Quite
Sunnis and Shias
- Thread starter Dans
- Start date
It wasn't just the Ottoman empire either.
I read the criticism a lot on here and have thought about making this point in several threads before. At the end of WW1 they took years to decide where the borders were going to be drawn. There were huge competing interests and important political and economic interplay. I don't know if people have read about how the settlement was eventually drawn up and point out legitimate mistakes or whether it is just an easy blanket remark to blame some one else for all the current problems. Either way every peace settlement in history is only ever as good as the acceptance of it and the people involved had a massively difficult task which only a crystal ball could have made easier.
Is this a joke? Ask Israel if there were no terrorist attacks before 2001. Pak may not have terrorists running amok like now but were happily facilitating attacks on India. Afghanistan.. well... Taliban ha ruined that country already and most of the people (especially women and children) had no human rights to speak of. It may make you uncomfortable, but there is hiding from the fact that Quran was used as a justification for all these acts even before 2001. Ofcourse other geo-political factors also played their part but they can't be used to override the role played a religious ideology. You may say that they they were not using the Quran you know, but they would say the same about you.
As long as there is a brutal dictatorship in place to cow the population then it might seem so.
The US attack on Afghanistan was inevitable the moment the planes crashed into US cities.
The second Iraq war was a escapade the US brought solely on themselves. I don't think the moral case against it is that clear if Saddam left in charge was the alternative, to pass on his dominion to his sons and on and on. They really and truly messed it up post war though and that is entirely their fault because they refused advice which might well have seen a better outcome for Iraqis and that is a shame they should take time to own.
As for the other points you make I am not going to agree that the only possible outcome was for people across the middle east is to start killing each other in droves. It could have been different, it should have been different and I won't accept that only brutal suppression can contain it. One day there will be a better and peaceful way, even a democratic way for all the factions to live together. The answers are known now only the will to accept them is missing. I hope that changes quickly because the fact is that all the loss of life is a terrible and tragic waste.
It is really saddening to see all this and to live at a time when nothing seems to be able to stop it. I think about all the young people I have seen in the various conflicts their hopes destroyed and it upsets me more than it ever used to.
I'll make this short to avoid going off thread topic.
Israel are no angels. If you forcefully took peoples land, basically made the whole population live in ghettos/prison - even the likes of Ghandi would lose their mind. You really think USA/Allies went to Afghanistan to liberate women and give them rights?. Are women especially in rural India are any better off than those in Pakistan and Afghanistan? I'm sure India are not ruled by the Taliban.
India are also working behind the scenes in destabilising Pakistan. Lets not be naive and think our country is clean of these acts.
I will be the first the admit Muslims are their worst enemies.
Last edited:
What! The ME isn't stable and Sykes-Picot was a disgusting piece of underhand treachery reneging on Hussain-McMahon.
In general,I think they are.. Granted we have a fair distance to cover in terms of women's rights, but as a country as a whole, women are better of in rural India than some place the Taliban rule. Women are not stoned to death for adultery or something equally ridiculous,that in itself makes India a better place according to me.
A quick look through wiki shows that even in the year 2000 Taliban started killing Shia's in northern Pakistan.. This was before the war launched by Bush.. I think it is just convenient to blame everything on the USA war on terror, rather than accept that the Taliban behaviour was leading to what we are seeing now, even back then.
You have the lost plot if you think current condition or status of women in India is in any way comparable to those in Afghanistan back in 2001 or even now. Perhaps you don't know the kind of hardships Taliban imposed on them so should read up more on it. That was Muslims killing other Muslims without any provocation from US.
My point was not about justification of Afghanistan war but to refute yours about everything being rosy pre-2001 as opposed to now. India may be doing a lots of things but they have never harbored terrorists or terrorist organisations like Pakistan have and do.
If you read my post properly. "I said hardy". I never denied there was no terrorist acts.
In other words, the Israelis deserved this.
Shame on you, Sultan. Israel could not have "made populations live in ghettos" if it wasn't attacked by those populations in the first place. Your choice of words, not for the first time too, together with the distinction you make between terrorism here and in Muslim countries show you for the bigot you are even if you usually manage to hide this behind sugar coated posts.
I've been posting long enough here to recall the argument that if young people, suicide bombers, sacrifice their own lives in the process of killing innocent civilians one has to try and understand their motives. You are more than welcome to the practice now.
Have I said anywhere Pakistan are innocent in any of the acts you mention or justified their actions?
Oh the irony!
Someone who has defended killing of thousands of innocent Palestinians on here for years.
