VoyForums

Tuesday, June 18, 04:44:29pm [ VoyUser Login optional ] [ Contact Forum Admin ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, [6], 7, 8, 9, 10 ]

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Date Posted: 23:53:25 04/27/04 Tue
Author: Gate Raider
Subject: It caused an uproar.
In reply to: SG63 's message, "Re: it's only a crusade in al qaeda's view" on 17:08:49 04/27/04 Tue

He used the word once, it was picked up by the press and he was severly criticized. Never used it again, obviously, for political reasons. That is why I think it will be inevitable that HC will be asked to make a change.

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Replies:

[> [> [> [> [> Not political correctness, Bush screwed up -- DamnRam, 13:43:54 04/29/04 Thu

Bush used the word "Crusade" to inspire a predominantly Christian nation that this is a just war against religious Muslims, which would take place primarily in an area of the world where religious tensions are always high and selective memories for atrocities are reinforced.

It was from a propaganda perspective one of the worst things you could do and is one of the primary propaganda tools being used against us now. It really was a major mistake which will undoubtedly be used as a textbook case in PR and PsyOps classes of what not to do. Don't downplay this as some opportunistic jab by politically correct opponents.

A major mistake he made before that was to allow Christian evangelistic groups into Afghanistan and (I believe) Iraq. Once again, it only served to hand over to the religious fundamentalists another propaganda tool to use against us. If there was any doubt amongst the people of the region that Bush wasn't motivated at least in part by his strong Christian beliefs (and I personally am not saying he was or wasn't), his Crusade remark eliminated that doubt for many of those people.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[ Edit | View ]
[> [> [> [> [> [> Another View -- Gate Raider, 23:39:01 04/29/04 Thu

We didn't fire first. Since we are a free country I don't see how the president or government could stop any group from going to another country, evangelist or other reasons. Remember Jane Fonda's travels to North Viet Nam, and others going to Cuba and the USSR? Also, Muslims practice evangelism in this country in communities, mosques, and prisons. How 'bout Jose Padilla. Do you really think the was is only being fought in the Middle East. I guess you forgot the deaths from the twin towers, pentagon, PA and the plot against the LA airport, bombings in Indonesia and Spain, plots in England and France and shootouts in Thailand. To be frank, this does seem to be a religious war fought by Christians, Jews, Hindus and, in general,Western Civilization against fundamentalist Muslims. Even more liberal Muslims are fighting against the fundamentalists. Last, there is religious freedom in the US. That really can't be said about many middle east countries even though the do have some small Christiam communities. I am sure you heard the Muslim fundamentalists who state it is a Muslim's duty to kill Christians and Jews and other non-believers as defined by them.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[ Edit | View ]

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> WRONG FORUM FOR THIS DEBATE! -- pitt65, 06:38:33 04/30/04 Fri


[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[ Edit | View ]

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Amazing. -- HC'84, 08:46:10 05/01/04 Sat

A Fordham guy and a Colgate guy debating politics on a Holy Cross sports message board. What is wrong with this picture?

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[ Edit | View ]

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> Your rambling laundry list -- DamnRam, 08:31:18 04/30/04 Fri

I am very aware of all the atrocities you mentioned (and many more), as well as all the facts you mentioned (and many more). Giving me a laundry list of all the religious goings on in the world today (and mentioning Jane Fonda for whatever reason) doesn't address my original point. When you are fighting fundamentalist guerillas militarily in their own country and hoping to win over the native peoples to keep them from supporting the those guerillas, the last thing you do is hand those guerillas a propaganda slam dunk by using the word "Crusade" (which in that part of the world is an even more loaded term than the word "jihad") and allowing in your missionaries. By the way, I haven't even mentioned the various public comments from our fundamentalist Christian groups who have been vocal supporters of the Bush Administration, and from certain officers in our military, that for them this really is essentially a Crusade of Christ against infidels. Do you think this isn't getting back to the middle east in a NY minute?

The government and our military routinely facilitates or denies access to this country and other areas that we control, depending upon whether they deem it to be in our "national interests". They go out of their way to deny access to, hamper, and occasionally even physically remove journalists, human rights groups, environmental groups, etc. from areas they control. But when an evangelical Christian group wants to prosletyze in a recently conquered Muslim area, Bush and the military (who are to say the least sympathetic to those groups, if not even politically beholden to them) lets them have free run (sometimes even helping them through various means openly and covertly). Do you think that helps us to win over public opinion in the areas our troops are literally dying to maintain control over? Do you think it doesn't reinforce the perception amongst those same people that we aren't at least partially on a "Crusade" in the classic sense of the word?

Pitt65 is right. This is the wrong forum for this discussion so I will cease on this topic. I'm sorry for posting this obviously unrelated thread on a sports board but when so many people are dying and so many stupid mistakes are being made, I feel morally compelled to speak up.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[ Edit | View ]

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Wrong again, DamnRam -- USA was founded on Christian principles, 17:00:18 04/30/04 Fri


[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[ Edit | View ]

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> That's a response? -- DamnRam, 09:29:21 05/02/04 Sun

I write a very well-reasoned post and offer to stop on this thread, and in response you post a simple "Wrong again, DamnRam" which does not in fact refute any of my points and incorrectly implies that I was wrong previously. Simple denial is not an argument. As a Colgate or HC grad I would certainly hope for better from you. A simple 'agree to disagree' would have been much more acceptable.

The "USA was founded on Christian principles" and the USA still being a predominantly Christian nation are obvious facts, not arguments. What's not so obvious is how constantly reminding the Muslims we now rule that we are an increasingly evangelical Christian nation, headed by a fundamentalist Christian president, and with a terrible national thirst for oil, is supposed to make those people more receptive to our presence.

Could you explain that?

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[ Edit | View ]

[ VoyUser Login ] Not required to post.
Post a public reply to this message | Go post a new public message
 Note: This forum is moderated -- new posts are not visible until approved.
* HTML allowed in marked fields.
* Message subject (required):

* Name (required):

  Expression (Optional mood/title along with your name) Examples: (happy, sad, The Joyful, etc.) help)

  E-mail address (required):

* Type your message here:

Choose Message Icon: [ View Emoticons ]

Note: This forum is moderated -- new posts are not visible until approved.

Notice: Copies of your message may remain on this and other systems on internet. Please be respectful.
 The Voy.com User Agreement applies to all visitors.

[ Contact Forum Admin ]

Forum timezone: GMT-5
VF Version: 2.94, ConfDB:
Before posting please read our privacy policy.
VoyForums(tm) is a Free Service from Voyager Info-Systems.
Copyright © 1998-2012 Voyager Info-Systems. All Rights Reserved.