Teacher beheaded near Paris after showing cartoons of Prophet Muhammad

[2cents]

No time to post all you wrote. The Egyptians had over 50, 0000 regular forces fighting against Saudi Regular forces in Yemen.

I have acknowledged this in my post. But it’s a little different from writing “he fought a war against the Saudis.” Or at least your lack of mention of Yemen led me to interpret your comment as a direct Egypt vs Saudi war, rather than support for the opposing sides in Yemen’s civil war.

Yes Egypt was independent in name with the British running the country. Just like Malaya too who had a sultan but the British advisors were running it.

Again, I acknowledged this in my post.

You should listen to the news of that time. Maybe you are too young to have seen that period. I have and saw the news from those days. Had family living in Egypt too during that period. Nasser hated the Saudi Royal family.

Correct, I did not live through the period.

I have not denied that Nasser was personally antagonic towards the Saudis. However throughout the 50s and 60s Egyptian policy towards the Saudis ebbed and flowed in response to various other pressures. There were times when Nasser was receptive to and/or embraced warmer relations with Riyadh, most often when he had one of his many disputes with the Syrian and/or Iraqi Ba’th, or when he felt the Soviets were demanding a little too much subservience for his taste and he wanted to keep lines with Washington open. Ultimately he was forced to fully embrace the Saudis after 1967.

You should also look at the history of what happened in Afghanistan. A Saudi prince and a Saudi funded international organization was involved in all of this. Yes Pakistan too with the isi being the parent. Bin Laden certainly was supported by the US as he was the one who was involved in building the tunnel which was cia funded too. The Mujahideen was cia funded thru the isi and directly too. You should learn about Casey the CIA director and the support he gave to the Mujahideen. They had no idea that putting all these people together and radicalising them would be a terrible idea. Everyone had their own agenda. The communist had to be crushed.

I’m fully aware of the history, thanks. There are many credible journalists and scholars who have researched the CIA program who have argued that there is little or no evidence that the Americans directly supported bin Laden. See Jason Burke here and Peter Bergen here for example. That CIA support may have reached him indirectly through the ISI is hotly debated, as I wrote. In any case, al Qaeda wasn’t founded until the last days of the war, and there is no evidence the CIA had any role in that, or were even aware of its existence.

Iran may have been funding anti american activities but they never have been involved in these kind of terrorism activities against innocent civilians like Al Queda affiliated groups or Daesh affiliated groups.

I agree that Iranian backed groups have not matched the level and viciousness of the violence unleashed by Sunni jihadists since the mid-90s. Before then, however, the opposite is true. Some famous cases in which they’re implicated since then would be the bombings in Argentina in the 90s, and more recently a tourist bus bombing in Bulgaria - two men convicted just last month (see https://www.google.ie/amp/s/www.alj...bombing-blamed-hezbollah-200921095842463.html)

And I’d argue that their initial use of suicide attacks in the 80s helped legitimize and popularize this tactic across the sectarian divide.

 

[shamans]

Have to agree with this bit, most of the mujaheddin were anti-Taliban for sure.

I disagree with this and without trying to sound like a ball sack I do feel this is one field in which I'm ITK....

 

[2cents]

I disagree with this and without trying to sound like a ball sack I do feel this is one field in which I'm ITK....

Rabbani, Massoud, Hekmatyar, Mazari, and Ismail Khan all fought the Taliban in the 90s. All unsuccessfully. There were lesser figures who couldn’t put up a fight and were basically absorbed by the Taliban. And the odd one, like Haqqani, who joined them a bit less reluctantly.

One of the major factors behind the Taliban’s rise was their disgust at the behavior of the warlords and the state they’d left the country in following the Soviet withdrawal.

 

[Dr. Dwayne]

I disagree with this and without trying to sound like a ball sack I do feel this is one field in which I'm ITK....

That's fair but if you're going to make that claim please tell us why.

 

[Foxbatt]

Rabbani, Massoud, Hekmatyar, Mazari, and Ismail Khan all fought the Taliban in the 90s. All unsuccessfully. There were lesser figures who couldn’t put up a fight and were basically absorbed by the Taliban. And the odd one, like Haqqani, who joined them a bit less reluctantly.

One of the major factors behind the Taliban’s rise was their disgust at the behavior of the warlords and the state they’d left the country in following the Soviet withdrawal.

Agree with you on this. The Mujahideen at the onset were not religious zealots. They were anti establishment and war lords. Dustum The Uzbek was the most notorious. The bacha bazi issue was a major issue. I think it still goes on.
The Taliban is actually from Talib( students). I am sure isi was involved in the Taliban. At least at that stage.
Nasser was really anti brotherhood. He was no fundamentalist. He was an Arab nationalist. The Egypt of his time and now are two different places. It has gone very conservative now compared to his time.
Why are Muslim countries moving to that direction?
Religion is the only thing politicians are scared of. Fundamentalists use religion as a political tool to bash the leadership especially dictators. In non dictator run countries politicians are forced to move in that direction because they themselves are corrupt.

