaders, keeping the 'faithful' uneducated (in the dark) is in their best interests and this is what we see the world over.

Regrettably I think most of our politicians only meet the upper echelons of the countries, who are not the people who are carrying out all the attacks.

Like they don't know lol

ChuckD - out lives have run along similar lines, although I also spent ten years in Libya. (Plus time in the UAE)

The people I mixed with (managers, engineers and other similar persons)

There's the answer to your problem. The majority of the population in most countries don't consist of 'managers, engineers and other similar persons'.

I must admit I find it hugely entertaining when people who are brought up in the west with its ideas of individual responsibility and democracy and who take advantage of those ideas to further their own lives bemoan the fact that the population of the countries that they work in expect the same rights and don't want to knuckle down under dictatorships supported by the west.

I'm not sure how much better off they are under religious dictatorships that they have inflicted upon themselves.

I'm not sure how much better off they are under religious dictatorships that they have inflicted upon themselves.

If the west had encouraged them towards proper democracy over the past 50 years rather than supporting their oppressors then perhaps those religious dictatorships wouldn't have emerged.

The fanatics are fanatics because they want to return to Islamic Medieval times, not because they want to shop at Walmart and drive a bigger car.

I think they are in mediaeval times already. If somebody had mocked Christianity in the Middle Ages, the reaction would have been much the same (mutatis mutandis). Little or no education, and whatever they did 'know' was from their priest, as the Islamist fanatics get it from their mullahs.

The Crusaders, although their leaders were educated (sort of), slaughtered Christian Arabs in the Holy Land because they couldn't tell the difference.

After the Reformation, Catholics and Protestants were as nasty to each other as Sunni and Shiite.

In other words, I don't think the present reaction to a film mocking Islam is very surprising. Americans the main target because the US is the perceived leader of the West.

Democracy is out of the question until you have an educated electorate.

I'm not sure how much better off they are under religious dictatorships that they have inflicted upon themselves.

If the west had encouraged them towards proper democracy over the past 50 years rather than supporting their oppressors then perhaps those religious dictatorships wouldn't have emerged.

As is stated by Isanbirder - democracy requires an educated electorate.

In the majority of countries where Islam is the main religion education of the general population is woeful, as it is in India, South America, Central America. China and Russia are working towards an educated citizenry, as was the Shah in Iran - but Carter stopped all that.

I'm not sure how much better off they are under religious dictatorships that they have inflicted upon themselves.

At least it's their choice. Seems they prefer a dictator of the imaginary type.

The fanatics are fanatics because they want to return to Islamic Medieval times, not because they want to shop at Walmart and drive a bigger car.

I think they are in mediaeval times already. If somebody had mocked Christianity in the Middle Ages, the reaction would have been much the same (mutatis mutandis). Little or no education, and whatever they did 'know' was from their priest, as the Islamist fanatics get it from their mullahs.

The Crusaders, although their leaders were educated (sort of), slaughtered Christian Arabs in the Holy Land because they couldn't tell the difference.

After the Reformation, Catholics and Protestants were as nasty to each other as Sunni and Shiite.

In other words, I don't think the present reaction to a film mocking Islam is very surprising. Americans the main target because the US is the perceived leader of the West.

Democracy is out of the question until you have an educated electorate.

Yes, I can't disagree with much of that. Only the slight modification that most Middle Eastern countries are not run by the worst of the worst nutjobs - it could definitely be worse than this. Because now, you get angry mobs and fanatic groups storming embassies, which is bad enough, but not as bad as the entire country's military forces waging war because said angry mobs and fanatic groups are truly running the show.

The world’s policeman must not retreat from the world’s most dangerous region; indeed America should do more

With their

[America's]

troops now mercifully out of Iraq, their efforts to push the Israeli-Palestinian peace process going nowhere and shale gas reducing their dependence on Arab oil, surely it is time for them to leave the world’s least grateful people to make a mess of their lives by themselves?

This is a seductive narrative—and no doubt it will play even better on the campaign trail after Mr Stevens’s death (see

Lexington

). But it is deeply wrong in both its analysis and its conclusions. Many parts of the Arab world are in fact heading in the right direction. And in the parts that are not, notably Syria, the United States is more needed than ever.

In general, America should do more in the Middle East, not less.

http://www.economist.com/node/21562914

And that's the key point.

Like it or not the US is the only player that can coordinate a resolution of the Middle Eastern impasse.

