RE: So . . . what do we do about Daesh?

RE: So . . . what do we do about Daesh? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

bounty44 -> RE: So . . . what do we do about Daesh? (12/5/2015 4:47:44 PM)
im just talking out loud for a moment to no one person in particular---the crusades and the inquisition are pretty complicated issues (and they are not unrelated), and people are very quick to condemn Christianity for them and to an extent, rightly so, but one thing the average person always misses in my experience is, that those actions did not occur outside of the illicit and rather unholy marriage of the state with the church, or alternatively, with the church wielding secular/worldly, and even spiritual authority that it did not rightly have. most importantly, those instances do not wholly find their justifications in the Christian faith. also, those events were not universally accepted without criticism and condemnation at the time. as one might imagine, this was especially true of some of the actions of inquisitors. those criticisms and condemnations continue to occur in present times.

thompsonx -> RE: So . . . what do we do about Daesh? (12/5/2015 5:03:01 PM)
ORIGINAL: bounty44 im just talking out loud for a moment to no one person in particular---the crusades and the inquisition are pretty complicated issues (and they are not unrelated), and people are very quick to condemn Christianity for them and to an extent, rightly so, but one thing the average person always misses in my experience is, that those actions did not occur outside of the illicit and rather unholy marriage of the state with the church, or alternatively, with the church wielding secular/worldly, and even spiritual authority that it did not rightly have. Then why are you constantly pimping for the state to sponsor christianity?

LookieNoNookie -> RE: So . . . what do we do about Daesh? (12/5/2015 5:06:39 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri quote: ORIGINAL: NorthernGent quote: ORIGINAL: Greta75 Trying to defend Islam and keep saying, oh it's peaceful, it's totally peaceful. It's not! How can anybody who reads their teachings even associate the word "peace" to it, that I cannot fathom. We could interpret a book according to our own bias, or: We could look at the evidence. When was the last time a muslim country invaded England or the United States or France or a few more. How many times have Western nations set up shop in muslim countries? The fact, and I restate fact, not your interpretation of religious books; is that the aggressors are Western nations. I don't speak as someone who has a problem with religion; nor do I care who is killing whom in the world - it's boring and nothing to do with me - but what I can't stand is people with big mouths who have a lot to say but none of it has any basis in fact. When was the last time a "Christian" country attacked another country over religious reasons? Well, to be fair, there will be some who will say that regardless....they ("Christian countries") did indeed attack.

bounty44 -> RE: So . . . what do we do about Daesh? (12/5/2015 5:10:46 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri quote: ORIGINAL: bounty44 bama, ive posted to this effect before and it bears revisiting. the justifications/admonitions for the violence we see are integral to their holy writings. im not aware of anyone in the muslim world looking at the violence done by fellow muslims, and judging those people as heretics. by contrast, the violent ones are looking at the others and effectively judging them as apostates. http://www.pri.org/stories/2015-11-18/muslim-condemn-isis-are-terrorists-apostates that's a start I suppose but here's the kicker---both sides cannot be right in their judgments. ive seen and read the Islamic arguments from the "radical" side, and haven't seen those arguments, or the "radicals" themselves, refuted by the moderates using their sacred writings/teachings. some of that is just due to the way information pours out into the ether, or what I tend to come across, but short of that, the position of the moderates is inadequately generic, and/or akin to "im rubber and youre glue whatever you say bounces off me and sticks on you."

LookieNoNookie -> RE: So . . . what do we do about Daesh? (12/5/2015 5:14:04 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri quote: ORIGINAL: JVoV The only religion that can be considered truly peaceful is Buddhism. Judaism and Christianity are both drenched in blood, no different than Islam. If we judge Islam by the works of terrorists, should we judge Christianity by the Inquisition? Or Judaism by Palestinian genocide? 1. We shouldn't judge Islam by the works of terrorists, or the radical fringe. 2. No, Christianity, as a whole, shouldn't be judged by the Inquisition. Whichever religion sponsored the Inquisition should be judged by the Inquisition, and only so far as to what it was at that time. Christianity nowadays shouldn't be judged by actions from long ago that are no longer espoused, taken, or supported. Flawless (again....as always....loooove reading your comments!). It has been said (to be fair) that "the reason they're in our shit is because.....we're in their shit" I think there's some truth in that however....I think had we never been in their shit....the revenues from oil, Wahhabism and a myriad of other opportunities for "them" to grab opportunity.....has only opened the door. Perhaps that's why the Saudi's (long before we engaged).....engaged....eliminating their resources.... Maybe....as much as they are *absolutely* the villain....they are also smart enough to think..... "If the world's gone crazy....we can't sell oil at 100 bucks and....cutting off 100 buck oil from the crazies....may just be a way to protect our cash flow".

LookieNoNookie -> RE: So . . . what do we do about Daesh? (12/5/2015 5:16:19 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: thompsonx ORIGINAL: LookieNoNookie ORIGINAL: thompsonx That brought it home because, good Christians can fight them with Jesus as the role model, and say, "Jesus wouldn't want this!" So it was all the "good christians" who stoped the inquisition? It was all the good christians who stopped the crusades? It was all the good christians who stop those who would murder abortionist? Christians are not a nickles worth different than any other religion. It is all about the benjamins and nothing more. The Inquisition happened when an adult male had the education level of a 12 year old today. Spanish inquisition 1478-1834. It would appear that you have less than the educational level of a 12 year old The Crusades were BEGUN by Christians...your point? (Stupidity reigns in history). So also in your posts The number of (morons) who have stalked Planned Parenthood clinics (and killed people)....were not a group of "licensed" religious fuck for brains...they were were isolationists who were (much like you).....morons. I am sure you would like to believe that but they do seem to have a relatively large and vocal posse...for which you seem to be a cheerleader. Christians are different.They've learned (and they KNOW they were wrong) So now they are fully cognizant of their stupidity...well that is comforting to some I would suppose.[8\|] and....the education levels available today are vastly different than 1,000 years previous. Yours does not seem to have advanced much...considering the inquisition started a little over 500 years ago not 1000.[8\|] You were (clearly) dropped on your hayud as a small child, possibly multiple times as an adult.

bounty44 -> RE: So . . . what do we do about Daesh? (12/5/2015 5:23:11 PM)
nookie, don't mind me... Thompson---though I am reluctant to talk with you and take you the least bit seriously: "the inquisition" is not confined to spain. it was a European wide phenomena and roughly began in the 1100s, and more earnestly in the 1200s. and spain was one of the places. the 1478 date you mention has to do with king Ferdinand and queen Isabella making the inquisition a "royal instrument" but the inquisitors (and thus "the inquisition") had already existed in spain for two centuries. feel free to apologize...

thompsonx -> RE: So . . . what do we do about Daesh? (12/5/2015 5:32:22 PM)
"If the world's gone crazy....we can't sell oil at 100 bucks and....cutting off 100 buck oil from the crazies....may just be a way to protect our cash flow". I believe that it was the saudi oil minister who mentioned that they were willing to support the price of oil down to about $30 per bbl. So it would seem that they have all the money they want or need. But then one would need to be aware of the reason he said such a thing.[8\|]

thompsonx -> RE: So . . . what do we do about Daesh? (12/5/2015 5:43:25 PM)
ORIGINAL: bounty44 nookie, don't mind me... No one pays you much attention[8\|] Thompson---though I am reluctant to talk with you and take you the least bit seriously: That is because you typically speak from a position of ignorance. "the inquisition" is not confined to spain. it was a European wide phenomena and roughly began in the 1100s, and more earnestly in the 1200s. The spanish inquisiton was a spanish gig seperate from the pope and his posse

LookieNoNookie -> RE: So . . . what do we do about Daesh? (12/5/2015 5:47:54 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: bounty44 nookie, don't mind me... Thompson---though I am reluctant to talk with you and take you the least bit seriously: "the inquisition" is not confined to spain. it was a European wide phenomena and roughly began in the 1100s, and more earnestly in the 1200s. and spain was one of the places. the 1478 date you mention has to do with king Ferdinand and queen Isabella making the inquisition a "royal instrument" but the inquisitors (and thus "the inquisition") had already existed in spain for two centuries. feel free to apologize... (He doesn't have the mental capacity to apologize.....can't grasp his inherent errors....Loooove Desi's comments....always well thought out).

LookieNoNookie -> RE: So . . . what do we do about Daesh? (12/5/2015 5:49:21 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: thompsonx ORIGINAL: bounty44 nookie, don't mind me... No one pays you much attention[8\|] Thompson---though I am reluctant to talk with you and take you the least bit seriously: That is because you typically speak from a position of ignorance. "the inquisition" is not confined to spain. it was a European wide phenomena and roughly began in the 1100s, and more earnestly in the 1200s. The spanish inquisiton was a spanish gig seperate from the pope and his posse Utterly amazing (but not at all a surprise).

bounty44 -> RE: So . . . what do we do about Daesh? (12/5/2015 6:02:14 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: thompsonx "the inquisition" is not confined to spain. it was a European wide phenomena and roughly began in the 1100s, and more earnestly in the 1200s. The spanish inquisiton was a spanish gig seperate from the pope and his posse that's completely irrelevant to the point of the general timing of inquisitors and the inquisition in general being ~a thousand years ago, which was nookie's position. your inappropriately introducing the "Spanish inquisition" when nookie hadn't specified it is a combination of poor comprehension compounded by bad scholarship and a perverse desire to insult people.

Lucylastic -> RE: So . . . what do we do about Daesh? (12/5/2015 6:23:49 PM)
12 century catholic church, against sectarianism. Spain,Isabella and torquemada 1470s, England more so when henry became protestant and leader of the Church of England. Luther, etc 15 and 16th century lots of killing native americans and south americans/mayans etc, ..after 1492 specially, catholics n protestants in europe killing each other thruout the 16th century up into the 18th and still today.

LookieNoNookie -> RE: So . . . what do we do about Daesh? (12/5/2015 6:56:34 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: bounty44 quote: ORIGINAL: thompsonx "the inquisition" is not confined to spain. it was a European wide phenomena and roughly began in the 1100s, and more earnestly in the 1200s. The spanish inquisiton was a spanish gig seperate from the pope and his posse that's completely irrelevant to the point of the general timing of inquisitors and the inquisition in general being ~a thousand years ago, which was nookie's position. your inappropriately introducing the "Spanish inquisition" when nookie hadn't specified it is a combination of poor comprehension compounded by bad scholarship and a perverse desire to insult people. (Beyond his comprehension....prepare for BOLD TYPE RESPONSE!!!!!!) (Because...that's the only way he knows how to clarify).

Hillwilliam -> RE: So . . . what do we do about Daesh? (12/5/2015 7:54:38 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri quote: ORIGINAL: NorthernGent quote: ORIGINAL: Greta75 Trying to defend Islam and keep saying, oh it's peaceful, it's totally peaceful. It's not! How can anybody who reads their teachings even associate the word "peace" to it, that I cannot fathom. We could interpret a book according to our own bias, or: We could look at the evidence. When was the last time a muslim country invaded England or the United States or France or a few more. How many times have Western nations set up shop in muslim countries? The fact, and I restate fact, not your interpretation of religious books; is that the aggressors are Western nations. I don't speak as someone who has a problem with religion; nor do I care who is killing whom in the world - it's boring and nothing to do with me - but what I can't stand is people with big mouths who have a lot to say but none of it has any basis in fact. When was the last time a "Christian" country attacked another country over religious reasons? The entire 14th thru the 18th centuries in Europe pretty much.

Greta75 -> RE: So . . . what do we do about Daesh? (12/6/2015 3:00:19 AM)
quote: We could interpret a book according to our own bias, or: We could look at the evidence. You really just need to google alot of moderate muslims explanation for fundalmentalist muslims explanation of where in their holy text says this and that, about transgressing, and majority of the time, moderate muslims just counters it by, "That hadith is not accurate! We can't listen to it!" Hadiths gives real historical examples of what Muhammad did in actual actions, in relations to the verses of the Quran, so that Muslims can understand better without ambiguity, what it actually means by understanding through his actions. To say that this is our own "personal bias" is simply because you don't understand that Islam is not like Christianity, in how the Quran was formed. You are treating it like Christianity. quote: When was the last time a muslim country invaded England or the United States or France or a few more. Their method of invasion is to move into the country and then start crying for sharia laws to be implemented and demanding for everything to go Halal and their 5 times a day compulsory break for prayers, to cater to their religious needs. What better way than to scream Racism whenever they are denied their special treatment. Even though Muslims is not a race, but they love to use the Race card too, because Western nations have become so "politically correct" these days and are always on egg shells not to look like they are discriminating against colour or religion. Neighbours who noticed suspicious activities in the California incident were afraid to even report it, in case they were seen as racist. They would only feel safe reporting suspicious activities of their own race. It's all very brilliant. You know, modern world needs some modern techniques too, there are many ways to invade and conquer. Once rooted in that country, their reproduction rate is also usually higher than the natives of that country. It's a matter of time they outnumber and in democratic societies, that means out-voting when they have built the population strength. You live in UK yourself and the fact that subways made 200 of their outlets halal. Isn't Pork ham and Bacon a UK staple? They have successfully got it removed in quite a number of outlets. It's the little things. I'm sure most native British people do not enjoy Macon or Turkey Bacon.They just need to increase their numbers in that country to increase their influence and just take over. And the reality is, in democratic society, majority wins. To win, they just need to get to being majority. quote: How many times have Western nations set up shop in muslim countries? Muslim people has no problem wanting to have the good things that Western people invented to be available in thier country, because it benefits their people, what has this got to do with friendliness? If the US invented a cure for aids, I'm so hell gonna import their medicine even if I want to kill them, even if I was ISIS.

DesideriScuri -> RE: So . . . what do we do about Daesh? (12/6/2015 6:53:46 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: bounty44 quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri quote: ORIGINAL: bounty44 bama, ive posted to this effect before and it bears revisiting. the justifications/admonitions for the violence we see are integral to their holy writings. im not aware of anyone in the muslim world looking at the violence done by fellow muslims, and judging those people as heretics. by contrast, the violent ones are looking at the others and effectively judging them as apostates. http://www.pri.org/stories/2015-11-18/muslim-condemn-isis-are-terrorists-apostates that's a start I suppose but here's the kicker---both sides cannot be right in their judgments. ive seen and read the Islamic arguments from the "radical" side, and haven't seen those arguments, or the "radicals" themselves, refuted by the moderates using their sacred writings/teachings. some of that is just due to the way information pours out into the ether, or what I tend to come across, but short of that, the position of the moderates is inadequately generic, and/or akin to "im rubber and youre glue whatever you say bounces off me and sticks on you." Blood sells. News outlets are looking more for stories that will create headlines, drawing in eyes and $$. You're not going to make lots of $$ reporting on the views of non-radical Muslims. Almost all the Christians I know won't make headlines for anything having to do with religion/faith. They're boring, as far as headlines are concerned.

DesideriScuri -> RE: So . . . what do we do about Daesh? (12/6/2015 6:57:56 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Hillwilliam quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri When was the last time a "Christian" country attacked another country over religious reasons? The entire 14th thru the 18th centuries in Europe pretty much. So, pretty much a long fucking time ago (which was my point).

BamaD -> RE: So . . . what do we do about Daesh? (12/6/2015 9:41:25 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: bounty44 im just talking out loud for a moment to no one person in particular---the crusades and the inquisition are pretty complicated issues (and they are not unrelated), and people are very quick to condemn Christianity for them and to an extent, rightly so, but one thing the average person always misses in my experience is, that those actions did not occur outside of the illicit and rather unholy marriage of the state with the church, or alternatively, with the church wielding secular/worldly, and even spiritual authority that it did not rightly have. most importantly, those instances do not wholly find their justifications in the Christian faith. also, those events were not universally accepted without criticism and condemnation at the time. as one might imagine, this was especially true of some of the actions of inquisitors. those criticisms and condemnations continue to occur in present times. It also needs to be pointed out, yet again, that the object of the Crusades (in the "holy land") was to TAKE BACK the area that had been FORCEFULLY TAKEN by the Muslims earlier. Had the Arabs maintained control of the territory the Crudades might never have begun. Remember that an outbreak of brigandy and attacks on pilgrims (which the Arabs had encoruaged, lots of profit there) were what set off the 1st Crusade. The Crusades were a response to, not an initiation of violence.

seekingOwnertoo -> RE: So . . . what do we do about C? (12/6/2015 10:07:09 AM)
Exactly what we are doing now! No doubt, that angers many of you; but keep in mind: 1. Western Forces, especially US forces, will be viewed as colonialists and conquerors. They will incite: popular unrest, guerrilla warfare and open rebellion. All that comes from being on the ground it is many, many casualties; until the Western Power(s) withdraw. 2. Stable Government everywhere in the world requires popular support. Middle East is no exception. 3. Daesh is NOT popular, unless Western Armies are on the ground. 4. Daesh WANTS Western Armies attacking their HQ. They believe it is a fulfillment of prophecy. 5. Western Ground forces attacking their HQ; will bring hundreds of thousands of new recruits to Daesh. My conclusion is to let local forces beat Daesh down, develop a national identity, and create working, peaceful Government. And we hardly have to do a thing. Except: bomb Daesh while arming and supporting the local opposition. Oh and shut down Twitter, Facebook and all social networking sites. As well as force Technology Companies world Wide to allow Government Spying. That's it, it simple. BTW, Ground Forces DID NOT WORK in Vietnam or Iraq. They will no work now, either.

Page: << < prev 6 7 [8] 9 10 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.078125