2 of 3
2
Islamic threat : how real is it ?
Posted: 18 June 2008 10:33 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 16 ]  
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  1485
Joined  2007-12-10
arildno - 18 June 2008 01:05 PM
tavishhill2003 - 17 June 2008 08:26 PM
Dee - 17 June 2008 07:36 PM

Hey arildno—you sound like my kind of non-passive, shoot -from-the-hip guy ! As far as I’m concerned those who stand up and protest the “slandering ” of Muslim people for blasting the whole Islamic culture, are beating a dead horse. That’s because Islam is Islam—and everything that goes with it, and you can’t argue by rationalizing and making excuses for what is inhumane . And by standards of modern life as it is today, Islam IS inhumane.

It isn’t our place in the world to run around “shooting from the hip” everyone we arbitrarily decide is acting inhumanely.

Aah, here Tavish shows his true colours.
He thinks it is merely ARBITRARY, i.e, nonsensical and without foundation to designate mass murder and childfucking as evil.

No, I just tend to believe if we are willing to make such judgments then they have to appeal to us as well.  When we run around the globe toppling govts, installing ruthless dictators, training terrorists (especially in one of our own states), overthrowing democratic “regimes”, bomb innocent ppl, whole heartedly support the bombing and terrorist acts of the Israeli govt in their illegal occupation for 40 yrs, and then rush to Iraq to kill anothr couple hundred thousand civilians…we aren’t in any position to act surprised when the ppl we’ve attacked repeatedly over the decades reacts wit similar fits of violence. 

If you atually care about fixing the problem, we have to gt the muslim world to op hating US froeign policy.  With it being squarely about exploiting and destroying said region of the globe and terrorizing its civillians, the chances we can do so without changing the game on our end is zero.  We are the only ones who can help cull terrorism against the US in a radical way, and doing so means we hve to stop poking the rabid dog with sticks if we really want to avoid being bitten. 

If all it took was killing the dog we’d have enjoyed victory long ago.  But the more you poke the dog, the more other rabid dogs aurround us.  You don’t solve the problem by doing everything possible to make 1.2 billion ppl hate us so much they are willing to die for it and that seems to the be route you idiots wish to take.

We can’t get ANY group of religious ppl to change their views in the short term.  So trying is worthless atm.  We can get them to stop viewing women as material products AFTER we worry about getting radical muslims to stop flying planes into buildings.  The way to get their culture to change is to set up paths for political reform over time, just as it happens everywhere else in the world.  Our current foreign plicy is designed to destroy any of those paths.  If you reallythink we are in Iraq or are supporting Israel’s illegl and terroristic occupation of Palestine or are trying to start a war with Iran because of women’s rights r pedophila in other cultures of the world, you are a fucking moron. 

Next I assume you’ll claim we should go kill all the tribes in Afria who still practice stupid behavior that we find revolting.  Maybe Dee can start a thread about how there is supposedly a rising threat of these tribal traditions inspiring other Aricans in the US to rise up and overthrow the USA as she often pretends is the case with muslim Americans.  Might as well just say all black ppl are savages nd push them into the sea eh guys?  Or at least kick them niggers out of the grand ole US of A right? 

Or should we only pretend to give a fuck about the cultures that have oil and already hate the US for our foreign policy?  Mmhmm.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 18 June 2008 10:59 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 17 ]  
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  1485
Joined  2007-12-10
arildno - 18 June 2008 12:53 PM
tavishhill2003 - 17 June 2008 06:26 PM
arildno - 17 June 2008 03:57 PM
tavishhill2003 - 17 June 2008 03:27 PM

US foreign policy and geopolitics has put the muslim world into a positoin where they literally have no other means to air any grievances they might have.

Even more nonsense.
They could get on with their lives, be productive, rather than murdering others.

They are disgusting, twisted creatures, most of them.

So you are saying “most” as in more than 50% of the 1.2 billion muslims alive today are in fact “disgusting, twisted creatures”?

Yup

  That’s quite a claim to make regarding 600 million ppl you’ve never met.

Not really.
I consider ALL childfucker worshippers and mass murderer admirers to be disgusting, twisted creatures, Muslims or not.

So you are saying that 50%+ of all muslims around the world “admire mass murder”?  YOU admire mass murder by advocating that we should go around the world killing these ppl.  You think we should just blow them all off the face of the earth and you think this is a practical solution that solves our problems?  You do realize muslims don’t think of Mohammed as some child fucking mass murderer right?  Regardless of what the scripture says, to claim they are worshipping him for supposedly being such things means we should kill them all to you? 

I guess we should murder all Christians too for worshipping a far worse God who doesnt’ kill kds, but instead demands their own parents to slaughter them, demands all non-Christians to be systematically killed among other geotesque acts too eh? 

And clarify for me again, you REALLY think our foreign policy is designed around combatting arranged marriages for young women or pedophilia?  Or was it just that you don’t like the God they pray to and therefore you think it’s just great that we murder them all because “they are evil”? 

So lemme recap this reasoning…it is “evil” for radical muslims to want to kill non-muslims who have long histories of abusing the political and economic structures of the muslim world and continuousl start or support wars of aggression against muslim civillians…but when you wake up one day and decide you don’t like the God they pray to, you think it’s justified to kill them all?  So why is it “evil” when they want to kll you for not liking who they pray to, yet when you do the exac same it is perfectly fine?

