When I read some of the posts by people in this forum I understand what they mean. However, as Islam spreads around the world, many non-Muslims get a wrong idea about the tenents of Islam. I am not Muslim (or much of anything else) but I take the words of Tsun Tsu seriously: "Know the enemy as yourself and the battle is yours". To understand the "towel/rag/diaper heads" you must understand (not necessarily believe) Islam. This next partial tome is a beginning and I start using a quote from Vox in another thread:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Vox:
Islam is not a religion of peace. The prophet's actions and words, in the Qur'an as well as dubiously "recorded" in the ha'dith, demonstrate an attitude toward outsiders that is demeaning, megalomaniacal...and backed up with threats and uses of murder and treachery. A religion of the sword, perhaps. Of peace, hardly.

---

Vox,

I only say these next words in an effort to give a little insight into Islam. Having said that, I do not claim to be an expert.

The revelations that Allah gave Mohammed via the Angel Gabriel were obviously sequential since there was only so much "word" that Allah passed at a time. When Mohammed first began to get his messages from Allah, he (Mohammed) was residing in Mecca. Mohammed began instructing (preaching) as he was getting his messages. The citizens of Mecca did not take kindly to Mohammed's rejection of their polytheism and idolitry and forced Mohammed and his followers from Mecca. Mohammed went to Medina (somewhat North of Mecca) where his ministry gained strength (Arabic tribal jealousy's played a hand here) and Mohammed returned and took Mecca by force of arms. The slaughter was so bad that after the battle, Mohammed had a visit from Gabriel where God said, "Let your wives be numbered one and two and three and four." This was to keep the widows and orphans (on both sides) from starving (Mohammed had 7 wives, his favorite being a Coptic Christian- a present from the then Egyptian Pharoah). It is this battle for the control of Mecca which divides the revelations from Allah into two parts. Prior to being kicked out of Mecca, Islam was a total religion of peace. However, the revelations from the Medina period onward show a different, warlike, vengeful Allah that the Islamic Fundamentalists use as their example today.

For what it's worth.

Nox

This, sadly, is to be expected as Muhammad was put into a situation where he either fought or he would have been wiped out. Muhammad choose to fight for the message of Allah, and as a consequence, he merged church and state. The Fundamentalists are concerned about maintaing their own power, or achieving it, therefore it makes sense that they choose the Median revelations, they pertain directly to rule.

Nox,
im sorry if this is off subject or in the wrong forum. ( if it is let me know and ill do wut ill have to. )
Why is it so important for everyone to speak out there religion and try to convert everyone or exterminate them? Religion is the source of prejudice. If Mohammed just remained in his spot and preached his crap from there maybe the modern day islamists would not be fueled by revenge. Terrible it is how a man has to try and attempt to finish what an other one started by they only make matters worse.
They say: he died for a cause... but it still did not change the world... so ill do something about it...
but suicide bombers only make matters worse.
And whats worse is that cristianity wich is a religion based on "The Pardon" continues in the game of revenge. So cristians are just as bad Or even worse then Muslums.

I belive that a religion should be personnal. And should not be a justification for any sort of bad action.
A holywar is just an excuse for a hate war.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Nox:
...but I take the words of Tsun Tsu seriously: "Know the enemy as yourself and the battle is yours".

---

I'm sure you were just paraphrasing but...

quote:

---

One who knows the enemy and knows himself will not be endangered in a hundred engagements. One who does not know the enemy but knows himself will sometimes be victorious, sometimes meet with defeat. One who knows neither the enemy nor himself will invariably be defeated in every engagement.

---

Sun Tzu-Art of War

The quote is from chapter three, Planning Offensives.

Just trying to help.

I think people (mainly Westerners) get confused between "holy war" or Jihad, and what al Qaeada are doing. Just because they SAY it is a jihad does not make it true. There are a number of rules of the Jihad and to my nowledge I think only one of them has been obeyed by al Qaeada. (the one about protecting Islam, allegedly).

The Crusades is an example of real Jihad (from the Muslim perspective) as they were 100% defensive. And one would argue that the defense of Tora Bora also was Jihad in that no land was expected to be gained, no civilians were needlessly killed and it was to protect Islam - 9/11 was however not. And that is what people need to relise.

Some Muslims are violent but then so are some Christians and some Hindus (Buddhists are never violent). But not all Christians are violent as are all Muslims and I can't be arsed

quote:

---

Originally posted by Templeton:
Just trying to help.

---

Thanks, I appreciate it.

King,

You are not off topic. I have to go to work now and I will answer later.

Nox

OK, u guys have the wrong idea about islam, sep 11 isnt a jihad i agree, terrorism is wrong i agree, but what you have to understand is that islam only allows jihad to be waged in self defence, eg. crusades.
It is NOT a religion of war but a religion of justice and peace, it doesnt tell you to turn the other cheek when you are getting a beating but tells you to fight back.
It is a religion of peace because it does not allow invasion of other countries for no reason.
So go read some unbiased info about islam and u might change your mind.

i think theres no such thing as "terrorism" but only a label stamped onto people or groups who oppose the US. i mean how do classify terrorism? no matter how u classify it, US would prolly fit into it. unless u classify terrorism as picking flowers and make love and peace :S

a terrorist is someone who disagrees with the current regime.. simple

quote:

---

Originally posted by ChuckStone:
(Buddhists are never violent)

---

I seem to remember a few Buddhists setting themselves on fire about 35 years ago. Violence against oneself is no less violent than against another, you are still killing someone. It doesn't matter what you are protesting.

As for Islam being violent or a threat to others, name one religion that hasn't.

Catholics tortured/murdered hundreds if not thousands of indigenous peoples throughout the world if they wouldn't convert from the pagan idolatry.

Christians had their fun in the sun also.

Jews? Yeah, they were there.

All organized religion has its downside, as soon as the person spewing it says "we are the one true religion" you know what is coming next, everyone else is evil and needs to have something bad happen to them. That is the reason none of them like the chosen to ask any questions, just believe, or else, because no religion can take too much light being shown upon it. They always come down to a book, scroll, stone tablet, story handed down over a thousand years or so as their rock solid proof of concept.

There has never been a religion that didn't start out as some guys great idea for getting a free meal.

Jihad does not mean Holy War, it means struggle. It is just that jihad is the duty off all Muslims, so when the clerics at the Mosque are trying to rally the people into a jihad agaisnt the US, in effect, they are trying to use their religion as a starter for a war. So while the term itself does not mean holy war, the effect in the world is a polarization where it is Muslims vs. Non Muslims.

"(Buddhists are never violent)"

ever heard of komikaze pilots? they were shinto, a sect of buddhism that is, obviously, very violent. all samurai were shinto. it is a mistake to equate zen buddhism, a very peaceful form of bbuddhism, with some of the more violent types.

Shinto is not a form of Buddhism.

