Read Koran, Kill Unbelievers

Chat about any other current events around the globe

Moderator: Moderators

Read Koran, Kill Unbelievers

Postby gribble on Mon Dec 11, 2006 4:45 pm

Has anybody here ever read the Koran? I started reading it the other day and basically here's what it boils down to: it has all the key stories that you find in the bible (minus the endless geneologies), only it tells them in the most negative tone you could ever take to tell these stories. About every ten verses it tells how either Allah or the collective people of Islam will mete out great punishment to the unbelievers. It's really pretty ridiculous.

I'm convinced that anybody who uses this book as the guide to their religion will have a great desire to kill the unbelievers. That's the only possible feeling you can get out of it. And the Pope was absolutely right in quoting the statement that what new Islam brings is only evil. So pretty much all Muslims want the unbeliever to suffer great pains whether by their hands or by someone else's hands.

You should all go out and get a copy of it and read it. You'll come to the conclusion that there is no reason to let these people live among civilized societies. All you have to do is look at problems that governments around the world have with terrorism and realize that no good comes out of this religion of Islam.

So at this point, out of sheer self-preservation we either have to eliminate Islam from the books of history or have good civilizations be destroyed by evil people who read this Koran.

Read some more about Terrorists, which all Muslims are...


Katherine Kersten: Suspicion about Imams grows as Terror Links Pile Up

The grounded imams incident at the Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport has been a public relations coup for the imams, their supporters and their claims that the group's only suspicious activity was saying evening prayers.

US Airways continues to defend its crew's decision to pull the imams off a plane last month, saying they took the seating configuration used by 9/11 hijackers, requested seat-belt extensions that could be used as weapons and otherwise raised concerns.

Who are the parties involved here, who seem so interested in linking airport security with racial bigotry?

The Council on American-Islamic Relations, the imams' legal representative, is an organization that "we know has ties to terrorism," Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., said in 2003. And the Muslim American Society, which is also supporting the imams? It's the American arm of the Muslim Brotherhood, according to the Chicago Tribune, which called it "the world's most influential Islamic fundamentalist group."

How about Omar Shahin, the imams' spokesman and also president of the North American Imams Federation? He is a native of Jordan, who says he became a U.S. citizen in 2003. From 2000 to 2003, Shahin served as president of Islamic Center of Tucson (ICT), that city's largest mosque.

The ICT is well known. The mosque has "an extensive history of terror links," according to terrorism expert Steven Emerson, who testified about terrorist financing before the Senate Banking Committee in July 2005.

The Washington Post described these links in a 2002 article. "Tucson was one of the first points of contact in the United States for the jihadist group that evolved into al Qaeda," the Post reported. And the ICT? It held "basically the first cell of al Qaeda in the United States; that is where it all started," said Rita Katz, a terrorism expert quoted by the Post.

ICT members have included high-profile terrorists. Wael Hamza Jelaidan, the mosque's leader in the mid-1980s, was identified by the U.S. government as a " 'co-founder' of al Qaeda and its logistics chief," the Post reported.

Another former member, Wadi Hage, served as Osama bin Laden's personal secretary after leaving Arizona, the Post said, attributing it to government sources. Hage established a bin Laden support network in Arizona and "this network is still in place," Emerson wrote in his book "Jihad Incorporated: A Guide to Militant Islam in the U.S.," citing a 2002 Senate Intelligence Committee Report. In 2001, Hage was convicted of plotting the 1998 bombings of the U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania.

The best-known terrorist with apparent (according to the Post and Emerson) connections to the ICT is Hani Hanjour, who piloted the plane that flew into the Pentagon on 9/11. Hanjour took aviation lessons in Tucson in the late 1990s.

Shahin has downplayed the ICT's connections to terrorism. The mosque should not be held accountable for former members who may have engaged in terrorism after they left Arizona, he told the Post in 2002. Al-Qaida nests in America? "All of these, they make it up," he told the Arizona Republic shortly after 9/11.

