News America you don't know what you've done.

[Alias]

That is why I included the clarification of terms in this thread.

What is correct is that the dominating ideology of Islamism is violent.

I was trying to get people to notice that there is a proper distinction between Muslims and Islamists. I think, though that whoever coined the phrase could have done better, because for weeks I've been thinking that there must be some alternative spelling of Islamics or that people were using an incorrect term and should have been using the term Muslims when in fact they were using the term Islamists correctly in describing particular terrorists.

 

[russ_watters]

I have to totally, utterly, disagree. Just a question for you guys that think this -- are you basing this just on vague media reports, or on Moslems you know? Half my family is Moslem (and living in Iran to boot), and I run into lots of other Persians and Arabs around here. Islam is not a violent religion!

Damgo, reread my post. You completely and utterly missed my point.

I said explicitly that I do not believe the vast majority of muslims are violent. What I said is:

the violent ones are in charge

 

[damgo]

Russ, that wasn't directed at you... I just pulled that quote without looking. Mainly I have noticed a general trend by some Americans to think Islam is inherently violent; which is unfortunately understandable if your main contact with Islam is hearing Saddam or Hamas calling for martyrdom. I beat this drum to try and get a better picture across; I'm not trying to accuse anyone.

 

[drag]

Greetings !

Originally posted by LURCH
Would anyone have an idea as to how much of the Arab or Muslim world is of this persuasion? From things I've seen in recent years, it would appear to be a very large segment, perhaps even the majority?

There's a wonderful invention called television -
use it(and I'm not talking about these times in
particular).

Look at their countries and societies. If it were
not for their oil and the money they get from it
for many decades. If it were not for the USSR
that supported them militarily, scientificly/
educationaly and financialy because of their oil
and because they were seen as allies
against the west. If it were not for their oil
and connected external influences they'd be
in a much worse situation than those "3d world"
countries in Africa. In fact, I'm pretty sure that
the africans, given the same treatment, could've
had a well developed continent by now.
If their oil ended in the next few years as some
predict is possible they will totally collapse.

Ever seen their non-religous population segments ?
I haven't. Every friday they all go and listen
and guess what they're told...

Live long and prosper.

 

[drag]

Greetings !

Originally posted by sir-pinski
Was the Christian faith (not the religious institution) or for that matter the Bible to blame for the Witch Hunts or for the Spanish Inquisition?

You forgot the main part - the Crusades.
Nevertheless, those were different times. In the
modern world people are (supposed to be) more
"inlighted".

Originally posted by sir-pinski
...doesn't mean the religion is the problem.

In my personal view - ANY religion is a problem.
But, then again, look at some of the religions
in eastern asia. They seem to prove both you and
me wrong. Not only that they include no violence
whatsoever unlike Islam and never had violent
followers, they also value the kind of values
that I think many people should follow.(Although
the God/gods part is always in the way -
maybe if it were reformed to "optimal for the
human mind behaviour mode" or something.)

Live long and prosper.

 

[drag]

Originally posted by sir-pinski
I don't know much of the history to these faiths...

Ooops... Now that WAS bloody, indeed.
Purhaps, what is required at the basis of
a peaceful religion is an ancient war - to
keep the "evil" in sight.

Live long and prosper.

 

[kat]

Originally posted by damgo
I have to totally, utterly, disagree. Just a question for you guys that think this -- are you basing this just on vague media reports, or on Moslems you know? Half my family is Moslem (and living in Iran to boot), and I run into lots of other Persians and Arabs around here. Islam is not a violent religion! It has its fair share of fanatics, and even mainstream Moslem leaders love to call on God and martyrdom to support their pet conflicts; but that doesn't mean much.