If you were in power and all decision were up to you, are you saying you’d commit genocide against 1/5 of the world’s poplation in muslims because you find their God distateful, then carrying on with that logic you’d have to drop some nukes on North Korea, killing all of them as well, then maybe you can invade and commit genocide in Africa to get rid of those savages who don’t behve a you would desire, then torund off the evening maybe commit genocide against all Christians or Jews in Israel and the US and everywhere else because they worship a much mroe distatesteful diety than even the muslims?

If you think it is justified to commit genocide simply because you think a largegroup of ppl worships a distasteful deity or behaves barbarously in many regards, you do realize that would lead you to advocate wiping out damn near the entire world’s population right?  You’d be like an Uber Hitler!  And to you this logic is sound and such actions wou be justified?  Or is genocide only ok when it keeps the oil companies from making tens of billions each quarter as opposed to just a few billion in profits? If you could clarify, it’d be just swell.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 18 June 2008 11:08 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 18 ]  
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  1243
Joined  2006-12-26
tavishhill2003 - 18 June 2008 02:33 PM
arildno - 18 June 2008 01:05 PM
tavishhill2003 - 17 June 2008 08:26 PM
Dee - 17 June 2008 07:36 PM

Hey arildno—you sound like my kind of non-passive, shoot -from-the-hip guy ! As far as I’m concerned those who stand up and protest the “slandering ” of Muslim people for blasting the whole Islamic culture, are beating a dead horse. That’s because Islam is Islam—and everything that goes with it, and you can’t argue by rationalizing and making excuses for what is inhumane . And by standards of modern life as it is today, Islam IS inhumane.

It isn’t our place in the world to run around “shooting from the hip” everyone we arbitrarily decide is acting inhumanely.

Aah, here Tavish shows his true colours.
He thinks it is merely ARBITRARY, i.e, nonsensical and without foundation to designate mass murder and childfucking as evil.

No, I just tend to believe if we are willing to make such judgments then they have to appeal to us as well.

Indeed, we certainly should condemn childfucker worshippers and mass murderer admirers among our own midst.
When have I ever said anything else?

When we run around the globe toppling govts,

Which may well be defensible in some cases, but not in others.
Anyway, it is wholly irrelevant to the proper stance onme should have towards childfucker worshippers.

installing ruthless dictators,

Ibidem.

training terrorists (especially in one of our own states),

Who?

overthrowing democratic “regimes”,

Where?

bomb innocent ppl,

On occasion, a defensible casualty of war, on other not.
It has very little to do with the proper stance towards childfucker worshippers, though.

whole heartedly support the bombing and terrorist acts of the Israeli govt in their illegal occupation for 40 yrs,

Israel is legally entitled to its occupations.

and then rush to Iraq to kill anothr couple hundred thousand civilians…

This is dead wrong.

.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 18 June 2008 11:22 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 19 ]  
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  1243
Joined  2006-12-26
tavishhill2003 - 18 June 2008 02:59 PM
arildno - 18 June 2008 12:53 PM
tavishhill2003 - 17 June 2008 06:26 PM
arildno - 17 June 2008 03:57 PM
tavishhill2003 - 17 June 2008 03:27 PM

US foreign policy and geopolitics has put the muslim world into a positoin where they literally have no other means to air any grievances they might have.

Even more nonsense.
They could get on with their lives, be productive, rather than murdering others.

They are disgusting, twisted creatures, most of them.

So you are saying “most” as in more than 50% of the 1.2 billion muslims alive today are in fact “disgusting, twisted creatures”?

Yup

  That’s quite a claim to make regarding 600 million ppl you’ve never met.

Not really.
I consider ALL childfucker worshippers and mass murderer admirers to be disgusting, twisted creatures, Muslims or not.

So you are saying that 50%+ of all muslims around the world “admire mass murder”?

Nope. I said they admire a mass murderer.

YOU admire mass murder by advocating that we should go around the world killing these ppl.

Where have I said this?

You think we should just blow them all off the face of the earth and you think this is a practical solution that solves our problems?

I haven’t said it, don’t condone it. But it would certainly solve the sub-problem of Islam.

You do realize muslims don’t think of Mohammed as some child fucking mass murderer right?

But he was, and they know it.

Regardless of what the scripture says, to claim they are worshipping him for supposedly being such things means we should kill them all to you?

1. Again, you state that I advocate killing them all. Where do you get that from?
2. I’ve never said that Muslims worship Mohammad BECAUSE he was a mass murderer and child rapist. Of course they don’t.
But that point is utterly beside the issue.
The point, you see, is that precisely BECAUSE Mohammad was a child rapist and mass murderer, he is utterly undeserving of the devotion Muslims show him, and that devotion makes them compromise within their individual moralities precisely in respect to those types of horror Mohammad frequently indulged himself in.

If Mahatma Gandhi were shown to have been fond of ripping up the bottoms of little boys, the vast majority of those individuals now venerating him would TURN AWAY in disgust.

Disgust is the proper moral reaction to have towards a monster like Mohammad, and the lack of that disgust among Muslims testifies to their moral perversity.

I guess we should murder all Christians too for worshipping a far worse God who doesnt’ kill kds, but instead demands their own parents to slaughter them, demands all non-Christians to be systematically killed among other geotesque acts too eh?

