Are You Fearful of the Caliphate Movement?
Are You Fearful of the Caliphate Movement?
What is your thinking about this?
-
High Threshold
- Posts: 2856
- Joined: Wed Nov 23, 2005 2:20 am
Are You Fearful of the Caliphate Movement?
Lon;1457952 wrote: What is your thinking about this?
Is there a new one afoot or are you speaking about the old one?
Is there a new one afoot or are you speaking about the old one?
-
Mark Aspam
- Posts: 668
- Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 12:00 am
Are You Fearful of the Caliphate Movement?
Lon;1457952 wrote: What is your thinking about this?Never heard of it.
Are You Fearful of the Caliphate Movement?
I do not live my life in fear. I get up each day and face the world optimistically. If I confront truth, I embrace it. If I confront good, I reward it. If I confront evil, I oppose it. I have a bullet casing on my filing cabinet to remind me of the costs of my convictions. But I refuse to live in fear. Period.
-
AnneBoleyn
- Posts: 6632
- Joined: Sun Dec 11, 2011 3:17 pm
Are You Fearful of the Caliphate Movement?
Saint_;1458053 wrote: I do not live my life in fear. I get up each day and face the world optimistically. If I confront truth, I embrace it. If I confront good, I reward it. If I confront evil, I oppose it. I have a bullet casing on my filing cabinet to remind me of the costs of my convictions. But I refuse to live in fear. Period.
:-4
:-4
Are You Fearful of the Caliphate Movement?
I am wary. I firmly believe that these people, misguided and violent, should be prevented from flourishing. The world has enough problems without these fanatically violent people bullying others. I am sure that the powers that be are keeping an eye on things, and I am sure that these powers that be come from many different countries of the world, so I suppose Isis is doing the world a favour by bringing nations together against a common enemy.
I am glad that I have no particular belief, except the belief in myself. I am thankful that I am not religious as I see that through the ages, religions and the manner with which the different religions worship their particular god, and interpret certain writings in books, have been the cause of so many violent and tragic episodes in history.
No, I'm not frightened, just wary, observant and alert.
I am glad that I have no particular belief, except the belief in myself. I am thankful that I am not religious as I see that through the ages, religions and the manner with which the different religions worship their particular god, and interpret certain writings in books, have been the cause of so many violent and tragic episodes in history.
No, I'm not frightened, just wary, observant and alert.
I'm a Saga-lout, growing old disgracefully
-
High Threshold
- Posts: 2856
- Joined: Wed Nov 23, 2005 2:20 am
Are You Fearful of the Caliphate Movement?
G#Gill;1458086 wrote: ....... I suppose Isis is doing the world a favour by bringing nations together against a common enemy.
Your message may be more cryptic than you intended it to be. What 'common enemy' are you thinking of? Just curious. Well ...... a tad bit more than that.
Your message may be more cryptic than you intended it to be. What 'common enemy' are you thinking of? Just curious. Well ...... a tad bit more than that.
Are You Fearful of the Caliphate Movement?
High Threshold;1458093 wrote: Your message may be more cryptic than you intended it to be. What 'common enemy' are you thinking of? Just curious. Well ...... a tad bit more than that.
Terrorism, in general. Does this not affect most civilised countries ?
Terrorism, in general. Does this not affect most civilised countries ?
I'm a Saga-lout, growing old disgracefully
-
High Threshold
- Posts: 2856
- Joined: Wed Nov 23, 2005 2:20 am
Are You Fearful of the Caliphate Movement?
G#Gill;1458095 wrote: Terrorism, in general. Does this not affect most civilised countries ?
Yes, of course. I was wondering if you meant that the efforts of such groups force the inhabitants of western countries to see that non-western countries have a legitimate gripe, thus uniting us with what I assume they consider to be their 'struggle'.
Yes, of course. I was wondering if you meant that the efforts of such groups force the inhabitants of western countries to see that non-western countries have a legitimate gripe, thus uniting us with what I assume they consider to be their 'struggle'.
Are You Fearful of the Caliphate Movement?
So, to what Caliphate Movement do you refer, Lon?
Just looking at the news about Iraq and Syria tells me that the Islamic world is far from re-uniting under a Caliphate.
They are becoming nearly as splintered as the Christian movement after the Reformation period got underway.
we have a lot of things to be worried about. I don't think the Caliphate is going to be one of them for a long time.
Just looking at the news about Iraq and Syria tells me that the Islamic world is far from re-uniting under a Caliphate.
They are becoming nearly as splintered as the Christian movement after the Reformation period got underway.
we have a lot of things to be worried about. I don't think the Caliphate is going to be one of them for a long time.
The home of the soul is the Open Road.
- DH Lawrence
- DH Lawrence
Are You Fearful of the Caliphate Movement?
I don't see the Caliphate movement as having much chance of success, although it could cause further unrest/violence in the region.
First there is the religious sectarian problem. Even though the Sunni significantly outnumber the Shia, they have been fighting this battle for 1500 years with no sign of reconciliation. There is a history of persecution and animosity there that will not magically disappear.
Secondly, there is the political side. Saudi Arabia is overwhelmingly Sunni. Iraq is overwhelming Shia. Neither is going to give up autonomy to become part of a larger caliphate. Most of the other countries are predominantly Sunni but are unlikely to surrender autonomy and political power.
Most attempts to build an inclusive government (Sunni and Shia sharing power) have failed. When one holds the power, almost invariably there is persecution of the other. I don't see this situation changing any time soon.
First there is the religious sectarian problem. Even though the Sunni significantly outnumber the Shia, they have been fighting this battle for 1500 years with no sign of reconciliation. There is a history of persecution and animosity there that will not magically disappear.
Secondly, there is the political side. Saudi Arabia is overwhelmingly Sunni. Iraq is overwhelming Shia. Neither is going to give up autonomy to become part of a larger caliphate. Most of the other countries are predominantly Sunni but are unlikely to surrender autonomy and political power.
Most attempts to build an inclusive government (Sunni and Shia sharing power) have failed. When one holds the power, almost invariably there is persecution of the other. I don't see this situation changing any time soon.
-
High Threshold
- Posts: 2856
- Joined: Wed Nov 23, 2005 2:20 am
Are You Fearful of the Caliphate Movement?
LarsMac;1458573 wrote: So, to what Caliphate Movement do you refer, Lon?
Just looking at the news about Iraq and Syria tells me that the Islamic world is far from re-uniting under a Caliphate.
They are becoming nearly as splintered as the Christian movement after the Reformation period got underway.
we have a lot of things to be worried about. I don't think the Caliphate is going to be one of them for a long time.
Once (if?) they begin to realize that their problems are hatched from abroad then we´re in for some real trouble. I´m not very knowledged on that subject but I assume that is what Al Qaida is all about. Isn´t it? I´ve been led to believe that the Taliban and Al Qaida work together on occasion and if such cooperation is eventually harnessed world-wide (or at least regionally) then we´ll begin to see some noteworthy change in world politics and the UN will never be the same again.
Ps. The cold eye approach to Turkey's timid application for EU status just has to figure into this equation. We, in The West, are making a very big mistake on that point. A HUGE mistake.
Just looking at the news about Iraq and Syria tells me that the Islamic world is far from re-uniting under a Caliphate.
They are becoming nearly as splintered as the Christian movement after the Reformation period got underway.
we have a lot of things to be worried about. I don't think the Caliphate is going to be one of them for a long time.
Once (if?) they begin to realize that their problems are hatched from abroad then we´re in for some real trouble. I´m not very knowledged on that subject but I assume that is what Al Qaida is all about. Isn´t it? I´ve been led to believe that the Taliban and Al Qaida work together on occasion and if such cooperation is eventually harnessed world-wide (or at least regionally) then we´ll begin to see some noteworthy change in world politics and the UN will never be the same again.
Ps. The cold eye approach to Turkey's timid application for EU status just has to figure into this equation. We, in The West, are making a very big mistake on that point. A HUGE mistake.
-
recovering conservative
- Posts: 529
- Joined: Sun Nov 02, 2008 12:28 pm
Are You Fearful of the Caliphate Movement?
Anyone who takes even a brief scan of history will note that secularism in the Muslim World began and grew in influence while the last caliphate - the Ottoman Empire, was ruling Asia Minor and most of the Arab world. It seems that the best cure for an Islamic state was to actually have one in place that was corrupt, featuring obese sultans, living in extravagant palaces with harems and eunuchs serving them,presiding over an ineffective and corrupt bureaucracy that can't deliver services or even run the military.
