The Abuse of Islam in Political Rhetoric
- Thread starter Jurhum
- Start date
What nuclear threat? there thusfar has been no proof of Iran seeking nuculear weapons, the IAE or whatever their called just bashed the Bush admin for making false statements about Iran seeking nuclear weapons. Its a falsehood an Bush is trying to scare people into believing its Iran's intention to have nukes, just as he did with Iraq.
Thats what gets me is when people say "oh Iran is trying to produce nukes" thats completly false theres no proof of this whatsoever, its a scare tactic to get people to support a pre emptive attack.
Thats what gets me is when people say "oh Iran is trying to produce nukes" thats completly false theres no proof of this whatsoever, its a scare tactic to get people to support a pre emptive attack.
i think the whole belief that Israel should be wiped off the map is probably the sticking point with the US when it comes to Iran. i would find it hard myself to allow a country that says things like this to have nuclear capabilities, whether their claim of only using it as an energy source is true or not. however i don't agree to an invasion of Iran and i don't think one will be happening soon anyway, considering there isn't much manpower available in the US military right now, they are spread out too thin and i think an invasion would be out of the question, even for trigger happy Bush
Where on earth did you get this notion? The Palestinian government is run by a group whose stated goal is to murder every Jew in the region. Iran is run by people who want to "wipe Israel off the map."
The Muslim world doesn't want the lands of Israel so much as they want the Jews dead and/or gone from the region.
Iran has ballistic missiles capable of hitting Europe, Russia and Israel. Iran used chemical weapons in the 1980s against Iraq. Apply chemical warheads to ballistic missiles.
There's absolutely no chance of Iran being invaded, and there never was, because Iran is too powerful to be conquered. As for a preemptive strike on their nuclear capabilities, that would require Israel at the least having anti ballistic batteries that were 100% error free. From everything I've read, Israel and the US are working on anti ballistic missiles systems in Israel, but I don't think even the US has error free anti ballistic batteries.
Why should anyone in the West believe Iran is not trying to create nuclear weapons? The West has offered to give Iran nuclear fuel to run their energy program, so long as Iran itself doesn't enrich uranium. Iran stalls and then rejects the incentives package offered by the UN.
Iran has been playing games with the IAEA. And the thing about making nuclear weapons is there won't be any proof that Iran is making a nuclear bomb until the bomb is completed and they pull out of the NPT pact, just like North Korea.
The Muslim world doesn't want the lands of Israel so much as they want the Jews dead and/or gone from the region.
Iran has ballistic missiles capable of hitting Europe, Russia and Israel. Iran used chemical weapons in the 1980s against Iraq. Apply chemical warheads to ballistic missiles.
There's absolutely no chance of Iran being invaded, and there never was, because Iran is too powerful to be conquered. As for a preemptive strike on their nuclear capabilities, that would require Israel at the least having anti ballistic batteries that were 100% error free. From everything I've read, Israel and the US are working on anti ballistic missiles systems in Israel, but I don't think even the US has error free anti ballistic batteries.
Why should anyone in the West believe Iran is not trying to create nuclear weapons? The West has offered to give Iran nuclear fuel to run their energy program, so long as Iran itself doesn't enrich uranium. Iran stalls and then rejects the incentives package offered by the UN.
Iran has been playing games with the IAEA. And the thing about making nuclear weapons is there won't be any proof that Iran is making a nuclear bomb until the bomb is completed and they pull out of the NPT pact, just like North Korea.
Ok Morris the west is assuming Irans intentions are too build nuculear weapons, assumption is the mother of all fuck ups. An there are more ways to find out if thats Irans goal. First off depleted uranium is only the beginning of making a nuke, then they must find a missle or produce one that will be capable of carrying such a payload, if they cant manufacture their own then the importing of such materials is easy to track. The statement made here was there is no proof that this is their goal, your argument of Iranian nuclear armament is hearsay an therefore an invalid arguementative point.
Yes Iran used chemical weapons against Iraq in the 80's, chemical weapons that the U.S. supplied them while at the same time suppling Iraq with the same crap in the hopes the two would X each other out.
Iran's statement of "wiping Israel off the map" while bold is ridiculous to think they would even attempt such a task should they obtain a nuke. Realistically what would happen? They may get one off an reduce Tele Viv (sp) to rubble, but the retaliation against Iran would be much greater. No moderate in the region would stand by Irans side, Iran would cease to exsist. The statement was bold yes, really becomming reality, highly Illogical.
The biggest problem I see is if that is Irans true goal, is them giving a nuke to Hezabolla or Hamas, then yes I do see a huge problem we all know Hezabolla an Hamas would probably have no seconds thoughts of using it against Israel. As far as the offers the U.S. made too help Iran with nuculear energy I havent seen in detail what the offer was, maybe it was ridiculous. But I see no burden of proof that shows it is Irans intentions to seek nuclear weapons, North Koreas attainment of them seemed quick but that was because they had been working on it for some time even after they agreed not too back in 98. N.K. is the real problem here an should be sought at ridding them of nuculear capablities asap, that regime has no quelms with selling one too anybody will too pay top dollar or make the U.S. look stupid.
"The Muslim world doesn't want the lands of Israel so much as they want the Jews dead and/or gone from the region."
seems a lil bit of prejudice statement there Morris
I am a Muslim so i consider myself a part of "the muslim world" myself an millions of other muslims wish no such thing on Jews, I think you would have been more correct to say "The Radical Muslim World"
Kareem, why wouldn't Iran want nukes? Is there a chance they want to have Israel and the US breathing down their backs forever, not to mention a nuclear Pakistan, which is no friend to Shia? The West has to use common sense and assume the worst in a case like this, not wait until Iran has them to conclude that they wanted them.
By the way, has anyone visited Ahmadinejad's blog? Join his forum. I'm having a debate with him now. He argues just like Teck.:angry:
By the way, has anyone visited Ahmadinejad's blog? Join his forum. I'm having a debate with him now. He argues just like Teck.:angry:
Iran already has these. They testfired one that could hit the places I listed before over 3 years ago successfully. So they don't have to import/obtain the missile making materials.
Israel is not that big. One nuclear weapon would pretty much destroy the entire state.
Exactly. An even worse situation is Al Qaeda getting their hands on the material and using one on the US or the West or Israel, because then what state can you retaliate against when a group operates in dozens of countries?
Analysts believe Iran is about 5 years away from being able to complete the bomb. North Korea isn't threatening to wipe any of its neighbors off the map. The problem with North Korea is the possible proliferation of nuclear technology or materials to other states.
For example, when North Korea testfired those ballistic missiles a few months ago, members of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard attended the launches.
I probably should have said the Arab world actually. Someone above me (maybe you) called it the Muslim World so I simply referred to it as that in response
Israel is not that big. One nuclear weapon would pretty much destroy the entire state.
Exactly. An even worse situation is Al Qaeda getting their hands on the material and using one on the US or the West or Israel, because then what state can you retaliate against when a group operates in dozens of countries?
Analysts believe Iran is about 5 years away from being able to complete the bomb. North Korea isn't threatening to wipe any of its neighbors off the map. The problem with North Korea is the possible proliferation of nuclear technology or materials to other states.
For example, when North Korea testfired those ballistic missiles a few months ago, members of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard attended the launches.
I probably should have said the Arab world actually. Someone above me (maybe you) called it the Muslim World so I simply referred to it as that in response
The Jewish world all 14 million of them want the Muslims in their region all gone and wiped out. Past and present zionist high ranking leaders have said just that.
Many countries can be added to that list to including Israel., when a country is constantly being threatened its only natural to develope such weapons in case of an invasion
Because they are the same people that accused Iraq of having Nuclear weapons LOL. DUH
Why should they if they can develope their own? I hardly doubt the west would except any help from Iran if it was vice versa. It's pride and like i said before they dont beg for outside help.
Many countries can be added to that list to including Israel., when a country is constantly being threatened its only natural to develope such weapons in case of an invasion
Because they are the same people that accused Iraq of having Nuclear weapons LOL. DUH
Why should they if they can develope their own? I hardly doubt the west would except any help from Iran if it was vice versa. It's pride and like i said before they dont beg for outside help.
That's simplifying things quite a bit, if not outright erroneous. Israel is not calling for Iran to be wiped off the map. And I don't think the other 50% of Jews in the world are interested in destroying the entire region either.
When exactly has Israel been threatening Iran? Iran has funded Palestinian terrorist groups to fight an intifada for the past 6 years, and Iran has Hezbollah igniting stuff on another border by proxy. And Israel has still not struck Iran or even threatened to do so.
Nobody ever accused Iraq of having nuclear weapons. In fact, we knew Hussein wasn't enriching uranium. What the Coalition argued was that he was a threat to restart his nuclear programs. And the Coalition argued that he was a threat with WMD.
We know Iran is enriching uranium.
The West has offered a number of incentives, including the nuclear fuel necessary to produce the power, and Iran has turned it down.