Eeh?
I think you’ve read the Koran, rather than the Bible.
Please come up with a direct reference in the New testament that urges Christians to kill infidels.
There are plenty of such passages in the Koran, none to my knowledge in the New Testament.
(Not that I have any respect for that perverse book, either).

And clarify for me again, you REALLY think our foreign policy is designed around combatting arranged marriages for young women or pedophilia?

No. Nor have I said it was.

Or was it just that you don’t like the God they pray to and therefore you think it’s just great that we murder them all because “they are evil”?

No. They are morally depraved because they worship a patently evil man.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 18 June 2008 01:02 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 20 ]  
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  1485
Joined  2007-12-10
arildno - 18 June 2008 03:08 PM

Ibidem.

The short list is below.  Several of them tied to Reagan and Nixon can be found admitted to in the Church Report, an investigation done by the US Senate into the matters.  Or you can find several of them detailed here:

http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB8/nsaebb8.htm

OR you can simply ask any historian, especially of US Foreign Policy (Chamlers Johnson and Samantha Powers come to mind) or professors/experts of Latin American political study.

Who?

Without noting the obvious cases of the Mujahadeen or Israeli military forces, we’ve also trained terrorists on US soil in Fort Benning, Ga.  There, we train terrorists who are dispatched to infiltrate the various militaries of Latin America so when we need to stage a military coup r ignite a revolution or support rvoluionary movements despit who they are or what their political philosophy is, we can do so.  Panama, Nicaragua, Guatemala, Cuba, and Venezuela are all examples of areas where conflicts started using these operatives, often specifically to illicit unrest and support for a “revolution”.  The operatives are trained by US military officials, usually Army. The training site is known as th “School of the Americas”.

The operatives also often work as deterrants to narcotics law enforcement in Latin America, especially during the times the CIA was workin hard to build the narcotics industry on the global scale in the late 180’s.  The group has organized assassinations and coups, violent revolutions, mass murders, and much of the international drug trade. 

Some notable students of the “university” include:

Luis Posada Carriles - a terrorist trained in explosives at ths schoolprior to his invovlement in the Bay of Pigs operation.

The Atlacatl Battalion - Was responsible or the El Mozote massacre.

Col. Cid Diaz - A key operative in the Las Hojas massacre.

Hugo Banzer Suarez - Bolivian dictator whose rise to power came after he organized a violent military coup.  He killed, arrested, and tortured thousands of political opponents as dictator and many more thousands fled the country seeking refuge elsewhere.

Leopoldo Fortunato Galtieri Castelli - Another military dictator of Argentina.  Organized torture for political opponents and mass murders.  He controlled the death squad Intelligence Battalion 601.  Also rose to power via military coup.  He became imperialistic in 1982 when he invaded the Faulkland Islands with the initial support of the US.  Late in his life he was accused of organizing large child kidnapping operations.  The military dictator the year prior to him was also a graduate of the school in Georgia.

Raúl Iturriaga - A retired Army general and a former deputy director of the the Chilean secret police under the Augusto Pinochet military dictatorship.  He headed up organizing and carrying out numerous assassinations during Operation Condor.  He played a key role in the military coup that ousted Allende from power and installed Pinochet.  He was in charge of a secret detention center known as La Venda Sexy for tis sexual abuses and torture of prisoners. 

Guillermo Rodríguez - Yet another military dictator, this time in Ecuador.  And again, he rose to power via military coup with support from his fellow School of the Americas graduates within the militay there.  Had political opponents jailed, exiles, or assassinated. 

Roberto D’Aubuisson Arrieta - The Main organizer of the infamous ‘Death Squads’ in El Salvdor.  one of the most dreadful terrorist organizations in the recent history of Latin America, responsible for the torture and killing of thousands of civilians in El Salvador, previous to and during the Salvadoran Civil War. To his political opponents, D’Aubuisson was also known as “Blowtorch Bob,” or simply “The Blowtorch,” for his alleged preference in using a blowtorch to torture political prisoners.  There isn’t enough room to list all the things this asshole did.  Assassinatons, torture, death squads and the like were part of his daily schedule.

Marco Antonio Yon Sosa - Terrorist leader of the Revolutionary Movement 13th November, a Guatemalan guerilla organization.  The movement slaughtered civillians by the hundreds.  Key player in military coup in Guatemala.

Manuel Noriega - The former Panamanian general and the military dictator of Panama, installed via military coupl by the US.  Noriega worked with the CIA from the late 1950s to the 1980s, and was on the CIA payroll for much of this time, although the relationship had not become contractual until 1967.  After the US become convinced he was spying for Castro, Noriega was the victim of a military coup of his own, also orchestrated by the CIA.  Aided the guerilla death squads created and funded by the US in Nicaragua and El Salvador.  Noriega was an arms dealer while in power as well to various guerila terrorist groups in Latin America.  Was convicted of drug trafficking, money laundering, and racketeering on top of lots of UN human rights violations obvoiusly.

Omar Torrijos - Another military dictator who cmae to power via violent coup suppoted by the US.  Was another Panamanian dictator.  Prior to his dictatorship, he and Major Boris Martínez led a successful military coup against the democratically-elected president, Arnulfo Arias.  Nolong after he and President Carter negotiated for the full sovereignty of the Panam Canal Zone in 1999, the CIA assassinated him.  Torrijos died shortly after the inauguration of US President Ronald Reagan, just three months after Ecuadorian president Jaime Roldós died in strikingly similar circumstances.

