74 replies to this topic

[KingstonDon]

Many of the countries believe your type of education is American or European Propaganda and don't want it taught in their school systems. So, it's their own fault on that one too!

In that spirit, then your ignorance about many things in the world is not your school system's fault but rather yours. To add to that your ignorance of many things is even worse because as a westerner you have the internet and a computer at your disposal to learn more ...

Seeing as every child in a third world country has a voice in their governance ...
Seeing as very person in a third world country has a voice in their schooling ...
Seeing as every child and person in a third world country gets proper schooling.

Really? I did not know they were any different. Forgive my ignorance. We don't learn this stuff in America.

^{^remember this?}
Some governments in the middle east have long been feeding incorrect propaganda to their citizens and just like we can witness in North Korea, a dumb general public will not question it and believe all the lies given. It's not "their" fault, it's the fault of those in power with malicious intent.
As is often the case these lies are fed from an early age, just like our education is started from an early age so that we may learn quickly and well.

Those who have achieved adulthood would still linger in the ways of old. The children however is where the future would be.

where the group matters more than the individual.[/u]]

You made apparent with your answer to this that you understand naught of Middle Eastern culture.

In middle eastern culture, the culture of individualism - sociological - isn't as prominent and the role of the group i.e. "the family" is far greater.
The family as an entity has a certain honor and this family identity is far greater than any one member.
This is the reason why you would find honor-killings so prominent, because the defacing of the family's honor is seen as a crime punishable by death.

This has nothing to do with communism, you have a tendency to draw rash conclusions without previous knowledge and nuance of subjects.

Edited by KingstonDon, 22 December 2011 - 08:48 AM.

[GNR Rvolution]

The Far right in Europe is probably the moderate right in the USA. I am just trying to make you understand how the right feels about Muslim as I am a Moderate Right Wing individual.

Many of the countries believe your type of education is American or European Propaganda and don't want it taught in their school systems. So, it's their own fault on that one too!

The far right is the far right no matter where you are. We have people with just as extreme views in Europe, it's just that they are normally ignored or labelled racist, fascist or some equivalent. And to echo Kingston Don, what is taught to the masses is controlled by the government in these countries, so they learn what they are allowed to learn. But it's not so different in the west, exactly what do most people know about Islam in the US? They know what they are taught in school and more-so in this age what they see on TV, read in the papers and on forums like these. I doubt very much that many people in western culture really know anything about Islam other than the word jihad, and maybe Qu'ran.

Again, I never said that they just stood up and decided to attack the USA or to be "evil". And I've never said they were all bad. Just the extremist majority. it's been a long time coming and many would say America deserved it, which is a horrible opinion to have.

No-one is saying that 9/11 was deserved, but again it's a question of profile. How many times have civilians been killed following the war in Afghanistan and Iraq? Do people in the west really care much about this? Certainly not from my perspective, people just think 'Oh well, another few dead, never mind, it's war, these things happen.' And your use of the phrase 'extremist majority' again lends to the notion that you think most muslims harbour ill will to the West, which is not the case.

I loved how you just described the difference between Democracy and Communism there. Good job lolz! Of course the Middle East isn't communist, it's more like complete anarchy mixed with a few dictators. Which is how communism works in practice. That brings up another great question.

Well that's not quite true is it? Most of the countries have a rule of law (albeit Sharia law), the only places where anarchy rules is normally places that have been attacked by us.

Why shouldn't the US, go into those countries and try to "educate" them about democracy? As you put it. After the wars, that's what we do eventually. Although recently thanks to the internet the people have discovered a whole different world out there and are converting to democracy on their own. (See: Egypt & Arab Spring) If we want them to grow up out of their extreme traditions, this has been pretty much the only way to do so. Force the lesser of two evils onto the people and see what happens. Of course it's not ideal, but if we were living in an ideal world, there would never be any fighting over religion. Hopefully with advances in social networking and the internet those people will begin to wake up and see the error of their ways.

It's a cultural thing, you can't just go and 'educate' people about democracy, particularly if they are quite happy with the way their country is run. As you yourself pointed out, you can't educate someone who doesn't want to learn, so essentially we are trying to force democracy on middle-eastern countries at gunpoint. The Arab Spring has been good for the rise of democracy in these countries, but we have to let them come to their own decisions about this, otherwise we are hardly being very democratic ourselves.

[Shimmy]

I don't see any way to justify the fact that 76% of Pakastanis support the death penalty for apostasy. This is a nuclear armed supposedly advanced nation.

