The Ba'athists were and are secular for the most part. Those in both Iraq and still in Syria are socialists, no doubt, but have absolutely no world domination platform of any kind, or if they do, it' has never been acted on so far.

As I've repeatedly pointed out, both Hussein and the two Assad's have put down numerous attempts at religious coup d'etat's by groups such as Al Queda and others.

You are, as usual, completely ignorant of these issues.

Invade Iran? Only if president Bush is not satisfied with securing the title of "worst president of our time", and wants to make a run at "worst president of all time."

Could happen, I guess. He's pretty ambitious.

Is it the economy or is it not finishing the war on terror in a 30 minute sitcom like fashion that you think will secure that perception in the history books?

wiki'ed this:

Fascist-derived ideologies in the Middle East such as the Kataeb Party, the Baath party, and the Syrian Social Nationalist Party have been explicitly secular, and have drawn their strongest support from minority groups in the Arab world which feared the consequences of an Islamist government. The founders of the SSNP, the Baath, and the Kataeb were all Christians, and the movements have tended to have their strongest Muslim support from religious minorities like the Sunni Arabs of Iraq or the Alawites of Syria."

Regarding "Islamofascism" :

Islamofascism is a neologism and political epithet used to compare the ideological or operational characteristics of certain modern Islamist movements with European fascist movements of the early 20th century, neofascist movements, or totalitarianism. Organizations that have been labeled Islamofascist include Al-Qaeda, the current Iranian government, the Taliban, the Muslim Brotherhood, Hamas, and Hezbollah. None label themselves fascist, however, and critics of the term argue that associating the religion of Islam with fascism is both offensive and historically inaccurate. On the other hand, Daniel Pipes equates only militant Islamism to fascism. Thus Pipes and most others critics say they refer to a small number of Islamist zealots, including terrorist groups such as al Qaeda.

Hitler was a secularist too. The Baathist party began in association and inspiration of the Third Reich and Adolph Hitler. They did have visions of world domination, and if they didn't certainly fundamentalist Islam does. They both require political dictatorship. They both hate Jews. They both agree with you that America is the aggressor.
And I have beat your ass on this issue several times. Hussein himself had direct ties to fundamentalist Islamic terrorist organizations. He, in fact, had a Quaran written in his own blood and penned official documents giving honor to Allah.

"...finishing the war on terror..."

How exactly do you finish a 'war' on a word? Terror is not a state, a country, a race, a religion, a sect, cult, or even a readily identifiable person. Whose to say its finished?

Regarding "Islamofascism"
Of course, you're completely ignoring the actual definition of fascism

The essential ingredient to fascism is not any partnership with the corporate world. The essential ingredient to fascism is socialism and the necessary totalitarianism that it requires.

Hum, he promised a 30 second war and we are into the 2nd day.
We didn't finish with the bad guy who attacked us, but decided to go after a bully/blowhard in the local neighborhood for some unfounded reason.
Since removing him, we can't make the neighbors agree to anything. Funny thing, they have never seen eye to eye before.


Is there anything I missed?

The same types of critics that are trying to get "illegal alien" removed from public discourse. Those offended by the term "Islamofascist" have an axe to grind or a cause to support that is countered by the truth of the statement. Fundamentalist Islam, as well as secular Islam, are simply an Arab equivalent to Mussolini's brainchild.

THe actual defn. . . .too funny.

Yeah Mul, don't you know? . .. Fascism 'now' means Bushism .. therefore Islamofascism now must mean Christian Bushism. --try to keep up would ya. ;)

oh, and the leftist sub text is: "I am rubber you are glue....

such tools :rolleyes:

No, that's incorrect.

The Bush'ists are a type of fascist.

So you offer that under Hitler's regime, Hitler was controlled by the corporate interests?, or would you assume Hitler gave the execs an offer they couldn't refuse?...hmmm?

Your linked definition is simplisitic and self-serving, it is fallacious.

Yeah Pat . . sssssuuuurrrreeee . .. ..and Christians are Islamic. Don't you know about that link? --it makes them the same.:rolleyes:


fas·cism n. 1. Often Fascism.a. A system of government marked by centralization of authority under a dictator, stringent socioeconomic controls, suppression of the opposition through terror and censorship, and typically a policy of belligerent nationalism and racism. b. A political philosophy or movement based on or advocating such a system of government. 2. Oppressive, dictatorial control. [Italian fascismo, from fascio, group, from Late Latin fascium, neuter of Latin fascis, bundle.]

per; American Heritage Dictionary

Indeed, Glenn, that is the closest definition to fascism I have seen put forth.

edit: the "belligerent nationalism and racism" I think are byproducts of the European brand of fascism, not necessarily main ingredients...In the case of Islamofascism they are replaced by "irrational Islamism and religious bigotry."

Seems that definition would have fit the Shah of Iran more than current government.

Please...The Shah was an ally, not an enemy...Carter's legacy is the Iran we see today.

obtuse again. Whose talking about friend or foe?
The Shah was a tyrant in his own country. Just didn't have the belligerant nationalism in his psyche.

Compared to the present nutcases, that was a good thing.