I certainly didn't mean to imply that. I agree with you.

My point is that some people want to insist that the president is a Muslim implying that he is sympathetic to the radicals. Other people believe that they are all radical and some are simply hiding the fact.

Let me make this clear. I do not like this president's policies or ideas. I didn't vote for him either time and will not vote the democratic candidate next time around. But I believe that we should stick to substantive issues and not resort to ridiculous name calling.

I was not implying that all Muslims are bad. I was responding to the people who do think that that way.

I am yet to meet a good Muslim or anyone of the Islamic faith. I feel confident the may exist, but I have not witnessed a lot of condemnation of radical Muslims from the rest of them. Until I see otherwise, all mulims are intent on killing me, my family my children and my grandchildren. I hope I am wrong about this.

Biggest question for me right now is WHO are these rebels ?

The Free Syrian Army....The Syrian liberation Front...Syrian Islamic Front..Jabhat al-Nusra, etc. etc. All I have seen mentioned. To me our leaders need to concentrate a lot on that.

Colin Powell in 2003 and now
 

I wanted to see how Colin Powell viewed the WMD situation in Iraq in 2003, leading up to invasion on March 19, 2003, and now in 2013 in Syria. These two links are instructive....

Briefing on the Iraq Weapons Inspectors' 60-Day Report: Iraqi Non-cooperation and Defiance of the UN

Secretary Colin L. Powell
Washington, DC
January 27, 2003

Well, good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen. Earlier today, in accordance with UN Resolution 1441, Doctors’ Blix and El Baradei provided the United Nations Security Council their 60-day reports on inspection activity in Iraq.

We listened carefully as the inspectors reported that Iraq has not provided the active, immediate and unconditional cooperation that the Council demanded in UN Resolution 1441.

As Dr. Blix said, "Iraq appears not to have come to a genuine acceptance, not even today, of the disarmament that was demanded of it." Let me repeat, because this is the essence of the problem. Dr. Blix said, "Iraq appears not to have come to a genuine acceptance, not even today, of the disarmament that was demanded of it." 1441 is all about the disarmament demanded of Iraq.

The inspectors' findings came as no surprise. For 11 years before 1441, Saddam Hussein's regime refused to make the strategic decision, the political decision, to disarm itself of weapons of mass destruction and to comply with the world's demands.

To this day, the Iraq regime continues to defy the will of the United Nations. The Iraqi regime has responded to 1441 with empty claims, empty declarations and empty gestures.

It has not given the inspectors and the international community any concrete information in answer to a host of key questions: Where is the missing anthrax? This is not just a question of historical curiosity. It is essential for us to know what happened with this deadly material.

Where is the VX? Also not just a trivial question. We must know what happened to this deadly material.

Where are the chemical and biological munitions? Where are the mobile biological laboratories? If the Iraqi regime was truly committed to disarmament, we wouldn't be looking for these mobile labs. They'd drive them up and park them in front of UNMOVIC headquarters for inspection.

Why is Iraq violating the restrictions on ballistic missiles? Why is it violating the ban on missiles with a range of more than 150 kilometers? Where are the credible, verifiable answers to all of the other disarmament questions compiled by the previous inspectors?

Today, we heard that the inspectors have not been able to interview any Iraqi in private. We heard that the inspectors have not been allowed to employ aerial surveillance. Why not? If Iraq was committed to disarmament, if Iraq understood what 1441 was all about, they would willingly allow this kind of surveillance, they would willingly allow people to be interviewed without minders, without fear of retribution.

We have heard that the inspectors have still not received, a full list of Iraqi personnel involved with weapons of mass destruction. If Iraq no longer has weapons of mass destruction, they should willingly give the names of all who were involved in their previous programs to the inspectors for examination and interview.

The inspectors told us that their efforts have been impeded by a swarm of Iraqi minders. Why, if Iraq was committed to disarmament, would they be going to these efforts to deceive and to keep the inspectors from doing their work? Passive cooperation is not what was called for in 1441.

The inspectors have also told us that they have evidence that Iraq has moved or hidden items at sites just prior to inspection visits. That's what the inspectors say, not what Americans say, not what American intelligence says, but we certainly corroborate all of that. But this is information from the inspectors.

And the inspectors have caught the Iraqis concealing "top secret" information in a private residence. You all saw the pictures of that information being brought out. Why? Why, if Iraq was committed to disarmament, as required under 1441, would we be finding this kind of information squirreled away in private homes, for any other reason than to keep it away from the inspectors?

The list of unanswered questions and the many ways Iraq is frustrating the work of the inspectors goes on and on. Iraq's refusal to disarm, in compliance with Resolution 1441, still threatens international peace and security. And Iraq's defiance continues to challenge the relevance and credibility of the Security Council.......

Briefing on the Iraq Weapons Inspectors' Report

Aug. 25, 2013 - COLIN POWELL: Syria Is An 'Internal Struggle' That Is Beyond US Capabilities

Read more: COLIN POWELL: Syria Is An 'Internal Struggle' That Is Beyond US Capabilities - Business Insider

"....In both Egypt and Syria, America has to take a much more clever role," Powell said. "We shouldn't go around thinking that we can really make things happen. We can influence things and we can be ready to help people when problems have been resolved or one side has prevailed over the other."

"To think that we can change things immediately just because we're America, that's not necessarily the case," Powell said. "These are internal struggles."

His comments are in stark contrast to Sens. John McCain and Lindsey Graham, who both have called for "limited military actions ... that can change the balance of power."

In a joint statement from both Republicans, they said "the longer the conflict in Syria goes on, the worse and worse it gets and the more it spreads throughout the region."

A retired four-star general, Powell served as Secretary of State during the Bush administration from 2001-2005. His testimony to the United Nations in 2003 was instrumental in garnering international support for the Iraq war.

Read more: COLIN POWELL: Syria Is An 'Internal Struggle' That Is Beyond US Capabilities - Business Insider

Wow! That is all I have to say about this.

How many Muslims have you met personally? How did they harm you?

Add to the scenario....almost 2 MILLION refugees from Syria in the region.....over 700,000 to Turkey alone (another brewing crisis here).

We are told that poverty, desperation, etc breeds terrorists and terrorism so if you look at the map in the link, you can almost see the area that WILL flare up.

Stories from Syrian Refugees

I am personally torn about all of this. I want to say, let them figure it out, but I also know we have serious interests in the Middle East and can't. I want to say bombs away, but, in my opinion that will make it worse.

I guess for the last years we have ignored Egypt, Libya, Syria, etc thus the problem is magnified.

We should all pray that our elected officials do not make this discussion political and understand ALL ramifications. And pray they all of a sudden, in lieu of pure politics, get wisdom.

I do not feel confident. A lot of what I hear is sounding partisan. This issue, addressed a year or so ago instead of...well..whatever, but it is now even more multi faceted and complex. I keep saying, to me, an important issue is determining exactly who are these rebels. ANY action will help them....although since we are already supplying some arms to them,let us hope we have identified them.

Understand But
 

I understand the problem with surgically removing the snakes who killed over a thousand children BUT having said this I have a hard time believing that to be politically correct we should kill thousands of innocent people because of a few and to do this to be sure we are PC. There are killings of leaders all the time. As I recall we killed Osamba, the Russians have killed a number of leaders who disagree with them, etc.etc. I have a hard time pointing this out as I don't think it should be a "way of life". BUT when terrible people take it upon them selves to kill thousands of children I lift the restrictions and say go get them. When the Muslim's killed all of the Olympic Jewish team Israel tracked down the killers over a few years and met their life for a life. They did not bomb Muslim countries but surgically made the killers pay for their killings.
What makes a great society is the ability to be civil and disagree with each other. Thank goodness for The Villages :rant-rave:

That's all there is to a great society. In a great society, there isn't much disagreement. "Diversity is good" is the great lie. People who are alike get along, people who aren't don't. You don't get a great society from people who don't get along.

Take The Villages as an example...do you really think it would be what it is if it were "diverse"? I don't think so... The truth is hidden from us.

I consider myself well read and, although not Mensa material, I pride myself on being fairly smart with abundant common sense and be dang if I can figure out how a strike can help in any way! (Other than possibly making someone feel better about themself). Two wrongs never make a right! The risk is too great that it will cause more harm than good. Seems Assad (if we are to believe everything we are told) killed over 100,000 people before anyone took an interest! I smell a big ole rat!

Really?? Someone should have told that to Hitler, Mussolini, Hirohito, Osama bin Laden, Saddam Hussein, Manuel Noriega, and give me a little time and I bet I can come up with several more. How about Abraham Lincoln and John F Kennedy,Yitzhak Rabin, Anwar Sadat.
Which world leaders exactly have signed on to this agreement?

Off the top of my head... Hitler was suicide, Saddam was tried, Mussolini was killed by the "Italian resistance movement", Hirohito died from cancer, Noriega was tried...

What does this have to do with one nation assassinating another nations leader? That's not what happened in your examples.

I don't understand your point. That leaders die? Yes, everyone does... But not by state sanctioned assassination. And that was the point I was making. 1st world states don't assassinate the leaders of other states.

I am in this wagon also. The only ONE we should go after, if anyone, is the ONE who gave the order. If we start bombing we will have several million more Muslims willing to be suicide bombers.

I have worked with Muslims when we lived in Wash D. C..

They all harmed me by remaining silent after 911. Any person not condemning radical Muslims supports their actions. That silence hurts me and mine.

YES! Until they are prepared to condemn their own, no support from this house.

Golfingnut and Madelaine are correct even if we don't really care for how it was stated.

Silence is a very telling attribute of every Muslim I know. I also live in the DC area and I know many. A few I count as people I know well. Notice I did not say friends intentionally. I have even discussed the terrorists attacks and the radical jihads with several of them. These are good people. The live, work, raise children, shop, and socialize with others.

However not a single one of them will condemn the actions of the radical side of their religion. They don't openly support those actions, but they also do not condemn them. They remain silent. They are taught in their church that you and I are infidels. They are taught that we are not to be tolerated. They are taught that killing us is not a sin, but an entrance to paradise.

Until the leaders of the Muslim world come out and condemn the actions of those that want to kill us, until they stop teaching their children that destroying all infidels is the right thing to do, I will not condone the silence they support by inaction. So far not a single one has publicly stated their condemnation of the radical side of their religion or people. That position is not acceptable to me.