June 2nd, 2012, 08:19 AM
Since as long as I can remember Arabs always moan about there lands and leaders
They are always killing some one, some where.When will they learn that Jihads are pathetic they only continue the argument.
Why kill children and the innocent why can they not understand you get one chance on earth (make the most of it) MAKE THE MOST OF IT.
I think we should give up on peace in the middle east as they don't seem to want it. wasting our time.
I'd agree, but
along with the guns, we support radio and television which shares world culture
personally, I'd rather "disband the standing land army", arm the citizens of this great nation
and make love, not war (entertaining story about the dangers of having a civilian army was Switzerland's accidental invasion of Liechtenstein-- the 1992 Triesenberg event)
incidentally
I think Osama Bin Laden won his round
he spent 1/2 million to cost us 3 trillion(and counting)
and his suicide heroes had a kill ratio that would be the envy of all modern armies
caution
when the word "they" creaps into your reasoning, reasoning soon departs
Last edited by sculptor; June 3rd, 2012 at 12:00 PM.
Honestly you need to learn a lot more about that region then. Most of the middle east is far less violent than some US cities--including Washington DC.Originally Posted by Genesis
Iraq Less Violent than Washington, D.C.
When I lived there this question came up quite often--why the US was so violent a combination American reluctance to sit down have a good meal and discuss matters combined with their own ignorance and assumptions about Christians.
Last edited by Lynx_Fox; June 2nd, 2012 at 11:57 AM.
This is very true The U.S are very aggressive, maybe the most aggressive nation in the world in what they call defensive.
Even on a global scale where we have data there are places all over Europe, South America and Asia with points just as violent or more so than the Middle East.
List of countries by intentional homicide rate - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
To the vast majority of Muslims, Jihad means a deeply personal struggle against often the same kinds of things many people struggle against--greed, envy, seeking to harm another for revenge, jealousy etc.
I suppose the trouble is that we don't interact with those Muslims very much. They don't come over here and offer to help us build very tall buildings, like the ones their friends blew up for us. Though.... admittedly,..... this is apparently not for want of aptitude at building them. The first, and second tallest buildings in the world are both located in Muslim-dominated countries.
List of tallest buildings in the world - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Somewhat sounds like the American Indian's complaints. But at least they did not perform any Jihads and had their own methods for killing. Specimen A doesn't understand specimen B so it becomes an all out war.
This head line sort of sums things up.
Noble Peace Prize laureate on verge of announcing failure of peace bid in Syria
.:Middle East Online::Noble Peace Prize laureate on verge of announcing failure of peace bid in Syria :.
What is it in your psyche that alows you to post that without realising it is prejudiced, self righteous and inflammatory?
Probably the climate was hot lately (global warming?) and people got really angry??? (Maybe) there's a link between aggresiveness & heat and all the arabs world are desert hot?? In fact: all the rich arabs (with air-conditioning) didn't appear in news, but all the oppressed poor people (probably hot people) are leading a revolution!
eg: Heat and Violence , http://psycnet.apa.org/journals/bul/106/1/74/ , http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/1...459.x/abstract
OP 'sounds' like a MMWPBRI (Mainstream Media Warmongering Propaganda Brainwashed Racist and Ignorant) comment worthy of a Fox News reactionary outlet.
"Arabs always moan about there lands and leaders"
Hey that's strange, its almost like "they" were invaded by nutcase colonists with delusions of biblical god given right to invade or by warmongering powermongering greedy crappers looking for oil that just happened to be there. Hum, I wonder why Norwegans arent moaning about being invaded by Mormons who claim their magical-underpants book of revelation says its their land and by the US army, oh, wait, maybe its because they havent been invaded by Mormons and had operation Bombs-Of-Freedom rain down on them...
... moaning ...
"what is that Scottish character in Braveheart moaning about, with freedom and crap? Why dont they want to be ruled by the British?"
"Those indians moan about their land" lets send more US colonial troops to pacify them
"those American colonist are moaning about..." lets send British Empire troops to show them
"those Philipino claimed freedom from the Spanish Empire, and now are moaning about US troops invading them"
"those French are moaning about having SS troops in the streets of Paris, they're resisting, whats their problem anyway?"
"whats up with those IRA Irish moaning about this and that, complaining about the British Empire like all those other moaners?"
"What are these north Vietnamese moaning about? Its almost like they dont like being immolated by napalm and invaded by troops coming from the other side of the world?"
... "they" ...
- Sorry mister, what are you doing?
- I'm reading my newspaper while waiting for the Bus...why?
- But arent you an "arab"?
- ah, yes.. I am
- But arent you suppose to be terrorizing and ploting to blow yourself with underpants in the most secure of checkpoints?
- ?
- Thats right, "arabs" bla bla bla... and stereotype this... ...and Rush Limbau says that...
- Ok, so why arent you as a "white" going to kill students in a school like Columbine "white" students?
Last edited by icewendigo; June 4th, 2012 at 11:08 AM.
story about a muskovite russian who went to the police to expose corruption
and the head cop said
"arent you afraid"
the reply..."I'm doing my civic duty by reporting this to you"
and the head cop said
"no,...no..no..., arent you afraid of us?"
in the usa
1/2 the federal budget is directed to the department of defence/homeland security/etc
ain't war grand?
It's actually about 1/5, but I entirely agree it could be much lower without compromising American security. It would be easier if Europe and free nations of Asia payed more of their share as well.
The rich Arabs arn't always going around killing people, they seem busy spending their money building spectacular theme parks and sky scrapers.
I don't mean to be terribly one sided about it. Every culture approaches the others around it on the basis of what it has experienced. It doesn't matter how many good, kind members a society has if they never bother to interact with us.What is it in your psyche that alows you to post that without realising it is prejudiced, self righteous and inflammatory?
People who resent the USA do so on the basis of their negative reactions, with us blowing something up, or alternatively sometimes sending aid in some form. If you lived in Afghanistan, you might know someone who died fighting the USA. Or you might know someone who got seen by a special forces doctor and treated for a curable malady that had previously been left untreated. Not saying the two necessarily balance out, but at least there are two sides.
How many primarily Muslim charities are there that benefit non-muslims?
And if we then gave them their fair share of control over the issue (equal shouldering of burden - equal say), would we even be there?
I do not know about Europe or Asia, but the UK is playing a significant part in, The War On Terror.
When it comes international operations I think your quite right then everyone should play their part and do their fare share, I do think though that this war on terror is quite unpopular in many countries and many of the people don't understand or believe what is actually being tried to achieve so it is harder for their governments to get the support to fully commit their resources. I think also their seems to be a perception that America can handle anything by themselves.
As for the UK I think they would support America with whatever campaign it wanted to undertake wether they really agreed with the reasons or not because they are very close allies, but that said the British army is already stretched after years in Iraq and Afganistan, also with no aircraft carriers in active service they have to send in planes from land bases which limits capability.
We hurt ourselves a lot by broadening the mission objective to include Iraq. There is little or no evidence that Saddam willingly cooperated with terrorists on any level whatsoever. You can't just stack things together like that. Expect the international community to both go along with:
A) - Our anti-terror objectives
and
B) - Our nation building objectives
And then say they don't care about terror because they didn't join us. That would be like trying to sell someone a puke green colored hybrid, and then saying they don't care about the environment when they decide against buying it.
