Islamic Fundamentalism - Can they be appeased?

[One Eyed Cat]

From the books thread.

Behind every war of men lies a war of ideas. Islamic fundamentalism weds an anti-modernity philosophy with a radical interpretation of islam. I do not believe they can be appeased in their quest unless the entire middle east was surrendered (including Israel). I do not believe the tactics currently used are working. The battle of ideas must be won. How do other feel about the likelihood that islamic fundamentalism can be appeased and or fought?

OEC

[Kidthorazine]

they may be able to be stamped out but first you must convince everyone that they are evil or they gain a larger following this is very Machiavellian but its probably the only way to do it or you might be able to appease them by nuking Isreal but that wouldnt be very polite now would it

[One Eyed Cat]

they may be able to be stamped out but first you must convince everyone that they are evil or they gain a larger following this is very Machiavellian but its probably the only way to do it or you might be able to appease them by nuking Isreal but that wouldnt be very polite now would it

I'm 120% Pro-Israel. I believe the UN made a major error by going back on the Balfour Agreement. Jordan was meant to be the Palestinian State with Israel intact between The Jordan and the Sea. I believe Islamism must be defeated and must recognize their defeat. I disagree only in the tactics being used at present. Btw, Israel can nuke the entire Middle East before anything even landed

OEC

[tinstar]

From the books thread.

Behind every war of men lies a war of ideas. Islamic fundamentalism weds an anti-modernity philosophy with a radical interpretation of islam. I do not believe they can be appeased in their quest unless the entire middle east was surrendered (including Israel). I do not believe the tactics currently used are working. The battle of ideas must be won. How do other feel about the likelihood that islamic fundamentalism can be appeased and or fought?

OEC

DOB... I'm right with ya. Well stated.

There is only one thing I am admittedly not 100% sure about. Where you state "radical interpretation of Islam." I have not yet read the Quran, but I would infer that, like Christianity and the Bible, this is where Islam (supposedly) takes all of its cues. In order to find out if the problem is "radical interpretations" or simply "Islam" itself, I will have to read more.

Even if (in my own rational mind) I decide that the core of the problem lies fundamentally with Islam itself, do not misinterpret that as cause for action against Muslims in general. Ideas are still ideas and everyone is free to have them. This is inherent in our humanity. When ideas begin to motivate action, then there is cause for action in return. Anything else is fascism or genocide.

I do believe that, over time, humanity will depend less and less on mysticism and fanatical despots for guidance. Religion, the most vigorous enemy reason (and by default, humanity) has ever had, will be left by the wayside in exchange for truth.

[One Eyed Cat]

When I say "radical interpretation" I am referring mostly to the need to "destroy the infidels". The Quran is a brutal text but still open for interpretation. I agree that we should not *in any way* be against muslims as a whole. I do not even believe most muslims subscribe to islamist viewpoints.

OEC

[tinstar]

Originally Posted by Kidthorazine
they may be able to be stamped out but first you must convince everyone that they are evil or they gain a larger following this is very Machiavellian but its probably the only way to do it or you might be able to appease them by nuking Isreal but that wouldnt be very polite now would it

I'm 120% Pro-Israel. I believe the UN made a major error by going back on the Balfour Agreement. Jordan was meant to be the Palestinian State with Israel intact between The Jordan and the Sea. I believe Islamism must be defeated and must recognize their defeat. I disagree only in the tactics being used at present. Btw, Israel can nuke the entire Middle East before anything even landed

OEC

Hehe, I spent so much time crafting my reply, you guys just took off with that one. Kidthorazine, I don't think you need to convince anyone that they are evil. No Machiavellian tactics are required where there is truth. Also, the idea that any of the civilized governments of the world (US and UK, in particular...) requiring approval from the UN is absurd. Read OEC's msg for just one of the many screwups that have resulted from such a philosophy.

