On a much simpler level than that, why should we be "protected" by the government from speech that they decide people might find uncomfortable, when there is no incitement to violence involved? It's one thing if private citizens restrict what goes on on their property (such as their homes, message boards, or companies), but when you have restrictions at all associated with elections or government, that really gets into First Amendment territory.
The Saudi and Kuwaiti royal families support quite a few things inimical to other Muslims, as well as the mass of the population in their own countries, in pursuit of their personal interests, mainly to do with oil. Insofar as the general population of Saudi Arabia and Kuwait supported the sanctions, Sunni religious bigotry against Shia and ungodly Baath socialists is indeed a factor. (To still be unaware of the antagonism between Sunni and Shia brands you as grossly ignorant or shamelessly dishonest.) Turkey, which is predominantly secular, never supported the US assault on Iraq with the same enthusiasm as Saudi Arabia and Kuwait. It's government refused to allow US forces to invade Iraq via its territory. Who knows what would happen if Turkey were strong enough to defy the US? As is, Turkey's attitude towards Iraq is determined by the Kurdish problem. More generally, Turks are not Arabs. Religious bigotry is not the only cause of man's inhumanity to other men.
The sanctions were aimed at containing or toppling Saddam and his Tikriti lackies, who are all Sunni, not Shia. Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, and Turkey had no problem with Iraqi Shias, who'd never been in power and never presented a threat to anyone but the colonial British and Iraq's Ba'athists. Um, Turkey is strong enough to defy the US, and did, as you mentioned. All other countries are likewise strong enough to defy the US, and do so daily because they know we don't expect other countries to do our bidding. We can't even get third world allies to cooperate on most matters, even trivial matters, and even if we tried there would be a dozen other American interest groups telling them to do the opposite of whatever the State Department wanted. So even if they were inclined to obey Americans, which ones would they obey, since Americans can't agree on anything? That is the magic and genius of American foreign policy. I've noticed that most non-Arabs aren't Arab. It's probably just coincidence, though.
^^^The psychotic belief that "all other countries" defy the US "daily" suggests paranoid feelings about how the US is persecuted! The notion that foreign governments spend their time responding to unofficial interest groups is just dumb. Blandly ignoring the fact that religious bigots hate socialists is just dishonest. Saudi Arabia and Kuwait and Turkey have a big problem with Iraqi Shia, especially in conjunction with their friends, the Iranian Shia. If they hadn't had a big problem with the Iraqi Shia, they'd have helped them overthrow Saddam in the aftermath of the "First" Gulf war! Everything you write is vicious nonsense.
I'm a believer, and I have no problems saying that my beliefs are irrational and not based upon logic. Faith is an illogical concept.
Well, with time you will learn that, despite claiming the contrary, gturner is usually taking the piss. He's fun nonetheless.
Um, no. Other countries don't elect governments just to have them kowtow to the crazy notions of a US ambassador, who probably doesn't even speak their language (except the US ambassadors to Britain, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, etc), and who only has the job because he made a bunch of campaign donations in Topeka. Nor do they feel intimidated by our State Department, as they have their own foreign services staffed with bureaucrats. Actually they do, as do we. Who do you think all the lobbyists are? What do you think AIPAC is? Amnesty International, the ICRC, and a thousand other groups, including the press? They all get meetings with government officials or write scathing reports that cause government officials lots of headaches. Boy, that's quite an insultingly broad brush on the bigotry comment, so I'll just ignore the rest.
Eh, I have an example: http://trekbbs.com/showthread.php?t=129855 What exactly are prayers gonna help there?
What concern is it of yours? Seriously. You bump a two week old thread to complain about something that doesn't affect you negatively in any way. What you just linked isn't an example of religion, it's an example of community support, something you apparently still need to understand. That one's simple.
Are you fucking serious? Are you actually using another thread created by a poster asking for help to prove a silly point of yours? That's bullshit and you should be ashamed of yourself. I say this as someone who 100% does not believe in God.
Well, it may be an example of religion, but it's definitely not an example of hypocrisy. Some people really do believe that prayer can help others, there's nothing hypocritical about asking for something you believe might help. Trekker is not an atheist IIRC. JR obviously thinks it's silly and pointless, and shoehorned his opnion into this discussion for some reason.
Even though that thread is not in reference to someone posting here, it's REALLY low class behavior to resurrect a topic in order to use a four-month-old child's unexpected death as the launching point for your personal crusade against religion. I have to wonder at your lack of judgment in posting that. Did you honestly think that would go over well, with anyone? What's the damage in asking for prayers and condolences? It does absolutely no harm to you or anyone else and you are under no obligation to participate. If the very notion of someone asking for or offering prayers for the death of a co-worker's infant child offends you so much, you bite your tongue and show a little respect. As an atheist your post embarrasses me. Please think before you post next time. Frankly, you're lucky the person Trekker's thread is about was a co-worker and his child rather than a member of this board, or your behavior would have gotten you a trolling warning.
Being agnostic means no one agrees with you. Squarely between belief and nonbelief makes it hard to answer. The believers think you're just an aethiest and aethiests think you're just in denial and do believe in something. There are a lot of unanswered and unanswerable questions but even if there is a God or other divine being, he's not just standing around somewhere waiting for you to ask him for help, you need to do some of the foot work on your own. An all-knowing being would also know what you believe or think and should not require you to pray or beg for help or forgiveness if it's truly something you think. But that's a far cry from saying there's nothing there or that whatever is there is uncaring or aloof to the troubles of mortals.