The elephant in the room is that we're offering them the worst kind of leadership. Self serving, wholly dishonest objectives, that we continually white wash by trying to tie them back into the problem of terror with rhetoric.
I think a lot of nations realize the idea of a war on terror was inherently a stupid idea. Terror is a tactic (like blitzkrieg), not something to go to war against. We changed it the obtuse phrase "Overseas Contingency Operation" a few years back. What is was of course was a deliberate attempt to interrupt the financing, movement, training of private and government led organizations who use terror as their primary weapon to gain political support.
--
:-)The rich Arabs arn't always going around killing people, they seem busy spending their money building spectacular theme parks and sky scrapers.
I'll keep this brief. I personally believe there is a Cultural Difficulty at play here. And a long history of unsettlement for many reasons, in middle eastern nations. Religion. Territory. Exploitation. ( read oil ) Natural resources other than oil and petrolium, or the lack there of. What we come to understand from Iraq and afghanistan is that a section of the people in these Nations resent strongly interference from outsiders in their internal affairs. They have had long experience at confronting would be invaders. They are riflemen. The Kyber Pass. This is their bread and butter. ( please throw me in the brambles mr. fox, that would be terrible for me, said the white rabbit) Yes, they employ themselves as defenders of the Faith. This is what they do. It's on their Duty Statement. If Peace should settle throughout the Middle East, they would be out of a job and unemployable. And that would mah=ke them angry. westwind.
You don't mean to be. It's just something you are naturally gifted at.
And what efforts have you made to intereact with muslims? I mean in addition to looking suspiciously at anyone of Middle Eastern appearance.
Wow, you sound like a prefectionist. I would really like to know how you came to that conclusion.
You really do not sound different to the people you are accusing. Do you think the US is really the land of the brave?. It is inconceivable that a human can build a bomb, take it up in the skies and drop it on thousands of inocent peoples head and call themself righteous.
Why would one leave their own country and travel thousands of miles to kidnap another human being just for monetary gain as they did to the africans? What goes around comes around.
Would you clarify who this point was addressed to please. Same for the next post.
You mean like the Barbary Pirates used to do to Europeans? And who defended the Barbary's base of operations in Tripoli? Oh wait..... was that the Ottoman Empire? Tripoli was never exactly a stronghold in its own right, but if Europe had wanted to invade it to reclaim all of their lost kidnapped relatives from slavery, they'd have to go through the rest of the Muslim Empire to do it.
The Muslims brought their hardships on themselves just as much as any European actions have. They built anger over centuries of antagonization, but all anyone remembers is what happened after World War I, when the European powers partitioned out that empire in a very deliberate effort to permanently break its military strength so they'd never have to deal with another round of Barbary Pirate raids on their shores.
When I say Arabs want to get the Ottoman empire back together, I don't necessarily mean they want it under Ottoman rule. Maybe Iranian rule, or Saudi rule, or Egyptian rule. But the goal will be the same. As an empire, they can take any non-muslim they want as a slave in order to help "convert" them. It already happens in Pakistan, where Muslim groups have been kidnapping the daughters of Christians in the area, forcing them to marry by raping them and threatening to show the pictures to their family if they don't consent.
PAKISTAN Pakistan, appeal for Christian girl kidnapped and forced to convert to Islam - Asia News
Muslim Persecution of Christians: January 2012
This religion still has in many (dare I say "most"?) forms an unlimited "end justifies the means" clause when it comes to forcible conversion. I know Christianity used to have that. How many hundreds of years shall we wait while Islam catches up? And is it ok to quarantine them while we wait? Maybe contain them in their backwards countries so they only hurt each other?Pakistan: A Christian girl who was abducted in 2001 when she was 15 and forced to marry a Muslim, returned to her Catholic family after 10 years. Her case is not an isolated case: "there are at least 700 cases a year of Christian girls kidnapped and forced to marry Muslims.” Likewise, "within the past three months, nine women have been abducted and forcibly converted to Islam."
If I recall correctly, the kidnap-rape-threat-forced marriage routine is a common device in many times and regions. I first read about it as a practice on Mediterranean islands decades ago, maybe Italy/Sicily but I could be wrong there, but certainly a nominally Christian area. Currently it's often used in the remoter Chinese rural regions - explained as being due to the imbalance in male-female populations, for all we know it's been a long-standing practice that's merely become more common.Muslim groups have been kidnapping the daughters of Christians in the area, forcing them to marry by raping them and threatening to show the pictures to their family if they don't consent.
Genisis, I sometimes wonder who do we humans think we are and what do you expect from life as you define it. The beauty of life is to recognise the different elements of culture and enjoy it. We go all around the world dictating to each other to do the things that every body else is doing and destroy the beauty and invigorating presents of the human expresion. If we would stop meddling in the culture of others and leave them alone to evolve on their own terms, we would not have to critisize one another. I could say the same thing about every country on the planet espicially the US and Great Briton. They are always complaining about some other country not complying to their whims. This sick patriotism that each country uses to laud it over less fortunate ones is gone out of control.
It wasn't religion...
People are brutal. This wasn't religion but instead linked to tradition (culture/believe-system), and the nature of people itself. For example: Places like xxxxx can be an example for existent of brutal tradition, for example Caste system still exist today (a rank in society, slave & master!), and there's even culture which necissitate torture of mother who give birth to female newborn (which the baby should be exterminated/as a-disgrace), but brutal culture is rarely known now (and very difficult to find example anymore, except some human-right cases we saw in CNN report/documentation/exposure) because their culture are already overwritten by religion (arriving thru globalisation & conquest of the 18th century. eg: Even in remote places in tropical jungle of south east asia has christian church).
*Also modern systematic evil is like (was) genocide in south africa, in cambodia, and another one in bosnia & herzegovina... That's the top most popular genocide news some time ago. Its not even a war... (war is too long ago)*
The point is: people can be evil, and please stop thinking it has easy fix like "it was ideology to blame!". In fact, when Charlse Darwin travelled around the world to make observation of the natural world he mentioned there's humans behaving like animals, and they slept like dogs! It really made sense to me why he believe human is descended from ape....
... P/S: please don't label nice people as evil please. You are using religion as stereotype... pffft!
Last edited by msafwan; June 7th, 2012 at 08:29 AM.
Fair enough. Maybe people would be evil no matter what religion they joined. However, what disgusts me is the tolerance the Muslim community openly demonstrates.
In Christianity, preachers aren't afraid to tell you you're going to go to hell when you die if you act like that. In Islam, I don't hear anyone anywhere telling those individuals they will go to hell for their actions. If Islam wants to wash its hands of those people, it should condemn them to hell.
How many Muslims do you know? The few I know are absolutely horrified by evil acts done by people claiming Islam as a justification.In Islam, I don't hear anyone anywhere telling those individuals they will go to hell for their actions.
Ditto...and I know dozens.
So, there is some consensus that those individuals will burn in Islam's equivalent of hell? Any Imams on board with that statement?
The moment a religion authoritatively condemns someone to hell (perhaps adding "if they don't repent", so as to give them that chance) is the moment they are truly saying that person is no longer a part of their community. That's an important tipping point. I'd say it is "the" tipping point.