 

[2cents]

Agree with you on this. The Mujahideen at the onset were not religious zealots. They were anti establishment and war lords. Dustum The Uzbek was the most notorious

Dostum was a communist, he fought against the mujahidin during the 80s, then abandoned the regime just before it collapsed in 92, and has somehow managed to remain a major player through some world class, repeated back-stabbing and alliance shifting.

Nasser was really anti brotherhood. He was no fundamentalist. He was an Arab nationalist. The Egypt of his time and now are two different places. It has gone very conservative now compared to his time.

You will enjoy this:

 

[snk123]

Ladies and gentleman, the turkish deputy minister of Culture and Tourism. Do you guys really need a translation?

Have you seen the cartoon they have made against Erdogan? Blatant Islamophobia, insulting and inciting hatred.

 

[shamans]

Rabbani, Massoud, Hekmatyar, Mazari, and Ismail Khan all fought the Taliban in the 90s. All unsuccessfully. There were lesser figures who couldn’t put up a fight and were basically absorbed by the Taliban. And the odd one, like Haqqani, who joined them a bit less reluctantly.

One of the major factors behind the Taliban’s rise was their disgust at the behavior of the warlords and the state they’d left the country in following the Soviet withdrawal.

Bold is true but you ignore the founding figure himself mullah omar. He himself would have motivated plenty to join his faction.

 

[shamans]

@2cents you probably know this but it's messed up how one aspect of the rise of taliban was fighting "bacha bazi" - male adults raping grooming and sleeping with young boys.

The messed up part is when the U.S came to fight the taliban they allied with a lot of local war lords that practiced this act. They even told soldiers to basically turn a blind eye towards it.

This knowledge can be found online as well, verified if you don't believe me but it's true.

 

[2cents]

Bold is true but you ignore the founding figure himself mullah omar. He himself would have motivated plenty to join his faction.

Yes but he was a minor figure during the 80s. Hardly anything is actually known for sure about his activities then. Which is why I wrote “Only a few obscure mujahidin went on to form the Taliban in the 90s”.

 

[2cents]

@2cents you probably know this but it's messed up how one aspect of the rise of taliban was fighting "bacha bazi" - male adults raping grooming and sleeping with young boys.

The messed up part is when the U.S came to fight the taliban they allied with a lot of local war lords that practiced this act. They even told soldiers to basically turn a blind eye towards it.

This knowledge can be found online as well, verified if you don't believe me but it's true.

Yes I’ve heard about this and been told about it happening in some madrassas when I was in Peshawar.

 

[Dr. Dwayne]

I recall reading an article some years ago about that business. Horrible stuff.

 

[shamans]

Yes I’ve heard about this and been told about it happening in some madrassas when I was in Peshawar.

I recall reading an article some years ago about that business. Horrible stuff.

Happens quite a bit in the Bannu region as well.

Sure does and makes it for a very easy recruiting strategy for the local taliban/terrorists as well. I also think (from personal reports) that the reports of drug use under Taliban is not true. Maybe they sell it to fund their activities but cities they ran generally did not have a drug problem or child rape problem (though I'm sure "collateral damage" was needles deaths).

Anyway if I sound like a Taliban sympathizer, can assure all I am not. They are definitely monsters especially higher up the chain and stop at nothing. Just trying to paint a picture to report some things that don't often get reported.

As for Mujahideen turning into Taliban I don't think it's a wrong concept:

1) You only need a few to start a faction. Mullah Omar's got traction and it took off but no Mujahideen and it never would have.
2) The system of funding armed local militia was in place. The idea of "Jihad against the west" was nurtured during the 80s. These ideas plus the insane amount of guns available could have only lead to that

 

[Foxbatt]

Dostum was a communist, he fought against the mujahidin during the 80s, then abandoned the regime just before it collapsed in 92, and has somehow managed to remain a major player through some world class, repeated back-stabbing and alliance shifting.



You will enjoy this:

I saw that long time ago. My uncle met him a couple of times long time ago.

 

[Foxbatt]

The bacha bazi is bad business. It's more than child abuse. The young boys are sort of in drag too.
Afghanistan is a place to be left alone.

 

[Gehrman]

Have you seen the cartoon they have made against Erdogan? Blatant Islamophobia, insulting and inciting hatred.

Check the one they did with Marie Le'pen.