[Kidthorazine]

I'm 120% Pro-Israel. I believe the UN made a major error by going back on the Balfour Agreement. Jordan was meant to be the Palestinian State with Israel intact between The Jordan and the Sea. I believe Islamism must be defeated and must recognize their defeat. I disagree only in the tactics being used at present. Btw, Israel can nuke the entire Middle East before anything even landed

OEC

True Israel can nuke the whole middle east and i think thats one reason why the muslims see it as a threat the problem with Israel is that they moved in with american and european support and displaced a great deal of Muslims in the process and drove them back with a superior millitary that was handed to them by someone else sure the Pallistinians attack civillian targets but so do the Israelis and you have to realize that thats the only way Pallistine can get their message across because they are desperately trying to take back land that was taken from them

[23*]

I do believe that, over time, humanity will depend less and less on mysticism and fanatical despots for guidance. Religion, the most vigorous enemy reason (and by default, humanity) has ever had, will be left by the wayside in exchange for truth.

The problem is universal, not just Middle Eastern. We must all try to progress beyond ridiculous dogmatisms, East & West.

Things will never change when you believe that one side or another is simply and unequivocally evil. Pragmatism must replace Ideologies. In Israel they must ask the question - What is more important to us, peace in the Middle East or territoral dispute. Nations must ask questions of themselves before peace is possible. Dialogue is the only hope for the future, not warfare.

Unfortunatly, it seems that humanity is, if anything moving backwards Tinstar. Look West to Bushism & East to Islamism.

[One Eyed Cat]

True Israel can nuke the whole middle east and i think thats one reason why the muslims see it as a threat the problem with Israel is that they moved in with american and european support and displaced a great deal of Muslims in the process and drove them back with a superior millitary that was handed to them by someone else sure the Pallistinians attack civillian targets but so do the Israelis and you have to realize that thats the only way Pallistine can get their message across because they are desperately trying to take back land that was taken from them

Actually, Israel was originally supported by the USSR who quickly turned on them. The true western support for Israel did not take off until *after* the 1967 war. Jerusalem had a jewish majority going back to the 1800s. Had the Balfour Agreement remained intact, you would have a river separating the 2 warring parties. The Jordanians are partly to blame for their unwillingness to assimilate more Palestinians. Jordan is a Hashemite Kingdom, the ruling class constitutes a small minority of the population.

OEC

[One Eyed Cat]

The problem is universal, not just Middle Eastern. We must all try to progress beyond ridiculous dogmatisms, East & West.

Things will never change when you believe that one side or another is simply and unequivocally evil. Pragmatism must replace Ideologies. In Israel they must ask the question - What is more important to us, peace in the Middle East or territoral dispute. Nations must ask questions of themselves before peace is possible. Dialogue is the only hope for the future, not warfare.

Unfortunatly, it seems that humanity is, if anything moving backwards Tinstar. Look West to Bushism & East to Islamism.

I agree we have to move beyond dogmatisms. I see the only way out as a recognition of national borders and a greater attempt to help the muslims financially. Arab leaders keep their people under tyrannical rule. The "Zionists" may well be a threat, but they are also a scapegoat for the brutal conditions under which many Arabs live.

OEC

[chaosfeary]

...Take not the Jews and Christians for friends. They are friends one to another. He among you who takes them for friends is one of them. Lo! Allah guids not these wrongdoing people. (Quran Surah 5:51)

...slay the idolaters wherever you find them, and take them captive, and besiege them, and prepare to ambush them. But if they repent and establish [Islamic] worship...their way is free. Lo! Allah is forgiving and Merciful. (Quran; Surah 9:5)

Kill the unbelievers wherever you find them, capture and besiege them and prepare for them every kind of ambush. (9.5)

O believers, fight the unbelievers who are near to you and let them find in you a harshness. (9.125)

We shall let the unbelievers taste a terrible chastisment, and will recompense them with the worst of what they were working. When you meet the unbelievers, smite their necks. (47.5)

The Jews, the Christians and the Pagans will burn forever in the Fire of Hell. They are the vilest of all creatures. (98.6)


Emnity and hatred will reign between us until ye believe in Allah alone. (60.4)

"Suppose you hear in one of the towns the LORD your God is giving you that some worthless rabble among you have led their fellow citizens astray by encouraging them to worship foreign gods. In such cases, you must examine the facts carefully. If you find it is true and can prove that such a detestable act has occurred among you, you must attack that town and completely destroy all its inhabitants, as well as all the livestock. Then you must pile all the plunder in the middle of the street and burn it. Put the entire town to the torch as a burnt offering to the LORD your God. That town must remain a ruin forever; it may never be rebuilt. Keep none of the plunder that has been set apart for destruction. Then the LORD will turn from his fierce anger and be merciful to you. He will have compassion on you and make you a great nation, just as he solemnly promised your ancestors. "The LORD your God will be merciful only if you obey him and keep all the commands I am giving you today, doing what is pleasing to him." (Deuteronomy 13:13-19 NLT)