[GNR Rvolution]

I'm not a supporter of any religion, they should all be banned if you ask me, but singling out one religion above the rest and decrying them to be the only bad guys is not the way to go. I don't believe that religion should play any part in the law-making process, and these are the sorts of powers that were stripped from religions in Europe several centuries ago, but aggressive foreign policy will only make matters worse. If it wasn't for their nuclear capability I would say just leave Pakistan the hell alone, isolate them and let them work it out themselves, but because of their capabilities they have to be included in any discourse.

[jjf3]

hm. I am a bit confused by some of the comments made on this topic. I find myself to agree with Shimmy & Craven on this subject more than most people here. You say it's the culture's and the Middle East society's fault, you say it's the dictators fault and then you say we shouldn't try to force them to change? Why not! Especially when their own traditions (when a majority justify suicide bombings) are harmful to themselves. You do realize how long its going to take the Middle East, which are run by terrorists and Extremists a very long time to escape from their holy war. The majority of Muslims in the west have but even then there are still those who secretly support it or can finance it thanks to American money. You do realize what hate filled propaganda is being taught in schools like Saudi Arabia and in those countries before the wars right? You are very lucky to have grown up in Europe or USA. You can't go around blaming everyone else for the extremists actions. They do what they do and there is very little you can do to change that. US tried with aggressive foreign policy and of course it doesn't work as nicely as our leaders would have us believe. If a war doesn't work what will? Surely not education lolz. But I think Iraq was the last "pointless war" as Ron Paul says. We'll see more little wars with Drones and such when we want to target a group of terrorists that want to kill us half way around the world.

The Nuclear issue is definitely a threat. Iran could definitely sell bombs to our enemies-- the terrorist groups. Again you can't justify terrorist actions, you can't cooperate with terrorists, and you can't educate/talk to them. At least we tried to do something about it! You can't kill an idea and the extreme idea is growing over there. They have more Billionaire financiers and believers. Remember Nazi Germany? Yeah only 3% of their population were actually Nazis and that sparked a holy war against all Jews! Before you start attacking me for that statement about Nazis I think it is very appropriate to use that statistic here, when talking about minorities and holy wars. So your solution is to just sit patiently and wait for them to grow up? Directly after 9/11 we couldn't afford to do that. Remember they attacked us! So I say, what can you do?

I find it laughable that some people would defend the "poor terrorists" and then attack me with past examples of my ignorance and supposed propaganda based education. Most people in those countries allow religion to run their lives (as PEW statistics shows) and that's where the extreme stuff seeps into their culture. Plus I would say some of them are probably just plain evil. Just like how you attack the Extremists in your own countries. KIngston started this discussion by saying how much he hated the right's attitude towards Muslims. Why do you justify the Extremists actions in the Middle East, then? That's why i said it's a contradiction. You attack the right wingers but then stick up for terrorists who are worse extremists! And you talk about how there is an extremist problem, you can't pick and choose which extremist you like better. I don't know why you want to stick up for terrorists and attack me instead. That's just ridiculous. If you really wanted to stick up for the minority, then try to agree with me on occasion. I wish we had a terrorist on this forum to support his viewpoint. Then you'll see that I'm basically right on most of my talking points. I've seen em on some other larger international forums, and they are usually written off as trolls because they use religious verses to justify their hate filled attitude to the west. Good luck trying to force his mind to change or to speak to him about logic or social engineering. But then again, they would never go onto a Forum about the future especially one so Eurocentrical. Warning they hate Europe almost as much as US!

Edited by jjf3, 22 December 2011 - 04:19 PM.

[GNR Rvolution]

I am not trying to defend terrorism or extremism, and I am not trying to attack you personally, but I'm am trying to point out that although many of these terrorists do so under the banner of Islam, what they actually do has little or nothing to do with the religion itself. The only way to defeat terrorism is to understand why these people go down this path in the first place and deal with the underlying problems. It can be a mutlitude of reasons from political and religious intolerance to geographical or historical association, but going in guns blazing under the banner of democracy is not going to get rid of terrorists. Look at the Israel / Palestine situation, why do you think the Palestinians carry out suicide bombings? A large part of it is because they feel they have no other way to express their plight, it doesn't mean that they are right to do so, but it's why they do what they do. On the nuclear front, I'm not sure that we will ever see terrorist attack carried out with nukes, people are so aware of the implications of a nuclear attack that any attack would lead to a globalised response to the attack in the same way that 9/11 did but on an even more unified scale. Actually bioterrorism scares me far more than the nuclear threat, did you see the work that was being carried out in the Netherlands recently? Or the company that was asked to redact a paper on H1N5 showing how to cross-infect species?

