Yes... my title is deliberately controversial. I don't believe for a moment that GWB is a 'messenger of God' in any way other than he might be able to read scripture publically.

But the point I'm making in this discussion, is the similarity between what the USA and Bush are doing 'now' to what Mohamed did in Northern Arabia.

Lets look at what GWB is doing:

1/ Pre-empting attacks from outside states, and attacking them. He is saying "If you are not with us, you are against us".
2/ He is binding them by treaty and political relationship to the USA sphere of influence.
3/ Those who are peaceful and supportive of the Gospel of Democracy, are left in peace, such as Pakistan.
4/ Those who are opposed, are attacked and subdued.

MOHAMED during the period of consolidation of the first Islamic State, recognized the danger of having tribes and clans to the north, which were allied with the Byzantines.

Interstingly, he sent his general up (Kalid Al Waleed) with the following message:

"Fight us, or fight for us"....hmmmm this sounds strangely like "If ur not with us, you're against us"

Any city or tribe which did not enter into treaty with the Muslims, was destroyed and its women and children enslaved.
Dumah was sacked, its prince forced to convert to Islam and become a reluctant ally.

The parallels are astounding. Sufficiently so that no Muslim should EVER criticize GWB for his actions, as they reflect those of their own prophet, with one notable exception. GWB is not asking Arab rulers to convert to Christianity.

GWB can be criticized by many of us, for many things, but no Muslim can ever do so. They are witnessing their own history, except that this time, 'they' are on the losing side.

Let me ‘deliberately’ take the bait this time.

Preamble:
Time constraint is not valid here. Prophet Mohammed lived in a time where every empire, clan, state and tribe was at war unless you have a peace treaty. There was no UN-like body to organise and maintain states relations and nation’s sovereignty.

a. Muslims early wars were survival wars. A simple proof is that in any average war Muslims were out numbered by a factor of 1:9,10 and sometimes 15.
b. Muslims protected Christians and Jews and maintained their churches and synagogues against the Jizyah (a defence tax). This was a revolutionary kind, merciful and un-heard of even by Christian empires at the time (refer to the same time history of Europe how Christian Europe was doing)
c. Muslims never broke a peace treaty unless their opponent blatantly broke it. Also, they accepted offers of peace and truce even when they were in a stronger position.
d. Muslims never converted anyone by the sword. Christians, Jews lived amongst Muslims for the last 14 centuries. The Nativity church and the early Egyptian churches were best maintained by Muslims until today. Even when Christian Europe turned on Jews in the 14th century they migrated to Muslim counties seeking refuge and protection.
e. Muslims never practised collective punishment. Even when their opponent broke a peace treaty and attacked their women and children, the prophet investigated and arrested only those who were involved
f. Muslims never looted or stole wealth of a country they dominated on the contrary, they enriched it. A living proof is Spain: the best architecture, infrastructure and street designs are where Muslims lived.

Now GWB: my personal opinion: a sincere guy more manipulated than naïve. GWB deserves respect on uniqueness: he takes decisions regardless of vote which is a good quality that western politicians should learn from.

(Continued)
On Iraq:
a. I don’t know why we are there. There has never been a link between Iraq and terrorism. The war was with Taliban (ie Afghanistan and potentially Pakistan).
Being in Iraq reminds me of old joke about the little kid looking for his toy in his bedroom. When his father asked him “I thought you lost your toy in the backyard” he answered innocently: “yes dad but the backyard is dark, my room is lit!”
Who are we fighting in Iraq?

b. I don’t need to talk about collective and collateral damage in Iraq the number of civilian casualties speak for itself. There was a number of incidents were Aussie troops objected to non-precision equipment used by the US troops. Anti-Australian and anti-Islamic practices. God bless our troops!

c. The Iraqis wealth is sucked by foreign oil companies and the ‘spoils of war’ are distributed only to US companies. One would wonder why not an Iraqi national investment board and Iraqi oil companies. I think the AWB stunt by the US was an obvious one.

d. The total destruction of Iraqi infrastructure (similar to what Israel did in Lebanon) which is the extreme opposite of what Muslims did in any country they conquered

F.H. could you please read this link, specially the part about the Tabuk campaign, and then revisit your list and see if you wish to alter or modify any points ?

http://www.witness-pioneer.org/vil/Books/MH_LM/campaign_of_tabuk_and_death_of_ibrahim.htm

You need to scroll down to about half way, and you will come across this bit (heading)

"Ibn al Walid's Campaign against Dumah"

I hope others will read the whole of this document as it is not that long, perhaps a few pages only. It would help all of us work through these important issues, and see the root causes of say F.H. viewing things differently from myself and possibly others.

