Bow Down Before Iran?

Tom Kalbfus · 2006-09-29 11:29:27

There is a rather curious article in the Christian Science Monitor.
http://www.csmonitor.com/2006/0928/p03s02-ussc.html
I always considered us lucky not to be neighbors with a region full of cross-eyed fanatical muslims wanting to blow themselves up in the presence of Americans. I sometimes wonder about the sudden so called facination with Islam in the wake of the 9/11 attacks. Do people actually join the religion because they want to kill someone? Do they want a palative for the violence they intend to do, and reassurance that they'll go to heaven for doing it? Al Qauda needs recent converts that don't look like Arabs, and blend in with the large hispanic popuklation of the USA so they can get close to their victims prior to blowing themselves up.

We've seen how Chavez suddenly converted himself to the champion defender of Islam by making an alliance with Iran. Islam has suddenly become neat and cool right after 9/11, perhaps people are wiching they could do something like that to Americans and so they convert to Islam. If someone goes "blah blah blah Islam is a peaceful religion blah blah blah" they'll accept it as a means of getting close to Americans and nothing more. You see if they are ostracised by Americans, they can't get close to them and blow themselves up, and without their intended American victim, the gates of heaven are closed to them, perhaps that is their way of thinking. Perhaps those muslims thinking that Islam is a peaceful religion are suddenly inundated with converts who want to do violence and are looking for an excuse. :evil:

John Creighton · 2006-09-29 12:53:19

There is no equivalent to fundamentalist Islam in Christianity
They cry, pray to Bush and wash out the devil - welcome to Jesus Camp
http://www.guardian.co.uk/usa/story/0,,1883730,00.html
...
At one point Pastor Fischer equates the preparation she is giving children with the training of terrorists in the Middle East. "I want to see young people who are as committed to the cause of Jesus Christ as the young people are to the cause of Islam," she tells the camera. "I want to see them radically laying down their lives for the gospel, as they are over in Pakistan and Israel and Palestine."
...
<sarcasm> Yay. </sarcasm>
You say that Pastor Fischer equates the preparation she is giving children with the training of terrorists in the Middle East, but the quote you cite indicates nothing of the kind. "I want to see young people who are as committed to the cause of Jesus Christ as the young people are to the cause of Islam," is the cause of Islam terrorism, this sentence doesn't explicitly say so. "I want to see them radically laying down their lives for the gospel, as they are over in Pakistan and Israel and Palestine." He is not explicitly saying Christians should murder people, which is what the Middle East Terrorists do, he is saying people are laying down their live, it could mean they are laying down their lives as Jesus Christ did on the cross. Perhaps he means the other Muslims besides the terrorists, who are simply murderers, suicidal murderers in some cases, but I would't call someone who commits murder and suicide to be laying down his life for his religion.
I read the story by the Guardian and the pastor himself didn't make this comparison to terrorists, only the person who wrote the artical. What people are laying down their lives for Islam? Is it the terrorists, or is it their innocent victims? I say the terrorists are not so innocent, so it isn't they who are laying down their lives, rather it is they who are making human sacrifices of other people for a religion that does not demand the blood of the innocent. I see no comparison between that and Christianity. By maryr in Christiandom we mean somebody who is willing to lay down his life for Jesus Christ, that is if someone threatens him with Death if he refuses to change his religion, then he would freely accept death, rather than convert to some other religion while under the threat of death to do so, or someone who dies as a result of following the tenants of his religion, like that of a German Priest who sacrificed his life to save a Jew from the Holocaust. People who blow themselves up to kill other people are acting in an unchristian manner, so he cannot be said to be laying down his life for Christ when he is violating his principles.

If we make excuses for radical Christians we are no better then the moderate Muslims condoning the extremists. Like them we become complicit in the consequences. Stop and think, what are the consequences of teaching kids to kill for their religion. I don’t care if Muslim extremists are worse and more wide spread. That doesn’t make it right.

Tom Kalbfus · 2006-09-29 13:12:35

If we make excuses for radical Christians we are no better then the moderate Muslims condoning the extremists. Like them we become complicit in the consequences. Stop and think, what are the consequences of teaching kids to kill for their religion. I don’t care if Muslim extremists are worse and more wide spread. That doesn’t make it right.

I just don't think the example cited of Pastor Fischer is a real good one. In the quotation cited, he doesn't call for kids to kill for their religion, he calls for them to lay down their lives. There is a difference you know.

noosfractal · 2006-09-29 16:07:49

People who blow themselves up to kill other people are acting in an unchristian manner, so he cannot be said to be laying down his life for Christ when he is violating his principles.

