Fowler Goes Steyn

[Argus]

...seems to be but really isn't responsible on its own, or as a causative factor. Unless somebody could put forward a reason why it might be responsible...

You don't think religion is a causative factor in the way ISIS treats people it conquers? You don't think religion is a causative factor in the centuries long slapfest between Suunis and Shias?

Edited October 7, 2014 by Argus

[Argus]

BD had some good points about colonialism, if you want to have a look. It's harder to say that the results of colonialism are mixed or positive for colonized people, after seeing those points.

I addressed those points earlier, before he made them.

[Argus]

Germany is a colony of ? Ancient Rome ?

Japan was a colony of ?

Germany and Japan were not colonies, but defeated countries. Nevertheless the point remains both were under occupation for a considerable period of time. In Japan's case, for example when the changes to the Japanese constitution proposed by the Japanese government weren't extensive enough to suit him he wrote their new constitution for them. The US had tremendous influence over both countries in the decades of occupation, even when that occupation turned more to protection than being an overlord. Then again, the Japanese and Germans weren't murdering Americans every other day so who knows if they would have stayed as long as they did if the circumstances were less welcoming.

Edited October 7, 2014 by Argus

[Black Dog]

And I'm not saying there aren't local factors involved in individual cases either. However, the presence of Islam seems to be partially or overwhelmingly responsible for an awful lot of violence wherever its adherents exist in numbers.

That's a question of correlation and causation that can't really be answered.

And as much as I'd like to have the God-like power to redraw boundaries I don't, nor does anyone else, nor would the locals accept it without bitter violence directed at ME.

Redrawing the borders is literally what ISIL is trying to do. And borders change all the time (ask Israel), the question is, why is the west doing it utmost to perpetuate these fictions?

So that means we deal with what we can deal with, which is putting out fires as they arise and hoping that some day the locals will climb out of their sixth century mentality.

Except that suggests a kind of disengagement from the region on the part of the west that is as unlikely as any long term occupation. It's very much our mess too and we're stuck with it.

[Argus]

Redrawing the borders is literally what ISIL is trying to do. And borders change all the time (ask Israel), the question is, why is the west doing it utmost to perpetuate these fictions?

But ISIL's border redrawing attempt is based entirely on the concept that only those of their religious belief are allowed to live in that area. Nor have they shrunk from attacking areas such as the Kurds or Shias which don't want any part of them.

[Black Dog]

But ISIL's border redrawing attempt is based entirely on the concept that only those of their religious belief are allowed to live in that area. Nor have they shrunk from attacking areas such as the Kurds or Shias which don't want any part of them.

Point was never that if we let people alone they'll sort things out and live peacefully side by side. Part of ISIL's brand is that they are redressing the historical wrongs of western imperialism. Think of that what you will, but that has a powerful resonance in that part of the world, which is why it keeps cropping up as a theme among various Sunni jihadist groups.

[cybercoma]

That's a question of correlation and causation that can't really be answered.

Sure it can. If Islam causes these things, then why are there literally hundreds of millions of peaceful Muslims around the world?

[Argus]

Sure it can. If Islam causes these things, then why are there literally hundreds of millions of peaceful Muslims around the world?

What do you want them to do? Do you want every baker and plumber and cabby throughout the Muslim world to be screaming and pulling at their hair every day of their lives? Where Muslim nations are almost entirely Muslim of one branch there tends to be little religious violence. Quelle surprise! Where there are other religious groups or multiple sects present you have violence, and fairly constant violence in most Muslim countries directed at those others.

Is Saudi Arabia one of your examples of millions of peaceful Muslims? Only Muslims live there by law. No other form of worship is permitted. Even so, the temporary stationing of some US troops there to deal with Iraq was what apparently incensed Osama bin Laden and his bunch to attack Americans.

So yes, Saudis are peaceful, under the heel of a brutal dictatorship, because they have no one to attack. That hasn't stopped the wealthier members from sponsoring terrorism against other sects or religions abroad. And if the current dictators are overthrown it will be because they are considered far too liberal, far too easygoing and tolerant for many Saudis. If there was an election in Saudi Arabia tomorrow they would vote in a religious dictatorship which would make the present King and his government look like enlightened modernists.

Edited October 7, 2014 by Argus

[Michael Hardner]

Nevertheless the point remains both were under occupation for a considerable period of time.

? The point... is beside the point.

[Argus]

? The point... is beside the point.

Have you read this thread?

[PIK]

You said that I reject the 'pack up and go home' bit, that we should never go home. The point I'm making is I don't want to go in in the first place. If a place like Afghanistan has to have a hundred thousand babysitters present for the next hundred years, babysitters who will be constantly targeted, then the international community should hire some mercenaries or something. I don't believe Canadian soldiers should have that duty.

I agreed with invading Afghanistan. I didn't agree with trying to set up some kind of democracy in a land without the cultural value set to support democracy. I certainly didn't agree to sticking around for years while that was attempted. I think something like that would take generations, and I don't want Canadians coming home in coffins during that time period.

One of the main reasons Britain could subdue and keep control of India for all those years was nobody in any position of authority much gave a damn about the British soldiers who died doing it.

[/quote

Sure it can. If Islam causes these things, then why are there literally hundreds of millions of peaceful Muslims around the world?

And where are they, they seem very quiet. And nothing will change them until their teachings are changed.

[PIK]

Screwed that up. lol

[August1991]

Germany: not colonized

South Korea: not colonized

Japan: not colonizedding Africa and the Middle East.[/size]

What does colonization have to do with this 21st world issue? We are facing ignorant/backward people who barely understand Galileo and certainly don't understand Voltaire.

Argus imagines that we can simply ignore them or isolate ourselves from them. But this is the 21st century. We go there and they can come here. Heck, these medieval people use our cellphones.

========

I don't know how you teach indivdiuals.

In late 1945, surviving Germans were lost and confused. They learned. I am not so certain that the Japanese have learned the same lesson.

BlackDog or MH, where in your family's past did you or they learn about the scientific method? Understand sarcasm? Learn irony?

[August1991]

Christ on a stick, I can't think of a single statement that better captures the utter hypocrisy the diddling classes bring to this discussion.

Outstanding.

Eyeball, if I understand you properly, you want "us" to stay here - and "them" to stay there.

In this 21st century, that's impossible.

In this modern world, individuals go there and individuals come here. It's cheap to travel.

I fear that the idea of a gated-community is a false hope.

Edited October 8, 2014 by August1991

[August1991]

I made the mistake of thinking August 1991's OP was an accurate resume of Fowlers article in the Globe and Mail...WRONG.

I quote the final 3 paras of Fowlers article:

I cannot understand how August thinks what Fowler says is what Steyn says. I should have known better especially since Steyn doesn't say anything but 'We are way better than them'.

Sorry, Peter F, I disagree. By any measure, Fowler (an Ottawa FS bureaucrat Liberal/liberal) has gone Steyn. Edited October 8, 2014 by August1991

[August1991]

Nazism and Japanese militarism were by and large limited to those nations. Global communism of the Marxist-Leninist variety was a paper tiger that crumbled as soon as its main sponsor couldn't afford to maintain it.

BD, tell that to the 50,000 American soldiers who died in Vietnam defeating "global communism... a paper tiger".

Black Dog, IMHO, you seem to take for granted too easily your freedom.

Edited October 8, 2014 by August1991

[Michael Hardner]

Have you read this thread?

Yes, but the point about colonalism was made, and whether or not a country was a colony is not as important as the ruling class and conquered peoples of that colony.

Japan was never colonized - compare how they have fared to Vietnam, for example.

[Michael Hardner]

What does colonization have to do with this 21st world issue? We are facing ignorant/backward people who barely understand Galileo and certainly don't understand Voltaire.

I guess your colonial viewpoint makes it impossible to see what colonization has to do with it.

People said the same thing about the people of Quebec, oh... fifty years ago ? ie. "How can they manage their own affairs ?

"

BlackDog or MH, where in your family's past did you or they learn about the scientific method? Understand sarcasm? Learn irony?

I'm not sure. But they learned it, so I didn't have to be the first of my family to learn it, ie. from strangers. I learned it from them.

[Michael Hardner]

BD, tell that to the 50,000 American soldiers who died in Vietnam defeating "global communism... a paper tiger".

Whether or not people died is beside the point. People do die in futile efforts, too. It doesn't make their sacrifice less noble, but it should make it clearer to us to look at the big picture: the waste that is war, the importance of establishing working governments in place of chaos.

[Argus]

Argus imagines that we can simply ignore them or isolate ourselves from them. But this is the 21st century. We go there and they can come here. Heck, these medieval people use our cellphones.

Why do people keep stating what I imagine or think? No, I wish we could ignore them, but as I HAVE ALREADY SAID SEVERAL TIMES we can't, because as the Americans learned about Afghanistan, ignoring them and hoping they'll just sit there and bother themselves doesn't work.

Yes, it would be nice to slap some kind of cordon saniaire around the whole mideast, but that's not going to happen. The crazies will come out, so it's in our interest to limit the influence and power of the crazies.

[Argus]

Japan was never colonized - compare how they have fared to Vietnam, for example.

Japan was under the direct influence and power of the US for a generation. The US turned them from a militaristic nation to a nation of pacifists. Do you think the Japan we see today would be the same had the US simply accepted their surrender and gone home?

[cybercoma]

The crazies will come out, so it's in our interest to limit the influence and power of the crazies.

Yet the things we do seem to make it worse. Decades of dropping bombs and killing innocent people isn't going to make people less radical.

[Michael Hardner]

Japan was under the direct influence and power of the US for a generation.

And they weren't colonized.

Do you think the Japan we see today would be the same had the US simply accepted their surrender and gone home?

The obvious answer is no. But they weren't colonized.

[bush_cheney2004]

Japan was under the direct influence and power of the US for a generation. The US turned them from a militaristic nation to a nation of pacifists.

Yes....unrelenting incendiary and fission bombs have a way of doing that.

[Argus]

Yet the things we do seem to make it worse. Decades of dropping bombs and killing innocent people isn't going to make people less radical.

The idea is to make them less alive.