Well..aren't there fairly large differences between Iranian(also non-arabic) moslems and the moslem religions of arabic countries? I've never really delved into the Iranian peoples "physcological" mindset but considering they don't even speak the same language...
Also, I believe any ideal can become violent if harnessed correctly, not just god based ideals..and I believe anyone who follows the media in many ME Arabic countries must admit that these ideals are definitely being harnessed to incite violence and hatred.
My children are first generation Arab/American and I too have personal connections to the Arabic world..I have heard some extremely bizarre and prejudicial beliefs, I have read these repeatedly in mainstream arabic media...So, there is a dangerous combination of idealistic religious based fervor, race prejudice, media instigated hatred that falls upon, in many cases either young impressionable and educated minds or..on the other end of the spectrum the uneducated but just as easily impressed.
In countries where the government influences and in most cases controls the media..one has to question whether the media is reflective of the peoples beliefs or if the peoples beliefs are reflective of what the media is educating them to believe. Of course then again, if you delve into what is being taught the children in many ME arabic countries schools..you again see these hate based myths being instilled in young minds.
For me the big question is, who profits from this? It's obviously NOT the common people of these countries..it's obviously not those who are the brunt of their hatred..so that leaves who?
I apologize for the rambling nature of my post, I'm just putting forth my own insights.

 

[Alias]

Originally posted by sir-pinski

What about Taoism? Anybody know the roots to this?

1 : a Chinese mystical philosophy traditionally founded by Lao-tzu in the 6th century B.C. that teaches conformity to the Tao by unassertive action and simplicity.
2 : a religion developed from Taoist philosophy and folk and Buddhist religion and concerned with obtaining long life and good fortune often by magical means

 

[russ_watters]

Russ, that wasn't directed at you... I just pulled that quote without looking. Mainly I have noticed a general trend by some Americans to think Islam is inherently violent; which is unfortunately understandable if your main contact with Islam is hearing Saddam or Hamas calling for martyrdom. I beat this drum to try and get a better picture across; I'm not trying to accuse anyone.

Fair enough.

One thing though: what about the Moral Imperative? The Moral Imperative states that if you see a moral injustice being comitted and you have the power to stop it, you are bound by your morality to do so. I realize that's easier said than done, but regardless, it doesn't make the average Joe muslim a moral person if he doesn't openly object (at the very least) to the violence of his leaders.

A clearer (more extreme) example (the usual one): Nazi Germany. Were the majority of Germans violent/evil people? I doubt it. Did they understand what their government was doing was as evil as evil gets in this world? Probably. That they didn't attempt to stop it (most of them) makes them complicit.

Peaceful muslims need to step up and take control of their religion. It would appear that that is happening in Iran. But that's a rarity.

Or perhaps certain western actions persuade these people to become fundamentalists. A lot of resentment can be generated this way. How would you feel if a large country simply threw it's weight around just to get what it wants without considering you. This has happened numerous times through history (in the US as well as other countries) and always causes problems.

One problem with that thesis - the US throws its weight around EVERYWHERE. And this doesn't cause hatred everywhere - only in some places. Germans and Frenchies disagree with us (pretty srongly) right now but they aren't flying airplanes into buildngs. WHY? Their disagreement is purely political (and economic). Islamic extremist hatred for the US is that plus religious, cultural, and racial. Those last 3 differences are where the hatred comes from - and there is nothing we can do to change that.

Just because someone does something terrible in the name of religion doesn't mean the religion is the problem.

Its not that simple. Sometimes it is impossible to separate the religion from the actions being taken in the name of the reigion. Untl Martin Luther, the Catholic Church WAS christianity and it was horribly corrupt. It was not possible to go against the Catholic church and still be a christian.

Maybe we need a Muslim Martin Luther?

 

[russ_watters]

Well I think it's a bit stronger than just strong disagreement at the moment. From what I have seen there is a growing resentment for the US, it's policies and cultural attitudes. It's not just the "frenchies" and the germans either. Anti-US sentiment is heavily on the increase in the UK and a large number of other countries which were previously quite close to the US. This is not just a war thing either, this has been on the increase for several years.

Thats my point! With all this anti-american sentiment, is a war likely between Germany and the US? Terrorism? Not even remotely possible. WHY!? Because our disagreements are only political and economic, not racial, religious, and cultural.

 

[kyleb]

well no one suggested that this would insight Germans to become terrorists anyway russ.

 

[LURCH]

Originally posted by kyleb
well no one suggested that this would insight Germans to become terrorists anyway russ.

But it has been suggested that this is what causes middle eastern muslims to become terrorists. What Russ seems to be saying is that these social differences must not be the true cause because if they were, they would insiight Germans (or the French, or whomever had these same grievances).

 

[kyleb]

well we are just having disagreements with the Germans at the moment, it is not like we have been oppressing them almost constantly for nearly a millennium.

