BF2S Forums What is America doing to the Arab and Islamic world?

Bertster7 wrote:

CameronPoe wrote:

Kmarion wrote:

The contest between the Mid-east and the West is thirteen hundred years old. Although it occasionally paused it never stopped. Despite the errors we have made in the Middle East the problems are not really about America. The Mid-East has grown so inhumane and weak that it craves a great Satan to explain it's ineptitude. The United States will have to do. Muslims are in a crisis of responsibility. Hundreds of millions of Muslims have fled into a fantasy world. We would be better off by far if we were able to turn away and ignore the Islamic heartlands. But we cannot avoid engagement, since our enemies are determined to bring the of terror to our shores. Even if they can not destroy America they are determined to wound and humiliate us to validate themselves.

We all make our own devils in our lives. And the Muslims of the Mid-East require a great Satan to explain why more than a thousand years of effort, often successful, came to nothing in the end. Until the inhabitants of the Mid-east can begin to take responsibility for their own success or failure, welcome change, the rule of law, hard work, individual merit, and above all womens rights, the Mid-East will remain the world's sick civilization.

Interesting take. I agree with it partially vis. the requirement for the region to have an enemy against which they can focus their rage and explain their own shortcomings. That same principle applies to the US today (enemy=Islam, used to be USSR), Cuba (enemy=USA), North Korea (enemy=US/South Korea/Japan). Nationalistic fervour is stoked up through anti-enemy propaganda. But you are being too simplisitic. The west has been exploitative and supportive of governments in the region that they suffer at the hands of - so their labelling of the west as 'the enemy' is hardly without cause. Also, one can avoid engagement in a conventional military sense - if sanctions are effectively applied and domestic security is made as water-tight as possible.

I agree with both of you.

Good points.

Sanctions only hurt the people. The bastards in power have their horded goods and criminal supply chains.

Surkill wrote:

If there were not organizations like this one, than we might find something better to do with our lunch money..

You didn't hear? Due to the looming economic crisis in Iran those guys have since found work elsewhere.

GunSlinger OIF II wrote:

who the fuck refers to their very own nation as 3rd world.  i call bullshit to the OP

Slinger just owned the thread.

stef10 wrote:

Oh, but still those needles and those dolls.

theres never been needles and dolls in voodoo EVER
the christian missionaries introduced it as an effective piece of propaganda, in reality theres no religious ceremony in voodoo worse than baptism (though if your hydrophobic...)
the christians got the idea from a European religion that i cannot remember the name of (karma for anyone who can) that i think was paganistic in nature and that the christians weeded out in the 16th or something century.

Interesting thread.  I'm no expert on the world's religions by any means but I wonder, though, if you put an Islamic and a Christian farmer in the same room - would they talk politics, religion, or crops? 

This may be a simplistic thought, but generally I want to agree with Bertster7 - religion, by itself, is not the real culprit.  During the Dark and early Middle Ages, while Christians were slaughtering and burning themselves on stakes in Europe in the name of Christian Dogma, it was the Islamic nations that carried on the torch of science and civilization.  Today's civilizations would be significantly less so without the Islamic decimal mathematics, or the Chinese - another non-Christian group - invention of dual-entry Accounting.  What I'm trying to say here (IMHO) is that all groups, be they based on nationality, religion, or other common factor, have had their share of positive and negative influences on the growth of human civilizations throughout history. It's by learning from and accepting each other that we've come to be the advanced society we are now.  So, OK, everyone owns a share of the credit and the guilt of where we're at.  The finger pointing and blaming each others' beliefs, dogmas, and ideals is as justified as it is futile.  No one is ever going to sort out and settle all the wrongs we've heaped on each other through the past.

Yet throughout human history it is generally not a generalized group that causes issues but it's the individuals and personalities leading and influencing the groups.  There are references throughout this thread about troubled countries but very little references to the individuals running these countries.  There's a few references to Saddam, but little elsewhere.  The troubles in Rwanda, Sudan, Congo, etc., are mostly the result of corrupt individuals (of all races, religions, nationalities, etc.) whose primary consideration is the continuation of their personal agenda.  A German farmer would never have invaded Poland without the direct leadership of Hitler and his cronies, as much as an Iraqi farmer wouldn't have invaded Kuwait without Saddam, or American and its Allies invading Iraq without their current leaders.  Popes sending Crusaders to invade the Holy Land, Imams urging Jihaddists to fight the Infidel, Catholic Fathers preaching damnation towards Protestants, Capitalists vs. Communists, Unions vs. Businesses, etc., you get the idea.  And everyone justifying their actions for the good of the people, nation, religion, or any other cause (or threat) that will rally the populace behind them.

So my questions is not 'What is America doing?', but what are the  personal agendas of the leadership of all the factions involved and are those agendas justifiable in the best interests of the peoples which these leaders represent and the peoples they affect?  Don't necessarily focus on the differences of the groups to further dissension, but look at who stands to gain what and to what end? 