Now where have I heard that before? Oh yes, from moderate Muslims ...

http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/islam.htm[/url]"]Q: How does Islam view terrorism?
A: Islam does not support terrorism under any circumstances. Terrorism goes against every principle in Islam. If a Muslim engages in terrorism, he is not following Islam. He may be wrongly using the name of Islam for political or financial gain.

http://www.glocaleye.org/binladen.htm[/url]"]All Muslims agree that terrorism is unIslamic

etc, etc.

Talking about un-Christian manners, what ever happened to "Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you" ? You'd think the words of Christ would carry some weight among Christians.

Tom Kalbfus · 2006-09-30 00:16:58

Tom Kalbfus wrote:
People who blow themselves up to kill other people are acting in an unchristian manner, so he cannot be said to be laying down his life for Christ when he is violating his principles.

Now where have I heard that before? Oh yes, from moderate Muslims ...
http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/islam.htm wrote:
Q: How does Islam view terrorism?
A: Islam does not support terrorism under any circumstances. Terrorism goes against every principle in Islam. If a Muslim engages in terrorism, he is not following Islam. He may be wrongly using the name of Islam for political or financial gain.

That is just one man's opinion of what Islam is.
If you take the community of Christians and the community of Muslims you come up with certain tendencies among their societies which are very revealing about what these two religions represent. Do you know the difference between a fringe group and a mainstream movement? What is mainstream in Iran, is it the moderate muslims that says that Islam does not support terrorism under any circumstances, or is it the Ayatollah that says, "Death to America! Kill the Jews! The Holocaust never happened!" Who runs this country the moderates or the radicals? To get an equivalent ideology among the Christians, you have to go way out on the fringe. You have to use fuzzy logic, what do most Christians believe? What do most Muslims believe.

If most Muslims were moderates in the Palestinian territories, do you think they would have elected terrorists?

If most Lebanese Muslims were moderates, do you think they would let a terrorist group control their territory in South Lebenon? It is really interesting the the Lebanese weren't really offended at having a terrorist group occupy their country, but when Israelis move in to clean them up, suddenly there is great umbrage over foreign invaders taking over territory which they said wasn't under their control in the first place, it another case of them trying to have their cake and eat it too. Oh no, it not that the Lebanese were waging war on Israeli, oh no, it just that some group that was beyond their control waged war, and they weren't interested enough to take back their country, but suddenly when the Israelis moved in, suddenly they want to take back their country and give it back to Hezbollah. Duh! The Lebanese government and by extention its people are collectively guilty of starting this war because the majority of them are not moderates, I know its a politically incorrect conclusion to come to, but given that its a democracy and given that they share power with a terrorist group that should rightfully be in jail and not in government.

There is something very wrong with many Islamic societies that the Pope can't speak his mind about Islam honestly without causing riots and violence against Christians. You know well that Christians have been called many terrible things by many Muslim leaders, and their reaction was much more muted.

Talking about un-Christian manners, what ever happened to "Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you" ? You'd think the words of Christ would carry some weight among Christians.

The bible doesn't say anything about letting your enemies harm you, kill you or exterminate you. I don't see why you can't love your enemies from a distance, a very long distance! Do you have to be vulnerable to your enemies in order to love them? You can love them, but you also can defend yourselves from them. Christianity is not a suicide pact, in contrast to certain branches of Islam, most Christians don't interprete loving your enemies as letting themselves be killed by their enemies. A Chrisitan will fight in self-defense, not out of hatred. Hatred is illogical and unreasoning, it is an emotion. The best way to fightRadical Islam is with reason and steps to contain it, and limit its ability to harm you. You can love the human being, but you don't have to love his ideology or the ideas he has. Some people interprete Christianity as meaning that we should not defend ourselves, and that is wrong.

noosfractal · 2006-09-30 01:52:55

That is just one man's opinion of what Islam is.

Or, in fact, the official position of USA Today, a newspaper with a readership of 5.7 million people - the nation's highest.

If you take the community of Christians and the community of Muslims you come up with certain tendencies among their societies which are very revealing about what these two religions represent.

Let's take a look, shall we?

US Population, nominally Christian: 350 million. Number of Fundamentalist Christians: 40-75 million. Believe the temple in Jerusalem must be rebuilt in order for Christ to come again. Actively work towards that goal. Be generous, call it 10% of the population.