 

[Njorl]

I think that one reason terrorism sprouts in the Arab and Muslim world is that there is no other vent for dissatisfaction. There is no political freedom. About the only two things one is free to express are one's faith, and anti-Westernism. Dissatisfaction with your government is not healthy to express.

Njorl

 

[drag]

Originally posted by Njorl
I think that one reason terrorism sprouts in the Arab and Muslim world is that there is no other vent for dissatisfaction. There is no political freedom. About the only two things one is free to express are one's faith, and anti-Westernism. Dissatisfaction with your government is not healthy to express.

Indeed. You have a point there Njorl.

Live long and prosper.

 

[kat]

Originally posted by Njorl
I think that one reason terrorism sprouts in the Arab and Muslim world is that there is no other vent for dissatisfaction. There is no political freedom. About the only two things one is free to express are one's faith, and anti-Westernism. Dissatisfaction with your government is not healthy to express.

Njorl

Ah com'on guys..this is true in part...but who would they focus on if they weren't encouraged by their media and schoolbooks to hate the evil U.S. and those blood sucking jews? Ooops, could it be they'd lash out at their own (put numerous appropriate adjectives here) rulers?
What is the value of creating an enemy for your restless and dissatisfied subjects to focus their anger on? priceless?

 

[kyleb]

Originally posted by kat
What is the value of creating an enemy for your restless and dissatisfied subjects to focus their anger on? priceless?

well i think it is worthless, i just wish i could convince people like you of that.

 

[kat]

Originally posted by kyleb
well i think it is worthless, i just wish i could convince people like you of that.

Well, give up..you'll never convince people like me..that is if you even have the insight to grasp what type of people I am.
It's certainly not worthless ..in fact I dare say it's rather costly, probably in more ways then your limited self hating american type persona allows for..but it is indeed worth something and those that profit hugely by creating hatred aren't just the pastie faced anglo saxon's sitting on the front stoop of corporate america that you and your tunnel vision are entirely consumed with.

 

[kyleb]

you must be talking to someone other than me considering i don't have a "self hating" issue, or tunnel vision for that matter.

 

[LURCH]

Originally posted by kyleb
well we are just having disagreements with the Germans at the moment, it is not like we have been oppressing them almost constantly for nearly a millennium.

And we have been constantly oppressing the Arabs? How did we oppress them back before this country existed ("nearly a millenium")?

 

[kyleb]

well that would be our European ancestors i am referring to there.

 

[drag]

Greetings !

Originally posted by kat
What is the value of creating an enemy for your restless and dissatisfied subjects to focus their anger on?
priceless?

Indeed.

Originally posted by kyleb
well i think it is worthless, i just wish i could convince people like you of that.

Originally posted by kat
It's certainly not worthless ..in fact I dare say it's rather costly, probably in more ways then your limited self hating american type persona allows for..

Indeed.
(And, no offense, but you don't exactly need a
phsycology PhD to figure that out kyleb...)

Live long and prosper.

 

[Nicool003]

I know this is way off topic but drag I notice that in your last few post you seem to be favoring the word "indeed"

Indeed

 

[Nicool003]

sorry to bring this up again but I was horrified when I saw this

i am talking about the similarities between wiping out gangs who you don't get along with and religions you don't get along with.

They aren't similar Kyle! How can you evem SAY that?? Religions= peaceful group of people that believe in a common thing. Gangs= group of crap heads that do drugs and other illegal things. HOW CAN YOU EVEN COMPARE THEM?

 

[kyleb]

argh Nicool003, i don't think you would understand no matter how much effort i put into anwsering your question.

 

[russ_watters]

But it has been suggested that this is what causes middle eastern muslims to become terrorists. What Russ seems to be saying is that these social differences must not be the true cause because if they were, they would insiight Germans (or the French, or whomever had these same grievances).

Yes, that's exactly what I was getting at.

well we are just having disagreements with the Germans at the moment, it is not like we have been oppressing them almost constantly for nearly a millennium.

well that would be our European ancestors i am referring to there.

Kyle, that just doesn't fit. Clearly the hatred coming from the middle east is focused on the US and Israel. And its only the past 50 years.

 

[kyleb]

oh come on, that is the current hot topic; but even if you do want to forget history, there still are many people who do not.