Once that point is reached, then by definition, those practicing the forbidden behaviors are no longer "Muslims". This is similar to the way Mormons separate themselves from polygamists operating in Utah. Whenever someone is discovered doing that, they are immediately ex-communicated. In one sense, they are extremist Mormons, but in the sense that counts, they're not even Mormons at all. Their baptism has been revoked by the Mormon leadership.
Because they are animals called Homo sapiens, they are a close relative of chimps. And just like separate chimp groups fight, and commonly kill each other, humans do the same.
To me your statement, is leaving out other countries that kill people for nothing. Americas behavior in the last few years, has been more murderous and insane than any Arab country.
G W Bush attacked Iraq in the name of killing "al qaeda" , while Iraq's government was trying to kill "al qaeda" for years before Sept 11 even happened.
Can you list a Arab killer, that killed someone for reasons less than this?
And when G W Bush attacked Iraq (for less than nothing) he killed 100,000 innocent people (thousands of them were children)
Can you list a group of Arab killers who killed 100,000 innocent people?
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I do agree with the things you say. Those Arab countries have a different social structure than most countries. They have tribal leaders and religion leaders.
Maybe in a way they are gang banging, like street gangs do when they kill each other. Even Americas history is full of this behavior now, and also in the past. We used to have Irish and Italian gangs that would kill each other. Then we had Al Capone who used to just slaughter people.
America also had the ku klux klan, these killers were some of the biggest evil slime balls in all of history. The KKK would hang and kill black Americans, just for walking down the wrong street. History has hidden the evil crimes of the KKK.
You say we should give up on the Middle east, because we are wasting our time. And I agree with you. Those people dont even want anyone there. They want to be ruled by their own people, and they want their tribal systems.
(I have no problem at all with Arab culture, and there tribal systems, I think they are cool. I just do (not) like the headgear they force women to wear. And I think they spend way too much time praying. And I also dont like they way they stone people, for small crimes.)
I am just like you, its pathetic they way people, kill innocent people now a days.
Last edited by chad; June 18th, 2012 at 02:59 AM.
Look at what is going on in Syria, One man wants to cling onto power, so thousands die in the most cruel way.
They slaughter the innocent and the world does nothing.
It is worse than what the Nazis did in Germany, with what they are doing to children.
This is maybe the reason why instead of a united nations, we should have a world order.
so a Vito by a nations, Russia, China could not implemented as Cruel dictators would not be tolerated
Of course, the American people only backed him because they believed his BS about nuclear weapons, and because they thought everyone would live happily ever after once Saddam was dead.
They underestimated the inability of Arabs to get along without a strongman dictator standing over them pointing a gun at their head and forcing them to get along. They made the mistake of thinking Iraqis were as advanced a culture as Americans are.
The advantage America has always had in these matters is that the violent idiots running around causing chaos were always a very small minority that could be kept in check by the majority population around them.I do agree with the things you say. Those Arab countries have a different social structure than most countries. They have tribal leaders and religion leaders.
Maybe in a way they are gang banging, like street gangs do when they kill each other. Even Americas history is full of this behavior now, and also in the past. We used to have Irish and Italian gangs that would kill each other. Then we had Al Capone who used to just slaughter people.
America also had the ku klux klan, these killers were some of the biggest evil slime balls in all of history. The KKK would hang and kill black Americans, just for walking down the wrong street. History has hidden the evil crimes of the KKK.
In Iraq, either the majority is not able to keep its violent idiots in check, or those violent idiots are the majority themselves. I don't know which it is.
The trouble is that, just because we leave them alone doesn't mean they'll return the favor and leave us alone. I wish it could work like that.You say we should give up on the Middle east, because we are wasting our time. And I agree with you. Those people dont even want anyone there. They want to be ruled by their own people, and they want their tribal systems.
When America finally "gives up" on the middle east, that act of giving up will probably take the form of a nuclear mushroom cloud over Mecca and a few Arab population centers. Probably enough other nuclear powers will agree with us by then that it won't cause an international incident. If we can't convince them to be peaceful, then our next option is to be rid of them.
We don't have a third viable option. (Though I'm sure we have many non-viable options.)
What kind of insane plan is that? if you nuke Mecca you'll also be nuking the citizen of every muslim country in the world! (because they all do pilgrimage to Mecca every year)
Imagine the outrage...
In which universe?Probably enough other nuclear powers will agree with us by then that it won't cause an international incident
Yes, I could.
I don't understand... Kojax, why do you need to care that much about middle-east? why nuke? why make them soo ridiculously important that you'd gonna nuke them all if they failed....? (what about Pizza Hut branch there?)
I'm just saying, if terror attacks escalate to the point where they pose a danger to the populations of Europe and the USA. If even one terrorist cell ever gets its hands on a nuke or a working biological weapon of strong enough potency, and threatens to use it, eventually MADD will be triggered. Nobody is going to give up as long as terrorists are small time nuisances that occasionally get off a lucky shot here and there. But on the other hand, it probably wouldn't take too many 911 events.
Actually more likely than nuking Mecca would be to go in on foot and desecrate it. Ariel Sharon already did something similar to that to the Dome of the Rock. (Technically slightly different because Jewish and Muslim people alike claim ownership of the site.)
Bloodbath at the Dome of the Rock - Middle East - World - The Independent_
Ariel Sharon - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
But wiping out a group of people we can't figure out how to get along with would be nothing new in the USA's history. Groups of people that prefer to be governed by warring tribal groups, tend to want martial government. It's like if you try to govern them by words instead of guns, you're showing disrespect for their martial abilities. But, the USA doesn't have the patience to perpetually rule that way. If a group of people can't make the transition from government by guns to government by words, there is a strong temptation to just finish things once and for all.
You will be doing a very very wrong stuff because not all muslim are terrorist. If you nuke or desecrate Mecca then you'll kill alot of civillian lives because all those pilgrimage do not carry weapon and are in state of purity. Desecrating Mecca will just imply that you're a serial killer and not someone who made a statement.
*It also mean that the bad guys win... because no one came after them.
And it would never occur to anyone at all to describe such an act as nuclear terrorism! Nuh, not me. I'd never say that. Never, ever.When America finally "gives up" on the middle east, that act of giving up will probably take the form of a nuclear mushroom cloud over Mecca and a few Arab population centers.
Dear adelady. ( from the City of Wine and Rose ). When we give up and leave the Lands of the Middle East might we make a few Codicles? ( read conditions ). Say the Americans might let it drop that they are going home now, mainly to prepare some Inter-Continental, ( read Middle Eastern here ), Guided Nucleur Missiles to be launched if ever another 9/11 incident occurs. Several of them. More powerful than any previous nucleur weapons ever deployed. And, let them know that they are free to call Americas Bluff any time they like. Just an observation on recent turmoil in Syria and Lebenon. Americans have long memories. Terrorists were allowed immunity in these Countries to sneak acroee the Borders and Kill Americans in Iraq ans Aphganistan. So America is rather busy at this time, being Summer, they are concentrating on the Golf and the good Fishing. And thats what I would be doing if I was an American. westwind.
