Started By
Message

re: Muslims, Islamists, Jihadists, Terrorists

Posted on 6/4/17 at 1:34 pm to
Posted by MrCarton
Paradise Valley, MT
Member since Dec 2009
20231 posts
Posted on 6/4/17 at 1:34 pm to
quote:

no, not all of them

just a couple of strategic strikes to provide motivation to reform

like the motivation we provided to a fanatical Japan in 1945


frick yeah, because Islamic extremists and terrorists are a centralized government power just like Japan. Nothing like a few nukes on a geographical area to destroy their power base and critical requirements!

This post was edited on 6/4/17 at 1:35 pm
Posted by uway
Member since Sep 2004
33109 posts
Posted on 6/4/17 at 1:35 pm to
quote:

Yes Christianity has less direct calls for violence but let's not act like it has been impossible to find justifications in the text

Except that Christ himself provides no such justification. It's a distinction that makes all the difference in the world and totally negates the comparison.

quote:

This new style of conflict is VERY recent

The other very recent thing is widespread immigration from Muslim countries to the West. Our culture is simply incompatible with their religion, and their religion does not allow them to just live and let live.
Posted by RD Dawg
Atlanta
Member since Sep 2012
27323 posts
Posted on 6/4/17 at 1:35 pm to
quote:

Kinda like ... the original Crusades, which in the long run accomplished nothing except a lot of unnecessary death


Do what?Do you not realise the crusades were a RESPONSE to a Muslim invasion to the Holy Lands?
Posted by TrueTiger
Chicken's most valuable
Member since Sep 2004
68924 posts
Posted on 6/4/17 at 1:36 pm to
I mean, we've tried everything else many times,

what is the sense in repeating those failures?
Posted by Antonio Moss
Baton Rouge
Member since Mar 2006
48360 posts
Posted on 6/4/17 at 1:37 pm to
quote:

i loathe that culture


I think this is probably the bigger issue. While I know that most Muslims aren't terrorists, the culture of Islam, in and of itself, completely clashes with the principles of Western Civilization.

And no one has ever been able to tell me one objective benefit there is for merging the two cultures.
Posted by uway
Member since Sep 2004
33109 posts
Posted on 6/4/17 at 1:39 pm to
quote:

I mean, we've tried everything else many times


We haven't tried what worked forever before the last few decades, which is not having any Muslims in the West and not bombing them in their homelands.
Separation will solve this.
Nuking the Middle East is a ridiculously naive idea that would have apocalyptic unintended consequences.
Posted by uway
Member since Sep 2004
33109 posts
Posted on 6/4/17 at 1:40 pm to
quote:

And no one has ever been able to tell me one objective benefit there is for merging the two cultures


Keeping the Euro elite in power and sustaining the welfare state since Euros stopped reproducing. That's why they are importing them to Europe. Cant everyone see this?
Posted by TrueTiger
Chicken's most valuable
Member since Sep 2004
68924 posts
Posted on 6/4/17 at 1:40 pm to
I think segregation will work.

Good fences make good neighbors.

But you will never convince the worshipers of multiculturalism.
Posted by VOR
Member since Apr 2009
63753 posts
Posted on 6/4/17 at 1:41 pm to
quote:

Do the "tenets of islam" condone violence in the name of islam or killing an infindel who they see as a threat to Islam? Please define this better.




I assure you that Islam scholars are rare on this site.
Posted by WhiskeyPapa
Member since Aug 2016
9277 posts
Posted on 6/4/17 at 1:42 pm to
quote:

Yes Christianity has less direct calls for violence but let's not act like it has been impossible to find justifications in the text

Except that Christ himself provides no such justification. It's a distinction that makes all the difference in the world and totally negates the comparison.


"For the entire law is fulfilled in keeping this one command: “Love your neighbor as yourself.”[a]

Galatians 5:14
Posted by WhiskeyPapa
Member since Aug 2016
9277 posts
Posted on 6/4/17 at 1:44 pm to
quote:

I mean, we've tried everything else many times,



How should it work over there? What is our best policy? Using history as our guide always, we can look at the Brits going back to the Golden Age under Elizabeth.

Brit policy was to support a weaker continental country against the strongest continental country. Spain ascendant? Support the Dutch. France Ascendant? Support the Spanish. Russia a problem? Ally with France and support Turkey. Germany ascendant? Support France. Germans at your throat again? Support France again. Unceremoniously ejected from the continent? Enlist the United States.

That policy works. It worked for the Brits for 300 years. We are doing exactly the opposite in our policy currently. The ally we need in that region is IRAN. We pretty much shanghaied them into being our ally in the 1950's. After their revolution we should have enlisted them as such again. The Reagan Administration took them a cake. The Iranians have a large population they have a long and proud history and they are NOT Arab. They hate the Arabs. THEY could act as a foil to Saudi Arabia. which is our greatest enemy in the region by far, and perhaps the world.

Supporting the second strongest power in a region against the strongest is a proven policy.