[jjf3]

I am not trying to defend terrorism or extremism, and I am not trying to attack you personally, but I'm am trying to point out that although many of these terrorists do so under the banner of Islam, what they actually do has little or nothing to do with the religion itself. The only way to defeat terrorism is to understand why these people go down this path in the first place and deal with the underlying problems. It can be a mutlitude of reasons from political and religious intolerance to geographical or historical association, but going in guns blazing under the banner of democracy is not going to get rid of terrorists. Look at the Israel / Palestine situation, why do you think the Palestinians carry out suicide bombings? A large part of it is because they feel they have no other way to express their plight, it doesn't mean that they are right to do so, but it's why they do what they do.

Religion definitely has a major part in it. Did you read the PEW Stats? It states that nearly 95% of those countries do not want separation of their religion and politics and that is unfortunately the root cause of the problem. The left feels that the Right does what they do based on the Christian Religion and yet, when talking about Muslims extremists they find any other excuse but religion to try and justify their actions. I think screaming Allah at the top of their lungs and praying eight times per day before carrying out such horrific acts of violence speaks for itself. Until they are willing to grow up out of this Dark Age nonsense with religious mythology ruling their everyday lives, I say that the Muslim population will always be at a disadvantage and the West will do everything they can to try and change that or stop their progress, either one.

Edited by jjf3, 23 December 2011 - 03:20 PM.

[Craven]

I'm am trying to point out that although many of these terrorists do so under the banner of Islam, what they actually do has little or nothing to do with the religion itself.

It's only partially true. Of course if their situation and life conditions were diffrent terrorism rate would go down. And of course there are political acts of terrorism (IRA). But still majority cases feature suicide attacks by religious fanatics, that are convinced that it's act of jihad and they'll be rewarded with uncertain number of virgins. So I'd say religion is pretty damn important, key factor.

[GNR Rvolution]

Sorry, been away for a few days with the family for xmas. Look I see what you guys are saying, and I know where you are coming from, but try to look past the muslim angle. Who is behind the suicide bombers? It is people who are ordering or carrying out these acts for their own ends, not that of the greater good of Allah. It just so happens that they carry it out under the banner of islam, but if these were catholic countries they would find a way to use that faith to carry out the same atrocities. Yes, the Islamic faith has it problems, all major world religions do, but as ever the people running the show are doing it for their own ends, not that of religious zeal (depsite what they might claim). Same with the crusades, it was done under the banner of the church, but essentially it was about acquiring wealth, land and power for those in charge. Or maybe I'm wrong. Problem is I don't believe in God, never have and never will, and I have my doubts about those (certainly the ones in power) who claim faith guides them. I'd prefer to believe it's power that guides them, and they are primarily using faith to further their own ends.

[jjf3]

I do understand what you are saying and it's true the leaders are corrupt but they use Islam to justify those actions. I think every war has had some type of religious backing. Weather it would be the war on terror, revolutionary war, WWII, etc... The wars happen because people believe in different myths and different traditions. That's how political instability across the Middle East got started with the Shiites and the Sunnis. Any western scholar knows that Shiites and Sunnis have very similar traditions and they hate each other over a few tiny religious differences! While Resources and Oil are always part of war, that gets dragged in later once things become political and global. And again, Islam is highly rooted in the political ideology of not just the leaders but all the Middle Eastern people. They live in a shithole, so of course religion and faith is pretty much all they have!

[Craven]

Who is behind the suicide bombers? It is people who are ordering or carrying out these acts for their own ends, not that of the greater good of Allah. It just so happens that they carry it out under the banner of islam, but if these were catholic countries they would find a way to use that faith to carry out the same atrocities.

Did any of them got money or power by conducting acts of terrorism?

[truthiness]

Did any of them got money or power by conducting acts of terrorism?

Terrorism is the business of inducing fear asymmetric to your actual force. Fear is like the superhighway to power.

Ask my man Grand Moff Tarkin, over here... he'll tell you...


"Fear will keep the systems in line - fear of this battlestation"

[Craven]

I love your post, but really - only US goverment got more and more power due to terrorism.

[truthiness]

Oh, no question about that! But the US aren't the only ones who rule or who command respect in this world through fear and intimidation, though the US is easily the best at what they do in that regard. I'd point to the Russians under Putin, the North Koreans (of course), Israel, any of the various strongmen running Latin American countries at any given time, any of the Arabian states that have been seeing uprisings, the Taliban in Afghanistan, just about anywhere in Africa from Mugabe's Zimbabwe to the Mad Max libertarian paradise of Somalia to the oil and blood-drenched Niger Delta. It's all power through fear. Fear of being found out and imprisoned, tortured, or outright murdered by the police is in many ways just as much terrorism as the fear of being blown up for saying or doing something that might offend someone else's god. The tactics become more sophisticated as more power is obtained. As to committing acts of terrorism and then obtaining power, I don't think it quite works that way. Terrorism is just a starting point down the road to power. Power through fear is very much the end objective to just about any act of terrorism, but the terrorist act is not meant to immediately acquire power. The second step is to leverage fear with a promise of security if "the enemy" (say, the democratic government in charge who is elected by a majority, but who the terrorist, who happens to be in the minority, despises) is brought down. At first, the people will naturally side with the government against the terrorists, but if the terrorist can demonstrate that the government is inept to protect the people, the terrorist can begin gaining support through fear and intimidation. The next step is to "go legit", stop blowing up marketplaces, form a political party, and begin intimidating for votes while simultaneously promising reforms and perhaps a restoration of some former glory, usually through an expanded military. A scapegoat can be helpful at this point for the up-and-coming powerful ex-terrorist. Once power is obtained and the loyalty of the military is secured, any trappings of democracy are removed and you have yourself a new authoritarian regime. This formula has been followed in one way or another several times in history from the Red Terror in Russia to Batista or Castro in Cuba to revolutionary Iran to Hamas in Palestine.