So, if the modern day caliphate movement wants to create a new one....let them! The main reason for the stalling out and decline of secularism in the Muslim world was the retreat to religion in the face of conquest by foreign infidels plundering their oil and other resources. The only surefire cure for Islamic fundamentalism is to get the hell out of the Middle East and let them decide how fast they want to use up their oil reserves, and how the profits should be divided up.
So, if the modern day caliphate movement wants to create a new one....let them! The main reason for the stalling out and decline of secularism in the Muslim world was the retreat to religion in the face of conquest by foreign infidels plundering their oil and other resources. The only surefire cure for Islamic fundamentalism is to get the hell out of the Middle East and let them decide how fast they want to use up their oil reserves, and how the profits should be divided up.
-
Silvio Dante
- Posts: 48
- Joined: Sat Jun 14, 2014 12:16 am
Are You Fearful of the Caliphate Movement?
I pray the Shia world, in conjunction with help from Russia, can crush these Extremist Sunni savages.
I also believe that anyone who travels to Syria or Iraq to fight with ISIS should not be allowed back into Ireland or the UK...
I also believe that anyone who travels to Syria or Iraq to fight with ISIS should not be allowed back into Ireland or the UK...
Are You Fearful of the Caliphate Movement?
posted by recovering conservative
The main reason for the stalling out and decline of secularism in the Muslim world was the retreat to religion in the face of conquest by foreign infidels plundering their oil and other resources.
You could also make a case that it was due to western governments overthrowing democratic ones in the region and replacing them with ones that favoured western oil companies interests and that suppressedpolitical dissent so religion comes along as an alternative. Before that it was over the suez canal and trade routes.
The only surefire cure for Islamic fundamentalism is to get the hell out of the Middle East and let them decide how fast they want to use up their oil reserves, and how the profits should be divided up.
I'd agree with you there but I think the solution is no longer that simple. The thing about religious sectarian warfare is it's irrational and only ends when both sides are exhausted.
The main reason for the stalling out and decline of secularism in the Muslim world was the retreat to religion in the face of conquest by foreign infidels plundering their oil and other resources.
You could also make a case that it was due to western governments overthrowing democratic ones in the region and replacing them with ones that favoured western oil companies interests and that suppressedpolitical dissent so religion comes along as an alternative. Before that it was over the suez canal and trade routes.
The only surefire cure for Islamic fundamentalism is to get the hell out of the Middle East and let them decide how fast they want to use up their oil reserves, and how the profits should be divided up.
I'd agree with you there but I think the solution is no longer that simple. The thing about religious sectarian warfare is it's irrational and only ends when both sides are exhausted.
-
High Threshold
- Posts: 2856
- Joined: Wed Nov 23, 2005 2:20 am
Are You Fearful of the Caliphate Movement?
Silvio Dante;1458604 wrote: I also believe that anyone who travels to Syria or Iraq to fight with ISIS should not be allowed back into Ireland or the UK...
This is your idea of what Democracy should be, eh?
This is your idea of what Democracy should be, eh?
-
High Threshold
- Posts: 2856
- Joined: Wed Nov 23, 2005 2:20 am
Are You Fearful of the Caliphate Movement?
gmc;1458605 wrote: You could also make a case that it was due to western governments overthrowing democratic ones in the region and replacing them with ones that favoured western oil companies interests and that suppressedpolitical dissent so religion comes along as an alternative.
Thank you Jimmy. You saved me the trouble of saying it myself. :-6
Thank you Jimmy. You saved me the trouble of saying it myself. :-6
-
Silvio Dante
- Posts: 48
- Joined: Sat Jun 14, 2014 12:16 am
Are You Fearful of the Caliphate Movement?
High Threshold;1458612 wrote: This is your idea of what Democracy should be, eh?
It is imperative that we protect our democracies and freedoms.
Stopping these sick and twisted individual coming into our countries is one way of showing such people that their poison is not welcome on our lands...
It is imperative that we protect our democracies and freedoms.
Stopping these sick and twisted individual coming into our countries is one way of showing such people that their poison is not welcome on our lands...
-
recovering conservative
- Posts: 529
- Joined: Sun Nov 02, 2008 12:28 pm
Are You Fearful of the Caliphate Movement?
gmc;1458605 wrote: posted by recovering conservative
You could also make a case that it was due to western governments overthrowing democratic ones in the region and replacing them with ones that favoured western oil companies interests and that suppressedpolitical dissent so religion comes along as an alternative. Before that it was over the suez canal and trade routes.
That was all part of the same process that came immediately after the Ottoman Caliphate was dissolved. My point in mentioning it was that the Arabians in particular, were not talking about Islamic Government back when the Islamic Government was run by non-Arabs whose only concern about religion was how well it served to legitimize the Empire.
According to urban legend, the dividing up of the Caliphate was done by British and French representatives drawing up their territorial maps of the new territories of Lebanon, Syria, Jordan, and Iraq on the back of a dinner placemat....and everyone is still wondering today why these nations are fractious and internally divided! That may have been part of strategy judging from how they set up colonies in Africa, Asia and the New World; since a tiny colonial army and bureaucracy could manage a colony for their own purposes by keeping people divided by religion and tribal identities focused against each other.
And usually, the chosen group to operate as the proxies of empire were taken from a minority group within the colony, who would see their prosperity tied to maintaining the colony. It didn't work in all cases, as we could see with the rise of a marxist movement (Baath Party) in Iraq and Syria, that appealed to a wide swath of the populations; but most of the time, colonies lingered on through the divide and conquer strategy.......and then after independence, when the colonies were granted political legitimacy...though rarely the chance to gain economic independence from Europe...the former colony remains as a tinderbox just waiting to explode.
The only mystery to me, is why the fact that nations like Iraq and Syria can only be tranquil under oppressive dictatorships!
I'd agree with you there but I think the solution is no longer that simple. The thing about religious sectarian warfare is it's irrational and only ends when both sides are exhausted.
It depends on what the underlying factors are that have started the war. Religion makes a convenient handle, just as tribal identities do, when the shooting starts. But, there are more wars breaking out in places that had been relatively calm for decades. In East Africa for example, it's impossible not to notice that increasing droughts in recent decades have reduced crop yields and turned grasslands back to desert in the Sudan, Ethiopia and Kenya.
In Nigeria, enormous wealth has been generated for a few from taking a share of the oil profits, while the majority receive little or no benefits as overpopulation and declining food production raise food prices. Just because some of the war fronts provide a convenient handle for western reporters - Muslim vs. Christian, and "tribal conflict" if both sides belong to the same religion, the general reporting of these conflicts in the west, varies from lazy to outright fraudulent, through their unwillingness to provide any context in covering the stories, and their scrupulous avoidance of ever mentioning the influence of outside interests....most notably oil companies in Nigeria that have their own private armies that have more firepower than the Government forces!
You could also make a case that it was due to western governments overthrowing democratic ones in the region and replacing them with ones that favoured western oil companies interests and that suppressedpolitical dissent so religion comes along as an alternative. Before that it was over the suez canal and trade routes.
That was all part of the same process that came immediately after the Ottoman Caliphate was dissolved. My point in mentioning it was that the Arabians in particular, were not talking about Islamic Government back when the Islamic Government was run by non-Arabs whose only concern about religion was how well it served to legitimize the Empire.
According to urban legend, the dividing up of the Caliphate was done by British and French representatives drawing up their territorial maps of the new territories of Lebanon, Syria, Jordan, and Iraq on the back of a dinner placemat....and everyone is still wondering today why these nations are fractious and internally divided! That may have been part of strategy judging from how they set up colonies in Africa, Asia and the New World; since a tiny colonial army and bureaucracy could manage a colony for their own purposes by keeping people divided by religion and tribal identities focused against each other.
And usually, the chosen group to operate as the proxies of empire were taken from a minority group within the colony, who would see their prosperity tied to maintaining the colony. It didn't work in all cases, as we could see with the rise of a marxist movement (Baath Party) in Iraq and Syria, that appealed to a wide swath of the populations; but most of the time, colonies lingered on through the divide and conquer strategy.......and then after independence, when the colonies were granted political legitimacy...though rarely the chance to gain economic independence from Europe...the former colony remains as a tinderbox just waiting to explode.
The only mystery to me, is why the fact that nations like Iraq and Syria can only be tranquil under oppressive dictatorships!
I'd agree with you there but I think the solution is no longer that simple. The thing about religious sectarian warfare is it's irrational and only ends when both sides are exhausted.
It depends on what the underlying factors are that have started the war. Religion makes a convenient handle, just as tribal identities do, when the shooting starts. But, there are more wars breaking out in places that had been relatively calm for decades. In East Africa for example, it's impossible not to notice that increasing droughts in recent decades have reduced crop yields and turned grasslands back to desert in the Sudan, Ethiopia and Kenya.
In Nigeria, enormous wealth has been generated for a few from taking a share of the oil profits, while the majority receive little or no benefits as overpopulation and declining food production raise food prices. Just because some of the war fronts provide a convenient handle for western reporters - Muslim vs. Christian, and "tribal conflict" if both sides belong to the same religion, the general reporting of these conflicts in the west, varies from lazy to outright fraudulent, through their unwillingness to provide any context in covering the stories, and their scrupulous avoidance of ever mentioning the influence of outside interests....most notably oil companies in Nigeria that have their own private armies that have more firepower than the Government forces!
-
High Threshold
- Posts: 2856
- Joined: Wed Nov 23, 2005 2:20 am
Are You Fearful of the Caliphate Movement?
Silvio Dante;1458614 wrote: It is imperative that we protect our democracies and freedoms.
...
Huh?! You are ranting in Fascist terms. You do not understand what Democracy is ..... so how can you claim to be its champion? ANSWER: You cannot and you do not.
...
Huh?! You are ranting in Fascist terms. You do not understand what Democracy is ..... so how can you claim to be its champion? ANSWER: You cannot and you do not.
Are You Fearful of the Caliphate Movement?
Silvio Dante;1458604 wrote: I pray the Shia world, in conjunction with help from Russia, can crush these Extremist Sunni savages.
I also believe that anyone who travels to Syria or Iraq to fight with ISIS should not be allowed back into Ireland or the UK...
You sound just like my Persian friend.
I also believe that anyone who travels to Syria or Iraq to fight with ISIS should not be allowed back into Ireland or the UK...
You sound just like my Persian friend.
The home of the soul is the Open Road.
- DH Lawrence
- DH Lawrence
-
Silvio Dante
- Posts: 48
- Joined: Sat Jun 14, 2014 12:16 am
Are You Fearful of the Caliphate Movement?
High Threshold;1458626 wrote: Huh?! You are ranting in Fascist terms. You do not understand what Democracy is ..... so how can you claim to be its champion? ANSWER: You cannot and you do not.
democracy does not equal door mat pacificism.
these individuals do not respect or even recognise our democtatic origins, nor do they wish to see our freedoms continue.
They desire an Extremist Sunni dictatorship in out countries.
Keep them out I say, unless or un til they openy refute their twisted ideologies...
democracy does not equal door mat pacificism.
these individuals do not respect or even recognise our democtatic origins, nor do they wish to see our freedoms continue.
They desire an Extremist Sunni dictatorship in out countries.
Keep them out I say, unless or un til they openy refute their twisted ideologies...
-
Silvio Dante
- Posts: 48
- Joined: Sat Jun 14, 2014 12:16 am
Are You Fearful of the Caliphate Movement?
LarsMac;1458627 wrote: You sound just like my Persian friend.
I love the Persian People...
I love the Persian People...
-
Silvio Dante
- Posts: 48
- Joined: Sat Jun 14, 2014 12:16 am
Are You Fearful of the Caliphate Movement?
Great to see the Russians standing up to the plate in the fight against poisonous Wahabism...
-
High Threshold
- Posts: 2856
- Joined: Wed Nov 23, 2005 2:20 am
Are You Fearful of the Caliphate Movement?
Silvio Dante;1458631 wrote: democracy does not equal door mat pacificism.
You are makiing no sense at all. Why not quit the absurd rhetoric, get back to the point of yours that I am contesting, and let's hear what you have to say. Personally, I mean.
Silvio Dante;1458631 wrote: these individuals do not respect or even recognise our democtatic origins, nor do they wish to see our freedoms continue.
They desire an Extremist Sunni dictatorship in out countries.
Keep them out I say, unless or un til they openy refute their twisted ideologies...
You derive all of that from the fact that they have fought in some other country? Hmmmm, a Fascist mind-reader? That would have gone down very well in Stalin's Soviet Uniion.
You are makiing no sense at all. Why not quit the absurd rhetoric, get back to the point of yours that I am contesting, and let's hear what you have to say. Personally, I mean.
Silvio Dante;1458631 wrote: these individuals do not respect or even recognise our democtatic origins, nor do they wish to see our freedoms continue.
They desire an Extremist Sunni dictatorship in out countries.
Keep them out I say, unless or un til they openy refute their twisted ideologies...
You derive all of that from the fact that they have fought in some other country? Hmmmm, a Fascist mind-reader? That would have gone down very well in Stalin's Soviet Uniion.
-
Silvio Dante
- Posts: 48
- Joined: Sat Jun 14, 2014 12:16 am
Are You Fearful of the Caliphate Movement?
High Threshold;1458679 wrote: You are makiing no sense at all. Why not quit the absurd rhetoric, get back to the point of yours that I am contesting, and let's hear what you have to say. Personally, I mean.
You derive all of that from the fact that they have fought in some other country? Hmmmm, a Fascist mind-reader? That would have gone down very well in Stalin's Soviet Uniion.
You've got to love 'Liberals'. It's ISIS who are going around decapitating people yet I'm the Fascist...
You derive all of that from the fact that they have fought in some other country? Hmmmm, a Fascist mind-reader? That would have gone down very well in Stalin's Soviet Uniion.
You've got to love 'Liberals'. It's ISIS who are going around decapitating people yet I'm the Fascist...
-
High Threshold
- Posts: 2856
- Joined: Wed Nov 23, 2005 2:20 am
Are You Fearful of the Caliphate Movement?
Silvio Dante;1458683 wrote: You've got to love 'Liberals'. It's ISIS who are going around decapitating people yet I'm the Fascist...
Willingness to engage in intelligent discussion and debate doesn't necessarily mean one is a 'Liberal', as you say. You make more than one mistake:
1). You assume that anyone volunteering to go abroad to fight is bent on forcing 'his way' on the population 'back home' and therefore ought not to be allowed to return home. The term 'idealism' isn't in your vocabularly? Or is it only considered a postive attribute if it is aligned with your own convictions?
2). I'll have to ask ISIS if they think of themselves as Democratic, I don't know what they think on the subject. I do know that you think of yourself as a champion of Democracy but I can tell you quite frankly that your ideas on this subject are most certaily NOT Democratic.
3). You have offered ample indication that those deemed as 'terrorists' are non-Democratic and that those who are in disagreement with them must be Democratic by default. I wonder if you can stand up to a debate on that notion.
4). You say "It is imperative that we protect our democracies and freedoms" yet you deny Democratic principles and thwart freedom - in the process - when you say that people ought not to be allowed to return home because of their international convictions.
I say you do not understand some the most fundamental principles of Democracy and you are acting more like a Fascist.
Willingness to engage in intelligent discussion and debate doesn't necessarily mean one is a 'Liberal', as you say. You make more than one mistake:
1). You assume that anyone volunteering to go abroad to fight is bent on forcing 'his way' on the population 'back home' and therefore ought not to be allowed to return home. The term 'idealism' isn't in your vocabularly? Or is it only considered a postive attribute if it is aligned with your own convictions?
2). I'll have to ask ISIS if they think of themselves as Democratic, I don't know what they think on the subject. I do know that you think of yourself as a champion of Democracy but I can tell you quite frankly that your ideas on this subject are most certaily NOT Democratic.
3). You have offered ample indication that those deemed as 'terrorists' are non-Democratic and that those who are in disagreement with them must be Democratic by default. I wonder if you can stand up to a debate on that notion.
4). You say "It is imperative that we protect our democracies and freedoms" yet you deny Democratic principles and thwart freedom - in the process - when you say that people ought not to be allowed to return home because of their international convictions.
I say you do not understand some the most fundamental principles of Democracy and you are acting more like a Fascist.
-
AnneBoleyn
- Posts: 6632
- Joined: Sun Dec 11, 2011 3:17 pm
Are You Fearful of the Caliphate Movement?
Silvio Dante;1458683 wrote: You've got to love 'Liberals'. It's ISIS who are going around decapitating people yet I'm the Fascist...
Glad I didn't give you the benefit of the doubt. I'm on to you, you bet.
Glad I didn't give you the benefit of the doubt. I'm on to you, you bet.
-
Silvio Dante
- Posts: 48
- Joined: Sat Jun 14, 2014 12:16 am
Are You Fearful of the Caliphate Movement?
High Threshold;1458689 wrote: Willingness to engage in intelligent discussion and debate doesn't necessarily mean one is a 'Liberal', as you say. You make more than one mistake:
1). You assume that anyone volunteering to go abroad to fight is bent on forcing 'his way' on the population 'back home' and therefore ought not to be allowed to return home. The term 'idealism' isn't in your vocabularly? Or is it only considered a postive attribute if it is aligned with your own convictions?
