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.

 

Who do you think is responsible for this Middle East Mess?

page: 2
1
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 20 2006 @ 08:10 PM
link   
Why do we need to follow?
We are the rulers of this planet, we should be the ones LEADING by example.
Not shooting of missles and munitions that TAINT the soil.
Not killing and spilling blood

What example is that?

Why do we NEED religion?
We are all human beings. Our only differences are visual. Inside we all work the same, we all think with our minds, we all care for our childeren and we all want to LOVE! why do I need a mythical being in my thoughts making limiting what I can do and cant do, if sex is enjoyable DO IT. Why wait for marriage?. why get MARRIED AT ALL?

There are two guises, Good and Evil.

People know when you are good, because you are decent, caring and understanding.
People know when you are evil, because you are hidden, devious and unkind.

Religion is what is wrong with this planet.
If there was a god, an eternal being that see's all and creates all He wouldnt let innocent childeren be slaughtered IN HIS NAME!




posted on Jul, 20 2006 @ 08:37 PM
link   
You are right, we don't need religion. We only need philosophy and science.



posted on Jul, 21 2006 @ 01:22 PM
link   
I don't believe it's religion.
Palestine has had a mixture of many religions. The fact that under Turkish control, Palestine was allowed to have religions other than Islam was one of the arguments stated in 1917 for establishing a Jewish homeland.
For a purely sociological point of view the function of religion is to provide answers for the unknowable questions, so the the average person can lead an averagelife without getting totally depressed for not having an answer.
Each religion has it's own mythology. By mythology, I refer to stories that serve to illustrate and reinforce the principles of the religion.
And religions have churches ( although they are called different names in different religions) that are basically organized groups that meet to educate others and practice the requirements of the religion.
Churches are hierarchial in nature. In large church organizations, the church becomes almost a shadow government. In countries where the church is the offical government, the result is not a virtuous government, but a corrupt church that manipulates religion to control the populace, while all sorts of criminals are drawn into the church to seek positions of power.
Everyone in the Unites States know the story of the Pilgrims and the first Thanksgiving. They came to America to practice Christianity in their own way. In England, this was forbidden by the Anglican church, headed by the King of England.
More recently, in Afghanistan, The Taliban mandated their own flavor of Islam as the state religion, whit the Taliban leaders as the heads of the church and heads of state. They were described by one afghani as little more than a crime family.
In the US we enjoy the separation of church and state. This does not prohibit a candidate from running on a religious platform or even in a church based party. The separartion of church and state is what permits it.
Isreal has a state mandated religion. It is Judeaism. They have no tolerance for Islam, even though both religions are extremely similar in beliefs and practices. ( I once explained to a Jordanian coworker that kosher is the Jewish version of Hallal) Isreal also does not permit Christians to become citizens, but seems to tolerate Christians better than Moslems.
The Islamic faith promotes education and strong family values. In it's purest form, Islam is not about violence, and those that practice violence in the name of Islam are barred from Paradise.
I believe thet religious fanatics are being used by the criminals that want to run things. I also believe the fanatics and criminals are the minority.

BTW for the record, I am an Existentialist, and while there are Christian Existentialists, I am in fact an agnostic.



posted on Aug, 8 2006 @ 04:16 PM
link   
The US, OTOH, faces a situation in Iraq that has broken decisively against it. However hopeful the US situation might have seemed the night al-Zarqawi died - B43 made the announcement in person on national tv apparently having forgot the May 1 Mission Accomplished blunder - the decision by Iran's allies in Iraq to pursue civil war rather than a coalition government has put the US into a militarily untenable position.

The US does not have sufficient forces to prevent a civil war. It can undertake the defense of the Sunnis, but only at the cost of further provocation of the Shia. The US military options are severely limited and therefore, withdrawal becomes even more difficult. The only possibility is a negotiated settlement and at this point, Iran doesn't need to negotiate.