But dubious activity continued when Shahin became ICT president. For example, the mosque raised thousands of dollars for an Islamic charity called the Holy Land Foundation in 2001, and Shahin served as the charity's Arizona coordinator, according to the Associated Press. Holy Land "collects funds for widows and orphans and needy people," he told the AP.

In December 2001, the Treasury Department froze Holy Land's assets, citing its funding of the terrorist organization Hamas' efforts to recruit suicide bombers.

Shahin also told the Arizona Daily Star in 2001 that he would permit the Global Relief Foundation to raise funds at the ITC. In 2002, the U.S. government froze that organization's assets because of its support of bin Laden, Al-Qaida and other terrorist groups.

Another incident of interest occurred during Shahin's tenure at ITC. On June 13, 2003, the FBI arrested Muhammad Al-Qudhai'een, who was active at the mosque, and transported him to Virginia to testify as a material witness before a federal grand jury investigating 9/11.


The grounded imams incident at the Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport has been a public relations coup for the imams, their supporters and their claims that the group's only suspicious activity was saying evening prayers.
US Airways continues to defend its crew's decision to pull the imams off a plane last month, saying they took the seating configuration used by 9/11 hijackers, requested seat-belt extensions that could be used as weapons and otherwise raised concerns.

Who are the parties involved here, who seem so interested in linking airport security with racial bigotry?

The Council on American-Islamic Relations, the imams' legal representative, is an organization that "we know has ties to terrorism," Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., said in 2003. And the Muslim American Society, which is also supporting the imams? It's the American arm of the Muslim Brotherhood, according to the Chicago Tribune, which called it "the world's most influential Islamic fundamentalist group."

How about Omar Shahin, the imams' spokesman and also president of the North American Imams Federation? He is a native of Jordan, who says he became a U.S. citizen in 2003. From 2000 to 2003, Shahin served as president of Islamic Center of Tucson (ICT), that city's largest mosque.

The ICT is well known. The mosque has "an extensive history of terror links," according to terrorism expert Steven Emerson, who testified about terrorist financing before the Senate Banking Committee in July 2005.

The Washington Post described these links in a 2002 article. "Tucson was one of the first points of contact in the United States for the jihadist group that evolved into al Qaeda," the Post reported. And the ICT? It held "basically the first cell of al Qaeda in the United States; that is where it all started," said Rita Katz, a terrorism expert quoted by the Post.

ICT members have included high-profile terrorists. Wael Hamza Jelaidan, the mosque's leader in the mid-1980s, was identified by the U.S. government as a " 'co-founder' of al Qaeda and its logistics chief," the Post reported.

Another former member, Wadi Hage, served as Osama bin Laden's personal secretary after leaving Arizona, the Post said, attributing it to government sources. Hage established a bin Laden support network in Arizona and "this network is still in place," Emerson wrote in his book "Jihad Incorporated: A Guide to Militant Islam in the U.S.," citing a 2002 Senate Intelligence Committee Report. In 2001, Hage was convicted of plotting the 1998 bombings of the U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania.

The best-known terrorist with apparent (according to the Post and Emerson) connections to the ICT is Hani Hanjour, who piloted the plane that flew into the Pentagon on 9/11. Hanjour took aviation lessons in Tucson in the late 1990s.

Shahin has downplayed the ICT's connections to terrorism. The mosque should not be held accountable for former members who may have engaged in terrorism after they left Arizona, he told the Post in 2002. Al-Qaida nests in America? "All of these, they make it up," he told the Arizona Republic shortly after 9/11.

But dubious activity continued when Shahin became ICT president. For example, the mosque raised thousands of dollars for an Islamic charity called the Holy Land Foundation in 2001, and Shahin served as the charity's Arizona coordinator, according to the Associated Press. Holy Land "collects funds for widows and orphans and needy people," he told the AP.

In December 2001, the Treasury Department froze Holy Land's assets, citing its funding of the terrorist organization Hamas' efforts to recruit suicide bombers.

