Frank wrote: "I'm sorry, I don't follow you. I guess you are saying "Arab is not the same thing as Muslim and Arab Muslim is NOT the same as fundamentalist Muslim", if so I disagree. The Islamic religion fits the definition of fundamentalist perfectly[*1]. A strict code of rules that must be followed and takes precedent over civil law. Not all Muslims are terrorists or radical but they are all fundamentalist[*2]. If you scratch a fundamentalist you find a radical[*3] whether they are Muslim or Christian. "

This makes absolutely no sense, Frank, you contradict yourself in this statement:
Frank Premise#1: All Muslims are Fundamentalists (*1)
Frank Premise#2: Not all Muslims are radical (*2)
Frank Premise#3: if fundamentalist 'F' is a fundamentalistm then 'F' is a radical (*3)

Following immediately from Frank Premise #1 and Frank Premise#3: All Muslems are radicals.

Which direcrly contradicts your second premise: Not all Muslims are radical

Do you deny That you said and mean 1,2 and 3? And do you find my deduction invalid? And If you do, do you refute Logic itself?

This is contradiction.

Furthermore, its EMPIRICALLY ABSURD! There are Arab christians, non arab Fundamentalist Muslims, Arab secular Muslims and on and on. Please, don't make these absurd universalizations that equate apples with oranges! This is like saying All Europeans are Chrsitians, and All Christians are Fundamentalists, and All Fundamentalists are radicals. Or All Israelis Are Jews, all Jews are Fundamentalists and all Fundamentalists are radicals.

In all three cases (Israelis/Jews, Euros/Christians and Arabs/Muslims) There are INSTANCES of radical fundamentalism, and INSTANCES of association of ethnicity, but the universal statement is FAR from accurate by the sheer weight of obvious counterexample.

Painting all Arabs with the brush of Muslim Fundamentalism is entirely false. Painting all Arabs with the brush is absurd.

But I will believe you if you can simply demonstrate this statement as true: All Arabs are Radical Muslims. (You can't, its not true)

There are MANY folks in america who wish to see religious christian dogma and doctrine supercede secular law. This does not make America a fundamentalist state. It is, last I checked, the general position of the Church that Christian Law should exceed secular law when Christian Law and Secular Law conflict. This does not make all Catholics radicals.

Frank wrote: "Iraq has a tradition of being ruled by a despot. Their potential tendency toward secular life is based on their relative educational level and not tradition. The possibility of an Islamic state is a living threat but perhaps easier to deal with than say, Afghanistan."

Again, this makes no sense. I thought All Arabs Were Fundamentalists, but here you acknowledge that Iraq is secular, and Arb Iraqi society tends towards secularism. So what is it? What is the case? How is it that Iraq is the homeland of Muslim Radicalism?

You are being inconsistent Frank. So are you right or atre you wrong- or do you have the Magic Manna Hat that allows you to be right but unable to state your argument in logically consistent ways? And How is this different from Faith?

Frank wrote "I almost didn't even respond to this but I will, simply to say that If you don't believe in Arab brotherhood as it applies to non-Arab, ask an Arab. Of course they have tribal hatreds but unity against non-Arab transcends. You also can't separate Arab and Muslim fundamentalism. The religion dominates their lives. "

First off, respond or don't respond. Don't try the highschoolish rhetorical technique of the 'lazy handwave' with me.

If you believe in Arab unbity, point to it. Point to the political consistency and coherence in the Arab world? Again I state (and you have not refuted:) The Secular OPEC has shot itself in the foot even though it is Dominated by Arab states and Arab interests. The Arab League can not even get a Quorum together.

Frank wrote: "You also can't separate Arab and Muslim fundamentalism. The religion dominates their lives. "

Again, you state the logically impossible. There are Arab christians, A few even Arab jews. There are non-fundamentalist Arabs. There are Fundamentalist Non Arabs.

Your statement that 'all Arabs are Muslim fundamentalists' is absurd, especially when cast against what you have already admitted Iraq is: A secular muslim society.

I know you want to resolve this by sayng "see, you have your truth and I have mine". But Frank, if were going to galivant around the world Occupying nations and KILLING VAST SUMS OF PEOPLE, don't you think that moral relativism is the WRONG footing? Don't you think that the foundations for war should be logically at least difficult to refute, at least not contain self-contradiction and empirically invalid statements?

We can run back to our respective perspectives on Tax Cuts and Entitlement programs, sure Frank. Bit don't you think we owe it to the folks who die in these struggles to be as right as we possibly can?

We can have our emotional 'I feel this way' causes for salads and internal politics, but we DON'T have that right as soon as we point our guns at another human being.

In this situation, frank, you are either Consistent and Correct or you are A thug who just murdered 10-15,000 people.

Davin L.