Page 8 of 9 FirstFirst ... 3456789 LastLast
Results 141 to 160 of 161
  1. #141  
    Quote Originally Posted by treobk214
    the point was about comparing islamic extremism to christian fundamentalism
    The Crusades were nothing but kittens and rainbows!!
  2. #142  
    And I'm giving an example of something widely seen - whether you agree with the view or not - as an unprovoked act of christian terrorism.
    Animo et Fide
  3.    #143  
    eurokitty, reread the posts.
    the crusades were in the past. what are christians doing now that compares to that scale?
    I can see you simply want to get argumentative.
    bush's affairs with bin laden's family are beside the point. clinton's NON-INVOLVMENT WITH THEM protected us none the better did he. lol. yes... indeed. let's talk
  4.    #144  
    do you think it was better having hussein terrorism in iraq was better than your so-d
  5. #145  
    Quote Originally Posted by treobk214
    bush did not set the islamic extremists attack-fury in motion all on his own, now. this element of the islam was in motion long before any bush was in the picture. that fact is undeniable.
    this is the difference between the two.
    You mentioned the past in your post above, hence my Crusades comment.
  6.    #146  
    sure people are dying in iraq now, but with hussein in power, with his track record, many more would have been either killed, maimed, tortured, etc. whether or not he did this in the name if islamic extremism ( I think it was independent of religion, I think he was simply a purely vicious man ) he might still be an example of extremism in that section of the world.
  7. #147  
    I'm not making any moral judgement, just giving you an example of something people in the middle east would consider current Christian terrorism.
    Animo et Fide
  8. #148  
    Quote Originally Posted by treobk214
    . the islam extremists are behaving in a manner that regresses to the barbaric middle ages - when the christians were committing their acts- not in a manner that reflects any degree of evolutionary progress most of the rest of the world has made in modern civilization. it would appear for the most part the christians have evolved beyond that behavior. the islamic extremists have not.
    If someone gets killed by an IRA bomb, or gets killed by an al queda bomb, both acts are barbaric and despicable, I see no difference. Are the muslims' victims deader than the christians' victims or were they more innocent? Is one worse or more barbaric? no!
    Last edited by cellmatrix; 09/14/2004 at 02:58 PM.
  9. #149  
    I think treobk214 has a point (and forgive me if I'm misrepresenting it):
    There is a great deal of widespread, organized violence conducted by self-proclaimed Muslims for the express purpose of defending/promoting Islam. Furthermore, the targets of this violence are often civilians.
    While Christians are also responsible for a great deal of violence, their religion is incidental. That is to say, they are not violent with the immediate or express purpose of defending/promoting Christianity. Furthermore, this violence is rarely directed against civilians.

    Is that about right?

  10.    #150  
    eurokitty, my point in mentioning the crusades was that yes, christianity was guilty of that behavior BACK IN THE MIDDLE AGES. it has evolved beyond that in the current day. if you read my posts I am trying to tell you that all religions are guilty of some form of atrocity, oppression, etc. but not to the degree that the islamic extremists are RIGHT NOW. in the current day. the crusades are in the past. and yes the kkk and ignorant groups like this are guilty of crimes in the name of christianity. but these crimes pale in comparison to the acts being committed by these islamic extremists.
    christianity has its own history of crime. I stated that. but I also stated that it has for the most part evolved beyond the slaughtering mentality of the barbaric middle ages. islamic extremists, eurokitty, have NOT.
  11.    #151  
    yes nareau, thankyou. that is the point I am trying to convey here. appreciated!
  12.    #152  
    cellmatrix, on the grand scale, I am saying islamic extremists are far more representative of such terrorist bombings. at this moment in history, it cannot be denied that islamic extremists are THE biggest threat to modern civilization.
    all religions are guilty of atrocity in one form or another, but the islamic extremists tip the scale unquestionably.
  13. #153  
    Quote Originally Posted by treobk214
    at this moment in history, it cannot be denied that islamic extremists are THE biggest threat to modern civilization.
    Honestly, I have to disagree with you there. I think the existance of nuclear weapons presents the biggest threat to modern civilization. Well, that, and zombies.

    I also disagree with the statement:
    it (Christianity) has evolved beyond that in the current day
    I personally see that for the most part, people are evil *despite* their religion, not because of it. It wouldn't surprise me in the least if a nation were to commit even greater atrocities in the name of Jehovah.

    There aren't that many religions out there that consistently forbid killing or harming other people. Those that do forbid it don't generally end up with adherents who control powerful nations.