Shahin also told the Arizona Daily Star in 2001 that he would permit the Global Relief Foundation to raise funds at the ITC. In 2002, the U.S. government froze that organization's assets because of its support of bin Laden, Al-Qaida and other terrorist groups.

Another incident of interest occurred during Shahin's tenure at ITC. On June 13, 2003, the FBI arrested Muhammad Al-Qudhai'een, who was active at the mosque, and transported him to Virginia to testify as a material witness before a federal grand jury investigating 9/11.

Earlier, the FBI had investigated Al-Qudhai'een's involvement in a 1999 incident. According to the 9/11 Commission Report, Al-Qudhai'een and Hamdan al Shalawi, a fellow Saudi, were removed from an America West flight after engaging in what the flight crew considered suspicious activity. The crew asserted that Al-Qudhai'een had twice attempted to open the plane's cockpit door. After 9/11, FBI agents in Phoenix considered whether the incident had been a "dry run" for the attacks. The 9/11 Commission noted that Al Shalawi had reportedly trained in Afghan terrorist camps in November 2000, learning how to conduct "Khobar Towers"-type bombing attacks.
The America West incident attracted national attention in 1999. In 2000, the two Saudis filed a lawsuit alleging racial discrimination by the airline. "What happened to us was based on racial and religious discrimination," al Shalawi told the Arizona Republic. CAIR hired the Saudis' attorney for them, and urged a boycott of the airline. America West won the lawsuit. Al-Qudhai'een was later deported to Saudi Arabia.

Shahin left ICT in June 2003. Subsequently, he became a fundraiser for KindHearts, another Islamic charity. But the Treasury Department froze KindHearts' assets on Feb. 19, 2006. "KindHearts is the progeny of Holy Land Foundation and Global Relief Foundation, which attempted to mask their support for terrorism behind the facade of charitable giving," according to the Treasury Department.

Shahin has evidently helped raise money for all three of these organizations.

Ten days ago, Shahin expressed ignorance of KindHeart's terrorist connections. "When they shut down, I had no clue what they were doing," he told the Washington Times.

So was the Flying Imams incident an instance of bigotry? Or was it part of a larger script? If so, whose script is it, and what's the final act?

I'll consider those questions in Thursday's column.


Katherine Kersten • kkersten@startribune.com

_W_
(OO)
/__\
H H
"" ""
User avatar
gribble
 
Posts: 548
Joined: Fri Mar 28, 2003 5:56 pm
Location: Weiganvat

Postby theprophet0 on Tue Dec 12, 2006 11:40 pm

Those Imans should be deported. They're not from here nor do they like the current state of this nation.
"THEY WANT THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT CONTROLLING SOCIAL SECURITY LIKE IT'S SOME KIND OF FEDERAL PROGRAM."-George Bush

"I know the human being and fish can coexist peacefully." —Saginaw, Mich., Sept. 29, 2000-George Bush
User avatar
theprophet0
 
Posts: 1963
Joined: Sat Jul 26, 2003 12:17 pm
Location: Duluth

Read Koran, Kill Unbelievers

Postby Stang76 on Wed Dec 13, 2006 7:10 pm

gribble wrote:So at this point, out of sheer self-preservation we either have to eliminate Islam from the books of history or have good civilizations be destroyed by evil people who read this Koran.


You seriously need your head checked if you're worried about this. If indeed it's even true that Islam cannot possibly be reconciled with reason (as it has been in Turkey, Bangladesh, Indonesia, and - albeit precariously - Lebanon), I still fail to see how a regressive Islamic world could "destroy" civilizations in the rest of the world that possess such massive population, industrial, and technological advantages.