Would that solve every issue, obviously not but until the Palestine-Israel question is addressed and a suitable compromise arrived at, there will be little overall progress.

Liberal Fox News contributer takes Obama to task for appeasement.

Team Obama’s unseemly groveling to violent extremists has been cloaked in a newfound concern on the left for respecting religious sensibilities. Tuesday, a liberal professor argued in USA Today that the maker of the Mohammed film should be arrested.

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2012/09/14/president-obama-stop-blaming-victim-for-mideast-violence/#ixzz26dgdCoGt

The world's policeman must not retreat from the world's most dangerous region; indeed America should do more

With their

[America's]

troops now mercifully out of Iraq, their efforts to push the Israeli-Palestinian peace process going nowhere and shale gas reducing their dependence on Arab oil, surely it is time for them to leave the world's least grateful people to make a mess of their lives by themselves?

This is a seductive narrative—and no doubt it will play even better on the campaign trail after Mr Stevens's death (see

Lexington

). But it is deeply wrong in both its analysis and its conclusions. Many parts of the Arab world are in fact heading in the right direction. And in the parts that are not, notably Syria, the United States is more needed than ever.

In general, America should do more in the Middle East, not less.

http://www.economist.com/node/21562914

And that's the key point.

Like it or not the US is the only player that can coordinate a resolution of the Middle Eastern impasse.

Would that solve every issue, obviously not but until the Palestine-Israel question is addressed and a suitable compromise arrived at, there will be little overall progress.

I can't see how the US can coordinate a resolution to the whole Middle east problem area without virtual colonisation, which it wouldn't do, and which anyway would be enormously costly in lives (and money).

I said earlier that the US should interfere less. You say it should interfere more. I think we're both right! What won't work is the sort of not quite fully involved situation which obtains at present. And indeed, the Israel/Palestinian situation has to be resolved first (which I think is currently insoluble unless some new factor is introduced (and I couldn't suggest what that new factor might be)).

Arresting the maker of the Mohammed film would be shutting the door after the horse has bolted; the damage is already done.

The world's policeman must not retreat from the world's most dangerous region; indeed America should do more

With their

[America's]

troops now mercifully out of Iraq, their efforts to push the Israeli-Palestinian peace process going nowhere and shale gas reducing their dependence on Arab oil, surely it is time for them to leave the world's least grateful people to make a mess of their lives by themselves?

This is a seductive narrative—and no doubt it will play even better on the campaign trail after Mr Stevens's death (see

Lexington

). But it is deeply wrong in both its analysis and its conclusions. Many parts of the Arab world are in fact heading in the right direction. And in the parts that are not, notably Syria, the United States is more needed than ever.

In general, America should do more in the Middle East, not less.

http://www.economist.com/node/21562914

And that's the key point.

Like it or not the US is the only player that can coordinate a resolution of the Middle Eastern impasse.

Would that solve every issue, obviously not but until the Palestine-Israel question is addressed and a suitable compromise arrived at, there will be little overall progress.

I can't see how the US can coordinate a resolution to the whole Middle east problem area without virtual colonisation, which it wouldn't do, and which anyway would be enormously costly in lives (and money).

I said earlier that the US should interfere less. You say it should interfere more. I think we're both right! What won't work is the sort of not quite fully involved situation which obtains at present. And indeed, the Israel/Palestinian situation has to be resolved first (which I think is currently insoluble unless some new factor is introduced (and I couldn't suggest what that new factor might be)).

Arresting the maker of the Mohammed film would be shutting the door after the horse has bolted; the damage is already done.

I think the Palestinian situation is like the Mohammed video. Even if you were to solve it, they would find another reason to be unhappy, riot and hate the West. Just like they did with the teddy bear named Mohammed, or the Mohammed cartoons. I don't think these people have it in their religious DNA to be happy. I also think it is a bad idea and waste of time to try to make someone happy who is incapable of being happy.

I know this won't be well-received but here goes...the people rioting are the easily manipulated uneducated masses who are unable to think for themselves so we need to remove everything that puts the bad thoughts in their heads.We need to physically replace all their religious leaders with more moderate ones. If that precise surgical procedure fails, then the only probable solution is to ban their religion outright. Burn all holy books, destroy all holy sites, close all religious TV channels, execute all religious leaders. It might seen impossible, but no less impossible than what has been tried in recent decades.