Then at the LORD's command, he shouted, "O altar, altar! This is what the LORD says: A child named Josiah will be born into the dynasty of David. On you he will sacrifice the priests from the pagan shrines who come here to burn incense, and human bones will be burned on you." (1 Kings 13:1-2 NLT)

Stuff like that's in most of the major religions, but then again best to take it with a grain of salt as there are lots of contradictory things in most as well.

Unfortunately a lot of things are coloured by individual writers' own personal agendas as with anything.

People choose their own meaning of texts and choose not to believe the bits they don't like. Following any exactly to the word would be impossible.

[Mr Karl]

well it's all about extreme stuff here, I am against all interpreations of the universe, except my own, and unless two consiusnessess can occuppy the same spot then technically there should be 5 billion religions out there more or less , maybe thats what the tower of babel is all about really. Yep get rid of ALL organized religion , that means you too , pagans and satanists and bobs your uncle guys, If you want a community thing then find a different focus besides god, because your probably all wrong.

Sorry but religion is not good for humanity, cummunities yes, humanity no

[Morning Glory]

this has nothing to do with islam it's just a convient excuse to get people to join up with these so-called "islaimc fundamentalists" if the most popular thing in the middle-east was the circus, you could bet they'd try to get everyone to dress up like clowns. it's the same way that america uses "patriotism" as an ideal to get people to support our military.
It doesn't say anywhere in the quran that you should use ak-47's and bombs, and that you should hate america and isreal... because these things didn't exist when muhammed wrote the quran... all that shit about killing your enemies was because everyone wanted to kill muhammed, and it was relevent at the time. After he came to power and Islam spread he then preached that christians jews and muslims should live in peace...
so islam really has nothing to do with modern society just like the bible and every religion that hasn't been changed in a thousand years.

[Morning Glory]

but no they can't be appeased because the things that they are figthing against: World Trade- corporate involvement in private life, U.S Militarism and occupation, war for oil, western culture being forced on arabic traditions... these things are going to go on forever, and even longer so since we still continue to ignore them and base thier entire campaign on the fact that they are islamic.

[CorporateGoth]

I dont believe ANY extremist type groups can be appeased, be it islam, religious extremists, racist groups or what have you. I think there is an element of one-upmanship to extremism that will drive a person to continue even after they have achieved what they want. If the Klan were to achieve a "white state", I think that it's members would turn on each other (I'm more white than you are, etc..). Members of extremist groups, imo, aren't really after what they claim to be after. They might think they are, but I think they are driven by the conflict itself and wouldn't be happy in it's absence.

[jynxed hero]

From the books thread.

Behind every war of men lies a war of ideas. Islamic fundamentalism weds an anti-modernity philosophy with a radical interpretation of islam. I do not believe they can be appeased in their quest unless the entire middle east was surrendered (including Israel). I do not believe the tactics currently used are working. The battle of ideas must be won. How do other feel about the likelihood that islamic fundamentalism can be appeased and or fought?

OEC

I don't think the radical Muslims would be any less willing if all of the middle east surrendered. A lot of their hatred for America and probably modern ideals comes from what America has done to them. Just in the past 4 years under the first Bush administration we've gone and invaded them. If we invaded China like we did Iraq we would not be received well. The fact that Bush's reasons for invading Iraq were so flimsy and ill conceived didn't help - it simply made America appear as though we invaded Iraq on a whim. Right now America is trying to impose democracy and "spread freedom" that's all and good but that doesn't mean ALL of Iraq even wanted this let alone the rest of the middle east. A lot of the conflict has to be rooted in the American hubris. America, to quote Toby Keith (fucking idiot), "has to put a boot up your ass, it's the American way." That has to be the bigger problem

It's more than a battle of ideals. I don't think there's even much of battle of ideals to be won in the first place. It's more a battle of propaganda. America's (the symbol of modern life on the go) image hasn't improved in the eyes of most Muslims, even after providing millions in tsunami releif. Just like Bush's reasoning for invading Iraq, Al Quida and the other fundamentalist's reasons are very thin. The religious text they're quoting - one would hope is superceded by Islam's other, bigger, ideals.

