Obama´s mosque

Anything else you want to talk about.
Post Reply
lwd
Senior Member
Posts: 3810
Joined: Sat Jun 17, 2006 2:15 am
Location: Southfield, USA

Re: Obama´s mosque

Post by lwd » Tue Sep 14, 2010 1:18 pm

RF wrote:I think that what is coming out of all this is that mankind has not really progressed into the twenty first century. We are still being held back by those anachronisms from the Dark Ages, religion.
I'd argue that some of us have but progress is never even or smooth.
Until we consign religion - all of it - into the dustbin of history there can never be any chance of any peace in the world. The truth is that the religous extremes feed from each other and use science and technology for their own ends, in spite of the fact that science and technology, indeed the whole Enlightenment, would not exist if these religions had their way.
Religions are fundamentally systems of belief. Science can be considered one as well as can Communism along with the more traditional ones. Religions are by their very nature alogical. I.e. there are at the bottom of them some fundamental assumptions or beliefs. The problem however is that many are illogical and many of their adherents don't like being confronted with this. The problem is not religion it's that some use religion as an excuse not to think while others use it to promote thier own self image or welfare at the expense of others.

User avatar
Karl Heidenreich
Senior Member
Posts: 4808
Joined: Thu Jan 12, 2006 3:19 pm
Location: San José, Costa Rica
Contact:

Re: Obama´s mosque

Post by Karl Heidenreich » Tue Sep 14, 2010 1:20 pm

Bgile:
What you are asking is that we deny our constitution in order to discriminate against Moslems. The day that happens, our country will no longer exist as it is, and the enemy has won.
You cannot be more wrong! You sound like a Hollywood's political thriller morale. It is not an evil fascist establishment aim to destroy civil liberties what we are dealing with. Islam's aim is NOT to produce a colapse of the Constitutional Rights, they want and need those rights in order to advance, progressively, in order for them to grow in numbers and power until the time came to rip off the same Constitution and impose the Sharia. And when that happens where are going to be all the liberal bleeding hearts? Maybe praying to Mecca. But for sure there is not going to be no more Constitution (which the liberals are destroying anyway by making the Central Goverment more and more powerfull and weakening the States and the individual).
An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last.
Sir Winston Churchill

lwd
Senior Member
Posts: 3810
Joined: Sat Jun 17, 2006 2:15 am
Location: Southfield, USA

Re: Obama´s mosque

Post by lwd » Tue Sep 14, 2010 1:27 pm

From all that I've read the Moslems in the US have been assimilated to a much greater degree than those in say Western Europe. Just last night for instance I was listening to a radio program where they mentioned the close working relationship between the FBI and the local Islamic population in Dearborn MI. Islamic radicallism is usually linked to those who have little and no real hope of every having much for them or their families. While there will always be some crazies the real prospect of a "good life" keeps their numbers down to the point that are marginalized. Much the same can be said of the fanatical Christian groups in this country. They are here their power and hope for power is pretty marginal.

User avatar
RF
Senior Member
Posts: 7593
Joined: Wed Sep 20, 2006 1:15 pm
Location: Wolverhampton, ENGLAND

Re: Obama´s mosque

Post by RF » Tue Sep 14, 2010 1:54 pm

The thing is, lwd, that some of these Christian groups don't look marginal, for example the Moral Majority and the groups did did hold sway over the Republican Party, that in particular opposed stem cell research during the George W Bush adminisration.
''Give me a Ping and one Ping only'' - Sean Connery.

boredatwork
Member
Posts: 234
Joined: Mon Mar 09, 2009 8:42 pm

Re: Obama´s mosque

Post by boredatwork » Tue Sep 14, 2010 2:31 pm

Karl Heidenreich wrote:Boreatwork:For being such an inteligent and educated person you seem too naive in your appreciation of this problem.
No more naive than thinking application of unlimited military force would "solve it."