I urge others to read particularly the heading cited above, and then compare the events with F.H's list :) See if there is any discrepancy, and if so, how is it explained.

Ok.. off to the gym for kickboxing :) to prepare for the mujahadeen in Melbourne..oops..WAIT.. they all pleaded 'guilty' to the charge of assault against the chanel 7 cameraman.. aah.. they will probably only get suspended sentences so I better still do a good workout :)

cheers F.H. and all.

Boaz,

I forgot to mention the historical references:
All writings of William Muir & George Sale who are credible British Historians who documented and travelled across to check historical references.

I am not using Muslim view of the universe and neither missionary propaganda sites.

I thought we are talking about GWB and Iraq? Can't you master your grudge and envy of Islam for a day?

Blessings mon ami! Ramadan is here soon.

FW,

Catholics have a type of mini-Ramadan every Friday but no feast afterward. You guys get the good deal compared to Catholics. ( :

Irrespective of controversies about the Prophet Mohammed I presume everyone would agree that he would never have done this:

Explosive damages Virgin Mary statue

By KYLE PEVETO
The Daily Sentinel

Wednesday, September 20, 2006

The calm of a Catholic courtyard built for prayer and contemplation was broken Sunday morning when a small bomb shattered the white plaster face of a statue of the Virgin Mary.

Located along a row of Christian student centers on East College Street across from the SFA campus, the courtyard sits between St. Mary's Catholic Chapel and the Catholic Student Center, where students come for camaraderie and religious study away from class.

No one witnessed the vandalism, and police have no suspects. Catholics at the center considered the act purposeful, but without any malice toward the organization.

"It kind of takes you by surprise, a little," said Omar Marroquin, student president of Knights of Columbus, a Catholic service organization. "You're angry for a little bit, but it is an act of stupidity from someone."

The vandalism occurred days after Pope Benedict XVI, the leader of Roman Catholics, drew anger from many Muslims over remarks made in a speech. Also, the Knights of Columbus donated the statue more than 30 years ago in memory of aborted pregnancies, according to the Rev. Jesudoss Thomas, the chapel minister. He said he hopes the statue's vandalism was not tied to any statement, and no group has claimed responsibility for the vandalism.

....

I think it is a stupid thing to do but it is much better a way to vent frustration than killing a nun.

Dear F.H....
I was drawing a comparison between GWB's approach to the world and Mohammeds. Thats the key to this disucssion.

The source I used is an Islamic one, and as far as I know is reliable. I gave you the link and you might have some question about it, so I ask you to scrutinize.

The writings of all those others, I cannot comment on, because I don't have access to their works, nor do I know what they wrote on the particular incident I am referring to for the purposes of this discussion.

Its not about 'hate' for goodness sake, its about me trying to delve into a particular incident as reported in a source and seeking to understand the mindset of Mohamed in that particular event.

If correctly reported, it also shows many aspects to the Muslim mindset of the day.
This is socially and historically important don't u agree ?

Please review my source and give your evaluation.
cheers, happy Ramadan

WHAT ;- Caliph JW Bush-Egad Omar Mohammad-Bush. Fairdinkum, Give me a break; some people have too much spare time on their hands.
You left out Howard and Blair. But wait a minute , how can that be , they are Crusaders; They can't be in on the Caliphate , can they ?
I can see pixies floating around me. Ooooo no.

F.H. you might like to check out this link mate... a significant Muslim from your own Islamic University.... (Egypt)

http://www.faithfreedom.org/forum/viewtopic.php?p=302730

His testimony is also linked on that site.

One day David you may understand the true meaning of hatred, it is all in the mind, you believe you are always right, maybe you are when it comes to having a memory filled with fiction, you are not capable of understanding Islam, you see Muslims as "them" because they dont belong to your invented God Club,
George Bush only has one thing on his mind , MONEY from oil, how many millions of dollars from oil and armaments, go into his fathers bank account every day, how many millions of dollars are spent every day to stop anyone getting too close to GB, he worships a antichrist disguised as God, he needs to understand God tells us we must not kill, and that he GB will have to ride a camel through the eye of a needle to get in to heaven, so how can he be a messenger from God,

Dear Athair....
I do understand about hate.. its origins etc.. from the heart..as Jesus said.

