It's about time we talk about Syria...

[Taem]

...much better approach would be, in my humble opinion, to disprove the existence of religion entirely, thus negating all forms of religious war, turmoil, and subjugation due to extremists views of all religions and cults - which is really what all religions really are anyways.

People have all kinds of odd ideas and beliefs. As long they aren't harmful, live and let live. Some ideas like burning witches, or genocide are too dangerous to let run wild. Or even Nigerian mystical penis thievery when it leads to lynch mobs. The short answer, from Bill Maher recently was, "To Claim Islam Is Like Other Religions Is Naive And Plain Wrong". The risks of you traveling to Jerusalem, Tehran, or Amman are very different than your risks in traveling to Cairo, or Riyad. Keeping the war ravaged nations out of it... Comparatively, we don't have much to fear from Mormons, unless you are a teen aged girl whose father is in the minority FLDS.

I don't think we need occupation. Just an intolerance for a homicidal extremist ideology, and a plan for seeing it is bounded. But, not such a simple thing when you have a regional ally (Saudi Arabia) founded, and steeped in it. I feel sad for those who suffer, and I abhor the barbarity, the stonings, beheadings, mutilation, public whipping, and slavery. The extremists feel it's justified to kill you, an unbeliever, wherever you are in this world. In Europe, and the US, where we have a long tradition of the separation of church and state, we are facing an increasing number of people who do not understand the rationale, history, and so do not share that value. -- Islamic Law in a Modern World.

Nine things you’ll learn from Pew’s poll of the world’s Muslims.

I read your post yesterday. I reread it this afternoon. I read it again just now. It's interesting that I got something a little different each time I read it. I suppose that's why communicating via internet can be a confusing place. Not where I was going with this at all, but wanted to mention it nonetheless.

Anyway, I feel like you are nudging us (the readers) to make a statement for/against Muslims so you can respond to that reaction with your own opinion.

The reasons I believe this, starting from the top of your post, are because three of your four provided links either poke fun at or examine how Islam will not work in a modern society; because your analogy of world travel pits hotbed terrorist/civil rights activists areas with Islam agendas versus previous hotbed areas that are no longer as volatile in an attempt to draw attention to how Islam must be the cause for all this anger in the world; because you tie all this to a "we", pulling the reader into your cause, and finishing with an absolute: "should be intolerant of homicidal extremist ideology"... no shit, but you just tied it all to Islam with that one statement, rather true or not; because you then enlighten us to the atrocities committed by, oh, I don't know, like every terrorist organization out there, including the Lords Resistance Army and even drug cartels in Mexico (i.e. "barbarity such as stoning, beheading, mutilation, slavery..."), and then go on to tie this extremism again to religious fanatics who want to destroy unbelievers, strongly hinting at Islam without actually pointing the finger; and because in your final sentence, you are playing coy with the innuendo that Europe and the US do not share the values of Islam, which on it's own is a complete falsehood since in both nations religion and state are separate, but when combined with the rest of your assertions paints a bleak picture of Islam. Versus what, your point of view?

Rather or not I agree/disagree with your statement is irreverent to what I see as a poor way of presenting an argument, and a prime example of manipulative coercion. You direct the reader down your narrow vision then provoke them into a verbal trap where any response they make will prove your point further. It's clear to me that you don't agree with Islam. I don't like any organization that calls itself a religion, period. I get your point and I agree extremism should be stamped out, but I disagree on pinpointing any single group. My issue with Islam is that it stemmed from the Judeo-faith and thus all religions based on that one religion should be dismantled in my opinion. I can make quite the convincing argument on how this huge faith, with it's many offshoots, has distorted the ethics of morality the world over and is either the direct cause or main reason for much of the inequality, sexism, and xenophobia in this world today including many laws directly influenced by this religion.

While I do agree Islam has it's fair share of fanatics, I don't blame this off-shoot directly, and I don't believe stopping this one zealous group of believers would solve the long term issues with faith; no, I blame the entire religious system itself which I think should be dismantled with something so simple... truth! I'll stop there because I feel a serious rant coming on, and I don't need to nitpick facts when I've done the research myself and would be happy to share if asked.