2). I'll have to ask ISIS if they think of themselves as Democratic, I don't know what they think on the subject. I do know that you think of yourself as a champion of Democracy but I can tell you quite frankly that your ideas on this subject are most certaily NOT Democratic.
3). You have offered ample indication that those deemed as 'terrorists' are non-Democratic and that those who are in disagreement with them must be Democratic by default. I wonder if you can stand up to a debate on that notion.
4). You say "It is imperative that we protect our democracies and freedoms" yet you deny Democratic principles and thwart freedom - in the process - when you say that people ought not to be allowed to return home because of their international convictions.
I say you do not understand some the most fundamental principles of Democracy and you are acting more like a Fascist.
With freedoms come responsibilities. The responsibility to protect our freedoms from those who would wish to dismantle them one by one.
Such people are those who bring terror to Syria and Iraq. Devottees of radical Sunni creed that hates you and seeks to destroy your liberties.
Keep them out, good riddance...
1). You assume that anyone volunteering to go abroad to fight is bent on forcing 'his way' on the population 'back home' and therefore ought not to be allowed to return home. The term 'idealism' isn't in your vocabularly? Or is it only considered a postive attribute if it is aligned with your own convictions?
2). I'll have to ask ISIS if they think of themselves as Democratic, I don't know what they think on the subject. I do know that you think of yourself as a champion of Democracy but I can tell you quite frankly that your ideas on this subject are most certaily NOT Democratic.
3). You have offered ample indication that those deemed as 'terrorists' are non-Democratic and that those who are in disagreement with them must be Democratic by default. I wonder if you can stand up to a debate on that notion.
4). You say "It is imperative that we protect our democracies and freedoms" yet you deny Democratic principles and thwart freedom - in the process - when you say that people ought not to be allowed to return home because of their international convictions.
I say you do not understand some the most fundamental principles of Democracy and you are acting more like a Fascist.
With freedoms come responsibilities. The responsibility to protect our freedoms from those who would wish to dismantle them one by one.
Such people are those who bring terror to Syria and Iraq. Devottees of radical Sunni creed that hates you and seeks to destroy your liberties.
Keep them out, good riddance...
-
Silvio Dante
- Posts: 48
- Joined: Sat Jun 14, 2014 12:16 am
Are You Fearful of the Caliphate Movement?
anneboleyn;1458692 wrote: glad i didn't give you the benefit of the doubt. I'm on to you, you bet.
ok....................................:-5
ok....................................:-5
-
High Threshold
- Posts: 2856
- Joined: Wed Nov 23, 2005 2:20 am
Are You Fearful of the Caliphate Movement?
Silvio Dante;1458783 wrote: With freedoms come responsibilities. The responsibility to protect our freedoms from those who would wish to dismantle them one by one.
Such people are those who bring terror to Syria and Iraq. Devottees of radical Sunni creed that hates you and seeks to destroy your liberties ....
The rule in connecting the dots is that you start from number 1 and follow ALL OF THE DOTS, in sequential order, without lifting your pen from the surface, untill you connect up the final dot. Your pen seems to have run amok, both on and above the surface.
Such people are those who bring terror to Syria and Iraq. Devottees of radical Sunni creed that hates you and seeks to destroy your liberties ....
The rule in connecting the dots is that you start from number 1 and follow ALL OF THE DOTS, in sequential order, without lifting your pen from the surface, untill you connect up the final dot. Your pen seems to have run amok, both on and above the surface.
-
Silvio Dante
- Posts: 48
- Joined: Sat Jun 14, 2014 12:16 am
Are You Fearful of the Caliphate Movement?
High Threshold;1458797 wrote: The rule in connecting the dots is that you start from number 1 and follow ALL OF THE DOTS, in sequential order, without lifting your pen from the surface, untill you connect up the final dot. Your pen seems to have run amok, both on and above the surface.
How very Liberal of you. All the while Radical Sunni Wahabism is plotting to destroy all you hold dearly...
How very Liberal of you. All the while Radical Sunni Wahabism is plotting to destroy all you hold dearly...
-
recovering conservative
- Posts: 529
- Joined: Sun Nov 02, 2008 12:28 pm
Are You Fearful of the Caliphate Movement?
Silvio Dante;1459313 wrote: How very Liberal of you. All the while Radical Sunni Wahabism is plotting to destroy all you hold dearly...
It's up to you if you want to keep chasing after that mechanical rabbit running down the rail, but in case you haven't been paying attention, the group claiming to form an Islamic state or new caliphate, is disputing the leadership of Al Qaeda and Ayman al Zawahiri in particular.
What this tells me and anyone who even thinks about it for a few seconds is that more "Islamic" the Islamic state is, the less support it has among Muslims, even among Sunni Muslims! After all, if there is a split between the hardcore fundamentalists who are trying to form the Caliphate, what serious level of long term success will it have?
So, the U.S. and every other actor with their hand on the wheel in Iraq knows this as well, BUT they also know that this temporary **** storm - ISIS sweeping through the desert in northern and western Iraq provides them the rhetorical excuse to spend more money and interfere in Iraqi affairs to an even greater degree....right now, we have Obama stating openly that the Maliki Government needs to be replaced. I have no idea or even give a crap whether replacing Maliki is a good/or a bad thing; but what I do know, is that Obama and the U.S. Government are operating by the principle: "never let a good crisis go to waste."
It's your choice if you want chase this latest rabbit down the rail; most of us...those of us who are either not conservative thinkers, or thought we were at one time and abandoned most conservative logic, are going to sit on the sidelines and hope the latest foreign venture blows up in their face!
When it comes to the "Caliphate," read some history of the Arab World through the rise and the development of Islam, and you will discover that when ISIS-type thinking caliphs were in charge, the Caliphate started fracturing apart; while the more tolerant and open-minded caliphs were the only ones capable of maintaining relative calm and prosperity. The last Caliphate - run by the Ottoman Turks, was by far, a less religious government than the modern day governments that exist today; mainly because the Turks were trying to maintain an empire....a corrupt empire, and keeping the peace, and maintaining the flow of trade and commerce outweighed any concerns over religion. They didn't care what the religious beliefs were of their territories, as long as they payed their taxes and didn't support rebellions and uprisings. Notice that non-Muslim religious communities and even Muslim splinter sects like the Ahmadis, Ismaelis and Druze, existed and lived for generations in the same territories until the fall of the Caliphate and the rise of nationalisms, fundamentalism and Arab-supremacy groups took over and were forming governments.
The conservative rhetoric about Islam spreading like the plague and taking us over, is no different than the "Domino Theory" that was used to justify sending half a million American troops to occupy Vietnam a half century ago. Cynic that I am, I think the Islamophobia of the Neocon movement, was a cynical ploy to find a foreign threat to keep Americans paranoid after the fall of the Soviet Union removed the main argument for the oversized military and abusive security and surveillance apparatus.
Since I've gone this far, maybe it's time to discuss the differences in thinking between typical liberal thinkers and conservatives....because the same frontlines are drawn up between liberals and conservatives on a whole host of issues.
I think the difference between liberals and conservatives on this issue, is that liberals are more inclined to try to think through and evaluate their beliefs, while conservatives enshrine their core beliefs with religious and/or nationalistic justifications. A quick example of this phenomena would be a study reported on in Psychology Today last year that followed a long-running trend in psychological and sociological research in recent years about whether there are hardwired differences between conservatives and liberals in their thinking and how they make choices.
The particular study that caught my eye was one that showed an inverse relationship between liberals and conservatives in how likely they are to change their thinking on an issue: in brief, the higher the education level (their assuming this indicates intelligence) of a liberal thinker, the easier they are to be persuaded by new evidence and new arguments; whereas the conservatives move in the exact opposite direction! So, the higher the education level of a conservative, the more likely they are to raise objections to the new evidence.
I would argue that we see this all the time on issues like fundamentalist creationism, global warming AND real or imagined foreign threats! This would be the only means I can think of for why, back when almost everyone accepted the conventional wisdom coming out of the Bush Administration after 9-11, the liberals started heading for the exits first, when Bush, Cheney, and their pack of Neocon mouthpieces in the Government and media, started using Al Qaeda as an argument for an Iraq Invasion! After a couple of years, when every liberal or moderate realized the Invasion was a sham and a disastrous policy, the conservatives never abandoned their agreement that the invasion was a good thing...even after the Bush Administration provided another four different reasons why they had to go into Iraq. The rest of us decided if they were going to lie their way to war with a false or unsupportable claim of "weapons of mass destruction," they would lie about everything else! And it's to their shame that the Obama Administration "decided to move on," and did not allow investigations or the legal process to apply...since Bush, Cheney and associates committed a number of war crimes - first being going to war under false pretenses.
