Islamic Imperialism

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by Wotan31, Jun 13, 2009.

  1. Wotan31 macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2008
    #1
    http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,526126,00.html

    Is this the dark ages still?? Why do the members of a Sharia Law society still use violence in an effort to forcefully convert all non-muslims? And they wonder why all of us "Infidels" view them as barbaric peoples. This is the exact same thing they were doing 1000 years ago, which prompted the Crusades.
     
  2. obeygiant macrumors 68040

    obeygiant

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2002
    Location:
    totally cool
    #2
    religioustolerance.com

    What those people did in the article you posted don't represent Islam as a whole. Or one can only hope. :)
     
  3. Blue Velvet Moderator emeritus

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2004
    #3

    Speak for yourself, as it seems you're happy to make a sweeping statement about a billion people or more.

    Interesting username you have there. Do you actually know any Muslim people?

    Did you complain when Ann Coulter said:

    Not excusing any behaviour on the part of extremist groups, but it makes me laugh when anyone from the US accuses other people of violent imperialism. This isn't anti-Americanism, just a plain statement about your nation's history in Asia and South America, disregarding the Middle East and just using some other examples.
     
  4. Desertrat macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2003
    Location:
    Terlingua, Texas
    #4
    Blue Velvet, that's a rather simplistic view of US "Imperiallism". Our whole deal has been based on trade, not occupation, control and governance. We've not imposed US law nor any religion or language upon anybody.

    Doesn't mean we've never done stupid, of course, but when I think of the treatment of indigines by the Spanish or the Germans, not to mention other empires, I'd say we've damned well been benign. We've paid market price, not stolen, and there are a helluva lot of countries who can't say that. Japan, Russia, France, Holland, Belgium, Italy and Great Britain come to mind, just offhand. :)

    My problem with Islam is that it's a wad-up of religion and law. No separation of church and state. I regard the second-class status of women and non-Islamics as anathema. The Koran speaks of "tolerance" of non-Islamics who are "people of the book". Sorry, I see you and me as equals to any Islamic, not people to be "tolerated".

    Their post-Mohammed expansion by armed invasion does not strike me as an example of a benign history. Nor does the idea of the present regime in Iran for a new "Islamic Crescent" to be controlled from Teheran seem to foretell a new era of friendly accomodation to foreign concepts and ideals.
     
  5. Blue Velvet Moderator emeritus

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2004
    #5
    'Rat, I don't want to sidetrack this thread, but your claim that the US strategic interests and the way they've been pursued over the past 60-70 years has been solely through trade is simply incorrect, and what's more, you well know it.

    I'm not comparing the US to other countries. I don't have a dog in this hunt as I'm not from any country that is any form of a power, but it's laughable for any American to condemn others for imperialism.

    Can you name a single country that Iran has ever invaded? Your notion of this Islamic Crecent would be disputed by Iran's neighbors, seeing as Iran is predominantly Shiite.
     
  6. zap2 macrumors 604

    zap2

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2005
    Location:
    Washington D.C
    #6
    I agree on most of your other point, but I'm going to have to disagree here...an American could easily call out American Imperialism(vote against it, disapprove,etc) as well as other forms Imperialism from other nations
     
  7. Burnsey macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2007
    Location:
    Canada
    #7
    This isn't a problem with Islam, but rather certain countries who prefer to keep the mosque and the state as one. There are secular muslim countries like Turkey that do not practice this.

    Also every religion calls for tolerance of those of different religions, not necessarily equals. Members of every religion (at least the 3 Abrahamic ones) see themselves as the chosen ones, best etc..., the others are to be tolerated. NO religion says "our religion and another is equal". In the eyes of religion, there really is only one "right", be it Christianity, Islam or Judaism. Jews believe Judaism is right (hence them being Jews), Christians believe Christianity is right (hence them being Christians) and Muslims believe Islam is right (hence them being Muslims). I have never met or heard of anyone who is a Christian and a Muslim or some other combination of the three.

    The interesting difference here is that Islam accepts Judaism and Christianity as somewhat legitimate (i.e. it is backwards compatible and adds to the others), while the other two (Judaism and Christianity) are limited in this regard, because they came along earlier. For example neither Christianity or Judaism accepts Muhammad as a legitimate prophet, while Islam accepts both Moses and Jesus as legitimate prophets.
     
  8. mactastic macrumors 68040

    mactastic

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2003
    Location:
    Colly-fornia
    #8
    LOL... no we've never imposed US law on any, oh say native Americans. Never forced them into schools to learn "God's language". And we never did anything so horrible as enslave people who looked different, then brought them over to the US and forcibly converted them and taught them English.

    It must be nice to have such a rosy view of US history. Of course, it's completely wrong; but it must be so nice to have a superiority complex.
     
  9. .Andy macrumors 68030

    .Andy

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2004
    Location:
    The Mergui Archipelago
    #9
    Which crusades were these?

    Sounds innocuous.
     
  10. zap2 macrumors 604

    zap2

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2005
    Location:
    Washington D.C
    #10
  11. Desertrat macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2003
    Location:
    Terlingua, Texas
    #11
    Blue Velvet, it is a publicly stated aim of Iran to create this "Crescent". That Hezbollah is their surrogate would-be attacker of Israel is beside the point; sure, Iran itself hasn't gone to war with anybody. But the threat of nuke-force capability and the ability to deliver can well be a means of expanding Iran into empire status--with Sharia as the ruling system.

    Other than the exigencies of the Cold War, almost all of our military non-war efforts have been involved with interruptions of trade. "Gunboat diplomacy" and "banana republics" is a good example, there. I don't claim it was the right thing to do, but in the usual connotations of "empire" we didn't occupy and rule. A reasonable generality would be that when stability returns, we leave.

    mac, the psychology of the westward expansion across what is now the U.S. was completely different from the accepted usage of the word "empire". No doubt about the cruel and wrongful treatment of the Indians, but I note that we've made notable efforts toward redress--which no other true empires have ever done.

    All that said, what we HAVE done that is in the nature of empire is to overextend ourselves in the good ol' guns'n'butter tradition and have gone broke in the process. Thus we're in the beginning stages of a retreat to a lesser status while the BRICs are in the ascendancy. Sorta like Britain after Suez in 1956. As is common, however, neither the ascent or descent will be smooth straight lines. The old Chinese curse will be operative for quite a while; this next decade will indeed be interesting.

    And so off to bed...

    'Rat
     
  12. VideoFreek macrumors 6502

    VideoFreek

    Joined:
    May 12, 2007
    Location:
    Philly
    #12
    What an absurd post! Your premise, I suppose, is that since the United States has engaged in what some consider to be "imperialism," all Americans are imperialists by association, and therefore it is "laughable" for any of them to condemn imperialistic acts by other nations. By this logic, neither should any British, Dutch, French, Portuguese, Spanish, Chinese, Japanese, Austrian, Italian, or Russian person dare speak out against the evils of imperialism, the hypocrites! No German, Italian, Romanian, Spaniard or Japanese should ever be critical of fascism. We should laugh to the point of wetting ourselves if any Russians, Chinese, or any of the aforementioned former fascists say unkind things about totalitarianism.

    Only one question for you--who is left to take others to task when they're doing wrong? Perhaps only people from countries that haven't mattered very much in the world are "clean" enough for this.
     
  13. Desertrat macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2003
    Location:
    Terlingua, Texas
    #13
    Bad stuff from imperialism? Thousands in the Belgian Congo died of beatings and starvations before King Leopold reformed the system, but the Belgian system was rather inefficient. Stalin improved on that with some 12 million in the Ukraine discovering the joys of Socialism. And then we had the Holocaust, during an effort at creating an empire for Lebensraum.

    Note that the US Army has been playing "tripwire" in Macedonia, protecting Islamics. But one wonders, was the arrival of Islamics in the Balkans the result of peaceful immigration?

    One thing that stands out about any US empire activities and our military: We're known for bringing as much food as we are munitions. The local people don't go hungry when our army is around. There are more schools and hospitals now in Iraq than before we entered. More electricity and more potable water. Further, oil production is greater than before our arrival. This is not the common behavior of past empires.

