News Exploring Causes for Terrorist Attacks on US

[kyleb]

The occupation brings much injustice. There are bad Israelis and good Israelis. There are soldiers with disregard for lives, and there are commanders that would rather risk the target's family members more than their soldiers. But it's my opinion that the report is a populist spin of a disturbing report on a tragedy - not a conspiracy. Noone is stupid enough to send a TV crew to the mission and briefings if they thought the arrest will end anywhere near the way it unfolded.

I appreciate you taking the time to give your critique on the report; but surely you are not contesting its relevance of the report to the topic at hand with your arguments? Of course you don't intentionally send out a TV crew to record such injustices taking place; and as the report enplaned, you don't even let foreign reporters near such situations and systematically shelve what footage is caught by Israeli reporters. Sure that isn't a conspiracy; it is public relations efforts targeted at minimizing the injustices perpetrated by Israel though the occupation of Palestine while maximizing the exposure of the injustices perpetrated on Israel. Our ability to to continue purpotrarting such wrongs on a population is "freedom and way of life" which those who benift most from such action are most determined to protect.

 

[daveb]

This whole "name one such invention" is really getting ridiculous.

I agree. Let's get back to the OP question. If someone wants to debate whether or not the Arab world made such contributions, feel free to start a thread about such.

"Compromise" with bin Laden is like "compromise" with Charles Manson --- not particularly useful.

For some odd reason, I would have to disagree with this. If there were an actual "compromise" I have a feeling the things the US would get would far outweigh the things he would get. I would be more apt to say that trying to compromise is probably pretty useless.

 

[mbrmbrg]

OK, pcorbett. I went back to the beginning of this sub-debate. Mickey said invention. You took issue. I refuse to sift through hundreds of years of history to find an uncontested Islamic invention. HOWEVER. I refuse to accept your "Sure, if you want to call it that" about the whole friggin' concept of an Islamic golden age. Are you really wanting to take on standard history's lable of an era spanning 500 yrs (750-1200 CE)? Or are you just so appallingly ignorant that you don't have a clue what you're taking on?
Sorry, I take back appallingly ignorant. I know almost nothing about the great majority of world history, and I don't think that I'm appallingly ignorant. But I do think that I have the good sense to keep my mouth shut when I know nothing.

 

[pcorbett]

HOWEVER. I refuse to accept your "Sure, if you want to call it that" about the whole friggin' concept of an Islamic golden age. Are you really wanting to take on standard history's lable of an era spanning 500 yrs (750-1200 CE)? Or are you just so appallingly ignorant that you don't have a clue what you're taking on?

"Golden age" is a value-laiden term in the field, and I'm pretty much against the label on general principle. Take it or leave it.

 

[Mickey]

Diophantus wrote of Arithmetica a millenium before al Muhammad ibn Musa al-Kwarizmi was born.

And followers of Pythagorus wrote before Diophantus was born. We systematically call it algebra because of Musa-something-or-other.

 

[Schrodinger's Dog]

The term optics is the title subject of a fourth century BCE Euclid treatise.

Optics such as spyglasses are Middle Eastern though or more accurately I supose magnifying glasses, two lenses, I supose spyglass means telescope, but I'm unsure of a name for a simple system of two lenses with no adjustment of focal length, again I'm afraid that is an invention, and I've yet to see you contest that, that was nit picking. OK just to be clear I meant optics such as, rather than the way light appears to be bent when it enters water, K.

They did not invent the zero but they did invent the counting system or at least were the first to use it or apply it to accounting, which is where the confusion lies, the crusaders bought this system back with them. IIRC the Indians invented the Zero.

Zero
Zero was invented by the Hindu mathematicians Aryabhata and Varamihara in India around or shortly after the year 520 A.D.

Oh yeah there you go.

Oh and a little casual browsing shows wine was also invented in the middle East, as was I think, bread. So at least the catholics owe a little homage to the region but this is beside the point, anyway AAMOI.

"Golden age" is a value-laiden term in the field, and I'm pretty much against the label on general principle. Take it or leave it.

Golden Age means the period in history where the culture was most widespread, the philosophy was most piquant, the art was most revered and the Arabs were at their height of power and influence. Taking a start at Mohammed's flight we can safely determine that their golden age was between the mentioned years. The English Golden age was probably around 1560-1914. The US are still in there's I'd say from around 1900 to present. It may sound fairly arbitrary but historians do take it fairly seriously.

 

[Schrodinger's Dog]

Indians invented the zero and the so called arabic numerals-Sanskrit professor, Michael Witzel an old German Orientalist at Harvard told me so, and he should know--case closed.

But they didn't use it in any applicable sense, there's where the difference lies, the Arabs took the system and showed how it could be used not in principle but in reality and they perfected it.

And anyway they have invented one thing and that's all he wanted. Just one and it's apt.

And also they came up with philosophical ideas that we're advanced, such as free will and an omnipotent God being mutually exclusive. A fair few weapons too, and warfare tactics, but who cares about war

Using camels against horses is one of them, Horses fear camels it's the smell, they realized it and perfected tactics to drive Knights back. Instead of sending in cavalry.

 

[Mickey]

Using camels against horses is one of them, Horses fear camels it's the smell, they realized it and perfected tactics to drive Knights back. Instead of sending in cavalry.

Horses were very important to any kind of land battle in the second half of the first millennium, after the tribal invasions of Rome from the Steppe, who were practically all horsemen. I'm not familiar with how the Arabs used camels in battle, but, they walked next to their horses until the time was right to make an attack. Then, they rode their horses out of battle, and then returned to the battlefield on other horses, so they wouldn't tire out so quickly in the desert.

The tactic of attacking and retreating over and over again on horseback was what wore down large infantries. A few small tribes from the Steppe could disperse and run around the edges of the battlefield on horses all the time, creating chaos, frustration, and terror. Arabs would shoot arrows on horseback, as well as take swipes with swords and maces, so they must have been quick to learn from the Steppe.