It's up to you if you want to keep chasing after that mechanical rabbit running down the rail, but in case you haven't been paying attention, the group claiming to form an Islamic state or new caliphate, is disputing the leadership of Al Qaeda and Ayman al Zawahiri in particular.
What this tells me and anyone who even thinks about it for a few seconds is that more "Islamic" the Islamic state is, the less support it has among Muslims, even among Sunni Muslims! After all, if there is a split between the hardcore fundamentalists who are trying to form the Caliphate, what serious level of long term success will it have?
So, the U.S. and every other actor with their hand on the wheel in Iraq knows this as well, BUT they also know that this temporary **** storm - ISIS sweeping through the desert in northern and western Iraq provides them the rhetorical excuse to spend more money and interfere in Iraqi affairs to an even greater degree....right now, we have Obama stating openly that the Maliki Government needs to be replaced. I have no idea or even give a crap whether replacing Maliki is a good/or a bad thing; but what I do know, is that Obama and the U.S. Government are operating by the principle: "never let a good crisis go to waste."
It's your choice if you want chase this latest rabbit down the rail; most of us...those of us who are either not conservative thinkers, or thought we were at one time and abandoned most conservative logic, are going to sit on the sidelines and hope the latest foreign venture blows up in their face!
When it comes to the "Caliphate," read some history of the Arab World through the rise and the development of Islam, and you will discover that when ISIS-type thinking caliphs were in charge, the Caliphate started fracturing apart; while the more tolerant and open-minded caliphs were the only ones capable of maintaining relative calm and prosperity. The last Caliphate - run by the Ottoman Turks, was by far, a less religious government than the modern day governments that exist today; mainly because the Turks were trying to maintain an empire....a corrupt empire, and keeping the peace, and maintaining the flow of trade and commerce outweighed any concerns over religion. They didn't care what the religious beliefs were of their territories, as long as they payed their taxes and didn't support rebellions and uprisings. Notice that non-Muslim religious communities and even Muslim splinter sects like the Ahmadis, Ismaelis and Druze, existed and lived for generations in the same territories until the fall of the Caliphate and the rise of nationalisms, fundamentalism and Arab-supremacy groups took over and were forming governments.
The conservative rhetoric about Islam spreading like the plague and taking us over, is no different than the "Domino Theory" that was used to justify sending half a million American troops to occupy Vietnam a half century ago. Cynic that I am, I think the Islamophobia of the Neocon movement, was a cynical ploy to find a foreign threat to keep Americans paranoid after the fall of the Soviet Union removed the main argument for the oversized military and abusive security and surveillance apparatus.
Since I've gone this far, maybe it's time to discuss the differences in thinking between typical liberal thinkers and conservatives....because the same frontlines are drawn up between liberals and conservatives on a whole host of issues.
I think the difference between liberals and conservatives on this issue, is that liberals are more inclined to try to think through and evaluate their beliefs, while conservatives enshrine their core beliefs with religious and/or nationalistic justifications. A quick example of this phenomena would be a study reported on in Psychology Today last year that followed a long-running trend in psychological and sociological research in recent years about whether there are hardwired differences between conservatives and liberals in their thinking and how they make choices.
The particular study that caught my eye was one that showed an inverse relationship between liberals and conservatives in how likely they are to change their thinking on an issue: in brief, the higher the education level (their assuming this indicates intelligence) of a liberal thinker, the easier they are to be persuaded by new evidence and new arguments; whereas the conservatives move in the exact opposite direction! So, the higher the education level of a conservative, the more likely they are to raise objections to the new evidence.
I would argue that we see this all the time on issues like fundamentalist creationism, global warming AND real or imagined foreign threats! This would be the only means I can think of for why, back when almost everyone accepted the conventional wisdom coming out of the Bush Administration after 9-11, the liberals started heading for the exits first, when Bush, Cheney, and their pack of Neocon mouthpieces in the Government and media, started using Al Qaeda as an argument for an Iraq Invasion! After a couple of years, when every liberal or moderate realized the Invasion was a sham and a disastrous policy, the conservatives never abandoned their agreement that the invasion was a good thing...even after the Bush Administration provided another four different reasons why they had to go into Iraq. The rest of us decided if they were going to lie their way to war with a false or unsupportable claim of "weapons of mass destruction," they would lie about everything else! And it's to their shame that the Obama Administration "decided to move on," and did not allow investigations or the legal process to apply...since Bush, Cheney and associates committed a number of war crimes - first being going to war under false pretenses.
Are You Fearful of the Caliphate Movement?
Silvio Dante;1459313 wrote: How very Liberal of you. All the while Radical Sunni Wahabism is plotting to destroy all you hold dearly...
Let them plot away. I live in a country with the most powerful military in Earth's history. I'm going to go out for ice cream....
Let them plot away. I live in a country with the most powerful military in Earth's history. I'm going to go out for ice cream....
Are You Fearful of the Caliphate Movement?
The most ironic thing of all is that the Jihadists preach of America as being The Great Satan, whilst making full use of all the technology sourced, where else, but from America. Talk about being hypocritical.
-
recovering conservative
- Posts: 529
- Joined: Sun Nov 02, 2008 12:28 pm
Are You Fearful of the Caliphate Movement?
FourPart;1459391 wrote: The most ironic thing of all is that the Jihadists preach of America as being The Great Satan, whilst making full use of all the technology sourced, where else, but from America. Talk about being hypocritical.
Doesn't that describe Christian fundamentalism also? They also embrace technology, while teaching their adherents to avoid learning about science. To me, this is the worst combination! Imagine a religion that had the courage to change with acquired knowledge, while demanding that people take the long view on new inventions and innovations, rather than immediately embrace them and spread them throughout. Here's an example of what wariness of new technologies might have prevented - 88% of world’s oceans covered by plastic junk
My number one complaint with Christian fundamentalist logic, is that they used to push back against materialism and acquisition of wealth, and even harbour some suspicions about progress. But, what it has turned into is even more pro-tech than any Muslim groups you can find, and has turned the traditional Christian social gospel message upside down by adopting Prosperity Gospel rhetoric which deems great wealth as a sign of God's blessings, and poverty to be a sign of rejection by God.
Doesn't that describe Christian fundamentalism also? They also embrace technology, while teaching their adherents to avoid learning about science. To me, this is the worst combination! Imagine a religion that had the courage to change with acquired knowledge, while demanding that people take the long view on new inventions and innovations, rather than immediately embrace them and spread them throughout. Here's an example of what wariness of new technologies might have prevented - 88% of world’s oceans covered by plastic junk
My number one complaint with Christian fundamentalist logic, is that they used to push back against materialism and acquisition of wealth, and even harbour some suspicions about progress. But, what it has turned into is even more pro-tech than any Muslim groups you can find, and has turned the traditional Christian social gospel message upside down by adopting Prosperity Gospel rhetoric which deems great wealth as a sign of God's blessings, and poverty to be a sign of rejection by God.
Are You Fearful of the Caliphate Movement?
I couldn't agree more, and what is worse is the hoards of wealth owned by the Church, despite the amount of world poverty & starvation. So much for Jesus chucking the Money Lenders out of the temple.
-
recovering conservative
- Posts: 529
- Joined: Sun Nov 02, 2008 12:28 pm
Are You Fearful of the Caliphate Movement?
FourPart;1459422 wrote: I couldn't agree more, and what is worse is the hoards of wealth owned by the Church, despite the amount of world poverty & starvation. So much for Jesus chucking the Money Lenders out of the temple.
Agreed! The problem we hear about with Muslim extremism is in large part caused by the wealthy, hedonistic Saudis and similar ruling classes in the oil-rich states, who start getting nervous about their eternal prospects late in life, and start buying their way into heaven, by bestowing large sums on wahabbi clerics to build mosques, madrassahs and finance their version of Islam, which has taken over much of the Sunni Muslim world. This was the pattern in Medieval Europe through to more modern times, until churches flipped their message.
The Church became the hoarders of wealth through the same system of blackmail applied to shake down the wealthy nobles. So, it didn't make a lot of difference in practice, as there were still great disparities in wealth, and those with money had ways to game the system...even to buy their way into heaven.
But, at least years ago, there was an expectation that the wealthy had to be a little more reserved about their money and lifestyles. When the American nouveau riche started flaunting their wealth through public extravagance over 100 years ago, that was considered something obscene in Europe, and even in Canada. Until Conrad Black (our Donald Trump) came along, most of the wealthy business and banking class in Canada maintained very low public profiles. I think that a more reserved wealth class is at least better than having these clowns like Koch's, the Vegas casino owner (I forget his name), and the many Wall Street and dot come billionaires thinking their 'John Galt's' - superior to the rest of us, and entitle to tell us how we should be ruled by them and their money.
Agreed! The problem we hear about with Muslim extremism is in large part caused by the wealthy, hedonistic Saudis and similar ruling classes in the oil-rich states, who start getting nervous about their eternal prospects late in life, and start buying their way into heaven, by bestowing large sums on wahabbi clerics to build mosques, madrassahs and finance their version of Islam, which has taken over much of the Sunni Muslim world. This was the pattern in Medieval Europe through to more modern times, until churches flipped their message.
The Church became the hoarders of wealth through the same system of blackmail applied to shake down the wealthy nobles. So, it didn't make a lot of difference in practice, as there were still great disparities in wealth, and those with money had ways to game the system...even to buy their way into heaven.
But, at least years ago, there was an expectation that the wealthy had to be a little more reserved about their money and lifestyles. When the American nouveau riche started flaunting their wealth through public extravagance over 100 years ago, that was considered something obscene in Europe, and even in Canada. Until Conrad Black (our Donald Trump) came along, most of the wealthy business and banking class in Canada maintained very low public profiles. I think that a more reserved wealth class is at least better than having these clowns like Koch's, the Vegas casino owner (I forget his name), and the many Wall Street and dot come billionaires thinking their 'John Galt's' - superior to the rest of us, and entitle to tell us how we should be ruled by them and their money.
-
AnneBoleyn
- Posts: 6632
- Joined: Sun Dec 11, 2011 3:17 pm
Are You Fearful of the Caliphate Movement?
FourPart;1459422 wrote: I couldn't agree more, and what is worse is the hoards of wealth owned by the Church, despite the amount of world poverty & starvation. So much for Jesus chucking the Money Lenders out of the temple.
Jesus did not throw out the Money Lenders and many others doing business in the Temple because he hated wealth. He had wealthy backers, i.e. Lazarus, etc.
Jesus did not throw out the Money Lenders and many others doing business in the Temple because he hated wealth. He had wealthy backers, i.e. Lazarus, etc.
-
recovering conservative
- Posts: 529
- Joined: Sun Nov 02, 2008 12:28 pm
Are You Fearful of the Caliphate Movement?
AnneBoleyn;1459435 wrote: Jesus did not throw out the Money Lenders and many others doing business in the Temple because he hated wealth. He had wealthy backers, i.e. Lazarus, etc.
Well then; why did he throw them out of the Temple?
I noticed, when I did a quick scan around the usual religious online sources, that the Cleansing is an event that really bothers modern-day pro-capitalist fundamentalist Christian leaders; so they try to do a lot of equivocating and inserting their own ideas, to diminish the message behind the Cleansing...which the Gospel accounts are in agreement that what defiled the Temple was not that that Roman coins were being exchanged for Jewish coins...this was essential, as the Roman coin was stamped with the image of the Roman god-man (the Emperor), and would defile the Temple if it (a graven image) was brought inside. But, what was offensive, was that the moneychangers were profiting from the transactions...and profiting greatly. As well, it's noted in some of the Gospel accounts that the system provided those with more money the opportunity to make greater sacrifices and appear publicly to be more pious, than the poor...who would likely feel ashamed and dejected because of their inability to make such great sacrifices.
In earlier passages in Mark, and Luke, and I believe John also, Jesus goes on a rant in parables like The Widow's Mite - which are intended to demonstrate that the poor widow's meager sacrifice is of more value than the extravagant sacrifices of the wealthy scribes and Sadducees, and others who surrounded the Temple. Likewise, Jesus is offended by the discrepancies in what great wealth provides them to show off and portray themselves of greater piety than the average Judean...who would only be able to afford to sacrifice one or two doves.
About Jesus having wealthy friends: the Bible says a lot of different things and contradicts itself, but notice by the time we get to the descriptions of the early Church in Acts, we find an end time community that is extremely socialistic. So, socialistic that everyone is supposed to contribute all of their money and wealth (including selling their land) to the Church community for everyone's benefit and further the cause of evangelizing in the last days. So, when a wealthy couple - Ananias and Sapphira join...but withhold a small amount of their earnings from selling their land, they are both struck dead by the Holy Spirit...according to Acts ch. 5. These communities may have been more extreme than earlier verses in Old and New Testament about wealth and those who amass great wealth, but the general message throughout is that there is a simple contradiction between being a Christian/ or even an Old Testament Israelite, and being concerned about money and material gain.
Well then; why did he throw them out of the Temple?
I noticed, when I did a quick scan around the usual religious online sources, that the Cleansing is an event that really bothers modern-day pro-capitalist fundamentalist Christian leaders; so they try to do a lot of equivocating and inserting their own ideas, to diminish the message behind the Cleansing...which the Gospel accounts are in agreement that what defiled the Temple was not that that Roman coins were being exchanged for Jewish coins...this was essential, as the Roman coin was stamped with the image of the Roman god-man (the Emperor), and would defile the Temple if it (a graven image) was brought inside. But, what was offensive, was that the moneychangers were profiting from the transactions...and profiting greatly. As well, it's noted in some of the Gospel accounts that the system provided those with more money the opportunity to make greater sacrifices and appear publicly to be more pious, than the poor...who would likely feel ashamed and dejected because of their inability to make such great sacrifices.
In earlier passages in Mark, and Luke, and I believe John also, Jesus goes on a rant in parables like The Widow's Mite - which are intended to demonstrate that the poor widow's meager sacrifice is of more value than the extravagant sacrifices of the wealthy scribes and Sadducees, and others who surrounded the Temple. Likewise, Jesus is offended by the discrepancies in what great wealth provides them to show off and portray themselves of greater piety than the average Judean...who would only be able to afford to sacrifice one or two doves.
About Jesus having wealthy friends: the Bible says a lot of different things and contradicts itself, but notice by the time we get to the descriptions of the early Church in Acts, we find an end time community that is extremely socialistic. So, socialistic that everyone is supposed to contribute all of their money and wealth (including selling their land) to the Church community for everyone's benefit and further the cause of evangelizing in the last days. So, when a wealthy couple - Ananias and Sapphira join...but withhold a small amount of their earnings from selling their land, they are both struck dead by the Holy Spirit...according to Acts ch. 5. These communities may have been more extreme than earlier verses in Old and New Testament about wealth and those who amass great wealth, but the general message throughout is that there is a simple contradiction between being a Christian/ or even an Old Testament Israelite, and being concerned about money and material gain.
Are You Fearful of the Caliphate Movement?
The point is, arguments aside as to interpretations of the Scriptures (for that is where it all starts), the fanatics of ANY religion are to be feared, as these are the ones who, despite the teachings of their Bible, Koran, Q'uran, Grunth etc., use violence to invoke their beliefs on everyone else, with force, if necessary. "You WILL bow down & worship our God of Peace - or else!!".
As we are all aware, practically every war & act of atrocity throughout history has been in the name of religion - or, more to the point, those who would place themselves in places of power within those religions.
As we are all aware, practically every war & act of atrocity throughout history has been in the name of religion - or, more to the point, those who would place themselves in places of power within those religions.
-
recovering conservative
- Posts: 529
- Joined: Sun Nov 02, 2008 12:28 pm
Are You Fearful of the Caliphate Movement?
FourPart;1459494 wrote: The point is, arguments aside as to interpretations of the Scriptures (for that is where it all starts), the fanatics of ANY religion are to be feared, as these are the ones who, despite the teachings of their Bible, Koran, Q'uran, Grunth etc., use violence to invoke their beliefs on everyone else, with force, if necessary. "You WILL bow down & worship our God of Peace - or else!!".
As we are all aware, practically every war & act of atrocity throughout history has been in the name of religion - or, more to the point, those who would place themselves in places of power within those religions.
Again, I have to say that religion is just used as a brand name to describe wars that have more to do with economic decline, overpopulation & resource shortages, and other more mundane causes. Even this ISIS group that inspires this new round of hysteria about the Caliphate taking over, can be sourced in the fact that the climate in that part of the Middle East, has been drying out since the mid-70's. Farmers have been forced off the land in both Syria and Iraq because of the lack of seasonal rains. If everything was still humming along, Sunnis may not like Shias, and the Alawites who run Syria, but they would have been busy with everyday life. When thousands of people start pouring in to refugee camps, then any flashpoint can start a revolution or a civil war...and the religious differences serve as the brand labels.
I also have to say, that I don't buy the notion that's been floating around since the New Atheism writers became prominent over 10 years ago, that "religion poisons everything," and religion, in and of itself, is the main source of violence in the world. The secular substitutes for religion that were created by Marxist governments, seemed to have found ways to go to war without the need for appealing to religion.
As we are all aware, practically every war & act of atrocity throughout history has been in the name of religion - or, more to the point, those who would place themselves in places of power within those religions.
Again, I have to say that religion is just used as a brand name to describe wars that have more to do with economic decline, overpopulation & resource shortages, and other more mundane causes. Even this ISIS group that inspires this new round of hysteria about the Caliphate taking over, can be sourced in the fact that the climate in that part of the Middle East, has been drying out since the mid-70's. Farmers have been forced off the land in both Syria and Iraq because of the lack of seasonal rains. If everything was still humming along, Sunnis may not like Shias, and the Alawites who run Syria, but they would have been busy with everyday life. When thousands of people start pouring in to refugee camps, then any flashpoint can start a revolution or a civil war...and the religious differences serve as the brand labels.
I also have to say, that I don't buy the notion that's been floating around since the New Atheism writers became prominent over 10 years ago, that "religion poisons everything," and religion, in and of itself, is the main source of violence in the world. The secular substitutes for religion that were created by Marxist governments, seemed to have found ways to go to war without the need for appealing to religion.
Are You Fearful of the Caliphate Movement?
recovering conservative;1459529 wrote: Again, I have to say that religion is just used as a brand name to describe wars that have more to do with economic decline, overpopulation & resource shortages, and other more mundane causes. Even this ISIS group that inspires this new round of hysteria about the Caliphate taking over, can be sourced in the fact that the climate in that part of the Middle East, has been drying out since the mid-70's. Farmers have been forced off the land in both Syria and Iraq because of the lack of seasonal rains. If everything was still humming along, Sunnis may not like Shias, and the Alawites who run Syria, but they would have been busy with everyday life. When thousands of people start pouring in to refugee camps, then any flashpoint can start a revolution or a civil war...and the religious differences serve as the brand labels.
I also have to say, that I don't buy the notion that's been floating around since the New Atheism writers became prominent over 10 years ago, that "religion poisons everything," and religion, in and of itself, is the main source of violence in the world. The secular substitutes for religion that were created by Marxist governments, seemed to have found ways to go to war without the need for appealing to religion.
To me, the whole thing about Religion is no different to that of the primitive Tribal regimes. Each guarding their own territory, as well as annexing others, by any means possible. It never really had anything to do with the teachings of their individual creeds which, when it boils down to it, are all basically the same as each other, but a banner of their tribe & a way of identifying who is meant to kill who.
I also have to say, that I don't buy the notion that's been floating around since the New Atheism writers became prominent over 10 years ago, that "religion poisons everything," and religion, in and of itself, is the main source of violence in the world. The secular substitutes for religion that were created by Marxist governments, seemed to have found ways to go to war without the need for appealing to religion.
To me, the whole thing about Religion is no different to that of the primitive Tribal regimes. Each guarding their own territory, as well as annexing others, by any means possible. It never really had anything to do with the teachings of their individual creeds which, when it boils down to it, are all basically the same as each other, but a banner of their tribe & a way of identifying who is meant to kill who.
-
recovering conservative
- Posts: 529
- Joined: Sun Nov 02, 2008 12:28 pm
Are You Fearful of the Caliphate Movement?
FourPart;1459530 wrote: To me, the whole thing about Religion is no different to that of the primitive Tribal regimes. Each guarding their own territory, as well as annexing others, by any means possible. It never really had anything to do with the teachings of their individual creeds which, when it boils down to it, are all basically the same as each other, but a banner of their tribe & a way of identifying who is meant to kill who.
But, religion is usually combined with other important symbols of the group, like nationalism. I would say that the flag-flying and jingoism expressed by fascism and conservative almost-fascism is more important than the religious appeals. A good indicator would be how right wing religion in America, puts more emphasis on the nation, than they do on their God! Any reading I've ever done on Christianity, I have noticed that nationalism and warfare are huge problems for the Christian leaders and thinkers to grapple with after the 3rd century...when they distinctly abandoned end times theology for a permanent Christianity. St. Augustine was the first to try to craft a set of principles on "Just War," there is nothing in how self-proclaimed Christian leaders today advocate and operate, that is even close to Augustine's rules of war principles. They just shape-shift religious justification for whatever they want to do next, and justify torture, mass surveillance, indefinite detention, indiscriminate bombing of civilians...you name it, the big three branches of the Judaic tradition will find ways to justify what they want to do today!
Here's a recent story I was looking for, which reflects a lot of people's suspicions that in the West, we are being manipulated by messages of fear to rally around again: Islamic threat is exaggerated by ‘oxygen of publicity,’ says former MI6 chief
But, religion is usually combined with other important symbols of the group, like nationalism. I would say that the flag-flying and jingoism expressed by fascism and conservative almost-fascism is more important than the religious appeals. A good indicator would be how right wing religion in America, puts more emphasis on the nation, than they do on their God! Any reading I've ever done on Christianity, I have noticed that nationalism and warfare are huge problems for the Christian leaders and thinkers to grapple with after the 3rd century...when they distinctly abandoned end times theology for a permanent Christianity. St. Augustine was the first to try to craft a set of principles on "Just War," there is nothing in how self-proclaimed Christian leaders today advocate and operate, that is even close to Augustine's rules of war principles. They just shape-shift religious justification for whatever they want to do next, and justify torture, mass surveillance, indefinite detention, indiscriminate bombing of civilians...you name it, the big three branches of the Judaic tradition will find ways to justify what they want to do today!
Here's a recent story I was looking for, which reflects a lot of people's suspicions that in the West, we are being manipulated by messages of fear to rally around again: Islamic threat is exaggerated by ‘oxygen of publicity,’ says former MI6 chief
-
High Threshold
- Posts: 2856
- Joined: Wed Nov 23, 2005 2:20 am
Are You Fearful of the Caliphate Movement?
Silvio Dante;1459313 wrote: How very Liberal of you. All the while Radical Sunni Wahabism is plotting to destroy all you hold dearly...
Yes, of course. I've had to reinforce the facade to my building with steel rods, install bullet-proof glass all round, and issue industrial strength ear plugs to my whole family. The Moslems are just bashing away at the bricks, pounding on the glass, and mega-phoning the message of Mohammed at us 24/7. I don't know how much longer we can last but thank G_d for watch dogs as yourself who will protect me from the plot to destroy all that I hold dear! Bloody Fascist.
Yes, of course. I've had to reinforce the facade to my building with steel rods, install bullet-proof glass all round, and issue industrial strength ear plugs to my whole family. The Moslems are just bashing away at the bricks, pounding on the glass, and mega-phoning the message of Mohammed at us 24/7. I don't know how much longer we can last but thank G_d for watch dogs as yourself who will protect me from the plot to destroy all that I hold dear! Bloody Fascist.
-
recovering conservative
- Posts: 529
- Joined: Sun Nov 02, 2008 12:28 pm
Are You Fearful of the Caliphate Movement?
I think it is very clear now, after all of the wars of opportunity breaking out around the world, that post-9-11, the U.S. and other governments have been preparing the citizenry for a state of permanent war. Most of the ongoing minor wars (undeclared wars) don't even make the news cycle anymore! They've just become part of the background noise of doing business in an age when oil and other essential natural resources are running in short supply and increasing rapidly in costs of development. As Michael Klare put it a few years ago, the times we live in are "The Race For What's Left."
On the OpEd News site awhile back, I came across this interesting entry -
"The Connection Between War & Violence Against Women," which connects the dots between the rising emphasis on military, the rise in interest in MMA and other bloodsports, the rapid increase and tacit approval of online misogyny etc., and how these facets of 21st century life are markers that our political and cultural leaders are trying to abolish peace and equality movements that they view with contempt as making 20th century men "too soft." So, we are back in a state of Warrior Culture again, that existed throughout most of European history of the last 1000 years or so.
Taking this wide angle lens-view of our culture; what right, or better still - what legitimacy do any alarmists today have to try to whip us into a frenzy against other warrior cultures like Russia again...now that the Cold War is back...or in this case - the Muslim World?
Let's face it; as this world goes to hell, where it's anyone's guess which of a confluence of disastrous developments will destroy us all, here we have our patriarchal warrior leaders once again trying to propagandize and foment the next invasion of opportunity! In this case, let's take note of the fact that this claimed "Caliphate" sits right in the middle of the last place on Earth that has a large stock of cheap and easily recoverable petroleum! That's what this latest round of anti-Muslim hysteria is really about. I don't believe there is any way to confirm or discount it yet/ but I have come across a few non-mainstream Mideast analysts who suspect that this ISIS group was intentionally set up by the U.S. Government! Sounds like a crazy conspiracy theory, until you consider that:
1. The leader was set free, even though he could have easily been shipped off to Guantanamo and disappeared forever like so many have already.
2. This group received large amounts of funding and weapons from the U.S. to fight as a major part of the coalition against Assad in Syria.
3. Nobody...not even other so called Muslim extremist groups agree that ISIS has any religious legitimacy to make a claim towards forming a caliphate government. On the contrary, their actions - specifically beheading Shiite and Kurdish Muslim soldiers, have been condemned as blasphemous and unlawful by every Muslim authority of all stripes. They could have legitimately imprisoned or even executed Muslims from competing armies if they had just cause; but the summary executions and beheadings are why, even Al Qaeda condemns them as illegitimate.
4. The rise of ISIS and their success against the Iraqi Army immediately led top American officials to calls for President Maliki to resign, and some even started tentatively started supporting the strategy of breaking up Iraq into three separate nations...something that only idiots like Joe Biden voiced support for a few years back...now, everyone's saying Iraq should be divided between Kurdish, Sunni and Shiite nations.
This last point coincides with the full realization in Washington that "regime change" failed to accomplish the primary goals that the U.S. had in mind: a compliant Iraqi Government that allows easy access to development by American oil companies, AND more importantly - no restrictions on the amount of development and export of Iraqi oil!
Instead, what the U.S. meddlers got with the compromise president - Maliki, was a Shia leader who refused to support the U.S./Israeli effort of regime change in Syria; a leader who closely cooperates with their other evil empire - Iran; and a leader who has been eager to re-establish close relationships with other evil empire - Russia.
The U.S. planners and meddlers may not be able to control ISIS, anymore than they were able to control Al Qaeda, a few decades back, when the U.S. and Osama Bin Laden shared the common goal of defeating the Soviet Union and driving their forces out of Afghanistan. ISIS is so insular, violent and extreme....and according to Muslim scholars - so ignorant about their religion, that they don't have a hope in hell of really forming a caliphate government that will last more than a year or two! But, what they can do is more important: they will drive a permanent wedge between Sunni and Shiite communities, making a unified Iraq ungovernable, and impossible to prevent the establishment of a Kurdish nation.
The Kurds have always been the tribal group that over the decades, repeatedly received promises from the CIA and Mossad, only to be stabbed in the back again and again, when their loyalty was promised to lead towards independence. This time though, the Kurds may in fact get their nation...because as much as it will offend U.S. ally - Turkey, the now oil-rich Kurds are making open deals to sell oil to Israel!
So, looking at the big, big picture again, what is ultimately a war for remaining resources being ruthlessly prosecuted in the Middle East, is being sold to us by our mainstream media as repackaged jingoistic bullshit!
On the OpEd News site awhile back, I came across this interesting entry -
"The Connection Between War & Violence Against Women," which connects the dots between the rising emphasis on military, the rise in interest in MMA and other bloodsports, the rapid increase and tacit approval of online misogyny etc., and how these facets of 21st century life are markers that our political and cultural leaders are trying to abolish peace and equality movements that they view with contempt as making 20th century men "too soft." So, we are back in a state of Warrior Culture again, that existed throughout most of European history of the last 1000 years or so.
Taking this wide angle lens-view of our culture; what right, or better still - what legitimacy do any alarmists today have to try to whip us into a frenzy against other warrior cultures like Russia again...now that the Cold War is back...or in this case - the Muslim World?
Let's face it; as this world goes to hell, where it's anyone's guess which of a confluence of disastrous developments will destroy us all, here we have our patriarchal warrior leaders once again trying to propagandize and foment the next invasion of opportunity! In this case, let's take note of the fact that this claimed "Caliphate" sits right in the middle of the last place on Earth that has a large stock of cheap and easily recoverable petroleum! That's what this latest round of anti-Muslim hysteria is really about. I don't believe there is any way to confirm or discount it yet/ but I have come across a few non-mainstream Mideast analysts who suspect that this ISIS group was intentionally set up by the U.S. Government! Sounds like a crazy conspiracy theory, until you consider that:
1. The leader was set free, even though he could have easily been shipped off to Guantanamo and disappeared forever like so many have already.
2. This group received large amounts of funding and weapons from the U.S. to fight as a major part of the coalition against Assad in Syria.
3. Nobody...not even other so called Muslim extremist groups agree that ISIS has any religious legitimacy to make a claim towards forming a caliphate government. On the contrary, their actions - specifically beheading Shiite and Kurdish Muslim soldiers, have been condemned as blasphemous and unlawful by every Muslim authority of all stripes. They could have legitimately imprisoned or even executed Muslims from competing armies if they had just cause; but the summary executions and beheadings are why, even Al Qaeda condemns them as illegitimate.
4. The rise of ISIS and their success against the Iraqi Army immediately led top American officials to calls for President Maliki to resign, and some even started tentatively started supporting the strategy of breaking up Iraq into three separate nations...something that only idiots like Joe Biden voiced support for a few years back...now, everyone's saying Iraq should be divided between Kurdish, Sunni and Shiite nations.
This last point coincides with the full realization in Washington that "regime change" failed to accomplish the primary goals that the U.S. had in mind: a compliant Iraqi Government that allows easy access to development by American oil companies, AND more importantly - no restrictions on the amount of development and export of Iraqi oil!
Instead, what the U.S. meddlers got with the compromise president - Maliki, was a Shia leader who refused to support the U.S./Israeli effort of regime change in Syria; a leader who closely cooperates with their other evil empire - Iran; and a leader who has been eager to re-establish close relationships with other evil empire - Russia.
The U.S. planners and meddlers may not be able to control ISIS, anymore than they were able to control Al Qaeda, a few decades back, when the U.S. and Osama Bin Laden shared the common goal of defeating the Soviet Union and driving their forces out of Afghanistan. ISIS is so insular, violent and extreme....and according to Muslim scholars - so ignorant about their religion, that they don't have a hope in hell of really forming a caliphate government that will last more than a year or two! But, what they can do is more important: they will drive a permanent wedge between Sunni and Shiite communities, making a unified Iraq ungovernable, and impossible to prevent the establishment of a Kurdish nation.
The Kurds have always been the tribal group that over the decades, repeatedly received promises from the CIA and Mossad, only to be stabbed in the back again and again, when their loyalty was promised to lead towards independence. This time though, the Kurds may in fact get their nation...because as much as it will offend U.S. ally - Turkey, the now oil-rich Kurds are making open deals to sell oil to Israel!
So, looking at the big, big picture again, what is ultimately a war for remaining resources being ruthlessly prosecuted in the Middle East, is being sold to us by our mainstream media as repackaged jingoistic bullshit!
-
High Threshold
- Posts: 2856
- Joined: Wed Nov 23, 2005 2:20 am
Are You Fearful of the Caliphate Movement?
recovering conservative;1459693 wrote: I think it is very clear now, after all of the wars of opportunity breaking out around the world, that post-9-11, the U.S. and other governments have been preparing the citizenry for a state of permanent war. .....
Another excellent post - and right on the money.
Another excellent post - and right on the money.
Are You Fearful of the Caliphate Movement?
High Threshold;1459706 wrote: Another excellent post - and right on the money.
You have committed thoughtcrime, and I'm going to rat you out to the thought police...right after the ten minutes of hate assembly!
(Reference to Orwell's 1984 where the West was permanently at war with the East so as it give the people a common enemy and control them.)
You have committed thoughtcrime, and I'm going to rat you out to the thought police...right after the ten minutes of hate assembly!
(Reference to Orwell's 1984 where the West was permanently at war with the East so as it give the people a common enemy and control them.)
-
High Threshold
- Posts: 2856
- Joined: Wed Nov 23, 2005 2:20 am
Are You Fearful of the Caliphate Movement?
Saint_;1459709 wrote: You have committed thoughtcrime, and I'm going to rat you out to the thought police...right after the ten minutes of hate assembly!
If I fill my head with pure thoughts such as ..... I don't know ..... my love for big brother for example, will it clear my thoughts and reinstate my status as a good citizen ?
If I fill my head with pure thoughts such as ..... I don't know ..... my love for big brother for example, will it clear my thoughts and reinstate my status as a good citizen ?
Are You Fearful of the Caliphate Movement?
High Threshold;1459710 wrote: If I fill my head with pure thoughts such as ..... I don't know ..... my love for big brother for example, will it clear my thoughts and reinstate my status as a good citizen ?
Hahaha...let me tell you how much I truly enjoy a member with a literate background. You are surely a welcome addition to this forum, ht. we have plenty of humor, and lots of intellectual firepower, but the combination of both is always embraced by all here.
Hahaha...let me tell you how much I truly enjoy a member with a literate background. You are surely a welcome addition to this forum, ht. we have plenty of humor, and lots of intellectual firepower, but the combination of both is always embraced by all here.