Anyway, that's my $0.02 ramble.

Kmarion wrote:

CameronPoe wrote:

The OP does smack a little of 'fake muslim'.

I'm on it fellas..lol. His email address contains the name Farzand which I believe is Muslim. http://forums.bf2s.com/profile.php?id=27873 .

Could be set up you know. People go to great lengths to prove things.

usmarine2007 wrote:

ATG wrote:

GunSlinger OIF II wrote:

who the fuck refers to their very own nation as 3rd world.  i call bullshit to the OP

Slinga contributes more value per post count, than almost anyone else IMnevertobehumbleO.

Here comes a bubbapoe question.......

Does it matter where he is from?

What do you mean?

usmarine2007 wrote:

CameronPoe wrote:

What do you mean?

Well, I would think you guys agree with his message, so the messenger is irrelevant somewhat.  No?

More or less. Elements of it anyway. Wasn't exactly the most eloquently put post and was rather simplistic.

thfalk1982 wrote:

Interesting thread.  I'm no expert on the world's religions by any means but I wonder, though, if you put an Islamic and a Christian farmer in the same room - would they talk politics, religion, or crops? 

This may be a simplistic thought, but generally I want to agree with Bertster7 - religion, by itself, is not the real culprit.  During the Dark and early Middle Ages, while Christians were slaughtering and burning themselves on stakes in Europe in the name of Christian Dogma, it was the Islamic nations that carried on the torch of science and civilization.  Today's civilizations would be significantly less so without the Islamic decimal mathematics, or the Chinese - another non-Christian group - invention of dual-entry Accounting.  What I'm trying to say here (IMHO) is that all groups, be they based on nationality, religion, or other common factor, have had their share of positive and negative influences on the growth of human civilizations throughout history. It's by learning from and accepting each other that we've come to be the advanced society we are now.  So, OK, everyone owns a share of the credit and the guilt of where we're at.  The finger pointing and blaming each others' beliefs, dogmas, and ideals is as justified as it is futile.  No one is ever going to sort out and settle all the wrongs we've heaped on each other through the past.

Yet throughout human history it is generally not a generalized group that causes issues but it's the individuals and personalities leading and influencing the groups.  There are references throughout this thread about troubled countries but very little references to the individuals running these countries.  There's a few references to Saddam, but little elsewhere.  The troubles in Rwanda, Sudan, Congo, etc., are mostly the result of corrupt individuals (of all races, religions, nationalities, etc.) whose primary consideration is the continuation of their personal agenda.  A German farmer would never have invaded Poland without the direct leadership of Hitler and his cronies, as much as an Iraqi farmer wouldn't have invaded Kuwait without Saddam, or American and its Allies invading Iraq without their current leaders.  Popes sending Crusaders to invade the Holy Land, Imams urging Jihaddists to fight the Infidel, Catholic Fathers preaching damnation towards Protestants, Capitalists vs. Communists, Unions vs. Businesses, etc., you get the idea.  And everyone justifying their actions for the good of the people, nation, religion, or any other cause (or threat) that will rally the populace behind them.

So my questions is not 'What is America doing?', but what are the  personal agendas of the leadership of all the factions involved and are those agendas justifiable in the best interests of the peoples which these leaders represent and the peoples they affect?  Don't necessarily focus on the differences of the groups to further dissension, but look at who stands to gain what and to what end? 

Anyway, that's my $0.02 ramble.

QFE

This response essentially covers what really needs to be looked at.

Surkill wrote:

I know very well that the US has a defence budget of $450 billion. I don't know what that number means to you, but as a person from a thrid world country.....

deeznutz1245 wrote:

Since you are Muslim maybe I can ask you a question. When are these jihadist lowlife freaks going to stop terrorizing countries? When will they stop killing innocent people? When will they stop teaching their youth that it is acceptable to kill westerners just because they think it is right? And when will they start not smelling like nasty ass body odor?

How the hell is he suppose to know why terrorists jidad and when they will stop. It’s like asking the Irish why the IRA do what they do. Terrorists don't give a shit about westerners, they bomb, kill/murder, kidnap anyone who stands in their way, no matter what their religion, faith or what ever u want to call it. Have you never seen in countries such as India, Pakistan, Iraq, Iran.. Who is it that is being killed by terrorists? Its the fcking Muslims!! Sorry I guess you never knew that, too much Fox and CNN?
When will narrow minded people like you, lowing (good riddance) and USmarine wake up to some sense of reality?
I feel like I’m baby sitting, except I’m not getting paid.

--->[Your]Phobia<--- wrote:

can a fcking mod please tell me why my post has been removed? At least have the decency of sending me a PM as to why it has been removed. As no reason has been give I will repost it again when I have time.

(too bad I never saved it...)

you need to learn sometimes to keep the flaming to yourself, your post is back without some features.