It's not an attempt to change their behavior, or even instill fear. Just be rid of them. That's the trouble with a free society. When you encounter someone who won't leave you alone as long as they have the freedom to fight you, then you must either deprive them of their freedom or deprive them of their lives (or let them keep trying to kill you.) For a free society, depriving them of their lives is a more palatable option. At least then they die free.
The non-threat ones are irresponsible, which is almost as bad. They ought to be utterly rejecting and eschewing their violent brethren so that they're easy to find. There should be informants in every city voluntarily coming forward and telling us about their activities. If the reason they don't is conscience, then they're complicit. If the reason they don't is fear, then they're cowards. (The world doesn't need any more cowards. It already has plenty of those.)
Most Americans would rather die than live as a coward, so might as well help these poor people along on their journey.
Oh... nm. Rereading Adelady's post more carefully, she's talking about the specific case of hitting Mecca, not hitting all the population centers. Yeah. I guess that's terrorism.
You are also complicit about conflict between Israel & Palestine and their invasion of Lebanon, complicit about US waging war abroad... so it make you qualified to be killed? Maybe you are just civilian.
Genesis, What is going on in Syria? You sound as if you know. I don't know you but I can tell you are having a problem with reading between the lines. They have a saying that goes "Fools rush in where wise men never enter" I am not calling you a fool because no one is just wise, but I am saying you have no idea. Remember The US and UK supported the Nazis, or did you not know. What do you think the US is doing clinging on to power and killing millions. Please wake up they have you also where they want you.
What is going on in Syria is the same as what went on in Nazi Germany
power mad nutters that, don't want to loose Power
If Hitler did not invade other country's then. like today, the world would of just of stood back and let the atrocities happen, Lead the innocent to slaughter
Good point.
Most of the real reasons behind that stuff are so classified nobody in the USA can be sure whether there was a good reason for it or not. Secrecy is the trump card against democracy. The people can't express their will if they don't even know what their will is.
Do you think maybe fundamentalist Islam works in a similar way? Maybe most Muslims are so ignorant of the teachings in their own Koran that they can't be sure whether the fundamentalists are accurately portraying it, so they stand back rather than risk mis-communicating the will of Allah to their fellow Muslims? Or maybe it's just the fact the fundamentalists claim to be fighting against stuff like the stuff you mentioned, and the rest go along with it for reasons not specifically religious?
I suspect that the usa engages in a seemingly endless series of armed interventions
to always have a handy enemy to divert the attention of the media and citizens from domestic troubles
(long ago and far away) when i was in basic training for the army, we had bayonett practice and a rather offensive seargent would get right up in my face and scream
"what is the motto of the bayonett?" whereupon, i was expected to scream back "kill, kill, kill, seargent" and the spitit of the bayonett was "blood and guts, seargent"
( I suspect that my voice betrayed a noticable lack of enthusiasm for the subjetc at hand)
maybe something is different now?
but i think that the only way to stop the killing
is to stop killing
but i think this ain't something that the average joe can change
and what it is that our leaders think justifies their military action is something about which i know less than zero
(and there is everpresent the teaser "what if we actually are doing good?")
My problem is how you characterized the problem---conflating Arab culture, with Islamic terms such as Jihad in your opening point. You are right it's is much about entitlement for a family against a backdrop of nationalistic Arab tribe pushed by the Ba'ath philosophy. But it's also important to note that Ba'ath ideals are more Arab nationalist than Islamic or Christian, though they borrowed from both with Christians and Muslims present in its original and current leadership.
What conflates it further is the degree to which Islam itself borrowed from the nomad culture of the region it was in. It appears the system has always required plunder from outside its borders in order to sustain itself. Muslims feel entitled to wealth they have not produced as their booty for going out and forcing the rest of the world to learn the will of Allah.
......Not that US democracy is proving to be very different of late. GW and his followers thought the USA deserved some free oil from Iraq in exchange for our gracious willingness to show them the light of democracy.
All empires do this.It appears the system has always required plunder from outside its borders in order to sustain itself.
USA, UK, Japan, China, Russia, USSR, the Roman and Ottoman empires, many European countries. It doesn't matter whether the rationale for the empirical ambitions and practices are commercial, ideological, racial, religious or mere competitiveness (see European history of exploration/exploitation). And it doesn't matter that some tinpot prince of a remote province claims to be the omnipotent emperor of half a dozen villages and a yard of donkeys or that some modern entities claim not to be empires at all - China, Indonesia, USA ..... the result is still the same. Expansion, exploitation, expropriation, trade, war.
No empire, country, region, city can sustain its power and growth without obtaining resources from elsewhere. The resources required and methods involved vary by time and place, but the principle never varies.
I'm not sure what has happened here so forgive me if I am tresspassing on your poste adelady. I just wanted to support your poste and admire your understanding of the collective human condition. But are the inititives to exploit others for whatever reason solely the responsibility of the Leaders? The citizens having no say? Or is it the situation we are afraid to go against our Rulers? Or greedy for the fruits of exploitation. It appears the people are easily persuaded to go along with the idea. This worries me for some reason. Has China become one of these Exploiters?, by going into Tibet? Or was this just Political? Surely our Nation will not become one of these Exploiters? westwind.
We're just a remnant of a larger empire here. Though it took us a good long while to give up New Guinea.
The moral responsibilities of leadership might best be left for another thread.
Here in America, many people (fear) the idea of a world government.
But I think on every continent in the world, there are democratic countries, like Americas and most of Europes. These governments are not perfect, but they are better than Hitlers and certain Arab countries.
I would hate a world government, that killed its nations individuality.
But when you think about how populations, so fully follow insane governments, like Hitlers and these insane Arab leaders. I just wish there was some large world power, that would at least try, to remove this worlds insane governments.
But I dont think they should do this, with violence and weapons. But rather respect and good communication.
Last edited by chad; June 17th, 2012 at 03:33 AM.
[/quote]
We don't have a third viable option. (Though I'm sure we have many non-viable options.)[/QUOTE]
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I would not care, so much about this subject, if there were no such thing, as nuclear bombs and biological weapons. But with so many insane governments with access/ or about to have access to these weapons. I think this world should take measures, to stop insane governments and groups, from using these weapons.
Our present way of removing a bad government, is dropping bombs on them. But this does (not) seem to 100% work, and it causes the populations of these countries, to hate us even more.
Another option to deal with these problems, is to cut 25% of our militarys spending, and then use that billions of dollars, to make peace with these Arab countries.
Instead of spending money on military strikes, and building military bases in Arab countries. We could use that money to build them hospitals. This would cause the populations of these countries to respect us, (would they want to kill the people, that build hospitals for their children?)
Our government could also use that military money, to send white, Asian, and black American Muslims, to these Arab countries on missions of understanding and peace. They could also send American Arabs, who hate these terrorists just like we do. These American Muslims could hang out with the Arab leaders, and some form of respect would come out of this. We could then use these bonds, to create a new branch of American government. A branch of government that would love, respect, and care for these Arab countries (to lessen the chances of a biological or nuclear weapon, being released in America.)
Also, I have heard that Arab terrorist recruiters, spend most of their recruiting resources, in very poor areas. Because rich Arabs have better things to do, than strap a bomb to their chests and kill themselves. Many of these terrorists are acting out on rage, from their own poverty and feelings of being nothing. One way to fight terrorism is to fight poverty.