Unless Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani, the top Shiite cleric in Iraq, firmly demands a truce, the sectarian fighting will continue and at the moment, it is not clear that even al-Sistani could get a truce. While the US was focused on the chimera of an Iranian nuclear bomb - a possibility that remains years away from a reality - Iran has moved to redefine the region. At the very least, a civil war in Lebanon where Christians and Sunnis might resist Hezbollah could match the civil war in Iraq, with the Israelis and Americans both trapped in undesirable roles.

The break point has come and gone. The US now must make an enormously difficult decision.

1) If it simply withdraws forces from Iraq, it leaves the Arabian Peninsula open to Iran and loses all psychological advantage it gained with the invasion of Iraq.

2) If American forces stay in Iraq, it will be as a purely symbolic gesture, without any hope for imposing a solution. If this were 2004, the US might have the stomach for a massive infusion of forces in an attempt to force a favorable resolution.

But this is 2006. The United States has no good choices; its best bet was blown up by Iran. Going to war with Iran is not an option. In Lebanon, we have just seen the value of air campaigns pursued in isolation, and the United States does not have a ground force capable of occupying and pacifying Iran. Or Iraq? Looking back to Vietnam. As sometimes happens, obvious conclusions must be drawn. The American electorate thought they were voting for an end of the Vietnam War in 1968. Instead, Nixon continued the war until 1974. Then in 1975, we had to flee from the roof of the Embassy in Saigon. Will we repeat that mistake in Baghdad?



posted on Aug, 8 2006 @ 05:13 PM
link   


posted by niklaus

“ . . under Turkish control, Palestine was allowed to have religions other than Islam . . one argument in 1917 for establishing a Jewish homeland . . “ [Edited by Don W]


it seems that prior to the 20th century, Muslim states were tolerant of all religions. Do you know what caused that to change? Or is it just Western propaganda?



From a sociological POV the function of religion is to provide answers for the unknowable so the average person can lead an average life without getting depressed not having answers to the unanswerable.



While I agree with you, afer the Age of Enlightenment and more especially after the Explosion of Knowledge in the 19th and 20th century, religion has no excuse at all to continue bilking the faithful. It should go quietly into the night. But have you ever known a tick to leave its host?



Each religion has mythology . . stories to illustrate and reinforce the principles of the religion . . religions have organized groups to teach and practice the requirements of the religion . . Churches are hierarchal . . In some cases large organizations become a shadow government. In countries where the church is the official religion, the result is not a virtuous government, but a corrupt church that manipulates religion to control the populace, while all sorts are drawn into the church to seek positions of power.



Yes. I refer you to James Dobson, who I call the Pope of Colorado. Focus on the Family. Formerly headquartered in Los Angeles, but James loves to ski. Colorado offered him money to move his 200 employees to Pueblo I believe, so he got a new headquarters paid for by the taxpayer and nearby skiing, no more chartered plane rides. It was no coincidence that Colorado was voting on the anti-gay rights amendment when he came there. He was soundly defeated. If he had won, he would have been a power in Colorado as Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson are powers in Virginia.



In the US we enjoy the separation of church and state. This does not prohibit a candidate from running on a religious platform or even in a church based party. The separation of church and state is what permits it.



Yeah, but, you overlooked the prime issue. Once elected, the candidate must not advance his personal, private point of view. He is to be a public servant, serving properly all the community. Not an advocate of his own private form of belief. That is what we’re missing since the Eisenhower run against Stevenson invoked the South’s disdain for divorce. It has gone downhill since. Faith based is a euphemism for getting their greedy hands on public funds. Like school vouchers and choice. All aimed at destroying the public school system in America. And I regret to say, they are making rapid progress on thier agenda. Ugh!



Israel has a state religion . . Judaism. They have no tolerance for Islam . . the Islamic faith promotes education and strong family values. In it's purest form, Islam is not about violence, those that practice violence in the name of Islam are barred from Paradise . . the fanatics and criminals are the minority. BTW for the record, I am an Existentialist, and while there are Christian Existentialist, I am in fact an agnostic. [Edited by Don W]



Well, Niklaus, since we’re in a confessional mood, I’m a Big Bang person myself, on origins, and a humanist on conduct.