Worst case scenario, the Islamic world successfully isolates itself and the rest of the world has to find alternatives to oil. How much would that really matter in the grand scheme of things?
Last edited by Stang76 on Thu Dec 14, 2006 10:48 pm, edited 1 time in total.
"The American Republic will endure, until the day Congress discovers that it can bribe the public with its own money." - Alexis de Tocqueville

Killdozer 6/4/2004 - we shall never forget.
User avatar
Stang76
 
Posts: 4442
Joined: Wed Oct 23, 2002 3:02 pm
Location: Teenage wasteland, ohh yeah

Postby gribble on Thu Dec 14, 2006 1:58 pm

Have you been to the supermarket lately? It's not about isolation, look at Europe, Muslims are emigrating across the world in hopes that they can outnumber everyone else and then subjugate them. Do you know how many kids these people have. Seriously, these people are already coming to our country to take over. People who drink alcohol are already being discriminated against by angry muslim taxi drivers. It's ridiculous.

You need to get your head checked if you think that the doctrine of their religion is not complete domination over every individual on the planet. It isn't just about who has the better military. With democratic countries all they have to do is send more muslims over to become citizens. Muslims in america are not moderate. They're just as intent on converting the entire world by the end of the sword as any al-qaeda member.

Why do you think they kill eachother without pause? Do you think that if they have no problem killing other muslims that they disagree with, they will have any problem killing non-muslims who their holy book implores them to kill in every other verse?
_W_
(OO)
/__\
H H
"" ""
User avatar
gribble
 
Posts: 548
Joined: Fri Mar 28, 2003 5:56 pm
Location: Weiganvat

Postby Anti_Liberal on Thu Dec 14, 2006 2:20 pm

gribble wrote:Seriously, these people are already coming to our country to take over. People who drink alcohol are already being discriminated against by angry muslim taxi drivers. It's ridiculous.


at the risk of being sucked into this thread ...its not just alcohol, seeing-eye dogs too.

gribble i'm with you. in this "age of stupidity" it is easier for a militant minority to take down the civilized majority than ever before. they just need to control key assets and weapons. they have the assets, and we're turning our backs while they get the weapons.
User avatar
Anti_Liberal
 
Posts: 224
Joined: Fri Mar 24, 2006 5:32 pm
Location: The state where nothing is allowed

Postby ron28 on Thu Dec 14, 2006 6:33 pm

You guys need to stop listening to Michael Savage. But I will agree that the whole alcohol/Taxi thing is an outrage.
ron28
 
Posts: 302
Joined: Sun Nov 20, 2005 4:16 pm

Postby gribble on Thu Dec 14, 2006 8:35 pm

I'm telling you, read the fucking Koran and you will be extremely enlightened as to what the muslim faith is really all about.
_W_
(OO)
/__\
H H
"" ""
User avatar
gribble
 
Posts: 548
Joined: Fri Mar 28, 2003 5:56 pm
Location: Weiganvat

Postby Stang76 on Thu Dec 14, 2006 10:45 pm

gribble wrote:Have you been to the supermarket lately? It's not about isolation, look at Europe, Muslims are emigrating across the world in hopes that they can outnumber everyone else and then subjugate them. Do you know how many kids these people have. Seriously, these people are already coming to our country to take over. People who drink alcohol are already being discriminated against by angry muslim taxi drivers. It's ridiculous.

You need to get your head checked if you think that the doctrine of their religion is not complete domination over every individual on the planet. It isn't just about who has the better military. With democratic countries all they have to do is send more muslims over to become citizens. Muslims in america are not moderate. They're just as intent on converting the entire world by the end of the sword as any al-qaeda member.


Now I'm certain you're just trolling, but I'll bite anyway:

Outnumbering? Give me a holler when Muslims account for more than 0.6% of the population, and increase at a rate more than 4% of the total growth rate.

gribble wrote:Do you think that if they have no problem killing other muslims that they disagree with, they will have any problem killing non-muslims who their holy book implores them to kill in every other verse?
gribble wrote:I'm telling you, read the fucking Koran and you will be extremely enlightened as to what the muslim faith is really all about.


...and yet your underlying ass-umption that the Qu'ran makes up the entire corpus of 'Islam' shows how willfully ignorant you truly are.
"The American Republic will endure, until the day Congress discovers that it can bribe the public with its own money." - Alexis de Tocqueville

Killdozer 6/4/2004 - we shall never forget.
User avatar
Stang76
 
Posts: 4442
Joined: Wed Oct 23, 2002 3:02 pm
Location: Teenage wasteland, ohh yeah

Postby Anti_Liberal on Fri Dec 15, 2006 7:20 am

I'm not saying its the Qu'ran or even muslims. N. Korea, venezuela, Iran could take down america and europe with careful planning and execution pretty easily.

