An exercise in compassion (Galloway's statement)

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060526/ap_on_re_eu/britain_galloway
Galloway: Blair's death would be justified

You are a radical Islamic fundamentalist that believes that your culture and society are being threatened by evil outsiders collectively know as THE WEST. How do you fight them?

If I recall my history correctly, the British felt that our American army acted like terrorist for failing to honor traditional military combat structure.

I am no fan of Blair's (I actually despise him) but I have been impressed in the past with some of Galloway's positions. However this is BS.

The crux of the matter is that both Blair and radical Islamists are egoists who feel they each have the last word on truth. And being so full of themselves each feel morally righteous,acting as inspired followers of their respective gods.

For those who have to bear the brunt of these power-hungry egoists there is a great difference between Blair and Islamic fundies, namely Blair can be run out of office, but radical Islamists like the Taliban cannot, once they have power their is no dissent, there is no way out.

How should the taliban fight the west?

and get its own act in order. But that is not going to happen because being extremists they are incapable of doing what is required to get its act in order such as giving women full rights, allowing dissent, acknowledging that there is no right way to interprete their religion etc.

And what's with the notion of fighting the west anyway? The west is not the monolith Islamists wish it to be.

edit spelling

(or at least they were).

If you don't believe those things are proper, how would you stop their influence?

these things are proper but their OPINION is not shared by 100% of their countrymen and women. However there is no room in their fanaticism to accomodate those who have other views.

peace

If they gave women equal rights, permitted dissent, and became religiously tolerant, they wouldn't be Islamists... they would be Turks or moderate Muslims like in Indonesia. Who they are depends on them being monomaniacal zealots with little regard for innocent life or human rights.

I wrote that they ought to reform. Like you I too believe that because they are extremists internal reform is beyond them.

Most of our battles were fought in a traditional, European fashion. Long Island, Princeton, Brandywine, Germantown, most aspects of Saratoga(except for sniping officers), Monmouth, Camden, Guilford Courthouse, etc were all set piece European battles. Only a handful were fought with guerrilla type tactics.

There was far more disdain pointed at Washington (from primary sources I've read) for failing to give them the satisfaction of a miliary showdown year after year than with the relatively few hit-and-run raiders of the Marion and Clark variety. They still considered the Americans rustics for how they fought.

We lost most of them. Most of Washington's campaigns were much more conventional than he is given credit for. The nasty guerrilla stuff was part of an overall strategy, but mainly implemented by local commanders in areas like western New York and the south.

In the end the war was won by the brilliant maneuvers first of Nathanael Greene in the south and then the trapping of Cornwallis at Yorktown. The guerrilla campaigns played a role, but not a large one. That is more myth than fact. I used to believe that nonsense myself until I studied the war more closely. It is American populist schlock and little more.

To pretend it was not the french intervention that did the saving,
the presumption of colonial imperial power is overimpressed.