The world's policeman must not retreat from the world's most dangerous region; indeed America should do more

With their

[America's]

troops now mercifully out of Iraq, their efforts to push the Israeli-Palestinian peace process going nowhere and shale gas reducing their dependence on Arab oil, surely it is time for them to leave the world's least grateful people to make a mess of their lives by themselves?

This is a seductive narrative—and no doubt it will play even better on the campaign trail after Mr Stevens's death (see

Lexington

). But it is deeply wrong in both its analysis and its conclusions. Many parts of the Arab world are in fact heading in the right direction. And in the parts that are not, notably Syria, the United States is more needed than ever.

In general, America should do more in the Middle East, not less.

http://www.economist.com/node/21562914

And that's the key point.

Like it or not the US is the only player that can coordinate a resolution of the Middle Eastern impasse.

Would that solve every issue, obviously not but until the Palestine-Israel question is addressed and a suitable compromise arrived at, there will be little overall progress.

I can't see how the US can coordinate a resolution to the whole Middle east problem area without virtual colonisation, which it wouldn't do, and which anyway would be enormously costly in lives (and money).

I said earlier that the US should interfere less. You say it should interfere more. I think we're both right! What won't work is the sort of not quite fully involved situation which obtains at present. And indeed, the Israel/Palestinian situation has to be resolved first (which I think is currently insoluble unless some new factor is introduced (and I couldn't suggest what that new factor might be)).

Arresting the maker of the Mohammed film would be shutting the door after the horse has bolted; the damage is already done.

I think the Palestinian situation is like the Mohammed video. Even if you were to solve it, they would find another reason to be unhappy, riot and hate the West. Just like they did with the teddy bear named Mohammed, or the Mohammed cartoons. I don't think these people have it in their religious DNA to be happy. I also think it is a bad idea and waste of time to try to make someone happy who is incapable of being happy.

I know this won't be well-received but here goes...the people rioting are the easily manipulated uneducated masses who are unable to think for themselves so we need to remove everything that puts the bad thoughts in their heads.We need to physically replace all their religious leaders with more moderate ones. If that precise surgical procedure fails, then the only probable solution is to ban their religion outright. Burn all holy books, destroy all holy sites, close all religious TV channels, execute all religious leaders. It might seen impossible, but no less impossible than what has been tried in recent decades.

That's worse than colonisation! (Think where the US would have been without colonisation.... still taking scalps! Sorry!) No, there is only one long-term solution.... education. Without it, there will still be rabble-rousers, and an easily-roused rabble. If the excuse of a misunderstanding of Islam is taken away from them, they will soon find another.

But I'm afraid my solution is still as 'pie in the sky' as yours.

the people rioting are the easily manipulated uneducated masses who are unable to think for themselves so we need to remove everything that puts the bad thoughts in their heads.We need to physically replace all their religious leaders with more moderate ones. If that precise surgical procedure fails, then the only probable solution is to ban their religion outright. Burn all holy books, destroy all holy sites, close all religious TV channels, execute all religious leaders. It might seen impossible, but no less impossible than what has been tried in recent decades.

Probable how, and on what empirical basis?

The way I see it, that method would just create immense amounts of suffering and (more) mass resentment leading to yet more hatred... and still fail to achieve its purpose.

The world's policeman must not retreat from the world's most dangerous region; indeed America should do more

With their

[America's]

troops now mercifully out of Iraq, their efforts to push the Israeli-Palestinian peace process going nowhere and shale gas reducing their dependence on Arab oil, surely it is time for them to leave the world's least grateful people to make a mess of their lives by themselves?

This is a seductive narrative—and no doubt it will play even better on the campaign trail after Mr Stevens's death (see

Lexington

). But it is deeply wrong in both its analysis and its conclusions. Many parts of the Arab world are in fact heading in the right direction. And in the parts that are not, notably Syria, the United States is more needed than ever.

In general, America should do more in the Middle East, not less.

http://www.economist.com/node/21562914

And that's the key point.

Like it or not the US is the only player that can coordinate a resolution of the Middle Eastern impasse.

Would that solve every issue, obviously not but until the Palestine-Israel question is addressed and a suitable compromise arrived at, there will be little overall progress.

I can't see how the US can coordinate a resolution to the whole Middle east problem area without virtual colonisation, which it wouldn't do, and which anyway would be enormously costly in lives (and money).

