If Mort Divine ruled the world

[HamburgerBoy]

no, my point is that there were radical and non-radical muslim political movements. that's why radical and radicalized are interchangeable here

Sure, obviously, not sure how that contradicts anything I've said.

am I back in high school or something? everyone knows Christianity killed lots of people and was radicalized and politicized for global conquest. why are we acting like "omg i'm saying christianity is just as bad as islam oooooo my god"

Today, Islam is more radical and violent than Christianity, sure. That's not what I'm talking about though. I'm talking about the reason the Middle East has been in a state of increasing religious radicalization for the last few generations. If you have to go back to North Africa in the 1800s, then you have to consider what Christianity was doing around the same time.

yeah i don't think this is true at all. muslim nations have had power vacuums since the fall of the ottoman empire in ww1 and nothing but stabilization is going to de-radicalize any nation

And who creates those power vacuums? Who deposed Mossadegh, Gadaffi, Saddam, etc? Who is currently trying to create a new power vacuum in Syria?

 

[rms]

And who creates those power vacuums? Who deposed Mossadegh, Gadaffi, Saddam, etc? Who is currently trying to create a new power vacuum in Syria?

you're being dishonest and trying to move the discussion to bring up some shitty facts that the west(U.S.) intervened in the middle east. it isn't relevant. you said muslim nations were de-radicalizing in the 1st half of the 20th century. the truth is the opposite and the reasons why aren't needed to be known when you make an incorrect claim. you want to say meddling by the west created/inflamed political turmoil in the middle east and africa? anyone educated/informed cannot deny it

If you have to go back to North Africa in the 1800s, then you have to consider what Christianity was doing around the same time.

Islam has had a strong hold on northern africa way before Europeans and Christianity. it's why the northern half is nearly entirely muslim and vice versa for southern africa

Sure, obviously, not sure how that contradicts anything I've said.

you just made it seem like you cant use both words when describing islam

 

[TechnicalBarbarity]

Citation needed.

you cant be that separated from reality, can you? Wow you are beyond ignorant, i swear. Are you really implying that muslims commit more violent crimes such killings(women, children, men, etc), rape, etc than the western countries? oh my dear god. Dude, there isnt a day that passes where you turn the news on and you dont see some white trash hillbillies who raped, killed and buried their child somewhere in the forest or other similarly horific, atrocious disguting incidents. Here area few, but if you think im going to keep spendging my time looking through countless articles for your entertainment, than you better think again. I'll leave that to you.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articl...d-up-disable-adopted-daughter-police-say.html

http://ktla.com/2016/09/06/child-po...aulting-killing-11-year-old-jacob-wetterling/

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articl...nherently-violent-and-the-math-proves-it.html

"What about violent crime? Here Muslims are way behind the rest of us—and in a good way. Homicide rates in Muslim-majority countries average about two murders per annum per 100,000 people. In non-Muslim countries, the average rate is about 8 per 100,000. Murder rates fluctuate from year to year, but they are consistently low in Muslim societies. The homicide rate in Indonesia, the world’s largest Muslim country, is 1 per 100,000—one-fifth the rate of the world’s largest Christian country, the United States. Christian countries live with murder rates that are unknown in the Muslim world. Brazilians and Mexicans are used to murder rates in the 15-25 range; the rate in Venezuela tops 50. Turks, Egyptians, Iranians, and Malaysians live with rates in the 2-4 range. In a good year, Christian South Africa lives with a murder rate of around 30. In a bad year, the rate in Muslim Senegal is one-tenth of that. Anyone who is skeptical of these numbers is invited to walk through minaret-dotted Dakar and steeple-studded Johannesburg at night and compare their experiences in the two cities. For that matter, have a stroll after dark in the low-income areas of Istanbul or Ankara. Then do so in Philadelphia or Oakland."

