It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

What would the world be like under hardliner Muslim rule?

page: 2
0
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 10 2005 @ 11:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by Jamuhn
Sorry for the sarcasm, but I think you get my point now.


Actually most of your post backed mine. My point was not how great we are but to question the agenda of those who whale and moan about the noble efforts of those who saw a persons head off and film it and how horrible it is for us to fight them. Who will pick apart every news article for an American wrong but will shrug off stoning women, beheading hostages, and yes Chinese labor camps and the slaughter in Sudan as merely "culturally differences". Why is a wrong only wrong when an American can be blamed for it?

I did not agree with the Iraq war and still don't but fail to see the nobility of those who target women and children and tire of those who parade them as heroes and try to paint them as innocent victims of Americas bloodthrist.

Can you answer the question or would you prefer to just be sarcastic? Or would you prefer to just blame America for every problem in the world?

I have never claimed we are blameless I am just confronting those who think the rest of the world is.


Originally posted by Jamuhn
And that makes it all better. As long as there is a worse country in the world, then your respective country is alright.


No it doesnt make it better but should I cheer for a worse country?

[edit on 10-2-2005 by Amuk]




posted on Feb, 11 2005 @ 12:02 AM
link   
Once again, I am an American, and as an American, I hold my country to high standards. Higher standards than a country such as Sudan, Saudi, or China. As well, I live in America therefore I am more knowledgable about the activities of my government and of its problems. That is why I concern myself about ways to make America better. I know that right now, we are heading in the wrong direction as a country.

I realize that our borders at a country stop at a fixed point. To start wars, allocate resources, or any other activity outside of those borders will cause tension, its inevitable. Only in extreme circumstances should tension be brought on outside our borders because we are, after all, in someone else's land.

There is no reason to glorify terrorists just as there is no reason to glorify Bush. But, it is wise to understand that terrorists are fighting in their region of the world and fighting for what they think is best for them. Perhaps instead of forcing our values upon another people and another region of the world, we should be making strides to connect our cultures as they stand.

More people die in our own borders, than they do outside, but it would be interesting to see percentages. I think if we want to combat terrorism, we need to look inside and work out. We need to stop gang violence and the like. As far as foreign policy, it should be one of working towards global brotherhood and not alienating the world by attacking countries outside our borders for reasons unknown.

You can debate that last part, but my point is ultimately that we must work with the world and the world will work with us. That is how you achieve global economic and social unity. You don't do that by forcing your agendas on other countries and ignoring the opinion of others around the world.

Pick any country around the world and they have as much say as what happens in Iraq or Iran as we do. The world will not always have one voice, but diplomacy does not seem to be the voice of ours. All I read about from the Bush administration are threats and forcing our ideals on others.

But honestly, if the world were like how you described, I'd probably be labeled as a terrorist. Extreme governmental control is not my cup of tea.


[edit on 11-2-2005 by Jamuhn]



posted on Feb, 11 2005 @ 12:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by Amuk
But just as mainstream Christians have distanced themselves from their fanatics Muslims must do so to, or be lumped in with them


there have been instances of this. The Grand Ayatollah of Iraq, Al Sistani, has called for restraint and tolerance from the people in the face of the US occupation, has repeatedly denounced and acted against insurgents, and has made it quite clear that he and his followers do not support or shelter such people.



posted on Feb, 11 2005 @ 01:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by Amuk
[I did not agree with the Iraq war and still don't but fail to see the nobility of those who target women and children and tire of those who parade them as heroes and try to paint them as innocent victims of Americas bloodthrist.

ok,
first of all, i never agreed with war in in iraq too.
and i never belived it was "a noble cause" to go to this war, to rescue people from the extremists who target women and children. if the u.s. goverment was SO concerned about the lives of women and children, they would go and rescue africa; there seems to be a whole lot of problems. do you know how many civil wars are currently in africa, and nobody knows about them? how many "evil dictators" are there slaughtering people? and why nobody does anything? i would really love to know that too.
so, please, spear me this "noble cause" about saving people and giving them a new hope in "democracy".

secondly,
what is your intention with this thread?
as it was mentioned before, world was already ruled by hardline muslims. ok, europe was. and their influence is very strong here where i live, in the balkans region. here is the "melting pot" of europe, where religions and cultures meet.
all i wanted was to say, that world under one rule, muslim, christian, jewish; british, turkish, american, dont matter which, is never going to be peacefull and loving. because there is always one empire against many rebels. you either get assimilated in the empire or die. and people will fight against that. it is not a question of religion or nation: all men can be wicked, and all men can be greedy, doesnt really matter whats their religion. every "good book" can be interpreted in a really EVIL way.
in the old days of the dark ages, the christians and the chursh burned about five million women!!! why? because they were witches, sorceress, priestess, medicine women, dancers, singers, etc. why? because the church wanted to opress the feminine role in the world. and they did! very successfully, and women kept that role for centuries!
and they were all very religios, and read the bible every day. what does that make them?
religion fantaics? but how? they are peace loving bible worshipers? that can not be!

so the answer to your question:
the world would be the same under ANY hardline rule!
it really doesnt matter for me, if you come from america, afganistan or asia,
if you want to take my home and my land, i WILL fight you!


