Re: I\'ve been Thinking
 

[ QUOTE ]
I don't disagree with any of this. I'm just pointing out that SOME passages can be pretty darn clear. It isn't ALL entirely dependent on interpretation.

[/ QUOTE ]

I can take any religious book out there, heck any book, and cherry pick quotes that make that book look like whatever I want it to, for the most part. People who do that with the Bible infuriate me to no end, and doing it with the Koran is no better.

Re: I\'ve been Thinking
 

I'm sorry Max,
Your post explains a great deal.

I may not have a corner on defining what makes someone a human being, but I firmly believe I have a corner on defining what makes me a human being. Part of that is the capacity to use whatever tools I posses to preserve my own existance. If I wanted to prove Islamists were sub human I could have easily taken a different tact from the one I chose. For example, I have heard Micheal Savage discribe Islamofascists on his radio program as sub human on the basis of what they do to their victims. Many of those victims have been your fellow Jews. Trust me, Islamists want many many more of your fellow Jews to be their victims as well. I think it is safe to say that Islamists view you with much more animosity than they view me. I am just American, but you are a Jew.

As I said in my original post, my own logic disturbs me. This discourse has helped me to understand my motivations behind it and has clarified my politics on the matter greatly. I am also pretty suprised by my own capacity to bend and shape logic here as I have. I haven't really seen any challenges here that stand up to it, as far as I am concerned. I feel it is just as valid as the logic an Islamist uses to paint me, and probably better thought out.

One thing I want to mention to you here before I go. The book "Man's Search for Meaning" by Victor Frankl comes up again and again here on 2+2. I recommend you read it. Frankl survived Aushwitz. In the book he describes how his fellow prisoners labeled other prisoners who did not wash or shave as "moslems."

Re: I\'ve been Thinking
 

Sub, the way I see it we are all humans - muslim, christian, american, european, whatever - and all have the same capacity, in general, for 'good', 'evil', enlightenment, etc. The problem is culture.

At one time, Christians were just as evil and oppressive as the current radical islamic movement (e.g. during the spanish inquisition and a couple of the crusades).

However, people who compare modern day radical islam to christian extremists are missing the reality of the situation in a colossal way. There are *vastly* more radical muslims preaching the most vitriolic and hateful ideas imaginable, and using the fervor of religion as fuel to inflame these masses.

In an ideal world, we could counter such a movement with example, dialog, and outreach. But the current situation is much too far gone for that. Sadly, there is no alternative now but total war against islamic terrorism - and it won't take too many more attacks by radical muslims against westerners before the West finally wakes up to this fact in a big way.

Re: I\'ve been Thinking
 

I actually think the the real goals of those like Osama Bin Laden are not actually religious in nature. Their real goals are political and have to do with the acquisition of power and influence. Religious extremism is just a great way to brainwash a lot of people into supporting their cause and doing their bidding. Religious extremism is just a cover story.

Re: I\'ve been Thinking
 

Not everyone WANTS to be free and I think it's wrong to shove freedom down their throats.

I'm an entrepeneur (whether or not I can spell it -lol). I thrive on freedom when it comes to making my living. But it's not for everyone. Many could never make it and would be miserable doing what I do for a living. They NEED someone telling them what time to be in, what to do today, etc. etc.

It's the same with life in general. Not everyone is a leader or enjoys freedom. To many people WANT someone else to take conrol of their lives. It gives them a sense of security.

I think there is a very real danger that America seems to want to force freedom down other country's throats. I think everyone has the RIGHT to be free, but not everyone HAS to be free. Just my humble opinion.

Re: I\'ve been Thinking
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

I don't disagree with any of this. I'm just pointing out that SOME passages can be pretty darn clear. It isn't ALL entirely dependent on interpretation.


[/ QUOTE ]


I can take any religious book out there, heck any book, and cherry pick quotes that make that book look like whatever I want it to, for the most part. People who do that with the Bible infuriate me to no end, and doing it with the Koran is no better.

[/ QUOTE ]

I see your point, but that's what those quotes in the Koran actually mean. I guess you'd have to do a lot more reading before possibly believing that, though.

Re: I\'ve been Thinking
 

[ QUOTE ]
Not everyone WANTS to be free and I think it's wrong to shove freedom down their throats.

[/ QUOTE ]

Valid point, but do those who not want to be free have the right to also force non-freedom on those that want to be free?

[ QUOTE ]
It's the same with life in general. Not everyone is a leader or enjoys freedom. To many people WANT someone else to take conrol of their lives. It gives them a sense of security.

I think there is a very real danger that America seems to want to force freedom down other country's throats. I think everyone has the RIGHT to be free, but not everyone HAS to be free. Just my humble opinion.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't entirely disagree with you here. Forcing democracy can have repercussions.

The problem, as I see it, is that those who believe in radical political Islam (the Islamists) want not only to not be free themselves, but to force everyone else within their sphere of influence to not be free as well. Moreover they keep trying to expand that sphere of influence.

It would be one thing if Muslim countries offered a choice, for example: if you want to live by Sharia, you live in the southern part of the country. If you want to live as secular Muslims, you live in the Northern part. Something like that might be less repugnant to those who value human liberty, though even that would entail the huge problem of oppression of women born into families living in the South. But even this sort of arrangement would be entirely unacceptable to the Islamists. They think everyone must be forced to submit to living under the specific instructions and eternal word of Allah as set forth in the Koran.

Re: I\'ve been Thinking
 

[ QUOTE ]
I actually think the the real goals of those like Osama Bin Laden are not actually religious in nature. Their real goals are political and have to do with the acquisition of power and influence. Religious extremism is just a great way to brainwash a lot of people into supporting their cause and doing their bidding. Religious extremism is just a cover story.

[/ QUOTE ]

I disagee with the that overall assessment, and note that bin-Laden and Zarqawi have made clear in public statements that the religious nature of their actions is paramount (see the article I linked in another thread which quotes both Zarqawi ans bin-Laden; in one of these quotes, their opposition to democracy in Iraq states that any laws made by man are a form of apostasy, because man-made laws would result in man being ruled by men instead of by Allah's laws as set forth in the Koran. Other quotes exist too.).

Yes, they both have made political demands as well, but all of these demands still fall under the umbrella of their global jihad: which aims to cleanse Arab lands of infidels, then restore the Caliphate, then expand their territory.

If religious extremism is a form of brainwashing, as you put it (and I more or less agree with that take), then it would be correct to count bin-Laden and Zarqawi as among the extremely brainwashed.

Re: I\'ve been Thinking
 

<font color="red">Valid point, but do those who not want to be free have the right to also force non-freedom on those that want to be free? </font>

Absolutely not! If a people WANT to be free then I'm all for fighting for their rights and "saving" them if you will. But I think we as Americans tend to push our idealogies on other cultures. There are many cultures (it seems to me Islam might be one, but I don't know enough to intelligently debate this, so don't hold me to it), who have no desire to be free! In a way, I can see their point and I can see how they feel very threatened by our way of life.

Imagine being a devout religious person (I do not believe in religion by the way). They live very simple lives, pray every day, and devote themselves to their God. Now look at our lifestyle. Las Vegas, gambling, strippers, drinking, etc. etc. It's easy to see why they don't want this culture to spread. If you were so inclined to be this devout, I couldn't blame you for calling us the great Satan. I think they're wrong, I'm just saying I can see where they're coming from. So I say, leave them alone to their simple lives if that's what they want.

<font color="red">The problem, as I see it, is that those who believe in radical political Islam (the Islamists) want not only to not be free themselves, but to force everyone else within their sphere of influence to not be free as well. Moreover they keep trying to expand that sphere of influence. </font>

Are they? Or do they just feel threatened by the "Western" way of life, because we have made it known that our agenda is to spread democracy and freedom? Again, if I am a devout religious person, I don't want my children exposed or seduced by the Western way of life which I would view as sinful.

So could it be that the two sides may feel threatened for the very same reason? That is, we think THEY are trying to spread their way of life on us, and they feel we are doing the same?

<font color="red"> It would be one thing if Muslim countries offered a choice, for example: if you want to live by Sharia, you live in the southern part of the country. If you want to live as secular Muslims, you live in the Northern part. </font>

It seems simple to me because I know nothing about politics, but why can't there just be more seperate countries? This seems to be what they are moving towards. If the Shiites can't live with the Sunnis, then why not divide Iraq? Of course, I realize there is much more to it than that. Certain land is more valuable, etc. etc. But I believe this is what will have to happen eventually.

<font color="red"> They think everyone must be forced to submit to living under the specific instructions and eternal word of Allah as set forth in the Koran. </font>

It's sad that no one thing has caused more deaths, wars, and hatred than religion. All in the name of a loving God. Ironic, isn't it?

Re: I\'ve been Thinking
 

<font color="red">I disagee with the that overall assessment, and note that bin-Laden and Zarqawi have made clear in public statements that the religious nature of their actions is paramount (see the article I linked in another thread which quotes both Zarqawi ans bin-Laden; in one of these quotes, their opposition to democracy in Iraq states that any laws made by man are a form of apostasy, because man-made laws would result in man being ruled by men instead of by Allah's laws as set forth in the Koran. Other quotes exist too.). </font>

THIS is a very interesting subject! It is a fact that people with higher IQ's tend not to believe in Gods, religions, etc. Do you really think that all those who masterminded 9/11 are dumb enough to believe in their stated religious cause? I'm not saying they aren't... Certainly those that carried out the attack were. But it would be highly presumptious and ill-advised on our part to overlook political motivations.

Re: I\'ve been Thinking
 

Hi again, Lestat,

I'm not trying to discount the political goals and aspirations on the part of the people in question; they certainly have those too. However, for the global jihadists (and bin-Laden and Zarqawi definitely are global jihadists), religious considerations are of great importance in shaping their views and goals. Actually, such persons, who take the Koran most literally, cannot truly separate the political and religious components as we can; and the ideology of Islam itself is not very tractable to such a separation, anyway.

Islam contains a code for the conduct of all human affairs, outlined out in the Koran, and elaborated on in the hadiths (along with biographical information of Muhammad's life); and Islam has the ultimate goal of eventually bringing the entire world into submission under Allah's will. Devout Muslims are those who fully submit to Allah's will. Such submission, over the entire world, is in fact is the ultimate Islamic concept of peace: all humankind under Allah, all following Allah's will and instructions, and thereby living happily and worshipfully ever after in that wonderful state. "Peace" is following Allah's will, along with other like-minded followers. And Allah's will is spelled out clearly in the Koran, because Muhammad recorded the precise words of Allah, as told to him by the archangel Gabriel (interestingly, there are no questions of authorship with the Koran, as contrasted with the various books of the Bible: the Koran is all from one source and all recorded by the Allah's Mesenger, Muhammad).

As for your bringing up the intelligence of religious fanatics: I too would guess that on average it may be on the lower side; yet, it is amazing what some intelligent people can end up believing if that is all they hear and read from the time they are little children. Imagine being forced to pray ritualistically five times a day, too. Growing up fully immersed in unquestioned religion and faith can cause many to accept such dogmas without question. Also, the fundamental aspects of personality which are developed during the early years of childhood, often tend to stay with people for a lifetime.

Re: Our man reveals his true colors...
 

I'll try to reply as best I can to each segment of your post:
[ QUOTE ]
Hi Hetron,

You will notice that I expressed that scenario conditionally. Actually, quite a parlay of adverse trends and developments would have to occur before I would actually advocate such a course of action. It could happen, though.

[ QUOTE ]
it is so very INTERESTING to me that you propose going in and "molding" the middle east instead of just suggesting leaving the whole region alone. Do you feel that Islamic fanaticists would lose their preoccupation with the west if we lost our preoccupation with their oil?

[/ QUOTE ]

No, the Islamic fanatics would not lose their preoccupation with the West if we lost our preoccupation with their oil.

Firstly, the only reason they have any sort of substantial economy at all, is because we buy their oil. Otherwise their GDP would be just terribly, terribly small--and even with the massive oil sales, it is not large compared to other Western countries or regions. So we do help their economies tremendously. Of course, it is a mutually beneficial arrangement. And yes, much of those revenues are concentrated amongst the ruling powers in the Middle East. Yet without those revenues the region would be far poorer still.


[/ QUOTE ]

Ok. I won't debate that.

[/ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Secondly, the principal reason the Islamists hate the West is for religious reasons. The words of Zarqawi and bin-Laden make very clear the religious component to all of this, and this undercurrent is ever present. Their specific stated grievances are just add-ons to the basically religious fanatical theme of hating infidels, democracy, and anything that runs contrary to prely Islamic religious rule.


[/ QUOTE ]

It is unclear if they could garner any support for these ideas if the common folk didn't seem to think that the US was a supreme meddler in the region.

[ QUOTE ]

The problem with just "leaving the Middle East alone" is threefold: 1) if left alone it will continue to fester and produce more virulent anti-Western propaganda and hatred, a la the Saudi Arabia worldwide ideological campaign, 2) Nuclear weapons in the future hands our fanataical enemies such as Iran, could be disastrous, and 3) the current state of the Middle East is entirely deplorable with regard to human rights and especially women's rights. I can't feel morally OK with just allowing many millions to be so oppressed if there is anything within reason which we can do to help the causes of freedom and human rights--and I would hope that you can't, either.


[/ QUOTE ]

Like I said, if the united states was so concerned about human rights, it would do more to help stop human rights abuses in parts of the world that were less economically important, eg, africa. Of course, our silence when it comes to the massacre in darfur is deafening.
[ QUOTE ]

However, as mentioned above, quite a parlay would have to occur before I would actually advocate a Western war against, and occupation of, such countries as Iran, Syria and Saudi Arabia.

[/ QUOTE ]

Re: I\'ve been Thinking
 

You seem to know much about this. To the point where you've gotten me interested to learn more about the Islamic faith myself.

I agree that it's not easy breaking away from years of brainwashing which begins in early childhood. Of course this would increase the possibility of a few intelligent religious fanatics here and there. This is especially true of those who I suspect have lived very sheltered lives.

I'm not sure if men like Osama fall into this catagory however. Some of these guys have traveled the world over and received their education at major universities (you would know better than I if this were true, but I'm guessing that it is). In other words, they have had exposure to the outside world and ample opportunity to think for themselves.

I think we can agree that whatever Osama's personal beliefs are, he must certainly know that catering to the intellectually inferior masses by using religion as a tool, is the surest way to unite his front and further his cause. Just look at how often George Bush throws the word God around to try and unite the intellectually inferior of this country.

Btw-
 

In re-reading my reply it might seem as if I look down on religious people. This is NOT the case and I'm sorry if it came across that way.

Unfortunately, I really do believe that people in large masses whether they be Americans, Muslims, or whatever, are capable of becoming blithering idiots! There's something about human beings in large numbers that when the individual thought process is taken away, it makes them collectively DUMB! A pretty sad take on humanity, huh?

Re: Our man reveals his true colors...
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I can't feel morally OK with just allowing many millions to be so oppressed if there is anything within reason which we can do to help the causes of freedom and human rights--and I would hope that you can't, either.

[/ QUOTE ]




Like I said, if the united states was so concerned about human rights, it would do more to help stop human rights abuses in parts of the world that were less economically important, eg, africa. Of course, our silence when it comes to the massacre in darfur is deafening.

[/ QUOTE ]

I wasn't suggesting that the United States is acting primarily for altruistically moral reasons; rather, I was just stating personal feelings regarding how repugnant I find the oppression of millions of people. And yes, the oppression (and worse) in Sudan, Nigeria, and Darfur is really horrible and sickening. And the US and UN are paying it relatively scant attention it seems.

Re: I\'ve been Thinking
 

You make a good point MMMMMMM. The religous and political aspects cannot be seperated out for them. They are one and the same.