List of great muslim/arab inventions or discoveries
- Thread starter gunslinger
- Start date
I never promised anything about international law
Yes you did.
More importantly we seem to agree that the US did not break international laws and acted in full accordance with the norms and standards of international behavior, at least prior to 9/11. I am glad you are on board with the idea that we did nothing wrong even if our policies were unpopular in some European and Islamofascist circles. Next thing you know I may even convince you that the US does not do 99% of the killing.
This thread is...about claiming that Muslims are savages and barbarians. The only way I know how to refute that is by explaining why some Muslims are angry
Perhaps you chose the wrong way to refute that. The arab street is always angry, the muslims are perpetually enraged. Too bad anger is no excuse, murdering innocent civilians out of anger, rioting, kidnapping, burning cars, beheading out of anger actually does confirm that they are savages and barbarians. The fact that they have not had any inventions or discoveries in many many centuries does not help either.
Americans in their place would react in a similar way.
Nonsense. As I told you before americans are angry at Mexico, americans are angry at Iran, North Korea, spineless Europe, France for their ties with Syria, muslims for their unconditional support of the Palestinians... The Tibetans are angry at China, the Ukrainians are angry at Russia, the Russians are angry at Georgia.... No one reacts in a similar way. Amerians, Ukrainians, Tibetans, Russians don't go about murdering innocent citizens of countries whose policies they disagree with. Muslims do.
Nice try. I'm still waiting for you to confirm that it will in fact change your view on terrorists. The second you do that, I'll be all over the case.
The reason why you love talking about international law so much is because you (or rather Hannity and the other people you copy) know it is a slippery slope. Problem is though, you're doing it the wrong way. You're supposed to ask me to find prove that the US has been convicted by international law - and get the immediate response "I cant", because herein lies the beauty in the argument; the US has been opposing the ICC from its very beginning and they still threaten to use military force if US nationals are held in Hague without permission, so getting the US convicted has never been an easy task.
What you are doing however, is asking me to provide prove of any action by the US that is illegal according to international law. Considering the fact that the US doesn't respect international law (remember Iraq?), you should not ask me to do this. It can only hurt your case.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Criminal_Court
I know you probably can't point out the US on the map, but take my word for it; it's the only gray area at the huge continent on the left side. If you don't trust me, I suggest you google "USA map".
Listen closer to your mentors.
I've been to Egypt twice and Jordan once, and I can honestly tell the street is not angry. You seem far angrier than any Arab I met over there.
I'll refer you to the statistics again:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_on_Terrorism_casualties
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casualties_of_the_conflict_in_Iraq_since_2003
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civilian_casualties_of_the_War_in_Afghanistan_(2001–present)
The conclusion is quite clear. Muslims are not the only ones doing some civilian killing. They're in fact doing it allot less than others. Another difference is that terrorists are mostly independent groups working for their own goals. The other part thats doing the major killings in these wars are national military forces of democratic countries, supposedly doing it at the order of their populations. So when your army bombs a town and kills 20 civilians or tortures some hundred civilian innocent people (tying ropes around their dicks, sterilizing them, etc *), their doing it on behalf of the American people. When the terrorists does something awful like that, their doing it on behalf of their own. Holding the entire population of world Muslims responsible for it, is just insane.
* http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abu_Ghraib_torture_and_prisoner_abuse
-----------------------------------------------------
I've been asking you a whole lot of questions and you keep ignoring them. Don't you understand that if you were right you would have been able to answer? If you're supporting the US policies in the middle east (especially the Israel-support) out of religious reasons, at least be man enough to say so directly; say that you believe Israel is a holy land that belongs to the Jews and that you - because of this - support anything they do in their power to take the land and secure it for them self. Say it right out that the Palestinian people has no rights to freedom or property in this matter, because of Gods words. Have the balls to stand up for your faith.
If you don't - if you're still pretending to be a rational person who supports all of this out of reason and not faith, answer me these simple questions: Why does the US support Israel unconditionally in building the security-fence when this fence eats up huge parts of Palestinian land (land that is not recognized as Israeli land)? Why doesn't the US government tell Israel that they will only support the fence if it's built on the boarders? Why is the US always blocking UN resolutions concerning this fence (at the orders of AIPAC) when the US obviously would never accept a Mexican fence eating up huge amounts of US land? Why is the US doing nothing about the new settlements that keeps popping up on Palestinian land? Sure they say they're concerned about it, but no one has ever done anything about it. While American tax money keeps financing it. Explain this to me.