I said earlier that the US should interfere less. You say it should interfere more. I think we're both right! What won't work is the sort of not quite fully involved situation which obtains at present. And indeed, the Israel/Palestinian situation has to be resolved first (which I think is currently insoluble unless some new factor is introduced (and I couldn't suggest what that new factor might be)).

Arresting the maker of the Mohammed film would be shutting the door after the horse has bolted; the damage is already done.

I think the Palestinian situation is like the Mohammed video. Even if you were to solve it, they would find another reason to be unhappy, riot and hate the West. Just like they did with the teddy bear named Mohammed, or the Mohammed cartoons. I don't think these people have it in their religious DNA to be happy. I also think it is a bad idea and waste of time to try to make someone happy who is incapable of being happy.

I know this won't be well-received but here goes...the people rioting are the easily manipulated uneducated masses who are unable to think for themselves so we need to remove everything that puts the bad thoughts in their heads.We need to physically replace all their religious leaders with more moderate ones. If that precise surgical procedure fails, then the only probable solution is to ban their religion outright. Burn all holy books, destroy all holy sites, close all religious TV channels, execute all religious leaders. It might seen impossible, but no less impossible than what has been tried in recent decades.

Fair if it was also applied to the American Right Wing Christian zealots, please do not tell me that they don't preach hell and damnation to all not of their views?

I can't see how the US can coordinate a resolution to the whole Middle east problem area without virtual colonisation, which it wouldn't do, and which anyway would be enormously costly in lives (and money).

I said earlier that the US should interfere less. You say it should interfere more. I think we're both right! What won't work is the sort of not quite fully involved situation which obtains at present. And indeed, the Israel/Palestinian situation has to be resolved first (which I think is currently insoluble unless some new factor is introduced (and I couldn't suggest what that new factor might be)).

Arresting the maker of the Mohammed film would be shutting the door after the horse has bolted; the damage is already done.

I think the Palestinian situation is like the Mohammed video. Even if you were to solve it, they would find another reason to be unhappy, riot and hate the West. Just like they did with the teddy bear named Mohammed, or the Mohammed cartoons. I don't think these people have it in their religious DNA to be happy. I also think it is a bad idea and waste of time to try to make someone happy who is incapable of being happy.

I know this won't be well-received but here goes...the people rioting are the easily manipulated uneducated masses who are unable to think for themselves so we need to remove everything that puts the bad thoughts in their heads.We need to physically replace all their religious leaders with more moderate ones. If that precise surgical procedure fails, then the only probable solution is to ban their religion outright. Burn all holy books, destroy all holy sites, close all religious TV channels, execute all religious leaders. It might seen impossible, but no less impossible than what has been tried in recent decades.

That's worse than colonisation! (Think where the US would have been without colonisation.... still taking scalps! Sorry!) No, there is only one long-term solution.... education. Without it, there will still be rabble-rousers, and an easily-roused rabble. If the excuse of a misunderstanding of Islam is taken away from them, they will soon find another.

But I'm afraid my solution is still as 'pie in the sky' as yours.

I think your solution is the step that follows my solution. Replace the religious extreme with education.

Fair if it was also applied to the American Right Wing Christian zealots, please do not tell me that they don't preach hell and damnation to all not of their views?

There is no moral equivalence. Christian Holly Rollers do not preach murdering non-believers

.

I can't see how the US can coordinate a resolution to the whole Middle east problem area without virtual colonisation, which it wouldn't do, and which anyway would be enormously costly in lives (and money).

I said earlier that the US should interfere less. You say it should interfere more. I think we're both right! What won't work is the sort of not quite fully involved situation which obtains at present. And indeed, the Israel/Palestinian situation has to be resolved first (which I think is currently insoluble unless some new factor is introduced (and I couldn't suggest what that new factor might be)).

Arresting the maker of the Mohammed film would be shutting the door after the horse has bolted; the damage is already done.

I think the Palestinian situation is like the Mohammed video. Even if you were to solve it, they would find another reason to be unhappy, riot and hate the West. Just like they did with the teddy bear named Mohammed, or the Mohammed cartoons. I don't think these people have it in their religious DNA to be happy. I also think it is a bad idea and waste of time to try to make someone happy who is incapable of being happy.

I know this won't be well-received but here goes...the people rioting are the easily manipulated uneducated masses who are unable to think for themselves so we need to remove everything that puts the bad thoughts in their heads.We need to physically replace all their religious leaders with more moderate ones. If that precise surgical procedure fails, then the only probable solution is to ban their religion outright. Burn all holy books, destroy all holy sites, close all religious TV channels, execute all religious leaders. It might seen impossible, but no less impossible than what has been tried in recent decades.