When has it ever made sense to spend resources making stuff to produce nuclear energy when all the resources and more are being offered to you for free?
The only thing Iran would not be allowed to do is to enrich uranium, and Iran turned down the offer.
Is it really any wonder why?
When exactly has Israel been threatening Iran? Iran has funded Palestinian terrorist groups to fight an intifada for the past 6 years, and Iran has Hezbollah igniting stuff on another border by proxy. And Israel has still not struck Iran or even threatened to do so.
Nobody ever accused Iraq of having nuclear weapons. In fact, we knew Hussein wasn't enriching uranium. What the Coalition argued was that he was a threat to restart his nuclear programs. And the Coalition argued that he was a threat with WMD.
We know Iran is enriching uranium.
The West has offered a number of incentives, including the nuclear fuel necessary to produce the power, and Iran has turned it down.
When has it ever made sense to spend resources making stuff to produce nuclear energy when all the resources and more are being offered to you for free?
The only thing Iran would not be allowed to do is to enrich uranium, and Iran turned down the offer.
Is it really any wonder why?
Did you really believe I meant what I said in that quote of mine? I was simply using your logic when you accused the whole Islamic world of wanting the annihilation of all Jews. You simplified things quite a bit there yourself did you not?
Fact is they accused the country of having weapons they did not have. and possibily fabricated evidence against them and presented it to the world as a justification for war with the regime. Nuclear weapons or WMD doesn't matter at all.
No concrete evidence to support that argument.
Thats Iran for you, They just dont like to accept resources from the west. The same west they love to hate. Iran is self-sufficient in every field. 90% of their sophisticated equipments used in the nation’s power plants are supplied by domestic producers
It's understandable why they'd refuse to accept help from the west when they can produce what they need themselves.
Fact is they accused the country of having weapons they did not have. and possibily fabricated evidence against them and presented it to the world as a justification for war with the regime. Nuclear weapons or WMD doesn't matter at all.
No concrete evidence to support that argument.
Thats Iran for you, They just dont like to accept resources from the west. The same west they love to hate. Iran is self-sufficient in every field. 90% of their sophisticated equipments used in the nation’s power plants are supplied by domestic producers
It's understandable why they'd refuse to accept help from the west when they can produce what they need themselves.
Didn't know if you were being ironic or hypocritical there but I would like to point out that your religion totally condones the extortion or execution of anybody that does not even believe in what you believe in;
"Fight against such of those to whom the Scriptures were given as believe in neither God nor the Last Day, who do not forbid what God and His apostle have forbidden, and do not embrace the true Faith, until they pay tribute out of hand and are utterly subdued." —Qur'an 9:29
And, like somebody has already mentioned in this thread; you need and want things like the Iraq invasion to happen as it gives you a reason to try and justify these actions and very unfair retaliations against innocent civilians who oppose the "war" much as you do. Without it you would find something else to use as a reason.
But tell me this, you always talk about things as black and white, Middle East vs. West, but what about all the terrorism that is happening all over the world against non-Western countries by Muslim groups? How can you justify this?
Off the top of my head;
Pakistan against India?
Abu Sayyaf violence in the Philippines?
Chechen violence against Russia?
Malaysians bombing Southern Thailand?
Bombing of non-Muslim sites in Afghanistan like the Ancient Buddhist monuments and churches?
All of these ongoing acts of extreme violence have absolutely nothing to do with the US or the UK but all follow the same traits and methods and all carried out by Muslims mostly against a non-resistant or non-threatening sufferer.
Your reason that the current terrorism that is happening against the West is all a reaction to them invading Islamic soil, however there is fighting in and against Russia, the Philippines, India and African countries where Muslims are trying to create separate Islamic states and they use terrorism to do this.
I can see how you see things but I don't think you are really considering the big picture here, or you are just choosing to ignore it.
"Fight against such of those to whom the Scriptures were given as believe in neither God nor the Last Day, who do not forbid what God and His apostle have forbidden, and do not embrace the true Faith, until they pay tribute out of hand and are utterly subdued." —Qur'an 9:29
And, like somebody has already mentioned in this thread; you need and want things like the Iraq invasion to happen as it gives you a reason to try and justify these actions and very unfair retaliations against innocent civilians who oppose the "war" much as you do. Without it you would find something else to use as a reason.
But tell me this, you always talk about things as black and white, Middle East vs. West, but what about all the terrorism that is happening all over the world against non-Western countries by Muslim groups? How can you justify this?
Off the top of my head;
Pakistan against India?
Abu Sayyaf violence in the Philippines?