Please view this video from Indonesia, and look at our future here unless we maintain true vigilance at all times.

Just imagine if 'you' were one of the Christian ladies in this courtroom. Listen to the rantings of the Muslims outside.
Look at what these people are saying.

It appears that one of these ladies left Islam, and they want her killed.
I saw the 13 in Melbournes Country Court... I won't draw anything from that except that you may well benefit from a visit during their trial and 'see' them..... their faces...etc.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W5HCmIKAWMk&NR

Here are Bosnian Muslims desecrating a Church
http://www.youtube.com/watch?search=&mode=related&v=aeC5zbA3F-U

Albanian Muslims burning and desecrating a Church
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p8mlJpmda1I&mode=related&search=

Remember post Cronulla.. what happened to 3 churches ? Is this close enough to 'home' for you ?

Whatever else Bush may be, he is certainly fighting against this.
You can speak about resources, and its as true of Bush as it was for the Muslim Caliphs..for the Ottomans... for all. "All have sinned"

Boaz David,

You are mixing tribalism, law and order with religious practice. A simple example I can give you by the reaction of the Christian Orthodox in Egypt to a reported paedophile priest in the Church: not only did the ‘faithful’ cover up for his crimes for years, they rioted in the streets when he was arrested by the police.

In an attempt to bring some reason and rationale into the thread, let me throw a little challenge at you:

- On reason: Islam is younger than Christianity by 570 years, yet the Islamic enlightenment superseded the Christian one by 3 centuries. Muslims invented the cheque, the first concept of hospital and their research and findings in math, algebra, anatomy and optics were the corner stone for European enlightenment. Probably this is why Catholic writers at the time referred to them as evil (evil = associated with science, God forbid!)

- Credibility: Islam in essence has one source: the Quran. Quoting a story or a hadith that conflicts with the Quran discredits the story and the source. Simple really. The prophet couldn’t have opposed the Quran. In Islam the Quran is taught to everyone and not educated to the elite to communicate with God.

- Theology: Islam and Christianity in essence is one of the same. Reading the Bible (van Dyek’s bible), it is as clear as daylight that Jesus talked about himself as a prophet. His family and followers regarded him as such. How did you get from the bible (and the Quran) to today’r tri-headed Theology by using reason?

Do you have what it takes to discuss without mud-throwing?

Dear F.H. I cannot separate 'tribalism' from Mohammed. He was the perfect example. His actions are pointed to as the finest.

There is no contradiction between the Quran and say the massacre of the Banu Qurayza as it is referred to there. Just fleshed out in the Hadith and Histories.

Khaibar is my biggest worry. Mohammed's actions cannot in any way be regarded as other than his "theology in action" mate. The grisley torture of Kinana... the marraige to his wife, while his body lay on the blood soaked ground.. the imagery is almost too much to contemplate.
Even Muir your hero, writes devastating things about the 'dark' side of Mohamed's character. If you reject the portrayals of his character based on tribalism, then you must reject ALL..not just the distasteful parts.

The things you mention about history and science.. I accept them but not as from 'Islam' simply coincidence from a different stream of history, just as the discovery of penicilin was not based on 'Christianity' as much as good observation mate.

You say the Quran is tops..but to me it came 'from' Mohammed..not God.
I conclude this with ease by simply observing his 'convenient' revelations which let him 'off the hook' over controversial issues such as the marraige to his adopted sons wife and other 'convenient' verses regarding his access to women.. the mind boggles.
But I don't want to sling mud... you can read as well as I can.

Hope you are holding up well in your fasting.
Cheers

F H,

Your Egyptian example if I understand it correctly is thought provoking. The behaviour of the Christians over there is similar to behaviour that many here apparently associate with Muslims. Rioting in the streets can clearly be cultural over there. It is apparently an illiterate and volatile culture. This however ties in with the idea that the Quran is taught to everyone. To me it raises two issues:

1. It has been suggested that some political and religious power brokers take advantage of the illiteracy of the people and that the BBC Pope comments is an example. The illiterate actually believed that the Pope was insulting them because the literate wanted them to and found the misunderstanding an empowering tool to manipulate the masses. The view seems credible. What do you think?

2. Why do you consider that Christian teaching is only available to the elite. Christians for various purposes are forever trying to make Christian teachings known and in Western countries Churches were the first to push for mass literacy. Could you please elaborate on that point?

Further, it seems a little ambitious to assume that Catholic writers, at the time when their country was at war with Muslims, would have said that to conceal Islamic mathematical achievements. Da Vinci code conspiracies attributed to Christians normally relate to theology not maths. There are obviously much more likely explanations theological (contrary belief), situational, and cultural if you look at the interactions of the cultures. You seem to want to make Christianity look backward compared to Islam but rather than challenge the Muslim claim to enlightenment I'll note its controversial nature. In this forum someone claimed that the achievements were more spoils of war than personal accomplishment.

As regards the theology I do not believe that I have a van Dyek's bible but in the ones I have looked at Jesus as God and the trinity were supported.

Thank you for bringing the religions into focus in this way. It could spark some very lively discussions as you appear to essentially argue that Islam is better than Christianity.

Dear Boaz David,

First, many of the hadith you refer is a) collected two/three centuries after the prohet’s death and b) Quoted the Jewish tribes as the source/ reference.

Second, Islam is not the teachings of the prophet Mohamed but the Quran as the word of God. History proves that the prophet didn’t appreciate people calling him 'master' or 'teacher', he wanted an anonymous grave and Caliph Omar cut the tree where he used to teach after his death so people won’t turn it into a holy place. Your ‘manufactured’ grudge on the prophet of Islam is unjust and unjustified.
And given your comment: what do you think of Yahweh (the God of Israel in the OT and his prophet kings). Did you read the compulsory killing of men, women, childern and cattle?

“You say the Quran is tops..but to me it came 'from' Mohammed..not God”

Reading the Quran is a matter of individual choice and $9.95 from Dymmocks. I can only say that few thousands Aussies who read the Quran in comparison to your scripture will strongly disagree with you :) :)

The Quran couldn’t be from Mohamed for many obvious reasons (re-read the Bible and the OT carefully). You just don’t like the ‘Jesus is a prophet’ story that’s all. The Quran, the Gospel of Barnabos and many other Gospels talk about Jesus the prophet but it’s easier for you to discredit all of them because they are not telling you what you want to hear. Will you reject today’s bible because Jesus describes himself as a prophet? That the Virgin Mary had 4 younger brothers after him? (She couldn’t have done if she knew Jesus is divine).

There is an old African wisdom that says: “if a man calls me a horse I will fight him, if the whole village call me a horse, I should go and buy a saddle”.

Blessings, Ramadan is a great time for reflection and prayers.

Hi Mjpb,

Thanks for your comment.

Lets start with a minor correction I don’t see Islam as superior to Christianity but rather are one of the same fabric. I only use thought provoking statements with the likes of Boaz sometimes to cool him off but no offence is intended.

Answering your points:

1. Totally agree: the media like to stir the naïve and to be honest the local media in many Muslim countries are worse: they don’t investigate the source and try to inflame conflict situations.

2. I was referring to historical sense to present. Until the 18th and 19th century reading and teaching the Bible was restricted to those within the church hierarchy.

My point regarding history is in essence Islam and Christianity are one of the same but for some reason they seem to be both in denial about it. We share the commandments and belief in Jesus and Muslims can learn a great deal from reading Jesus history, teachings and biography. Christians can also benefit from reading the Quran, the story of the Virgin Mary and Jesus miracles (many of Jesus miracles in the Quran are not mentioned in the Bible).
The Van Dyek bible is the Arabic Orthodox Bible and you can get it via the Bible society of Egypt or from the Coptic Orthodox church community in Australia.

Apologies if I offended your beliefs but I have been struggling with "Boaz lord of the rings" for yonks.

Peace,

T

aaahhh F.H.... I see I have yet much work to do :)

MJ.. F.H. is speaking from a 'educated in a Catholic school' background. So, much of his perspective emerges from this.

I don't have time to 're-educate' F.H. right now :) but I do want to make the point above, and take up one issue..

Mary did indeed have more children. There is no problem with Jesus having been born miraculously and her having a normal married life after that. F.H. you are reflecting that Catholic background mate...

Should I tempt you with some nice friend noodles while daylight ? :)

Ok..I wont.... fight the good fight.. there can only be one winner :)
and that is the Lord.

Boaz,

My position is and have always been clear: reading the Quran and the Bible: the character of jesus is the same.

Jesus is a prophet in the Bible by his own words, for his family and friends and on the cross.

I can't see how the Bible is different to the Quran on the Character of jesus. So where did the divinity and his death for our sins come from? Later philosophies perhaps?

I took every criticism with a smile Boazy so please don't duck for cover and runaway when the kitchen is hot. Answer the question: practised christianity today is not in the Bible? how did you end up mixing philosophy and religion? If you practice the Bible and consider Jesus for what he really is in the Bible then you are technically a Muslim in denial :)

Thanks for the soup offer but I am not tempted. Maybe after Ramadan I will buy you a coffee.

Hi FH,

Don’t worry. If you say something offensive I will tell you. I have been known to do that in here. Hopefully you won’t find anything of mine offensive.

“Until the 18th and 19th century reading and teaching the Bible was restricted to those within the church hierarchy.”

If you change the date a few centuries that would be half right so I won’t get pedantic. Don’t Muslim clerics teach authoritatively? Is every Muslim required to take his or her own view of the Quran?

”My point regarding history is in essence Islam and Christianity are one of the same but for some reason they seem to be both in denial about it.”

Jehovah’s Witnesses claim the label Christian but deny the divinity of Jesus (whilst considering Him extremely important). However they use the Bible not the Quran. Mormans use the Book of Mormon in addition to the Bible but (I believe) accept the divinity of Jesus and again claim the label Christians. The breath of Christianity doesn’t stop far short of the border of Islam. Feel free to correct me if I am wrong but I’d cite the following similarities off the top of my head:

1. Worship the same God albeit by a different name.
2. Consider Jesus to be important in the ways you mentioned at the relevant time.
3. Consider the Virgin Mary as being a significant figure worthy of esteem (Didn’t Mohammed destroy all pagan statues somewhere but ensured the a statue of Jesus and a statue of Mary were preserved?)
4. Share commandments
5. Arose in the Middle East
6. Consider themselves spiritual descendants of Abraham.
7. Participated in the crusades and preceding battles ( ;

Out of curiosity … do you get Muslims who deny virtually the entire religion but still claim the label?

Finally, you are being quite provocative yourself with David (or any Christian) re: your smart alec comments about Jesus. However he has it coming given his provocative remarks calculated (I believe) to stir you.

David,

Do you disagree? Your headings alone should attract Muslim attention.

MJPB,

Good comment.

You are spot on re what we have in common with a minor correction re point 1: Allah is the Arabic name for God in the Arabic Bible as well. Muslims (and Arab Orthodox Christians) don’t translate it because of two reasons: a) it’s a word that have no plural and b) its neither male nor female.

The point I am making is to look at what’s common or look at differences is, at heart is a personal choice.
I have friends whose faith is Islam, Christianity, Jewish and of no religion or faith (including sub sects).

“Out of curiosity … do you get Muslims who deny virtually the entire religion but still claim the label?”

Yep, the obvious one is today’s organized crime labeling themselves as Muslims. Islam for us is a way to live a better life and not be harmful to one self, the society or other creatures. The Qu’ran refers to that clearly and the prophet teachings confirm it. Terrorism believe in abrogation, i.e. that all tolerant teachings of our HolyBook were abrogated/ deleted which in essence means rejecting Islam as a faith.

What’s interesting about Boaz David is his intentional use of non-credible historical references. A simple example is the same sources lies in the infancy bible (banned by the church) in which they accused Jesus (pbuh) of murdering a child at the age of 12 and used to torture animals.
Now if these sources are labeled ‘liars’ by the church (Khaibar, Bani Al Mostatlaq being among these sources), so why quote their stories on the prophet Mohamed pbuh?

Great to read from you.

Peace,

T

"You guys get the good deal compared to Catholics. ( :"

Well MJ, perhaps that explains why Catholics are going downhill
and Muslims are going uphill and expanding.

The heaven that the Catholics sell is all rather boring.
Spending time with popes and angels is all rather boring lol.

Sex is a major problem for Catholics, something to feel
guilty about. Meantime the Muslims have lots of wives,
lots of fun in heaven too. The Catholics misjudged
human behaviour, they are flogging the wrong dream :)

Hello Yabby it has been a while,

Get your mind out of your pants! : ) I was talking about a food feast not a sexual feast. FH is invited to correct any misunderstanding but I believe that Muslims have similar sexual ethics to Catholics.

"The heaven that the Catholics sell is all rather boring.
Spending time with popes and angels is all rather boring lol."

Don't knock it until you try it and don't forget that God is supposed to be there too. In any case doesn't it beat the heck out of the alternative?

"Sex is a major problem for Catholics, something to feel
guilty about. Meantime the Muslims have lots of wives,
lots of fun in heaven too. The Catholics misjudged
human behaviour, they are flogging the wrong dream :)"

I was reading some comments "The Jews were quite free of complexes about sexual life. Jewish people adored large families and hordes of chidren." Why is it that sex within marriage seems to be only a source of guilt and problems if it is within the context of Christianity?

Surely it is right to be guilty about doing wrong but if a Catholic slips up why would they feel guilty in the long term when the religion teaches that confession can absolve them of their sin? Wouldn't that make Catholics the least guilty?

FH Is it true that Muslims (presumably Muslim men) have lots of wives?

Yabby..you should have stayed in the poo trenches with pigfarmer I fear...
I think youve been talking about pig feaces for so long your starting to develop s..t for brains...

You are such an uncomplicated lil man child are'nt you?

Yabby..yabby..yabby.

Im sorry to say but poo does stick.:)I still like you but you do need to be around kinder ,much nicer pple.

George Bush is a war mongering Ronald McDonald..sorry that Im not too close to 'on topic' but it fits him and it will do.

Hi Mjpb,

Polygamy is an interesting topic although.
The turth is I probably met less than a dozen of men married to more than one wife.

If you google polygamy in the US, you will find more than 10,000 reported cases in the state of South Dakota alone among Christians.
In most cases, the male is married to more than 3 or 4.

Polygamy in Islam is a priviliege and not a right and is restricted to orphan or widow sponsorship. Male dominated cultures like African and Arab cultures naturally abuse this right.

Peace,

Sorry guys, I'm so stuffed right now.. did a 100 pushups, and 300 ab curls and 5 laps :) then a workout.. preparing for next Cronulla 0_-

I'll get back when my brain is more functional. Probably tomorrow.
thanx for participating.. Yabby.. yes.. get that mind out of your pants :)

On the issue of sex, Christians in general have no 'problem' with it as far as I know. If the Catholic Church does, its just one more reason I'm not an RC.

Laterrrz....zzzzzzzzzz....zzzzzzz....zzzzz......zzz....z

Hey... how did we leap over into polygamy here ? F.H... *pinch* I think your brain drifted to your thread :).... this is MYYYY territory ya know.. you and ur al Qaeda mates.. always trying to take our territory 0_-

MJ your observation about similarities between Islam and Christianity is valid at a superficial level. But thats as far as it goes 'Similarities'. They might mention the same people (Mary, Jesus) etc.. but are as far as East and West apart on crucial points.

Actually, this is probably not the place to debate all that. So, I'll *duck* :) and return to the topic. (for the other, goto Missionary heat thread)

GEORGE BUSH. I started the thread to make the point that He was not acting in any way that a Muslim should take issue with, because he is just doing what MOhammed did....being:

a) Taking pre-emptive action based on intelligence reports about enemies actions.
b) Making use of the enemies resources once they are defeated.

My sources are impeccable. F.H. is just slurring them because he is a terrorist :) Ok.. yes.. I am kidding. Seriously though, he is challenging them because they support my contention rather than his.
He should realize that my sources are 'Strong Hadith', and the history to which I refer often now is the very one HE (another pinch F.H.) claims are the ones he personally accepts like Muir, Guillame etc.

On Mr Bush, the more I see of him, and hear him speak, the more CONFIDENT I am that he is very naive and ignorant of the realities of Tribalism in Arab societies. Either that, or he simply says to himself "Well.. doesn't matter how much of a mess we make, as long as we:
a) Protect the oil
b) Protect Iraq from coming under Iranian control
c) Give ourselves a forward operating base for future strategic actions.

None of these things are unlike Mohammeds actions :)

Boaz,

Stick to the topic:

You quoted

"a) Protect the oil"

from the Iraqi people by handing it over to US oil companies.

"b) Protect Iraq from coming under Iranian control"

I guess this is a self contained joke: Thanks to the Iraqi invasion Iran now realised a life long dream to take control of Iraq through a democratic process. Me thinks they should erect a statue for Bush in Tehran to show gratitude.

"c) Give ourselves a forward operating base for future strategic actions."

What da....?? Sounds like a copy and paste from a BS overpaid consultant! (I am cleaning them up where I work now:)

Peace, may Ramdan bring you peace and harmony.

T