Juan Velasco Alvarado - Military dictator of Peru.  He organized and lead a coup to overthrow the govt of Peru and took power in 1968.


...to name a few.  That is just from the School of the Americas system.  It doesn’t include the likes of Pinochet who was fully supported and sponsored by the US despite his rule killing thousands of ppl with hundreds of thousands of others tortured.  Nor does it include Suharto in East Timor, Savimbi, Saddam, the Shah, Kamirov, Belaguer, or Sarmoza.

Where?

The US worked to subvert democratic process in:

France, Italy, Colombia, Guyana, Iran, Jamaica, Dominican Republic, Brazil, Chile, Uruguay, Syria, Indonesia, Greece (twice), Argentina (twice), Haiti (twice), Venezuela, Bolivia, Egypt, Lebanon, Peru, Zaire, Fiji Islands, and Afghanistan (prior to the Soviets showing up).


The US has overthown democratically elected govts in:

Iran, Guyana, Venezuela, Chile to name a few.


The US rulers have actively pursued covert actions or proxy mercenary wars against popular revolutionary governments in:

Cuba, Angola, Mozambique, Ethiopia, Portugal, South
Yemen, Nicaragua, Cambodia, East Timor, and the Western Sahara. 

Israel is legally entitled to its occupations.

By whom, lol?  Not the UN, not ANY other nations in the region.  The rest of the wrld supports the UN resolutiuon to force them back into their pre-1968 borders.  The US is the only vote gainst that resolution, and unfortuantely it has veto power.  The ONLY country outside Israel supporting that occupation is the US.

This is dead wrong.

Even the lowest esimates put close to 100,000 civillians killed in Iraq as a direct consequences of our going in and destabilizing the country.  Higher estimates are up near 200,000.  Officials in Iraq claim they are only tallying up pobably 50% of the total casulties because they can’t keep up. 

Also, the US was largely sponsible for letting the Iraq/Iran war happen and even encouraged Saddam to invade Kuwait.  We were laregly responsible for Saddam’s terrorism against the Kurds in nothern Iraq where he murdered an estimated 200,000-300,000 civillians usig OUR biological weapons and OUR helicopters all while the Petnagon knew full well what he was planning to use them for. The US pioneered sanctions against Iraq ended up killing an esimated 1.6 million civillians, 500,000 of them children according to the UN.

[ Edited: 18 June 2008 11:03 PM by tavishhill2003]
Profile
 
 
Posted: 18 June 2008 01:38 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 21 ]  
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  1485
Joined  2007-12-10
arildno - 18 June 2008 03:22 PM

Nope. I said they admire a mass murderer.

So all of them then admire admire a mass murderer and therefore what?  They should be wiped from the earth?  What is your offered solution to the problem you have with muslims?  If there really was a ‘Violent War with Islam’, how do we win other than killing them all?

Where have I said this?

Wait, so you don’t advocate the murders the US partakes in all over the globe or the US sponsored, carried out, or funded terorism acts?  Or do you just not know about them?  I’ve listed some of them in my last post if you are willing to learn about history a bit.

I haven’t said it, don’t condone it. But it would certainly solve the sub-problem of Islam.

So i’s a sub-problem now?  What’s the overall problem then?  And how does that solve any problems when killing 1.2 billion ppl will only lead to the destruction of the US by the rest of the world?  You don’t really think the rest of the world would sitback and let that happen do you?  Killing all republicans or right wing conservatives solves the prblem too.  Or just changing our foreign policy to somehting that doens’t involve exclusively operating as an arm of the oil industry. 

But he was, and they know it.

And God was ten times worse in the OT.  So should we kill all Jews and Christians while we are at it?  Does that solve the sup-problems of those religions too?

1. Again, you state that I advocate killing them all. Where do you get that from?

Well, that IS the only answer you’ve offered thus far to the issue of terrorism. :/  Feel free to offer more reasonable solutions.

2. I’ve never said that Muslims worship Mohammad BECAUSE he was a mass murderer and child rapist. Of course they don’t.
But that point is utterly beside the issue.

How do you even know that all muslims are aware of the shit he supposedly did?  The VAST majority of Christians ad Jews have no idea what God did in the OT outside a handful of the more cheerful stories. 

The point, you see, is that precisely BECAUSE Mohammad was a child rapist and mass murderer, he is utterly undeserving of the devotion Muslims show him, and that devotion makes them compromise within their individual moralities precisely in respect to those types of horror Mohammad frequently indulged himself in.

And I say as Jesus most likely never existed, he is even less deserving.  And again, what exactly are you advocating as the solution to terrorism?  Efforts to get these reigious ppl to change their minds?  That usually takes political reform that is a long term goal done thru collaboration with the outside world not isolation and destruction and exploitation.  So you must agree that our foreign policy is doing the exact oppose of building paths for reform in these societies right?

If Mahatma Gandhi were shown to have been fond of ripping up the bottoms of little boys, the vast majority of those individuals now venerating him would TURN AWAY in disgust.

Well, he was a racist.  And I don’t think they would.  His contributions are far more useful than his personal sexual discretions in the case he had any.  That’s like saying Thomas Jefferson is unworthy of praise because he was an adulterer.