 

[Siv]

Originally posted by Alias
Not all people are good, just because they are human. Some people are bad. Some people have no consideration for their fellow humans and never will. These people are best left alone. Unfortunately, sometimes these people wish to impose their will on you, your friends or your family. When this happens, it is necessary to act. And yes sometimes when you act, it is like agitating a hornets nest. Things sometimes become more difficult. But that's life. You deal with the threat, absorb your loses, and move on.

Of course, when dealing with dangerous human beings, you have a couple of options. One method is to imprison, rehabilitate, and then release. Another is to kill. Sometimes the former is not effective. That leaves us with the latter. Sadam, his followers, and every anti-western terrorist falls under the last category. The best thing that can be done, for the sake of humanity, is to kill these people. I know it sounds harsh, but it is the only viable alternative.

And that's how all the bloody wars in history have been justified. They're evil. They're not like us. They're so bad. We're so good. Kill them.

Unfortunately, the same lines can be used for the other party too. To incite them to kill you.

Us vs. them. Our innate xenophobia and ethnocentrism. Human nature.

Earlier it was to one of the wandering tribes of hunter-gatherers that you pledged allegiance to. Now its a piece of land in which you (or your ancestors) happened to be born in. " My country, right or wrong ".
Or rather ... " This piece of land with artificial borders, in which my ancestors happened to be born in. I am prepared to die for this piece of land and kill all those who happened to have ancestors born in other pieces of land bordered by other artificial boundaries. "
Patriotism is as dangerous a religion as Islam or Christianity. Because, like them, it is also based on nothing real. An outcome of our cavemen environments. Our brains are still very much in the stone age.

The US government has always been particularly successfull at doing this. They sell patriotism like soaps and shampoo. And the people (some of them, at least) lap it up. No wonder, because it appeals to their natures. Its nice to think of the world as being delineated into clear blacks and whites. Like in the movies. The good men and the bad men. The good men always end up killing the bad and what better justification for that than the "fact" that they're bad - oh, so bad, completely evil. Evil Commies. Evil Saddam. Good Americans.
Black and white.

I wish life and human nature were that simple.

- S.

 

[russ_watters]

Siv, you are close but you have one major error in your operating premise:

xenophobia and ethnocentrism

Your definition of patriotism is incorrect. Patriotism is simply love of your country. It is not blind and it is not exclusionary. What you are describing is NATIONALISM and though similar to patriotism, it is essentially a dead concept in the western world. The death of nationalism is the reason the western world isn't fighting internally anymore. Certainly some of the elements of nationalism such as xenophobia and ethnocentrism still exist, but to a much more limited extent than say in 1938.

 

[Alias]

Originally posted by Siv
And that's how all the bloody wars in history have been justified. They're evil. They're not like us. They're so bad. We're so good. Kill them.

You forgot the part about how they want to kill us.

I wish that we could separate the world into two groups. One group could be the group that wants to kill everyone and everything related to western culture. The other group would be the "I'm cool, if you're cool" group. Then we could begin to kill the people in the "We want to kill the west" group, one at a time, giving each one of them a chance to abondon their hate.

What you fail to understand is that as long as nobody bugs me while I'm eating, I'm easy to get along with. Live and let live. Do your own thing, man. You know what I mean?

911 taught me that there are some out there that have no regard for my life, PERSONALLY, and that they would like to kill me even though they don't know me. As far as I know, I was in the trailer park that day working on my truck. I didn't oppress anyone. I didn't murder anyone. I didn't force my ideology down anyones throat. What the fucck did I do to these people? NOTHING! Yet they want to kill me.

So my response is... Kill them first. Kill their friends, kill their families. Kill anyone with similar ideas. Sure there's lots of people on the list, but we just got started. There's plenty of time to abandon hate. I hope they get the message before it's too late.

All I wanted to do was drink a couple of beers and work on my truck. Now I have to start killing people. How do you think that makes me feel?

 

[Nicool003]

argh Nicool003, i don't think you would understand no matter how much effort i put into anwsering your question.

What do you mean? Oh wait nevermind now I get it. Your racist or something. Or maybe you realized your wrong! Yes that must be it.

 

[kyleb]

nope, that's two srikes for you.

 

[drag]

Originally posted by Alias
You forgot the part about how they want to kill us.