Population of nominally Muslim nations: 1500 million. Number of Fundamentalist Muslims: 75-150 million. Believe the US is an agent of Satan actively attempting to dismantle their traditional society. Be ungenerous, call it 10% of the population.

That's right - both nations are infected with the same illness.

If most Muslims were moderates in the Palestinian territories, do you think they would have elected terrorists?

I don't think you can live in Palestine and be a moderate. But you are right there. The election of Hamas means all hope for peace there is gone. And it doesn't bring great tidings to the larger situation either.

If most Lebanese Muslims were moderates, do you think they would let a terrorist group control their territory in South Lebenon?

Actually, the largest, and ruling, ethnic group in Lebanon is Christian (or at least was, the political situation has made census difficult).

It is really interesting the the Lebanese weren't really offended at having a terrorist group occupy their country

I don't believe they are overjoyed at the presence of Hezbollah, but the presence and support of a half million Palestinian refugees makes it difficult to suppress the organization.

The bible doesn't say anything about letting your enemies harm you

But I say unto you, That ye resist not evil: but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also.

Tom Kalbfus · 2006-09-30 08:54:04

But I say unto you, That ye resist not evil: but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also.

Maybe Christ said that, but it doesn't mean that most Christians believe it. There is another saying, "Evil triumphs when good men do nothing." I guess many Germans can be considered "good Christians", they did not resist the evil done unto the Jews. When their Jewish neighbors we're hauled away by the Gestapo or the SS and put on the trains bound for the Death Camps, they "turned the other cheek", and some of them turned over more Jews to the Authorities.

Not resisting evil means that evil wins. That branch of Christianity that believed the above statement quickly became extinct. You got to have Christian values that are conducive to survival. There are ways of resisting evil without murdering innocent people, there are means and ways that alot of Muslims seem totally ignorant of, so quick are they to go for the gun and the bomb.

I'm not talking specifically about what Jesus Christ said or Muhammad said, but about how these two groups of people behave. In the Christian World their is an accepted body of values considered appropriate behavior, in the Muslim World there is also, but comparing the two societies as a whole, the Muslims' general tendency is toward more violence when they don't get their way, the Christian tendency is toward peaceful protest. In the spirit of the above quotation, Christians try to find nonviolent means of resisting evil first before resorting to violence as a last resort. Christians gennerally are not eager to start a war, Muslims on the other hand, tend to value their current existence less, are less concerned about whether the live or die, and easily led to commit violence.

You can go over the bible verse by verse and I don't care, there is a Christian community of values, in those values it is acceptable behavior to defend oneself from evil, but murdering people is wrong. Common sense means that you don't follow chains of logic startiong out with axioms from the Bible and then come up with ridiculous conclusions saying that a Christian is not allowed to defend himselve and must therefore let radical Islam trumph and force his children to convert to Islam at the point of a sword. A vast swath of the Muslim World was once Christian you know, perhaps Islam was so successful there because the Christians they conquered "turned the other cheek" and their sons and daughters were forced to convert to Islam. Those Christians that resisted the Islamic onslaught learned that dogmatic adherence to Christ's teachings regarding "turning the other cheek" was not conducive toward survival, and so they fought back, and so we had the Crusades. One oft unacknowledged fact is that the objective of the Crusades wasn't to win new lands for Christiandon, rather it was to roll back the Muslim conquests in North Africa and the Middle East.

I don't think you can live in Palestine and be a moderate. But you are right there. The election of Hamas means all hope for peace there is gone. And it doesn't bring great tidings to the larger situation either.

The Palestinians don't want peace, but the Israelis do. The Israelis were trying to be reasonable by offereing some land as incentive, but the Palestinians wanted none of that, they elected terrorists, but just remember the Romans eventually got their peace after repeated attacks by Carthage, Tacticus said that the Romans "made a desert and called it peace." To be fair, I don't know what other choice the Romans had, the Cartheginians certainly didn't give them any other options. Maybe some people don't deserve to be attacked all the time just because the other side doesn't want peace and has their eyes fixed on the prize of conquest.

What do you do when one side is incapable of winning but is unwilling to sue for peace, not even on favorable terms for themselves, they want the fruits of victory and would settle for nothing less than the other sides destruction yet they are incapable of bringing it about? What Israel has been doing is giving the Palestinians the kid glove treatment in order to maintain the good graces of the World Community, that means Jews keep on being attacked, how long they'll put up with this situation, I don't know, but the road to peace still exists, it is just unpleasant to implement. There is the peace that occurs after a major war, when much that was good is ruined and people are sick of fighting. I don't see much evidence fo the Palestinians ever getting sick of the ravages of war, perhaps because the Israelis aren't ravaging them enough. The Israelis are holding back at the World's insistance and the Palestinians perceive it only as weakness, and the Jews are beginning to perceive the World's insistance that they hold back as antisemitism. The world is basically saying, "don't fight back, let them kill you, don't over react!" I bet some Jews are saying that the World will keep saying this unti the very last Jew is killed.