1) create an energy crisis, stop producing or selling oil. Mr Chavez and DB in iran would do that if it meant bringing down america. we would be in a world of hurt economically.

2) when congress meets for emergency energy crisis hearings, drop a nuke on DC. they want to do that anyway.

3) that is the signal for sleeper cells throughout the world to poison food and water supplies, and generally speaking create even more chaos that would be very difficult to recover from even in 10-20 years.
User avatar
Anti_Liberal
 
Posts: 224
Joined: Fri Mar 24, 2006 5:32 pm
Location: The state where nothing is allowed

Postby UMD TSAR on Fri Dec 15, 2006 9:03 am

Two things come to mind here...

1. Alcohol/Taxi. I've heard alot about this on morning/afternoon talk radio when I get a chance to catch it online. If they own their own cabs, that's fine, they can have whatever rules they want. Just don't complain when the Airport revokes your lisence to do business there because you're being discriminatory. And if you're driving a company cab, you better damn well be ready to get fired for failing to do your job.

2. Koran. There's a MASSIVE divide between "what a religious text says" and "the way it is practiced". You simply cannot look at what a book says and say "Muslims want to kill people". There's *plenty* of stuff in the Bible that *plenty* of Christian sects disregard or re-defined. You're making a religious fallacy if you think that Koran text = Muslim action.

It might very well be a warped, horrible book. But that doesn't necessarily imply Muslims abide by, or believe, or act on, those words. The Bible talks about stoning adulterers - I don't see many Christians taking that very seriously.

3. Anit-Lib. Of you're three points, the first two are nonsense. If the first happened, trust me, we can do without politicians. Martial Law would be declared, and the Joint Chiefs of Staff would step up and hold down the fort until new elections could take place. It wouldn't be so bad.

The second point about Iran/Venezeula cutting off oil is just total economic impossibility. It's a global market. If Iran/Vene cut off oil to the West, they'd still need to feed thier people to retain power, so they'd have to sell oil to China/India/*somebody*. That just means China/whoever is no longer bidding on oil out of Nigeria/Mexico/Saudi/et al. Unless they stopped selling it altogether (ensuring their own overthrows from power) they could only cause a mere ripple in global markets, which would be smoothed over in a matter of weeks.

The third point about biological/chemical weapons in water/food supplies is valid. That's a weakness that we can never defend against or be prepared for. Fortunately, human history has shown a low tolerance for such tactics.
"No great decisions were ever made from an armchair." - Patton
User avatar
UMD TSAR
 
Posts: 5246
Joined: Thu Feb 21, 2002 10:31 pm
Location: Off the Reservation

Postby ron28 on Fri Dec 15, 2006 10:42 am

Imagine opening a taxi company in Saudia Arabi, one of the supposedly more "moderate" Muslim nations. In it, you have a picture of Jesus, a rosary hanging from the rearview mirror, and you often smoke. Would you be deported/stoned to death in

a) 12 hours?
b) 18 hours?
c) 24 hours?
ron28
 
Posts: 302
Joined: Sun Nov 20, 2005 4:16 pm

Postby Stang76 on Fri Dec 15, 2006 12:20 pm

UMD TSAR wrote:2. Koran. There's a MASSIVE divide between "what a religious text says" and "the way it is practiced". You simply cannot look at what a book says and say "Muslims want to kill people". There's *plenty* of stuff in the Bible that *plenty* of Christian sects disregard or re-defined. You're making a religious fallacy if you think that Koran text = Muslim action.

It might very well be a warped, horrible book. But that doesn't necessarily imply Muslims abide by, or believe, or act on, those words.


