One issue at a time "Javed". Take the U.S. in Iraq ...simple, Arabs needed someone to do their for them.

Submitted by kman (United States), May 25, 2009 at 00:23

The U.S. went their because no one else would take responsibility for ensuring world oil supplies by getting rid of one of history's worst and most evil despots - Saddam Hussein. The Arabs say to stay out & let Arabs handle their own affairs in Arab ways. Big problem - the Arabs were sitting on their duffs doing nothing about the one man powder keg at the center of world commerce.

The Arab way is to do nothing because they are to cowardly to address the problem. The western powers took care of him, and Islam decided to make Iraq their battle field, so the Muslims are responsible for the continued U.S. presence their.

AS for the American way of handling the native population in this continent, yes there certainly could have been a better way, but you make a historical pimple into a mountain. Now you take the Muslim incursion into, first, the Middle East from Africka and then into Europe where they slaughtered, raped and plundered with total abandon. No comparison.

As for Dev, you generalize to the extent that you totally abandon perspective. What happened with American Indians is a mole hill compared with the ongoing slaughter of billions by Islam - as a matter of policy.

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".