What is the conservative solution for the middle east?

Question

Tax cuts? More religion in the government? Traditional values? Bashing feminists and secularists?

Or nuking it entirely for Jesus?

The reason the middle east is so backward is because it is a bastion of right-wing conservatism/fundamentalism.

How about more prayer in the school?

In case any con got confused, I was talking about the middle east. They love their "traditional values" and religion in the government over there.

Spence,

Nuking the middle east, is the typical response I would expect from yahoo cons, so I thought I would beat them to it and include Jesus to expose their hypocracy.

They seem to very strong christians, but are quick to talk about killing muslims and nuking entire countries.

Answer 1

As long as they chose to be a tribal attitude it is easy for outside agitators to come an instigate further hatred. As South Africa showed there was not way to get their country to move forward by in acting retribution for past acts of apartheid. They did require that individuals acknowledge their crimes in part so that they couldn't be blackmailed for them.

Now, you asked for a solution. I've offered this one many times & I have heard anyone else thinking outside the box. As a society we have mixed feelings about the TV. We chastize the press for their spin doctoring. Now is time to use the mass media to have them question the Iraqis what is in it for them to distroy their own country. It is time to acknowledge that the US doesn't have all the answers, but we will work with them. Have the press show the movie Lawrence of Arabia. He had great faith in what they could become. The Iraqi people need to have faith in themselves the ways the Jews did. Israel wasn't always prosperous. They both had to work very hard & believe that they could make a difference. Military force can't do that, but if the press challenged their ego - who knows.

Answer 2

I don't know but I'll keep posting these definitions until you folks with so much hate start to at least define your enemy.

Liberal

Many new liberals advocate a greater degree of government influence in the free market to protect what they perceive to be natural rights, often in the form of anti-discrimination laws, universal education, and progressive taxation. This philosophy frequently extends to a belief that the government should provide for a degree of general welfare, including benefits for the unemployed, housing for the homeless, and medical care for the sick. Such publicly-funded initiatives in the market are rejected as interference by modern advocates of classical liberalism, which emphasizes free private enterprise, individual property rights and freedom of contract; classical liberals hold that economic inequality, as arising naturally from competition in the free market, does not justify the violation of private property rights.

This doesn't really sound like the classic Democrat.

How about the conservative?

Conservatism is a relativistic term used to describe political philosophies that favor traditional values, where "tradition" refers to religious, cultural, or nationally defined beliefs and customs. The term derives from the Latin, conservāre, to conserve; "to keep, guard, observe". Since different cultures have different established values, conservatives in different cultures have different goals. Some conservatives seek to preserve the status quo, while others seek to return to the values of an earlier time, the status quo ante.

Hm....I don't recognize a lot of drum beating war monger Republican in that definition, do you?

How about the neocon? Well this is a very complicated issue as it has changed in meaning since 1960's but in todays climate:

Neoconservatives also have a very strong belief in the ability of the United States to install democracy after a conflict - comparisons with denazification in Germany and installing a democratic government in Japan starting in 1945 are often made - and they have a principled belief in defending democracies against aggression. This belief has guided U.S. policy in Iraq after the removal of the Saddam Hussein regime, where the U.S. insisted on organizing elections as soon as practical

These folks really don't sound so bad either. Looks like the media (all of them, did you hear Rosie O donell on ABC the other day!) have gotten to us all.

Let's grow up shall we.

Answer 3

Glad you asked.

We have been at war with radical Islam since Iran took our embassy people hostage during the Carter administration. We chose to ignore this disease known as international terrorism for decades. We finally realized that we are at war after the attack on 9/11. The only reason it ended up in Iraq right now is Saddam overplayed his hand. He would still be in power if he had cooperated with the UN inspectors. He liked making everyone believe he had horrible weapons. After 9/11 we could not take the chance that he did and might provide the technology to terrorists. Since we were still at war with Iraq since Dessert Storm, we took the opportunity to take out his perceived threat.

The terror supporting countries in the region realize the threat to them that a Free Iraq would pose, have been supporting the insurgency with money and sophisticated weapons. The disease of fundamentalist Islam tyranny cannot abide the cure that liberty brings to the long suffering people of the Middle East.

The solution is liberty. Once that genie is let out of the bottle as it is now in Iraq, it is impossible to put it back in. However, my well meaning liberal friend, do not expect the tyrants to go away peacefully.

The tree of liberty must be watered from time to time with the blood of tyrants and patriots. Freedom isn't free. But it is well worth the cost.


.

Answer 4

Whats the liberal solution cut and run, give in to their demands, buy them out, or make them give up their faith? You can go to hell for all i care you liberal. I say we dont give up in Iraq the troop increase is actually working. I don't always support Bush but overall i don't think he's all that bad of a guy.

Answer 5

Drill our own oil in this country, then we won't need the middle east. But for some reason the democrats in congress don't want to drill in our own country for "environmental reasons":, but prefer to buy oil from other countries, where they have to drill anyway. Idiots.

Answer 6

sterotyping. I do not believe in nuking the mid east for Jesus as much as I believe in nuking America for Alla. Jesus would not want to nuke them.

Answer 7

keep sending more troops for the next decade until every last dime America can muster has been transferred to arms barons who preside over the military industrial complex. After that - who cares?

Answer 8

The true conservative will conserve his fellow humans life in an effort to restore peace.

For the majority of Americans this conservativism is best represented in the Democratic party.

Answer 9

I guess you could say the republicans are fighting their own image. It is rather strange how many of the good christians in the republican party are so willing to deal in death.

Answer 10

Indoctrinate the people of what is proper and moral for the world.