  14.    #154  
    I return you to the point I am trying to make. yes all religions have evil cowards of some sort hiding behind their religion.
    ALL RELIGIONS HAVE THIS. but on the whole, christianity does NOT operate as it once did cruelly slaughtering mass numbers of innocents. it just doesn't.
    islamic extremists would have this done to their enemies if they had the means. christianity does not behavr this way on the grand scale, so christianity have evolved further than the world of islamic extremism has. there is just simply NO comparison.
  15.    #155  
    regarding nuclear weapons - of course that is the greatest threat - but that is not an ideology or religion. I am talking about the single greatest threat by way of religion to civilization.
  16. #156  
    Quote Originally Posted by nareau
    There is a great deal of widespread, organized violence conducted by self-proclaimed Muslims for the express purpose of defending/promoting Islam. Furthermore, the targets of this violence are often civilians.
    This seems reasonable, especially if you consider suicide attacks. Some of the most frightening "inventions" in human history so far (as far as ideological "technology" goes) are the methodologies used to motivate people to perform this sort of violence. I mean, honestly, Catholic guilt has nothing on simply convincing people it's not only okay to blow themselves up along with 50 or so of their neighbors but that it would be a good thing to do. It's not something that's unique to Muslim extremist terrorist groups (look at Japan's emperor-worship up to, and including, WWII), but they do seem to be engaging this sort of activity more than any other group right now.

    As far as the title of "Biggest Threat to Modern Civilization" goes, I think it would be a good idea to be as specific as possible when we talk about this kind of thing. The problem we find is that Muslim extremists are resorting to terrorism and they are killing people. That's just not good. That's got to stop. I think we can stop it, I think we can fight it. But we've got to be very clear exactly what we are trying to stop. So it would be good to avoid loose, inclusive statements like "All Muslims should be rounded up and shot." That doesn't help.

    Which sort of leads to looking for long term solutions for this problem: how did we get to this situation? What can we do, what can we all do, to resolve the source of this conflict? At that point we get into, at least, discussions of how fundamentalist (as opposed to extremist) or even mainstream religious groups interact with one another.

    Oooh, I'm feeling all optimistic. How strange. We'll be alright! Yeah!!

    ...Well, assuming we survive the zombies, anyway.
  17.    #157  
    lol. yeah I don't think the islamic extremists have anything on the zombies.

    I've never supported the whole " round all the muslims up" kind of thinking. that would be the surefire way to have not only the islamic extremists against us, but ALL of the muslim world against us.
    no that is not the way to combat the problem. the majority of muslims are peaceful people. we need to work WITH them to stomp out the extremists in the world.
    I agree in that we have to choose our battles in the future wisely in this fight, this is for sure.
    there is a way out of this I believe. I think it is by becoming close allies with the muslim world and maintaining close communication with them.
    in doing this we would meet each other on an equal plateau, and would leave these extremists out in the cold - lonely, with no sympathizing nations to safehouse them.
    if america and the western world can meet the muslim world in peaceful, proactive, and constructive ways, we can derail this train that the islamic extremists are trying to put the rest of the muslim world on.
    we can & should fight them, but I also think the single-most effective move we need to prevail will be our alliance with the muslim world, and our joined battle against the world of islamic extremism.
  18. #158  
    Hear hear. And that's why we need to take muslim popular opinion into account when conducting foreign relations, not just rely on the US 'leading' opinion.
    Animo et Fide
  19. #159  
    Dubius legality? Where does that impression come from? Nothing illegal about it. The problem with it is that our "friends" were in the pool alsok, right there helping Saddam avoid doing what he had said he would. Right down to the UNs Oil for Food program that was so very crooked. France was in the middle of it. Germany was in the middle of it. Russia was in the middle of it. The UN was in the middle of it. No wonder our "traditional friends" did not want to become involved. They were guity with their hands covered with it. Illegal? No. Immoral on the part of our "friends" is what one might say.



    Quote Originally Posted by PeterBrown
    Can you see the argument that when Bush launches a war of dubious legality and kills thousands of people and uses his religion constantly in a political context then the iraq war is widely seen as a current act of christian terrorism, at least in the islamic world?
  20. #160  
    Well, how do you describe someone directly responsible for the killing of 300,000 of his country's citizens? Murderer? Sure, why not. He would still be at it if the United States, Great Britain and their allies had not done something about it. Strictly legal.



    Quote Originally Posted by PeterBrown
    Well this goes back to my reason why I had no problem with the invasion of afghanistan but a big one with the invasion of iraq - you couldn't describe Saddam as an Islamic extremist.
Page 8 of 9 FirstFirst ... 3456789 LastLast

Posting Permissions