If America took 25% of its military spending, and did things like listed above. It would cause many (less) Arabs to hate us.
I think we should try to make peace with these Arab countries. Before a biological weapon gets released in New York, and really messes up our American way of life.
Also most of America, does not realize, that the state of Israel (are a bunch of land stealing bastards.)
Israel should be forced to give their neighbors land back (that they stole old testament style.)
And Israel should also be forced, to give their neighbors freedom (instead of acting like the KKK)
If Israel did these above things, there would be a much less chance, of a nuclear bomb going off in Israel.
Last edited by chad; July 5th, 2012 at 02:49 AM.
I don't think it would make any difference. They'll judge us by what they think we could afford, not by what we really can afford. They think we're filthy rich beyond imagination.
They won't think we're doing our best for them until we spend an amount of money comparable to their misguided perception of us.
Not saying any cultures don't try to expand, but clearly some cultures are capable of survival without it. Clearly for every culture that expanded historically there was another that had to contract to make room for them. Europe contracted from around 700 AD on up to the Mongol invasion starting with the loss of Spain to Muslim invasion, and later parts of the East to the Mongols and Ottomans (depending on how you count the Byzantine Empire.) All anyone wants to remember is the period after the discovery of the Americas gave them a new territory to expand into.
The discovery of the Americas, in turn, was prompted largely by the closing of the spice trade routes when the Ottoman empire sacked Constantinople in 1453 AD. (Columbus sailed in 1492.)
It seems that we evolve via mechanisms of disasterThe discovery of the Americas, in turn, was prompted largely by the closing of the spice trade routes when the Ottoman empire sacked Constantinople in 1453 AD. (Columbus sailed in 1492.)
and inconvenience
much as the muslim intervention raised the price of spice beyond reason and led the europeans to sail the deep
maybe
the unreasonable price of oil (imho the underlying cause of the global recession) will be a boon to the next step in energy production/creation?
[QUOTE=kojax;331386]
You said, they won't think we're doing our best for them until we spend an amount of money comparable to their misguided perception of us.
We spent $1 trillion dollars in Iraq, for less than nothing. And you want to forget about this, and do it again.
(THATS $1 TRILLION DOLLARS), but that means nothing, in your fantasy world.
$1 trillion dollars spent in Iraq like countries, for hospitals, and youth activities (would create more things than you think.)
5 minutes ago I actually wanted to apologize to you, for busting in on your threads/posts about Arab countries. But I no longer want to apologize, because you are speaking on a subject, you know nothing about.
Its Westerners like yourself, that are causing most of the problems in Arab countries. By not even caring that Israel steals land, and mistreats people. ex. ex. ex.
What if China, came over to America, and took (your) land?
Could you just forget about it, and not hate China, like you expect the Arab countries, to do with Israel? HELL NO, YOU WOULD BE A TERRORIST AGAINST CHINA.
Your motto is, "do as I say, not as I do". That is insane.
I cant blame the Arab countries, for hating people like you. Who do you think you are?
Its ironic (you) are as simple minded and close minded, as all of the Arabs you speak bad about.
I will side with the Arabs, you speak so bad about, instead of your "do as I say, not as I do" attitude.
The fact is, simple minded behavior like yours, will cause nuclear or biological weapons, to one day, be released in America. (And you dont even care.)
Do you know what would happen, if a (good) biological weapon or nuclear weapon, was released in New York?
You dont even care.
And you actually want to increase, the (world wide matters) that will increase the odds, of Biological and nuclear weapons, going off in my backyard.
We should pick up every man like you, and drop you into Arab countries with a gun. And then you all can fight, (your) fantasy world battles there. That way you could stop hiding like a coward, and face your (twin) Arab enemies face to face. Instead of them having to come to America to get (you).
You have all of this hate, for these Arab countries, and you want to fight them. Stop being a coward and go fight them, but you are scared too. Instead you will sit here, speaking your simple minded hate, that will cause bio/nuclear weapons to kill innocent American family's.
Who do you think you are?
I (may) be kinda sorry for my rude tone, but you are the one, who wants to get innocent people killed, for your "do as I say, not as I do" attitude. And you have no right to do this, face your hated enemies like a man, so they dont come to America, to kill people like you, and kill our kids in the process (just like GW Bush killed 1,000's of Iraq's kids, for less than nothing).
Chad.
Last edited by chad; June 18th, 2012 at 03:42 AM.
All of you (edit: Arab haters), should learn about what Israel and America, has done to these Arab countries. Before you post your, know nothing hatred about this subject.
Learn that Israel steals their neighbors land, like immoral invaders.
Then learn that G W Bush, killed more innocent Arab people (and children), than any Arab terrorist group, ever has.
Lets see some hatred talk for Israel and America.
The above 2 facts show, that America and Israel are more murderous, than the Arab countries you all love to hate.
America and Israel have murdered and stolen more, than all of the Arab countries, you all complain about.
But these facts mean nothing to you all. (country pride and racism, must be behind your blind hatred of these Arabs)
What else could be causing you all, to not even look at the facts, or the whole picture?
Last edited by chad; June 17th, 2012 at 10:28 PM.
chad
do not lump all americans under the unbrella of "our" government nor it's leaders
Sorry kojax,
But your simple minded hatred, will increase the odds of a nuclear or biological weapon, going off in my backyard.
And you have (no) right to do this.
Chad.
I did not mean to, I am sorry.
Chad.
kojax,
We all see the world differently, and this gives us the ability to be so much smarter. And you post many important ideas, on this subject.
Its just I am sick, of seeing the senseless destruction, and senseless death in this world.
I think I let my anger out on you. But I believe you are a much smarter, and a much more moral person, than my above posts implied.
Earlier I wanted to apologize, for busting in on your threads/ posts on this subject in the past, and a few posts above I did not want to do this. But now I do again.
I am sorry for letting out my anger, on Middle East policies on (you).
(The following is a compliment) You are very unorthodox, you are on all sides of certain issues. I believe this uncertainty, and you being in the wrong place at the wrong time, helped me let out my anger on you.
I like you kojax, and I am sorry if I insulted you.
(I am sorry for busting in on your Middle East posts.)
Chad.
The simple answer, that hardly gets mentioned, is we got an huge oil producing nation not beholding to OPEC with enormous potential to keep developing fields untapped well after its neighbors peak. So how much is $1 trillion.....less than what the US spends in a single year in oil. It would even be better if US oil companies got the loin's share of leases.We spent $1 trillion dollars in Iraq, for less than nothing.
Iraq's soaring oil production could shift power within OPEC - The Denver Post
Whether is was worth it is a mater of opinion, I personally lost or saw too many friends maimed serving a country that hardly realized that a war was even happening. But regardless, we're probably going to get our money's worth and then some as long as the another civil war doesn't break out.
It is of course possible, on a personal level, to get your money's worth by purchasing a large knife and mugging old people. It would be questionable if one justified this behaviour as a way of discouraging old people from leaving their homes where they are then at risk of falling and breaking their hips.
Wait-do some people on here actually think Americans are over there to HELP? OMG I thought it was a myth that Americans thought that!
and as for the "kill kill kill", um nobody remember what happened a few years ago? American and English troops caught physically and sexually assaulting people in custody?
