response to sully

Submitted by a Filipino liberal (Philippines), Feb 13, 2006 at 03:55

Oh, darn, I'd almost forgotten about this post. I just noticed this now. And though I know, Sully, that you're not going to read this, I will respond, just to show some people that I do have a response.

In your "reply", you didn't actually respond to my points. Now you're saying that moderate Muslims are cheering on their radical brethren. Are they? I don't think so. But at least you believe that there are moderate Muslims.

You also said that you disagree with most US foreign interventions. I was almost pleased, until I saw "national interest". So you're another one of those cons who thinks that countries should intervene in other countries to protect their own interests. Well, I'm saying it now, that's wrong. And we were almost going to agree already. And you did give one example of a misguided intervention - the war in Kosovo! The intervention where Americans helped Muslims was, quite naturally, the wrong one. What about all the other interventions? They were right?

---

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".