Disgust is the proper moral reaction to have towards a monster like Mohammad, and the lack of that disgust among Muslims testifies to their moral perversity.

But you aren’t applying it to just him, you are applying it to 1.2 billion ppl you’ve never met and just ASUMING that they all feel exactly the same way as he supposedly did.

Eeh?
I think you’ve read the Koran, rather than the Bible.
Please come up with a direct reference in the New testament that urges Christians to kill infidels.

Nope.  Old Testament, which is very much the foundation of Christianity as it lays the basis for the prophecy and who God is, which is pretty damn importan in Christianity.

No. Nor have I said it was.

Then what are you whining about?  When I say we should look at the actual cause of terrorism threatenin he US and that the poblem is US foreign policy in no small part and the solutin is to change that absurd set of policies, which is something the country would demand if they knew even a small portion of the things said policies have done in the past 50 yrs…when I point this you you whined about how it was “nonsense”.  Look how aggressively the public has reacted just to Iraq, a tiny, tiny tip of the ice berg regarding US foreign policy philsophy. 

Are you saying, as you have in other threads, that the policies of exploiting these economies and cultures and overthrowing govts and isntalling dictatorships etc is working out well for us when we end up with planes hitting buildings a killing 3000 of our citizens?  It’s not just an issue of morality on our end.  That flew out the window long ago.  It is an issue of national security and foreign relations.  The solution to protecting these areas is to change the way we treat the region so cull that hatred and thus recruitment and standing for terrists in these types of cultures.

No. They are morally depraved because they worship a patently evil man.

So don’t most republicans.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 19 June 2008 12:32 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 22 ]  
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  1243
Joined  2006-12-26

1. Again, you state that I advocate killing them all. Where do you get that from?

Well, that IS the only answer you’ve offered thus far to the issue of terrorism.

You piece of disgusting, lying shit!

WHERE HAVE I SAID THIS?

Profile
 
 
Posted: 19 June 2008 12:48 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 23 ]  
Member
Avatar
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  805
Joined  2007-08-28

“I can’t speak for you, but I wasn’t a happy camper when planes crashed into those towers on 9/11.  This may be difficult for you to grasp Dee, but not all of us would like to see that sort of thing happen again.  Some of us are so concerned about the threat, that we have the intellectual fortitude to take things seriously and if it comes down to changing how the US behaves in the muslim world, too…fucking…bad. “

Well, the bad news is, terrorism works; and the good news is, that T3 is one of the few atheists to concede that 9/11 was political rather than religious.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 19 June 2008 12:59 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 24 ]  
Member
Avatar
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  892
Joined  2007-12-04
mcalpine - 19 June 2008 04:48 PM

Well, the bad news is, terrorism works; and the good news is, that T3 is one of the few atheists to concede that 9/11 was political rather than religious.

Actually thats not true at all, thats all I ever hear from just about anyone out in society. No 9/11 had nothing to do with religion. That its because people in the middle east are oppressed, that it was an inevitable response to us foreign policy. That it got to be our fault somehow.

While tavish and others got some good points as to why we should not expect much understanding from the middle east in some issues. Its also incredibly naive to not see the religious motives.

The bottom line is, if 9/11 was political and not religious.They would have planted bombs in the towers and detonated them from a far. They didn’t they blindly killed themselves in a blaze of fire. Signifying something deeper about their convictions.

People rarely kill themselves in terrorist acts just for political reasons. When you have a political agenda you generally want to stay alive to see it implemented. Otherwise its useless to you.

 Signature 

What can be asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without evidence.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 19 June 2008 01:48 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 25 ]  
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  1485
Joined  2007-12-10
mcalpine - 19 June 2008 04:48 PM

“I can’t speak for you, but I wasn’t a happy camper when planes crashed into those towers on 9/11.  This may be difficult for you to grasp Dee, but not all of us would like to see that sort of thing happen again.  Some of us are so concerned about the threat, that we have the intellectual fortitude to take things seriously and if it comes down to changing how the US behaves in the muslim world, too…fucking…bad. “

Well, the bad news is, terrorism works; and the good news is, that T3 is one of the few atheists to concede that 9/11 was political rather than religious.

T3?  And I’m not sure I actually agree whole hog with what you noted.  I don’t think 9/11 was purely political or economical just as it wasn’t purely religious.  I think the primary cause of terrrism or maybe it is better to say the ROOT cause of it was political, economical, etc, where as after a long history of abuses in those areas the muslim world became convinced the US was evil.  So their hate is a direct response to our actions.  Whether or not their hate is justified is another topic (I think it certainly is generally speaking, but that’s not the basis of my position on how to combat terrorism). 

I think it isn’t the 1 step process that Sam Harris thinks it is or that right wingers think it is.  I think there are a lot of atheists who have grown so distasteful of religion in general, especially with regard to the dangers the faith proposition espouses, that after 9/11 and a resurgence in terrorism they want to blame religion as if it were the solely resonsible component of the problem and balk any time they see others aspects layered in because they desperately want to indict modern day religion and put ALL the blame on it.  And these acts should be indictments for faith, because as Sam is perfetly right to point out, we can’t have suicide bombers without the religious assumption they call faith telling them they will be honored in death and enjoy 72 virgins in paradise or some other religious dogma. 