Tom Kalbfus · 2006-09-30 11:36:25

But I say unto you, That ye resist not evil: but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also.

Isn't it interesting that this flaw in Christianity seems to be the opposite of what it is in Islam. Reasonable moderate Christians would say that this statement does not mean that a Christian can't defend himself against his enemies. An unreasonable extremist Christian would obey the above statement to the letter, this is not a moderate position, but this idea when taken to extremes produces Christians who turn the other cheek and don't defend themselves. I don't think that pastor would qualify as an extremist under the above definition.

As for what to do about the Israeli/Palestinian conflict, I'm really not sure. Roman logic would of course lead to the Israelis doing some rather unpleasant things to the Palestinians in order to obtain peace, this would enrage the Islamic World which would in turn mean the Israelis doing some unpleasant things to them as well. Once the Arab world has had its fill of bloodshed and assuming the Israelis can survive the encounter, then it may be possible afterwards to have peace for the Arab world would have grown its own crop of peaceniks and consciountious objectors who are tired or war, but so long as the struggle is cheap and easy for the Arabs to continue, they will. Its like of like the Arabs are saying this, "If your merciful to me, you are weak. If your unmerciful to me, you are cruel."

That is why space exploration is so important. When peace is impossible, there is always space. When the Universe is basically limitless, and as far as the human race is concerned it might as well be, retreat is always a viable option. We can deprive the Arab world of an enemy and then they'll turn upon themselves and in one million years they will be gone. The rest of human kind can return to the Earth or what's left of the Earth and rebuild. When ever you have two mutually disagreeable ideologies, you can either fight it out till one is eradicated, or with space colonization, the human race can split up and put some space between one group and the disagreeable party that will not have peace. Perhaps this is a better solution that the Roman/Carthigean one.

John Creighton · 2006-09-30 15:12:55

US Population, nominally Christian: 350 million. Number of Fundamentalist Christians: 40-75 million. Believe the temple in Jerusalem must be rebuilt in order for Christ to come again. Actively work towards that goal. Be generous, call it 10% of the population.
Population of nominally Muslim nations: 1500 million. Number of Fundamentalist Muslims: 75-150 million. Believe the US is an agent of Satan actively attempting to dismantle their traditional society. Be ungenerous, call it 10% of the population.

Very interesting. This sounds a lot like the president of Iran building roads to form a well to help bring about the return of the Mahdi.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mahdi

I think there are certain Christians and Muslims that believe that apocalyptic prophecies need help. Talk about self fulfilling or what. Fortunately at this current time the more extreme Christians do not have the same positions of power as the more extreme Muslims. I did a Google search on Christian terrorism the other day.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_extremism
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_terrorism

I didn’t see to the same kind of things as we see from Muslim extremists in the wikipedia articles but I did see evidence of violence such as the bombing of abortion clinics. I guess the big differences is after such events happen here they are condemned by the local medias as opposed to in some Islamic states were there is massive celebration in the streets.

John Creighton · 2006-09-30 15:19:36

This quote I found interesting:
” "I want you to just let a wave of intolerance wash over you. I want you to let a wave of hatred wash over you. Yes, hate is good... Our goal is a Christian nation. We have a biblical duty, we are called on by God to conquer this country. We don't want equal time. We don't want pluralism."”

Tom Kalbfus · 2006-09-30 15:34:12

Its fairly obvious the differences between the Christian World and the Muslim one. You can argue many things to finding exceptions to everything. I think however Christians by and large are peaceful and Muslims less so. When prominent people say bad things about Islam, they have to watch their back. Everytime I go to an Airport I'm reminded that Islam is not as peaceful as the politically correct people say. Before Muslim extremists, airport security was lax, and you could bring beverages onboard airplanes, no questions asked, now because of Islam and their culture we cannot, and the fact that you can find extreme examples Christianity on the fringes of societies doesn't change any of that. What, for example, was that Lunatic of an Iranian President doing at the US representing Iran? I thought Islam was a peaceful religion, then how come this leader calling for the destruction of Israel is representing this peaceful population of Iranians at the UN. You'd think if the Iranians were truly peaceful they wouldn't have elected this warmongering nut to be their President. You'd also think they would boycott their mosques since the head of their Religion goes around calling for a host of all evil things, assassination, murder, war, Death to America and to the Jews etc. Surely this religious figure who is the spiritual leader of a Nation much bigger than the Vatican could not truly be the head of a peaceful religion, and if he is not, what are peaceful Iranians doing attending his mosques every Friday? You'd think that a long time ago they would have figured out their religion was nothing but a crock, and excuse to murder people or to beat up women. How many peaceful Iranians boycott their religion in protest to its evil and its violence advocated by the Ayalollah?

John Creighton · 2006-09-30 17:42:00

If we want to keep these Christian groups “fridge” it is not helpful to pretend they don’t exist so they can recruit and grow under the radar. If we take the attitude that Christian is superior and Immune to such sickness then the same Cancer may reemerge in Christian society that we now find in Muslim society and use to find in Christian society.

Tom Kalbfus · 2006-10-01 08:23:06

Who's ignoring them, they receive the amount of attention in proportion to the threat the represent, which is not much. On the otherhand Islamic radicals have taken over whole countries, it would seem on the face of it that Islam lends itself rather well to these radical ideologies. The theology of Islam has Mohammad leading armies, contrast that to the cheek turning Jesus Christ. Islam has its Jihad and Christ turns the other cheek. It seems that the radicals of Christianity go to extremes in turning the other cheek, which makes them mostly harmless, while radical muslims go to extremes in waging their Jihad. All-in-all I feel safer around someone who won't defend himself, believes the world was created 6000 years ago and that the end of times is at had, than around someone who wants to convert me or else chop my head off. Christianity is at its heart a pacifist religion, when it goes to extremes, it goes to pacifist extremes in not fighting back. I think that is what happened in the Middle East. The Arabs who were Christians went to extremes of pacifism and wouldn't not defend themselves against the conquering armies of Islam, and thus Islam, a more warlike religion took over the entire middle east and north African region. And those Arabs who were fanatical Christians had their children converted into fanatical muslims who would die fighting fortheir religion just as their parents would die not fighting for it.

Palomar · 2006-10-03 10:00:51

Just read through the pages of this thread.

Overall, I agree with Tom Kalbfus.

clark · 2006-10-04 10:59:04

LOL. I hope none of you are seriously entertaining this tripe as sensible or well reasoned.

Sure, it is easy to look at the surface of the issues and say, "It's the Muslims fault." I mean, that makes us noble. It's *those* savages that can't be reasoned with. We are the civilization of peace!

Meanwhile, the western -christian- civilization engages in wholesale genocide or native american, jew, gay, crippled etc. throughout its long and peaceful history. Let's not even mention the OH SO charitable chrisitan tradition of slavery!

Word to the wise, Muslims aren't the problem- and before somebody gets all huffy, Christians aren't the problem. Infants and the mentaly damaged are the ones who like to make blanket statements to construct an understanding of what is going on just so they can turn off the rest of their brain and not think it through any further.

What is going on is the exploitation of the ignorant and the poor. This isn't a problem with Islam, or even with religion in general- it is a fundamental problem with humanity. Human beings exploit one another. Human beings use religion, sex, class, race, ideology, appearance... you name it, against one another.

If you shut off your brain and just assume that it is "Islam" that is the problem, then nothing will ever change. It isn't Islam's fault. It's individuals taking advantage of others because these others lack education and lack opportunity.

Tom Kalbfus · 2006-10-04 11:45:18

Well it seems all this terrorist violence has a definite beginning. There was a time when their wasn't a suicide bomber every day, and suddenly there was. If people were always doing this, then I think we'd have terrorist attacks throughout history and there have been not. As for the strategy of suicide passenger airliner hijackings, that tactic wasn't invented in Christiandom, it was imported here from other parts of the World.

LOL. I hope none of you are seriously entertaining this tripe as sensible or well reasoned.
Sure, it is easy to look at the surface of the issues and say, "It's the Muslims fault." I mean, that makes us noble. It's *those* savages that can't be reasoned with. We are the civilization of peace!

and I hear the pages of a history book slowly being opened.

Meanwhile, the western -christian- civilization engages in wholesale genocide of native american, jew, gay, crippled etc. throughout its long and peaceful history. Let's not even mention the OH SO charitable chrisitan tradition of slavery!

That is not happening now in Western -christian- civilization. There is such a thing called evolution, biological forms evolve and so do civilization. To be sure we were more beastial and uncivilized in the past, but that is how we measure progress. Unfortunately for us, Islamic civilization has not progressed as far as our own, and they are giving us problems by exporting their savagery to us.

