>As he represents your country more accurately than you do at the moment isn't it you who is being anti american.
>
>The notion that I'm being "anti-American" is too silly to even address.
>
>The majority of Americans still would love to see an end to Islamic terrorism- but many have been conditioned (or as we say in America, p___y-whipped) into fearing that they'll be labeled as war-mongering. Well, I'm not afraid to repeat what I've said before. Just like we soundly defeated Germany and Japan in WW II, there are a small handful of countries we should burn to the ground.
>
>There is this asinine notion (and it IS asinine) that the harder we fight, the "nastier" we get....the more enemies we consequently make. A truly strong offense doesn't inspire our enemies - it defeats them. If this weren't true, we'd still be fighting German and Japanese suicide bombers today....and conversely, North Korea (whom we more or less backed off from) would be peaceful, prosperous, and free.
>
>We have been fighting Islamic terrorism since 1979, and we've lost every step of the way (including thousands of lives) - because our leaders lack the courage to do what needs to be done - burn these nation/states that have supported Islamic terrorism (Iran, Syria, etc.) to the ground. Everyone takes for granted that we've had friendly relations with Germany (well, West Germany, that's a different story) and Japan for YEARS now.
>
>But until the day we soundly fight back, we continue to face Islamic cells in North America, plotting attacks, while hiding behind constitutional protections that they have sworn to destroy.

True. Cells are hard to find and destroy, though. And they are not the same as countries. As bad as our reputation is now, it would be infinitely worse if we nuked some random Islamic country.