But being a necessary component of an action or motivation doesn’t mean it is the root cause of said action or motviation or somehow the bit of the apple we have to bite into to find the worm.  If we want to solve the problem of terrorism, we need to put aside ignorant stereotypes of muslims and terrorism and look at the root cause and deal with it, regardless of who it indicts as a consequence.  If it indicts US foreign policy, we can’t afford to pretend otherwise because this is such an important threat.  The claim it is purely religious falls flat on its face with even the slightest bit of intellectual pressure applied to it, as does the claim it is purely political etc.  It’s a mixture of th two, but that doesn’t imply equal responsibility on the part of motivation for the base hatred from which the actual terrorism later follows. 

I’d say the politics etc leads to the hatred, right or wrong, and the hatred leads them to either take action to change things or suffer and hope for the best.  They get tired of suffering pretty quick.  So they look to act.  But our actions, coincidentally, involved removing every possible tool a populace could use to get us to change our policies including educational, political, cultural, and economic power structures in the muslim world. 

So they are in a position where the only tool they have to base their culture and personal comfort on is their religion and at this point they already hate the US anyhow.  This is a recipe for radical religious interpretation because religious folks believe what they want to believe. 

By radical interpretation I don’t mean they are necessarily twising the scriptures btw.  Maybe that is badly phrased on my part.  I mean it is radical in the sense of how the culture would normally treat such scripture.  Just as normally Christian or Jewish cultures ignore the scripture about murdering entire towns full of ppl for praying to another deity.  They aren’t interpreting that to mean “Jesus is Love” or some other bullshit, they just pretend the parts of the OT they don’t like don’t exist or make excuses as to why it isn’t appliable today.  In the culture they live in, one that still has the toolset to express grievances or work towards necessary reform, they have no cultual need to act on such scripture. 

But as I was saying, ppl will see what they want to see in their holy texts.  If their feelings towards the US were friendly, their religious interpretations/applications would reflect that.  But they aren’t.  So they use the religion to justify the only remaning option for pressuring the US to change its polices…violence justified by their religion to fight a reat enemy of Islam. 

The disconnect ppl have is in seperating the cause of the justification for such violence from the cause for what drove them to want to act out in the first place, aka the cause for the hatred.

 


Ppl who are ultra-nationalistic and xenophobic like Dee hold the position they do on this issue because they are completely ignorant of our foreign policies actually entail and the consequences they have.  This usually is because the person is so over the top deluded as to what patriotism is that in their mind that any policy stemming from the US just HAS to be a good idea no matter what and our leaders are so perfect they just couldn’t have made decisions based on greed or corrupt ideologies (unless they are those pesky ani-American Democrats of course).  Well, this just ain’t the reality. 

If you asked these ppl what the official position on Iran is for instance, and you asked whether it was about overthrowing that sovereign nation’s standing govt or was about to keep Iran from getting a nuclear weapon, they’d tell you 10 times out of 10 that it was about keeping Iran from getting a nuke. If you asked them who started the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict, they’ tell you it was entirely the Arabs fault.  If you told them Israel was illegally occupying and had invaded land that was the property of other countries, they’d tell you you were nuts.  If you told them there was a startling connection between parts of the world with oil or otehr profitable natural resources and which countries we invade or intervene in, they’d tell you either tht we never trvene anywhere (because theya re ignorat of what actions we have actually taken in this capacity) or that you were imagining things.  And they’d be wrong, 10 times out of 10.

 


arildno,

You very specifically admitted that killing all muslims would solve the problem of terrorism.  If you don’t advocate it, then I stand corrected.  HOWEVER you CERTAINLY did note that it is one possible answer in your eyes and as such it was actually the ONLY solution you have offered in this thread.  If you’d like to ofer policy solutions, go right ahead, but up to this point you haven’t done that.  So stop crying about the fact I pointed it out.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 19 June 2008 02:09 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 26 ]  
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  1485
Joined  2007-12-10
Unbeliever - 19 June 2008 04:59 PM
mcalpine - 19 June 2008 04:48 PM

Well, the bad news is, terrorism works; and the good news is, that T3 is one of the few atheists to concede that 9/11 was political rather than religious.

Actually thats not true at all, thats all I ever hear from just about anyone out in society. No 9/11 had nothing to do with religion. That its because people in the middle east are oppressed, that it was an inevitable response to us foreign policy. That it got to be our fault somehow.

While tavish and others got some good points as to why we should not expect much understanding from the middle east in some issues. Its also incredibly naive to not see the religious motives.

The bottom line is, if 9/11 was political and not religious.They would have planted bombs in the towers and detonated them from a far. They didn’t they blindly killed themselves in a blaze of fire. Signifying something deeper about their convictions.

People rarely kill themselves in terrorist acts just for political reasons. When you have a political agenda you generally want to stay alive to see it implemented. Otherwise its useless to you.

You present the fallacy of the 1 step process as I pointed out in my last post.  You mention that ppl don’t try to kill themselves generally via terrorism.  That’s true, but it doesn’t have any impact on the discussion unless the real reasons Islamic terrorism upsets you is because you really didn’t want to see the suicide bombers have to die, which would be an odd thing for your to believe. 

