[Tiresias]

Maybe this is a naive question, but will Muslims one day come to look back on terrorism as "we" (Western Christians and non Christians) now look back on the Witch Hunts and Inquisitions? Will Islamic Extremism naturally resolve itself as the Middle East is modernised and democratized, and as its intellectual and cultural frontiers expand through globalisation?

If the answer is no, then I don't see it ever going away. If the answer is yes, how many years, decades, centuries will it take?

[osiris]

It'll go away when oil stops being a valuable resource.

[badidea]

[Super Mario]

Oil has nothing on religious violence which has been around for thousands of years. Nothing goes away as long as there are humans to follow it. We have to realize that world peace and all that is like a joke a hippy played on us when he got us stoned.

In a free world, with freedom of opinion and thought, we accept that :

Religious extremists will always be around
Terrorism will continue
Terrorism will grow
Commies will return
Anarchists will ally with the above
Scientology will always be stalking your mom
New cults will come
New utopian idealists will plant silly ideas

The only way to stop people forming different religious and political opinion and movements is to control free thought. We don't want that so we gotta live with all kinds of **** and just let the cops and the marines deal with it when it gets explosive.

[Doofy]

Originally Posted by toothpick_charlie 

Maybe this is a naive question, but will Muslims one day come to look back on terrorism as "we" (Western Christians and non Christians) now look back on the Witch Hunts and Inquisitions?

No. Not until the whole world is subject to their cult, anyways.

And don't forget, the inquisitions were an indirect result of the moors invading in the first place - if they hadn't have invaded Iberia, there'd have been no inquisitions..

[Cipher13]

Originally Posted by Super Mario 

The only way to stop people forming different religious and political opinion and movements is to control free thought. We don't want that so we gotta live with all kinds of **** and just let the cops and the marines deal with it when it gets explosive.

Actually, it seems as if the American Government wants nothing more than to control/eradicate free thought.

[osiris]

Most of the meddling in the ME is revolving around oil.. The religious aspect comes in to play because we are forced to confront the faces behind the oil cartels.

Originally Posted by Super Mario 

Oil has nothing on religious violence which has been around for thousands of years. Nothing goes away as long as there are humans to follow it. We have to realize that world peace and all that is like a joke a hippy played on us when he got us stoned.

In a free world, with freedom of opinion and thought, we accept that :

Religious extremists will always be around
Terrorism will continue
Terrorism will grow
Commies will return
Anarchists will ally with the above
Scientology will always be stalking your mom
New cults will come
New utopian idealists will plant silly ideas

The only way to stop people forming different religious and political opinion and movements is to control free thought. We don't want that so we gotta live with all kinds of **** and just let the cops and the marines deal with it when it gets explosive.

[Cipher13]

Originally Posted by osiris 

Most of the meddling in the ME is revolving around oil.. The religious aspect comes in to play because we are forced to confront the faces behind the oil cartels.

When it wasn't oil, it was something else. When it's no longer oil, it'll be something else.

[Rumor]

IIRC, Islam dates back farther than Christianity, and have almost always been fighting either internally or externally. I wouldn't be able to say that I could see the fighting stop any time soon.

[Doofy]

Originally Posted by Rumor 

IIRC, Islam dates back farther than Christianity

Christianity = 1st century.
islam = 6th/7th century.

Originally Posted by Rumor 

and have almost always been fighting either internally or externally.

True.

[Super Mario]

Originally Posted by Cipher13 

Actually, it seems as if the American Government wants nothing more than to control/eradicate free thought.

Even the most extreme rightwing Christian supports freedom of speech and expression because it is the only way to find new people to religionize.

Only Islamists and extreme left Socialists try to control free thought and everything else.

[Super Mario]

Originally Posted by Rumor 

IIRC, Islam dates back farther than Christianity,

Well, not farther but equally it is the same Messianic Osiran afterlife cult with Muhammed and Arab supremacism stuck on to it.

[Cipher13]

Originally Posted by Super Mario 

Even the most extreme rightwing Christian supports freedom of speech and expression because it is the only way to find new people to religionize.

Only Islamists and extreme left Socialists try to control free thought and everything else.

Well, I don't agree that even the most extreme rightwing Christians support freedom of speech and action... the most extreme Christians refuse to acknowledge homosexuality as a legitimate lifestyle choice, for example - but let's not go there, that's another thread (that's been done to death).

I don't know why you assumed that I meant Christian extremists when I mentioned the government, though. The thought didn't even cross my mind.

[Doofy]

Originally Posted by Bukhari Vol. I

I have been ordered by God to fight with people till they bear testimony to the fact that there is no God but Allah and that Mohammed is his messenger, and that they establish prayer and pay Zakat (money). If they do it, their blood and their property are safe from me".

Does it look like it's going to go away?

[Doofy]

Originally Posted by Cipher13 

Well, I don't agree that even the most extreme rightwing Christians support freedom of speech and action.

I cannot concur.

But your definition of "right wing" is probably the one which has been force fed to the masses by the left (i.e. "Hitler was right wing, as was Mussolini", etc., etc..), and not the correct one.

Any control which seeks to limit freedom of speech and action is, by definition, not right wing. True right-wingers simply don't believe in the mechanisms which enable the restriction of freedom. Both Adolf and Benito were lefties. But the left (which includes the vast majority of people in charge of history) doesn't want them to be associated with their side of the fence. Simple as that.

[Super Mario]

Originally Posted by Cipher13 

Well, I don't agree that even the most extreme rightwing Christians support freedom of speech and action... the most extreme Christians refuse to acknowledge homosexuality as a legitimate lifestyle choice, for example - but let's not go there, that's another thread (that's been done to death).

I don't know why you assumed that I meant Christian extremists when I mentioned the government, though. The thought didn't even cross my mind.

Well because I thought you meant George W. Bush was standing there with his crucifix and machine gun like Rambo 5 trying to smash freedom of expression.

Yes those rightwing Christian extremists have some hate in the heart about homosexuals and all that but you don't see them saying homosexuals should be killed or stoned like they do in Iran or Nigeria. They just say homos will go to hell and can be fixed with prayer and all that ****.

And I don't believe the US government wants to get in the way of freedom of expression because it is bad economics. The only thing they do is try to deflect criticism aimed at them which is what everyone does anyway. That's very different from oppression. That's ad hominem, changing arguments, putting spin, duck for cover, turning tails, etc

[Cipher13]

Originally Posted by Doofy 

I cannot concur.

But your definition of "right wing" is probably the one which has been force fed to the masses by the left (i.e. "Hitler was right wing, as was Mussolini", etc., etc..), and not the correct one.

Any control which seeks to limit freedom of speech and action is, by definition, not right wing. True right-wingers simply don't believe in the mechanisms which enable the restriction of freedom. Both Adolf and Benito were lefties. But the left (which includes the vast majority of people in charge of history) doesn't want them to be associated with their side of the fence. Simple as that.

Fair enough. I should've put "even the most extreme rightwing Christians..." in quotation marks, because it wasn't my statement, but was in the post I quoted.

I'd change it to "extreme Christians", but will leave the post intact with this followup so close to it.

[Super Mario]

Originally Posted by Doofy 

I cannot concur.

But your definition of "right wing" is probably the one which has been force fed to the masses by the left (i.e. "Hitler was right wing, as was Mussolini", etc., etc..), and not the correct one.

Any control which seeks to limit freedom of speech and action is, by definition, not right wing. True right-wingers simply don't believe in the mechanisms which enable the restriction of freedom. Both Adolf and Benito were lefties. But the left (which includes the vast majority of people in charge of history) doesn't want them to be associated with their side of the fence. Simple as that.

Just last week the Venezuelan leftist Chavez said he is shutting down a private TV station in Venezuela because their soap operas are addictive and too sexy. He has much love and support from Hollywood commies, those people who get paid millions for reading lines on camera, who live in big houses and have no contact with the real world. Love the contradiction.

Chavez also gave Danny Glover $17 million to make a movie about when Haiti won independence by fighting colonialists. Wonder if Glover and Chavez will show how Haiti is the poorest and most violent Carribbean nation today?

[Big Mac]

Originally Posted by Rumor 

IIRC, Islam dates back farther than Christianity. . .

You just lost your license to post in threads pertaining to religion.

[Cipher13]

Originally Posted by Super Mario 

Well because I thought you meant George W. Bush was standing there with his crucifix and machine gun like Rambo 5 trying to smash freedom of expression.

Yes those rightwing Christian extremists have some hate in the heart about homosexuals and all that but you don't see them saying homosexuals should be killed or stoned like they do in Iran or Nigeria. They just say homos will go to hell and can be fixed with prayer and all that ****.

And I don't believe the US government wants to get in the way of freedom of expression because it is bad economics. The only thing they do is try to deflect criticism aimed at them which is what everyone does anyway. That's very different from oppression. That's ad hominem, changing arguments, putting spin, duck for cover, turning tails, etc

No, they don't kill them, they just tell them they're going to burn in hell for eternity... though I'd venture only because killing them would possibly put a dent in their permanent record.

Bad economics? Seriously? I strongly disagree. I believe the current "administration" (by which I mean the powers that control your country, which most certainly aren't restricted to those within 50 feet of the Oval Office) would absolutely love to be able to tell you what to eat, what to drink, what to smoke, what to do, what to think... and in many ways they do.

Unfortunately, I don't have the patience to list examples or justify my position. There will be people that agree with me that may provide a persuasive argument, but right now I'm verging on a migraine so I'll leave it at that for now.

[Super Mario]

Originally Posted by Cipher13 

Bad economics? Seriously? I strongly disagree. I believe the current "administration" (by which I mean the powers that control your country, which most certainly aren't restricted to those within 50 feet of the Oval Office) would absolutely love to be able to tell you what to eat, what to drink, what to smoke, what to do, what to think... and in many ways they do.

I don't think it is exactly that way. The people most responsible for that are non government lobby groups, like health and fitness fanatics who don't want to breath your smoke in a pub. Parents groups who want R ratings on a movie with less blood and smoking than what children had no problem watching in the 80s, animal rights extremists who threaten scientists, anti-abortionists who threaten doctors, etc.

They are all non governmental but the government doesn't want any trouble with them and so bends over backwards to make them happy with temporary hot fixes, like some stupid software patch for society.

[Sky Captain]

So Lebanon is full of oil I take it.

[peeb]

Maybe this is a naive question, but will Western Imperialists one day come to look back on invasion of middle eastern countries as "we" (the Islamic World) will one day look back on the terrorism?

If the answer is no, then I don't see it ever going away. If the answer is yes, how many years, decades, centuries will it take?

[Rumor]

Originally Posted by Big Mac 

You just lost your license to post in threads pertaining to religion.

Nah, that was what IIRC was for, which I clearly did not recall correctly.

[Super Mario]

Originally Posted by peeb 

Maybe this is a naive question, but will Western Imperialists one day come to look back on invasion of middle eastern countries as "we" (the Islamic World) will one day look back on the terrorism?

What western imperialism would that be?
Why is it OK for Arabs to have business interests in the West and invade each other?
Why is it OK for Iran to ruin the Coalition's security operation?
How is it imperialism when Iraq is not a colony of any other country?
How is it imperialism when Iraqis and Afghans have voted for the first time in their history?
How is it imperialism when all of Iraq's provinces have a share of oil revenue for the first time in history?
How is it imperialism when the majority of Iraqis interviewed said they prefer it now even with sectarian violence and Iranian interference?
How is it imperialism when the Iraqi government said it is not the right time for Coalition forces to leave?
Why is it OK for Saudi Wahabs to train jihadis to overun foreign nations and develop Islamic empire?
Why is it OK for Islamists to conquer, carve up and convert other parts of the world like Palestine (Jewish), Afghanistan/Malaysia/Kazakstan/Uzbekistan (Buddhist), Chechnya/Albania/Bosnia (Orthodox) and Kashmir/Pakistan/Bangladesh/Indonesia/Thailand (Hindu)?
Why is it OK for Janjaweed jihadis to kill black Africans?
Why is it OK for Sudanese Islamists to call jihadis the world over to attack Ethiopia, but then not OK when Ethopia responds by supporting the moderate Sudanese government?

When are we going to stop having these insulting accusations leveled at developed nations like the US and UK who have no choice? If they wanted they could sit back and watch Muslims eat each other in war after war instead of sacrificing American and British lives for the benefit of Iraqis and the greater good. If they don't intervene around the world then they are called apathetic.

Cheap shots against soft targets are easy. Try criticizing hard targets if you have the balls.

[peeb]

You really don't think that there is a legitimate perspective that the invasion of Iraq is an act of imperialism? Wow. It's a real shame they're not so excited about the freedom you gave them. I just can't understand why they're not delighted. You're right. It's extremist Islam that is at fault for the Iraqis not recognizing the invasion of their country as a humanitarian gift to them.

[Super Mario]

Originally Posted by peeb 

You really don't think that there is a legitimate perspective that the invasion of Iraq is an act of imperialism? Wow. It's a real shame they're not so excited about the freedom you gave them.

Myth #234782893 Iraqis are not happy with their new found freedom.

Truth is they are. A BBC special report wanted to see if this myth going around had any veracity to it. They went around and did interviews with Iraqis in three cities. Old people had mixed opinions. Young people were very glad Saddam and Uday were dead and gone.

So short memories are! You P.C. people with your cliché views keep attacking and running from the truth. When Saddam's regime fell the world saw Iraqis jumping for joy. They were screaming support for Bush! Do you think anyone forgets that?

Today the Kurds are building a new city. They call it Paradise City! It has its own oil wells. The US has warned Turkey to not touch the Kurds. In Iraq the West has been doing the same thing Clinton was praised for doing in the Balkans. They are reshaping the region to make it prosperous in the future. It takes time and many mistakes are made along the way.

So go ahead and keep criticizing. Keep it up. Keep insulting all the American, British and Iraqis who have died for a better Iraq. Go ahead and side with terrorists and conspiracy theorists.

Why say nothing about how China supports corrupt and murderous African regimes and at the same time has over 600 companies operating in Africa but has not requested African nations for better human rights and development, and has taken jobs away from Africans? If the West did that I am sure you would talk, because Western governments allow you to.

[peeb]

Maybe one day the government will be able to get out of the Green Zone - then the people can tell them in person how happy they are!

[Tiresias]

Originally Posted by Super Mario 

So go ahead and keep criticizing. Keep it up. Keep insulting all the American, British and Iraqis who have died for a better Iraq. Go ahead and side with terrorists and conspiracy theorists.

[Matius]

Once we've killed all the extremists (or they have blown their own dumb asses up) we stand a better chance of seeing it fade away.

[peeb]

Originally Posted by Matius 

Once we've killed all the extremists (or they have blown their own dumb asses up) we stand a better chance of seeing it fade away.

Ah yes, all the extremists! Anyone else see the irony here?

[Matius]

Originally Posted by peeb 

Ah yes, all the extremists! Anyone else see the irony here?

And what is ironic about that? Why is it extreme to take offensive action against someone who won't stop until your head is on a pike because you don't believe what they do? Is it better to wait until after they try to kill you personally?

[peeb]

You don't think the statement 'Kill all extremists' sort of makes you, erm, an extremist?

[Super Mario]

Originally Posted by Matius 

And what is ironic about that? Why is it extreme to take offensive action against someone who won't stop until your head is on a pike because you don't believe what they do? Is it better to wait until after they try to kill you personally?

It worked in Germany and Japan because their history of violence wasn't as long as in the Arab world and they had good resources.

An Iraqi said two years ago before summer that the Americans better get the air conditioning working for the summer or there will be trouble. In hot dusty countries it is very hard to end the circle of violence because when they have nothing to do they go a little crazy because they lack resources (apart from oil most of Iraq is too arid to produce or create anything) to do much and most of their day they are trying to stay cool. As soon as they can't keep cool the heat makes them go mad and they look for a fight. That is one major important reason why there is more long term violence in all hot places around the world compared to cooler wetter places.

It is incredible isn't it that so much comes down to the weather and environment? So in a place like Iraq the hard approach doesn't work. A whole cultural shift has to take place towards civil behavior. That can't happen until the population has air conditioning, electricity, fridges, ice and cold water 24/7 all year around.

Terrorism isn't helping because every time they bomb **** it fv cks up the infrastructure the Coalition has been helping to build. Can't take hard action on terrorists otherwise cities end up looking like Faluja and we know who all the P.C. people will blame for that.

Catch 22 baby.

[Matius]

Originally Posted by peeb 

You don't think the statement 'Kill all extremists' sort of makes you, erm, an extremist?

No that makes me proactive.
Again though: Why is it extreme to take offensive action against someone who won't stop until your head is on a pike because you don't believe what they do? Is it better to wait until after they try to kill you personally? Or is it better to just look away and continue to believe that all humans have the right to their opinion no matter how misguided? I'll let you in on something that many people may believe but won't admit. Not all people deserve to live. All life starts out innocent and special, but through nature or nurture some people get skewed ideas of right and wrong. Somehow they believe that killing children and other innocent people is the right thing to do. They believe that walking into a cafe full of people and blowing it up is what God wants. Those people don't deserve to live. If someone wants to believe whatever it is that they believe, then have at it. I don't care what you believe. If you try to force your belief on me I don't take to well to it and will say so. But when I don't agree with your belief and you decide that I have to die because of it, well then it's game on.

[Rumor]

Originally Posted by Matius 

No that makes me proactive.

Again though: Why is it extreme to take offensive action against someone who won't stop until your head is on a pike because you don't believe what they do? Is it better to wait until after they try to kill you personally?

Or is it better to just look away and continue to believe that all humans have the right to their opinion no matter how misguided?

I'll let you in on something that many people may believe but won't admit. Not all people deserve to live. All life starts out innocent and special, but through nature or nurture some people get skewed ideas of right and wrong.

Somehow they believe that killing children and other innocent people is the right thing to do. They believe that walking into a cafe full of people and blowing it up is what God wants.

Those people don't deserve to live. If someone wants to believe whatever it is that they believe, then have at it. I don't care what you believe. If you try to force your belief on me I don't take to well to it and will say so. But when I don't agree with your belief and you decide that I have to die because of it, well then it's game on.

Ug, that's a little better.

[peeb]

Somehow they believe that killing children and other innocent people is the right thing to do.

You know, that's exactly what most Iraqis think of the US.

[Super Mario]

Originally Posted by peeb 

You know, that's exactly what most Iraqis think of the US.

Liar and myth monger. You're nearly as bad as Saudi television at spreading myths.

Truth is Iraqis haven't a coherent opinion. They are different on a street by street basis depending on how well their infrastructure is and how good their communication is with authorities and Coalition forces. If the communication is bad they feel let down. If communication is good their spirits are raised they have more optimism. But Iraq is big and it is hard for everyone at this stage to have the same infrastructure, communication and security.

To make matters worse Iranian agents are trying to sabotage Iraq, invading it slowly by controlling the police and use strong arm power to intimidate citizens. There is also a battle raging between Iranian Shia agents and Saudi Wahabists who fear Iran is trying to spread influence into Saudi Arabia.

Read how much Iranian involvement there is
'Welcome to Tehran' - how Iran took control of Basra | Iraq | Guardian Unlimited

I also recommend watching these videos of ex-terrorists Hassan Butt and Walid Shoebat who admit there is a violent racist undercurrent in Islamic culture that needs to be addressed but is not being addressed because of the gangbang style sectarianism, criminality and the religion's inclination towards racism, imperialism and oppression.

YouTube - Walid Shoebat on CNN - Former Terrorist Turned Zionist
YouTube - Walid Shoebat Former Terrorist Turned Zionist on Fox 3-2005
YouTube - Was Terrorist Now Zionist - Walid Shoebat - London Terror
YouTube - British jihadi Hassan Butt Renounce's Islamic Terror 1of2
YouTube - British jihadi Hassan Butt Renounce's Islamic Terror 2of2

[peeb]

You are simply wrong.
World Public Opinion

"79 percent of Iraqis say that the United States is having a negative influence on the situation in Iraq"

"Support for attacks against U.S.-led forces has increased sharply to 61 percent (27% strongly, 34% somewhat). This represents a 14-point increase from January 2006, when only 47 percent of Iraqis supported attacks."

"Eighty-four percent say they have little (22%) or no (62%) confidence in the U.S. military. An extraordinary 98 percent of Sunnis take this view (no confidence 85%, a little 13%) as do 91 percent of Shias (no confidence 66%, a little 25%). However a majority of Kurds—55%—express confidence in the U.S. military (some 37%, a lot 18%), while 45 percent do not express confidence (no confidence 17%, a little 28%)."

[Super Mario]

Originally Posted by peeb 

You are simply wrong.
World Public Opinion

"79 percent of Iraqis say that the United States is having a negative influence on the situation in Iraq"

79% ???

"Polling was carried out September 1-4 with a nationwide representative sample of 1,150 Iraqi adults, which included an oversample of 150 Arab Sunnis"

So there's only 1500 people in Iraq? And who the **** is this World Public Opinion compared to the major news networks and NGOs who are there every day who say otherwise?

[peeb]

No, that was a sample size. You can pick up a basic statistics class at your local community college.

[Big Mac]

peeb's totally right in that regard, Mario. A scientifically chosen random sample of 1,500 allows you to make valid statistical inferences about the population in question.

[Matius]

Originally Posted by Big Mac 

A scientifically chosen random sample of 1,500 allows you to make valid statistical inferences about the population in question.

Perhaps in this country or others where most citizens have the same experience day to day where quality of life is concerned. But in Iraq, as one poster mentioned, cities are sometimes worlds apart. Poll 1500 in Bagdhad and you will get different answers from polling 1500 in Basra or Kirkuk.

[Matius]

Originally Posted by Rumor 

Ug, that's a little better.

I'm gonna guess you don't care for my ideas. Maybe you can answer the questions I asked the other poster?

[OreoCookie]

Originally Posted by Matius 

Perhaps in this country or others where most citizens have the same experience day to day where quality of life is concerned. But in Iraq, as one poster mentioned, cities are sometimes worlds apart. Poll 1500 in Bagdhad and you will get different answers from polling 1500 in Basra or Kirkuk.

Super Mario was dismissing the study on the basis that `too few people have been asked', clearly not realizing that 1500 people is fairly standard (take a look at polls in the US or so).

You raise a different point which has nothing to do with the former. If you want to go into that, you should have a look at the links provided with the article and analyze them. Instead you cast doubts, because there `could be something wrong' without actually knowing.

[Matius]

Originally Posted by OreoCookie 

Super Mario was dismissing the study on the basis that `too few people have been asked', clearly not realizing that 1500 people is fairly standard (take a look at polls in the US or so).

You raise a different point which has nothing to do with the former. If you want to go into that, you should have a look at the links provided with the article and analyze them. Instead you cast doubts, because there `could be something wrong' without actually knowing.

Cast doubt on what, that you will get different answers based on geographical location within Iraq? Rest assured, you will. Oh, and I'd love to read articles from "World Public Opinion", but O'Reilly is on right now. (well Malkin is standing in tonight).

[peeb]

Come on - we're really being told that 'all is well in Iraq - anything else is liberal media bias'? Funny.

[OreoCookie]

Originally Posted by Matius 

Cast doubt on what, that you will get different answers based on geographical location within Iraq? Rest assured, you will. Oh, and I'd love to read articles from "World Public Opinion", but O'Reilly is on right now. (well Malkin is standing in tonight).

You are casting doubts on the methodology of the study without knowing how the survey was performed. I don't have a problem with that type of argument if you know that the sample of the study does not meet certain criteria. The article contains links which give details on how the study was performed and analyzes the results in detail.

[Matius]

Originally Posted by peeb 

Come on - we're really being told that 'all is well in Iraq - anything else is liberal media bias'? Funny.

What are you talking about?

[peeb]

It's called irony. Iraq is in meltdown, and these guys are holding their ears and saying 'NOT LISTENING! EVERYTHING IS FINE!'