|
| Author | Thread |
|
|
12/01/2006 01:59:20 PM · #201 |
Originally posted by legalbeagle:
I would strongly recommend a trip somewhere like Egypt or Jordan - great photo opportunities ... |
Petra, Jordan
Recent article on School of the Americas
Message edited by author 2006-12-02 15:26:27. |
|
|
|
12/04/2006 07:07:45 AM · #202 |
There are a lot of points to respond to. Forgive me if I don't carry on every thread in detail.
Proximity of religions
My authority for saying Islam was initially considered a sect of Christianity was in William Dalrymple's "From the Holy Mountain" - I do not have a copy to hand to give page references. It also makes the point that the Muslim method of prayer is a better preserved form of prayer as practised by Christians in the 8th century.
I would argue that Christianity and Islam are very similar in many respects. There is a huge variety of types of religion that the world has seen (from Greek mythological gods to Egyptian to Nabatean to Haitian to Incan etc etc). The fact that two derive from the same origins and refer to the same stories, from which they derive their precepts and general concept of god, results in them being very close.
Your suggestions of similarities between Hinduism and Christianity overlook some very central discrepancies. There is no commonality of origin and accordingly (as you would expect) the religions take on a very different nature. Principally, the polydeistic/pantheistic nature of god/s and repeated mortal reincarnation in Hinduism is very different from those concepts in Christianity.
As for closeness of religion, of course I understand the proximity of Christianity and Judaism. However, for obvious reasons, elements of the New Testament are reproduced only in the Qu'ran - whether Judaism or Islam is closer than the other to Christianity is highly tangential to the point (and subjective enough to warrant little further attention).
Imbalance in Reporting
RonB - you are obfuscating by suggesting that I am making a point of principal by saying that majorities or minorities must always be listened to in a certain proportion.
I am saying that those people who believe that all Muslims are somehow plotting against the USA are somehow missing the protests by the majority of Muslims against terrorism. There have been a number of news stories recently criticising the alarmism and lack of education about these issues: //news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20061201/lf_nm/usa_muslims_fear_dc_1
Why do I focus on the negative aspects of the Iraq invasion? Well, Iraq is currently in a situation "worse than civil war" if the latest reports are to be believed. It would not be, but for our actions. What good have we actually done? We have rebuilt parts of the country so that they are nearly as good as what was there before the invasion. We have removed a brutal dictator, but at a cost that far exceeds his brutality. We have exacerbated tension in the area and created a rallying point for extremism. I cannot see much good in the situation.
Helping themselves
The allegations that people in some countries are backwards, murderous, oppressive to women, and that the problems stem from the populace (the problem with Egypt is the Egyptians, the problem with Iraq is the Iraqis, etc) are stereotypical racial slurs made from an ill informed viewpoint.
I find it odd that routerguy666 suggests that the discord is the "result of a backwards belief that a religion should be the determining factor in all aspects of life", when there is such a strong sense of religiosity stemming from the USA at all levels (participants at this site included). However, given that there are several highly oppressive and religious states in the ME that are also very rich with sophisticated societies (Saudi, parts of UAE), the point appears to be disproven.
People are a product of the society that they grow up in. There is no template for the "right" way for society to behave. Because a society is different, it does not give us carte blanche to go and "straighten it out" (no more than Osama has a mandate to straighten out Western society).
People remain people, with all of the faculties that each of us has, regardless of their nationality or creed. I dare say that any society subject to the stresses apparent within Iraq and the failure of systems of control would collapse into civil disorder. It is not the average Iraqi's fault that he is part of a society that contains three vying ethnic groups, large and valuable natural resources, that its invasion has become the rallying cry for fundamentalists throughout the region, nor that the coalition stripped it of most forms of civil control and failed to put in place effective or sufficient replacements.
Think about what happens in Western states when law and order fails (Hurricane Katrina springs to mind - there were reports of murderous gangs taking advantage of the lack of a few days' absence of law and order).
