This week in Islam

[?Impact]

On 11/15/2017 at 11:52 AM, Bonam said:

I've posted many times here about how the Kurds should have their own state. They are hated and oppressed in Turkey, Syria, and Iraq. They form a large majority population in a contiguous region. More than any other stateless people on Earth right now, the Kurds deserve and need their own free and independent state. America and the UN ought to be leading the charge for this after how much the Kurds helped them. Instead, America and the world has betrayed the Kurds, leaving them to the mercy (or lack thereof) of the dictatorships in Turkey and Syria and the mock-democracy in Iraq

While I don't necessarily disagree with the idea of the Kurds having their own state, I am against more western meddling in the middle east. There is also the issue of how that state would function in the global economy, would it be isolated economically like it probably would be geographically? They would need to work cooperatively with their neighbours or they would become another Israel, and probably worse because they would not have international water access (Israel has access to both the Red sea, and Mediterranean).

Edited November 27, 2017 by ?Impact

[eyeball]

20 hours ago, WestCoastRunner said:

More importantly. More violence is the answer?

No, it underscores a question we're avoiding - why we think more tyranny is the answer.  

[WestCoastRunner]

7 minutes ago, eyeball said:

No, it underscores a question we're avoiding - why we think more tyranny is the answer.  

Obviously it isn’t but is more violence the answer? Why would you tolerate more of it?

[eyeball]

2 hours ago, WestCoastRunner said:

Obviously it isn’t but is more violence the answer? Why would you tolerate more of it?

As I said we're dealing with a question about our own violent actions and my intolerance for that is what's at issue.  The violence we're experiencing is simply blowback to that so its pretty much self-inflicted.  On the face of it I'd say there's no apparent end to the amount of that we're ready to tolerate - in fact there appears to be many who are quite prepared to tolerate it indefinitely.  

[GostHacked]

On 11/26/2017 at 12:10 PM, OftenWrong said:

You support terrorism now?

Why not? We already support terrorism via our government's interventions in other nations.

[OftenWrong]

3 hours ago, eyeball said:

As I said we're dealing with a question about our own violent actions and my intolerance for that is what's at issue.  The violence we're experiencing is simply blowback to that so its pretty much self-inflicted.  On the face of it I'd say there's no apparent end to the amount of that we're ready to tolerate - in fact there appears to be many who are quite prepared to tolerate it indefinitely.  

I think what you and GostHacked are condoning would bring utter mayhem upon all people everywhere, hence it is a totally useless suggestion.

My view is that all humans are more or less the same in their capacity for violence, as demonstrated by history. Your suggestion that we deserve more violence from our "enemies", as though it would transform the world into a better place, is disingenuous and naive.

 

[eyeball]

15 minutes ago, OftenWrong said:

I think what you and GostHacked are condoning would bring utter mayhem upon all people everywhere, hence it is a totally useless suggestion.

What exactly is it you think is being condoned?  I think supporting dictators is what's causing all the mayhem.  You seem to be suggesting that not supporting dictators will result in even worse consequences.  

Quote

 

My view is that all humans are more or less the same in their capacity for violence, as demonstrated by history.

 

My view is that humans also have just as much capacity for peace, as demonstrated by history.

 

Quote

Your suggestion that we deserve more violence from our "enemies", as though it would transform the world into a better place, is disingenuous and naive.

Why do you punish your kids when they misbehave - is it in hopes of changing their behaviour or do you just do it out of spite?

[OftenWrong]

1 hour ago, eyeball said:

What exactly is it you think is being condoned?  I think supporting dictators is what's causing all the mayhem.  You seem to be suggesting that not supporting dictators will result in even worse consequences.  

My view is that humans also have just as much capacity for peace, as demonstrated by history.

 

Why do you punish your kids when they misbehave - is it in hopes of changing their behaviour or do you just do it out of spite?

Incorrect on all 3 points.

- I suggest you cannot "not" support dictators, because non-dictators are nowhere to be found.
- Peace requires all parties to agree and to cooperate, for it to work. War does not. Peace is noticeably absent in the book of history.
- Parents punishing kids is a poor analogy, where parents represent a symbol of fairness and virtue. Who is the parent on the world stage? Which superpower is the parent, or which country. A better analogy is a playground where the kids are all bad, and no parents to be found. One kid's a bully who will beat the shit out of ya, the other's a criminal who'll knife you when no one's looking. So pick your poison.