There are an estimated 1.2 billion muslims in the world. If we are to belive you then a substantial portion of them are no better than the extremists. The United States and elements of Nato couldn't pacify 2 countries with a total population less than 10% of that. And that with substantial portions of both populations being, if not "friendly" towards the west then certainly openly hostile towards the insurgents.

A war against Islam will make them all openly hostile. How do you pacify a population of 1.2 Billion when it only takes 1 to plant a bomb?

The cost to remotely attempt this - while losing access to the economic resources of Islamic Countries for the duration, is crippling. If any victory could be achieved it would be at best Pyrrhic - with the western nations so bankrupt that their own internal finacial problems would tear them apart FAR more effectively than the occasional terrorist attack. Unlike WW2 there would be no benevolent superpower pumping in reconstruction aid into the local economy. The door would be wide open for neo-fascist, neo-nationalists, and neo-communist parties to run rampant and fuel further conflicts.


And even supposing you "defeat" the muslims without financial ruin what's next? Eternal Peace?

Hardly. Even before the victory is final the fear mongers will find another culture or ethnicity to be the next "threat." How many blacks are living in America and Europe now? Or Hispanics? Or Chinese? How many of them are "stealing our jobs" or being "a drain on our resources" or "an aggressive imperialistic culture?"

Why? Because promoting xenophobia is an easy way for inept leaders be they political or religious, muslim or christian or atheist to gain and keep power by deflecting public blame and anger from their own bumbling incompetance by instead dierecting it towards an external "enemy."
So, you equate Germans with Nazis?
Why not? If you're going to equate Muslims with Fundamentalists I'm merely following your lead.

However the constant effort of Islam to advance and "convert" the world to their faith is just that: constant. Since Day One when Mohammed started his military campaing (in the Gospels I do not see Christ commanding Peter to raise an army, but Allah asks precisely that to the Profet).
Again you make "my religion is better than yours" arguments while ignoring historical truth. It doesn't matter what was *written* in the Gospels because Christians HAVE made CONSTANT efforts to advance and convert the world to their faith as well, by both peaceful and militant means - how else do you think a religion born in isreal long before the internet could spread to 2 billion people globally?

"A man who is convinced of the truth of his religion is indeed never tolerant. At the least, he is to feel pity for the adherent of another religion but usually it does not stop there. The faithful adherent of a religion will try first of all to convince those that believe in another religion and usually he goes on to hatred if he is not successful. However, hatred then leads to persecution when the might of the majority is behind it.
In the case of a Christian clergyman, the tragic-comical is found in this: that the Christian religion demands love from the faithful, even love for the enemy. This demand, because it is indeed superhuman, he is unable to fulfill. Thus intolerance and hatred ring through the oily words of the clergyman."
Last edited by boredatwork on Tue Sep 14, 2010 3:29 pm, edited 4 times in total.

boredatwork
Member
Posts: 234
Joined: Mon Mar 09, 2009 8:42 pm

Re: Obama´s mosque

Post by boredatwork » Tue Sep 14, 2010 2:46 pm

RF wrote:I think that what is coming out of all this is that mankind has not really progressed into the twenty first century. We are still being held back by those anachronisms from the Dark Ages, religion.
I do not think "religion" or the idea of "God" is itself at fault but rather the inherant corrupt nature of humanity that drives people to have a desire to have "power" over their fellow men. If all religion ceased to exist you would still have people struggling over political ideologies or economic ones.

As such the problem with Islam and Christianity is not so much the message but rather the self appointed messangers who pervert the original moral wisdom to promote their own narrow self interest.

"If one purges the Judaism of the Prophets and Christianity as Jesus Christ taught it of all subsequent additions, especially those of the priests, one is left with a teaching which is capable of curing all the social ills of humanity."

User avatar
RF
Senior Member
Posts: 7593
Joined: Wed Sep 20, 2006 1:15 pm
Location: Wolverhampton, ENGLAND

Re: Obama´s mosque

Post by RF » Tue Sep 14, 2010 5:32 pm

I don't actually think that the teachings as you quote will solve all of society's ills, which is why I don't believe in religion, metaphysics or holoism.

In an open society any conflicts over ideology or economics is at least in the realms of the tangible and logical explanation. As you imply it won't lead to eternal peace but at least what is being argued about isn't based on teological fantasy.
''Give me a Ping and one Ping only'' - Sean Connery.

User avatar
RF
Senior Member
Posts: 7593
Joined: Wed Sep 20, 2006 1:15 pm
Location: Wolverhampton, ENGLAND

Re: Obama´s mosque

Post by RF » Tue Sep 14, 2010 5:39 pm

boredatwork wrote: No more naive than thinking application of unlimited military force would "solve it."

There are an estimated 1.2 billion muslims in the world. If we are to belive you then a substantial portion of them are no better than the extremists. The United States and elements of Nato couldn't pacify 2 countries with a total population less than 10% of that. And that with substantial portions of both populations being, if not "friendly" towards the west then certainly openly hostile towards the insurgents.

A war against Islam will make them all openly hostile. How do you pacify a population of 1.2 Billion when it only takes 1 to plant a bomb?
This is the absolute numbers argument and in the case of President George W Bush he certainly believed that ''unlimited'' conventional tactical battlefield forces would solve the problem.
Actually there are more subtle ways of dealing with the problem and that begins at home, starting with immigration policy.
''Give me a Ping and one Ping only'' - Sean Connery.

User avatar
RF
Senior Member
Posts: 7593
Joined: Wed Sep 20, 2006 1:15 pm
Location: Wolverhampton, ENGLAND

Re: Obama´s mosque

Post by RF » Tue Sep 14, 2010 5:43 pm

boredatwork wrote:
I do not think "religion" or the idea of "God" is itself at fault
I used to think that as well, I am now inclined to think that they probably are, on the basis that they are the starting point for the abuse you metion.
''Give me a Ping and one Ping only'' - Sean Connery.

lwd
Senior Member
Posts: 3810
Joined: Sat Jun 17, 2006 2:15 am
Location: Southfield, USA

Re: Obama´s mosque

Post by lwd » Tue Sep 14, 2010 7:24 pm

RF wrote:The thing is, lwd, that some of these Christian groups don't look marginal, for example the Moral Majority and the groups did did hold sway over the Republican Party, that in particular opposed stem cell research during the George W Bush adminisration.
I guess it depends on where you draw the line as to what consititutes a "fanatic". Even then there will be points in time when the idots have undue influence. The point here is that so called "Moral Majority" has pretty much vanished from the seen. Certainly there are still some of them around and extremist in both camps have undue impact in some way in their respective parties but when push comes to shove a lot of their power is illusion rather than fact. I.e. elected officials give lip service to their POVs while quietly negotiating reasonbable solutions. The problem right now seems to be that some have elevated the poltical parties to almost the level of religions (and I'm not sure of the almost part). I don't expect it to last long but it could take a few years before the flakes drift off center stage again.

User avatar
Karl Heidenreich
Senior Member
Posts: 4808
Joined: Thu Jan 12, 2006 3:19 pm
Location: San José, Costa Rica
Contact:

Re: Obama´s mosque

Post by Karl Heidenreich » Tue Sep 14, 2010 11:30 pm

Before I submit any reply I will like to post this:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/39175408/ns ... ?gt1=43001

Even the French are starting to react like the Danes... :think:
An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last.
Sir Winston Churchill

Bgile
Senior Member
Posts: 3658
Joined: Wed Mar 09, 2005 7:33 pm
Location: Portland, OR, USA

Re: Obama´s mosque

Post by Bgile » Wed Sep 15, 2010 4:41 am

Karl Heidenreich wrote:Before I submit any reply I will like to post this:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/39175408/ns ... ?gt1=43001

Even the French are starting to react like the Danes... :think:
Exactly how do you propose stopping this mosque from being built, since it's against US law to discriminate against anyone based on their religion?