And please don’t bring up bombings the towers…we don’t need Truthers ruining this discussion.  raspberry

 

In your comment about cause for moivation, you are equating religious motivation or rather jusifications (an important difference there) for violent actions with the motivations for the hatred that leads to the terrorism to in the first place.  It’s not that we should just have policies that everyon agrees with no matter what.  The solution is simply to not run around the world forcing everyone into such conditions where they have no other tools to use to air their grievances than violence, ESPECIALLY when you let that anger linger long enough in religious societies that it becomes a holy war for some ppl there. 

For example, look at Venezuela or the other Latin American nations we have overthrown at some in history or caused violent rebellions or installed dictators in.  They don’t respond nearly as much in regards to terrorism not cause they don’t hate us, but because tey have other means to express their problems with our policies.  In Venezuela in 2002, the US tried to ovethrow Hugo Chavez and briefly succeeded.  In his place for the few days the coup worked, an oil tycoon was installed as dictator.  When he was back in power, he wasn’t hapy with the US obviously, and what has he done to fight back?  He briefly stopped allowing th US to buy oil from them, pushing up oil prices when he did so (last year IIRC, but I may be wrong).

That is a case where the ppl were still able to work thru their political and ecnomical structure to fight back against a really dangerous foreign policy move on the part of the US just a few yrs ago. 

I would argue that it’s not wrong to say the hatred these cultures feel towards the US is the fault of US foreign policy.  I hate when ppl try to spin that distinction into such language as you used where you point to ppl saying it is “our” fault as if ppl like me are indicting the American ppl for this, especially with regard to 21st century terrorism that is very much related to Bush who the American ppl didn’t even elect.  When ppl say it is the fault of the US, do you REALLY think they mean to blame it on the American citizens or the foreign policy?  You are most likely casting a caricature of what they actually mean.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 19 June 2008 02:13 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 27 ]  
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  1243
Joined  2006-12-26

[quote author=“tavishhill2003” date=“1213922923

arildno,

You very specifically admitted that killing all muslims would solve the problem of terrorism.  If you don’t advocate it, then I stand corrected.

Nope.
YOU started accusing me of that way before I made that comment.
In addition, you specifically asked me if “killing all muslims” would solve the problem of terrorism.
To that, indulgently, I replied, that it would indeed, “solve” the sub-problem of Islam. The reason for that is fairly trivial, since if there weren’t any Muslims around, they wouldn’t go about blowing up themselves (and others!) in the name of Allah. I made it abundantly clear in that post that I didn’t condone it all, and your own wilful malice and misrepresentations are all that remains.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 19 June 2008 02:24 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 28 ]  
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  1485
Joined  2007-12-10

arildno,

But when I offered another solution you attacked it as “nonsense”.  My solution of changing our foreign policy is the only one that can possibly work without killing all muslims if you group them all together in such logic s you did earlier.  That being the logic wheree you tried to justifiy the foreign policy we have by claiming that all 1.2 billion muslims are evil, disgusting, creatures (note: initially it was 600 million, bu then you changed that when you said the basis of your remarks in this way was due to them worshipping Allah, which ALL muslims do). 

And your reply to my request for clarification was deeply inadequate as it doesn’t actually solve anything when the ed result is the whole of the remaining world uniting tot destroy the US as would certainly be the case if we killed 1.2 billion ppl on the basis of religion.

So, if you don’t advocate killing them all, what is your solution?  hen I brought up the evils of our foreign policy and said I disgreed with it, your response to defend it was to say that the terrorists are all disgusting creatures.  When I had you unpack such a ridiculous claim for justification, you reiterated that and wen even further by saying they were evil, disgusitng creatures becuase of who they worship…but that indicts ALL muslims and the logic must follow that you find it perfectly ok for the US to continue abusing them economically, politically, and physically so long as they worship Allah.

You’ve alrady attacked me for suggesting the policies are wrong, so you have to agree with it.  Now it jus comes down to how you want to justify the murder of those killed as a direct result of our foreign policy.  Calling them evil, disgusting creaures because they wohip Allah isn’t a very adequate reason for supporting such policies.

[ Edited: 19 June 2008 02:26 PM by tavishhill2003]
Profile
 
 
Posted: 19 June 2008 03:23 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 29 ]  
Member
Avatar
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  892
Joined  2007-12-04
tavishhill2003 - 19 June 2008 06:09 PM
Unbeliever - 19 June 2008 04:59 PM
mcalpine - 19 June 2008 04:48 PM

Well, the bad news is, terrorism works; and the good news is, that T3 is one of the few atheists to concede that 9/11 was political rather than religious.

Actually thats not true at all, thats all I ever hear from just about anyone out in society. No 9/11 had nothing to do with religion. That its because people in the middle east are oppressed, that it was an inevitable response to us foreign policy. That it got to be our fault somehow.

While tavish and others got some good points as to why we should not expect much understanding from the middle east in some issues. Its also incredibly naive to not see the religious motives.

The bottom line is, if 9/11 was political and not religious.They would have planted bombs in the towers and detonated them from a far. They didn’t they blindly killed themselves in a blaze of fire. Signifying something deeper about their convictions.

People rarely kill themselves in terrorist acts just for political reasons. When you have a political agenda you generally want to stay alive to see it implemented. Otherwise its useless to you.

You present the fallacy of the 1 step process as I pointed out in my last post.  You mention that ppl don’t try to kill themselves generally via terrorism.  That’s true, but it doesn’t have any impact on the discussion unless the real reasons Islamic terrorism upsets you is because you really didn’t want to see the suicide bombers have to die, which would be an odd thing for your to believe. 

And please don’t bring up bombings the towers…we don’t need Truthers ruining this discussion.  raspberry

 

In your comment about cause for moivation, you are equating religious motivation or rather jusifications (an important difference there) for violent actions with the motivations for the hatred that leads to the terrorism to in the first place.  It’s not that we should just have policies that everyon agrees with no matter what.  The solution is simply to not run around the world forcing everyone into such conditions where they have no other tools to use to air their grievances than violence, ESPECIALLY when you let that anger linger long enough in religious societies that it becomes a holy war for some ppl there. 

For example, look at Venezuela or the other Latin American nations we have overthrown at some in history or caused violent rebellions or installed dictators in.  They don’t respond nearly as much in regards to terrorism not cause they don’t hate us, but because tey have other means to express their problems with our policies.  In Venezuela in 2002, the US tried to ovethrow Hugo Chavez and briefly succeeded.  In his place for the few days the coup worked, an oil tycoon was installed as dictator.  When he was back in power, he wasn’t hapy with the US obviously, and what has he done to fight back?  He briefly stopped allowing th US to buy oil from them, pushing up oil prices when he did so (last year IIRC, but I may be wrong).

That is a case where the ppl were still able to work thru their political and ecnomical structure to fight back against a really dangerous foreign policy move on the part of the US just a few yrs ago. 

I would argue that it’s not wrong to say the hatred these cultures feel towards the US is the fault of US foreign policy.  I hate when ppl try to spin that distinction into such language as you used where you point to ppl saying it is “our” fault as if ppl like me are indicting the American ppl for this, especially with regard to 21st century terrorism that is very much related to Bush who the American ppl didn’t even elect.  When ppl say it is the fault of the US, do you REALLY think they mean to blame it on the American citizens or the foreign policy?  You are most likely casting a caricature of what they actually mean.

Tavish you are making all excellent points about the shortcommings of us foreign policy in the middle east. Trust me I am well aware of all of those arguments. I do afterall live in a part of the world that would gladly blame everything thats wrong on the planet on us foreign policy.

My argument is not with that, I just think that you are giving a misrepresentation of things. Its one thing to say that there are surely political factors involved in islamic suicide bombings. But you are in several posts taking it quite a lot further by, if not intentionally then atleast unintentionally placing religion as at best a side effect.

While the relation between political agenda and religious agenda can be debated when it comes to the smaller percentages. I think both are much involved.

I think that religious motives are probably the root, the method of twisting peoples minds into ending their lives, and the cause for most of the radical leaders. But I think political events play their part in helping to recruit new people into the ranks.

US foreign policy has created a lot of angry people that could be taken in to be terrorists. Generally though, thats not enough for the kind of behaviour we see from radical muslims. Especially since a lot of it is not even directed at the US.

But I personally think, based on how these people act, and how they differ from other political activists that the religious reasons is what ultimately pulls in and turns angry people into murders in this case.

Now you could argue that 9/11 was mainly a retaliation based on US foreign policy in the middle east. But lets face it these people were no freedom fighters. They were not upset about the Talibans being given power in Afghanistan, they relied on the Talabans having power in Afghanistan.
They might have been angry about the existance of Israel and through that on the US backing of Israel. But lets keep in mind that if the Israel Palestine issue were not at heart a religious one. It would be way less difficult to get a peace treaty working there.

Do you think that when Iran declares that Israel will be wiped off the maps, that it is a purely political cause? That Iran is just upset about the palestinian people being driven out?
NO. The palestinians are the most disciminated people in the middle east. When they flee their country. In Saudi Arabia and Iran they are third class citizens.
Iran and others doesn’t have a problem with a couple of people loosing their lands, they have a problem with jews on their turf and they got a problem with infidels in the holy city.

My country has been a neutral state for a long time, it has no historical involvement in the middle east. My government strongly opposed the Iraq war. Yet, muslim radicals are just as eager to murder the artist who drew our mohammad cartoons as they were the danish artist.
Our flag and dolls depicting our prime minister were burnt just as much as danish flags were.

Clearly, the drawing of a religious figure is far higher on the agenda than whether you support the Iraq war or have a history of colonialism in the region.

I don’t disagree with any points about the US being a disaster to international stability for the last 60 years. But I still don’t think that the hatred of the west is any more than loosely based on that.

 Signature 

What can be asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without evidence.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 19 June 2008 04:46 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 30 ]  
Member
Avatar
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  805
Joined  2007-08-28

“The bottom line is, if 9/11 was political and not religious.They would have planted bombs in the towers and detonated them from a far. They didn’t they blindly killed themselves in a blaze of fire. Signifying something deeper about their convictions.”

http://cns.miis.edu/pubs/reports/wtc93.htm

Note that both WTC attacks were in US presidential inaugural years. Maybe coincidence, maybe not. If McCain is elected, there would almost certainly be a major terrorist event in 2009. If Obama is elected, “they” might take the time to see what he’s all about before committing to something awful, like…

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GPzIM6YXNHA

Crank it up and check this out…

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nhj8ITvp-pw&feature=related

Now crank it WAY up and dig this…

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jmKR6evZRQQ

Profile
 
 
   
2 of 3
2
 
RSS 2.0     Atom Feed