Relax...it's my dodgy English skills. What I meant was that I doubt things would have been rosey in the ME even if that bad piece of work never happened.
I have always defended my country's struggle against those who deny its right to exist. I always will.
I have never questioned any other country's right to exist, while you and many others did.
The subjective feeling of hopeless and endless oppression and occupation seems to be the biggest enabling factor. Thats why hundreds of Hindus did suicide attacks and thats why some christians did it as well. The idea of life after death might further encourage people, but the idea that suicide bombings are only a Islamic phenomenon is clearly nonsense.
Last edited:
Oooh, you reckon no Jewish homeland wouldn't have avoided a lot of aggro?
Show me a post a where I denied Israel it's right to exist?
I'd never defend my country/government who steals land, indiscriminately bombs innocent people, commits war crimes - I can carry on, and on...
I reckon Muslims have proved for long enough that Israel's existence is a distraction from the more typical practice of killing each other.
What's your estimate of the death toll in the entire Arab-Israeli conflict?
Your last post referring to events leading to its creation.
Do carry on. And try not do delete WWII analogies next time they make their way from your mind to your keyboard.
Did I say it was an Islamic thing? I was pointing out that people understand terrorist better when they're not on the receiving end. Unfortunately, short-sightedness may bring terrorism closer to home. There is very little consolation in terrorist then being called for what they are.
Don't answer the question then (it was rhetorical and unrefutable anyway).
I promise to follow others' example and avoid answering questions.
OK so the establishment of a Jewish homeland in ME has caused untold and continuing misery.
Collective punishment of a civilian population is very Hitlerish.
I see holyland has hijacked this muslim vs muslim thread and converted it into muslim vs israel thread and then posts the following
people understand terrorism better when they are rational compared to when they are irrational, emotional, hateful and scared. So you are obviously wrong. You might or might not have a deeper personal experience on specific emotions, but surely not on the concept and its logic itself.
The word terrorism is the most overused word for the last 15 years. Its so overused that it has lost almost any specific meaning. Language shapes perception. A first step for anyone who wants to have a meaningful conversation about this topic would be to never use this terminology in the first place.
Yes India is or was doing its act in balochistan but it was only in response to them fiddling in kashmir.
Although every now and then news of idiotic judgements of khap panchayats creeps though but still id say the position of women is no where near the levels of taliban.
Your general gist that religion is used by the powers that be in these countries to further there political agendas is correct though but then again the brainwashed jahil foot soldiers believe they're doing it because its mandated by religion, so this is a problem that needs to corrected.
The Taliban are not the governing party. They are a terrorist organisation. Pakistani or Afghani governments do not stone women for adultery.
I'm sure if they were stoned to death a big proportion of women would not now be alive. Pakistani girls are very liberal despite what we hear in the media.
If you cared a bit about civilian casualties you'd have hit the streets by now demonstrating. You don't give a fvck. Not you, or any of the British/European Muslims and leftists. You've run out of energy demonstrating your support for Hamas in the summer.
People will understand terrorism better as soon as it hits their streets. Definitions are about to get clearer.
There's no doubt about that. It shouldn't have, though. At least not to the extent it has.
I'm sure you're wishing for a terrorist atrocity in the West judging by your posts just to prove a point. With your likes in the ME no wonder it's a mess.
Israel was established by terrorists.
During the 1936–39 Arab revolt in Palestine against the Mandatory Palestine, the militantZionist group Irgun carried out 60 attacks against Palestinian Arabs and British soldiers.[1] Irgun was described as a terrorist organization byThe New York Times,[2][3] the Anglo-American Committee of Enquiry,[4] prominent world figures such asWinston Churchill[5] and Jewish figures such as Hannah Arendt, Albert Einstein, and many others.[6] The Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs describes it as "an underground organization."[7]The New York Times at the time cited sources in an investigative piece which linked the Haganah paramilitary group to the Irgun terrorist attacks such as the King David Hotel bombing.[8]
Wiki
Religious people are always sure about everything, aren't they?
There's no need for another atrocity in the West to prove my point, and I certainly wouldn't welcome one.
I'll ask when I next meet one in North London.
This is quite Hitlerish too. Fighting this isn't terrorism.
Nevermind Irgun people were turned in to the Brits by the Haganah, but then I don't expect you to know history any better than what you can find in electronicintifada.
The proverb enemy of my enemy is my friend comes to mind. I condemn Husseini for his actions unlike yourself who always makes excuses for your nations evil acts.
I actually copied the Irgun link from Wiki.
I actually copied the Irgun link from Wiki.