It is not politically correct to look at things from a civilizational perspective, but sometimes we have to, because Islamic civilization is making us change the way we live, especially around airports. We in the West do not usually do stuff like praise god and then blow ourselves up along with a bunch of other people, that idea was imported from the East. It is a shame that we make such progress in improving the relations between black and white, men and women, increasing equality throughout and reducing discrimination, and then this Islamic Fanatacism thing comes to our civilization and bites us on the but. It is not politically correct to look at these things, but it is necessary in order to safeguard ourselves. I want Muslims to feel ashamed for what their civilization is doing. There are decent muslims around, I don't want those muslims to feel that suicide terrorism is normal or understandable, and we shouldn't make accomodations for it and give them an understanding pat on the back as they kill us. The first step toward solving a problem is understanding that something is wrong. Normal people do not behave the way these terrorists do, and normal civilizations do not applaud them for it, or elect terrorists into their government.

The fact that these people can get elected by the majority of the people indicates their is something seriously wrong with public attitudes. You don't like to point this out because it hurts feelings and sensibilities, I understand this, but we also don't like to be killed. If Muslims feel embarrased or ashamed, then maybe they might do something about it to correct the situation. Even if the Pope criticises Islam for violence, we get protests of more violence.

What is going on is the exploitation of the ignorant and the poor. This isn't a problem with Islam, or even with religion in general- it is a fundamental problem with humanity. Human beings exploit one another. Human beings use religion, sex, class, race, ideology, appearance... you name it, against one another.

Too bad we didn't cause it, but Muslims are making it are problem aren't they?
There are poor everywhere, they all don't engage in violence, they don't all let themselves be manipulated into acts of violence against other people, only Muslims are particularly troublesome in this regard.

I think we should try to be less understanding of their motivations and do something to deter them. Give them the message that they'd better not mess with us or else we'll mess with them.

Some people are so reflexive and self-consious about being politically correct all the time that they don't see the danger until their head in on a chopping block. I'm sorry that is so, but some people will see the danger before others, and I think slowly public awareness is growing. Sometimes it is better to be blunt and honest.

Cobra Commander · 2006-10-04 12:03:08

Infants and the mentaly damaged are the ones who like to make blanket statements to construct an understanding of what is going on just so they can turn off the rest of their brain and not think it through any further.
What is going on is the exploitation of the ignorant and the poor.

Clark makes a good point albeit it not entirely by design, blaming any of this on a single religion in its entirety is grossly oversimplifying the matter with a blanket statement.

But then reducing it to economics is no better. Reality is more complex than that.

It just so happens the Middle East is not only overwhelmingly Islamic, a religion that does contain plentiful impetus to wage war in its name, but is also full of oil rich countries run by corrupt autocrats. Most of the people are poor, but it isn't simply because they're exploited by outside powers via their own governments. Middle Eastern nations for the most part have never developed functioning economies, everything is based on oil. It's as though one of us had a beer tree in our yard, the only source around, and we could just sell people cases all day with no effort beyond picking them. No real skills, no need for them. Just load it up and collect the money. It's almost like being on welfare but with the illusion of self-sufficiency. It destroys the capacity to do anything else.

Woe to us if that beer tree ever dies.

Add to that, Arabic culture is very macho. The man is king and they teach themselves that theirs is the greatest society in the world, favored by Allah above all. And yet they look around and what do they see? In every sphere of endeavor they are surpassed by both the West and the East. "At least we're not Africa" could be the motto for the whole region. Quite a kick in the gonads ain't it?

Now, take a big dose of constant humiliation at having not accomplished anything of note for the better part of 800 years, add a dysfunctional oil economy that must import almost everything, mix in some religious fervor and the orgasmic thrill of impending matrydom and there we are, recipe for crazy jihad fun.

We can't simply convince them that Islam is a religion of peace. We can't just "educate" them and expect that the problem will go away. We can't pretend that if only they weren't so poor they'd mellow out, alot of terrorists tend to come from middle class, educated backgrounds rather than the poor ignorant masses. There's more than poverty and ignorance at work here.

Previous eras have models that could be followed for remaking that society of course, none of them 100% successful. the Japan "crush them until they give up against overwhelming force then occupy the crap out of them" method isn't going to fly these days, not without much more provocation.

"Kill everyone" is just so crude and leaves a sour taste. And the cleanup is obscene.

Leaving "go live there" as an outside chance for success. Colonial-Lite if you will, enough close contact to start molding the culture as well as improving education and economic prospects.

Hey, I don't print the cards, I just call the hand as it hits the table.

clark · 2006-10-04 12:31:48

Well it seems all this terrorist violence has a definite beginning. There was a time when their wasn't a suicide bomber every day, and suddenly there was. If people were always doing this, then I think we'd have terrorist attacks throughout history and there have been not. As for the strategy of suicide passenger airliner hijackings, that tactic wasn't invented in Christiandom, it was imported here from other parts of the World.

A terrorist act is an asymmetrical attack response against an opponent with overwhelming military superiority. If you fail to understand this, then there is no pre existing evidence I might point to that would disprove your assertion. Suicide bombers are nothing more than a form of asymmetrical warfare, which can be traced with a beginning by the Tamil Tigers (which is not an Islamic oriented political group by the way). The use of civilian planes as weapons is merely the escalation of asymmetrical warfare in order to leverage the maximum gain for the cost- but there is nothing new in using airplanes as bombs, just research Japanese warfare during the 1940’s.

and I hear the pages of a history book slowly being opened.

To be fair, you are the one referencing history in a rather flippant manner.

That is not happening now in Western -christian- civilization. There is such a thing called evolution, biological forms evolve and so do civilization. To be sure we were more beastial and uncivilized in the past, but that is how we measure progress. Unfortunately for us, Islamic civilization has not progressed as far as our own, and they are giving us problems by exporting their savagery to us.

True, many predominantly Muslim nations have not achieved the same level of social and technological progress as some western nations. Now the question is why they have not progressed, or are not progressing? We can point to their religious or secular leaders as a possible cause, which then leads to the question- How did these religious and secular leaders get into positions of power within these countries given the overwhelming military, financial, and technological superiority of western –christian- nations?
By and large, Islamic nations have the leaders they have due to western influence and western power games. Western history, in the modern era even, is replete with examples and evidence of imperialism and colonialism and straight forward exploitation of these nations. We have subverted governments that did not suit our needs, and propped up dictators that represented our own western interests (but almost never represented the interests of their subjects).
Here is a Christian theme- you reap what you sow. In no way does this excuse terrorism of any variety, but it does set the stage to begin to understand some of the root causes and how exactly we arrived at this point.

It is not politically correct to look at things from a civilizational perspective, but sometimes we have to, because Islamic civilization is making us change the way we live, especially around airports.

And I have to wear a seat belt by law when I drive a car because idiots can’t be expected to be responsible enough to do it on their own. You are inconvenienced at the airport and I am somehow supposed to care?

We in the West do not usually do stuff like praise god and then blow ourselves up along with a bunch of other people, that idea was imported from the East.

We don’t normally do this because we don’t need to. We do not utilize asymmetric warfare because we have overwhelming conventional forces. People act in this manner because they want to fight, but cannot fight on a level field against their superior advesary.

It is a shame that we make such progress in improving the relations between black and white, men and women, increasing equality throughout and reducing discrimination, and then this Islamic Fanatacism thing comes to our civilization and bites us on the but.

And you demonstrate your individual progress with your blanket statements regarding a particular religious belief.

It is not politically correct to look at these things, but it is necessary in order to safeguard ourselves. I want Muslims to feel ashamed for what their civilization is doing. There are decent muslims around, I don't want those muslims to feel that suicide terrorism is normal or understandable, and we shouldn't make accomodations for it and give them an understanding pat on the back as they kill us. The first step toward solving a problem is understanding that something is wrong. Normal people do not behave the way these terrorists do, and normal civilizations do not applaud them for it, or elect terrorists into their government.

Your mistake though is lumping all muslims together- the moderate with the fanatic. You do little to draw a distinction. If suicide bombing is not normal, and decent Muslims are normal, then obviously decent muslims will already know that suicide bombing is not normal. I question you because your underlying logic is faulty.

Too bad we didn't cause it, but Muslims are making it are problem aren't they?
There are poor everywhere, they all don't engage in violence, they don't all let themselves be manipulated into acts of violence against other people, only Muslims are particularly troublesome in this regard.

Go visit, or better yet, live in an urban city ghetto. Race riots are not unique to America. Class warfare is not new. Xenophobia and assaults against Irish, Chinese, and other immigrants is age old. It is a problem with all humans- not just one particular sub-class of humanity.

I think we should try to be less understanding of their motivations and do something to deter them. Give them the message that they'd better not mess with us or else we'll mess with them.

Sure, we can set up camps and just slaughter them, right? Maybe make them wear arm bands to identify them as muslims. Who cares if they are moderate or extremists- we need to send a message.

Some people are so reflexive and self-consious about being politically correct all the time that they don't see the danger until their head in on a chopping block. I'm sorry that is so, but some people will see the danger before others, and I think slowly public awareness is growing. Sometimes it is better to be blunt and honest.

It is always better to be smart and right.

Tom Kalbfus · 2006-10-04 12:40:57

We can't solve their problems. We can encourage them to keep their problems to themselves otherwise we'll give them greater problems! I'm sorry the Middle East is such a basketcase. We didn't make it that way. If they need a Great Satan to rail against to keep their society in order, let them find another one, we're too dangerous! I think the problem is that we've failed to communicate this fact to them. If we're to be their Great Satan, let them be afraid of us, and maybe they'll will find another littler Great Satan that would be less of a challenge for them. Not Israel though! Islam is like the guy in the Zoo who jumps over the fence and immediately wants to wrestle the Grizzly Bear.

John Creighton · 2006-10-04 13:13:01

Speaking of moderate Muslims speaking out and taking responsibility, I was doing some searching on the web last night. It is hard to find stuff. I found a few buzz phrases like Jihad for peace and Jihad for equality. That is basically how I started my search. I hard some Muslim on the multicultural channel using the word Jihad in that unconventional way. Unfortunately these phrases didn’t seem to inspire many and “Jihad for Peace” can actually be found on some extremists training camps. I am not sure if it is written to mock the idea or it is a kind of 1984 double speak.

Anyway, I did find one shining example of enlightenment and from a she’ite Ayatollah of all people. Not to be mistaking with the radical Islamic Ayatollah behind the Iranian revolution as there are in fact 60 Ayatollah’s in the world. Western me thought there was just one evil one. Lol.

The shining example of enlightenment is Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grand_Ayat … al-Sistani

He is an Iraq she’ite cleric originally born in Iran. This guy actually said during the cartoon incident that militant Muslims were partly to blame. He advocates the separation of church and state. He believes in democracy and his office actually released a statement that he would accept the pope’s invitation to dialog. With all the radical clerics this guy I think sometimes gets glossed over but he is real and he is speaking from an area in the world that needs this kind of voice the most. Oh by the way there may be some truth to what Clark says as this guy’s following is more from the wealthy educated Iraqi’s while the poor shite’s listen to the more radical clerics.

noosfractal · 2006-10-04 15:50:42

New Mars Forums

Announcement

#76 2006-09-29 11:29:27

Re: Bow Down Before Iran?

#77 2006-09-29 12:53:19

Re: Bow Down Before Iran?

#78 2006-09-29 13:12:35

Re: Bow Down Before Iran?

#79 2006-09-29 16:07:49

Re: Bow Down Before Iran?

#80 2006-09-30 00:16:58

Re: Bow Down Before Iran?

#81 2006-09-30 01:52:55

Re: Bow Down Before Iran?

#82 2006-09-30 08:54:04

Re: Bow Down Before Iran?

#83 2006-09-30 11:36:25

Re: Bow Down Before Iran?

#84 2006-09-30 15:12:55

Re: Bow Down Before Iran?

#85 2006-09-30 15:19:36

Re: Bow Down Before Iran?

#86 2006-09-30 15:34:12

Re: Bow Down Before Iran?

#87 2006-09-30 17:42:00

Re: Bow Down Before Iran?

#88 2006-10-01 08:23:06

Re: Bow Down Before Iran?

#89 2006-10-03 10:00:51

Re: Bow Down Before Iran?

#90 2006-10-04 10:59:04

Re: Bow Down Before Iran?

#91 2006-10-04 11:45:18

Re: Bow Down Before Iran?

#92 2006-10-04 12:03:08

Re: Bow Down Before Iran?

#93 2006-10-04 12:31:48

Re: Bow Down Before Iran?

#94 2006-10-04 12:40:57

Re: Bow Down Before Iran?

#95 2006-10-04 13:13:01

Re: Bow Down Before Iran?

#96 2006-10-04 15:50:42

Re: Bow Down Before Iran?

#97 2006-10-04 16:15:13

Re: Bow Down Before Iran?

#98 2006-10-04 23:12:51

Re: Bow Down Before Iran?

#99 2006-10-05 05:30:13

Re: Bow Down Before Iran?

#100 2006-10-05 05:58:23

Re: Bow Down Before Iran?

Board footer