What was "neccssary" about the Mohammedan wars of expansion?

pardon, the religion practiced by komikaze pilots was a combination of both shinto, and ancient japanese religion, and buddhism.
http://www.askasia.org/frclasrm/readings/r000009.htm

Nox,

So Islam went from a religion of peace to a religion of the sword while its prophet was still alive? Not a very long stretch of benevolence. My point isn't that some people practice their religion without rioting over denominations; it's that modern clerics draw from an ample source when they exhort their people to kill infidels because they are in the state of jahiliyya...or short of killing them, just enlslaving them, taxing them, or forcing them to convert.

Muslim countries have practically existed only during periods of war with their neighbors. Their armies, under the Arabs, Ottomans, Tatars, and the Moguls in India, came to dominate a large part of Europe and Northern Africa. Since the end of the Ottoman Empire in the 18th century, as it watched Europe accelerate into the industrial age, Muslim societies have been woefully behind economically, politically, and technologically.

The ineptitude of their governments are downplayed in favor of outside scapegoats--- who can only be resisted, never beaten. This keeps the blame away from the government, who should long ago have been overthrown by the people, but for one problem.

Islam is inexorably interwoven into the politics and societies of certain countries, and has not denounced those Muslims who continue in the path of the Prophet to struggle to protect the umma from the impure infidel. Even in America, Muslim groups do not come out and loudly denounce even those Muslims that kill their purported countrymen and women. Instead they raise money and donate it to Hisb'allah.

Their religion leaves much to be desired in the promotion of peace department. Unfortunately for them, they are misjudging us and our ways.

We are militarily strong, and the Arab world abjectly weak, not because of courage, numbers, brains, or better weather. We're superior because of our culture. To paraphrase Victor Davis Hanson: a billion Muslims doesn't amount to MIT, West Point, the US Congress, the International Herald Tribune, and the G.I. Bill.

Like the Greeks arguing and debating before
they rowed out with Themistocles, we sit and argue among ourselves before invading Iraq. The trend of imitation in military affairs, equipment, and tactics flows from the West to the Rest, and not vice versa, because of a social tradition that has spanned 2500 years.

Like Marxists, who blamed corporations and colonialism for the massive problems caused in the absense of open markets and free society, Islamists fail to recognize that Western supremacy hasn't everything to do with luck or resources, and much to do with social fabric.

Middle Eastern governments don't have the courage to admit that their societies are bankrupt because they are largely illiterate, governments are unrepresentative and unresponsive, economies closed, and their fundamentalists repress free speech, thought exchange, and public expression of dissatisfaction.

This wouldn't be so problematic for me if they would confine themselves to their own desert, but Islam has a startling proselytizing streak that makes it dangerous to democratic society. The West cannot overlook Muslim history when making military and security decisions, as Islam is too enmeshed in Middle Eastern society.

The fifty or so Islamic governments, save perhaps Morocco, Bangladesh, and somewhere else I can't recall, are ruled by kleptocratic thugs who are all too happy to allow their state-run newspapers broadcast "impartial" programs that provide an outlet for the masses' increasing psychological dislocation and political exclusion. They project the anger outward at the American and Jewish pig dogs, of course, having the helpful side effect of stifling public disillusionment with the government at home.

There are serious issues with governments that are truly a combination of religion and state. The West fought bloody revolutions and hundred-year wars before we split them apart. Islam has not crossed that bridge yet, but then again, the West only took so long because it didn't have the benefit of a globalizing cultural and economic society. There is change in the wind for the Middle East, and the West will effect it in some places through force, in others through diplomacy.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Vox:
Nox,

So Islam went from a religion of peace to a religion of the sword while its prophet was still alive? Not a very long stretch of benevolence. My point isn't that some people practice their religion without rioting over denominations; it's that modern clerics draw from an ample source when they exhort their people to kill infidels because they are in the state of jahiliyya...or short of killing them, just enlslaving them, taxing them, or forcing them to convert.

---

Wrong , islam ended the period of jahilliya.
Islam did not turn from a religion of peace to a religion of the sword, but it encourages peace and dialouge between civilisations, the sword is only used in self defence.

quote:

---

Muslim countries have practically existed only during periods of war with their neighbors. Their armies, under the Arabs, Ottomans, Tatars, and the Moguls in India, came to dominate a large part of Europe and Northern Africa. Since the end of the Ottoman Empire in the 18th century, as it watched Europe accelerate into the industrial age, Muslim societies have been woefully behind economically, politically, and technologically.

---

Muslim countries were always a world power when they were united under the banner of islam, but when they were divided into tiny squabbeling states they lost their power, and became the fools they are now.

And your statement of "Muslim countries have practically existed only during periods of war with their neighbors." is totaly wrong because muslim countries have existed since the establishement of islam by prophet Muhammed.

quote:

---

The ineptitude of their governments are downplayed in favor of outside scapegoats--- who can only be resisted, never beaten. This keeps the blame away from the government, who should long ago have been overthrown by the people, but for one problem.

Islam is inexorably interwoven into the politics and societies of certain countries, and has not denounced those Muslims who continue in the path of the Prophet to struggle to protect the umma from the impure infidel. Even in America, Muslim groups do not come out and loudly denounce even those Muslims that kill their purported countrymen and women. Instead they raise money and donate it to Hisb'allah.

---

Islam is a way of life, and it is CHOSEN by the people to be their way of life, just like you choose to be a christian or athiest.
Muslims should retain their religious ties to all muslims around the world.

You say they do not openly denounce the muslims that are killing their country men, but tell me when have the american people been killed with no reason? never, im not saying terror is right, but the terrorists have a reason to carry out their acts, and the american government is to blame in the end.

quote:

---

Their religion leaves much to be desired in the promotion of peace department. Unfortunately for them, they are misjudging us and our ways.

---

LOL, that must be the funniest comment i have ever heard, misjudging your ways? LOOOL
your ways: Killing innocent civilians, world domination , imperialism, benefiting the rich and making the poor poorer, ripping other countries off and getting them
to be bankrupt with your IMF, stealing oil and other valuable resources, putting puppet regimes in power in many countries to benefit yourself and destroy the economy of that country and it's people, and the list goes on....

quote:

---

We are militarily strong, and the Arab world abjectly weak, not because of courage, numbers, brains, or better weather. We're superior because of our culture. To paraphrase Victor Davis Hanson: a billion Muslims doesn't amount to MIT, West Point, the US Congress, the International Herald Tribune, and the G.I. Bill.

---

Your culture: Greed, exploitation, murder, rape, crime, rape, corruption, immorality, and the list goes on...

quote:

---

Like the Greeks arguing and debating before
they rowed out with Themistocles, we sit and argue among ourselves before invading Iraq. The trend of imitation in military affairs, equipment, and tactics flows from the West to the Rest, and not vice versa, because of a social tradition that has spanned 2500 years.

---

special tradition, LOOOL, when your kings were still trying to read, our people were composing poetry and writing beautiful words.

quote:

---

Like Marxists, who blamed corporations and colonialism for the massive problems caused in the absense of open markets and free society, Islamists fail to recognize that Western supremacy hasn't everything to do with luck or resources, and much to do with social fabric.