[edit on 11-2-2005 by Souljah]



posted on Feb, 11 2005 @ 08:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by Souljah
so, please, spear me this "noble cause" about saving people and giving them a new hope in "democracy".


Where did I say that? As a matter of fact I said the opposite, But I am not posting links to whatever screwball website I can find trying to Justify what is going on am I?




secondly,
what is your intention with this thread?


Try reading the title it should give you a clue. Its a rather simple question.



as it was mentioned before, world was already ruled by hardline muslims. ok, europe was. and their influence is very strong here where i live, in the balkans region. here is the "melting pot" of europe, where religions and cultures meet.


I was under the impression that the Muslims in Europe at that time were fairly reasonable in their rule, hardly "hardliners" or are you saying all muslims are the same?



in the old days of the dark ages, the christians and the chursh burned about five million women!!! why? because they were witches, sorceress, priestess, medicine women, dancers, singers, etc. why? because the church wanted to opress the feminine role in the world. and they did! very successfully, and women kept that role for centuries!
and they were all very religios, and read the bible every day. what does that make them?


Dead centuries ago? Where in the world does Christians burn witches today? Where in the world do Christians Stone Rape victims? Where in the world do Christians use the Old Testament as law of the land?



so the answer to your question:
the world would be the same under ANY hardline rule!
it really doesnt matter for me, if you come from america, afganistan or asia,
if you want to take my home and my land, i WILL fight you!


All that is fine and dandy and its been a wonderful dance all around the subject but I really didnt expect you to answer it. I will ask it again

IF the Taliban or OBL controled Europe or America what would be the result? Would they be the noble heroes your every post paints them as, or would they be be-heading people in sports arenas, stoning rape victims, torturing anyone who doesnt convert to radical Islam, etc?

these are your heroes



[edit on 11-2-2005 by Amuk]



posted on Feb, 11 2005 @ 08:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by Amuk
Everyone talks about how horrible America is and how terrible we treat everyone in the Middle East and I was just wondering how things would be if the shoe was on the other foot?

What would you be looking forward to if the Hardliners in the Muslim Party were the sole world super power?

Instead of being forced to have elections and allow Wal-Marts and MacDonalds what would we have?

Women would have to cover themselves from head to foot.

Be-heading and stoning people in sports arenas would become everyones national past time.

Only one Religion would be allowed.

There would be Religious police spying on everyone to make sure all were good little Muslims,

I will add to the list later but this should be a good start.

If the shoe was on the other foot what could we expect if OBL or the Taliban ruled Europe oe the USA?


I dont know what it would be like, because I would have died fighting against it.



posted on Feb, 11 2005 @ 08:25 AM
link   


You have voted MaskedAvatar for the Way Above Top Secret award.


You pretty much summed this thread up perfectly, along with the author. Nice work.



posted on Feb, 11 2005 @ 10:45 AM
link   
Life under any brutal repressive extremist regime would be horrible.

Who cares what flag or faith they wrap themselves up in?



posted on Feb, 11 2005 @ 11:02 AM
link   
Its not an issue of faith is an issue of culture



posted on Feb, 11 2005 @ 11:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by Jamuhn
Hey, maybe we don't need to do any legislation since there are worse countries!

Sorry for the sarcasm, but I think you get my point now.


Exactly!!!! We must be setting the example, not simply doing as we see fit.

good post sir, you've earned my vote for WATS this month



posted on Feb, 11 2005 @ 11:05 AM
link   
I love the way everyone dances around the question without answering it, or trying to turn it into another "we shouldn't be there" thread.

I agree we shouldn't be there. But that is neither the question nor the Topic of this thread.

Now can some of you answer the question or would that expose your hypocrisy?

[edit on 11-2-2005 by Amuk]



posted on Feb, 11 2005 @ 11:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by Amuk
I love the way everyone dances around the question without answering it.


- What's not been answered? It's been well and truely done with, hasn't it?

Life under a bunch of repressive nutters - any bunch of repressive nutters - would be horrible.

....what more do you need to know?
Haven't you read enough books about that kind of thing already in your life?



posted on Feb, 11 2005 @ 11:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by sminkeypinkey

Originally posted by Amuk
I love the way everyone dances around the question without answering it.


- What's not been answered? It's been well and truely done with, hasn't it?


Some have answered and some have completly ignored the question to go on about their own agenda.

The point of this thread is to bring to the attention of all those who would paint the Muslim Radicals as merely innocent, pious,and deeply religious people that were attacked for no reason, just exactly what THEIR vision of the future is. Just exactly what kind of world they want EVERYONE to live under.

The question is not hard at all

I am not supporting the war in Iraq, I am a Libertarian and think we should leave other countries to their own devices but quite a few on this board try to paint the Fanatics as noble heroes leading the good fight and refuse to discuss the FANATICS agenda.

[edit on 11-2-2005 by Amuk]



posted on Feb, 11 2005 @ 11:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by Amuk
I was under the impression that the Muslims in Europe at that time were fairly reasonable in their rule, hardly "hardliners" or are you saying all muslims are the same?

ok, the turkish invasion of southern europe was not very "nice".
they ottoman empire used janissaries in this area. they kiddnaped little boys from villages and turned them into elite fighting corps, that fought for them, and usually went back to their homeland, to fight against their own people.
now is that "hardline" for you, i dont know.

The Janissaries (or janizaries; in Turkish: Yeniçeri, meaning New Troops) comprised infantry units that formed the Ottoman sultan's household troops and bodyguard. The force originated in the 14th century; it was abolished (and massacred) by Sultan Mahmud II in 1826.

Bey Murad I of the fledgling Ottoman Empire founded the corps around 1330. It was initially formed of non-Muslim, especially Christian youths and prisoners-of-war, reminiscent of mameluks. Murad may have also used futuwa groups as a model. Such janissaries became the first Ottoman standing army, replacing forces mostly composed of tribal warriors whose loyalty and morale could not always be trusted. Besides, no self-respecting free warrior would have agreed to serve as a lowly infantryman.
nationmaster.encyclopedia

and i am not saying all muslims are the same.
i am saying that all "hardline" rulers are the same.
dont matter what religion, colour of skin or race you are.



Dead centuries ago? Where in the world does Christians burn witches today? Where in the world do Christians Stone Rape victims? Where in the world do Christians use the Old Testament as law of the land?

i was merly trying to point out, that it doesnt matter what religion, or place of birth, people are still the same. even in interpreting holy books for something they are not. extreme islam and extreme christianity is the same. they both did horrible things in the name of their lord.



All that is fine and dandy and its been a wonderful dance all around the subject but I really didnt expect you to answer it. I will ask it again

IF the Taliban or OBL controled Europe or America what would be the result? Would they be the noble heroes your every post paints them as, or would they be be-heading people in sports arenas, stoning rape victims, torturing anyone who doesnt convert to radical Islam, etc?

yes i know what you are trying to hear,
it was the intention of this thread.
you want to hear, that if the taliban or OBL were in charge, they would kill and torture and rape everyone, that doesnt want to be muslim.
and you are not going to hear that from me.
as i said before,
i fight against any hardline rule.

[edit on 11-2-2005 by Souljah]



posted on Feb, 11 2005 @ 11:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by Souljah
[you want to hear, that if the taliban or OBL were in charge, they would kill and torture and rape everyone, that doesnt want to be muslim.
and you are not going to hear that from me.


So it is not true? Are you saying these noble freedom fighters would not do just that?


I dont blame you I wouldnt answer either if my every post has been glorfying these fanatics

[edit on 11-2-2005 by Amuk]



posted on Feb, 11 2005 @ 11:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by Amuk
So it is not true? Are you saying these noble freedom fighters would not do just that?


I dont blame you I wouldnt answer either if my every post has been glorfying these fanatics

i didnt say that,
since they are not in that "role" now.
they are not attacking, they are defending.
and as i said before:

they game remains the same,
only the "pleyaZ" are changing.




posted on Feb, 11 2005 @ 12:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by Souljah
they are not attacking, they are defending.
and as i said before:


Defending the right to behead, stone rape victims, kill unbelievers, and force your religion onto everyone at gunpoint? What part of this makes them heroes to you?




they game remains the same,
only the "pleyaZ" are changing.



Lets go with that, because basically I agree.

If both sides are attempting the same thing why do you cheer for the side that guns down school children, beheads hostages, stones rape victims, tortures and kills women in sports arenas, etc?

Do you not see the hypocricy of this?



posted on Feb, 11 2005 @ 03:20 PM
link   
Amuk
Saudi Arabia
religious police is not in her

bye



posted on Feb, 11 2005 @ 03:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by almasad
Amuk
Saudi Arabia
religious police is not in her

bye


Google Saudi Religious police


this is just one of thousands of hits

www.domini.org...

heres another

www.newsfilter.org...

[edit on 11-2-2005 by Amuk]



posted on Feb, 11 2005 @ 03:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by almasad
Amuk
Saudi Arabia
religious police is not in her

bye


No religious police in Saudi Arabia?


Here's just one of the many articles on the non-existent religious police:



The leader of the group of al Qaeda militants that attacked the U.S. Consulate in Saudi Arabia was found to be a former member of the Saudi religious police -- a fact that is further evidence of al Qaeda's penetration of the Saudi state system. As militant Islamism grows and the Saudi government faces increased pressure to crack down on jihadists, the kingdom's rulers eventually will come into conflict with the religious establishment. The Saudi English-language daily Arab News on Dec. 13 quoted Saudi Ambassador to the United Kingdom Prince Turki al-Faisal as saying there could be no solution to the problem of terrorism until the Palestinian issue is resolved. Al-Faisal's comments come a week after a group of al Qaeda militants -- led by Fayez Jihani, a former member of the Saudi religious police known as the Commission for the Promotion of Virtue and Prevention of Vice, or mutaween -- attacked the U.S. Consulate in the western Saudi city of Jeddah.



www.freerepublic.com...



[edit on 11-2-2005 by 27jd]



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join