We don't pursue that policy because the Jewish State doesn't like it.
Posted by TrueTiger
Chicken's most valuable
Member since Sep 2004
68924 posts
Posted on 6/4/17 at 1:46 pm to
OK.

How about we get a big muslim meat-grinder of a civil war going and let them annihilate each other?
Posted by LSU alum wannabe
Katy, TX
Member since Jan 2004
27058 posts
Posted on 6/4/17 at 1:52 pm to
quote:

completely clashes with the principles of Western Civilization.


They are literally centuries behind the rest of the world and regressing.

I was talking to a Muslim woman who is apparently going to be stoned to death at some point if returns home too many times. She was asking me, as a christian, about the practice/tradition of women wearing head garments, like Catholics at the Vatican etc. I said all that I knew (very little) which it is a very old practice that I've seen with Italians and OLD Cajun women at funerals. I do not know its origin but recall seeing quite a few at my grandparents funerals in 1987. The old school French and English rosaries.

She was trying to find the text in the Koran where women shoul wear such things. She claims that there are only a couple of passages. One about a woman covering her hair, and the other about breasts essentially. Basically stating that a woman should be modest. She's making the case that "modesty" has been over interpreted and that the full beekeeper outfit has no place in Islam?

I told her I am obviously no religious scholar, but I feel all religions have people that take one passage and used it to bastardize the entire religion. I used the example of "taking up serpents" and the Appalachian churches that do this. It is a real thing. She acted as if she'd never heard this. I told her it is a real thing, but there is a huge difference. Here they are roundly laughed at, and there it is like the Muslim "snake handler types" are running the show. I cant recall if she is from Iraq or Iran, but she says she has been stopped and questioned by the "morality police" for her western dress. I told her I'd never return if I were her. If everyone in Louisiana were told they had to take up snakes or have their hands removed, Louisiana would no longer be my home. At least not the home I once knew.

I left the conversations at that. I did not ask her how she felt personally about leaving the religion or homosexuality and appropriate punishments for such infractions.
Posted by WhiskeyPapa
Member since Aug 2016
9277 posts
Posted on 6/4/17 at 2:09 pm to
quote:

How about we get a big muslim meat-grinder of a civil war going and let them annihilate each other?



Letting them whack each other while we reap the benefits, yes that is how the Brits did it.
Posted by TX Tiger
at home
Member since Jan 2004
35703 posts
Posted on 6/4/17 at 2:32 pm to
quote:

even if i agree with you about the elite controlling so much, we are at the peak of humanity right now. it's the most peaceful era and we've taken so many steps to fight disease, poverty, hunger, etc. none of that would have occurred had the USSR won the Cold War
Why is that?
Posted by SlowFlowPro
Simple Solutions to Complex Probs
Member since Jan 2004
425838 posts
Posted on 6/4/17 at 2:39 pm to
because the USSR was terrible and regressive?
Posted by TX Tiger
at home
Member since Jan 2004
35703 posts
Posted on 6/4/17 at 2:45 pm to
quote:

You try to boil it all down to something simple, and believe that all efforts are led by insincere leadership, that we are the tools of calculating people who use these pillars of tribal identity to gather wealth for themselves.
I don't know about "all efforts," but where 9/11 and the subsequent mess in the ME is concerned, yes, that is exactly what is happening.

quote:

not only that they sometimes do it in concert with others outside their tribe to the benefit of themselves and the detriment of their own group.
Example?

quote:

Further, some of the shite you think is going on for "resources" makes absolutely no rational, economic sense even if you were an evil motherfricker trying to do what you claim! That's why you're labeled a kook.
Again, example?


Posted by TX Tiger
at home
Member since Jan 2004
35703 posts
Posted on 6/4/17 at 2:55 pm to
quote:

because the USSR was terrible and regressive?
Oh, that's right. I keep forgetting. We murder in the name of freedom and wonderfullness; everyone else murders because they are terrorists, terrible and regressive.

Why can't I seem to remember that?
Posted by chRxis
None of your fricking business
Member since Feb 2008
23810 posts
Posted on 6/4/17 at 3:26 pm to
quote:

"For the entire law is fulfilled in keeping this one command: “Love your neighbor as yourself.”[a]

Galatians 5:14



honest question, but do you personally think that this does or does not include muslims, moderate or radical?

and it's not any 'gotcha' attempt, but i just truly would like to know how a practicing Christian reconciles this statement with their actual feelings towards the world in which they live....
This post was edited on 6/4/17 at 3:28 pm
Posted by biglego
Ask your mom where I been
Member since Nov 2007
76821 posts
Posted on 6/4/17 at 3:38 pm to
quote:

Do what?Do you not realise the crusades were a RESPONSE to a Muslim invasion to the Holy Lands?

No, he's a liberal. Liberals will always believe the Crusades were white supremacists invading and colonizing the peaceful and tolerant Muslims without provocation. They'll also gleefully tell you the Crusades were an utter failure and that somehow the Crusades are even relevant today when discussing a western response to the anti-west cancer that is Islam.
first pageprev pagePage 5 of 7Next pagelast page

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitterInstagram