Thailand is an ally of the US in the war on terrorism, so I doubt that a non-aggression pact is in the works. And they will do what they have been doing. Enlist. Support their country and their King.

Probably thought they were Arabs.:D

This statement contradicts itself slightly. Unless by meaning "make war" you mean countering on the intellecual plane. You said it, killing the adherents does not stop it. You can oppose an idea, as we oppose the ideological beliefs you just mentioned. Hitler was defeated, but Nazism still survives today, i.e. in a weakened state. We didn't win the battle against the idea of communism, but outlived the USSR. I agree that the body count doesn't mean anything, unless you bring about the extinction of the idea in the minds of misled people. Otherwise those people are just replaced by others. If we are at war with Islam, do we then need to eradicat the religion from the face of the Earth? What of those Muslims who live in the US and those who do not agree with the violence perpertrated on innocents? I do not believe that Islam as a religion is what we are fighting but those who bring violence to the world in the name of their religion.

Sorry about the "epistomogically" thing, I wrote that after just finishing a chapter of my thesis and didn't switch gears.

They better stand up and take their ideology back from the abusers before we are forced to take more drastic measures.

There are good things about almost every ideology, religion, etc. They become a problem when taken to extremes - all of them.

Take communism for example:munchin , the idea of no strife because everybody works together and shares is a nice one. As is a government where everybody gets to participate directly and self-critics their flaws realistically. Of course it won't work, but its still a nice idea.

I agree with you. I don't have a problem with Mohammed or praying 5 times a day facing East. But when the radical minority rules the roost, is it still the minority? Is it our fault?

No I agree with you. But I do not think the minority is in total control. They are the ones we hear about and the ones we see, because they are the one who have targeted us. In essence, what they are in control of is not the population but the means of producing violent actions. On the other hand. Places like Saudi Arabia are equally a problem. Through their support of the Wahabi movement they use the money from their oil sales to filter through to the radical madrasas throughout the world and help establish religious dominance that spouts radical islamist ideals and promotes the violence against others.

I'm not answering for anybody else, but I think the difference between an ideology and its adherents is that ideologies do not change their minds. ideologies dont change at all.

people, adherents, do.

Right, they have become the voice of Islam to the rest of the world. I think that is exactly what they want.

Look, I know not all Muslims are terrorists. Just like all Catholic priests are not pedophiles. Not even most of them. GH has given good examples of non-violent Muslims in Asia.

But in any ideology, if the majority allows the minority to become the voice, then the minority dictates the course of events with regards to the external world.

Most people that go to a demonstration do not throw rocks at police, loot or set fires. But what is remembered about Seattle for example - the thousands that marched peacefully and exercised their rights or the few that caused problems? And the longer it goes on, the more you get "Well, if they're going to call me a terrorist and terrorism is the way my leaders want me to go, then I might as well become a terrorist."

Are we at war with Islam? Since the Islam most of us know is radical terrorist Islam and the Islamic world doesn't stand up and denounce the incidents and take their religion back - radical Islam is fast becoming Islam.

COME ON! Islam, communism, Christianity, Mormonism, Buddhism, Liberalism - sum total of the ideology plus the adherents and the actions taken by the adherents to give the ideology a physical existence.

Are we at war with Buddhists? NO! Because we all believe in Buddha? Is it becuase Buddhists think we are all ok people? Or is it because the adherents of Buddhism have not allowed the Buddhist ideology to be abused into attacking us?

We have a warrior ideology given a physical presence by the graduates of the Q. Without the ideology, we would be Air Force. Without the adherents, we would be simply an idea. Together, we are what we are because of what we believe and you can see it because we exist.

maybe this should be a poll. it would be messy though.

Are we at war with Islam?

- no. we are at war with a political ideology and its adherents.

-yes. our nation is or should be at war with a radical religious ideology.

-no. Islam is at war with christianity and judaism. it is a religious war.

-yes. a nation is at war with a religion when the radical religious leaders are the political leaders.

-no. a nation cannot be at war with an intangible idea.

-no. we are at war against arab playboy boozers who oppress the proletariat.

You can't separate the ideology from the action when the action is a result of the ideology.

Why aren't Christian Arabs attacking us? They're Arabs.

pulque - What are you? No laundry list. One or three words.

"I am a ..."

STOP THINKING ABOUT IT!

:(

I don't get it.

Crip - define yourself please.