 

[HamburgerBoy]

you're being dishonest and trying to move the discussion to bring up some shitty facts that the west(U.S.) intervened in the middle east. it isn't relevant. you said muslim nations were de-radicalizing in the 1st half of the 20th century. the truth is the opposite and the reasons why aren't needed to be known when you make an incorrect claim. you want to say meddling by the west created/inflamed political turmoil in the middle east and africa? anyone educated/informed cannot deny it

It's not false at all. Far more women wear veils and non-Muslims are more persecuted more often now than they were in the 1950s in those countries. Just Google photos of Egypt in the 1950s vs now and compare. Radical Islamic groups were tiny, not massive like they are now with ISIS. Of course, Ronald Reagan creating the Taliban in the 80s to fight Russian-friendly India doesn't help things either. Most Islamic terror has its roots in Western support, whether direct or indirect via Saudi oil money. If you have evidence to the contrary, please provide it.

Islam has had a strong hold on northern africa way before Europeans and Christianity. it's why the northern half is nearly entirely muslim and vice versa for southern africa

Sure, obviously Arab conquest occurred, now we're going back to medieval times? The Catholic Church was literally no better.

you just made it seem like you cant use both words when describing islam

lol, I'm not a remotely politically correct person and have no issue with calling out radical Islamists for being radical Islamists. Doesn't change the fact that they've also been useful tools of the West for several decades now, and that we only care about them when we get hit.

 

[rms]

I'm not a remotely politically correct person and have no issue with calling out radical Islamists for being radical Islamists.

Sure, obviously Arab conquest occurred, now we're going back to medieval times? The Catholic Church was literally no better.

If you have evidence to the contrary, please provide it.

the evidence is irrelevant, I just said that. you're too fixated on pointing out christianity that this conversation has become tedious

 

[HamburgerBoy]

the evidence is irrelevant, I just said that. you're too fixated on pointing out christianity that this conversation has become tedious

You literally just brought up Christianity in Africa (twice actually). Why are you bitching?

Science operates on controls, so should other things. If one is going to attribute X to group 1, then one needs to as a first step see how X compares within group 2. If you're going to talk about a religion and its problems, then you need to look at a greater context and see how other religions compare. Again, I have no problem admitting that current Islamic culture, particularly in the Middle East and Northern Africa, is far more religiously radical than any Christian nation. I also have no problem admitting that the West has intentionally held back Islamic progress for several decades, and that the Islamic nations that don't have issues to the same degree (Malaysia, Indonesia, Brunei, etc) are (not by coincidence) those that have been least affected by Western influence.

EDIT: "The evidence is irrelevant", lol, just keep the faith then brotha

 

[CiG]

There's not a religious bone in my body

Besides the Muslim cock up your ass.

because you have people like cassette claiming that muslims are radicals, terrorist, baaaayyyde people, but christians arent.

When did I claim any such thing? I said, prove that Muslims are more peaceful than Christians.

you cant be that separated from reality, can you? Wow you are beyond ignorant, i swear. Are you really implying that muslims commit more violent crimes such killings(women, children, men, etc), rape, etc than the western countries? oh my dear god. Dude, there isnt a day that passes where you turn the news on and you dont see some white trash hillbillies who raped, killed and buried their child somewhere in the forest or other similarly horific, atrocious disguting incidents. Here area few, but if you think im going to keep spendging my time looking through countless articles for your entertainment, than you better think again. I'll leave that to you.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articl...d-up-disable-adopted-daughter-police-say.html

http://ktla.com/2016/09/06/child-po...aulting-killing-11-year-old-jacob-wetterling/

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articl...nherently-violent-and-the-math-proves-it.html

"What about violent crime? Here Muslims are way behind the rest of us—and in a good way. Homicide rates in Muslim-majority countries average about two murders per annum per 100,000 people. In non-Muslim countries, the average rate is about 8 per 100,000. Murder rates fluctuate from year to year, but they are consistently low in Muslim societies. The homicide rate in Indonesia, the world’s largest Muslim country, is 1 per 100,000—one-fifth the rate of the world’s largest Christian country, the United States. Christian countries live with murder rates that are unknown in the Muslim world. Brazilians and Mexicans are used to murder rates in the 15-25 range; the rate in Venezuela tops 50. Turks, Egyptians, Iranians, and Malaysians live with rates in the 2-4 range. In a good year, Christian South Africa lives with a murder rate of around 30. In a bad year, the rate in Muslim Senegal is one-tenth of that. Anyone who is skeptical of these numbers is invited to walk through minaret-dotted Dakar and steeple-studded Johannesburg at night and compare their experiences in the two cities. For that matter, have a stroll after dark in the low-income areas of Istanbul or Ankara. Then do so in Philadelphia or Oakland."

Talk about goalpost shifting. Now we're only talking about examples from America?

 

[TechnicalBarbarity]

Besides the Muslim cock up your ass.

bitch why are you going to start with the name calling if you are going to run off and snitch to the mods once this shit escalates? Pathetic. Look, you have quickly turned into one of the people here i dislike the most. So please stop responding to my comments if you are going to try and start shit just because you cant handle getting schooled. This is the internet where you start shit and go running off to the mods> If this was in person, im pretty suire you know it would play out very differently. You are the essence of the word coward.

 

[TechnicalBarbarity]

Talk about goalpost shifting. Now we're only talking about examples from America?

hmmmm ...

It's just that you're sitting here trying to unpin it from Islam while playing down Islamic terrorism and claiming that Muslims are more peaceful than most Christians.

[laughs inside your mum's cunt]
Support your claim that most Muslims are peaceful and are more peaceful than Christians. Because that is hilarious.

yeah ... you're a fucking pathetic weasel, i swear. NO BRO, we were never talking ABOUT AMERICA, the WEST. NO NOT AT ALL. Why would we? its not like the United States and the rest of the north and south american countries are christian or western, amiriite? P-A-T-H-E-T-I-C.

 

[CiG]

So then why ask if Australia even has any Muslims if you were talking broadly about the west? Obviously there are Muslims in Australia.

Also: at all your posturing.

 

[CiG]

if you are going to run off and snitch to the mods once this shit escalates?

Never happened.

bitch why are you going to start with the name calling

cuck

you cant be that separated from reality, can you? Wow you are beyond ignorant, i swear.

Are you that stupid or do you need me to point out again that all you keep doing is mentioning my post that was in response to HBB's post about when the Levant was radicalized? How dense can you possibly be? You're clearly nothing more than a western bigot

Aug is infinitely more educated than you are

And which moron needed you to point out that Iran isnt populated by arabs?

Anyone that fails to see why Islam has so many radicals today is just being super ignorant.

the fact that most of the clueless fucks buy into the whole "mulsims are terrorist" shtick is disgusting.

we have oppressed them, and anyone that doesn't see that is a grade A ignorant bigot.

bitch why are you going to start with the name calling

 

[HamburgerBoy]

Is that the only word in my last several posts you're going to reply to?

 

[CiG]

Just pointing out that it's hypocritical of him to start moaning about namecalling after all of this shit. I'll probably reply more seriously at some point.

 

[TechnicalBarbarity]

Is that the only word in my last several posts you're going to reply to?

lmao. Sounds like one of his signature moves.

I have him on my ignore list, for good this time. He's all yours now

 

[CiG]

Jesus what a bitch.

 

[Dak]

Different crime rates differ per country partially because of differences in reporting and partially because of differences in record keeping.

 

[rms]

It's no coincidence that the Middle East became radicalized shortly after the CIA began waging wars over oil and anti-communism

are we just going to ignore centuries of history in the region that spreads into Africa and Western Europe? Modern Middle East reasons for hating the West isnt too hard to find, but Islam has not historically been peaceful

What does colonialism/expansionism and the slave trade have to do with Islamic terrorism?

That's pretty much the case afaik. Islamic nations were gradually becoming Westernized until after WW2.

Northern Africa was more pissed off at European/Christian colonial rule at the time afaik.

its that islam was radicalized in africa and the middle east for a long damn time

Is your point just to say that fundamentalist Islam operated in Northern Africa and the Middle East? Then duh

My point is that the general direction of Islam in the first half of the 20th century was moving in the opposite direction of radicalization.

muslim nations have had power vacuums since the fall of the ottoman empire in ww1 and nothing but stabilization is going to de-radicalize any nation

Why are you bitching?

do you see how the argument has moved because you have no idea what you're talking about?

You claim Islam was not radicalized until the 1950s and the meddling of the West.

I counter this by saying fuck no it wasn't and it's spread to Africa and Southern Europe proves that Islam was radicalized for political gain. Instead of understanding why or how Islamic nations were radicals or radicalized during the 15-19th centuries, you say "what does the slave trade/colonialism have to do with Islamic terror?" -- As if Islamic terror is only via planes and suicide bombs and just so I don't have to read your shitty reply, like Christian terrorism is only some shitty Crusade with Swords. This is how the terror was manifested in two specific time periods, not how terrorism is defined.

Literally no majority of Islamic nations becoming Westernized in the early 20th century. You try and use that stupid image of Pakistan or Egypt showing the difference of women's clothing as if that's some sort of historical primary source worthy of writing a book on.

The underlying question is "Were nations, in Africa and the Middle East, that follow Islam radicalized before the 20th century?" The answer is undeniably yes. You are acting as if the question is "Were the nations, in Africa and the Middle East, that follow Islam radicalized because of Islam or because of Western influence? And how does that compare to Christianity"

If you're going to talk about a religion and its problems, then you need to look at a greater context and see how other religions compare.

do you see how no one asked the question/put forth the claim you are trying to prove? you're posting like a moron

 

[HamburgerBoy]

That's because you're struggling with basic grammar, something which I previously tried to help you with. Radical Islam existed before the 1950s, it always has and always will exist, but Islam was further radicalized in direct response to Western actions. If practicing slavery makes one an adherent to religious radicalism, then the United States was a radical Christian nation until the end of the Civil War. It's stupid to conflate something primarily economic (slavery) with religious extremism.

In the first half of the 20th century, you had Iran, Turkey, Egypt, Indonesia, and others all adopt varying forms of constitutional government with reduced religious influence (Turkey and Indonesia being outright secular). How is that not a trend away from radicalization? Again, if you have evidence of Muslim nations becoming more radical in the absence of Western influence, please provide it.

 

[rms]

It's no coincidence that the Middle East became radicalized shortly after the CIA began waging wars over oil and anti-communism

it always has and always will exist, but Islam was further radicalized in direct response to Western actions.

at least read your own posts and realize you spoke incorrectly before saying i did or can't comprehend basic grammar, ya doofus

If practicing slavery makes one an adherent to religious radicalism, then the United States was a radical Christian nation until the end of the Civil War.

what does christianity have to do with your original claim!?! jesus christ

If practicing slavery makes one an adherent to religious radicalism, then the United States was a radical Christian nation until the end of the Civil War. It's stupid to conflate something primarily economic (slavery) with religious extremism.

yeah, social and economic problems should never be conflated with radical tendencies that manifest in violent actions

Africa existed before there was the atlantic slave trade, i'm not really sure you understand this. I don't know why you are speaking on African/middle eastern history as if you know anything about it, it's coming off that you do not.

Again, if you have evidence of Muslim nations becoming more radical in the absence of Western influence, please provide it.

who the fuck do you think spread Islam to Africa, Southern Europe and as far east as it goes? Do you understand that Islam was stronger as a regional religion than Christianity for an extended period of time?!

How is that not a trend away from radicalization?

My point is that the general direction of Islam in the first half of the 20th century was moving in the opposite direction of radicalization

OK man, i'm done here. you're not even following your own words, when you stay consistent then maybe i'll continue.

 

[HamburgerBoy]

How was I wrong? "Radicalization" refers to trends. I'm also referring to two different things, Islam (a religion) and the Middle East (a geographical region) in those posts. Nothing I said was contradictory.

Again, if you're going to make an argument that X causes Y, you need to have proper controls and see how Z relates to Y. Slavery is not a feature unique to Islam. The fact that any mention of Christianity gets you incredibly butthurt tells me you're a religious person incapable of separating their emotional biases in order to engage in reasonable discussion.

Arab conquest during their heyday is not the same thing as religious fundamentalism. The Arabs were violent and expansionist, but after that fell and new Muslim nations were left in their wake, many did not share the same passion for war. If you have to go back hundreds of years, you have to consider that Christianity was hardly any different around the same time period (cue tears and butthurt).