User avatar
Karl Heidenreich
Senior Member
Posts: 4808
Joined: Thu Jan 12, 2006 3:19 pm
Location: San José, Costa Rica
Contact:

Re: Obama´s mosque

Post by Karl Heidenreich » Wed Sep 15, 2010 1:21 pm

Bgile:
Exactly how do you propose stopping this mosque from being built, since it's against US law to discriminate against anyone based on their religion?
Easy: a referendum of the people of New York, or of the US if necesary. The best way is always to call for the people, which is why the Democrats are going to be kicked heavy this next November, by the way...
An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last.
Sir Winston Churchill

User avatar
Karl Heidenreich
Senior Member
Posts: 4808
Joined: Thu Jan 12, 2006 3:19 pm
Location: San José, Costa Rica
Contact:

Re: Obama´s mosque

Post by Karl Heidenreich » Wed Sep 15, 2010 1:58 pm

boreatwork:
No more naive than thinking application of unlimited military force would "solve it."
It has been done before:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mongol_inv ... Khwarezmia
An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last.
Sir Winston Churchill

User avatar
Karl Heidenreich
Senior Member
Posts: 4808
Joined: Thu Jan 12, 2006 3:19 pm
Location: San José, Costa Rica
Contact:

Re: Obama´s mosque

Post by Karl Heidenreich » Wed Sep 15, 2010 2:11 pm

boreatwork:

There is something odd here:
A war against Islam will make them all openly hostile. How do you pacify a population of 1.2 Billion when it only takes 1 to plant a bomb?

The cost to remotely attempt this - while losing access to the economic resources of Islamic Countries for the duration, is crippling. If any victory could be achieved it would be at best Pyrrhic - with the western nations so bankrupt that their own internal finacial problems would tear them apart FAR more effectively than the occasional terrorist attack. Unlike WW2 there would be no benevolent superpower pumping in reconstruction aid into the local economy. The door would be wide open for neo-fascist, neo-nationalists, and neo-communist parties to run rampant and fuel further conflicts.
Three days ago you were adamant that these guys are peacefull western oriented people with which you play and ride in the subway. Now you acknowledge that having a conflict with them is un wise because of their strenght in numbers. Basically you are saying there is no winning scenario because any harm we do to them we do to ourselves? That's the basic Neville Chamberlain approach to the problem: Churchill will have recognized it inmediately.

First. The main problem is NOT in their own countries: this mob can live their desert and flea infected lands. The ones in the West are the main problem, as the danish and french experiences are so much telling us. As the danes are doing obstacles for their inmigration have to be implemented. Then a western cultural induction has to be forced upon those living inside the West: not that they have to reject their religion but they must accept the western, free and helenistic ways of ours. If not the door to deportation must be open. No more mosques in urban populated areas, that encourages them to come to the West, made this difficult.

Second. You fight the war you can win, not the one you can't. Low intensity conflicts, proxy wars, "pacification" wars are not those the west can win. So the conflict MUST escalate to that you can win: high intensity, high tech wars.
Caesar "pacified" both, Spain and Gaul with no more than three legions, however his actions were ruthless. That is why he is now in History a mighty figure whilst Robert McNamara will be forgotten or at least remembered as a loser. The Khan with 100,000 riders did conquered millions! It's a matter of will, strenght and stomach. It's them or us. Of course, for the liberal way of thinking this is too much warmongering demagogic speech. However it was exactly that hours before the nazis invaded Poland... however a bit after 6 am on September 1st, 1939 it was a wise and respectfull thought.

Anyway, it's Toronto and not San Jose, Costa Rica, the first of the capital to burn in an islamic riot for the imposition of the sharia. Hope you buy a fire extinguisher (A+B+C fire suppressor).
An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last.
Sir Winston Churchill

Post Reply