Alot of people in the world think Americans are pretty "kill kill kill" aswell...
examples-
The death penalty...
Legalisation of guns and abortion(I don't think it's murder but some people do)...
Unusually high rates of gun death/crime
Going into other countries for oil and killing people...
Alot of famous serial killers...
Last edited by Supervixen; June 18th, 2012 at 05:53 PM. Reason: forgot something
That was all a bit simplistic, don't you think? Loaded with stereotypes; no provision for the subtlies of geopolitical thinking; no recognition of the spectrum of views held by Americans; trite examples; etc.
that was my exact POINT... saying all middle-east people are "kill kill kill" is ridiculous. and i was pointing out that plenty of people think the same about Americans... I was fighting ignorence with ignorence really, i thought that was clear?
the only part I was serious about was the first sentence.
*EDIT* Also it's ignorence like the topic title that makes people form those stereotypes!
And the examples i named weren't all stereotypes, some happen to be true
Last edited by Supervixen; June 18th, 2012 at 07:16 PM.
The last interaction I had with a Muslim was with Jallel Aossey. He had gotten the lease on some neighboring government land in hopes of building a Muslim youth camp.
I called him up and asked if i could go out and collect some firewood and sawlogs from where he was planning to build the lodge, and he said sure, and offered his help.
He seemed a very nice person. In further interactions with him he was always polite and helpful. From an existentialist's viewpoint, I harbor no ill will.
Somewhat mine as well. The premise is wrong from the get go. There's little evidence that they are any more violent than other peoples--and if you compare to say Europe's violence over the past 75 years (about a human lifetime), you'd probably find they are considerably less so both on an individual level as well on a national war making level.that was my exact POINT... saying all middle-east people are "kill kill kill" is ridiculous
The problem is people in Iraq and Afghanistan are just plain too feudal. I don't know if Islam is to blame for that or not. Feudal minds seek to gain power and wealth by dominating and intimidating others into accepting their lordship, and then living off those people. It's inherently parasitic. Europe's time of being like that was called "The Dark Ages" for a reason. You can't bring freedom to a country who's population wants to make others do their work for them.
The goal of terror is very much the same. Make the Americans bring them food, so they can stand around in their clean white robes, pray a few times a day, and "supervise" or something. That's why it's a waste to give into their demands. They don't want any single concession. What they want is a permanent relationship that consists in concessions all the time. Give them that and they'll stop fighting. Then they can be the highest ranking "slaves of Allah", and we can be the bottom tier slaves (the ones who actually have to do labor.)
Thanks Chad. You definitely practice what you preach when it comes to creating peace with people. It would probably be a good thing if both sides of the conflicts abroad had enough people like that, so we could settle matters fairly and be done fighting.
Last edited by kojax; June 19th, 2012 at 01:04 AM.
Everyone does that too....
I just don't understand why you must insist everything must be arabs (???).
If you are hardworking and nice then good for you, but this doesn't justify your idea that "no one is lazy and grumpy except the arabs".
There's very little resemblance between feudalism and the forms of government in Iraq or Afghanistan. As for Europe's (and America's) ability to gain power and wealth by dominating and intimidating others--most of our wealth is built on the foundation of massive colonialism, slavery and ethnic cleansing during the 17th through 19th century followed by multicorporation exploitation sometimes combined with military might in the 20th to modern times.The problem is people in Iraq and Afghanistan are just plain too feudal. I don't know if Islam is to blame for that or not. Feudal minds seek to gain power and wealth by dominating and intimidating others into accepting their lordship, and then living off those people. It's inherently parasitic. Europe's time of being like that was called "The Dark Ages" for a reason.
Hardly. It's too broad a statement first off. And when you bring it to specifics such as what Al Quida wanted--Bin Laden was very specific in what he wanted--the Western nations from messing with the Islamic Arabs to include their manipulation and influence on Saudi Arabia (which he achieved in some respects when the US pulled its military). It didn't have a damn thing to do with food.The goal of terror is very much the same.
And to quibble a bit Afghanistan is not the Middle East.
Kojax - "The goal of terror is much the same. Make the Americans bring them food..."
Really? And here I thought what they want Americans to do is get the fuck out of their country.
Your entire post is just blatant racist hate-speach encompassed by naivity and stereotypical ignorance-and I won't humour it as any more than that.
Congratulations- the tool award goes to you!
Dude,
You are starting to sound like a troll.
YEAH- there must be something SO wrong with people who don't support discrimintation- any excuse to back up mindless hate and racism, right?Dude,
You are starting to sound like a troll.
The government is a laughing stock in those countries. Probably for the very reason that it isn't feudal, whilst the feudal system in place amongst their tribes is taken quite seriously.
One my friends who came back from Iraq, training local military told me he kept running into this problem where lower ranked soldiers would utterly ignore the orders of a superior officer if that officer came from a lower tribe than them. You've basically got two systems that overlap each other, and official one is not the one that gets primarily taken seriously.
Ethnic cleansing of native Americans was a land grab, not a free labor grab. America's problem has not traditionally been laziness. It has been land greed. The local population is seen as merely a big nuisance and pushed out of the way so English Americans could settle and cultivate their lands.As for Europe's (and America's) ability to gain power and wealth by dominating and intimidating others--most of our wealth is built on the foundation of massive colonialism, slavery and ethnic cleansing during the 17th through 19th century followed by multicorporation exploitation sometimes combined with military might in the 20th to modern times.
Slavery in Southern States was never anything approaching a backbone of the US economy, which was mostly based on manufacturing in the North, and food production in the West/Mid-West. It existed, but was hardly the foundation of anything.
It's an extremely status based society. You're just not getting how those work. Doing work is a sign of low status in a status-sensitive culture. You can see this emerging as a problem in the USA now also, where many jobs done by immigrants have become distasteful to the mainstream population. If you work in the kitchen with a bunch of Mexicans, you have to mingle with..... Mexicans. Fortunately, the illegal/legal social distinction is the extent to which the USA allows inequality. So at least Americans feel ok working, just not in severely unskilled/immigrant roles. But the mid-East is full of fully feudal systems, where there are lots of tiers and lots of ways one person can see themselves as superior/inferior to another.
We're dealing with an area of the world where half the population feels that the other half should work to support them. If they work at all, they'll expect substandard performance to be considered good enough (which often prompts them to import workers from the USA of all places if they want any actual work done.) These regions will never become industrial power houses. Anyone with the leadership skills to set up a functional business would probably rather just set up a fiefdom.
One my friends who came back from Iraq, training local military told me he kept running into this problem where lower ranked soldiers would utterly ignore the orders of a superior officer if that officer came from a lower tribe than them. You've basically got two systems that overlap each other, and official one is not the one that gets primarily taken seriously.
