The problen wih Islam, and how to solve it.
-
Diego Moita wrote: Western countries, which should stay out of it I agree, and, did I suggest we in the Wwest should establish their central authority? No I didnt, so your rebuttal is totally misfounded. Nunc est bibendum
Oh my, oh my... You certainly made a great effort to not understand my "rebutal". My central argument is that you can't change culture, politics and people from the outside. Your quotation is just an appendix to what I wrote. My argument is like Marc Clifton said some messages bellow: And people is a problem that other people always try to fix but can't. Where did you learn to debate by doing this stupid old trick of confusing the small part for the whole? With french descontrutivist philosophers? I don't suffer from insanity, I enjoy every minute of it.
-
Diego Moita wrote: The solution to the problem with Islam begins with Islam and inside Islam, not in the Western countries, which should stay out of it. You just dont get it. When they start flying planes into buildings, they brought us into it. Try reading a little history pre-WWII. Look at Chamberlin and Churchill. Who was right? Diego Moita wrote: Can't you see? You're just like the idiots in the White House thinking they can make nation building by imposing/forcing a external "solution" to a totally diferent culture/society. Is that why 80% are glad the US freed them from a dictator? Every culture has a right to be free. Just because it is diffrent from your own does not mean that it is not smart enough to handle freedom.
kgaddy wrote: When they start flying planes into buildings, they brought us into it. Ooops! A smart guy! That's a good argument! But when did it start? Look, I am not here to try to justify their insanity, stupidity or to hide the plain fact that they're the ones to blame for their own problems; but honestly there is a lot to discuss and criticize about the Western policy towards Arab countries. Oh, BTW, do we need to go back again to the subject "Afganistan, Saudi Arabia and Paquistan suported Al-Qaeda, but not Iraq"? kgaddy wrote: Is that why 80% are glad the US freed them from a dictator? Doesn't look like that to me. Are they giving flowers and baklavas to the troops? kgaddy wrote: Just because it is diffrent from your own does not mean that it is not smart enough to handle freedom. It is not about freedom. They're not countries. There are no arab countries, just tribes with flags. Their current geographical boundaries where drawn mostly by europeans. I don't suffer from insanity, I enjoy every minute of it.
-
kgaddy wrote: When they start flying planes into buildings, they brought us into it. Ooops! A smart guy! That's a good argument! But when did it start? Look, I am not here to try to justify their insanity, stupidity or to hide the plain fact that they're the ones to blame for their own problems; but honestly there is a lot to discuss and criticize about the Western policy towards Arab countries. Oh, BTW, do we need to go back again to the subject "Afganistan, Saudi Arabia and Paquistan suported Al-Qaeda, but not Iraq"? kgaddy wrote: Is that why 80% are glad the US freed them from a dictator? Doesn't look like that to me. Are they giving flowers and baklavas to the troops? kgaddy wrote: Just because it is diffrent from your own does not mean that it is not smart enough to handle freedom. It is not about freedom. They're not countries. There are no arab countries, just tribes with flags. Their current geographical boundaries where drawn mostly by europeans. I don't suffer from insanity, I enjoy every minute of it.
Diego Moita wrote: Doesn't look like that to me. Well if you read the reports, the one's doing the fighting are not the Iraqi people, but radicals from other countries. Diego Moita wrote: It is not about freedom. They're not countries. There are no arab countries, just tribes with flags. Their current geographical boundaries where drawn mostly by europea Are you saying they do not even rise to the level of a country, but are just tribesmen? Are you saying they cannot even handel a border and act like a country? Why are you so down on Arabs?
-
Diego Moita wrote: Doesn't look like that to me. Well if you read the reports, the one's doing the fighting are not the Iraqi people, but radicals from other countries. Diego Moita wrote: It is not about freedom. They're not countries. There are no arab countries, just tribes with flags. Their current geographical boundaries where drawn mostly by europea Are you saying they do not even rise to the level of a country, but are just tribesmen? Are you saying they cannot even handel a border and act like a country? Why are you so down on Arabs?
kgaddy wrote: Well if you read the reports, the one's doing the fighting are not the Iraqi people, but radicals from other countries. Depends on which reports you read. Since Collin Powell went to the UN assembly with 'evidences' of WMD's I don't read Pentagon's reports, anymore. kgaddy wrote: Are you saying they do not even rise to the level of a country, but are just tribesmen? Are you saying they cannot even handel a border and act like a country? Why are you so down on Arabs? Yes, I am saying that. They don't have institutions outside of church. Legal systems, clean elections, constitutions born from a democratic process limiting the powers of governments, free and thinking press, separation of powers, freedom of assembly, separation of church and state, professional army subject to authority of the state, professional and independent police and courts, ... all these things barelly exist there. The only rule most people know are just clan or family loyalties or the religion rules. Exceptions? Turkey is not an arab country. Egypt? Hmm... it was some time ago, I wouldn't say it is now. Lebanon? Let's wait to see it become democratic. I don't suffer from insanity, I enjoy every minute of it.
-
kgaddy wrote: Well if you read the reports, the one's doing the fighting are not the Iraqi people, but radicals from other countries. Depends on which reports you read. Since Collin Powell went to the UN assembly with 'evidences' of WMD's I don't read Pentagon's reports, anymore. kgaddy wrote: Are you saying they do not even rise to the level of a country, but are just tribesmen? Are you saying they cannot even handel a border and act like a country? Why are you so down on Arabs? Yes, I am saying that. They don't have institutions outside of church. Legal systems, clean elections, constitutions born from a democratic process limiting the powers of governments, free and thinking press, separation of powers, freedom of assembly, separation of church and state, professional army subject to authority of the state, professional and independent police and courts, ... all these things barelly exist there. The only rule most people know are just clan or family loyalties or the religion rules. Exceptions? Turkey is not an arab country. Egypt? Hmm... it was some time ago, I wouldn't say it is now. Lebanon? Let's wait to see it become democratic. I don't suffer from insanity, I enjoy every minute of it.
Diego Moita wrote: They don't have institutions outside of church Not true. They have schools, Museums, Universities. Diego Moita wrote: Legal systems Totally not true. They have courts, lawers. Sadamn is on trial right now in one those courts. Diego Moita wrote: clean elections How were the elections in January not clean? What proof do you have or are you assuming just like you assumed they have no courts. Diego Moita wrote: constitutions born from a democratic process limiting the powers of governments Wrong again, I guess you have not been following the news lately. The democratic process is alive and well. Just look the drafting of the new constution. The very fact they are bickering is a great sign. That means each side feels comfortable enough to fight (peacefully) for what they want. No sign of dictatorship or one ruling class. Diego Moita wrote: professional and independent police and courts Covered above..wrong again. Unlike you, many people belive all humans are created equal and can be free to choose their path. Thankfully not all are as bigoted as you. You would still have them as "tribemen" becase you belive they cannot handle democracy.
-
Diego Moita wrote: They don't have institutions outside of church Not true. They have schools, Museums, Universities. Diego Moita wrote: Legal systems Totally not true. They have courts, lawers. Sadamn is on trial right now in one those courts. Diego Moita wrote: clean elections How were the elections in January not clean? What proof do you have or are you assuming just like you assumed they have no courts. Diego Moita wrote: constitutions born from a democratic process limiting the powers of governments Wrong again, I guess you have not been following the news lately. The democratic process is alive and well. Just look the drafting of the new constution. The very fact they are bickering is a great sign. That means each side feels comfortable enough to fight (peacefully) for what they want. No sign of dictatorship or one ruling class. Diego Moita wrote: professional and independent police and courts Covered above..wrong again. Unlike you, many people belive all humans are created equal and can be free to choose their path. Thankfully not all are as bigoted as you. You would still have them as "tribemen" becase you belive they cannot handle democracy.
kgaddy wrote: Covered above..wrong again. Your answers refer just to Iraq, not the other arab countries. In Iraqi case the best I can answer is wait and you'll see. kgaddy wrote: Unlike you, many people belive all humans are created equal and can be free to choose their path. Thankfully not all are as bigoted as you. That's good. I don't think I am bigoted, but if that's the price I'll pay to be coherent, let it be... kgaddy wrote: You would still have them as "tribemen" becase you belive they cannot handle democracy. But where did I wrote that tribemen are not equal to me and don't deserve democracy? They are alike me and they do deserve democracy, but they'll have to create it (and their countries) by themselves. And imperialism is meant to help Haliburton and Bechtel, not them. I don't suffer from insanity, I enjoy every minute of it.
-
OK, after much thought and examination of what is going on in the world here is it is: Problem: Islam has many factions; some very extremist, bent on destruction, most, peaceful. But, how does one control the other? In a religion as distributed as Islam, how does a muslem in Birmingham control what a muslem in Indonesia does? Solution: A central muslem authority. Something like a pope, at the head of a centrally organised religion. As with the pope said head gets elected by the most eminent leaders. As an organisation, it has the ability to declare a rogue cleric as 'excomunicated' from the church, thefore outlawing him and all his teachings. This is the only way Islam is going to solve its problems. So, you muslems out there, whos got the ball sto start this going. Untill you do you will all be tarnished by the behaviour of the few. Nunc est bibendum
The problem with Islam and how to solve it? That's way too easy. Convert and blow yourself the fuck up. :->
-
kgaddy wrote: Covered above..wrong again. Your answers refer just to Iraq, not the other arab countries. In Iraqi case the best I can answer is wait and you'll see. kgaddy wrote: Unlike you, many people belive all humans are created equal and can be free to choose their path. Thankfully not all are as bigoted as you. That's good. I don't think I am bigoted, but if that's the price I'll pay to be coherent, let it be... kgaddy wrote: You would still have them as "tribemen" becase you belive they cannot handle democracy. But where did I wrote that tribemen are not equal to me and don't deserve democracy? They are alike me and they do deserve democracy, but they'll have to create it (and their countries) by themselves. And imperialism is meant to help Haliburton and Bechtel, not them. I don't suffer from insanity, I enjoy every minute of it.
Diego Moita wrote: , but they'll have to create it (and their countries) by themselves. Germany and Japan did it with outside help...not from the inside. Diego Moita wrote: And imperialism is meant to help Haliburton and Bechtel, not them. Who is being imperial? Isnt the point of imperialism to take over a country and take all their resources? THe US went in Iraq and SPENT it's resources the help. You are confused at best.
-
OK, after much thought and examination of what is going on in the world here is it is: Problem: Islam has many factions; some very extremist, bent on destruction, most, peaceful. But, how does one control the other? In a religion as distributed as Islam, how does a muslem in Birmingham control what a muslem in Indonesia does? Solution: A central muslem authority. Something like a pope, at the head of a centrally organised religion. As with the pope said head gets elected by the most eminent leaders. As an organisation, it has the ability to declare a rogue cleric as 'excomunicated' from the church, thefore outlawing him and all his teachings. This is the only way Islam is going to solve its problems. So, you muslems out there, whos got the ball sto start this going. Untill you do you will all be tarnished by the behaviour of the few. Nunc est bibendum
I think a lot of it has to do with the "Curse of Oil", over which many Muslim sit. You may be right on what needs to be done - but practically speaking it's impossible to achieve. I think an Egyptian named Nassar tried something like this back in the 60's and failed. The Israelis didn't like it either.
-
Oh my, oh my... You certainly made a great effort to not understand my "rebutal". My central argument is that you can't change culture, politics and people from the outside. Your quotation is just an appendix to what I wrote. My argument is like Marc Clifton said some messages bellow: And people is a problem that other people always try to fix but can't. Where did you learn to debate by doing this stupid old trick of confusing the small part for the whole? With french descontrutivist philosophers? I don't suffer from insanity, I enjoy every minute of it.
Diego Moita wrote: you can't change culture, politics and people from the outside I agree, and in my origonal post I did not suggesrt that this central authority be set up from the outside. It would of course be set up from inside the muslem world. There is already an Arab congress. Why not an islamic congress with an elected head? OK the Shia might not like it, but, they are a minority. But, as with all groups, extremism is diluted, and, the centrally authourised 'foreign policy' would be the official line. If enough bombnings happen, and if enough muslem say 'enough, we cannot let our name be tarnished, we must present a united front to the christians which represents the true views of muslems' then the job is mostly done. It is a mater time, and desperation. Nunc est bibendum