---

We are unlike communists in many ways, they failed, we will not, they were hated, we are the fastest growing religion in the world, they had your culture , we do not.

quote:

---

Middle Eastern governments don't have the courage to admit that their societies are bankrupt because they are largely illiterate, governments are unrepresentative and unresponsive, economies closed, and their fundamentalists repress free speech, thought exchange, and public expression of dissatisfaction.

---

]

Actualy muslims will acknowledge these things, we know alot about the world unlike you, we study all our lives and learn more than 1 language, while you are taking pride in your english and refuse to accept anything else, in our societies if you do not have a university education you are a bum, in many western countries university educations are not a necessity.
Our governments have been imposed on us by the west and the USA, this is a fact.
So don't blame islam but blame yourself, and as people wake up in the eastern and western worlds and realise what is happening you will be more hated than you already are.

quote:

---

This wouldn't be so problematic for me if they would confine themselves to their own desert, but Islam has a startling proselytizing streak that makes it dangerous to democratic society. The West cannot overlook Muslim history when making military and security decisions, as Islam is too enmeshed in Middle Eastern society.

---

Islam is not just a religion of the desert but a religion of the earth as it has followers all round the world, and the only reason it is dangerous to you and your way of life is because islam is about change and improving one's self, your governments do not want this change, but it is the inevitable, islam is growing rapidly, and believe me killing innocent people will not stop it from reaching even people like your self.

quote:

---

The fifty or so Islamic governments, save perhaps Morocco, Bangladesh, and somewhere else I can't recall, are ruled by kleptocratic thugs who are all too happy to allow their state-run newspapers broadcast "impartial" programs that provide an outlet for the masses' increasing psychological dislocation and political exclusion. They project the anger outward at the American and Jewish pig dogs, of course, having the helpful side effect of stifling public disillusionment with the government at home.

---

LOL, morroco and bangladesh? I know for sure that morroco is a dictatorship, and i see that you don't mind a dictatorship just because it is satisfying your own government, why don't you ask princecharmant he/ she is from morroco and he/she can tell you all about it, you don't give a damn about the people, they are ruled
by dictators but you don't mind them since they are serving you.

quote:

---

There are serious issues with governments that are truly a combination of religion and state. The West fought bloody revolutions and hundred-year wars before we split them apart. Islam has not crossed that bridge yet, but then again, the West only took so long because it didn't have the benefit of a globalizing cultural and economic society. There is change in the wind for the Middle East, and the West will effect it in some places through force, in others through diplomacy.

---

WTF?
PLZ explain this statement and clarify it.

Wrong, I used the term jahiliyya mockingly to describe the Islamic portrayal of non-Muslim society. Your fantasy of Islam is the very problem I am trying to convey: while we have people like you, who hold Islam on a pedestal and claim it to be the fastest-growing religion (as if that meant anything) that promotes peace and dialogue, we have the reality of the thing, which is violence, antagonism, and archaic practices of beard-growing and woman-hating. I don't know where you're from, but English is apparently not your native tongue judging by the problems you've had understanding my writing. I'll explain it for you, though I refuse to write in your pseudo-english code.

You admit modern Islamic states are fools. I agree. You blame this on the West. I say you're a finger-pointing scapegoat-finding coward that can't find fault with himself and his mind-bogglingly backward religion, so you blame everything on me. Ignoramus.

And your statement of "Muslim countries have practically existed only during periods of war with their neighbors." is totaly wrong because muslim countries have existed since the establishement of islam by prophet Muhammed.

How does this disprove my statement? Muslims have been warring with themselves and other religions since Mohammed's time. Disprove this, if you can.

Islam is a way of life, and it is CHOSEN by the people to be their way of life, just like you choose to be a christian or athiest.
Muslims should retain their religious ties to all muslims around the world.

I agree. And their religious ties should not supercede the ties "American" Muslims have to their home country. The fact that they don't only reinforces my argument that Islam is not a religion of peace, it's a religion of conflict. When a Talmudist terrorist kills innocent people, Jewish groups condemn his actions. When Muslim terrorists kill innocents from all nations, over and over again, in any country, not a peep is heard from "American" Muslims. Obviously ties of faith outweigh ties of nationality for these people, which is disgusting.

You say they do not openly denounce the muslims that are killing their country men, but tell me when have the american people been killed with no reason? never, im not saying terror is right, but the terrorists have a reason to carry out their acts, and the american government is to blame in the end.

Again, you make counterarguments that don't even address my arguments. Are you telling me that "American" Muslims hate the government too, and are just doing a good job of hiding it so they aren't persecuted while their jihadist brethren rampage against civilians? If so, then they are just as cowardly as the murderers that they support.

Killing innocent civilians, world domination , imperialism, benefiting the rich and making the poor poorer, ripping other countries off and getting them

Yes, yes, we've all heard this before. Well, all cultures have killed innocent civilians. Islamists are indiscriminate, killing infidels, fellow Muslims, and their own people. At least the West protects its own. Imperialsm is over, by the way, and can't be used as a slander for much longer. You might need to find another catch phrase to throw around as evidence of Western brutality soon.

"Benefiting the rich, and making the poor poorer." Quantify this statement, please. If you mean the gap in America is growing, you're wrong and shouldn't believe every single bit of leftist dogma thrown your way. In America, the nember of people living under the poverty line has dropped by 33% in the last thirty years, while the middle class has grown and leaned toward the upper. A basic element of wealth, as another poster said (forgive me for not quoting you), is that its presence promotes more wealth. Who should get this in your opinion? The person/corporation/country that originally invested it? Or the ones that are improving their lot through its presence?

As you see the concept crosses national borders. The industrial North is richer than the developing South (I mean global hemispheres, before you get excited)? Well, we did industrialize about two hundred years ago, and they're just doing it now (and not becuse they figured it out, by the way. Because we taught them how). Their standard of living has increased over the last century, has it not? Their countries have gained technological and mechanical tools, benefited from foreign direct investment and construction of industrial and commercial buildings, and injections of hard currency into their own local businesses followed by instruction in how to efficiently run their economies. IMF and WTO help this process. You abviously have no clue what either acronym stands for, much less what these organizations do, so for you to blame the woes of the Third World on them shows your leftist teaching.

For the last time, oil and other resources are PURCHASED from the countries they are in. What the corrupt, clan-based governments in those countries does with it is not the fault of the US. The "stealing" routine is just a charged catchword to get excitable little guys like you angry and show you someone else to blame but yourself.

If you knew anythign about history or politics, you'd see the trend in American foreign policy of helping other nations' economies. Marshall Plan ring a bell? And that's only the government. I've already gon over how private investment helps developing countries.

Your culture: Greed, exploitation, murder, rape, crime, rape, corruption, immorality, and the list goes on...

Here are some interesting things for you to think about:

Greed, exploitation: Financial evidence discovered in Yassir Arafat's various compounds shows he has amassed a fortune of over a billion dollars. A British intelligence report says the figure is much higher, closer to ten billion. This money comes from funds given as aid to the PA by Japan, the US, and EU since 1993. The EU still contributes $10 million a month to Arafat's various Swiss, American, and off-shore bank accounts, and meanwhile his "people," live in squalor and demand resources from Israel through bloodshed. Who is greedy? Saddam, Fahd and company, Arafat, Qadafi, Mubarak, Abdullah, Khamenei, al-Sabah...and that's just the ones currently in power. (source: NY Post, Aug 14).

Murder, rape, crime, rape: Okay.
My line: "You said rape twice."
Your line: "I like rape."

"A Pakistani tribal council ordered an 18-year-old girl to be gang-raped in order to punish her family after her brother was seen
walking with a girl from a higher class tribe." (Washington Post, July 2) In addition, though I regrettably can't recall the source (trust me it was an actual study done by an independent poller), Muslim males are reponsible for the lion's share of rapes in Europe, against muslima and non-muslim alike.

Corruption, immorality, the list goes on...: Please. Spare this redundant routine. As if every Middle Eastern country weren't ruled by autocratic, corrupt-to-the-bone regimes. And don't get onto morality too lightly...the US isn't alone in using capital punishment, but we certainly don't do it by letting the village throw stones at the condemned's head.

special tradition, LOOOL, when your kings were still trying to read, our people were composing poetry and writing beautiful words.

Laugh out loud all you want, you hyena. I said SOCIAL tradition. I will grant you, Western civilization had it rough in the civilization area for several hundred years. But that didn't stop it from burning Jerusalem to the ground repeatedly, while you were playing pretty music and waxing lyrical about flying carpets.

We are unlike communists in many ways, they failed, we will not, they were hated, we are the fastest growing religion in the world, they had your culture , we do not.

I said Marxists, not communists. You place blame on external factors because it's easier that way, change can (theoretically) come without destabilizing the current government, quite an attractive idea for the Clerics and corrupt officials who rule Middle Eastern countries. And I've got news for you: you are hated. The only reason you're around is because there is a foul reverse-racism against western civilization, mostly spawned of its own lazy "intellectuals" as they follow in the detrimental-sophist path of Rome's own scholars before its fall. The very hope of capitalism is what keeps us from sweeping our armies into the Middle East---we want you to get through it on your own. Plus, that little thing called "civility."

Actualy muslims will acknowledge these things, we know alot about the world unlike you, we study all our lives and learn more than 1 language, while you are taking pride in your english and refuse to accept anything else, in our societies if you do not have a university education you are a bum, in many western countries university educations are not a necessity.
Our governments have been imposed on us by the west and the USA, this is a fact.
So don't blame islam but blame yourself, and as people wake up in the eastern and western worlds and realise what is happening you will be more hated than you already are.

You know nothing about me. I am fluent in French and English, and speak and read Spanish. I was educated in France and the United States, so I know a lot about Muslims, having lived in very close proximity with them in France. Your accusations of ignorance and anglophilia are unsubstantiated fantasy. Find something else to accuse me of, if you can.

I don't know what you're insinuating with the university comment. I've completed four years of university schooling and have a bachelor's degree. I'm enrolling in law school next fall to pursue a graduate degree. I am college educated, as are more than half of Americans. 85% completed high school. A college degree doesn't guarantee or impede a role in society, as many people live rewarding, middle to upper class lives without college degrees.

Other governments imposed on you by the west adn the US. If this is so true, why don't you do something about it? You think the US supports the current government in Saudi Arabia or Iran or Kuwait because it shares warm relations with them? Not hardly. They have something we want; namely, oil. We can't take it by force (that pesky civility thing again), so we live with it. Again, these governments do an excellent job of funneling public rage away from the root of the problem and out at the US. You are a perfect example of this.

LOL, morroco and bangladesh? I know for sure that morroco is a dictatorship...you don't give a damn about the people, they are ruled by dictators but you don't mind them since they are serving you.

Well, at least you know something for sure. I didn't deny the existence of tyrants in Bangladesh or Morocco. I only said their media was somewhat freer than all the others. Read a little more carefully next time before you start laughing.

I would like to see a developed, modern Middle East, without Islamofascists and clerical regimes. I have Iraqi friends, believe it or not, and they are at least pragmatic about a solution for progress (though they also tend toward the "blame Israel" camp). I hate the fact that my government allows countries like Saudi Arabia and Iran to control their people ruthlessly, especially since these countries hardly "serve" me, they finance murderers to fly planes in to my buildings. But when the choices are either to ride it out and let the people do their thing or to send in troops, I'm glad we leave the revolutions to them. Isn't that what you want?

Your posts are a jumble of guilty admissions, accusations, and baseless insults. Since oyu had trouble with my last paragraph, I'll give you another chance to understand it.

Islamic government is bad. We used to have rulers appointed by God, but we stopped after we had an Enlightenment. Eventually, Muslims will too, I can only hope, since divine inspiration is a dreadful way to run a country. Keep your religion in the home and the heart, and away from government, because government cannot be fancy to the whims of priests if it is ever to be considered just and equitable.

Now do you get it?

possibly a minor point BUT
nearly all major religions have been used as a excuse for war.

Christianity is just as violent a religion as Islam. The most significant difference (and it is a significant difference) between the two is that the Qu'ran is believed to be the verbose word of Allah, whereas the Bible is generally accepted by modern Christians to be the work of human scribes (with further details lost in translation). Consequently Christians seek to interpret the Bible and follow Jesus' teaching, whereas Islam demands strict adherence to the incontrovertible truth of the Qu'ran. This makes it easier for Christian societies to progress to a secular, tolerant society than Islamic societies (Turkey has been largely secular since the rise of nationalism after the division of the last vestiges of the Ottoman Empire, but it is enforced secularism).

The trouble with Vox's polemic is while much of what he states is accurate, it can be applied to other authoritarian governments and to other faiths. Islamic clerics are no more guilty than other religious leaders (or any leaders) of shifting the burden of blame from the government to scapegoats. Incessant religious wars were fought between different denominations of Christianity (all with political ulterior motives).

Then there is the fallacy of mistaking failure to issue strong condemnation for tacit support. I hear little condemnation for the Provisional IRA from Irish American, but rather more about Irish Americans offering financial and logistical support to them. Sometimes media and ignorant individuals openly support them as freedom fighters. I would not, however make the mistake of assuming that Irish Americans endorsed terrorism.

quote:

---

Like the Greeks arguing and debating before
they rowed out with Themistocles, we sit and argue among ourselves before invading Iraq

---

The major difference being we have the resources to easily succede, and we're not fighting a major war.

Blue Rock:

The reason so many of us don't speak other languages is because we don't have to. Our superior culture is dominant, our language is part of our culture.

Though I'd like to learn Aye-rabic so I can stand on tables and give speeches on oppressive imperialistic bananas.

The major difference being we have the resources to easily succede, and we're not fighting a major war.

Let me be the first on to correct you.
Everyone though that bin laden would be easily captured, where is he now?
resources? You already in huge debt how much more have u got to lose?
I kept the best for the last.

we're not fighting a major war.

You are figthing a war against a phantom, against something that lives inside every person. A hate against the American ppl. Why u migth wonder, Because of thier way of life and the fact that they suck out the life out of this plannet. Maybe not the average citizen but the men in control. They are so many and they do what they want ( let me not wander off subject .. go check in conspiracy ). You will fight this war for years, and drag the whole planet into a global war, ( WORLD WAR is the term I belive ). There will always be terrorist treaths. And you will always have to respond to them. Kinda like the Jews who try n kill 10 palestinians for every dead jew.
Now more precisly about Irak. Youre going into that country for the second time in 10 years. Thats kinda major. I understand u wanna fix this problem once and for all but the fix has to come from te inside. Stop Arming groops and trying to take them out when they reach out of ur control years later. Stop putting your bases in every country. And The best thing to do would be to find a alternative to fuel.
With the money spent on ur bombs and state-of-the-art weapons im sure you could have found an engine wich didn't need oil and could have even found a way to comercialise it. No... u Have to steriotype, provoque, invande, kill, move on to the next one.
Afganistan, Irak, N korea, Who is next?
Ever heard te term mind your own bizzness?
now would be a good time to do that Mr. Usa.
hehehe I know im not talking to Bush here but im just spitting out my opinion.
when war comes inside your country figth it. do not look overseas for a war to help ur economy. Yes war came on 9\11. u didnt know how to deal with it. But since then have there been any attacks inside the USA? HAven't herd about them. THe usa is playing a war game cuz its fun. Play it alone. here have another civil war, as long as u keep it inside your borders and dont take your shit internationally. And stop influancing countrys who have nothing to do with your cause.
grr.

not a major war?
Ha.

Has it ever occured to you that the reason there hasn't been another major attack is that we've wised up on Saudi illegal immigrants and have Osama and Co. on their heels?

We're not playing war games, asshole. We aren't killing innocent Afghans. We knew exactly how to deal with the pukes that attacked us on September 11. And you can be goddamn sure that when the US invades Iraq the results will be swift, the interim government secure and benevolent, and the ultimate result a Westernizing foothold on the Middle East.

My arguments never play hypocritical strings. I freely admit the US uses its power to protect itself from those who seek to undermine it. Americans see things from a different perspective than you do, because even when you gang together and try to make us do something, we say "go fuck yourselves" and do whatever we want. You're ineffectual.

But we're a stable, benevolent hegemon. And though we do spend a lot on weapons, this research finds many applications in the world that help further human civilization...including this descendant of DARPANET on which we're now conversing. Research is research, and you're retarded to believe that the military isn't working on alternate sources of energy. Trust me, the military uses more forms of energy than anyone else, corporation or government.

ICC: bad idea from my perspective. All I see is the EU trying to weasel a little backdoor to unermine US supremacy. We do all the grunt work when some megalomaniac tyrant starts "cleansing" his country, but then you want to take us to court afterwards? This just isn't going to happen when you're economically and militarily outclassed (not to mention economically and militarily dependent).

My "polemic" is simply that Islam has been bellicose since its inception. Western religion is and was violent. The difference now, which too many people in the world don't understand, is that those Americans that count are not dumb and unwitting and oblivious to their government's objectives. We aren't under the sway of Jerry Falwell (and he never tells us it's our sacred duty to go out and kill the Muslim wherever he is found) in this country. We support our government, and it matters very little to us that you think we're bullies. We built your fucking countries with our blood and our money. In just 228 years, we've been around the block a couple times.

We've got our eye on you cockbreath. And where is bin Laden? Could be dead for all you know. Could be alive. All I know is his face hasn't been showing up around al-Jazeera lately, and nobody's attacked the Pentagon or our military yet. Islamic terror is so incredibly stupid. It doesn't work when the country you're doing it to fears for its physical existence and has nearly unlimited manpower, technological superiority, and military strength. Public support in this country is a terrible weapon, one you shouldn't be too quick to discount. When this country fights a war, armies are flattened. You are warned.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Vox:
Wrong, I used the term jahiliyya mockingly to describe the Islamic portrayal of non-Muslim society. Your fantasy of Islam is the very problem I am trying to convey: while we have people like you, who hold Islam on a pedestal and claim it to be the fastest-growing religion (as if that meant anything) that promotes peace and dialogue, we have the reality of the thing, which is violence, antagonism, and archaic practices of beard-growing and woman-hating. I don't know where you're from, but English is apparently not your native tongue judging by the problems you've had understanding my writing. I'll explain it for you, though I refuse to write in your pseudo-english code.

---

Yes english is my third language, so i have an excuse.

It means a lot that islam is the fastest growing religion, this shows that it is being accepted by more people all the time, so stop being ignorant.

I regard islam highly because I have read about it and its ways, unlike you, you just take example of islam from primitive retards like the taliban which are not considered as muslims by most muslims. I read views from both sides and so far i see that islam is the better system.

quote:

---

You admit modern Islamic states are fools. I agree. You blame this on the West. I say you're a finger-pointing scapegoat-finding coward that can't find fault with himself and his mind-bogglingly backward religion, so you blame everything on me. Ignoramus.

---

No i blame the west for placing those governments in power, you supported the taliban before Sep 11 so what are you talking about?

My religion constantly tells us to seek knowledge and advancement in our lives but the people that are in power that YOUR government have placed are not allowing us to do this, so tell me why I shouldn't blame you.

quote:

---

[b]And your statement of "Muslim countries have practically existed only during periods of war with their neighbors." is totaly wrong because muslim countries have existed since the establishement of islam by prophet Muhammed.

How does this disprove my statement? Muslims have been warring with themselves and other religions since Mohammed's time. Disprove this, if you can.

---

Your statement was that muslim countries have only existed in times of war which is false. Yes muslims have fought with eachother, so what? There has been civil wars in most european countries and the USA too. WHATS YOUR POINT?

quote:

---

Islam is a way of life, and it is CHOSEN by the people to be their way of life, just like you choose to be a christian or athiest.
Muslims should retain their religious ties to all muslims around the world.

I agree. And their religious ties should not supercede the ties "American" Muslims have to their home country. The fact that they don't only reinforces my argument that Islam is not a religion of peace, it's a religion of conflict. When a Talmudist terrorist kills innocent people, Jewish groups condemn his actions. When Muslim terrorists kill innocents from all nations, over and over again, in any country, not a peep is heard from "American" Muslims. Obviously ties of faith outweigh ties of nationality for these people, which is disgusting.

---

Exactly, this is what islam is about, tying people under their religion, nationalism is completely against islam, this way racism is eliminated, for you this might be disgusting as you seem to me like a close minded person, but to muslims this is how they feel.

quote:

---

You say they do not openly denounce the muslims that are killing their country men, but tell me when have the american people been killed with no reason? never, im not saying terror is right, but the terrorists have a reason to carry out their acts, and the american government is to blame in the end.

Again, you make counterarguments that don't even address my arguments. Are you telling me that "American" Muslims hate the government too, and are just doing a good job of hiding it so they aren't persecuted while their jihadist brethren rampage against civilians? If so, then they are just as cowardly as the murderers that they support.

---

Well i don't really think they are hiding it, there were huge anti war demonstrations with palestinian banners and all, and i guarantee there were many muslims participating in those, so i don't think they are cowardly at all , but brave to live in a society where almost everyone disagrees with their beliefs and call them terrorists.

quote:

---

Killing innocent civilians, world domination , imperialism, benefiting the rich and making the poor poorer, ripping other countries off and getting them

Yes, yes, we've all heard this before. Well, all cultures have killed innocent civilians. Islamists are indiscriminate, killing infidels, fellow Muslims, and their own people. At least the West protects its own. Imperialsm is over, by the way, and can't be used as a slander for much longer. You might need to find another catch phrase to throw around as evidence of Western brutality soon.

---

Is it over? I thought imperialism is well on it's way. I think you forgot what imperialism actually is, let me remind you from a dictionary.

Imperialism n the policy or practise of extending a country's influence over other territories by conquest, colonization, or economic domination.

This is happening, and while the USA keeps on practising imperialism i can safely use it as a catch phrase.

quote:

---

"Benefiting the rich, and making the poor poorer." Quantify this statement, please. If you mean the gap in America is growing, you're wrong and shouldn't believe every single bit of leftist dogma thrown your way. In America, the nember of people living under the poverty line has dropped by 33% in the last thirty years, while the middle class has grown and leaned toward the upper. A basic element of wealth, as another poster said (forgive me for not quoting you), is that its presence promotes more wealth. Who should get this in your opinion? The person/corporation/country that originally invested it? Or the ones that are improving their lot through its presence?

---

Man, can't you think of other nations and other people than yourselves, I wasn't talking about the american economy, i was talking about the economies of other nations and how they are destroyed by the USA, eg Iraq. The rich (USA) are getting richer and the poor (iraq and others) are getting poorer.

quote:

---

As you see the concept crosses national borders. The industrial North is richer than the developing South (I mean global hemispheres, before you get excited)? Well, we did industrialize about two hundred years ago, and they're just doing it now (and not becuse they figured it out, by the way. Because we taught them how). Their standard of living has increased over the last century, has it not? Their countries have gained technological and mechanical tools, benefited from foreign direct investment and construction of industrial and commercial buildings, and injections of hard currency into their own local businesses followed by instruction in how to efficiently run their economies. IMF and WTO help this process. You abviously have no clue what either acronym stands for, much less what these organizations do, so for you to blame the woes of the Third World on them shows your leftist teaching.

---

You see that's your problem, you believe everything for what it appears to be without really understanding it, you read IMF- international monetary fund and start thinking - man the USA have set this up so they can benefit the poor and the nations of the world who need money. What you fail to realise is that the USA benefits MOST out of this organisation.
And in the end the nations have benefited the USA more than themselves when using that money.

quote:

---

For the last time, oil and other resources are PURCHASED from the countries they are in. What the corrupt, clan-based governments in those countries does with it is not the fault of the US. The "stealing" routine is just a charged catchword to get excitable little guys like you angry and show you someone else to blame but yourself.

---

You again persist on saying i blame the USA for no reason. I will answer you very basically so you understand: the little clan leaderships are the puppets of your governments, this benefits the USA as they cover up for their stealing.

quote:

---

If you knew anythign about history or politics, you'd see the trend in American foreign policy of helping other nations' economies. Marshall Plan ring a bell? And that's only the government. I've already gon over how private investment helps developing countries.

---

LOOOOOL. The Marshal plan was to prevent communism from spreading to Europe, it wasn't much of a good natured donation but was aimed to benefit US aims.

In WW2 the USA didn't even help the allies in the beggining, until they saw that hitler would be a threat to them and he was advancing rapidly and conquering Europe, so to keep themselves on the safe side they started SELLING weapons to their "allies" (PATHETIC).

quote:

---

Your culture: Greed, exploitation, murder, rape, crime, rape, corruption, immorality, and the list goes on...

Here are some interesting things for you to think about:

Greed, exploitation: Financial evidence discovered in Yassir Arafat's various compounds shows he has amassed a fortune of over a billion dollars. A British intelligence report says the figure is much higher, closer to ten billion. This money comes from funds given as aid to the PA by Japan, the US, and EU since 1993. The EU still contributes $10 million a month to Arafat's various Swiss, American, and off-shore bank accounts, and meanwhile his "people," live in squalor and demand resources from Israel through bloodshed. Who is greedy? Saddam, Fahd and company, Arafat, Qadafi, Mubarak, Abdullah, Khamenei, al-Sabah...and that's just the ones currently in power. (source: NY Post, Aug 14).

---

AND? Your point? even if Arafat did use that money everything he buys would be destroyed by israeli tanks and bulldozers, so no point of wasting the money.
Anyway, our culture is based on islam, and islam outlaws corruptions and such things, they will alays exist though, but at least they aren't as bad as your country, we tend to keep them to ourselves while you tend to damage the whole world with them.

quote:

---

Murder, rape, crime, rape: Okay.
My line: "You said rape twice."
Your line: "I like rape."

"A Pakistani tribal council ordered an 18-year-old girl to be gang-raped in order to punish her family after her brother was seen
walking with a girl from a higher class tribe." (Washington Post, July 2) In addition, though I regrettably can't recall the source (trust me it was an actual study done by an independent poller), Muslim males are reponsible for the lion's share of rapes in Europe, against muslima and non-muslim alike.

---

OMG.. it was a TRIBAL court, this is against islam you uneducated fool. They are living in some mountain untouched by islam and it's ways, rape is punishable by death in islam, so imagine what the punishment of gang rape would be...

And I would like you to prove that statement of muslim males committing the highest rate of rapers in europe.

quote:

---

Corruption, immorality, the list goes on...: Please. Spare this redundant routine. As if every Middle Eastern country weren't ruled by autocratic, corrupt-to-the-bone regimes. And don't get onto morality too lightly...the US isn't alone in using capital punishment, but we certainly don't do it by letting the village throw stones at the condemned's head.

---

No middle eastern countries are not ruled by islamic clerics, but by autocratic US puppets, and they are corrupt to the bone i agree, this has nothing to do with islam.

quote:

---

special tradition, LOOOL, when your kings were still trying to read, our people were composing poetry and writing beautiful words.

Laugh out loud all you want, you hyena. I said SOCIAL tradition. I will grant you, Western civilization had it rough in the civilization area for several hundred years. But that didn't stop it from burning Jerusalem to the ground repeatedly, while you were playing pretty music and waxing lyrical about flying carpets.

---

You resort to insults, but I do not care, because you talk out of anger rather than knowledge. When we were playing pretty music and writing stories about flying carpets you were in your dark ages, so i can laugh all i want.

quote:

---

We are unlike communists in many ways, they failed, we will not, they were hated, we are the fastest growing religion in the world, they had your culture , we do not.

I said Marxists, not communists. You place blame on external factors because it's easier that way, change can (theoretically) come without destabilizing the current government, quite an attractive idea for the Clerics and corrupt officials who rule Middle Eastern countries. And I've got news for you: you are hated. The only reason you're around is because there is a foul reverse-racism against western civilization, mostly spawned of its own lazy "intellectuals" as they follow in the detrimental-sophist path of Rome's own scholars before its fall. The very hope of capitalism is what keeps us from sweeping our armies into the Middle East---we want you to get through it on your own. Plus, that little thing called "civility."

---

Man i am fed up with your BS, I am hated?
I probably have more western friends than you will ever do, If i am hated by fools like yourself than i am happy and proud of myself because it shows me what kind of person im not.

quote:

---

Other governments imposed on you by the west adn the US. If this is so true, why don't you do something about it? You think the US supports the current government in Saudi Arabia or Iran or Kuwait because it shares warm relations with them? Not hardly. They have something we want; namely, oil. We can't take it by force (that pesky civility thing again), so we live with it. Again, these governments do an excellent job of funneling public rage away from the root of the problem and out at the US. You are a perfect example of this.

---

No not really, i am an example of someone who sees past US propaganda.
The US does not support Iran but does support Saudia arabia, this comment shows how unknowing you are about the middle east.

And not everyone can do something about it, it's not as easy as you think. These governments bring fear into the hearts of the people, the only country that successfully overthrew the US imposed government was Iran, and the people voted for establishing an islamic republic, they only succeeded because the faith of the people was very strong in islam and they supported Khomeini when he returned from exile.

quote:

---

LOL, morroco and bangladesh? I know for sure that morroco is a dictatorship...you don't give a damn about the people, they are ruled by dictators but you don't mind them since they are serving you.

Well, at least you know something for sure. I didn't deny the existence of tyrants in Bangladesh or Morocco. I only said their media was somewhat freer than all the others. Read a little more carefully next time before you start laughing.

---

How is it freer? Morocco is almost fully controlled by the US allied monarch, ask prince charmant how their press is like, since he/she is from morroco.

quote:

---

I would like to see a developed, modern Middle East, without Islamofascists and clerical regimes. I have Iraqi friends, believe it or not, and they are at least pragmatic about a solution for progress (though they also tend toward the "blame Israel" camp). I hate the fact that my government allows countries like Saudi Arabia and Iran to control their people ruthlessly, especially since these countries hardly "serve" me, they finance murderers to fly planes in to my buildings. But when the choices are either to ride it out and let the people do their thing or to send in troops, I'm glad we leave the revolutions to them. Isn't that what you want?

---

I wouldn't mind any type of government that would make the people truely happy but also free from american control. The middle east with its huge amounts of oil can be a threat to America and this is why we will never be left alone, add to it the independent thinking of islam, and you have a big problem for the USA who want to dominate the world in every way possible, I only see a islamic republic will gain full independence from nations like the US.

quote:

---

Your posts are a jumble of guilty admissions, accusations, and baseless insults. Since oyu had trouble with my last paragraph, I'll give you another chance to understand it.

---

I think you are mistaking your own posts with mine.

quote:

---

Islamic government is bad. We used to have rulers appointed by God, but we stopped after we had an Enlightenment. Eventually, Muslims will too, I can only hope, since divine inspiration is a dreadful way to run a country. Keep your religion in the home and the heart, and away from government, because government cannot be fancy to the whims of priests if it is ever to be considered just and equitable.

Now do you get it?[/B]

---

Maybe in your view, but if the people want to have an islamic government then the US shouldn't go in and try to stop them, [b]Let the people decide and I'll be happy, whatever government they want. [b]

BTW: Illl reply to your other post later, right now i have no time.

King,

I haven't forgotten you ... this topic has taken off. Some other time we'll talk about religious fanatics and how/why they start wars, but for now:

Blue,

quote:

---

Originally posted by Blue-Rock:
LOOOOOL. The Marshal plan was to prevent communism from spreading to Europe, it wasn't much of a good natured donation but was aimed to benefit US aims.

---

I need help on this ... preventing the spread of communism to all of Europe was a US aim. Your post says nothing.

By the way, The Marshal Plan saved a great many Europeans from starvation and really was a 'good natured donation'. In case you've forgotten ... I don't recall that we were ever repaid for any European aid post WWII (in fact, I can't think of any aid from anywhere that we've been repaid- but the Brits still carry what they consider US debts on their books).

quote:

---

Originally posted by Blue-Rock:
In WW2 the USA didn't even help the allies in the beggining, (PATHETIC)

---

A quick history lesson for you: Germany and Italy, I repeat GERMANY and ITALY declared war on the United States first (December 11, 1941- to be exact). Your statement is totally true and at the same time totally meaningless in terms of whatever point you are trying to make ... and that is indeed PATHETIC.

Nox

The purpose of the Marshall Plan was to bring western European countries under American economic influence. By providing these countries with food, technology, and other nececities the standard of living increased in said countries. Most of western Europe had been destroyed by the Germans and the money from the Marshall Plan rebuilt it, it spurred a massive economic revival in western Europe. The European economic revival helped the American economy by providing large foreign outlets for American industry and technology. The money the U.S put into the Marshall plan was repaid through the growth in the American economy.

Was the Marshall plan a "good-natured donation"? Yes and no, it's motives were not completely "imperialistic" (as many European ingrates would have you believe) or humanitarian either. It was a combination of both, it was a win-win situation for both the United States and Western Europe.

quote:

---

Originally posted by ChuckStone:
I think people (mainly Westerners)

---

SO what exactly are you? a middlener? or what?

Jeez, I can't believe Nox still has to give history lessons to some people.

last time I checked the plantet was round so where is the west ( j\k )

The usa always plays win-win situations.
why they did not move in to war is left to thier discression. A country does not hae an obligation to join a war, ( exept if it is in a treaty telling them to ) The usa did not want a war but after they saw that half of thier trading partner Europe was under Germans they did something about it.
If history serves me rigth war for the Usa started after a uboat sinked a marchand American vessel.
Instead of asking yourselfs why It joined war so late u should be thankfull it did. Cuz if not even the brits would be talking german now.
It was a great strategic mistake to sink that ship, and for the Japs to bomb pearl Harbor. Everything would have turned out differntly. A lil question Arises, Would the USa join the war if it was not attacked by the axis? Maybe it would providing they got something in return.

Talking about war debts, Youre trowing money out the window. And still are ( Isreal )...
Why? have u got a surproduction of weapons? not enough warehouse space to stock them?
Why do u keep giving away free weapons? I did not find an anwser anywhere on the media. Maybe u could help me out.
Is the Usa Isreal's bitch or is it vice versa?

quote:

---

Originally posted by brainuser:
The purpose of the Marshall Plan was to bring western European countries under American economic influence. By providing these countries with food, technology, and other nececities the standard of living increased in said countries. Most of western Europe had been destroyed by the Germans and the money from the Marshall Plan rebuilt it, it spurred a massive economic revival in western Europe. The European economic revival helped the American economy by providing large foreign outlets for American industry and technology. The money the U.S put into the Marshall plan was repaid through the growth in the American economy.

Was the Marshall plan a "good-natured donation"? Yes and no, it's motives were not completely "imperialistic" (as many European ingrates would have you believe) or humanitarian either. It was a combination of both, it was a win-win situation for both the United States and Western Europe.

---

If the US had wanted to take influence over Europe, it would have controlled the funds. Instead it met with the countries and had them draw up a plan for their rebuilding, to be funded by the US.

it didn't have to control the funds, the only country that still had a large enough heavy industry economic base was the US. Which made it the defacto supplier of heavy industry.

quote:

---

Originally posted by kingenrage:
last time I checked the plantet was round so where is the west ( j\k )

The usa always plays win-win situations.
why they did not move in to war is left to thier discression. A country does not hae an obligation to join a war, ( exept if it is in a treaty telling them to ) The usa did not want a war but after they saw that half of thier trading partner Europe was under Germans they did something about it.
If history serves me rigth war for the Usa started after a uboat sinked a marchand American vessel.
Instead of asking yourselfs why It joined war so late u should be thankfull it did. Cuz if not even the brits would be talking german now.
It was a great strategic mistake to sink that ship, and for the Japs to bomb pearl Harbor. Everything would have turned out differntly. A lil question Arises, Would the USa join the war if it was not attacked by the axis? Maybe it would providing they got something in return.

Talking about war debts, Youre trowing money out the window. And still are ( Isreal )...
Why? have u got a surproduction of weapons? not enough warehouse space to stock them?
Why do u keep giving away free weapons? I did not find an anwser anywhere on the media. Maybe u could help me out.
Is the Usa Isreal's bitch or is it vice versa?

---

We are throwing money away on Israel? Do you think we give them all that shit for free?

tell me please why u give it to them?
SO they can keep thier mouth shut about something...?

quote:

---

Originally posted by kingenrage:
tell me please why u give it to them?
SO they can keep thier mouth shut about something...?

---

What's you point? We give hundreds of other countries around the world this stuff as well, why aren't you bitching about that? Hey, When was the last time you looked at your aircraft that your country's air force uses? how about Canadian ground troops? Look at what they use. Now as for Israel, look at the surrounding countries, all have, since 1948, banded together several times and attacked.

my point, Why do you keep arming countrys?
The Standard military rifle is not made in america: The C7A1 assault rifle is an improved version of the basic C7 combat rifle, incorporating a low-mounted optical sight. The C7 rifle is a Canadian adaptation of a U.S. firearm known as the M16A1E1

Manufacturer
Diemaco, Kitchener, Ontario
( http://www.army.forces.gc.ca/LF/equip/wpn/C7_E.HTML )


fine, ill bitch about it... Your contry is arming everyone. Those armed men use those weapons, And end up needing more, Youre all happy cuz ur selling, And fueling the fire wich fills up your pockets.

What else could u get in return tell me

quote:

---

Originally posted by kingenrage:
last time I checked the plantet was round so where is the west ( j\k )

The usa always plays win-win situations.
why they did not move in to war is left to thier discression. A country does not hae an obligation to join a war, ( exept if it is in a treaty telling them to ) The usa did not want a war but after they saw that half of thier trading partner Europe was under Germans they did something about it.
If history serves me rigth war for the Usa started after a uboat sinked a marchand American vessel.
Instead of asking yourselfs why It joined war so late u should be thankfull it did. Cuz if not even the brits would be talking german now.
It was a great strategic mistake to sink that ship, and for the Japs to bomb pearl Harbor. Everything would have turned out differntly. A lil question Arises, Would the USa join the war if it was not attacked by the axis? Maybe it would providing they got something in return.

Talking about war debts, Youre trowing money out the window. And still are ( Isreal )...
Why? have u got a surproduction of weapons? not enough warehouse space to stock them?
Why do u keep giving away free weapons? I did not find an anwser anywhere on the media. Maybe u could help me out.
Is the Usa Isreal's bitch or is it vice versa?

---

America's involvement in the European theatre of WWII was irrelevant. 80% of the German Army fought and died on the eastern front. By the time of the Normandy the decisive battle of World War II (Stalingrad) had already been fought and the Germans were retreating into Poland. The purpose of the western front was to make sure the Soviets didn't spread communism over the entirety of Europe, while America can't claim it defeated Hitler, it can claim that it defeated Stalin and his lot, a much more important victory.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Joe Boo:
We are throwing money away on Israel? Do you think we give them all that shit for free?

---

Yup.

The US Pays $4 Billion in Interest on Money It Borrows to Give Israel

U.S. Arms Transfers and Security Assistance to Israel

The U.S. also gives Israel weapons and ammunition as part of the Excess Defense Articles (EDA) program, providing these articles completely free of charge. Between 1994-2001 the U.S. provided many weapons through this program, including:

64,744 M-16A1 rifles
2,469 M-204 grenade launchers
1,500 M-2 .50 caliber machine guns
.30 caliber, .50 caliber, and 20mm ammunition

quote:

---

Originally posted by VeneFrigus:
If the US had wanted to take influence over Europe, it would have controlled the funds. Instead it met with the countries and had them draw up a plan for their rebuilding, to be funded by the US.

---

Are you stupid? It doesn't matter who draws up the plans as long as dollars are backing it. Funding is the most important part of any project.

>>>my point, Why do you keep arming countrys?
The Standard military rifle is not made in america: The C7A1 assault rifle is an improved version of the basic C7 combat rifle, incorporating a low-mounted optical sight. The C7 rifle is a Canadian adaptation of a U.S. firearm known as the M16A1E1

Manufacturer
Diemaco, Kitchener, Ontario
( http://www.army.forces.gc.ca/LF/equip/wpn/C7_E.HTML )


fine, ill bitch about it... Your contry is arming everyone. Those armed men use those weapons, And end up needing more, Youre all happy cuz ur selling, And fueling the fire wich fills up your pockets<<<

What else could u get in return tell me
Hey, now do yourself a favor, and look at who the Russians, Chinese, North Koreans, Pakistani's arm. If we are arming everyone, Who is selling Russian manufactured weapons to countries? And the C7 came from what design again? Your CF-18's, P-3's, and alot of other equipment come from your neighbor to your south. My point is if it's perfectly okay to murder Americans, then by that measure, it's fine for Americans to murder those, people from said named countries. Will someone address this for once, or skim over it?

>>>The U.S. also gives Israel weapons and ammunition as part of the Excess Defense Articles (EDA) program, providing these articles completely free of charge. Between 1994-2001 the U.S. provided many weapons through this program, including:<<<


And? forgive me for saying there is a flaw, but I've never seen an Israeli soldier carry an M-16, not to mention, what's the problem with providing excess to someone free of charge?

I bet ud be proud also if America was the largest exporter of gravestones...
Yes fine we got our planes of u. But the only time we might need em is when we get dragged into war by u. I heard once from a very good source that all the cf-18 could fint on the smallest American Carrier.
You guys have a warship for every state at least. ( not sure but I presume )

<<< And? forgive me for saying there is a flaw, but I've never seen an Israeli soldier carry an M-16, not to mention, what's the problem with providing excess to someone free of charge? >>>

Im sorry u never saw one in person. neether have I. But I found some pics for your pleasure.
http://www.isayeret.com/weapons/assault/m4/m4.htm

EDA? Excess... HA. When u have an excess shold u not stop producing? I guess that is unimmaginable.

quote:

---

Originally posted by darthQ:
a terrorist is someone who disagrees with the current regime.. simple

---

Correction. Someone who is a terriorist is someone who violently disagrees with the current regime.