What Am I Missing, brah?

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
81

[quote]Gkhan wrote:

[quote]orion wrote:
quote]

There are no formal Muslim authorities, there is no such thing as a Catholic Muslim chrurch.

They are not one uniform block either, there are Sufis and Alewites on one side of the spectrum and Wahabites on the other.

[/quote]

At one time there was a Caliph. There also was a Sultan. Most of the great Muslim leaders were conquerers. Go figure.

The worst we can hope for today is a Wahabi Caliphate ruled by Al Qaeda to counter the Reactionary Shia in Iran. That’s where it’s headed right now. For all you guys who hate Muslim dictators and kings this is the alternative.

Do you want that?

If not, then you surely can understand why we’re fighting this war (in Afganistan, Pakistan, Yemen, Somalia, ect…Iraq is another story).

[/quote]

Neither of them is strong enough to win in that struggle, unless of course you unite them because you kill so many of them that they forget their religious disagrements.

82

[quote]Chushin wrote:

[quote]milktruck wrote:

[quote]Chushin wrote:

[quote]milktruck wrote:
Bottom line is, all religions have been excuses for heinous shit, and nobody can point fingers. People are people and sociopaths come in all stripes, surprise surprise.

Why does present tense matter? You seemed to be comparing radical islam and radical christianity as fundamentally different in regard to their constituents propensity to do atrocious things. Any evidence that you dont like you dismiss by narrowing your definition, and you insult the intelligence of the person who gave the evidence.

You obviously are pushing an agenda here and trying to validate something you really want to believe.[/quote]

Hey Milky,

All I did was question another poster’s statement. (It’s still there, if you’d like to actually read it)

If that doesn’t fit YOUR agenda, then stay out of the discussion or start your own.[/quote]

Yeah and your premise that it matters when a religious sect was invoked to justify violence and oppression is you backpedalling. They are both susceptible to the same crap, because the crap is human, not religious. However, dogmatic belief systems are a great vessel to justify expression of some baser human tendencies. Christians are made of the same shit as Muslims who are made of the same shit as non-religious people, etc.

Sorry Im not allowed in the discussion if I question you, but thats they way these things work.[/quote]

Nah, you’re allowed.

Just learn to read so that you can actually follow the discussion without telling people what they are thinking.

Otherwise, stick to delivering milk.

Oh, and you can shove the “backpedaling” charge up your ass, at least until you actually clarify what my point was without attempting to read my mind. [/quote]

Its hard to follow the discussion when you post vacuous things like this and expect me to pretend a discussion is going on. Im going to stop pretending now.

84

[quote]orion wrote:
[/quote]

Neither of them is strong enough to win in that struggle, unless of course you unite them because you kill so many of them that they forget their religious disagrements.

[/quote]

I believe this is happening, not because we’ve killed so many of them, but because their hatred of infidels and the West is so strong it unites them. Iran and Al Qaeda can unite to attack a common foe, just like in the past feuding tribes united to do the same.

You say they are not strong enough to win…just give Iran a nuclear edge and see what happens. You’ll have nuclear blackmail to protect the exportation of terrorism and an arms race in the Middle East.

85

[quote]Gkhan wrote:

[quote]orion wrote:
[/quote]

Neither of them is strong enough to win in that struggle, unless of course you unite them because you kill so many of them that they forget their religious disagrements.

[/quote]

I believe this is happening, not because we’ve killed so many of them, but because their hatred of infidels and the West is so strong it unites them. Iran and Al Qaeda can unite to attack a common foe, just like in the past feuding tribes united to do the same.

You say they are not strong enough to win…just give Iran a nuclear edge and see what happens. You’ll have nuclear blackmail to protect the exportation of terrorism and an arms race in the Middle East.

[/quote]

Ah, they hate you so much that you really had no choice but to attack them.

I mean you blockaded their ports so that their children and parents died, you killed their neighbors, sons and daughters, but their hatred is “irrational” yet your anger is justified when 3000 people and mere real estate go up in flames.

86

Question…don’t let your hatred of America get in the way of your logic.

When you say we blocked their ports, who’s exactly?

Saddam’s? I thought there were no Al Qaeda in Iraq till after the invasion. If there were then the invasion is justified.

Iran’s? Are you saying Iran is in charge of Al Qaeda?

Bin Laden’s? Which ports does he own?

Saudi Arabia’s? When did this happen? We had troops stationed there.

Afghanistan? Hell, it’s a land locked country…

So who’s ports did we block and what the hell does that have to do with 9-11?

87

[quote]Ct. Rockula wrote:
Why all the fear/hate for Islam?