    This present resurgence within the Islamic world may not be driven by the more secular portion, nor by the general equivalent of Joe Sixpacks, peaceful as they may be. That doesn't matter. The Jihadists and certain political leaders are indeed attempting a renaissance of the efforts of a thousand and more years ago--and those past efforts were not noted for improving the local diet.

    For Iran as with many countries, when the internal affairs are in a shambles, external enemies must be found as a way of uniting the country to reduce the complaints about the government-induced misery. Iran, an oil-producing and exporting nation, has gasoline rationing and high inflation. There has been little or no effort at increasing the output of oil since the fall of the Shah. Crude oil is sent across the Gulf, refined, and the gasoline is then imported. So, there are two obvious external enemies: Israel, because it's Jewish; and the decadent western world, with the U.S. as the Great Satan.

    That women own property and businesses, wear bikinis and serve in our military and dance to rock music does not endear us to the true believers in Sharia. I note they penalize homosexuality, as well. When something as mild as "Playboy" is considered hardcore porno, somebody has serious emotional problems--and I don't think it's us. We're easy targets as external enemies, spreading such evil concepts around the world.

    The sad thing is that western purchases of oil provide the funds for the various militant efforts against us whether terroristic or direct military...

    'Rat
     
  14. Peterkro macrumors 68020

    Peterkro

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2004
    Location:
    Communard de Londres
    #14
    ^^^This is indeed true we all hate you because of your freedoms (and peace loving food bearing military)
     
  15. mactastic macrumors 68040

    mactastic

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2003
    Location:
    Colly-fornia
    #15
    Wrong about the electricity. Availability is less than pre-invasion, and not predicted to reach pre-war levels until 2011 at the earliest. The locals weren't hungry before we arrived, so it's safe to say that the US military isn't feeding them. Oh, and oil production wasn't quite up to pre-war levels as of May.

    Facts are not malleable things...
     
  16. Burnsey macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2007
    Location:
    Canada
    #16
    There are alot of things right and a lot of things wrong with this post. Yes, because of internal problems a country would need a common external enemy to bring the people together. As it stands the current regime in Iran depends on this. Heck one of the main pillars of the Islamic Revolution was opposition to America/the west, without this pillar the government would significantly be weakened.

    Their opposition to Israel and America/the West has little to do with Sharia or rock music, there are deep and historic political divides, theirs as legitimate as ours. After all, if this was a Sharia problem, they would equally oppose Russia, China, Canada, Venezuela and many other countries. But not only are they allies with Russia, China and Venezuela, but they also do a lot of business with those countries. And I've never heard them shout "death to Canada".

    You have your reasons all wrong. Yes, western decadence is a problem, pornography, short skirts, rock music, alcohol etc... Yes the Iranian supreme leader has called the West a "moral wasteland" or "morally bankrupt" but this isnt the main reason for opposition, and as far as I can see their problems with America are legitimate. There was the killing of their democratically elected president, replacing him with a corrupt and cruel dictator (the shah) and supporting Saddam in his brutal 8 year long invasion of Iran. When you see Anti-American propaganda in Iran, painted on the walls of the former US embassy in Tehran for example, you do not see half naked girls listening to rock music, you see a gun with an american flag on it, you see the stars and stripes dropping bombs etc... Then there is US imperialism (as the iranians call it), and this too is a major reason for their opposition. Historically the US has attempted to manipulate and control countries and governments in the middle east to best fit its own interests, the people be damned. Iran is a perfect example (the shah), Iraq and afghanistan two recent examples. They oppose American support for Israel (more on that in a minute), American military bases around the world, and the general "policing" and "bullying" that America seems to do (what countries can and cant have nukes for example).

    Today, east of Iran you have American and Nato forces in Afghanistan, west of Iran you have American forces in Iraq, south of Iran you have American warships and aircraft carriers in the persian gulf, and military bases to the north. The country is surrounded, and I wouldnt be surprised if they're getting a bit worried.

