Welcome to the internet.
Welcome to the internet.
Why couldn't they be both rapist and rape-survivor? Don't you know Reddit is an inclusive community? Don't be so rape-ist, people like you are the "problem Reddit has struggled with for several years".
In the words of Quagmire, rape it forward.
..and my penis fell off.
To the best of my knowledge, there is no equivalent of the golden rule in Islam. There are moral obligations, but only to your co-religionists. As for critical thinking, that's considered a crime in most of the ME nowadays:
Quoting Socrates at a muslim fundamentalist, as if he would accept his authority, is pointless. As you rightly point out yourself, he's from the Time of Ignorance (Jahiliyya). If the fundamentalists had their way, anything from that time would be destroyed. Not just books, but tombs, statues and monuments as well, heck, even the pyramids. IS has pledged to destroy the holy sites in Saudi Arabia.
The type of logic commonly used in muslim theology is reasoning by analogy, not syllogism. Even if you were able to corner a fundi with the Socratic method he'd simply say "you speak like a snake," and probably punch you in the face as well. It's how they're raised, dogma is literally bashed in to them. The average madrassa's curriculum is a brainwashing program, endless recitation while rocking back and forth, memorization of the entire Quran (phoneticallly if you don't speak Arabic). Kids are sometimes beaten to death for getting a surah wrong. Quoting their own scripture at fundis (or even regular muslims) in person is just downright dangerous. If you do it online they'll tell you that the true meaning is lost in translation, that interpretation requires deep knowledge of Islam etc. They'll quote some authority who came up with an interpretation that suits their purpose.
PS If you feel the need to engage in such discussions online, protect your anonymity. I'm not even joking, it's dangerous. It probably doesn't make the news in the US, but people get killed over this in the muslim world on a daily basis. If somebody publicly accuses you of being an apostate (kaffir, murtad), that's a death sentence, Rushdie was by no means an isolated case.
Getting in bed with Middle Eastern despots for oil
All ME leaders are despots, because.. well, ME. Are you saying we should boycott ME oil?
and cleaning up the messes that European colonialism left across the globe
Ahistoric BS. Muslims colonized Europe, not the other way around. They invaded the Crimea, Turkey, Spain, Portugal, part of France, Malta, Sicily, parts of Italian mainland, and Central Europe as far north as Poland. They were thrown out of most, but kept harassing and raiding for centuries.
The pirates of the Barbary coast attacked shipping and coastal towns to take slaves all over the Mediterranean, and other places, like Ireland, even the Americas and Iceland. It took the USMC to stop this piracy jihad (it was religiously justified). At the time it was part of the Ottoman empire, which was based on slavery (+castration), as well as on an sectarian caste system (millet). This was changed only after pressure from Britain, which propped them up as a counterweight to Russia. Last slave market in Istanbul was closed in 1908:
Slavery was re-introduced in 1915, during the Armenian, Greek and Assyrian (= anti-Christian) Genocides. What happened then is the same what Turkey's clients are doing atm in Syria: taking sex slaves, crucifixion, beheading, stoning, amputation, genocide. I'll leave it to you to figure out why (hint: Surah 5:33).
If you think this is all water under the bridge, you do not understand Arab culture. The majority do not share the West's linear conception of time and ideas about progress. In their mind, land once conquered by muslims remains theirs, even if they lost it 600 years ago. In Egypt for example, children are taught in school that Spain belongs to the muslims. Before WW I, Turkish children were taught that the Balkan was rightfully theirs, independence of Europeans was an affront to Turkish honor, and they needed revenge. This lead to the Armenian genocide.
PS I should point out it was the Mongols, not Europeans, who broke the muslim's power. They're still butthurt about it ("Destiny disrupted"). Also, a muslim theologian at the time wrote this was a punishment from Allah for straying from orthodoxy, his works are cited by modern islamists. It all has little to do with Europe or US policy.
Clock Boy, the sidekick to Litigation Man!
I think one of the main problems with the muslim world is lack of critical thinking, which leads to unquestioning belief in authority and conspiracy theories. Don't take my word for it, this is straight from the horse's mouth:
As for ISIS, it's too simplistic to say it's just religion, see this (somewhat biased, but largely true):
But you can't understand what they do without taking islam into account. They blow up not just ruins from pagan times (Jahiliyyah), but also muslim shrines. Well, that's Wahhabism in action, and Saudi Arabia has the same policies, to the extent that they can get away with it.
In Paris, IS targeted the music venue Bataclan, makes sense since music is banned in Wahhabism. It's also jewish-owned, and has been a target many times before, also the headlining band recently toured Israel, apparently. So there's the antisemitic aspect. Restaurants and bars were attacked: that's alcohol, music, *and* men and (non-covered) women in the same room, that's triple haram. Wahhabism also bans sports (any kind of game actually), which explains the attack on the soccer game.
Without this background-knowledge the massacre looks like a random burst of violence, perpetrated by mentally ill people. Far from it, it was well-planned, and in line with doctrine.
Another example, IS wants to conquer Rome. They also called Obama "the dog of Rome". This obsession puzzled me, until I found out what "Rome" can refer to in the Muslim world.
Know your enemy. Western policymakers don't seem to understand IS, so they got caught off gaurd last friday:
IS announced Washington DC and London will be next, so nobody can plead ignorance anymore.
Maybe they should go after Alibaba then.
Seriously, I'm guessing that UPS doesn't deliver in IS territory. IS probably uses an address in Turkey and smuggles it acros the Syrian border. If Anon could get a hold of such addresses as well as credit card data, that could be quite useful.
Would the US public support a ground war in Syria?
