11-04-2004, 09:55 AM
|
#13
|
|
Guest
|
Quote:
Originally posted by shamrock_uk:
Agreed, it certainly has a bloody history, but that's largely because if Muhammed hadn't raised a makeshift army sharpish their band would have been hunted down and killed for their beliefs.
I have to take issue with one point of yours regarding the action they should take:
quote:
the faithful of Islam should be ont he front lines dying with the Infidel Americans and British and others to stop the so called "People who pervert the peaceful religion of Islam"
|
Surely you're not suggesting they should have signed up to the war on Iraq for this privelege? Where else would they have the opportunity to do this if I've misunderstood you?
No, I wasn't speaking specificly about Iraq here. Im talking about the so called "Palistinians" and the "peacful arabs" in other areas where we see atrocities in the name of Allah. The suicide bombers who are killing innocent civilians, men, women and children are being harbored and sheltered among the "peacful people" of Islam....if they were all that peacful, they would turn the mad men out...Im just saying that if the people who are horrified by the violence and blood shed were really all that horrified..they would rise up together and squash the upstarts....but they don't...and that is because on some level they identify and to an extent approveof the actions being taken in Islams name.
I would also suggest that it is Muslims who are on the front line and dying because of these madmen. I would hazard a guess that a good 80% of Islamic terrorist attacks kill exclusively or mainly Muslims. Witness the latest explosion outside a Sunni mosque yesterday for example...
Yes you are quite correct. And yet we don't see the general populaces rising up to stop these attacks. Perhaps they have spent too many generations as slaves to the politcal and religious leaders to know how to fight for themselves...I really don't know the answer to that.
As for the wider question, I've read both accusative and apologist literature on the issue of Islam being inherently violent and I'm still utterly undecided. For every example of a Muslim that would 'conform' to Western views on civilization I should imagine there is one who doesn't.
The question is, should we impose our culture on them, even if we believe that theirs is morally wrong? I'll always remember the Muslim woman clad in the hijab who asked "have you ever asked a Muslim woman if she's opressed?"
LOL Actually the woman in Afghanistan who was polled while standing in line to vote adressed just this issue. She said, "I will still wear the Burkah(sp?) but now I do not "HAVE" to wear the Burkah...this is a great difference!"
Just a brief foray into the Israeli-Arab conflict to respond to your point about that: Muslim's saying that they want to kill Jews is not much different from some of the Jewish writings and ideologies at the time of the first Arab-Israeli conflict. Ben-Gurion's diary springs to mind for example. Definitely Muslims do not have a monopoly on hatred in that region, and you will likely find voices on both sides that would gladly wish the other dead. For each of them, I would imagine there would be ten more who just want the violence to stop and to leave in peace.
Oh yes you will find individuals on both sides with despicable attitudes however (and this is a biggie) Israel does not and has not ever declared their goal to be "to push the Arabs into the sea and to kill every last one of them"....a founding goal of the Arab League and the goal for all their offensives in the last 40 or 50 years. The isrealis are fighting to survive..the arabs face no such extinction. (note that I am not Jewish and have no jewish affiliations, these are just the results of my own readings on the subject...and several specials on the History Channel.
[/QUOTE]
|
|
|
|