News The surprising origins of the current Jihad

  • Thread starter alexandra
  • Start date
Rev Prez said:
And apparantly one of those things is printing books and sending them to Afghan schools. I don't think anyone's disputing that, Burn.

Rev Prez
The books were not only in a position for a reasonable use, but were a betrayal to all the classes in particular the primary ones. They held unnecessary material as were not written with the purpose of education but ideological propaganda.

We come across the following examples in math book:

- If out of 10 atheists, 5 are killed by 1 Muslim, 5 would be left.
- 5 guns + 5 guns = 10 guns
- 15 bullets - 10 bullets = 5 bullets, etc.
 
Burnsys said:
If out of 10 atheists, 5 are killed by 1 Muslim, 5 would be left.
Not only are these books morally and ethically dubious, they are also misleading. Should be:

"If out of 10 atheists, 5 are killed, 5 would be left."

for any other Muslim bar that 1, or indeed any non-Muslim, may have killed up to five of the remaining atheists. The standard of US-sourced educational material is quite simply shocking.

The degree level book has questions like:

"If one suicide bomber in a police station has explosives to create an explosion area of radius 10 metres, and another 5 metres away has enough for an area of radius 25 metres, and the probability of death decreases with distance from the bomber proportional to the strength of the explosive by: p(D) = D*A/r^2, where D = 10, if the lobby of the station has area Astat = 65 m^2 and contains 64 non-believers, what is expected victory (i.e. death toll)."

Turns out people have been trying to experimentally verify the answer to this question for decades, and here was us thinking they were terrorists!!!
 
A

alexandra

Rev Prez said:
It's a great story; how you react to it is a measure of how easily you're impressed by innuendo and anecdote.

Rev Prez
It is precisely because I question the official 'spin' of politicians, and am NOT gullible and easily impressed, that many people on these boards argue against me.

I just find it a bit difficult to believe the official stories when they change so much. Why was it necessary to invade Iraq again? Hmm, let's see - well, that depends on when the politicians were explaining it to us ... oh yes, here we go (in order of lie): 9/11, WMD, 'democracy', ?, ...whatever they dream up next.

I would be insulted at my own intelligence if I could change my beliefs 'as the wind blows'. Instead of dumbing myself down and/or pretending to believe the patently unbelievable, I prefer to air my views (democracy = 'free speech', after all) and argue my point instead.
 
quetzalcoatl9 said:
Relax, 2 cents. I actually considered it a compliment that they would be natural warriors.

If you look at the timeline, they seem to be a people who simply will not be defeated.

Where is there racism in that??? Infact, if you knew anything about my posts on this forum, then the fact that they are a people who will not lie down defeated is something that troubles me, since I support the US war effort in Afghanistan.
It can be said of many people that they will defend their country to the end, so why single out Afghanis as warriors, particularly by stating they are natural at it? I guess since I am of Viking decent I am predisposed to sack, rape, and pillage? In any event, if you admire them for standing up to superpowers and believe they can't be defeated, why would you support a war of attrition with no end to it? We invaded the country to pursue Bin Laden--why are we there now, and for how long?
 
Last edited:
alexandra said:
It is precisely because I question the official 'spin' of politicians, and am NOT gullible and easily impressed, that many people on these boards argue against me.
That's one way to spin it. Another way would point out that a single news piece "stunned" you. Should I find something intellectually impressive about your predictable dismissal of official statements?

I just find it a bit difficult to believe the official stories when they change so much.
Which probably says more about your channel to information than the information itself. This is one of the reasons I won't discuss a great many things with you and Art.

I would be insulted at my own intelligence if I could change my beliefs 'as the wind blows'.
I've never accused you of changing your beliefs as the wind blows. I accuse you of accepting an unsupported charge that the US is the principal cause of a culture known to produce violent, anti-American jihadis simply because it fits neatly with your tedious world view. You won't see me linking to National Review or Weekly Standard, yet I fully expect you, Art and quetz to dig up support on lewrockwell, zmag and from other sources off the reservation.

Rev Prez
 
Last edited:
Burnsys said:
The books were not only in a position for a reasonable use, but were a betrayal to all the classes in particular the primary ones.
What?

They held unnecessary material as were not written with the purpose of education but ideological propaganda.
Propaganda, schmopaganda. I'm not at all interested with how irate you are about what limited content you've gleamed from the news reports, but how these books produced an anti-American jihadi culture or give it a rest.

Rev Prez
 
2CentsWorth said:
It can be said of many people that they will defend their country to the end...
The Afghans have a particularly violent and turbulent internal history, one that is clearly apparanty towards the end of the 18th century and onward. Quetz's point stands.

Rev Prez
 
I

Informal Logic

Rev Prez said:
The Afghans have a particularly violent and turbulent internal history, one that is clearly apparanty towards the end of the 18th century and onward. Quetz's point stands.

Rev Prez
That may be, but it still does not negate the point that many countries have had violence/turbulence in history. And as usual people are obsessing about opinions rather than discussing the opening post, which is about text books.
 
A

Art

Returning to the point. Who here (apart from Rev Pres) would find it acceptable if their own children were to be educated using the kind of material which was supplied to the children in Afghanistan?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
A

Art

Rev Prez said:
Which probably says more about your channel to information than the information itself. This is one of the reasons I won't discuss a great many things with you and Art.Rev Prez
And I thought it was because of the number of times you've been shot down in flames :rofl:
 
Informal Logic said:
That may be, but it still does not negate the point that many countries have had violence/turbulence in history.
Which has nothing to do with anything.

Rev Prez
 
Art said:
Returning to the point. Who here (apart from Rev Pres) would find it acceptable if their own children were to be educated using the kind of material which was supplied to the children in Afghanistan?
You're dodging the issue. I've never given you even a hint that I'd want my children exposed to Islamic textbooks of any kind. On the other hand, you haven't even tried to substantiate the charge raised in the piece.