Not a rethorical question, I'm wondering what the sentiment is over there (I'm in Europe).
A few westerners, including Americans, have joined the YPG (Kurds). They recruit online:
The US government has stated that it is legal to join, although they discourage it. But let's face it, nobody here on
They're looking for "specialists like architects, doctors, engineers, technology specialists, media and translators" as well though:
Thank you for the clarification. One of the reasons that I enjoy Slashdot, as much as I do, is that I can enter the little bit that I know and someone, almost always, comes along and fills in the details for me
Same here, I learn more from the comments than the stories.
There's some sensitive types out today and while you weren't specifically racists, you certainly insinuated (even if not intentional) some prejudicial beliefs.
No I didn't, but I wasn't very clear. With "these people" I was referring to the attackers, not any wider group.
I can say that there are people there who speak out and condemn the violence and hate it (and the behaviors that are, truly, cultural) as much as you or I.
I've studied and worked with people from the ME, even had them in the family. They were much more decent people than the 2nd, 3rd generation immigrants of ME descent here in Europe. Especially the palestinians I've met.
It's the people over there that suffer most from this type of violence. They're struggling to maintain a secular society in the face of this threat in places like Algeria and Tunisia. The events in France is a type of violence that is not uncommon in those countries.
Take for example the Algerian civil war, very brutal:
GIA's policy of extermination was not unlike what IS is doing today, they just didn't have social media back then. They tried a 9/11 type attack against France already in the 90s, but were thwarted.
I've been warned about terrorists, kidnapping, and armed conflicts - I've traveled extensively in Africa and South America over the years as well as some in the Middle East.
I think the State Department is legally obliged to warn citizens, even if chances of being kidnapped are 0.1% a year.
See the violence in the "Christian" or "Voodoo" areas of East and West Africa. I'd not be surprised if they averaged out to a higher number of fatalities than the Islamic extremists have done in, say, the past quarter century.
That's possible, I don't think it's fair to compare those 2 regions though. Anyway, this type of ideology is a modern phenomenon. It started in the 20s with al-Qutb and has just slowly gained momentum. It's going into full bloom now, and things will get worse before they get better. Even if IS is defeated tomorrow, they'll melt away and pop up somewhere else. My money is on a war in the Caucasus within 2 years, there are 8-10k Chechnyans in IS and they've been threatening Putin.
I could be wrong but I don't really think the root is the religion, region, or culture.
The culture is definitely very different, Westerners tend to underestimate that. I have some anecdotes if you're interested.
I think it all boils down to being hopeless, full of despair, having nothing to lose, and having everything to lose.
If only it were that simple. There's a lot of money and politics behind it:
"the fountainhead of Islamic extremism that promotes and legitimizes such violence lies with the fanatical "Wahhabi" strain of Islam centered in Saudi Arabia. Exact numbers are not known, but it is thought that more than $100 billion have been spent on exporting fanatical Wahhabism to various much poorer Muslim nations worldwide over the past three decades.
"Saudi Arabia has not stopped its interest in spreading extreme Wahhabism. ISIS...is a product of Saudi ideals, Saudi money and Saudi organizational support, although now they are making a pretense of being very anti-ISIS."
You're referring to the La Castellane estate in Marseille. It's the most dangerous place in the most dangerous city of Europe. A bit sensationalist, but unfortunately all true:
The chants about Mohamed Mera refer to this POS:
Tbh, Marseille has always been sleazy. Not surprising since it's a port town and a gateway from Africa and ME to Western Europe. But these, ahem, people, take it to a whole new level. AK47, anyone?
Wrong country, Iran condemned the Paris attacks. They support Hezbollah and Assad in their fight against the Syrian rebels. They are ISIS' enemy nr 1, it's the 1300 year old batle of Sunni extremists vs Shiite extremists.
A very mature reply, good job. He is right though:
PS You sound very offended, what was that about the right to offend?
All empires are, by definition, multicultural, or at least multi-ethnic. Not sure why that'd be a "feat", nor why you think Persia was the first. But your most ahistoric claim is that the persian empire was muslim. It was Zarathustrian many centuries before they were invaded by Arabs. You need to brush up on your history buddy.
If they repelled the (ME) crusades, how come Christian pilgrims got safe passage to sites in the Holy Land? And how were Portugal and Spain liberated? These were the military objectives of the crusades.
It was the Ummayad and Ottoman caliphates that invaded Europe, not the other way around. It was simply a continuation of the policy of conquest of Christian countries like present-day Egypt, Syria, Turkey etc. They got to the gates of Vienna and the Polish border. they enslaved 35 million people in total.
The Mongols killed all the muslims in Baghdad in 1258: "The Mongol destruction of Baghdad was a psychological blow from which Islam never recovered. With the sack of Baghdad, the intellectual flowering of Islam was snuffed out."
Timur did the same in 1401, and also depopulated Aleppo and Damascus. He subjugated the Ottoman empire.
The west didn't invade it. The only reason it survived as long as it did was western *support*, against Tsarist Russia. The French and British even fought their wars for them (Crimea), and supported and armed muslim tribes in the Caucasus and Afghanistan as well. In return, the Ottomans had to abolish slavery (last of their slavemarkets closed in 1912) and grant rights to religious minorities. The resentment over this led to formation of groups such as the Young Turks, and eventually the Greek, Assyrian and Armenian genocides.
Turkey entered WW I in order to fulfill the dream of a pan-Turkish empire stretching all the way to China. Didn't exactly work out, but this idea is very much alive today, as is neo-Ottoman ideology (basis for Turkey's foreign policy).
An adequate bootstrap is a contradiction in terms.