When it comes down to it, I think peace can only be brokered once the Middle East sees that the west doesn't simply want their oil. That and let them have a little freedom from western culture. If they want it they'll come and get it. Cramming it down their throats isn't going to make them want it. It'll make them reject it. Let them be their own sovern nation.

(excuse my writing. I just woke up. it's 4 A.M.)

[23*]

Well sure, I just think that we need to ask a lot more questions about ourselves as well as others before we go bombing shit the fuck up.

[jynxed hero]

Well sure, I just think that we need to ask a lot more questions about ourselves as well as others before we go bombing shit the fuck up.

Bombing in the first place is silly.

[One Eyed Cat]

Well sure, I just think that we need to ask a lot more questions about ourselves as well as others before we go bombing shit the fuck up.

We're already there tho. I see oil as a factor but not *the* factor. I think at this point, they will take jihad as far as they can.

OEC

[23*]

Bombing in the first place is silly.

I was using bombing to represent shooting, killing or otherwise disabling.

I'm a pacifist, I think they're all wrong. But I kinda see Tequila Zaires point.....I just can't think of an alternative action in some extreme cases. I'm certain that one exists however.

In the meantime, we must ask questions questions questions.

[jynxed hero]

We're already there tho. I see oil as a factor but not *the* factor. I think at this point, they will take it as far as they can.

OEC

I think it all comes down to American hubris. People always bristle at arrogance. America is quite an arrogant nation. "We have the biggest, we have the fastest, we have the best. Do it our way." People hate people like that. Logic would follow people would hate that kind of nation .

[23*]

I think it all comes down to American hubris. People always bristle at arrogance. America is quite an arrogant nation. "We have the biggest, we have the fastest, we have the best. Do it our way." People hate people like that. Logic would follow people would hate that kind of nation .

totally,
think of all the crazy nasty shit that Europeans have done over the years and wonder why despite this, almost every crazy fundamentalist (except our own) with an itchy trigger finger wants to attack America, not England or France.

[One Eyed Cat]

I think it all comes down to American hubris. People always bristle at arrogance. America is quite an arrogant nation. "We have the biggest, we have the fastest, we have the best. Do it our way." People hate people like that. Logic would follow people would hate that kind of nation .

I think a lot of people hate the US for that reason. I doubt that islamic fundamentalism would be satiated simply by a humbler foreign policy in DC.

OEC

[jynxed hero]

I think a lot of people hate the US for that reason. I doubt that islamic fundamentalism would be satiated simply by a humbler foreign policy in DC.

OEC

I agree a humbler approach alone won't solve it. But if America changed it's general policy it'd help. But Military action alone will never do anything but make it worse. It's like picking a scab...a scab with guns.

But a humbler and more sensative approach to the middle east would be a big step in an eventual solution. If we do more things like provide aid to nations instead of bombing them and "spreading freedom." We'd be more likely to find some sort of peace. The big thing should be showing the world we're not evil.

On a side note, did anyone see the Republican National Convention? I remember seeing signs that said, "let freedom reign." That really buggs me. There's a contradiction there.

[23*]

I doubt that islamic fundamentalism would be satiated simply by a humbler foreign policy in DC.

OEC

I think it would help a lot though.

[One Eyed Cat]

I think it would help a lot though.

It's really a moot point now. My heart is with the Iraqi people who do aspire to freedom + the American, Ukrainian and other Soldiers trying to keep themselves and their friends alive in a very difficult situation.

OEC

[23*]

It's really a moot point now. My heart is with the Iraqi people who do aspire to freedom and the American Soldiers trying to keep themselves and their friends alive.

OEC

Maybe in this particular case. But it would certainly help the world generally.

When you have that kind of attitude (the one the American government sends out) you can only breed more & more terrorists in more & more countries.

People have been imprisioned all over Europe for damaging grounded American war planes and cuting wires into military compounds. When Bush came to Ireland recently, the Irish government thought it necessary to bring out the entire armed forces, tanks and all to protect him.