I would also add that the Qu'ran surprisingly makes up only a small portion of the wider corpus of Islamic scripture. Since Muslims believe - somewhat unfortunately IMO - that the day-to-day words and deeds of Muhammad and his companions was every bit as divinely inspired as the Qu'ran's revealed word itself, they hold the Sunnah (an amalgam of written and oral traditions ostensibly detailing the normative practice of the early ummah) to be every bit as important in determining the 'Muslim' way of life.

Unlike the New Testament which was short and simple enough to make "every man his own priest" after the printing press was invented (making the Reformation and resulting Enlightenment possible), the Sunnah was so large, disorganized, complex, and often contradictory that the people left it to generations of lifelong Islamic scholars to pick away at it and find something resembling a codified normative practice. Thus not only is there the Qu'ran and Sunnah, but there is also mountains on fiqh (jurisprudence) associated with several schools of ijtihad (interpretation) defined not by codified law but mere association with certain scholars.

The Sunnis believe the process of ijtihad was more or less complete after four distinct schools of fiqh crystallized by the 10th century, meaning there's some three centuries worth of ijtihad rulings from four different schools to stack onto the already massive Qu'ran-Sunnah pile. It's also worth mentioning that the Shi'a believe ijtihad is an ongoing process until the Mahdi's return, meaning there is not only the Qu'ran and Sunnah but also one and a half millenia worth of ijtihad that attempt to define the 'Muslim' way of life, plus a massive collection of the words and deeds of the first 11 Imams they see as divine.

And that's just the oversimplified version I can throw together before class. Bottom line gribble:

A) The written and spoken corpus defining different conceptions of 'Islam' is so vast and diverse that your skimming the Qu'ran one afternoon is absolutely meaningless.

B) Due to this daunting immensity and diversity, Muslims now and in the past have had no choice but to relinquish all control over definition of 'Islam' to the ulema and follow their word as if it was that of God himself.

C) There are so many contradictory snippets of this corpus that any well-educated shaykh can pretty much make up whatever version of 'Islam' he wants, including one which downplays, negates, or simply ignores the supposedly nefarious Qu'ranic verses to which you allude.

D) This flexibility has opened the door to myriad Modernist interpretations (read the works of 'Abduh for just one pioneering example) hardly distinguishable from past attempts to reconcile Christian and Enlightenment principles - all that's left for us is to steer the flock toward ulema holding these interpretations. Completing this task has nothing to do with the fucking Qu'ran, but whether our political will will last long enough to get the job done. That is where the problem lies, and why I'm convinced we will fail.
Last edited by Stang76 on Fri Dec 15, 2006 12:54 pm, edited 1 time in total.
"The American Republic will endure, until the day Congress discovers that it can bribe the public with its own money." - Alexis de Tocqueville

Killdozer 6/4/2004 - we shall never forget.
User avatar
Stang76
 
Posts: 4442
Joined: Wed Oct 23, 2002 3:02 pm
Location: Teenage wasteland, ohh yeah

Postby Anti_Liberal on Fri Dec 15, 2006 12:51 pm

TSAR i think youre giving iran and ven too much credit. they would only need enough money and supplies to keep a strong enough military to surpress the population. I doubt either one cares about the well being of the population. N. korea certainly doesnt, but they only have nukes. nukes, oil and hatred towards the west spells trouble.

i picture martial law and a temporary government, but i also see it handcuffed and challenged by ACLU types. i question how effective either would be. although even democrats were on board after 9/11 and the ACLU kept quiet for a little while after. who knows. I see iran nuking Europe before the US anyway and then that would be the end of Iran and N korea

it would certainly open the door for China to challenge our status.
User avatar
Anti_Liberal
 
Posts: 224
Joined: Fri Mar 24, 2006 5:32 pm
Location: The state where nothing is allowed

Postby Stang76 on Fri Dec 15, 2006 12:58 pm

If the Iranians were to use nukes at all, why the hell would they nuke (and thus be annihilated by) Europe before the Little Satan? What would be the point of that?
"The American Republic will endure, until the day Congress discovers that it can bribe the public with its own money." - Alexis de Tocqueville

Killdozer 6/4/2004 - we shall never forget.
User avatar
Stang76
 
Posts: 4442
Joined: Wed Oct 23, 2002 3:02 pm
Location: Teenage wasteland, ohh yeah

Postby Anti_Liberal on Fri Dec 15, 2006 2:51 pm

they will first nuke israel and we will send the UN after them. after the UN says some harsh words and slaps some wrists Europe will get hit because Europe isnt even a paper tiger, they are a paper bunny rabbit. then once we strike back after a few years we will grow weary of war and bring our troops home. then we wil get hit.
User avatar
Anti_Liberal
 
Posts: 224
Joined: Fri Mar 24, 2006 5:32 pm
Location: The state where nothing is allowed

Postby Stang76 on Fri Dec 15, 2006 3:13 pm

Are you being sarcastic? Israel has enough operational nukes to turn the biggest Iranian cities and military bases into parking lots. How would Iran attack Europe and then us after that? With flying monkeys?
"The American Republic will endure, until the day Congress discovers that it can bribe the public with its own money." - Alexis de Tocqueville

Killdozer 6/4/2004 - we shall never forget.
User avatar
Stang76
 
Posts: 4442
Joined: Wed Oct 23, 2002 3:02 pm
Location: Teenage wasteland, ohh yeah

Postby UMD TSAR on Fri Dec 15, 2006 5:22 pm

Anti_Liberal wrote:TSAR i think youre giving iran and ven too much credit. they would only need enough money and supplies to keep a strong enough military to surpress the population. I doubt either one cares about the well being of the population. N. korea certainly doesnt, but they only have nukes. nukes, oil and hatred towards the west spells trouble.

i picture martial law and a temporary government, but i also see it handcuffed and challenged by ACLU types. i question how effective either would be. although even democrats were on board after 9/11 and the ACLU kept quiet for a little while after. who knows. I see iran nuking Europe before the US anyway and then that would be the end of Iran and N korea

it would certainly open the door for China to challenge our status.

International Relations, with a focus on National Security Affairs, just so happens to be my area of study for my Master's of Science. The political philosophy I have developed in regards to this is a combination of Neitzsche and Realism.

I'll spare you the building-blocks to the argument, but the point is that I strongly believe individuals, and thus governments, desire POWER before all else. It is the fundamental nature of human beings, and thus governments.

Venezuela and Iran, therefore, desire POWER. Their actions are dictated by their goal of maximizing and increasing their power.

I have extreme difficulty understanding how stopping all oil production, retaining just enough strength to supress their own people, and nuking the West to bring us down maximizes or increases their power.
"No great decisions were ever made from an armchair." - Patton
User avatar
UMD TSAR
 
Posts: 5246
Joined: Thu Feb 21, 2002 10:31 pm
Location: Off the Reservation

Postby Anti_Liberal on Fri Dec 15, 2006 11:04 pm

Stang76 wrote:Are you being sarcastic? Israel has enough operational nukes to turn the biggest Iranian cities and military bases into parking lots. How would Iran attack Europe and then us after that? With flying monkeys?


yes, probably a little. i guess i'm still a little shocked that iran makes it crystal clear about its intentions with israel and yet we are allowing them to develope nukes. the UN was ormed to do 1 thing, and it was to stop problems like these before they start.
User avatar
Anti_Liberal
 
Posts: 224
Joined: Fri Mar 24, 2006 5:32 pm
Location: The state where nothing is allowed

Postby Anti_Liberal on Fri Dec 15, 2006 11:06 pm

UMD TSAR wrote:
Anti_Liberal wrote:TSAR i think youre giving iran and ven too much credit. they would only need enough money and supplies to keep a strong enough military to surpress the population. I doubt either one cares about the well being of the population. N. korea certainly doesnt, but they only have nukes. nukes, oil and hatred towards the west spells trouble.

i picture martial law and a temporary government, but i also see it handcuffed and challenged by ACLU types. i question how effective either would be. although even democrats were on board after 9/11 and the ACLU kept quiet for a little while after. who knows. I see iran nuking Europe before the US anyway and then that would be the end of Iran and N korea

it would certainly open the door for China to challenge our status.

International Relations, with a focus on National Security Affairs, just so happens to be my area of study for my Master's of Science. The political philosophy I have developed in regards to this is a combination of Neitzsche and Realism.

I'll spare you the building-blocks to the argument, but the point is that I strongly believe individuals, and thus governments, desire POWER before all else. It is the fundamental nature of human beings, and thus governments.

Venezuela and Iran, therefore, desire POWER. Their actions are dictated by their goal of maximizing and increasing their power.

I have extreme difficulty understanding how stopping all oil production, retaining just enough strength to supress their own people, and nuking the West to bring us down maximizes or increases their power.


i know theyre not likely to do that, just a wild scenerio how easy it would be to bring us down.

bringing us down would increase other countries power and influence.
User avatar
Anti_Liberal
 
Posts: 224
Joined: Fri Mar 24, 2006 5:32 pm
Location: The state where nothing is allowed

Postby theprophet0 on Sat Dec 16, 2006 4:06 am

Stang76 wrote:Outnumbering? Give me a holler when Muslims account for more than 0.6% of the population, and increase at a rate more than 4% of the total growth rate.
Estimated world population of 6.5 billion and a growing estiment of 1.75 billion Muslims. Then countries like Pakistan ect.. where the unpopular regimes ruling the masses would like to see Bin Laden style republics. There is where you have the problem dude.

Bin Laden is popular. The dude ruling Pakistan has no interest in illimination just margelization.

The invasion of Iraq did not create freedom and democracy, but instead reignited civil war, more terrorism and what will be more radical Islamic Republics.


Fools like Ranger and Tsar failed to see the history of Iraq and thought it was a great idea to invade. Saddam was the butcher because he crushed the uprisings aka civil wars! George Bush is not the great liberater/reformer. He was just a bankrupting fool/dreamer! :evil:
"THEY WANT THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT CONTROLLING SOCIAL SECURITY LIKE IT'S SOME KIND OF FEDERAL PROGRAM."-George Bush

"I know the human being and fish can coexist peacefully." —Saginaw, Mich., Sept. 29, 2000-George Bush
User avatar
theprophet0
 
Posts: 1963
Joined: Sat Jul 26, 2003 12:17 pm
Location: Duluth

Postby Stang76 on Sat Dec 16, 2006 2:32 pm

Anti_Liberal wrote:i guess i'm still a little shocked that iran makes it crystal clear about its intentions with israel and yet we are allowing them to develope nukes. the UN was ormed to do 1 thing, and it was to stop problems like these before they start.


It may be disappointing, but I don't find it "shocking" in the least. If 3000 Americans buried in a heap of smoldering rubble on our own soil only mustered 4 measly years of political capital to grapple with the problem before wavering, why would J.Q. Schlub accede to an even more extensive military action now? We aren't going to do jackshit until it's too late, so you might as well get used to it.

Besides, since Israel's the first target and they're bound to retaliate, in the worst case scenario two of our biggest problems will vanish in one day without us having to lift a finger, and we can focus on more important things. The sooner the better I say.

theprophet0 wrote:Estimated world population of 6.5 billion and a growing estiment of 1.75 billion Muslims. Then countries like Pakistan ect.. where the unpopular regimes ruling the masses would like to see Bin Laden style republics. There is where you have the problem dude.


If you'd bother to pay attention to context you'd see I was referring to the notion of Muslim immigrants infiltrating the American populace, not the world at large. Oh wait, I'm talking to prophet here.
"The American Republic will endure, until the day Congress discovers that it can bribe the public with its own money." - Alexis de Tocqueville

Killdozer 6/4/2004 - we shall never forget.
User avatar
Stang76
 
Posts: 4442
Joined: Wed Oct 23, 2002 3:02 pm
Location: Teenage wasteland, ohh yeah

Next

Return to US/World Events

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron