I am willing to have patience with a moderate Muslim. I have no patience for a moderate Muslim whose patience has worn out.
As to the power of dogma:
I don't hear many Christians offering "the other cheek" to these terrorists, though it is the bedrock of Christ's teachings.
My solution in the present instance, though radical, is very sane (as in M.A.D.=mutually assured destruction; it worked for 50 years). But I don't think it will even be considered, because it is deemed "unthinkable". Let me suggest that the "unthinkable" occurred on 9/11 and the taboo is already breached -- so far, it's been a one-way deal. Consider:
I am sorry to say this, but I find Islam to be friendly, cordial, hospitable -- to MUSLIMS ONLY. To the infidels (US), it is vindictive and barbaric. The terrorist attack we have just witnessed was SPAWNED in Islam. There is no shirking or refuting this. It is not only tolerated, it is encouraged, funded, and cheered (most of it secretly for fear of exposure of Muslims for the scurrilous beasts they are). To them, there is, as you say, no concept of live and let live.
And, far from being anathema to the Koran, the terror we just witnessed could easily be rationalized by such words from the Koran, such as "Kill them wherever you find them; over such men we give you absolute authority"; "strike terror into the hearts of the enemies of Allah..."; "...take neither Jews nor Christians for your friends...whoever seeks their friendship shall become one of their number." I quote. So, don't excuse Islam. It is the milieu in which these bewildered barbarians, who worry because the world has passed their religion by, these anachronistic a$$holes, it is the milieu in which they have hatched terrorism. And, dammit, it works for them, because they are also patient. They will lose war after war, yet call themselves victors for a whole nother century because they downed the infidels' trade center.
It is a good thing I am not president. Since we have no country to fight back against, we are currently frustrated. Not me. I see that our enemy is Islam -- barbaric, intractable Islam, with its atavistic dreams and visions and its fatuous designs on world domination (what a joke!). If I were president (again, luckily, I'm not), my only debate would be between the following two options:
1) announce the need to evacuate Medina (second holiest site for Islam -- Mohammed's burial place [you see, he's still IN his grave, yet he's greater than Jesus? Go figure]) prior to our nuking it; OR
2) DON'T announce it; just nuke it and let the rags fall where they may.
In conjunction with that, since they've given us the excuse, have hated us, do hate us, and always will hate us anyway, have hated Israel, do hate Israel, and always will hate Israel anyway, I would also encourage Israel to take a couple thousand pounds of high explosives up to the #3 holy site -- the Dome of the Rock (aka the in-your-face-Jews mosque) and blow it to smithereens. Again, the tone for this has been set by Islam, as have the terms of the war. Since they hit us in a place calculated to disturb the very core of our belief system, we need to do the same to them -- hit them in a place that would be calculated to strike at a symbol of THEIR core beliefs and values, to produce the kind of distress and angst in their minds as we are suffering, and to give them pause concerning continuing to play this kind of hardball with so formidable a foe as the USA.
Wednesday, our President (whom I dearly love and support) declared war on terrorists, which is a bastardization of the term ("war"), since war is, by definition, a state of hostility between nations. WE SHOULD HAVE DECLARED WAR ON ISLAM, politically incorrect though it would be, because in this case, it is the closest we can come. In fact, everyone on "Talk Back Live" Sunday afternoon declined to admit that Islam was the actual foe. But Farrakhan is right -- it IS a nation of Islam, and they stick together when it comes to Israel and the USA. The street celebrations and their subsequent efforts to minimize and prevent televising them should tell you that.
To any who would say, "Nuke Medina? Wow, that'll make the Muslims mad." I say, "Duh!", the already are mad, and they always will be!". To any who would say, "Wow! That'll make 'em REALLY do terrorism to us!" I say, "Duh!, they already do!" And then I say, "Muslims: better rethink that -- BECAUSE MECCA IS NEXT." In that sense, Mecca, then becomes hostage -- contingent on Islam's good behavior. And the perfect hostage it is, for without Mecca, they have no religion. It is truly a sine qua non that is without parallel in the religious world. Hardball. They threw the first pitch, high and tight. Now, it's our turn. And we'd better not throw some lousy knuckleball.
If Allah feels that dishonored, how come He doesn't come down and straighten the Jews and Christians out Himself?
I saw a muslim cleric on one of the news channels this weekend. He explained that Islam teaches against killing Christians and Jews because they are "of the book". This is, of course, different from your point and from some of my online searches on the Koran which talk only about not killing "believers", which I take to mean Muslims and not Christians and Jews. Why do you think this person has a different interpretation?
********************
Does anyone know the difference between Sunni and Shiite Muslims? My understanding is that the Shiites are the more militant group.
Anyway, has anyone heard a Muslim explanation of these militant verses in the Koran?