Who knows, if the government of the USA doesn't change its attitude now maybe these people will be the terrorists of succeeding generations. Moot indeed.

[Tequila Zaire]

I think it would help a lot though.

I seriously doubt it...you're working under the impression what they say is what they want. With fundementalists that's just not the case. They use ideas and ideals in religion, nationalism, and ehtnic identity to achieve their own ambitions that often times are never made public or shared outside certain circles. At the end of the day you are dealing with people who want power, not freedom.

[One Eyed Cat]

Maybe in this particular case. But it would certainly help the world generally.

When you have that kind of attitude (the one the American government sends out) you can only breed more & more terrorists in more & more countries.

People have been imprisioned all over Europe for damaging grounded American war planes and cuting wires into military compounds. When Bush came to Ireland recently, the Irish government thought it necessary to bring out the entire armed forces, tanks and all to protect him.

Who knows, if the government of the USA doesn't change its attitude now maybe these people will be the terrorists of succeeding generations. Moot indeed.

I would tend to agree that the overall policy is in serious need of review.


OEC

[23*]

I seriously doubt it...you're working under the impression what they say is what they want. With fundementalists that's just not the case. They use ideas and ideals in religion, nationalism, and ehtnic identity to achieve their own ambitions that often times are never made public or shared outside certain circles. At the end of the day you are dealing with people who want power, not freedom.

to clarify, I meant the statement more broadly.

But I sincerly do think it would help in the containment and discouraging of world terrorism in the future.

I also doubt that it would have much immediate effect in the middle East .

[Tequila Zaire]

Who knows, if the government of the USA doesn't change its attitude now maybe these people will be the terrorists of succeeding generations. Moot indeed.

If you're going to be a terrorrist over being put in jail for cutting wires...then the indivudual has a bit of an issue no? You put yourself in the crossfire like damaging military equipment you can't exactly think you'll get a slap on the wrist and a "oh you naughty boy" smile and wink.

It can't all be put on the U.S. doorstep it's naive to think that if the U.S. bends over and takes it in the ass from fundementalists around the world we'll all be living in a stable and peaceful world. It didn't work before Bush and it won't work after.

The U.S. did not see a decline in the "kinder and more understanding" Cinton years...so it's no shock we saw a spike and riled up a hornets nest in the "no so kind and gentle" Bush admin...no matter who the next guy is...be it a treehuger or a warmonger...they will have to spill blood or be bleed dry. Plus this is not exactly a U.S. foreign policy only deal...it's western nations as a whole and do we really want our lives and nations dictated by pissed off fundementalists from ANY part of the world?

As far as calling out the Irish military in full force...it's kind of a given no? 1. It's Bush. 2. It's Ireland...it's not exactly a country too far out of it's own terrorrist filled past eh?

[One Eyed Cat]

to clarify, I meant the statement more broadly.

But I sincerly do think it would help in the containment and discouraging of world terrorism in the future.

I also doubt that it would have much immediate effect in the middle East .

It would have an extremely detrimental effect in the immediate term. I would be utterly opposed to just cutting and running.

OEC

[Tequila Zaire]

But I sincerly do think it would help in the containment and discouraging of world terrorism in the future.

Unfortunately that's not a luxury anymore..."in the future" and that mentality was said after the first WTC attack and after ruby ridge...what resulted was another WTC attack and the Oklahoma city bombing. Foreign or domestic an active effort must be taken...no sitting around, no committe after committe...action...for right or wrong. You can't try to deal with any issue with the mentality you have AFTER something has happen or you do something. Hingsight is 20/20 only after an event...you never have clear eyes or an outcome as something occurs.

[23*]

If you're going to be a terrorrist over being put in jail for cutting wires...then the indivudual has a bit of an issue no? You put yourself in the crossfire like damaging military equipment you can't exactly think you'll get a slap on the wrist and a "oh you naughty boy" smile and wink.

Obviously I was suggesting that the overall level of outrage which the world feels towards towards the American government will only grow and grow unless they curtail their aggressive foreign policies.

U.S. bends over and takes it in the ass from fundementalists .

Nobody reasonable is asking the American Government to take it in the ass. They are suggesting that they behave more responsibly.

Plus this is not exactly a U.S. foreign policy only deal...it's western nations as a whole?.

not really.

As far as calling out the Irish military in full force...it's kind of a given no? 1. It's Bush. 2. It's Ireland...it's not exactly a country too far out of it's own terrorrist filled past eh?

As I'm sure you know, southern Ireland is not a haven for terrorists. To suggest it only shows your ignorance on the issue.

[23*]

It would have an extremely detrimental effect in the immediate term. I would be utterly opposed to just cutting and running.

OEC

me too.

I am talking about attitudes & approaches.

[Tequila Zaire]

I would be utterly opposed to just cutting and running.

OEC

Really nothing will be done till after Bush leaves anyhow...many world governments connect him and the war on terrorrism too closely for reason and resolve to be unified. No real shock since he's not the first leader of a nation to do something like this...sure as hell won't be the last. it is odd to see nations with jsut as many problems critique and lay blame though...it's what pissed off so many about France being vocal. It's fine to critique but when you bring up things like Vietnam and what not you gotta wonder..."Hey weren't YOU guys in vietnam too? what about Algeria?"

Critique for world benefit not to plan power moves on the world political chess set.

No wonder terrorrist's didn't slam a plane into the U.N. building...they knew it was a waste of time since nothing important gets done there anymore outside of coffee room debates on who the best "escorts" in NYC are and how to maxamize diplomatic immunity....

...and to plan ski trips that nothing, even an epic disaster, will take you from.


Ok cheap shot at the U.N. but have you ever had to deal with diplomats? Total assholes 9 out of 10 times.

[One Eyed Cat]

Really nothing will be done till after Bush leaves anyhow...many world governments connect him and the war on terrorrism too closely for reason and resolve to be unified. No real shock since he's not the first leader of a nation to do something like this...sure as hell won't be the last. it is odd to see nations with jsut as many problems critique and lay blame though...it's what pissed off so many about France being vocal. It's fine to critique but when you bring up things like Vietnam and what not you gotta wonder..."Hey weren't YOU guys in vietnam too? what about Algeria?"

Critique for world benefit not to plan power moves on the world political chess set.

No wonder terrorrist's didn't slam a plane into the U.N. building...they knew it was a waste of time since nothing important gets done there anymore outside of coffee room debates on who the best "escorts" in NYC are and how to maxamize diplomatic immunity....

...and to plan ski trips that nothing, even an epic disaster, will take you from.


Ok cheap shot at the U.N. but have you ever had to deal with diplomats? Total assholes 9 out of 10 times.

The UN is a farce and has been for a long time. The chair of the human rights committee is Qadhafi's Libya. The UN is, in part, responsible for as many conflicts as it aims to stop.

OEC

[Tequila Zaire]

Obviously I was suggesting that the overall level of outrage which the world feels towards towards the American government will only grow and grow unless they curtail their aggressive foreign policies.

Exactly when was the american government ever popular in other countries? They are always reviled for something. Either were too isolationist or too "imperialistic" it's a losing battle to be loved.

Nobody reasonable is asking the American Government to take it in the ass. They are suggesting that they behave more responsibly.

Like who?

not really.

Last I checked it was more than just the U.S. fundementalists were pissed off at...or did you miss the other attacks on western and pro western nations like Bali?

As I'm sure you know, southern Ireland is not a haven for terrorists. To suggest it only shows your ignorance on the issue.

Didn't take long for the "I" word to appear. Was not talking about Southern Ireland and I never even said it had terrorrists...but given the history of Ireland as a whole...north and south...there were a "few" as history boldly showed. It's a country with it's own history be it divided or united and terrorrism has played a role...and EVERY country can be a haven for terrorrists...so lets not be ignorant about that, eh?

[Tequila Zaire]

The UN is a farce and has been for a long time. The chair of the human rights committee is Qadhafi's Libya. The UN is, in part, responsible for as many conflicts as it aims to stop.

OEC

They do know how to throw a party though. No shock they always have the best food.

[23*]

you said "it's not exactly a country too far out of it's own terrorrist filled past eh"

If you were following the peace process in Ireland at all you would realise that the statement is completely nonsense.

Bush was in southern Ireland. That is why I was talking about southern Ireland. It makes sense to make this distinction.

the 'I' word?....I didn't call you ignorant dude, I said it was an ignorant statement, thats all.