R. – “Another way to fight back is to understand what drives them.”

There seems to be a school of thought that if one understands another person, one has to “forgive” them.

In the US, “understanding” is limited to somewhat ridiculous explanation, such as “they hate freedom”, or “they hate our material wealth”. In this country we have short memories and in reality many Muslims have a reason to resent the US. For instance, the CIA overthrew a popular regime in Iran, installed the Shah, taught his secret police how to torture their own citizens, and the US purchased oil.

No one has ever adequately explained to my mind how someone elses "freedom" would drive anyone to be a suicide bomber. I can understand a bit better how killing or causing a person's family to be killed could lead to some reckless response.

Many Muslims regarded that as terrorism – overthrowing the legitimate government and installing and equipping a puppet dictatorship. Didn’t like it. Didn’t like having the CIA and SAVAK torturing them, either. Not even a little bit.

We in the US, the very MOST enlightened people, say, “Well, we had to do it. No hard feelings, OK?”

There are hard feelings. But we don’t think they are reasonable, because they don’t understand. We HAD to do it. (That’s nonsense, but that’s the line.)

“They are humans ready to go to such extremes. Humans grow up, earn a living, have children, responsabilities; same in the muslim countries.”

That’s true, but if recognized would lead to understanding and that might lead to forgiveness. That’s what Jesus preached.

However, children and mobs cannot think that deeply, and prefer for the old “eye for an eye” WITHOUT understanding the nature of the enemy. Head to the most immature denominator, and that’s what happens.

As for what COULD happen, look to Desmond Tutu and South Africa. Children will not understand what has happened there, and make fun of it. Mobs don’t “get” it.

There’s an interesting story, reported as true. When the Crusaders (professing Christians, I don't think Christ would have recognized them) first “took” Jerusalem they reported to the Pope that the killed so many of the infidel that their horses were up to their knees in blood.

When the Arabs (Muslims) took it back, they allowed the Christians to remain, practice their faith in their own churches, etc. There was no slaughter for the sake of slaughter.

Arf