Chechen violence against Russia?
Malaysians bombing Southern Thailand?
Bombing of non-Muslim sites in Afghanistan like the Ancient Buddhist monuments and churches?
All of these ongoing acts of extreme violence have absolutely nothing to do with the US or the UK but all follow the same traits and methods and all carried out by Muslims mostly against a non-resistant or non-threatening sufferer.
Your reason that the current terrorism that is happening against the West is all a reaction to them invading Islamic soil, however there is fighting in and against Russia, the Philippines, India and African countries where Muslims are trying to create separate Islamic states and they use terrorism to do this.
I can see how you see things but I don't think you are really considering the big picture here, or you are just choosing to ignore it.
Not true, You've been visiting anti-islamic websites a little to much.
Don't copy and paste incomplete verses from the qur'an to further your hateful agenda against muslims. The verse goes on to say "Fight in the cause of Allah those who fight you, but do not transgress limits; for Allah loves not transgressors.
The above permission to fight clearly lays down the following conditions: (1) Never commit aggression; fighting is allowed only for self-defense. (2) Fighting must never be against non-combatants or non-fighting personnel.
When Muslims fought back, The Commander who led the campaign against agression by the Pagans, He adressed his follwers with this.
“Do not betray, be treacherous or vindictive. Do not mutilate. Do not kill children, the aged or women. Do not cut or burn palm trees or fruit trees. Do not slay a sheep, a cow, or camel except for your food. And you will come across people who stay in hermitages for worship; leave them alone to what they devote themselves to.”
If these false accusations are true that Muslims are commaded to kill non-muslims we'd see a population of 1.3 billion people taking up arms by now.
Yes I want things like the Iraqi war to happen, I'm Begging for the slaughter of hundreds of thousands of Muslims just to slaughter civilians in return. You've got me all figured out. Really grow up :thumb:
Off the top of my head
India against pakistan?
Phillipines against abu sayyaf?
Russian violence against chechens?
Thai soldiers murder of thousands of Thai Muslims?
There have been many bombings of of Mosques and other Islamic centres. They're both wrong and we shouldn't condone any of them.
2 sides to every coin buddy.
Who said it was just against the west?
true, Does not mean I condone their methods of retaliation.
These guys have their own reasons, Not neccassarily Invading Islamic soil. Violence back and forth have been going on for decades. Yet you choose to point only the Islamic ones.
Discuss Hindu terrorism against Muslism in India.
Dont forget the terrorism against Muslims in Bosnia and Russian savagery in Chechnya.
How bout we address the real problems and the violence against Muslims and non-muslims instead of just one side of the story?
It's true there have been many acts of terror done by Muslims, No one is denying that, We need to adress both problems not just one side, Your reasoning feeds extremists, Those who think like you are the real root cause of terrorism.
And you see things just from one picture when there is 2.
Don't copy and paste incomplete verses from the qur'an to further your hateful agenda against muslims. The verse goes on to say "Fight in the cause of Allah those who fight you, but do not transgress limits; for Allah loves not transgressors.
The above permission to fight clearly lays down the following conditions: (1) Never commit aggression; fighting is allowed only for self-defense. (2) Fighting must never be against non-combatants or non-fighting personnel.
When Muslims fought back, The Commander who led the campaign against agression by the Pagans, He adressed his follwers with this.
“Do not betray, be treacherous or vindictive. Do not mutilate. Do not kill children, the aged or women. Do not cut or burn palm trees or fruit trees. Do not slay a sheep, a cow, or camel except for your food. And you will come across people who stay in hermitages for worship; leave them alone to what they devote themselves to.”
If these false accusations are true that Muslims are commaded to kill non-muslims we'd see a population of 1.3 billion people taking up arms by now.
Yes I want things like the Iraqi war to happen, I'm Begging for the slaughter of hundreds of thousands of Muslims just to slaughter civilians in return. You've got me all figured out. Really grow up :thumb:
Off the top of my head
India against pakistan?
Phillipines against abu sayyaf?
Russian violence against chechens?
Thai soldiers murder of thousands of Thai Muslims?
There have been many bombings of of Mosques and other Islamic centres. They're both wrong and we shouldn't condone any of them.
2 sides to every coin buddy.
Who said it was just against the west?
true, Does not mean I condone their methods of retaliation.
These guys have their own reasons, Not neccassarily Invading Islamic soil. Violence back and forth have been going on for decades. Yet you choose to point only the Islamic ones.
Discuss Hindu terrorism against Muslism in India.
Dont forget the terrorism against Muslims in Bosnia and Russian savagery in Chechnya.
How bout we address the real problems and the violence against Muslims and non-muslims instead of just one side of the story?
It's true there have been many acts of terror done by Muslims, No one is denying that, We need to adress both problems not just one side, Your reasoning feeds extremists, Those who think like you are the real root cause of terrorism.
And you see things just from one picture when there is 2.
Sorry but you're confusing Muslims with Christians. Nice try :thumb:
You're saying muslims arent aware thats what their religion calls for when in the same post i proved that its not what islam calls for
And the majority non-violent ones are the actual ones who follow the Qur'an, Because the Qur'an doesnt encourage violence
You're saying muslims arent aware thats what their religion calls for when in the same post i proved that its not what islam calls for
And the majority non-violent ones are the actual ones who follow the Qur'an, Because the Qur'an doesnt encourage violence
Err, no, that's not true. I've never been to an anti-Islamic website in my life and being that I live in a Muslim country I don't think it's even possible as those types of site are probably banned here, and also being that my girlfriend and some of the people closest to me in my life are Muslims what kind of person would I be if I did??
See, like I said, with you everything is most definitely black and white, East and West, them and us. Because my location states I'm from the UK, for you, that must mean that I'm a devout Christian who hates Muslims, their way of life and where they come from but the truth is you fit this stereotype perfectly and maybe you don't even realise it. For over a year the only times I've ever seen you post in here is with the same single minded point of view.
For me, I was glad to see you write that because that's the first time I've ever seen you acknoledge that there is responsibility from both sides
Anyways, back to my point;
There would be terrorism because these groups want to create seperate Islamic states, with Islamic laws, courts, banks etc. There will never be a peaceful settlement to these conflicts because it would not be possible for Muslims to co-exist in a non-Muslim country as the two ways of life contradict each other. And I know you're going to say that Mulsims, Jews and Christians all live side by side in Jordan where there are Mosques, Churches and Sinagogues next to each other on the same street but this is a rarity and not something I think will continue forever.
The Abu Sayyaf was founded to create a seperate Islamic state in the Philippines like back in the 80's funded by a Saudi and apparently, and this does sound very cliche, linked to Bin Laden. The Philippines is not Islamic soil, nearly 100% of it's population is Christian but because it is surrounded by Islamic countries then they knew they would have local support to try to dominate the country.
And what were their ways to get their message across? Was it to form a political party? Was it to publicly demostrate? Write a strong worded letter to the President?? Nope, they started off with kidnappings, murders and bombings mainly towards their own people but also to expats. How very stereotypical of them!
Now none of this was in direct retaliation to anything the West had done to the Philippines, until then there had been no terrorism, so please try to justify this like you do everything else because this does not fit in with your one and only argument.
See, like I said, with you everything is most definitely black and white, East and West, them and us. Because my location states I'm from the UK, for you, that must mean that I'm a devout Christian who hates Muslims, their way of life and where they come from but the truth is you fit this stereotype perfectly and maybe you don't even realise it. For over a year the only times I've ever seen you post in here is with the same single minded point of view.
For me, I was glad to see you write that because that's the first time I've ever seen you acknoledge that there is responsibility from both sides
Anyways, back to my point;
There would be terrorism because these groups want to create seperate Islamic states, with Islamic laws, courts, banks etc. There will never be a peaceful settlement to these conflicts because it would not be possible for Muslims to co-exist in a non-Muslim country as the two ways of life contradict each other. And I know you're going to say that Mulsims, Jews and Christians all live side by side in Jordan where there are Mosques, Churches and Sinagogues next to each other on the same street but this is a rarity and not something I think will continue forever.
The Abu Sayyaf was founded to create a seperate Islamic state in the Philippines like back in the 80's funded by a Saudi and apparently, and this does sound very cliche, linked to Bin Laden. The Philippines is not Islamic soil, nearly 100% of it's population is Christian but because it is surrounded by Islamic countries then they knew they would have local support to try to dominate the country.
And what were their ways to get their message across? Was it to form a political party? Was it to publicly demostrate? Write a strong worded letter to the President?? Nope, they started off with kidnappings, murders and bombings mainly towards their own people but also to expats. How very stereotypical of them!
Now none of this was in direct retaliation to anything the West had done to the Philippines, until then there had been no terrorism, so please try to justify this like you do everything else because this does not fit in with your one and only argument.
Donate
Any donations will be used to help pay for the site costs, and anything donated above will be donated to C-Dub's son on behalf of this community.
Members online
No members online now.