Rev Prez
 
A

Art

Rev Prez said:
You're dodging the issue.
I'm not dodging the issue at all.
Do I find it shocking that bullets and guns are used to teach young impressionable children to count? Yes I do.
Do I think it is dangerous to instill children with a moral sense of justice in jihad? Yes I do.
Do I think that what people read affects their world view? Yes I do. As do the companies who spend billions advertising their products each year.
Rev Prez said:
I've never given you even a hint that I'd want my children exposed to Islamic textbooks of any kind. On the other hand, you haven't even tried to substantiate the charge raised in the piece.Rev Prez
I quite deliberately said the same kind of material. So in your case the question would be, would you be happy for your children to be educated with material using guns and other weapons to teach counting and encouraging crusades against non-believers? Or is it only okay for foreigners to be supplied with that sort of crap.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

SOS2008

Gold Member
0
0
Art said:
Returning to the point. Who here (apart from Rev Pres)...
Some members want to focus on irrelevant comments because they are trolling contrarians.
Rev Prez said:
Which has nothing to do with anything.

Rev Prez
If you do not question the validity of the source in the OP, what are you debating? Wrong versus right? Nature versus nurture? Please make a case instead of just being argumentative about every post that members make.
 
2CentsWorth said:
It can be said of many people that they will defend their country to the end, so why single out Afghanis as warriors, particularly by stating they are natural at it? I guess since I am of Viking decent I am predisposed to sack, rape, and pillage? In any event, if you admire them for standing up to superpowers and believe they can't be defeated, why would you support a war of attrition with no end to it? We invaded the country to pursue Bin Laden--why are we there now, and for how long?
Location: In a van down by the river!
Put down the bong.

They have a long heritage of resistance, what exactly is your problem?

Polynesians also have a long heritage of kayaking. Are you going to lock me up now?

2CentsWorth said:
In any event, if you admire them for standing up to superpowers and believe they can't be defeated, why would you support a war of attrition with no end to it?
Because it is in my interest to do so, and not necessarily theirs. Think of it as a football game - I am going to play on my team so that we can win, but I can also respect my opponents. It is an idea from a long time ago, you may not have even heard of it, it's called honor.
 
Last edited:
quetzalcoatl9 said:
...They have a long heritage of resistance, what exactly is your problem?
Okay, so they have had a long heritage of resistance. So have other cultures. Is it natural (genetic), or are they taught to be warriors--taught by textbooks such as mentioned in the OP? I argue that they are taught, and it would appear that the US has contributed to the teaching of it.
quetzalcoatl9 said:
Because it is in my interest to do so, and not necessarily theirs. Think of it as a football game - I am going to play on my team so that we can win, but I can also respect my opponents. It is an idea from a long time ago, you may not have even heard of it, it's called honor.
Yes, let's talk about honor. When will the US leave Afghanistan, or will we be a foreign occupying force forever? Let's talk about honor. It seems many feel it was okay for Bush to mislead Americans about his reasons for invading Iraq, which was illegal. There is a very long list we can discuss in relation to honor--if you knew what it meant.
 
SOS2008 said:
Some members want to focus on irrelevant comments because they are trolling contrarians.
This coming from someone whose spent all his time in the PF Lounge forums and, given his nick, is unhinged with hatred for Bush and conservatives.

If you do not question the validity of the source in the OP...
Something else which, to no one's surprise, has nothing to do with my objection.

Rev Prez
 
2,193
2
Art said:
I'm not dodging the issue at all.
Do I find it shocking that bullets and guns are used to teach young impressionable children to count? Yes I do.
Do I think it is dangerous to instill children with a moral sense of justice in jihad? Yes I do..

Excellent!!!
The radical Islamic movement is far more than adult adherents subscribing to the belief system. It is tremendously focused on "teaching" children to accept and even desire the jihad way.
 
Art said:
And I thought it was because of the number of times you've been shot down in flames :rofl:
Its kind of funny how just as I was reading this I was thinking of how many times you have been shot down...

These things make me really question the concept of objectivity. Is it only a myth? I guess its more or less the reason I no longer find any value in discussing topics in the politics sub-forum. You try to play fair and if you start to make a logical argument someone calls foul and all the while they are playing on a ton of logical fallacies. I wonder, are they thinking the same thing about my post or are they just emotional?

I just thought I was share that...its pointless I know but so are all the topics in this sub-forum. Nobody really changes anyones mind and no matter whom is right everyone will think they are. I personally think Rev Prez is right on most of the time but I question my very sanity due to the vehement, albeit sometimes crazy, rebuttals to just about ever comment he makes. There just cannot be any kind of objectivity in this crazy world, there can’t...cause if there is then at least half of the population is whacked out their minds.

I think PF should give a ribbon award for politics...it has to be the most difficult subject matter to discuss on this entire forum.

Regards
 
Last edited:
224
2
El Hombre Invisible said:
Not only are these books morally and ethically dubious, they are also misleading. Should be:

"If out of 10 atheists, 5 are killed, 5 would be left."
They do that in text books everywhere. It's part of the problem, you're supposed to be able to sort through all the unimportant crap and solve the problem with the few bits of info they give you that actually matter.
 

Want to reply to this thread?

"The surprising origins of the current Jihad" You must log in or register to reply here.

Physics Forums Values

We Value Quality
• Topics based on mainstream science
• Proper English grammar and spelling
We Value Civility
• Positive and compassionate attitudes
• Patience while debating
We Value Productivity
• Disciplined to remain on-topic
• Recognition of own weaknesses
• Solo and co-op problem solving

Top Threads

Top