I’ve always seen suicide bombers as the low level citizens who are desperate to give their families a better life by selling their own life as “martyrs”…I really don’t believe the whole “Holy War” thing at all. I’m not understanding the connection between Islam and street kids that launch attacks for money…I’m sure money is the incentive and not the purging of Christians or Jews.

IDK really, but, why isnt this the more common thought pattern? I mean, the formula for destruction has always been the same, right? Desperate poor people being taken advantage of by batshit leaders…right? Germany and Japan come to mind right now…even in my own experience from high school, the kids who had “no future” were treated like royalty by the recruiters at the school.

Anyway…why arent we hearing or seeing it from the stance I’ve presented…or am I just completely off base?[/quote]

You’re completely way off base.:wink:

Actually many media pundits have presented it your way, completely or deliberately ignoring that many suicide and other bombers are wealthy and educated. Some women were recruited to be suicide bombers, too.

To make this short - because this discussion has been carried in other threads on Islam - it’s the ideology.

And it is definitely a Holy War.

BTW, it is a Holy war whether you believe it or not. You’re just new to it that’s all.

Some of the many sites i visit for info:

faithfreedom.org
muslimagainstsharia.blogspot.com

A good set of books to read of the Doorstop Kind are The Legacy of Jihad and the Legacy of islamic AntiSemitism, both by Andrew Bostom. Incredibly comprehensive and chock-full of primary sources.

88

[quote]Gkhan wrote:
Question…don’t let your hatred of America get in the way of your logic.

When you say we blocked their ports, who’s exactly?

Saddam’s? I thought there were no Al Qaeda in Iraq till after the invasion. If there were then the invasion is justified.

Iran’s? Are you saying Iran is in charge of Al Qaeda?

Bin Laden’s? Which ports does he own?

Saudi Arabia’s? When did this happen? We had troops stationed there.

Afghanistan? Hell, it’s a land locked country…

So who’s ports did we block and what the hell does that have to do with 9-11?[/quote]

You blocked Iraqi ports which led to the death of hundreds of thousands.

89

[quote]orion wrote:

[quote]Gkhan wrote:
Question…don’t let your hatred of America get in the way of your logic.

When you say we blocked their ports, who’s exactly?

Saddam’s? I thought there were no Al Qaeda in Iraq till after the invasion. If there were then the invasion is justified.

Iran’s? Are you saying Iran is in charge of Al Qaeda?

Bin Laden’s? Which ports does he own?

Saudi Arabia’s? When did this happen? We had troops stationed there.

Afghanistan? Hell, it’s a land locked country…

So who’s ports did we block and what the hell does that have to do with 9-11?[/quote]

You blocked Iraqi ports which led to the death of hundreds of thousands.
[/quote]

And your source for this declaration is…?

90

[quote]orion wrote:
You blocked Iraqi ports which led to the death of hundreds of thousands.
[/quote]

Glad you decided to answer me. So, you are saying Saddam and al-qaeda are linked? I thought this rumor was proved false.

Then Bush’s war was justified…

(but seriously Orion, the inspiration behind 9-11, according to Bin Laden, was the Israeli invasion of Lebanon in the 1980s and Saudi Arabia housing US forces.

Had nothing to do with Iraq.

If al-Qaeda was concerned about Iraq why didn’t they take out Saddam? He killed far more people in Iraq and Iran than United Nations sanctions ever could have. Plus, Saddam used money allotted for food to supply his army.)

Bottom line they were UN sanctions, not US sanctions.

91

Saddam killed more than UN sanctions… with weapons the West sold him in the Iran-Iraq war.

The evil Taliban sponsoring Al Qa-eda attacked America on September 9/11… those noble mujahadeen who in the 80s Reagan’s government gave money to fight off the evil soviets and to whom Rambo III is dedicated.

America’s foreign policy biting them on the ass? Oh no it’s a crusade of Holy Islam. People in Iraq attack US troops. Well what did we ever do to them? It’s not as if we destroyed their infrastructure and energy supplies, created high unemployment, allowed stooges to become presidents, that some soldiers killed and raped Iraqi citizens? No they’re all terrorists who want a global caliphate not humans anywhere who don’t like other people invading their country and leaving it in a state of chaos!

As ye sow so shall ye reap

93

Nice straw man. I’m not sure at what point I said the Soviet Union was full of sunshine and rainbows. The wars and takeovers the Soviet Union conducted in Eastern Europe are far different to the war in Afghanistan anyway. It’s not as if your efforts to stop Vietnam becoming Communist, or indeed most of South-East Asia had any effect. No one has ever conquered Afghanistan, not Alexander the Great or Genghis Khan, why would the Soviets be any different?

Chushin, I’m not suggesting by any stretch that the Soviet Union was better than the USA as you’re implying. I’m merely arguing that sponsoring the Mujahadeen was at best, idiotic, and at worst, ridiculously short sighted.

And you can’t act as though the US has only implanted democracies and freedom wherever it has supported foreign countries. I could point out the dictatorship in Guatemala in the 50s, Pinochet, Mubarak, the corrupt Georgian leader sakaashvili (sp?), Karzai grows more dictatorial by the day…

My point was that American foreign policy frequently blows up in its own face. The idea that the Islamic world, with 1.5 billion people, has some kind of united front is to ignore ethnic, regional and religious divisions.

95

[quote]Bambi wrote:
not Alexander the Great or Genghis Khan, why would the Soviets be any different?

[/quote]

Alexander conquered it in approx 327 BC. 200 years later this guy was still in charge and kicking butt and taking names:

Menander I - Wikipedia

Genghis Khan conquered it. It was given to his son Chagatai and called the Chagataid Empire. It was in existance for 400 years.

Just because they don’t still hold it today, doesn’t mean they didn’t conquer it.

The Roman Empire fell, so did The British Empire.

and so did Alexander’s and Genghis Khan’s.

Just because the Soviets did not win does not mean we can’t.

-edit here’s an article about Soviet aid to Iraq during the Iran/Iraq war.

http://en.citizendium.org/wiki/Soviet_support_for_Iraq_during_the_Iran-Iraq_War

96

[quote]DrSkeptix wrote:

[quote]orion wrote:

[quote]Gkhan wrote:
Question…don’t let your hatred of America get in the way of your logic.

When you say we blocked their ports, who’s exactly?

Saddam’s? I thought there were no Al Qaeda in Iraq till after the invasion. If there were then the invasion is justified.

Iran’s? Are you saying Iran is in charge of Al Qaeda?

Bin Laden’s? Which ports does he own?

Saudi Arabia’s? When did this happen? We had troops stationed there.

Afghanistan? Hell, it’s a land locked country…

So who’s ports did we block and what the hell does that have to do with 9-11?[/quote]

You blocked Iraqi ports which led to the death of hundreds of thousands.
[/quote]

And your source for this declaration is…?[/quote]

Madelaine Ablbright.

Apparently “it was worth it”.

98

[quote]Gkhan wrote:

[quote]orion wrote:
You blocked Iraqi ports which led to the death of hundreds of thousands.
[/quote]

Glad you decided to answer me. So, you are saying Saddam and al-qaeda are linked? I thought this rumor was proved false.

Then Bush’s war was justified…

(but seriously Orion, the inspiration behind 9-11, according to Bin Laden, was the Israeli invasion of Lebanon in the 1980s and Saudi Arabia housing US forces.

Had nothing to do with Iraq.

If al-Qaeda was concerned about Iraq why didn’t they take out Saddam? He killed far more people in Iraq and Iran than United Nations sanctions ever could have. Plus, Saddam used money allotted for food to supply his army.)

Bottom line they were UN sanctions, not US sanctions. [/quote]

Those were US sanctions, had the US not pushed for it they would never have happened.

And no, they were not linked, but the next 9-11 has a fertile recruiting ground now, just like Iran hates and fears the US for a reason.

99

[quote]Chushin wrote:

[quote]orion wrote:

[quote]DrSkeptix wrote:

[quote]orion wrote:

[quote]Gkhan wrote:
Question…don’t let your hatred of America get in the way of your logic.

When you say we blocked their ports, who’s exactly?

Saddam’s? I thought there were no Al Qaeda in Iraq till after the invasion. If there were then the invasion is justified.

Iran’s? Are you saying Iran is in charge of Al Qaeda?

Bin Laden’s? Which ports does he own?

Saudi Arabia’s? When did this happen? We had troops stationed there.

Afghanistan? Hell, it’s a land locked country…

So who’s ports did we block and what the hell does that have to do with 9-11?[/quote]

You blocked Iraqi ports which led to the death of hundreds of thousands.
[/quote]

And your source for this declaration is…?[/quote]

Madelaine Ablbright.

Apparently “it was worth it”.

[/quote]

Cute, but inadequate.

Do you have a source or not?[/quote]

100

Orion, you have completely ignored the fact that Saddam had money for food.

Instead of feeding people he chose to use the money for himself and his army.

And blocking a port in a mostly land locked country could not have contributed to the deaths of thousands.

The US army is in Iraq now and they can’t stem the tide of weapons coming in from Syria and Iran. You mean to tell me they can smuggle arms to Iraq now and not food while “thousands” were dying? Say a lot about the Middle Eastern nations as a whole if you ask me.