So you suggest a 100% reactionary stand?
Speaking of #1, would you consider the horrors on humanity that have been committed in the name of Islamic Jihad a "war crime"? If yes, then why should we not attempt to halt the spread of radical Islam? If no, then, well, why not? Islamic radicals have started a WAR. They are at WAR with the West. They kill their teenage daughters in "honor killings" for crimes like wearing a skirt and lipstick. They kill gays for being gay. They stone women to death for the crime of being a rape victim.
And you say there is no reason to stop the spread of that ideology?
What are you comparing Islamic "Horrors" too? Just so we have a benchmark.
Personally..I hate theocracies..the Nazis were mixing government with religion and it had horrible results. And history shows that religion is a terrible way to go in terms of governance. You get things like the inquistion, the crusades and the holocaust. But if that's what people want to do..have at it. But they must adhere to international law.
- Beheading non-believers
- Stoning women to death for being raped
- Killing teenage daughters for dating or wearing skimpy clothes
- Blowing up masses of innocent people in cafes, markets, buses
- Killing gays, for being gay, banning their existence
- Trying to wipe Jews off the map
Just a sampling of the Religion of Peace in action.
What I mean as a benchmark..is in comparison to what other religion?
Seems that the major three have a lot of blood on their hands.