And Pars, I like Turks and Turkey so much, that I have bought a house there. Turkeys path under Ataturks direction has been the most sane and prescient policy in the Muslim world. In my view he was the greatest leader of the 20th century. It's a pity other Muslim countries didn't follow his lead. I am sure that I will feel confortable living there.

Because Islam, as it is practiced throughout much of the Moslem world, is a crime against the rest of humanity. Until, or unless, Islam changes, it will never be respected. Only feared, and from fear comes hate, and they shall reap what they have sown. BIGGER BOMBS, CL

Whether “peaceful” or “fanatical”, muslims as a whole believe that there can be no “peace” until there are no “unbelievers”. “Peaceful” muslims wait patiently, “fanatical” muslims impatiently pursue the same goal. Until islam preaches religious freedom, the world is in jeopardy.

***"A culturalist would even took Hitler's word if it is against Muslims."*** Perhaps, but the truth is that Hitler sided WITH islam!

Well you have a point Herot. I can't much argue with that. But what is the solution? Can Islam and the West co-exist or must one prevail over the other?

>>But what is the solution? Can Islam and the West co-exist or must one prevail over the other?<< My tentative read of history is that Islamic raiding is endemic throughout the whole history of their relations with non-Muslim neighbors. One example is that of the Eastern Roman Empire. The Byzantines were able to fend off Islamic raids by having regional cavalry units constantly patrol their frontiers. The central government eliminated these because experienced military units under regional commanders often had ideas about who should be emperor. The raiding resumed once the regional units were gone. The Byzantines were never able to control the raiding after the battle of Manzikert. The constant raiding gutted the imperial presence in Asia Minor. The Islamic fighters who participated in the raids were called ghazis, holy warriors. Islamic fighters who died were martyrs. Islamic rulers who sponsored ghazis derived great prestige from it in the Muslim world. The Turks saw this as right and natural, it was their destiny to complete the Islamic conquest of Rum (Rome). This had been a goal of the Muslim world for centuries. Was this just something “long ago and far away”? No. Lowell Thomas’ autobiography records that in the 1920’s he was not able to film in the area of the Khyber Pass, because some Afghan tribes had, “gone ghazi” and were raiding in the northwest frontier of British India. Were all the Muslims being taught to kill and plunder from infidels? No, only some of them. And only some Muslims are being taught to kill and plunder infidels today. Of course now the ghazis and martyrs are terrorists. Can we coexist? Yes, as long as we are militarily vigilant, and as long as we win the battles we choose to fight.

We will respect Islam enough to tell Indians to give up Pakistan, just as they gave up Afghanistan centuries before. We will respect Islam enough to tell Israelis to give up the Gaza Strip, and demolish their synagogues and exhume their cemetaries on the way out. We will continue to respect Islam and anguish over upsetting the same people in the Islamic world that we willfully avoid profiling for terrorism on our own soil. We will respect Islam until we are all dead.

>>My tentative read of history is that Islamic raiding is endemic throughout the whole history of their relations with non-Muslim neighbors.<< I must also say that living next to feudal nobility in Western Europe was an inherently warlike life.

...islam still lives in the middle ages.

i just had to change that title. been pissing me off for awhile.