Islamic militia says Mogadishu captured

[Fake Boris]

We live in such a climate of political corectness that I hear more people saying that Islam is deeply rooted in brutality than the opposite. Beware of censorship!!!

[aneeshm]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara

Originally posted by Oerdin
Islam most certainly does have fundimentalism built right into it's foundations which is why the Islamic Fundimentalists have such an easy time convincing people to follow their brand of Islam.

So do Judaism and Hinduism, at least as far as violent conquest and putting the unbelievers to the sword go. Christianity started as a religion of turning the other cheek, and look how that turned out.

I must have missed the "violent conquest" bit when I studied Indian history . Which king exactly attempted to conquer territories outside India for the sake of religion ?

And a reference to any Hindu scripture which tells us to kill non-Hindus just because they're not Hindus would be relevant here .

Originally posted by chegitz guevara

The reason the tendency is so strong in Islam today is that we (the West) actively supported it as a foil to the Communists for decades. We are reaping what we have sown.

Even if I ignore your bashing of the West , please tell me how India has caused the Kashmir problem ( WRT terrorism , not the terrotorial dispute , which is another thing altogether ) . Why is it that Pakistan Occupied Kashmir is used as a base to train militants who are then sent to India to carry out terrorist attacks ? How are we responsible for that ? How is the West responsible for that ?

And have you ever bothered to study the fatwas issued by clerics in a liberal place like India even today , as relating to how to treat kafirs ? Have you bothered to even take a cursory look at how Muslim rulers treated their non-Muslim subjects throughout Indian history ?

[Vince278]

Originally posted by Spiffor
Maybe Mogadisho will become less of a lawless hellhole now. It's unfortunate that the stability comes at the cost of having theocrats at the helm however.

Unfortunately my first thought as well. Maybe they can start feeding and caring for the people for a change.

[Fake Boris]

Originally posted by aneeshm
I must have missed the "violent conquest" bit when I studied Indian history . Which king exactly attempted to conquer territories outside India for the sake of religion ?

You're having your revenge right now, by exporting hairsplitting and useless moralist historical interpretation.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara

Originally posted by Oerdin
Islam most certainly does have fundimentalism built right into it's foundations which is why the Islamic Fundimentalists have such an easy time convincing people to follow their brand of Islam.

So do Judaism and Hinduism, at least as far as violent conquest and putting the unbelievers to the sword go. Christianity started as a religion of turning the other cheek, and look how that turned out.

The reason the tendency is so strong in Islam today is that we (the West) actively supported it as a foil to the Communists for decades. We are reaping what we have sown.

In traditional Judaism there is ONE holy war, that fits the above description, the original conquest from the Canaanites. All other wars were "normal" - they were decided by man, and were either wars of self defence, or were wars of choice,if the latter, they required approval from council of elders/sages to be licit. (this was debated extensively wrt to the halachic licitness of evading the draft during Viet Nam) And in general putting unbelievers to the sword was ruled out in these latter wars. Though the Hasmoneans famously converted the Idumeans by force. But this conversion was ruled null and void by later rabbis. But then that was in part because Herod was descended from Idumean converts, and the rabbis didnt much like Herod. So its fairly complicated.

[Ramo]

I doubt if this is going to make the situation any worse than it already is. The warlords are a nasty piece of work, and clearly our policy of supporting them against the Islamists failed miserably.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Ramo
I doubt if this is going to make the situation any worse than it already is. The warlords are a nasty piece of work, and clearly our policy of supporting them against the Islamists failed miserably.

I really dont know enough about this "Islamic courts" group. Are they Salafists? What is the nature of the connections some of them are claimed to have with AQ? What are their goals wrt Sharia?

Its possible we can negotiate with them, or they can work with the TNG in Baidoa.

[MichaeltheGreat]

Originally posted by GePap
Oh, and I love all the religious bigotry in the thread, Its precious.

It's not bigotry to say these fundamentalist Islamic miliatias and their leaders are murdering *******s. It's objective fact which will soon enough be demonstrated in the public squares and the good ol' soccer stadium, if it's still standing.

[GePap]

Originally posted by aneeshm

Even if I ignore your bashing of the West , please tell me how India has caused the Kashmir problem ( WRT terrorism , not the terrotorial dispute , which is another thing altogether ) . Why is it that Pakistan Occupied Kashmir is used as a base to train militants who are then sent to India to carry out terrorist attacks ? How are we responsible for that ? How is the West responsible for that ?

Well, not allowing the Kashmiris to be independent as they wanted was probably the main issue in that dispute, no? As for why Pakistan uses its area to train militants vs. India, simple, Pakistan is not strong enough to win the whole area by outright war. That has **** to do with religion.

And have you ever bothered to study the fatwas issued by clerics in a liberal place like India even today , as relating to how to treat kafirs ? Have you bothered to even take a cursory look at how Muslim rulers treated their non-Muslim subjects throughout Indian history ?

Who cares? Honestly. So the Muslim conquered the Hindus. The Hindus got a much better deal than say the pagans ever did from the Christians, or those followers of native religions in the Americas. After all, Hinduism remains a major global religion....

Maybe you need to get over your persecution issues.

[GePap]

Originally posted by MichaeltheGreat


It's not bigotry to say these fundamentalist Islamic miliatias and their leaders are murdering *******s. It's objective fact which will soon enough be demonstrated in the public squares and the good ol' soccer stadium, if it's still standing.

No, its bigotry to say islam is 'worse' than other religions.

[SlowwHand]

And again, it's radicals of ANY religion.

[aneeshm]

Originally posted by GePap


No, its bigotry to say islam is 'worse' than other religions.

Simple question : Why ? If X happens to be worse than Y , why is saying so "bigotry" ?

[aneeshm]

Originally posted by GePap


Well, not allowing the Kashmiris to be independent as they wanted was probably the main issue in that dispute, no? As for why Pakistan uses its area to train militants vs. India, simple, Pakistan is not strong enough to win the whole area by outright war. That has **** to do with religion.

I told you - forget the territorial dispute . Forget for a moment even the terrorist attacks carried out inside Kashmir itself . But what of the attacks in other parts of India ( such as the terrorist attacks on two major temples ( Akshardham and another in Kashi )) ?

Originally posted by GePap

Who cares? Honestly. So the Muslim conquered the Hindus. The Hindus got a much better deal than say the pagans ever did from the Christians, or those followers of native religions in the Americas. After all, Hinduism remains a major global religion....

Maybe you need to get over your persecution issues.

Firstly - let's not negate history . The Hindus lived as second-class citizens for about the last thousand years , in land which is theirs by hsitoric right . But I do not want to diverge from the topic at hand .

You did not get it . I am not talking about just history . I am talking about the present . Do you have any ideas of the fatwas the clerics have issued in the last thirty years ? Or the books of fatwas used as a base for Islamic law in India even now ? I am talking about them , about the current situation , not the past .

[SlowwHand]

And current matters the most.

[Fake Boris]

Originally posted by aneeshm


Simple question : Why ? If X happens to be worse than Y , why is saying so "bigotry" ?

begging the question