[edit on 8/8/2006 by donwhite]



posted on Aug, 9 2006 @ 07:21 PM
link   
It's not Who , rather it's What
Is Responsible For This Middle East Mess??

the What turns out to be human nature

But, it's not about assigning blame as your thread question suggests we do...


In my view, we are individually responsible for ourselves,
but the father or leader or head of the family/clan/group/et al,
has the additional responsibility of both the young and the old
and the women under their care & authority.
(that's not sexist, its just a model that humanity has followed for eons)

If the assembly,( be it a family-clan-tribe ) sees that a
Flood or a Eruption or a Typhoon is immediately in front of them,
and poises an immediate threat to life and limb...
the most prudent action to take would be to get-away-from-there!

So it is with the constant or repetitive conflicts in the middle east,
when one stays in the line-of-fire, you have no one to blame but yourself

Each, leader, authority figure, head of household/family/clan/tribe
should have went to extreme measures for the preservation of life
within the group they care for....against All the vagaries that
life and humanity can throw at you.

Each individual & family unit, has an example of migration in the meme/story
which is known as Exodus
which could/might/should be used as a intellectual & practical model to follow
when dealing with the Jews & Arabs & Persians & Egyptians etc, in the middle east.

after all, they & them can do all they want, to and against each other...
but it makes no-never-mind if me or my family are excluded as victims of their insanities.



posted on Aug, 9 2006 @ 07:36 PM
link   
It was bound to happen sooner or later. Terrorist bomb Israel->Terrorist come into your country->give them government job->Israel attacks terrorist, who are now everywhere in your country.


Originally posted by KingMongolBlueHat
Correct, we need to destroy the three major religions if we ever want peace in the middle east. The world would be fine if everyone followed Confucious.


Unless you are a woman who does not want to stay home to make babies.



posted on Aug, 9 2006 @ 08:30 PM
link   
Hamas, Israel, Hezbollah, the US, Iran, the UK, Syria, Saudi Arabia, France, the UN, Pat Robertson, Saddam Husein - by no means a complete list, and in no particular order.

All the parties involved bear responsibility for the situation we are in now.
No party involved in this is completely blameless.



posted on Aug, 11 2006 @ 10:29 AM
link   

Originally posted by xmotex
Hamas, Israel, Hezbollah, the US, Iran, the UK, Syria, Saudi Arabia, France, the UN, Pat Robertson, Saddam Husein - by no means a complete list, and in no particular order.

All the parties involved bear responsibility for the situation we are in now.
No party involved in this is completely blameless.


So Bin Larden also could be forgived!



posted on Aug, 11 2006 @ 10:31 AM
link   
Satan and 1/3 of the angels is responsible for all evil on earth................that and liberals



posted on Aug, 11 2006 @ 10:54 AM
link   
I think both sides are at fault.

It does seem to me that the kidnapping of 2 soldiers
does not justify a terrible war like this
but both of them are continueing the fight.



posted on Aug, 11 2006 @ 03:12 PM
link   


So Bin Larden also could be forgived!


Doh!

Yeah that was a pretty big omission, he's definately contributed more than his fair share to the mess.

Add Bin Laden to my list... and Thermopolis



posted on Aug, 11 2006 @ 04:04 PM
link   
This reply my come as a bit of a shock to anyone used to reading my posts, but in my humble opinion the whole damned "Middle East" region can go to hell. Seriously. I just don't care anymore. America may be a nation full of gluttonous oil-gulping irreverent immoral and exploitive people, but at least we don't go around swallowing bombs and blowing up busloads of children when people piss us off.

Yeah, we kill people. Yeah, we invade countries where we have no business being. We bully the world into our way of thinking, and our corporations exploit the hell out of anything and anyone they can, just to squeeze one more dollar out of the Earth. I will be the first to admit we have some truly f---ed up double-standards here and some really awful people.