[jjf3]

Oh, no question about that! But the US aren't the only ones who rule or who command respect in this world through fear and intimidation, though the US is easily the best at what they do in that regard. I'd point to the Russians under Putin, the North Koreans (of course), Israel, any of the various strongmen running Latin American countries at any given time, any of the Arabian states that have been seeing uprisings, the Taliban in Afghanistan, just about anywhere in Africa from Mugabe's Zimbabwe to the Mad Max libertarian paradise of Somalia to the oil and blood-drenched Niger Delta. It's all power through fear. Fear of being found out and imprisoned, tortured, or outright murdered by the police is in many ways just as much terrorism as the fear of being blown up for saying or doing something that might offend someone else's god. The tactics become more sophisticated as more power is obtained.

I totally agree with your last paragraph but this paragraph has me puzzled. You mean to say that you put the US in the same category as the drug/gun lords of the deserts of Africa? Yes, US does use intimidation on the countries we deem as our enemies but I think that's stretching it a little bit don't you? Yes, the government is too big, but we Americans know that we have the most prospered and the most freedom, even though we may not be enjoying as much freedom since before 9/11. Fear and Intimidation is needed in this world. Not everyone is going to follow the rules just because someone else sets them in place.

[truthiness]

hm... In the sense that the US government is not shy about using fear of external or internal security threats to wrest rights away from its own citizens (see the Patriot Act or this recent Defense Authorization Act) or using intimidation of military and economic power to ensure that foreign powers stay in line (as in our deployments around the world, the global navy, and the missile defense shield in eastern Europe), I would say that the US is similar to these regimes, yes. I think the difference lies in that the US does not need to actually demonstrate its power through violent acts, at least to its own citizens (Occupy crackdowns notwithstanding, I guess).

[jjf3]

hm... In the sense that the US government is not shy about using fear of external or internal security threats to wrest rights away from its own citizens (see the Patriot Act or this recent Defense Authorization Act) or using intimidation of military and economic power to ensure that foreign powers stay in line (as in our deployments around the world, the global navy, and the missile defense shield in eastern Europe), I would say that the US is similar to these regimes, yes. I think the difference lies in that the US does not need to actually demonstrate its power through violent acts, at least to its own citizens (Occupy crackdowns notwithstanding, I guess).

That's interesting you would say this. I still confused why YOU would say this though. I thought you were a liberal? Conservatives are the ones who usually say that the human race in born greedy and competitive. Liberals usually like to omit this and only see the good in society and think the evilness can be erased.

Oh, and with occupy the people were asked to leave and they refused thereby breaking the laws. Police had every right to crackdown. Protests aren't above the law no matter how "peaceful" they seem to be.

Edited by jjf3, 02 January 2012 - 07:01 PM.

[Craven]

we Americans know that we have the most prospered and the most freedom, even though we may not be enjoying as much freedom since before 9/11. Fear and Intimidation is needed in this world. Not everyone is going to follow the rules just because someone else sets them in place.

Wow, man. Please read your post once again.

[jjf3]

Wow, man. Please read your post once again.

According to Truthiness any form of enforcing laws is so called fear so that's all I meant by saying fear and intimidation is needed in this world especially with counties not willing to follow international law!

[Craven]

Interesting choice of words.

"Fear and Intimidation is needed in this world' = "we need rules", that's pretty much depiction of how USA justifies it's actions. Fighting for freedom everywhere outside it's borders, while giving it's citizens presents like NDAA. I really don't see americans as aware of fact that they prospered due to freedom. If that would be the case, they wouldn't let this freedom be flushed in toiled. And don't think that american wealth came from freedom. It came from overtaking big country and over 200 years of slavery.

It's strange how badly americans know their history. Believing that their wealth came from freedom, covinced that it was always "In god we trust" as their motto... It really looks like Orwell's Animal Farm