As for tolerating other nations, the Middle East is an area of very great toleration in many respects. Routerguy666 is confusing the rhetoric of some fundamentalists with the people at large. My suggestion of travelling to Egypt is not laughable (I did not suggest Iraq because it is a war-zone - but thanks for pointing out the dangers of travelling in a war-zone, RonB). If you travelled to Egypt, you would see a state implementing many, many measures to control extremism and the vast, vast majority of people in total support of those measures. You might also experience the hospitality and widespread admiration people have for America and Americans generally (although not for the foreign policy of the state).
Iran
If there is one thing that we have to do, it is learn from our mistakes. Invading Iran in order to remove their extremist leadership would be difficult, very costly and perhaps exceed our military capability. Working with Iran to develop a nuclear strategy under international auspices is a realistic proposition. Continued supervision/intelligence collation of any Iranian attempt at nuclear weapons must be maintained and ultimately this program should be stopped. A surgical military response should be the very last resort, as it would irreparably damage relations for decades.
routerguy666 - I believe you thought that Israel could never negotiate with Hamas during the Israeli/Lebanese war. But you were wrong - that was the way that the conflict was resolved. There is increasing pressure to engage Iran and Syria diplomatically over many issues: we do not have the military strength to engage those nations in war, so diplomacy is the only realistic option.
edit:sp
Message edited by author 2006-12-04 13:34:31.
|
|
|
|
12/04/2006 10:12:51 AM · #203 |
Originally posted by routerguy666:
Originally posted by Spazmo99:
Originally posted by routerguy666:
I have no respect whatsoever for people who continue to cry foul every time a Western country makes some attempt to straighten things up in the Middle East. These same people offer no alternative besides 'understanding their culture'. what do you need to understand about cultures who have oppressed the female half of their populations for millenia, continue to place religious beliefs above every semblance of rational governance, and show zero, ZERO, tolerance for the cultures of other nations themselves.
|
You seem so outraged and indignant by other cultures trying to "straighten out" Western culture. Why should they be any less indignant at the attempts of the West to "straighten them out"? |
I'm, rather obviously I thought, talking about people within Western nations decrying the actions of their own, |
Obviously, it was far from obvious.
If the West wants to help, how do you propose they help if the helpers remain ignorant of the wants, needs and motivations of those they are trying to help?
If the West wishes to remain ignorant of those cultures and people, then the West should have never meddled in their affairs in the first place.
|
|
|
|
12/04/2006 02:32:10 PM · #204 |
With logic like this I'm guessing that your pumping gas at night to make up for the lack of legal clients.
"The allegations that people in some countries are backwards, murderous, oppressive to women, and that the problems stem from the populace (the problem with Egypt is the Egyptians, the problem with Iraq is the Iraqis, etc) are stereotypical racial slurs made from an ill informed viewpoint."
Racist why? Because you declare that it is so? If you take a chapter from the Jews, confuse race with religion, and for purposes of discussion consider the muslim peoples of the ME to be a race then I've already offered other examples of ME nations - that race - who seem to have no problem prospering without oppressing their own people.
"However, given that there are several highly oppressive and religious states in the ME that are also very rich with sophisticated societies (Saudi, parts of UAE), the point appears to be disproven."
No. I already offered two examples of nations in the ME who had things on the ball. Notice I did not offer up Saudi Arabia. Like Egypt, Saudi Arabia is an oppresive regime with a massive population of extremely poor people. For you to hold it up as some benchmark for the region shows where the true lack of understanding and geopolitical sense lies in this discussion.
"People are a product of the society that they grow up in. There is no template for the "right" way for society to behave. Because a society is different, it does not give us carte blanche to go and "straighten it out" (no more than Osama has a mandate to straighten out Western society)."
Comrade LegalBeagle, the experiment already failed. People are in part shaped by the society in which they live. That does not mean they are incapable of changing that society nor does it absolve them of the guilt of standing idly by while an opporessive society stomps on the lives of their fellows. There is a template for the 'right' way for a society to behave - it should behave in such a manner that the people of that society benefit from its continued existence. Not a small group of people, not just the people with the guns - the lives of everyone in that society should be better for being a part of it. This exists nowhere on earth. This is what societies should be striving for.
In a completely connected world where no nation is immune from the actions of others, there is an inherent right known as 'self defense' which makes it A-OK for someone to point at a country, identify it as a threat, and take action. Saudi Arabia is a good example. A hyper-rich ruling family exploiting the nation's resources to fund their party decade after decade. Not a dime of that money going to help the citizens of their country. Religios leaders playing on this situation and, so as not to find themselves locked up, blaming not the ruling Saudi elite but The Great Satan in the West for Average Achmed's problems. Meanwhile Average Joe goes to work one fine fall day and has a plane flown into his office. An event that occurred directly as a result from the internal political situation in a country half a planet away.
Tell me again its about respecting their cultures...
"People remain people, with all of the faculties that each of us has, regardless of their nationality or creed."
I agree with this, even though it contradicts your people-are-products-of-society statement not two paragraphs earlier. All people have the same basic talents - the ability to reason and to consider the outcomes of their actions. This is why there is no reason Afghanistan and Iraq can't help themselves. Germany rebuilt itself after living under a dictatorship worse than Saddam's, an occupation more brutal than the Americans', and a loss of life that far outpaces that of the Iraqis no matter how you roll the numbers. The Soviet Union has climbed back from an even longer and even more brutal dictatorship with an incomprensible loss of life as well. Are they a model society? No. Are they gunning each other down in the streets day after day? Nope.
You let these people off the hook far too easily.
|
|
|
|
12/04/2006 02:35:00 PM · #205 |
Originally posted by legalbeagle:
routerguy666 - I believe you thought that Israel could never negotiate with Hamas during the Israeli/Lebanese war. But you were wrong - that was the way that the conflict was resolved. |
No I did not say they couldn't, I said they shouldn't.
Nontheless, this is another revisionist lie. The conflict hasn't been resolved, though Israel agreed to pull out after the UN promised to send in a replacement millitary force to keep the peace and implement the disarmament of Hamas per UN decree. Of course the force they sent in was a fraction of what was promised and they haven't disarmed anyone. Imagine that. |
|
|
|
12/05/2006 06:23:47 AM · #206 |
Originally posted by routerguy666:
With logic like this I'm guessing that your pumping gas at night to make up for the lack of legal clients. |
Yeah yeah yeah.
Originally posted by routerguy666:
Racist why? Because you declare that it is so? |
Are you criticising people of certain nationalities for their inherent inability to organise themselves, for their idleness in not stamping out disorder, or are you criticising their social structure for being prone to disorder? It sounds as though you are criticising the people for their perceived character traits determined by their nationality.
For example, I could ask why americans are so fat. On the one hand I could take this massive generalisation and attribute all americans with the quality of idleness and gluttony. Or, I could criticise say that american culture has developed around a highly capitalist structure that has delivered food at a price rather than a quality standard leaving its poor with high fat and low nutrition diet.
1. All americans are idle and gluttonous = racism.
2. Capitalism within american society has been influential in delivery of a high fat diet = social comment.
I think that your comments are in the vein of the first example, rather than the second.
Originally posted by routerguy666:
There is a template for the 'right' way for a society to behave - it should behave in such a manner that the people of that society benefit from its continued existence. Not a small group of people, not just the people with the guns - the lives of everyone in that society should be better for being a part of it. This exists nowhere on earth. This is what societies should be striving for. |
Yes - this idea of society reflects the american principles of equality and freedom of rights. As you say, as an ideal it is attractive. However, it is incredibly simplistic to say that nations with complex political dynamics and thousands of years of history should be ripping apart their culture and practices in order to fit in with the American view of a perfect society. In any case, how should the average man on the street act in order to affect these macro dynamics? What you are talking about will only ever change over the course of years and decades.
Originally posted by routerguy666:
In a completely connected world where no nation is immune from the actions of others, there is an inherent right known as 'self defense' which makes it A-OK for someone to point at a country, identify it as a threat, and take action. Saudi Arabia is a good example. A hyper-rich ruling family exploiting the nation's resources to fund their party decade after decade. Not a dime of that money going to help the citizens of their country. Religios leaders playing on this situation and, so as not to find themselves locked up, blaming not the ruling Saudi elite but The Great Satan in the West for Average Achmed's problems. Meanwhile Average Joe goes to work one fine fall day and has a plane flown into his office. An event that occurred directly as a result from the internal political situation in a country half a planet away.
Tell me again its about respecting their cultures... |
Do you not suspect that your religious and political elite are playing the same game? Rather than reviewing the reasons why the US is criticised and targetted and doing something about it, the US elite is blaming the Great Satan in the Middle East for all its problems. Meanwhile, Average Achmed goes to work only to be blown up by an american missile fired on the phony pretext that his nation was a direct and immediate threat.
Given that a large part of the world identifies GWB as the greatest threat to world peace, does the principle of self defence work both ways?
//www.iht.com/articles/ap/2006/11/03/america/NA_GEN_World_Views_of_Bush.php
Originally posted by routerguy666:
All people have the same basic talents - the ability to reason and to consider the outcomes of their actions. This is why there is no reason Afghanistan and Iraq can't help themselves. |
I am not sure that Germany and ex-USSR are valid points of reference for post-war reconstruction efforts. Iraq is beset by multiple interest groups (cf ex-USSR Russia and Chechnya where they are still fighting on the streets). It is also a rallying point for extremists. The ongoing fighting is based around guerilla war rather than conventional warfare. There is a significant power vacuum. These are all factors that differentiate Iraq from those other post-war examples.
|
|
|
|
12/05/2006 04:44:23 PM · #207 |
| Actually saying all americans or any nationality is anything is not racist. Racism comes from saying something about someone based on their Race. Being fat has nothing to do with racism. It would be more in a reference to stereo typing a society. Now you could say someone is pedujist for not liking an aspect of someone. We are all guilty of being predujist in one shape or another. You can be predujist about cheese. But racism is used too often to slander the intentions of a person. So to say I don't like the french would be predujist not racist. To say I don't like the french cause they are white or black would be racist. Etc.. |
|
|
|
12/26/2006 03:31:46 PM · #208 |
So they'll be carrying out the sentence within the next month. His appeal was rejected.
A great day for the Iraqi people. I'm sure. |
|
|
|
12/30/2006 09:48:21 AM · #209 |
| Well end of this discussion. He's Finally Dead. |
|
|
|
01/08/2007 06:33:02 AM · #210 |
Originally posted by hokie:
Originally posted by pawdrix:
Originally posted by bigalpha:
Originally posted by pawdrix:
[quote=pawdrix]...but in The Middle East who would expect anything different? |
C'mon. What kind of statement is that? |
I'd say it's a pretty logical statement based on....EVERYTHING!
I have NO faith in that entire part of the world. NONE.
History hasn't given me much good to work with. The entire region defies logic from most all I've seen. |
I agree...but..think about this too. Sometimes the United States defies logic. When we let the evangelical faction of American politics be the defining voice we look just as kooky as the Muslims.
I live in Virginia and we have this marriage ammendment thing trying to pass. Thats right. People trying to ammend the constitution that deals with inalienable rights of the individual to talk about the evangelical side of a civil union. I mean. Sometimes I wonder if I woke up on another planet or I feel like Hester Prynne from the Scarlet letter.
Sorry to get a little off target but I really get fed the "EFF" up when one culture of evangelicals starts throwing rocks at another culture of evangelicals. It's all a bunch of mysticism from my stance and I agree sometimes with the Muslims..it does look like the crusades all over again. |
Message edited by author 2007-01-08 06:33:35. |
|
|
|
01/13/2007 04:52:56 PM · #211 |
received via email...
Sadam's Cat
|
|
|
|
Current Server Time: 07/20/2025 02:00:21 PM  |
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 07/20/2025 02:00:21 PM EDT.
|
