If we force our women to cover themselves, kill gay people, and enforce a strict religious law we wouldn't need to continue with this horrible and costly War on Terror. We'd be giving up most of our Western values, sure, but at least we'd have peace and the terrorists would leave us alone. George Galloway could probably get Britain a "good deal" in a future world Caliphate and we'd probably be able to keep our Royal Family and other institutions. Isn't that better than having one more soldier killed in Iraq or Afghanistan?
2006-09-06 21:17:55 · 21 answers · asked by Sean H 1 in Politics & Government ➔ Law Enforcement & Police
And please don't witter from your armchair about "single bit" worlds please - we're talking about the real world, not some geek Guardian reader's playground.
2006-09-06 21:28:42 · update #1
I should clarify the point above about gay people. People can't help being born gay, so the new religious order would only mean punishing PRACTISING gays with death. So we're not talking anything barbaric here. There would also be an upside for elderly men - they would be allowed to wed 12 year old girls in arranged marriages... something to put the lead back into anyone's pencil, eh?
2006-09-06 23:04:24 · update #2
Hell yes it would be easier. Let's all do what's easier. Let's lie in bed all day and feed our fat behinds. Let's quit our jobs and live off the government. Let's sit on our front porches drinking beer and wait for the Jihadists to come and kill us. Life would be so much easier.
2006-09-07 00:12:05 · answer #1 · answered by Are_You_Stupid? 2 · 2⤊ 1⤋
On the 11th of november tell that to the people still alive from the second world war. Women in the UK Stood by their men to Win that War, Why should they be pushed back into the dark ages, The people we are fighting are cowards that won't even show their faces. Our soliders are brave and will stand up for our great nation and the people that live here.
2006-09-07 04:27:32 · answer #2 · answered by thecharleslloyd 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Too many people have bled in the last 70 years to give the western world the liberties it had 5 years ago for us to "give up" now. Why should we? Our liberties, if well used don't hurt anybody and can work with reasonable Islamic laws.
Sadly, both sides are being led by people who don't want a nice simple life. People who understand Islam with a huge bias and shove it down the throats of everybody else, and westerners that have the most unethical, unecological and downright short-term idea of what friendly coexistence is on this very small planet.
Sadly, those people who want to do things differently have to put up with their leadership's mistakes because the systems (ours AND theirs) are easily kept in the hands of those who prefer blood and vengeful rhetoric.
I say the civil servants should run countries. The people down on our level, who know our problems and would clear them if global budgets for welfare were being cut to buy bullets instead. Polititians of the world, wake up! Hear the voice of the citizens! Stop bleeding us for your greater glory and profit!
2006-09-07 04:28:27 · answer #3 · answered by NotsoaNonymous 4 · 0⤊ 2⤋
This is the biggest bit of cowardly BS I have read on yahoo answers. I bet your a islamic pedophile worshipper, I cannot believe that any decent person would think this unless they have a mental health issue.
P.S.
Try that and the war it will start from folks like me will make you wish the war overseas had never stopped.
2006-09-07 08:38:10 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Sure, and I would love to be forced to pray 5 times a day, learn Arabic and read the Koran, and force my women to cover themselves up. That's what will happen if we don't stop these fanatic Islamists who want to imprison the world in their freakish philosophy.
2006-09-07 04:45:56 · answer #5 · answered by Modest intellect 4 · 2⤊ 0⤋
That's one extreme. Our current policy is another extreme.
Fortunately, we don't live in a single-bit world, and we have more than just those two options. Unfortunately, too many people are deluded into thinking we do live in a single-bit world, and they deny anything in the middle.
2006-09-07 04:21:48 · answer #6 · answered by coragryph 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
It won't happen because it would make Bush and Blair look a right couple of pillocks and they are more interested in protecting their reputation than the number of people killed - even their own countrymen.
RoyS
2006-09-07 05:15:27 · answer #7 · answered by Roy S 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
hmmm. wel lse weve got a problem. were not the worlds police. we dotn show up whenever someone has a rpoblem. they have to learn to be self governed.
if the people allow a tyrant to gein control then they choose to be under his control. forgive me if im mistaken vut didnt it take a single person int Tieneman Square to stop a tank?
if they want peace then they have to take it, just like us americans took it from the british during our independence war.
time to grow up iraq.
2006-09-07 04:19:08 · answer #8 · answered by johnny_zondo 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Absolutely, after 5 full years atleast better sense should prevail. I think it's of no use-just important lives are being lost daily, who are someone's brothers, sons, husbands, fathers. Some one should take the initiative and force the govt to end the war and make peace .
2006-09-07 04:36:41 · answer #9 · answered by anil m 6 · 0⤊ 2⤋
Are you seriously suggesting we surrender to to a group of religious freaks. "George galloway could get us a good deal" and we could keep the royals. dear god that's enough for even the most committed pacifist to reach for a gun
2006-09-07 04:35:33 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