Fair if it was also applied to the American Right Wing Christian zealots, please do not tell me that they don't preach hell and damnation to all not of their views?

Please show me where the "American Right Wing Christian zealots" are rioting in the streets, storming foreign embassies and killing any "non-believer" they can get their hands on? Right, you can't because it doesn't happen. But when it does, let's go start cleaning house. In the meantime, we know which house is such a mess cleaning won't do, it needs to be torn down and rebuilt.

the people rioting are the easily manipulated uneducated masses who are unable to think for themselves so we need to remove everything that puts the bad thoughts in their heads.We need to physically replace all their religious leaders with more moderate ones. If that precise surgical procedure fails, then the only probable solution is to ban their religion outright. Burn all holy books, destroy all holy sites, close all religious TV channels, execute all religious leaders. It might seen impossible, but no less impossible than what has been tried in recent decades.

Probable how, and on what empirical basis?

The way I see it, that method would just create immense amounts of suffering and (more) mass resentment leading to yet more hatred... and still fail to achieve its purpose.

I never claimed it would be easy and that no one would suffer. Sadly, it would be a BIG mess but seriously, how much angry can these people get? I'd say not very much. How much more can they suffer? Not much it appears. My question is should we start with one country, or cluster of countries? Or just shoot for a whole freakin' region? Destroying out mosques, TV stations and holy book printers would be a cake walk. Could be done in 40 Days and 40 Nights (making it Biblical would be a nice touch). Capturing leaders would be the trickiest part. We still can find One-Eyed Omar in Afghanistan. Perhaps that would have to be the first move, go in covertly before the 40-40 and take out the top 500 most influential.

Of course, being the only solution AND impossible to carry out means that there is no viable solution. So we need to get used to all the rioting and killing. Accept it as a part of life, much like the USA accepted terrorism until 9/11. Of course, maybe another greater event will come by, much greater than 9/11 which will make the impossible solution worth a try? Let's hope it doesn't.

Fair if it was also applied to the American Right Wing Christian zealots, please do not tell me that they don't preach hell and damnation to all not of their views?

There is no moral equivalence. Christian Holly Rollers do not preach murdering non-believers

.

Unless they work in abortion clinics.....

I can't see how the US can coordinate a resolution to the whole Middle east problem area without virtual colonisation, which it wouldn't do, and which anyway would be enormously costly in lives (and money).

I said earlier that the US should interfere less. You say it should interfere more. I think we're both right! What won't work is the sort of not quite fully involved situation which obtains at present. And indeed, the Israel/Palestinian situation has to be resolved first (which I think is currently insoluble unless some new factor is introduced (and I couldn't suggest what that new factor might be)).

Arresting the maker of the Mohammed film would be shutting the door after the horse has bolted; the damage is already done.

I think the Palestinian situation is like the Mohammed video. Even if you were to solve it, they would find another reason to be unhappy, riot and hate the West. Just like they did with the teddy bear named Mohammed, or the Mohammed cartoons. I don't think these people have it in their religious DNA to be happy. I also think it is a bad idea and waste of time to try to make someone happy who is incapable of being happy.

I know this won't be well-received but here goes...the people rioting are the easily manipulated uneducated masses who are unable to think for themselves so we need to remove everything that puts the bad thoughts in their heads.We need to physically replace all their religious leaders with more moderate ones. If that precise surgical procedure fails, then the only probable solution is to ban their religion outright. Burn all holy books, destroy all holy sites, close all religious TV channels, execute all religious leaders. It might seen impossible, but no less impossible than what has been tried in recent decades.

Fair if it was also applied to the American Right Wing Christian zealots, please do not tell me that they don't preach hell and damnation to all not of their views?

Please show me where the "American Right Wing Christian zealots" are rioting in the streets, storming foreign embassies and killing any "non-believer" they can get their hands on? Right, you can't because it doesn't happen. But when it does, let's go start cleaning house. In the meantime, we know which house is such a mess cleaning won't do, it needs to be torn down and rebuilt.

The point is that fundamentalists of any religion (Muslim, Christian, Jewish etc), are no fun to deal with due to their blinkered view of the world.

Ireland has a bit of form in this area with the British embassy in Dublin being besieged and eventually torched in 1972, and the Brit ambassador was murdered by an IED in 1976.