I wish that we could separate the world into two groups. One group could be the group that wants to kill everyone and everything related to western culture. The other group would be the "I'm cool, if you're cool" group. Then we could begin to kill the people in the "We want to kill the west" group, one at a time, giving each one of them a chance to abondon their hate.

What you fail to understand is that as long as nobody bugs me while I'm eating, I'm easy to get along with. Live and let live. Do your own thing, man. You know what I mean?

911 taught me that there are some out there that have no regard for my life, PERSONALLY, and that they would like to kill me even though they don't know me. As far as I know, I was in the trailer park that day working on my truck. I didn't oppress anyone. I didn't murder anyone. I didn't force my ideology down anyones throat. What the fucck did I do to these people? NOTHING! Yet they want to kill me.

So my response is... Kill them first. Kill their friends, kill their families. Kill anyone with similar ideas. Sure there's lots of people on the list, but we just got started. There's plenty of time to abandon hate. I hope they get the message before it's too late.

All I wanted to do was drink a couple of beers and work on my truck. Now I have to start killing people. How do you think that makes me feel?

Indeed.

 

[russ_watters]

You forgot the part about how they want to kill us.

Yeah, that's kinda a deal breaker for me too, Alias. Until they acknowledge that I have a right to exist, there should be no negotiations.

 

[Alias]

If they had asked us for help solving their problems, rather than trying to kill us, things might be different.

It could be that due to their oppression, they are unaware of the mechanisms behind their oppression.

I think that a reasonable response, as a Superpower democracy, might be to send out a message to these oppressive regimes something like this...

"Stop treating your people like SH1T, or we're going to kick your ass."

That should be clear enough. But will it be effective?

 

[drag]

Originally posted by Alias
If they had asked us for help solving their problems, rather than trying to kill us, things might be different.

It could be that due to their oppression, they are unaware of the mechanisms behind their oppression.

I think that a reasonable response, as a Superpower democracy, might be to send out a message to these oppressive regimes something like this...

"Stop treating your people like SH1T, or we're going to kick your ass."

That should be clear enough. But will it be effective?

After this campaign, I think the chances are growing...

 

[DrChinese]

Originally posted by Galatea
I love how the "liberals" are always advocating peace but never offering any viable alternatives. Do you honestly believe if we love Saddam enough and send some white doves flying over Iraq things will be ok? Zero, do you have any bright ideas about what could be done?

Because all I've seen from people who think like you is a few semi-hostile (and pointless) protests about the war which did nothing but give people without jobs something to do and waste even more government money.

I do support the war because I think the US is going about things fairly carefully - I wouldn't condone a straight bombing, but I'm sick of liberals doing _nothing_ but whining and worshipping Tom Daschle.

Many liberals do not think anything needs to done to contain Saddam over and above what was already in place before we invaded. That is a specific alternative, and much of the rest of the world agree with the "liberals". Oh, and being against the war does not exactly make someone a liberal.

 

[Siv]

Originally posted by russ_watters
Siv, you are close but you have one major error in your operating premise: Your definition of patriotism is incorrect. Patriotism is simply love of your country. It is not blind and it is not exclusionary. What you are describing is NATIONALISM and though similar to patriotism, it is essentially a dead concept in the western world. The death of nationalism is the reason the western world isn't fighting internally anymore. Certainly some of the elements of nationalism such as xenophobia and ethnocentrism still exist, but to a much more limited extent than say in 1938.

Human nature has not changed, Russ. It takes tens of thousands of years to do so ... and this new environment (democracy, fundamental rights etc ..) is but a few centuries old.

The us vs. them is still very much there. But now its been polished and made up to be called by the euphemism "patriotism". Why the hell should I love some piece of land just because a certain set of my ancestors were born there ? ITs ridiculous ??

I pay taxes and agree to certain legal rules to live there and enjoy whatever infrastructure the government provides me with. Thats all. What else is needed ??
If we go further back in time, we all originated from the same place in Africa. Then we spread out from there.
If you go further back, maybe the first mammals originated from another place, the first vertebrates from some other place ... and the first life (the arbitrary dividing line again) in yet another place. Which is our country ?? Does it even make sense to call any piece of land that ??

Why should I pledge allegiance to India or Canada or UK ? I live in India and pay taxes and follow the legal laws here. But its ridiculous to expect me to feel "love" for this piece of land and "hatred" for other pieces of land. IT makes absolutely no sense. A Canadian lady is no different from me except in superficial stuff like dress, skin colour, language etc. Why should I prefer another Indian homo sapien to a Canadian one ... or an Iraqi one ... or a Pakistani one ?
Dividing up the entire human population into regions might make sense for better administration, but to start believing that this demarkation is absolute ... is crazy !
Thats like an organization where the Marketing dept starts thinking that the Finance Dept is fundamentally different.

- S.

 

[Siv]

Originally posted by Alias
You forgot the part about how they want to kill us.

I did not forget your assertion. I asked for evidence (objective) of the same. That the USA wanted to kill IRaqis is something we had objective evidence for all along. The US started moving in their troops long before the weapons inspection and have said so multiple times that whatever be the outcome of the inspection, they'll attack !

As Jay Leno said ... " "Iraq began destroying those missiles they don't have over the weekend.
See, President Bush may be the smartest military president in history.
First, he gets Iraq to destroy all of their own weapons. Then, he declares war."

There is zero objective evidence that the Iraqis wanted to kill you. And yet you declared war on them.

see, you're powerful and want a fight ... that's ok (its not, but no one can stop you!) ... but don't give us this sanctimonious bull****. Everyone knows what this war is all about. We're not blind.

- S.

 

[Alias]

We are at war with terrorists. The presumption that we think that Iraq is full of terrorists is absurd. Saddam's regime, on the other hand, is the very definition of 'terrorism'. If you can't see that, you might want to pay more attention.

The idea that this means that everything we do is designed to kill terrorists is simply ridiculous. While killing the ones that exist is fine by me, that doesn't solve the underlying problem. The underlying problem is that terrorists are born out of oppression. And this oppression comes, mostly, from their governments. So the most effective method of solving the problem is to change their governments.

 

[BoulderHead]

For some reason this reminds me of a song by Randy Newman.

Lyrics to "Political Science";

No one likes us
I don't know why.
We may not be perfect
But heaven knows we try.
But all around even our old friends put us down.
Let's drop the big one and see what happens.

We give them money
But are they grateful?
No they're spiteful
And they're hateful.
They don't respect us so let's surprise them;
We'll drop the big one and pulverize them.

Now Asia's crowded
And Europe's too old.
Africa's far too hot,
And Canada's too cold.
And South America stole our name.
Let's drop the big one; there'll be no one left to blame us.

Bridge:
We'll save Australia;
Don't want to hurt no kangaroo.
We'll build an all-American amusement park there;
They've got surfing, too.

Well, boom goes London,
And boom Paree.
More room for you
And more room for me.
And every city the whole world round
Will just be another American town.
Oh, how peaceful it'll be;
We'll set everybody free;
You'll have Japanese kimonos, baby,
There'll be Italian shoes for me.
They all hate us anyhow,
So let's drop the big one now.
Let's drop the big one now.

 

[russ_watters]

But now its been polished and made up to be called by the euphemism "patriotism". Why the hell should I love some piece of land just because a certain set of my ancestors were born there ?...But its ridiculous to expect me to feel "love" for this piece of land and "hatred" for other pieces of land.

Siv, again, that's *NOT* patriotism, that's *NATIONALISM.* Patriotism has nothing to do with a chunk of land and it has nothing to do with hate. PLEASE look it up. This is a good start:

Patriotism is love for country and desire to defend and promote its well-being; Nationalism is the exaltation of one country OVER another.

http://weekly.china-forum.org/CCF96/ccf9650/ccf9650-4.html

There is zero objective evidence that the Iraqis wanted to kill you.

You mean besides chanting "death to america" and "kill the infidels," right?

 

[Zero]

Hmmmm...good points from everyone...keep it cool, ok?

 

[Siv]

Originally posted by russ_watters
Siv, again, that's *NOT* patriotism, that's *NATIONALISM.* Patriotism has nothing to do with a chunk of land and it has nothing to do with hate. PLEASE look it up. This is a good start:

Ok, this is funny

Lets take your definition apart piece by piece, shall we ??

" Patriotism is love for country and desire to defend and promote its well-being; Nationalism is the exaltation of one country OVER another. "

Loving your country, right ? What exactly are you loving here ? Not the piece of land, you say. So what exactly are you loving ? The people ? So when you say love your country, you mean love Americans ? Why specify that except to differentiate against other country people ? If you love all human beings, why do you have to specify the country bit ?
Ok now coming to the "defend and promote its well-being" bit. Defend from what ?? When you use the word "defend", it always means "defend against" another.
And "promote" is again a promoting over another. If people wanted all countries to do well, no one would talk about promoting one.

Patriotism and nationalism are fundamentally the same thing.
You cannot support one country in a vaccuum. You have to support it against others. Promote it over others, defend it against others. The "against" component is built in into patriotism.

- S.

 

[Siv]

Originally posted by Alias
We are at war with terrorists. The presumption that we think that Iraq is full of terrorists is absurd. Saddam's regime, on the other hand, is the very definition of 'terrorism'. If you can't see that, you might want to pay more attention.

The idea that this means that everything we do is designed to kill terrorists is simply ridiculous. While killing the ones that exist is fine by me, that doesn't solve the underlying problem. The underlying problem is that terrorists are born out of oppression. And this oppression comes, mostly, from their governments. So the most effective method of solving the problem is to change their governments.

Enough of assertions, Alias. Show me some objective evidence.

- S.

 

[Alias]

Originally posted by Siv
Enough of assertions, Alias. Show me some objective evidence.

- S.

Which of the following do you need more objective evidence of...

1. We are at war with terrorists.
2. The presumption that we think that Iraq is full of terrorists is absurd.
3. Saddam's regime... is the very definition of 'terrorism'.
4. The idea that this means that everything we do is designed to kill terrorists is simply ridiculous.
5. ... that(killing terrorists) doesn't solve the underlying problem.
6. The underlying problem is that terrorists are born out of oppression.
7. And this oppression(that terrorists are born out of) comes, mostly, from their governments.
8. So the most effective method of solving the problem is to change their(oppressive) governments.

This is just how I see the world. I could be wrong. Maybe my genetic tendency to rip the throats out of those that threaten my well being is clouding my view. I think I might need some gene therapy. I'm considering crossing myself with that gay microsoft butterfly.

 

[drag]

Greetings !

Originally posted by Alias
8. So the most effective method of solving the problem is to change their(oppressive) governments.

The strange thing about is that they are
so used to it and so "unsmart" that some of them
actually seem to like being opressed, at least
while it happens. They are brainwashed and
convinced that their bad lives are the doing
of the evil non-muslims from other countries.
That is of course ridiculous... but it is the case.
Even amongst parts of the populatioin in countries
like Baharein and Cuwait. Not even mentioning
the other countries in the region where they
have a consensus over this.

Originally posted by Alias
This is just how I see the world. I could be wrong. Maybe my genetic tendency to rip the throats out of those that threaten my well being is clouding my view. I think I might need some gene therapy.

Nope, I think your genes are quite fine...

Live long and prosper.

 

[russ_watters]

Originally posted by drag
some of them actually seem to like being opressed, at least
while it happens. They are brainwashed and convinced that their bad lives are the doing of the evil non-muslims from other countries.
That is of course ridiculous... but it is the case.

Drag, I refuse to accept that starving people would actually enjoy starvation and the families of murdered dissidents enjoy the deaths of their family members. Certainly they may be so brainwashed they don't know where the oppression is coming from, but I can't believe they don't think they are being oppressed.

 

[Njorl]

Originally posted by russ_watters
Drag, I refuse to accept that starving people would actually enjoy starvation and the families of murdered dissidents enjoy the deaths of their family members. Certainly they may be so brainwashed they don't know where the oppression is coming from, but I can't believe they don't think they are being oppressed.

It could easily be something like Stockholm syndrome on a massive scale. For the last 12 years, all food and all medicine came from Saddam Hussein for many people. While he is also the source of cruelty, even that works in his favor. Every day that he does not kill someone is another day that he has given them life.

Njorl

 

[russ_watters]

Originally posted by Njorl
It could easily be something like Stockholm syndrome on a massive scale...Every day that he does not kill someone is another day that he has given them life.

Njorl

I'll certainly grant you that, but with one caveat - he DOES kill dissidents and innocent civilians on a daily basis. Not a lot of time for Stockholm syndrome to take hold. Stockholm syndrome depends on the kidnapper NOT harming you.