    Then there is the issue of trust. Iran does not trust America, and for good reason. The US talks of democracy and freedom, but they supported a dictator (the Shah) who had no such thing, but he was good for America. They talk of fighting terrorism and extremism, and yet they supported Saddam in his invasion of Iran, perhaps one of the greatest acts of terrorism in our time, because Iran losing was good for America. The US talks of Human rights, but they have prisons in Iraq and G-bay where these rights are ignored and untold horrors are the norm. But these prisons are in America's interests. In other words, America does ONLY what is good for America, and in its interests, regardless of human rights, freedom/democracy or Terrorism. The Iranians know that the Americans are only looking out for US interests, and take all the talk of democracy, human rights, terrorism etc... with a massive grain of salt.

    Israel is different entirely. The Iranian problem with Israel is not a Jewish problem, never has anything of this sort been mentioned by anyone other than the Israelis. When the Iranians are asked why the dont recognize Israel, and why they oppose it (like in the recent Aljazeera interview with the reformist candidate Mousavi) they have brought up reasons like occupation, oppression, and wars. America sides with Israel, Iran sides with the Palestinians. Israel does not recognize a sovereign Palestinian state, Iran does not recognize Israel. Saying Iranians are opposed to Israel because of Judaism is like saying Israel wages wars in Lebanon, Gaza, occupies the west bank etc... because they hate Islam. It's absurd propaganda at best.
     
  17. zap2 macrumors 604

    zap2

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2005
    Location:
    Washington D.C
    #17
    I'm not saying you are right or wrong, but I think a source to back up your claims would be a good idea(same thing for Desertrat)
     
  18. .Andy macrumors 68030

    .Andy

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2004
    Location:
    The Mergui Archipelago
    #18
    Where did you get the figures for hospitals? And schools?
     
  19. mactastic macrumors 68040

    mactastic

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2003
    Location:
    Colly-fornia
    #19
    Sigh... Why is it that I always have to provide proof of my claims, but 'Rat doesn't? :confused:
     
  20. iShater macrumors 604

    iShater

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2002
    Location:
    Chicagoland
    #20
    So this "honor killing" happened because they just decided to pick some dude and force him to convert. Nothing to do with that relationship with their sister which in that society is considered beyond taboo. Nope, it is purely a religious reason. :rolleyes:
     
  21. Don't panic macrumors 603

    Don't panic

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2004
    Location:
    having a drink at Milliways
    #21
    rolleyes indeed.
    how can you condone torturing and killing someone because he and his girlfriend have (consensual) sex is beyond belief.
    and since, allegedely, these 'honorable' brothers would have been ok with the agreed marriage if he had converted, yes, it seems that religion has something to do with it, if anything by providing the coverage and excuse for such barbaric acts.
     
  22. skunk macrumors G4

    skunk

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2002
    Location:
    Republic of Ukistan
    #22
    You are SO wrong. The Crusades were prompted by the oversupply of vicious warlords and credulous cannon-fodder in Europe.
     
  23. str1f3 macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2008
    #23
    Yep. It's so far different too when you kill a doctor providing abortion a
    ,get into a war every decade since WWII, and invading a country without proof of WMDs. You can pretend that the US isn't barbaric but you are a living in a fantasyland. There is very little difference between the religious conservatives here in the US and in the Middle East.
     
  24. Shivetya macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2008
    #24
    Well that and the Islamic goon squad trying to get to France
     
  25. Shivetya macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2008
    #25
    Hyperbole ftl.

    Yeah, because abortion doctors are lined up against walls here daily. When concentrating on only one justification given for the War in Iraq while ignoring the rest because if you don't your petty pouting falls on its face (so glad the morons dropped the war for oil cry).

    There is a very big difference between US based religious conservatives and those you would compare to them overseas. First off, I don't see them toppling walls on gays... or beating women who dare not dress right. Oh wait, you cite extreme examples in the US (show me how often an abortion doctor gets killed) and compare them to COMMON examples overseas.

    Oh lest we forget, I recently heard some christian radicals killed a family and friends group out on a picnic, children too, and mutilated the women... oh wait, thats right, it wasn't Christians, it was those adherents of the peaceful and loving religion of Islam
     

Share This Page