What you are doing however, is asking me to provide prove of any action by the US that is illegal according to international law. Considering the fact that the US doesn't respect international law (remember Iraq?), you should not ask me to do this. It can only hurt your case.
I specifically asked you about US violations of international law prior to 9/11 as according to your posts those alleged violations were among the reasons we were attacked on 9/11 (and the reasons for other terrorist attacks on american targets). Predictably you failed to come up with examples of these violations, your cheap rhetoric and transparent attempts to weasel out of your lies are not fooling anyone.
self-destructive: The only way I know how to refute that is by explaining why some Muslims are angry
...
self-destructive (a few hours later): I've been to Egypt twice and Jordan once, and I can honestly tell the street is not angry.
One minute you say they are angry, a few hours later you say they are not. LOL. You actually claimed in your post that we don't have free media in the US and in your next post you admitted that you got your news from CNN. You are not too bright, are you? Other than that I am gratified to know that the arab street in countries that have made peace with Israel is no longer enraged. That should certainly be a great example for the other 21 arab countries that still do not recognize Israel's right to exist.
The conclusion is quite clear. Muslims are not the only ones doing some civilian killing.
Of course not. But they are doing 99% of terrorism in the world.
I've been asking you a whole lot of questions and you keep ignoring them.
Start another thread about Israel and I will be happy to respond. I don't want to help you pollute this thread with irrelevant discussions.
If you're supporting the US policies in the middle east (especially the Israel-support) out of religious reasons,
I support some policies, I don't support others. My point has always been that our policies (with the exception of Iraq) are legal, legitimate and completely within the bounds of international law and norms. Our policies thererfore don't explain terror attacks on american targets, Islamic savagery does. And btw I am not religious.
According to my post, the US had done some stuff that made some very few Muslims angry enough to attack. That's not the same as claiming they attacked because the US broke some international laws. The point you are trying to make is that the US had not done anything wrong to provoke the terrorists, but for this whole international law thing to be relevant in this point, the terrorists would have to actually care about international law. To be honest, I don't think they give a rats ass what some judges in Hague feels about anything. So, what we need to discuss instead of these international laws, is whether the stuff the US has been doing in the middle east is bad enough for any people to react aggressively regardless of who they worship. This is highly relevant to the topic of this thread, because it gives us great clues on whether Muslims are savages or not.
Here comes the infamous flip-flop argument, I've been waiting for this. You keep deliberately misunderstand me, assigning me opinions and twisting and turning everything I say, and when I try to clarify something, you compare it to your version of what I've said and hold it against me. I'll try once more to clarify as best I can.
When I say "some Muslims are angry", I'm referring to the terrorists, which in my view does not represent all Muslims. Quite the contrary; they represent very few Muslims. Sure, they share some anger towards the US and the dislike of Israel, but when it comes to killing innocent civilian people, very, very few Muslims are capable of doing it. I also said earlier that the terrorists in a way represents the Arab street, so before you through this in my face, let me clear that one as well; SOME parts of the Arab streets, like Palestinians, supports very much the very thought of attacking and hurting the US, because of what they think the US has done to them. Once you ask them how they feel about the civilian casualties however, virtually all of them will tell you it's a very bad thing. At the very most, they'll tell you it's a sad but necessary sacrifice just like Americans would tell you about civilian Afghanis.
Now let me clarify what I use CNN for. I like the Situation Room and AC360, and I also followed the caucuses and primaries on CNN because none of the Scandinavian channels where covering them extensively enough. The foreign affairs coverage and in particular US foreign policy however, is not very interesting because it IS biased. Even Wolf Blitzer, the former AIPAC propaganda hound, admitted that prior to the Iraq war, CNN was way too naive in their coverage - something that lead to the persuasion of the American people. And that's CNN, one of your very BEST mainstream news channels. Fox News, your most popular News channel, is a billion times worse.
