I've been Thinking

[vulturesrow]

[ 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.

[Exsubmariner]

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."

[zipo]

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.

[MaxPower]

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.

[Lestat]

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.

[MMMMMM]

[ 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.

[MMMMMM]

[ 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.

[MMMMMM]

[ 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.

[Lestat]

<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?

[Lestat]

<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.