Extremists behind insane hostility

When a young man calmly explained to CNN that he doesn't blame the United States, but that everyone involved in making the anti-Muslim film that hurt his feelings should be executed, I felt so sad.

I wondered, what kind of twisted sociopath teaches children that when someone stupid says something hateful they should be murdered? Certainly not anyone of faith.

The jackals behind this insane hostility are extremists whose influence depends on conflict. Just as the Ku Klux Klan has nothing to do with Christianity, these extremists have nothing to do with Islam. Devils claiming to be angels are still devils, and radical "religious" leaders are no exception.

Let's retaliate by reminding one another at every opportunity that this is not a conflict between countries or peoples or ideologies or faiths. It's a battle between a minority of desperate demagogues and the rest of us. You know, the rest of us: the overwhelming majority of decent people throughout the world who are getting better and better at getting along with one another.

Chaz Hunt

El Cerrito

Extremists danger to world peace

There are two ways of retaliating -- one is a military response and the other is financial aid.

A military response should be out of the question, other than to protect Americans. But a full-fledged attack at this time should be a last resort.


Advertisement

However, it should be made clear that if Mideast countries can't control their people, we can control our money.

Yes, the video was crude and offensive, and some people will intentionally do things knowing it will cause trouble, as was the case here. But that is no reason for the rampage. Do we go on a rampage when they burn an American flag? The flag means more to me than their Quran.

Right now the Islamic extremists are proving what many Americans are saying: They are a danger to world peace. They should grow up and quit acting like children.

Johnny Strawther

Antioch

Eliminate foreign aid to retaliate

The retaliation the president always has at his disposal, and to which he swore an oath when elected, is to stand by the First Amendment -- our freedom of speech, accorded to us by the Constitution, even if it is offensive.

Giving credibility to a video released last year -- now misused by the media and politicians -- as a pretext for the well-coordinated attack (with advanced warnings), on the very day of the 11th anniversary of the attack on the Twin Towers, is despicable.

In 2009 in Cairo, President Barack Obama said, "Islam has a proud tradition of tolerance." Really?

Today, in 2012, complete chaos is raging throughout the Middle East, yet Mitt Romney is blamed for interfering with Obama's re-election with a statement Romney is allowed to make.

This administration is perceived to be weak and disengaged from Israel. Obama's belief in leading from behind is now kicking us in the behind. At what price? How many lives?

Eliminating the more than $2 billion aid from those who kill our officials on our sovereign ground is a realistic form of retaliation.

Irene Lynch

San Ramon

Wrong for U.S. to retaliate

Other than our ongoing battle with al-Qaida, I do not think we should retaliate for the attack of American embassies in the Middle East.

We have plenty of experience of how protests can get out of control in our own country with the Occupy movement over the last year. In those cases, the protests usually started off peacefully, but were hijacked by small groups of out-of-control thugs, just as we are seeing in the Middle East.

Unless intelligence information was available in advance, there is no way the Libyan police could have prevented the preplanned and coordinated attack on our consulate, any more than the police in Aurora, Colo., could have prevented the tragedy that happened there recently.

While we could retaliate against a government that sponsored terrorist actions against us -- as when Libya financed the Lockerbie bombing -- we should not retaliate against citizen protesters who were taken over by an out-of-control fringe element. Nor should be retaliate against their governments simply because they were not able to control a mob situation quickly enough to suit us.

Linda Pinder

Clayton

Cut foreign aid and penalize

Yes, we should retaliate for attacks on U.S. embassies.

Cut $1 billion in foreign aid to every country where this has happened. Add an extra $1 billion in penalties for every American life that was taken. This could include Afghan attacks on Americans, whether in embassies or not.

Like it or not, money makes the world go around. This would give incentive to leaders to guard our embassies and American lives better.

Also, bring individual assailants to justice.

Dale Harder

Castro Valley

Can't reason with the extremists

We should. We've been at war for 10 years now, sending troops to be slaughtered, training people to be a competent police presence, sending millions of dollars to help become a "democracy." These people can't be reasoned with.

The man who made the film had every right to do so. America has free speech. If Muslims keep saying they are people of peace and aren't extremists, why are embassies attacked and innocent people killed?

People of Catholic or Christian faith have listened and watched people degrade Jesus Christ. They don't kill people for what they believe.

Attacking innocent Americans because you disagree of a film showing Muslims in an unfavorable light shows you're not a peaceful nation. You are an extremist and terrorist.

More troops won't end the insanity. I am ashamed our leaders are apologizing for our country. We should show we are a proud, strong nation. If there are more attacks, take a look at hard but war ending decisions previous leaders like Truman did in the past.

Annie Barnes

Union City

Our policies help create hostility

A provocative anti-Muslim movie sparked protests, including the horrible murders in Libya. However, those protests would not happen in a different environment where there wasn't already enormous antagonism to the United States.

The sad truth is that U.S. policies in favor of oil corporations, the military complex, dictators and Zionists cause enormous harm and suffering. We should respond by reviewing and changing those policies. The huge majority of people in the United States and in the Middle East would benefit and be pleased.

We should stop supporting Mideast monarchs and dictators with our military support.

We should stop supporting Israel with our taxes ($10 million per day) until they end the occupation of the West Bank and remove their laws which give preference to one ethnicity.

We should stop allowing Zionists to influence our policy. There is a special historical, religious and diplomatic significance to Jerusalem. Most of the world knows this and that is why no country has its embassy in Jerusalem. Yet politicians continue to pander to Christian and Jewish Zionists and blindly inflame hostility against us. Then they wonder why.

Rick Sterling

Walnut Creek

Give them what they want -- barbarism

Pull the weapons caches that we are protecting in those countries, evacuate embassies, eliminate foreign aid.

Let them live like they want, early 20th century barbarism.

David Velasquez

Hayward

Let our freedoms be the retaliation

Darn tootin' we should retaliate, with the best retaliation there is: to let freedom ring in no uncertain terms.

Retaliate by standing strong, uncompromising, for our Bill of Rights. The Obama administration should stand by the First Amendment.

If free expression (however rude or insulting) causes bloodshed, then miniskirts cause rape, because dressing sexy provokes the potential rapist.

Should we kowtow to those who rape our embassies, our flag, our freedoms, our lives? No more apologies to those who would murder us because we are free.

Jay Jaffe

Concord

Against any retaliation in response to attacks

The following quote is from Michel Chussodovsky, economics professor at University of Ottawa: " ... the wars launched since that fateful autumn day in 2001 -- in the bitterly ironic name of 'justice' and supposedly to combat 'terrorism' -- continue to take lives of people across the world. These wars are based on lies and their costs are staggering."

I believe the United States has the goal of eventually taking over the entire Middle East and dividing it up into easily manageable client states. Because I oppose such a goal, I'm against any further retaliation in response to the U.S. embassy attacks.

Moreover, I'm of the opinion that the anti-Muslim film was a cheap public relations stunt designed to polarize the various culture groups. I also believe the embassy attacks were carefully coordinated to foment as much dissension as possible in order to justify additional NATO/U.S. intervention in what were previously sovereign Middle East countries.

Marilynne L. Mellander

El Sobrante

Take immediate action with missile strikes

We should retaliate against the terrorists in the Mideast. We can't tolerate the murder of our ambassador and his colleagues or attacks on any of our embassies.

We should take immediate actions with well-placed missiles in Yemen, Sudan, Pakistan, Syria, Egypt, on so forth. They only understand violence in these countries. Anything less is seen as a weakness and encourages more violence on their part.

We should pull our embassy folks out of these countries and then warn their governments that we are going to destroy their capitol buildings -- and then do it.

Additionally, we should warn them that any further violence against us will result in us totally destroying Mecca and Medina. If they don't listen, we should then do it. We have to hit them where it hurts.

Unfortunately, I don't believe our wimpy government will do anything meaningful. Our leadership has been engaged in Arab bootlicking too long, especially the president and secretary of state.

It's time we face up to the fact that nothing will change until we show some guts.

Ken Hambrick

Walnut Creek

Stop subsidizing hostile countries

Reflecting on the ongoing horrendous, hateful events in Libya, Cairo, and all the Muslim world, it would appear Islam is definitely not the religion of peace and tolerance, as some Muslims would like us to believe.

These violent, murderous events occurring now and that have occurred in the past around the globe, indicate that any real or perceived offense against Islam, no matter how trivial, is always an excuse for Muslims to rise up, burn, destroy, maim, and kill. Why is it?

If other major worldwide religions, such as Christianity, Hinduism and Judaism, were to take umbrage every time someone dared to offend them in some way, intentionally or unintentionally, the entire world would be on fire!

I think it is high time for the U.S. government to stop subsidizing those countries full of hate with the hard-earned money of us citizens.

Sylvia Downs

Concord