 

[hobbers]

Have you seen the cartoon they have made against Erdogan? Blatant Islamophobia, insulting and inciting hatred.

Exactly how is it?

 

[Sky1981]

Hebdo is shit and tasteless.

It's not intellectual. They should just go out of business. That's le pen shit is not freedom of speech. I dont know what that is. Tasteless insulting piece of garbage.

 

[Gehrman]

Hebdo is shit and tasteless.

It's not intellectual. They should just go out of business. That's le pen shit is not freedom of speech. I dont know what that is. Tasteless insulting piece of garbage.

I agree. Anyone who doesn't approve of Charlie Hebdo should simply boycott them.

 

[nimic]

That's le pen shit is not freedom of speech.

So you're saying the state should shut them down?

 

[Foxbatt]

I agree. Anyone who doesn't approve of Charlie Hebdo should simply boycott them.

It looks like the French products boycott is gaining traction too. It's crazy to get into a public fight with people like Erdogan and Trump. This is going to get interesting in the days to come.

 

[Gehrman]

It looks like the French products boycott is gaining traction too. It's crazy to get into a public fight with people like Erdogan and Trump. This is going to get interesting in the days to come.

Macron didn't start this fight. 250 french innocent people have been murdered by islamists in the past 5 years and with the beheading of Samuel Paty, he was reaffirmed that something ought to be done about this. Ergodan suggested that he needs mental treatment, for actually wanting to act on this problem.

 

[Foxbatt]

Macron didn't start this fight. 250 french innocent people have been murdered by islamists in the past 5 years and with the beheading of Samuel Paty, he was reaffirmed that something ought to be done about this. Ergodan suggested that he needs mental treatment, for actually wanting to act on this problem.

This exactly why you don't respond to people like Erdogan and Trump.

 

[fergieisold]

The nerve you have. You know fully well this forum is full of people who you say should be profiled, with a stupid smiley.

Well, I don’t want to be cynical but it seems I’ve lost the use of my text editor to add emojis now. A win for the campaign against use of emojis in the wrong situations. Hmmmm. Odd I can still add them via syntax

 

[Gehrman]

This exactly why you don't respond to people like Erdogan and Trump.

Has Trump weighed in on this?

 

[fergieisold]

Have you seen the cartoon they have made against Erdogan? Blatant Islamophobia, insulting and inciting hatred.

I’ve just looked it up...doesn’t seem to be any of those things so an explanation as to why you think it is would be good.

 

[Synco]

Well, I don’t want to be cynical but it seems I’ve lost the use of my text editor to add emojis now. A win for the campaign against use of emojis in the wrong situations. Hmmmm. Odd I can still add them via syntax

What are you babbling about.

 

[fergieisold]

What are you babbling about.

God knows. If you work it out let me know!

 

[Synco]

God knows. If you work it out let me know!

So you want to troll to rile me up.


Edit - okay, maybe I've got it now:

1. You accidentially messed up with the BB code button
2. You thought the staff revoked your editing ability because of my response to your post endorsing racial profiling
3. You decided to hit back with troll postings

Correct? Otherwise tell me, preferably in the CE Chat.

 

[Dr. Dwayne]

Well, I don’t want to be cynical but it seems I’ve lost the use of my text editor to add emojis now. A win for the campaign against use of emojis in the wrong situations. Hmmmm. Odd I can still add them via syntax

Click the little settings wheel on the right side of the reply box @fergieisold that should bring them back.

 

[fergieisold]

So you want to troll to rile me up.


Edit - okay, maybe I've got it now:

1. You accidentially messed up with the BB code button
2. You thought the staff revoked your editing ability because of my response to your post endorsing racial profiling
3. You decided to hit back with troll postings

Correct? Otherwise tell me, preferably in the CE Chat.

No I’m not trying to troll you, I was trying originally to make a joke about how I’m sure everybody around here won’t be surprised I thought profiling in some situations was sensible.

Click the little settings wheel on the right side of the reply box @fergieisold that should bring them back.

Genius! THANKS!

 

[Simbo]

Have you seen the cartoon they have made against Erdogan? Blatant Islamophobia, insulting and inciting hatred.

Not seen it, but regardless, haven't they got a pretty damn good reason to be Islamophobic?

 

[Gehrman]

Not seen it, but regardless, haven't they got a pretty damn good reason to be Islamophobic?

Now now having 90% of your staff brutally murdered by islamic terrorists isn't a excuse for being Islamophobic.

 

[Carolina Red]

Sorry but so much of this is bad history.



Egypt has been independent since the 20s, Iraq and Saudi Arabia since the 30s (although Saudi Arabia was independent under divided kingdoms since the 20s and even before), Syria and Lebanon since the 40s. British influence was maintained in Egypt and Iraq by treaties backed by military force and local elite alliances, but was effectively ended in 1952 and 1958 respectively when the monarchies were both overthrown. Syria and Lebanon were the responsibility of France until they were granted independence after WW2. It is true, however, that the UAE (formerly known as the Trucial States), Bahrain, Qatar and Kuwait only achieved real independence from the British in the 60s and early 70s.

Although Britain had a hand in the creation of the modern borders of these countries, none of them can be said to be wholly artificial. They weren’t dreamed up by British officials out of thin air, and a range of factors contributed to their modern existence. Of the states in today’s Middle East, the country that comes closest to the type of artificiality suggested is probably Jordan.



Saudi Arabia was not called the Hijaz. The Hijaz is the region along the middle of the Red Sea coastal plain of the Arabian Peninsula and its hinterland, including the holy cities. The Saudis’ origin is in Najd, the north-central desert region of the peninsula where the first Saudi state rose in the 18th century, during the time when the Saudi-Wahhabi arrangement was made. That state conquered the Hijaz in the early 19th century, but was ended a few years later by an Egyptian force ostensibly acting on behalf of the Ottoman Empire. A second Saudi state rose in the middle of the 19th century in Najd, but never took the Hijaz, and was defeated by its Rashidi rivals. The third Saudi state - which survives to this day - rose at the start of the 20th century, and only conquered and annexed the Hijaz in 1924/25. It then united Najd with the Hijaz and a bunch of other regions and declared the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia in the early 30s. The Hijaz had previously been an autonomous Ottoman province run by the Hashimites which had declared independence and proclaimed itself a kingdom during WW1.



Nasser never fought a war directly against the Saudis. At times he opposed them and at other times he was forced to ally to them. The closest they came to actual conflict was when he sent Egyptian troops to North Yemen in 1962 to support the Republican coup there, while the Saudis supported the overthrown monarchy.



Sorry, what children are you talking about here? Saudis? Or Afghans?



There’s no real evidence the Americans directly supported bin Laden, although there is some debate over whether he was an indirect recipient of funds before the founding of al Qaeda. Certainly American dollars supported plenty of other unsavory characters during the war, and the American effort definitely helped create the conditions in which al Qaeda could form and operate.

Only a few obscure mujahidin went on to form the Taliban in the 90s. The vast majority who continued fighting after the Soviet withdrawal - including nearly all the famous commanders/warlords who survived the 80s - went on to fight against the Taliban during the civil war of the 90s (and since 9/11 some, such as Hekmatyar and Haqqani, have allied with them).



It may seem like this now, but it was Shi’i groups who actually pioneered the use of suicide bombings and massive car and truck bombings in the Middle East in the 80s and early 90s. Closer to the actual topic of this thread, it was Khomeini who prompted the first such blasphemy controversy in the West.

More generally, your post betrays a singular focus on Saudi Arabia and Wahhabism as the root cause of the extremism you’re trying to explain. As such, it neglects a range of other equally important factors - not just other active parties such as the Muslim Brotherhood, revolutionary Iran, or various regional movements, but also longer term trends in Islam, the impact of the West, the failure of so-called ‘secular’ authoritarian regimes to provide dignified lives for their subjects, and a host of other material factors.

*(edit): Haqqani actually joined the Taliban well before 9/11.

Solid post. Thank you for the lesson.

 

[Foxbatt]

Has Trump weighed in on this?

He probably will once he gets finished his tweeting on the election and Joe Biden.

 

[utdalltheway]

By that same logic, you should be grateful that there arent more muslims shooting and blowing you up.

Your types are so stupid its a pisstake this forum allows you motherfeckers to talk your shit.

They’re lucky more are not getting shot or blown up?
Kinell.

 

[coolredwine]

Have you seen the cartoon they have made against Erdogan? Blatant Islamophobia, insulting and inciting hatred.

What? How is that cartoon inciting islamophobia and hatred? It’s insulting, yes. But the rest?!

 

[Gehrman]

By that same logic, you should be grateful that there arent more muslims shooting and blowing you up.

Your types are so stupid its a pisstake this forum allows you motherfeckers to talk your shit.

The logic I was using is that the staff of Charlie Hebdo have a pretty valid reason to be critical of Islam. I wouldn't even use the word Islamphobia in this case, because there is nothing irrational about it considering what has happened and that the surviving members have live out the rest of their days under constant police protection. I also don't in general think there is anything irrational at all about being critical of religion. It's in fact incredibly rational.

 

[Abizzz]

They’re lucky more are not getting shot or blown up?
Kinell.

I know right? The irony of complaining about the policing of the cafe while posting that vile shit

 

[fergieisold]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-54729957

stabbings in Nice.