That said, I never open up the morning paper to read about how yet another bombing destroyed part of Dallas, or how a community of Bible-thumping free-speech-hating right-wing extremists firebombed a local bakery just because it was owned by a Jew. I don't hear on the radio news about how Texas has walled off New Mexico's water supply and are encroaching on their land.

Yeah, we do horrible things, but we follow rules to do so. Sometimes we are at war in a country for the wrong reason, and that is unacceptable, and sometimes innocent lives are lost, and friedlies are killed. Sometimes terrible people managed to get into a uniform and commit atrocities in wartime, for one reason or another. But it has never been the official policy of my country to go in and purposely destroy civilians lives, to torture captives, or to swallow bombs and kill children. Even though our armed forces may not always be the good guys, we at least can rest assured in the knowledge that if even one of our soldiers gets out of line, the press will raise such a stink that three heads will roll for ever one misdeed.

And despite a cowboy president under the delusion that he can solo aggro the entire world and still come out on top, we always prefer a peaceful solution to a violent one. Even if the reasons are largely selfish (we don't want our friends and family members to get killed, and we're sick and tired of war) there is no shame in desiring a peaceful resolution.

This is not the case in the Middle East. War always seems to be the first resort. Jihads and Fatwahs are thrown about like they were seed, and fostered and nurtured and grown. The value of human life is so pathetically low that blowing oneself up to take out a busload of infidel children is viewed by many as a righteous deed, or at the very worst, a blind eye is turned towards those who organize such events.

And up until the whole mess between Israel and Lebanon, I thought maybe Israel was the one chance of any sort of reasonable government and armed force. Now I doubt even that. Israel was initially attacked by Hez. forces, but have carried it far beyond what any reasonable force would do. And so I am disgusted by all within the region.

This has nothing to do with religion, btw. I've known many Muslims in my life, personally, and they were all very educated, reasonable, tolerant, and good people. Some were friends, some were business associates, but all were people I'd have no difference of opinion with except in my personal choice to use intoxicants, but they never judged me based on that.

(Edit: And half my family is Jewish, so it's not like I have a problem with them, either).

What this is about is a region where the value of human life has sunk to such a low level that children are seen as valid targets just because they're the enemies children. To me, that smacks of a rabid strain of humanity and should be irradicated. Nuke the lot of them, and save us from another two millenium of heartache, or build a giant shell around all of them and make them either learn to live together without killing each other, or let them all kill each other off. Either way, I've washed my hands of the whole damned place and everyone in it can go to hell.

No offense intended to our Arab or Israeli members intended. I'm sure everyone who posts here is a fine upstanding individual who doesn't make a habit of swallowing bombs and killing children. And if you do, then you can go to hell too.

I will say this, though. People are very quick to blame America and Europe, and everyone else EXCEPT the Middle East for the problems therein. But I don't see anyone blaming the locals. As bad as our treatment has been of other cultures, we are not the ones swallowing the bombs and killing the children. My parents used to beat the crap out of me as a child, but I grew up to be a pacifist. You can only blame other people for so much, before your actions are ultimately your own responsibility.

So my final answer? It's The Middle East's fault. All of them. Those that are taking part in the violence need to learn to live together, or hurry up and kill themselves off so the real human beings can start repairing the damage. Those that aren't taking part in the violence need to take a REAL stand against it instead of turning a blind eye to it or justifying the actions of others through garbled attempts at religious rhetoric that their respective prophets never intended.

[edit on 8/11/2006 by thelibra]



posted on Aug, 11 2006 @ 04:49 PM
link   
Islamic-extremism- is what makes the middle-east a mess. Israel is only defending itself from it and they have the right to do so.



posted on Aug, 11 2006 @ 05:03 PM
link   
HATE IS RESPONSIBLE and to be honest just about everyone over there in the middle east says the same thing I hate Jews and I hate Americans usually in the same breath they'll say this. so looks to me that Hate is responsible



posted on Aug, 11 2006 @ 05:55 PM
link   


posted by thelibra

“ . . despite a cowboy president under the delusion that he can solo aggress the entire world and come out on top . . we always prefer a peaceful solution to a violent one. Even if the reasons are largely selfish we don't want our friends and family members to get killed, and we're sick and tired of war there is no shame in desiring a peaceful resolution. [Edited by Don W]



Gosh, TL, I didn’t realize I was living in such a pacific country. Sort of like everyone here is a closet “Quaker?” Heck, since 1945, the US has been engaged in war somewhere almost constantly. Sure, they are not always up to the “strength” of a Rolling Thunder, but for the killed, they are just as dead. Methinks you must be living high up in the Rockies, perhaps a few miles outside Sun Valley?

Q. Do you know - without looking - how many America GIs have been KIA in Iraq as of today? If you honestly do not know, that is a symptom of America’s general indifference to loss of life around the world. [I admit I do not know.]

It is likely for every American killed in Iraq, 100s Iraqis have died, yet, we hear not a whimper from the Oval Office - collateral damage - nor do I see America’s clergy marching on W-DC to stop the slaughter.

In fact, since the current Israeli campaign against Lebanon commenced about a month ago, with the expected 1000 dead Lebanese women and children for each killed Hezbollah type, I have heard nothing. No complaints. In fact, I hear cheers. For Israel.

There was Nicaragua, Panama, Granada, those 2 pacifists Ronnie Reagan and Ollie North. Somalia and Bosnia and Serbia under Clinton, and a long war in Mindanao in which we have been involved more or less on the qt. Cambodia and Laos have been attacked too. And we admit to having killed 1,000,000 in Vietnam, even though the Vietnamese say it was 3,000,000. Either number ought to satisfy the normal country for a century? I’ll betcha if anybody here gave a hoot, we could work out the actual number?

I fear you are not looking in the right places, Mr TL. You must be the only peace-monger in America? Hmm?



[edit on 8/11/2006 by donwhite]



posted on Aug, 11 2006 @ 06:19 PM
link   
Who do I think is responsible for the mess in the middle east?

In the middle east itself:
The Muslims
The Jews
The Christians
The Israelis
The Lebanese
The Syrians
The Saudis
The Iranians
The Kuwaitis
The other assorted Arab states.

In otherwords, Evereyone. because no one really wants peace there. They wish to continue their idiotic religous, ethnic, and tribal feuding and bloodshed as they have been doing for the past 4,000 years. None really want peace: they want total annihilation of the opposition.

Outside the middle east:

The United States: for its biased and outrageous foreign aid and support for Israel, as well as invading a military action against various nations for dubious reasons.
Europe: for funding and aiding both sides of the conflict, as well as their imperial legacy and creation of countries that should not exist
Russia: for aiding the Arab Nations
China: for aiding the Arab Nations

Now, if we were to remove all outside influence, all funding and weapon sales, we would reduce quite a few problems drastically. Without outside aid, the nations of the middle east would be forced to rely on what they have to fight. The battlefield would be even.

Then, they could decide whether or not they want to continue bombing and killing each other into the stone age, or, they could stop, realize that war sucks and peace is nice, then work on outgrowing the backwards ideas and vendettas that caused everyone to hate and fight each other in the first place.



posted on Aug, 11 2006 @ 06:28 PM
link   
Who do I think is responsible?

Well, I think the U.S, Israel and Islam are responsible.



posted on Aug, 11 2006 @ 06:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by Shar
HATE IS RESPONSIBLE and to be honest just about everyone over there in the middle east says the same thing I hate Jews and I hate Americans usually in the same breath they'll say this. so looks to me that Hate is responsible



I will tell you that is a bald faced lie. They may hate the Jews but they don't hate all of the Americans. You watch too much TV (read Israeli propaganda). They want to make it seem like Israel is America's only Mid-East option. People in the ME Love America. The US Government is another story.



posted on Aug, 11 2006 @ 11:42 PM
link   
I just quoted what i see and hear. Yes they do scream it very loudly-- that they hate us and the jews. We see our flags being burned even, they dont say we hate your government they say we hate America we hate Isreal.



new topics

top topics



 
1
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join