Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Rolepgeek]

I remember hearing that most Muslims who want Shariah law want it for Muslims. Like, in Muslim communities, not enforced blindly on everyone.

Also, any nuclear strike near Israel will result in them flipping their shit and quite possibly nuking everything as soon as they find out it's been launched.

EDIT: yeah, not really sure how those graphs paint a picture of Muslims being unreasonable. Maybe in Egypt, but the higher percentage Muslims, the less practical it is to have two separate law codes.

[Erkki]

I see, the religion of peace is in the headlines again.

[Sheb]

Where does this "Religion of Peace" EdgeMeme come from again?

Anyway, martinuzz, those kind of statements from major Muslim religious organization come pretty much every time there is a major terrorist attack in the West. That's nothing new.

[MarcAFK]

I see, the religion of peace is in the headlines again.

Pokemon? Yeah, Front page of the New York Times.

[scriver]

I remember hearing that most Muslims who want Shariah law want it for Muslims. Like, in Muslim communities, not enforced blindly on everyone.

I am sure the many persecuted Muslim minority branches and peoples feels very secure with this.

[Erkki]

I didnt know it was a meme in English-speaking world too... But thought you guys would still get the reference. We had some imam in a TV interview, I think it was after the Charlie Hebdo and Kosher store attacks, where he kept repeating this "islam is a religion of peace".

[Orange Wizard]

I sound like a guy who thinks that totalitarian ideology like Islam should be banned in any civilized country

You want to ban an ideology? That's kinda totalitarian.

I don't OW, I'm saying it's not the job for white people to take control of African countries for their own good - the long line of American freedoming the middle east has left a track record of mistakes and broken states, nothing has changed since then. Strong independent countries are not conjured out of thin air, they are built over long periods of time, there is nothing magical about white guidance that will revolutionarily succeed where it has failed in the past.

To be fair, American freedoming is mostly coups and airstrikes. Instability is inevitable.

I don't think that indefinite poverty and violent turmoil is necessary to create a stable country. I think that what has been achieved in the West can be achieved everywhere, and that if we can get there without people getting massacred, we absolutely should.
I've no evidence on what that path is, but something should be done. The status quo is terrible.

Where does this "Religion of Peace" EdgeMeme come from again?

Muslims insist that Islam is a religion of peace while apparently looking the other way from the rampant babrarism

[Sheb]

I'm not sure where it comes from in English, but it's definitely older than Hebdo. Like there is that "thereligionofpeace.com" website.

Regarding the whole middle-east and development thing, there was that long article (I think in the Atlantic?) about Obama's Foreign Policy Doctrine, and one of the thing the paper had him said was along the line of "There is a large bunch of violent nihilists there. We can't save them from themselves, but we can contain them so they don't prevent the rest of the world from moving onward." Prime exemple of that thinking is the fact that even though he was reluctant to get involved in Syria, he was ok with bombing ISIS, because if they grew they'd be a threat to the rest of the world.

[scriver]

The "religion of peace" thing is people mocking the apologist mantra, yeah. It's as old as it's been used to disavow and handwave away acts of violence and oppression. "Islam is a religion of peace" is basically "No true Scotsman, Islam edition".

[Loud Whispers]

Where does this "Religion of Peace" EdgeMeme come from again?

From "behead those who insult the religion of peace" guy

To be fair, American freedoming is mostly coups and airstrikes. Instability is inevitable.

American freedoming is not mostly coups and airstrikes, that's what their strategic fund and investment is for. I'm talking about countries they haven't bombed too. And get this - the Americans are doing the best job imo to helping foreign nations develop themselves.

I don't think that indefinite poverty and violent turmoil is necessary to create a stable country. I think that what has been achieved in the West can be achieved everywhere, and that if we can get there without people getting massacred, we absolutely should.
I've no evidence on what that path is, but something should be done. The status quo is terrible.

What has been achieved in the West can't be achieved everywhere, this is a patent delusion that ignores literate populations, cultural beliefs, historical development and the massive epochal wars that killed millions to define the modern democracy.
Look at Nigeria. Three large populations that were once at war with one another, of different religions, races and cultures, conflict over oil and even at one point a civil war - yet Nigeria remains one Nigeria, with one civic people. Nigeria is economically developing quite well with the assistance of foreign investment, that is nonetheless hindered by corruption and the lack of any assistance for victims of scams. Thus Nigeria needs to construct a robust legal system and a transparent government, something you can't will into existence overnight. Nigerians understand Nigeria better than white Americans, thus they should be aided in their own independence, not having their independence taken by whites who really do not know better and should stop treating Africa like America.

*EDIT
Whilst I should stress it is a cautionary tale for White America, it is not a cautionary tale for White Europe, which does in actuality think itself enlightened enough to rule over Africa with its benevolent guidance. West Africa has plenty reason to distrust the European Union.

[Loud Whispers]

The problem with claiming anything is peaceful is that it's always inherently wrong.

Or, to quote a character from Green Mars:
“You can't get any movement larger than five people without including at least one fucking idiot.”

The issue however, in this case, is that from what I understand Islam (Or at least the original version) DOES condone violence. Obviously there are moderates, and they're probably in the majority in western countries, but still.

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

[Sergarr]

EDIT: yeah, not really sure how those graphs paint a picture of Muslims being unreasonable. Maybe in Egypt, but the higher percentage Muslims, the less practical it is to have two separate law codes.

Having a large minority (and, in a lot of countries, majority) that advocates to kill anyone who leaves their organization, and to make the rules of their organization extend towards people outside of that organization, doesn't strike me as very reasonable. Unless you support totalitarist regimes that did exactly that in the past.

[TempAcc]

I remember hearing that most Muslims who want Shariah law want it for Muslims. Like, in Muslim communities, not enforced blindly on everyone.

I am sure the many persecuted Muslim minority branches and peoples feels very secure with this.

I know a girl from Indonesia who later imigrated to hungary who swears that the most dangerous time for her to go out on the streets was during the one muslim holiday in which every business is forced to close, despite the fact its a muslim only holiday. She told me going out on the streets during that time was asking to get ganked by multiple muslim men with not very nice intentions.

Reeleejun of pehss.

[Ukrainian Ranger]

You want to ban an ideology? That's kinda totalitarian.

Neo-nazies and other white racists agree with you.

[Kot]

I find it ironic coming from a guy who claims Bandera was a hero, UPA were good guys and Volhynian massacres were A-Okay.