I want to add though that when it comes to virtually everything except the subject of Israel and the middle east, I think CNN generally is capable of being quite balanced (they even tend to lean towards pro-liberal).
So watching CNN does not imply that one gets brainwashed or anything. My point is simply that one cannot expect to get a fair and balanced understanding of the middle east and in particular the case of Israel when watching mainstream US media - not even if it's CNN. In spite of the fact that I was watching CNN allot prior to the war, I was able to see what was really happening. I predicted that there were no weapons of mass destruction, that Bush wanted to go to war for some other reason, that Iraq was way too fractioned for a real democracy too work, and that removing the regime would bring chaos. I was right.
Yeah, but they weren't doing it 40 years ago and they probably will not be doing it in 40 years. This terrorism we're seeing today is a very modern phenomenon that to my knowledge was started by the PLO after decades of desperation. The PLO is NOT islamic fundamentalists, they were secular socialists with ties to South American communists. The Islamic fundamentalists simply adopted the methods of PLO because they actually did achieve some things. Compared to conventional warfare, one could achieve very much by doing very little killing, which is EXACTLY what fighters without tanks, helicopters and submarines would need.
If this thread is actually about Muslim inventions, then it was polluted already when people started claiming that Muslims are savages. It is OK for you that people pollute the thread by claiming Muslims are savages, but it is not OK when someone refutes this claim WITH documentation? You think some claims should just stand uncontested?
If you really want to discuss the Israel/Palestine conflict and the US relationship with Israel, and if you really do have any knowledge about the issues, I'll fire up a new thread in a couple of days.
Considering the fact that neither the US nor the terrorists gives a rats ass about international law, I do not see how this is relevant at all. My point have always been, and still is, that US policies towards the Arabs (more specifically the Palestinians), have been defining their reality in such a way that any people in the world could react with terrorism. This is my answer to the claim that "since 99% of the terrorists are Muslims, the Muslim people of the world must be savages".
If you're not religious, then why on earth did you support giving away the land of Palestinians to western Jewish immigrants? The West felt bad about the last few hundred years of oppression - an oppression which peaked with the Holocaust, but why should the Palestinians pay for our mistakes? Why are they still paying for our mistakes? They hadn't done anything wrong. I'm not trying to corner you with this, I'm asking sincerely because I don't understand the logic of this.
According to my post, the US had done some stuff that made some very few Muslims angry enough to attack.
And so had India, France, Israel, Australia, the UK, Spain, Russia.... Countries change, the attacker does not.
The point you are trying to make is that the US had not done anything wrong to provoke the terrorists,
No, the point I am trying to make is that a lot of people all over the world are angry at a lot of countries for lots of good and bad reasons but only muslims resort to terrorism, beheadings, kidnappings etc to make their feelings known.
If you really want to discuss the Israel/Palestine conflict
LOL, you're the one who's obsessed with Israel. I don't particularly want to discuss the conflict, it's been discussed so many times on so many blogs that you or I can hardly add anything. It's not particularly hard to figure out that your version of the conflict is similar to Arafat's and Ahmadinejad's so I certainly reserve the right to correct your lies, distortions and omissions if you do decide to start yet another 7,561st anti-israel thread.
US policies towards the Arabs (more specifically the Palestinians), have been defining their reality in such a way that any people in the world could react with terrorism.
Here you go again explaining and justifying muslim terrorism by US policies and yet again unable to come up with a single example which would be in violation of international laws, norms or standard practices. According to your logic if someone is mad at policies of another country it's understandable (at least to you) that he starts murdering civilians in malls and restaurants. Way to go my Scandinavian Arafat wanna-be.
You misunderstood me. I'm not asking whether you feel like discussing it, I'm asking you whether you are able to discuss the issues. In this thread, you have not been discussing anything, you have been acting like a terrible prosecutor, questioning me rather than the issues and trying to twist everything. I'm asking you if you will be participating in the discussion instead of playing these games. Do you think you can do that?
The fact that my explanation of the situation would in your mind justify the terrorist acts, does not mean I'm trying to justify anything. It simply means that you have a mindset close to that of the terrorists. Nice try my neoconservative al-Zawahiri wanna-be.
You forgot to respond to the question at the bottom of my previous post.