Quite honestly I did that full time, living with the Iraqi Army and never saw a single incident during day to day garrison, dozens of tactical missions and many other humanitarian missions They do have overlapping systems for sure, but in most cases the judges have final discretion over criminal matters. Sheiks will discuss and often come to agreements which are brought before them for approval. The HUGE advantage is criminal and civil matter that would take years in US courts can be solved in a meeting or two between tribal leadership; the disadvantage is sometimes there's corruption. The tribal system also doesn't confer automatic status to individuals--in fact there is tremendous flexibility of status for individuals and by tribe. The Iraq General I advised was from a moderately influential tribe--but by no means a king/or general maker--he was extremely capable and largely self made and rewarded ability. His executive office was from a powerless tribe other than what influence he brought to them--he earned his respect the amazing people skills and for courageously fighting the US Marines when they liberated the Kuwaiti coastline (they personally escorted his unit so protect them after the Iraqi surrender). On the other hand, there was a Major who served as the logistical officer for the Brigade--he had mediocre ability, was from the most powerful tribe in the area and the son of a sheik--it was widely recognized that he'd never be a general. He did, however, have a lot of contacts which made his useful and resourceful to getting stuff the brigade needed. No one ignored orders because there was strong leadership with wide command discretion to punish people as necessary. Among the people we saw pretty good examples of social and economic mobility all over--go getter food stand operators who's expanded into pseudo franchises, fishermen and boat taxi operators getting larger boats, people going to non-religious colleges to learn medicine, an artist who was starting his own school etc.
And you do know the US is among the worst in social economic mobility among developed nations ...don't you? http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/05/us/harder-for-americans-to-rise-from-lower-rungs.html?pagewanted=all
As for our own history a big part of American and European wealth was built off exploitation. http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2003/01/0131_030203_jubilee2.html
Also in Iraq, I could see that exploitation even today, with places so rich in oil that we'd see natural surface seeps all over when flying over by helicopters, Western and Chinese well operations, and Iraqi so poor they could barely feed their children trying to stay out of the way of the people pumping millions of dollars of oil out from under their feet.
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2003/01/0131_030203_jubilee2.html
To get back to the middle east through--they do things different but it's a vast mistake to assume it is all bad. They are not naturally violent compared to other peoples and possibly with the exception of their royal families, where they exist, their social systems are far more mobile than you seem to think they are.
--
(puts mod hat on)
Supervixen
Try to frame post to attack positions not people. Accusing people of racism isn't going to solve the main reason for it--ignorance--nor contribute to conversation in any productive way.
I believe you that meritocracy might prevail at the military end of the culture. That's true for most feudal systems, even the old European systems. Even Charles Martel, the man who would essentially set up most of the European Medieval system, was himself a bastard who proved his worth by commanding military forces. (Illegitimate son of a Duke, so still somewhat royal I guess.)
Charles Martel - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The trouble is when it doesn't prevail in much of anywhere else. If the only way to move up in your society is to be a good military commander, then all anyone with the ambition to better themselves will preoccupy over is killing.A brilliant general, he is considered to be a founding figure of the Middle Ages, often credited with a seminal role in the development offeudalism and knighthood, and laying the groundwork for the Carolingian Empire.[8][9] He was also the father of Pepin the Short and grandfather of Charlemagne.
I don't know why you are continuing the feudal comparison. There are no kings, no queens, knights, squires, or most of the trappings. There is no hereditary power, in fact the leadership in most tribes is elected by merit within that tribe--there are no village idiot sheiks and of the dozen or so I met all seemed highly intelligent with good people skills--both essential to negotiated the hundreds of decisions and dispute they attend to within their tribe and resolve between other tribes and in many cases the governmental agencies. They can also be removed by lower level family leaders when they fail their tribes or in some other way loose their confidence. The closest you'll get to anything resembling is their land agricultural policies; some sheiks own lands and water rights which they allow other tribal members to till and grow crops as for a share of the profits.
You know, a better way to analyze this is to ask: who are the culture's celebrities? The Renaissance in Europe was marked largely by a shift toward granting celebrity status to artists, scientists, and engineers. People alive at the same time as DaVinci knew who he was and respected him (also a bastard child of a noble, like Martel.) Certainly Shakespeare was well known.
By all accounts, Osama is a mega-celebrity in the middle East. How many Americans can remember the first name of General Patreas? Bill Gates is pretty well known. So is Mark Zuckerberg. I think that shows pretty well what America values. You could argue that we don't pay attention to our wars because we're so good at warfare, but..... we're also pretty good at computers. Indeed, we're probably even stronger in that area than we are in our military strength. World wide, what competitors does Windows even have? Intel and AMD pretty much lock up the PC market. I think there are a few local variations on Facebook that hold other cultural markets against Facebook, though.
So the question is: who are the non-warfare celebrities of the Middle East? There must be a few at least, right? Are they as famous as the warrior celebrities? If they are, that proves Muslims care about other things besides war. If they are not, then that proves they don't.
Would you recognize them? (I have no idea who Mark Zuckerberg is either--perhaps I'll google him after this).
But lets put it in context, most of the population of Iraq has no TV--no too surprising considering many still don't have power and virtually no one has reliable power. Egyptian programing tends to dominate the TV industry. Radio is very popular and according to my interpreters was mostly driving by Palestinian musicians--though I did get to the point of recognizing the more popular singers.
Look at this list of the richest people in Arabia...lots and lots of businessmen (including the Bin Laden's dad construction business)--upward socio-economic mobility with a capital M.
Arabian Business | Rich list 2011 | rich-list
Here's a Forbes article about the tremendous art business: Think Middle East Politics Are Hot? Try Middle Eastern Art - Forbes
You'd also find many of them know our popular TV and radio "celebrities" as well.
And given Americans "worship," of some of the least moral and disgusting individuals from Hollywood, huge % of people in prison and criminal violence, Americans are the last people who should be holding our "values," as better than anyone else's.
Last edited by Lynx_Fox; June 20th, 2012 at 02:01 PM.
Just for the sake of accuracy, kidnapping was not the usual method of acquiring slaves in the Atlantic slave trade. The slaves were normally captured by African tribesmen, and traded for manufactured goods shipped from Europe or North America (the top leg of the trading triangle). They were held in pens called baracoons awaiting arrival of the slave ships. Since the Guinea Coast of west Africa does not have many suitable harbors, the ships would anchor offshore. Local tribesmen called kroomen would then transport the trade goods to shore and the slaves out to the waiting slave ships.
That would explain why Palestine is such a popular issue in the mid-east, if they're the ones doing the best to promote themselves.
The only major Egyptian celebrity who comes to mind that I'd recognize on sight is Zahi Hawas. You'll see him appear in just about any documentary about Egyptology you watch, even the fringe ones (he tells they're wrong, of course). He's the minister of antiquities in Egypt, and he does a really good job of handling publicity issues for them.
Dubai is an interesting place. It's also where that tallest skyscraper in the world was built.Look at this list of the richest people in Arabia...lots and lots of businessmen (including the Bin Laden's dad construction business)--upward socio-economic mobility with a capital M.
Arabian Business | Rich list 2011 | rich-list
Here's a Forbes article about the tremendous art business: Think Middle East Politics Are Hot? Try Middle Eastern Art - Forbes
Burj Khalifa - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
I'm hoping more people will have something to add to this, since it's really what the OP was about anyway. We need to answer the OP's indirect question: what else, other than kill, kill, kill does the Middle East care about?