Your confusion seems clear on this... you have idealized our adversaries as though they are more peaceful than us, as though they are purely victims of the west. You ignore the evil things that they do to one another, and also the good works that are done by western civilization. Perhaps you prefer that the middle east be ruled by fanatics like Ayman Al-Zawahiri, the mastermind of Sept. 11 who inspired many Jihadis such as yourself to pray for planes to hit our buildings.

[eyeball]

3 hours ago, OftenWrong said:

Incorrect on all 3 points.- I suggest you cannot "not" support dictators, because non-dictators are nowhere to be found.

I suggest I can't support them because I'm not an asshole.

Quote

Peace requires all parties to agree and to cooperate, for it to work. War does not. Peace is noticeably absent in the book of history.

Well then its high time we did something to change that - it only takes one to start the ball rolling. OTOH it always takes two to Tango.

Quote

- Parents punishing kids is a poor analogy, where parents represent a symbol of fairness and virtue. Who is the parent on the world stage? Which superpower is the parent, or which country. A better analogy is a playground where the kids are all bad, and no parents to be found. One kid's a bully who will beat the shit out of ya, the other's a criminal who'll knife you when no one's looking. So pick your poison.

There you go again, defaulting to this ridiculous notion that there's no moral force for good in the world and so we have no choice but to behave like assholes.

Quote

Your confusion seems clear on this... you have idealized our adversaries as though they are more peaceful than us,  as though they are purely victims of the west.

No, you've simply lowered yourself to their level and then tried to drag me down with you.  Fuck that and the horse you rode in on.

Quote

You ignore the evil things that they do to one another, and also the good works that are done by western civilization.

No I just think their evil pales to insignificance compared to the things we've done to them.  I also think the bad things we've done undo the good.   

Quote

Perhaps you prefer that the middle east be ruled by fanatics like Ayman Al-Zawahiri, the mastermind of Sept. 11 who inspired many Jihadis such as yourself to pray for planes to hit our buildings.

No I wouldn't prefer that at all and while I don't subscribe to praying if I did I'd probably pray that the jihadis do a better job at targeting the asshioles who actually have it coming,  the jihadis seem to suck at targeting as badly as your side.

You do realize I place support for dictatorships amongst the very worst crimes against humanity that a people can commit against another don't you?  It should be pretty clear just how utterly irreconcilable our positions are and will be until you change.  AFAIC you're a far greater threat to my well being and safety than any terrorist.  It probably doesn't need to be said that I think the world would be a better place if people like you were gone.  OTOH if I was dead the world would just be the same old place, no better or worse and just as evil as always.

Edited November 28, 2017 by eyeball

[Michael Hardner]

6 hours ago, eyeball said:

I suggest I can't support them because I'm not an asshole.

I would suggest that you (and I) are actually assholes, but *minor* assholes, and we object to major assholes.  History could be seen as a progression of getting rid of the biggest assholes, then concentrating on the ones remaining, and rinsing and repeating.

 

6 hours ago, eyeball said:

No I wouldn't prefer that at all and while I don't subscribe to praying if I did I'd probably pray that the jihadis do a better job at targeting the asshioles who actually have it coming,  the jihadis seem to suck at targeting as badly as your side.

They target each other and innocent people who share their religion.  I would rather group people by their methods, than by their religion.  We have a professional class of combatants that do our bidding for us, because we can afford that, but 'we' also don't have the patience to see the rebuilding part of it through after the smoking craters have gone cold.

 

6 hours ago, eyeball said:

You do realize I place support for dictatorships amongst the very worst crimes against humanity that a people can commit against another don't you?  It should be pretty clear just how utterly irreconcilable our positions are and will be until you change.  AFAIC you're a far greater threat to my well being and safety than any terrorist.  It probably doesn't need to be said that I think the world would be a better place if people like you were gone.  OTOH if I was dead the world would just be the same old place, no better or worse and just as evil as always.

The forum would be much worse though.

[OftenWrong]

7 hours ago, eyeball said:

I suggest I can't support them because I'm not an asshole.

Well then its high time we did something to change that - it only takes one to start the ball rolling. OTOH it always takes two to Tango.

There you go again, defaulting to this ridiculous notion that there's no moral force for good in the world and so we have no choice but to behave like assholes.

No, you've simply lowered yourself to their level and then tried to drag me down with you.  Fuck that and the horse you rode in on.

No I just think their evil pales to insignificance compared to the things we've done to them.  I also think the bad things we've done undo the good.   

No I wouldn't prefer that at all and while I don't subscribe to praying if I did I'd probably pray that the jihadis do a better job at targeting the asshioles who actually have it coming,  the jihadis seem to suck at targeting as badly as your side.

You do realize I place support for dictatorships amongst the very worst crimes against humanity that a people can commit against another don't you?  It should be pretty clear just how utterly irreconcilable our positions are and will be until you change.  AFAIC you're a far greater threat to my well being and safety than any terrorist.  It probably doesn't need to be said that I think the world would be a better place if people like you were gone.  OTOH if I was dead the world would just be the same old place, no better or worse and just as evil as always.

Alright now fella, don't get all excited it's too early in the morning for that. You talked about me "lowering myself" yet it was you who started this latest outrage, with your comment that you support terrorism. Way I see it, you vehemently oppose dictators on the world stage, but don't seem to mind if ordinary folks get their heads cut off by Jihadis, because "we" deserve it. Common folk have little/ no say in these matters, if Cabinet approves a military venture. Sure they can vote them out next time, they can vote and vote and vote but they cannot vote for someone who's not a dictator. If you truly opposed dictatorship as you say, you would stop voting.

[scribblet]

So, you don`t see our MSM reporting on this stuff; Moroccan Muslims riot and loot a Christmas market where according to the Belgian media 22 cops were injured.

Merry Christmas cos Islam is Peace.

https://www.hln.be/nieuws/binnenland/rellen-in-brussel-na-wk-kwalificatie-van-marokko-22-agenten-gewond-en-auto-s-in-brand-gestoken~a481f1e4/

https://www.usatoday24x7.com/muslims-riot-in-brussels-stores-looted-christmas-market-attacked-video/

 

[GostHacked]

17 hours ago, OftenWrong said:

I think what you and GostHacked are condoning would bring utter mayhem upon all people everywhere, hence it is a totally useless suggestion.

My view is that all humans are more or less the same in their capacity for violence, as demonstrated by history. Your suggestion that we deserve more violence from our "enemies", as though it would transform the world into a better place, is disingenuous and naive.

 

It's the thing many may give a pass on our nation carrying out terrorist plots against other nations (Iraq and Afghanistan). We can't exactly cry foul when terrorism happens here in Canada due to our actions overseas. It's called blowback.  I know you don't support terrorism, but by supporting what our government does across the world you are in fact supporting some forms of terrorism. We get around that by calling it 'nation building'. Even if you don't support the government you are supporting terrorism because, well it's the government, our government making us look bad.

Our actions in the M.E. might be legal according to our laws here in Canada, but they are not legal there, and that's a big problem for us here.

[OftenWrong]

7 hours ago, GostHacked said:

It's the thing many may give a pass on our nation carrying out terrorist plots against other nations (Iraq and Afghanistan). We can't exactly cry foul when terrorism happens here in Canada due to our actions overseas. It's called blowback.  I know you don't support terrorism, but by supporting what our government does across the world you are in fact supporting some forms of terrorism. We get around that by calling it 'nation building'. Even if you don't support the government you are supporting terrorism because, well it's the government, our government making us look bad.

I know we've done some things over there that might not be considered fair by everyone else, like when we participate in a UN sanctioned mission which we are legally obliged to do. Canada is a small player in a big game. Those obligations come from commitments we've made with others, UN, USA, UK, EU. Canada's ability to affect policy decisions on that level is quite limited. Even more limited is the ability of the Canadian voter to make any difference. I only get to vote for the MP in my riding, based on a few non-binding promises they made and the list of options to choose from is pretty short. Asking a person like me to do anything affirmative about a problem in Iraq is a complete waste of time. That's why, insisting that I should accept responsibility is ludicrous. 

[?Impact]

6 minutes ago, OftenWrong said:

That's why, insisting that I should accept responsibility is ludicrous. 

Sort of like insisting that all Muslims should accept responsibility for terrorists.

[OftenWrong]

Just now, ?Impact said:

Sort of like insisting that all Muslims should accept responsibility for terrorists.

Who the hell says that around here? You?

[?Impact]

2 minutes ago, OftenWrong said:

Who the hell says that around here? You?

Well we did have 9 people vote for internment camps.

[GostHacked]

21 hours ago, ?Impact said:

Sort of like insisting that all Muslims should accept responsibility for terrorists.

This is a great post!

[GostHacked]

21 hours ago, OftenWrong said:

I know we've done some things over there that might not be considered fair by everyone else, like when we participate in a UN sanctioned mission which we are legally obliged to do. Canada is a small player in a big game. Those obligations come from commitments we've made with others, UN, USA, UK, EU. Canada's ability to affect policy decisions on that level is quite limited. Even more limited is the ability of the Canadian voter to make any difference. I only get to vote for the MP in my riding, based on a few non-binding promises they made and the list of options to choose from is pretty short. Asking a person like me to do anything affirmative about a problem in Iraq is a complete waste of time. That's why, insisting that I should accept responsibility is ludicrous. 

We collectively assume responsibility because it is the government we elect in. They do things on our behalf because of stupid 'obligations' with NATO type partners.  And the UN had nothing to do with the intervention in Afghanistan or Iraq as far as I can tell. I could be wrong.

[OftenWrong]

2 hours ago, GostHacked said:

We collectively assume responsibility because it is the government we elect in. They do things on our behalf because of stupid 'obligations' with NATO type partners.  And the UN had nothing to do with the intervention in Afghanistan or Iraq as far as I can tell. I could be wrong.

I think you are half right, and half wrong, same as me. If I recall correctly, Gulf War II (Iraq) did not receive UN sanction. That is why Chretien chose not to commit Canadian troops (although there was to my understanding some very limited Canadian involvement). Afghan war was UN approved, placing specific legal obligations upon Canada.

[taxme]

On 10/2/2017 at 9:01 AM, dialamah said:

I've posted my definition a few times.   

By the way, you still haven't answered a question I asked a few days back.  Here is the conversation, from Sept 22, Pages 262-263, to jog your memory:

Me:  19 wounded and 6 dead Muslims demonstrate that [Islamophobia exists] never mind the fact that reported hate crimes against Muslims has risen over 250% in 4 years.

Argus:  Your complaint of a rise in hate crimes is without merit. People are reacting to outsiders and the news. Virtually all such 'hate crimes' are minor in nature, and consist of verbal abuse or vandalism.  

Me:  Even when those crimes are directed against Jews?   

Argus:  The biggest threat against Jews is Muslims.

Me:   Do you have some facts to back that up?  As far as I have been able to determine, white nationalists are usually the culprits when it comes to Jews, Blacks and now, Muslims.  In 2015, hate crimes against Jews declined over the previous year and increased against Muslims; that seems odd if Muslims are the biggest threat to Jews.   

Anyway, if the crimes against Jews and Muslims are similar in both type and number (178 to 159) should they also be dismissed as minor? 

 

 

There are good white nationalists and there are bad white nationalists. Not all gun owners are killers just because one gun owner murdered someone. Got it now?  White nationalists have to be more concerned about Jews, blacks, and now Muslims now attacking them when they are having a peaceful parade.

When a demonstration by white nationalists goes bad and violence ensues, the white nationalists are always labeled as racists, bigots right wingers and Nazi's who started the violence by the left wing liberal media. But yet the leftists that counter demonstrate are never called communists, Marxists, fascists or left wingers. They are given nice names by the media like anti-fascists demonstrators, and that is it. Strange indeed. 

[?Impact]

2 hours ago, taxme said:

They are given nice names by the media like anti-fascists demonstrators, and that is it. Strange indeed. 

White nationalists? That sounds like a nice name. I would say what they really are, but then the strong arm of the moderators would step in.

[OftenWrong]

4 hours ago, ?Impact said:

White nationalists? That sounds like a nice name. I would say what they really are, but then the strong arm of the moderators would step in.

I think you can say it. Well today we also have anti-white nationalists. Probably few in number but they always get the media spotlight.

[Guest]

On 11/29/2017 at 3:56 PM, GostHacked said:

We collectively assume responsibility because it is the government we elect in. They do things on our behalf because of stupid 'obligations' with NATO type partners.  And the UN had nothing to do with the intervention in Afghanistan or Iraq as far as I can tell. I could be wrong.

I don't.  Any more than I would collectively assume responsibility because of a religion I belonged to.

[GostHacked]

4 hours ago, bcsapper said:

I don't.  Any more than I would collectively assume responsibility because of a religion I belonged to.

I get that, but that is now how the optics work on a good deal of people. Still blaming everyone in a specific group for a small few ruining things for them. But if those extreme elements are not called out by the rest , then it's about as good as accepting whatever the leaders/government does on our behalf.  The responsibility we have is to keep the government in check. So collectively we are still responsible for having a bad shit government that does bad shit and makes us look like bad shits.