The other irony is that it already did come around.Just for the sake of accuracy, kidnapping was not the usual method of acquiring slaves in the Atlantic slave trade. The slaves were normally captured by African tribesmen, and traded for manufactured goods shipped from Europe or North America (the top leg of the trading triangle). They were held in pens called baracoons awaiting arrival of the slave ships. Since the Guinea Coast of west Africa does not have many suitable harbors, the ships would anchor offshore. Local tribesmen called kroomen would then transport the trade goods to shore and the slaves out to the waiting slave ships.
Barbary corsairs - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
And the Barbary Corsairs did kidnap their own slaves up and down the shores of Europe. It was impossible to stop them because they had fast ships. They'd show up, grab everyone they wanted, herd the ones they didn't want into the church or other meeting building, and then burn that building to the ground.
It seems the OP statement showed the problem though, it should have been titled:That would explain why Palestine is such a popular issue in the mid-east, if they're the ones doing the best to promote themselves.
The only major Egyptian celebrity who comes to mind that I'd recognize on sight is Zahi Hawas. You'll see him appear in just about any documentary about Egyptology you watch, even the fringe ones (he tells they're wrong, of course). He's the minister of antiquities in Egypt, and he does a really good job of handling publicity issues for them.
Dubai is an interesting place. It's also where that tallest skyscraper in the world was built.Look at this list of the richest people in Arabia...lots and lots of businessmen (including the Bin Laden's dad construction business)--upward socio-economic mobility with a capital M.
Arabian Business | Rich list 2011 | rich-list
Here's a Forbes article about the tremendous art business: Think Middle East Politics Are Hot? Try Middle Eastern Art - Forbes
Burj Khalifa - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
I'm hoping more people will have something to add to this, since it's really what the OP was about anyway. We need to answer the OP's indirect question: what else, other than kill, kill, kill does the Middle East care about?
"Are we wasting our time in the middle east Kill Kill Kill seems to be the only thing WE THINK they know."
.
Last edited by Lynx_Fox; June 21st, 2012 at 09:15 PM.
Ofttimes, while the killing gets the press, we create a modern infrastructure that stays after we leave, and that is the true liberating influence.
true?
Opens up the other question, then: are we right?
What other accomplishments is the middle east noted for, other than killing? What other things does the culture preoccupy over? How many world renoun artists, scientists, or writers is the region turning out? It has certainly turned out a few world renoun killers.
If they know other things, then we ought to expect they would also achieve other things.
Why don't you do a bit of research.
Ironically you already know some....Bin Ladins for example, were well know all over the middle east for their massive construction company long before their crazy ass kid starting blowing up buildings--and I already gave you a long list of entrepreneurs many of which are also well known--construction, retailers, bankers and of course oilmen and royalty.
You can look up and listen to some of their more famous singers on Youtube such as Fairuz, or Assala Nasri. Many of their men are well know at local levels for their beautiful renditions of the Koran...almost a singing the verses in powerful emotive voice even if one only knows broken Arabic. Some of their local differences are rather remarkable and something I noticed other places around the world--they haven't become the homogenized and rather boring cultures shaped by huge corporations like America(yet).
If you search around and take a sampling of their art, music, literature, poetry, foods etc I think you'll find they are amazingly rich culture...but you've got to be willing to search and even get past some of the idiotic screens and prejudice we American's put up such as restrictions on Al Jazeera,
ma sallama Kojak
'They' had been invaded by the Italians, or absorbed by the French, or subjugated by the British, or arbitrarily administered by the same after breaking free from the Ottoman's. Their national boundaries were imposed from without. Their oil resources were divided up like spoils by the British and the Americans. And they were forced to accept a the insertion of European aliens into their midst. After a similar amount of time, following independence, the Americans held a little shindig called the Civil War. Was that because they liked violence?
Yeah. There are a lot of oil rich Saudis looking to spend their massive wealth on a vanity project or two. So it makes sense that somebody who builds a good relationship with some of them could make quite a lot of money in construction. Hard to say, though, whether it's who you know or what you know, in a situation like that.
I know Pakistan is famous for a few things. Supposedly there's a town full of some of the best gunsmiths in the world, and supposedly some philosophy scholars highly regard some of the philosophy from the region (though I couldn't comment further on that, not really knowing how such evaluations are made.)
If you search around and take a sampling of their art, music, literature, poetry, foods etc I think you'll find they are amazingly rich culture...but you've got to be willing to search and even get past some of the idiotic screens and prejudice we American's put up such as restrictions on Al Jazeera,
ma sallama Kojak
The point is, instead of telling everyone they're ignorant because they don't automatically assume there's so much more to know about the culture...... why not just go ahead and point out what it is they don't know? There's no point in being unspecific. It makes the whole argument sound like a bluff. If Muslims genuinely have other things to offer the world besides their wonderful violence that we all enjoy so much, then we'd best find it as quick as we can and point it out so we can tell our fellow westerners to stop shooting for and moment and have a look.
Last edited by kojax; June 22nd, 2012 at 10:48 AM. Reason: Split Post
Excuses, excuses, excuses.......'They' had been invaded by the Italians, or absorbed by the French, or subjugated by the British, or arbitrarily administered by the same after breaking free from the Ottoman's. Their national boundaries were imposed from without. Their oil resources were divided up like spoils by the British and the Americans. And they were forced to accept a the insertion of European aliens into their midst.
Germany hasn't exactly had an easy ride either. Admittedly this is due to quite a lot of fault of their own, but the Eastern half was subjected to some rather serious wartime atrocities when the Red army marched through, and the country itself was split for half a century. But..... somehow they've managed to accomplish quite a lot since then. Your home country if Britain got bombed to bits and recovered.
After a similar amount of time, following independence, the Americans held a little shindig called the Civil War. Was that because they liked violence?
Hmmm....in America's case? Yeah. Probably.
However, America has many non-violent accomplishments for every violent one. If the Muslims can say the same then maybe they're worth saving after all.
The intention that remains the stalking horse for a myriad of atrocities throughout human history.maybe they're worth saving after all.
And honestly I've already put up 50+ examples from business and music; you seem just unwilling to acknowledge them as examples of non-violent "celebrity... (famous would probably be better)people. Here's another , Nawal El Saddawi famous literary author who's been a big proponent of women's rights in the region.
Last edited by Lynx_Fox; June 22nd, 2012 at 11:56 AM.
The only Arab celebrity that I can think of is Omar Sharif, he is famous for his acting career, and contract bridge playing. I always thought that he was a Muslim, but after consulting Wiki, I find that he was born into a Melkite Catholic family in Egypt.
" Omar Sharif was born Michel Dimitri Shalhoub in Alexandria into a Melkite CatholicLebanese-Syrian family "
Omar Sharif - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Yes most Americans wouldn't know Arabic speaking/singing/writing actors, musicians, writers etc--this is mostly a cultural/language barrier problem. Most of us couldn't Id famous Chinese, or Indian or Russian celebrities either. That doesnt' mean they don't have them--anymore than I should assume Comumbine doesn't have a homecoming queens, a successful and respected businessperson because a few of their teenagers went postal and that's all I know about the place.
Yes, but Omar Sharif was eventually a Hollywood actor.
| « Taxpayer Welfare Supports Boat People. | Political discussion from "drop in sea level" » |
| Bookmarks |
Bookmarks |
24Likes
LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks
