Just read this. tfw no longer an Islamophobe.

If you really want to not be an "Islamophobe," read people like Hafiz, Rumi, Saadi, etc.

Rasheed.

What do you mean by Islamophobe?

>2015
>not wanting the complete destruction and removal from history of islam
I mean come on

>>319873
I used to think "criticism" of "Islam" was perfectly justified but now I see that the people who claim to be doing this are just anti-Islamic bigots who don't actually have any idea what they're talking about.

ITT: I read some books so it makes all the things Islam has ever actually done in history totally irrelevent to what Islam is

>>319893
Islam is a religion ... it doesn't "do" anything. But if you mean Muslims, then you may as well blame Christian as well. There's nothing special about Muslims in this regard. People are violent cunts.

>>319891

Criticism of Islam /is/ perfectly justified. Or rather, it doesn't need justification.

And you're right, the people who talk about it on TV usually don't know what they're talking about; and when they do, they don't get long enough to answer the nonsense questions they will always have to answer.

I'm asking what Islamophobia meant to you when you considered yourself one. Did you think most individual Muslims were your enemies?

>>319902
And one of those cunts function in western society and one of those cunts don't

>>319916
I didn't know I was an Islamophobe. I thought I was making reasonable judgments about an objective object called "Islam" - a set of doctrines. But now I realise that, since there's no such thing, painting all Muslims with the same brush as by definition believing harmful stuff is just bigotry.

>>319902
No religion is "just" a religion, it's a belief system which causes people to act in certain ways. It caused the man who started it to become a violent warlord and forcefully eliminate all other Arabic religions. It caused Islamic nations for a millennium to band together for the sole purpose of conquest against other religions and the destruction of their cultures. It's not a friendly religion.

I wonder if you'd give the same privilege to the Fascists and Communists.

Ah, hud on, they don't call themselves religions, so you have to judge these theories by their partisan's practice, rather than some sacred, luminous scripture.

Its not the people, its the theory. Islam, like Christianity and Fascism and Communism, brings oceans of blood. At least the fash and gommies will tell you outright that people will die.
Like true, devious utopians, Muslims and Christians will lie to your face, call themselves peaceful against all empirical evidence and get angry at you when you say otherwise, as though you are obliged to respect their convenient beliefs.

>>319844
I went into reading the Qu'ran completely neutral on Islam after being given a copy by an Islamic preacher on Queen St in Brisbane (forgive me if that's the wrong word),
When I finished I came out completely questioning how anyone could take this seriously in the modern era [insert le John Oliver 2015 face].

I guess the same thing could be said about the bible, though I've only ever read the first 10-20 pages in a doctors waiting room and those pages were fairly easy on the brutality.

>>319938

Did you recognize differences between and among Christians at the time? This is mostly rhetorical, people from the western world all understand this.

>>319940

Due to the tenets of Islam itself? Or because of the general situation in places that are majority Muslim?

Are you saying that the more violent a Muslim is, the more they are likely to know about the doctrines and history of Islam? I think the studies show the opposite is true.

>>319940
That "belief system" various depending on who you ask. 1.7 billions around the world believe different things, and there are varying views even across the Muslim clerical authorities. There is no Islamic pope; there is no definite set of doctrines; it's very open to interpretation. Muhammad was not a "warlord". He only ever fought in self-defense. He didn't force people to convert, "There is no compulsion in religion" (Al-Baqara 256). He was tolerant of other religions:"To you your religion and to me mine" (109:1-6). What Islamic warlords did after Muhammad's death was not his fault. They quite clearly distorted his message for their own political goals.

File: tariq ali clash of fundamentalisms.jpg (97KB, 510x685px) Image search: [Google]

97KB, 510x685px

I changed my mind about Islam when I read pic related.
It is a direct criticism to Samuel Huntington. pretty much political and left-wing leaning, but I like how Tariq Ali defines this current identity crisis within Islamism as a post-imperialism revolt and a phase. He pretty much blames the west for the closing of the Islamic mind, and well, he is convincing into this.

I like when he tells about the homosexual practices in medieval Islam. I never thought of how Islam was actually a religion full of sexuality and perhaps open-minded in its earlier ages.

>>319955
>implying every ideology doesn't bring oceans of blood with it
Sure is pleb in here

>>319957
>I guess the same thing could be said about the bible, though I've only ever read the first 10-20 pages in a doctors waiting room and those pages were fairly easy on the brutality.

Just wait until you get to Judges or Deuteronomy.

Anyone who can sit through the whole "Women have to have their clits cut off and their vagina's sewn shut to get into heaven" thing and say they aren't an "Islamaphobe" (whatever that means) isn't paying attention.

>>319955
There are thousands of normal reasonable Communists ... have you read Marx? I've never experienced any non-crazy fascists though. And fascist texts are way less open to interpretation because they're overtly political. The Quran on the other hand is thousands of years old, written in an old Arabic (which is a very ambiguous language), and it's mystical. You're inevitably going to get all sorts of interpretations.

>>319938
>there's no such thing
Tell that to ISIS, who are running around killing people for not following the set of doctrines they know as "Islam" - especially muslims.

>>319995
>normal reasonable Communists
No, there are not.

>>319983
Fugging boys is still common in the Middle East, brah

>>319964
>Did you recognize differences between and among Christians at the time? This is mostly rhetorical, people from the western world all understand this.
Personally, I thought all religion was basically bad by definition. I think people tend to realise this with Christianity, but seem to forget it when it comes to Islam.

>>319995
>I've never experienced any non-crazy fascists though
What about Giovanni Gentile?

>>319994
That's not a thing in the Qur'an though. I mean, FGM happens in some areas (mostly Africa, but also among the Kurds and I think some Yemenis) but it's basically purely cultural.

>>320002
This is the worst argument in the world.

>>320003
Do you know wtf Communism is?

>>319983
Yeah. Jesus was a fucking weird celibate. Muhammad had plenty of sex. way more trustworthy imo.

File: 1422331088742.jpg (18KB, 600x339px) Image search: [Google]

18KB, 600x339px

>>319995
>There are thousands of normal reasonable Communists [...] I've never experienced any non-crazy fascists though.

>>319994

But let us make a special exception for male genital mutilation.

>>319980
>"There is no compulsion in religion" (Al-Baqara 256). He was tolerant of other religions:"To you your religion and to me mine" (109:1-6).
Those are abrogated by the verses about killing the nonbelievers.

>>320002
isis probably didn't kill any more than 300 westerners, however they killed thousands of muslims so far. so if you are going to play the guilt card at least do it right.

>>320012
It's a pan Afro-Asiatic (Pagan Egyptians and Christian Ethiopians did and continue to do it) practice, yes, but it is entrenched in Islam. Just because it's a cultural practice doesn't mean it is exempt from criticism. The Papacy and saint veneration are both not found (directly) in scripture, but they are still Catholic practices because of their relation to the religion. Likewise, because FGM is promoted by many Muslims, it is a Muslim practice.

>>319980
If there is no absolute common belief system, then what is the point in arguing for or against any set of ideals based from a religion? In that situation, the only thing that matters is how the majority of believers act by how they think is necessary for the religion, and you'll find that Islam is very undesirable in that regard.

And anyone who claims Muhammad was not a barbaric desert warlord is a deluded revisionist. He conquered countless Arabian cities, ordered the destruction of any and all non-Islamic religious icons, and exploited the weakness and decentralization of the Arabian states in order to establish his own cultural and religious hegemony over the entire peninsula. There's no way you could explain how Muhammad could both not enforce Islam and also somehow convert nearly all of Arabia to believe his shitty story in such a short period of time.

>>320033
>Those are abrogated by the verses about killing the nonbelievers.
There are no verses in the Quran that tell you to kill unbelievers.

>>320016
An ideology whose practice has resulted in the murder of millions, yes.

You cannot be sane and normal while saying we should murder people.

>>319980

>There is no Islamic pope; there is no definite set of doctrines; it's very open to interpretation.

I bet you think that this is conducive towards peace. It isn't. No orthodoxy means constant sectarian bickering.
'Openness to interpretation' is not a positive trait in a religion. That's how you get takfiris.
A warlord who fights defensively is a warlord. Muhammad was a warlord, just like Albrecht Wallenstein and Yuan Shikai were warlords. Tactics are irrelevant.
He didn't force people to convert, he just created a polity where at every time there was the incentive to convert, not to mention that if you didn't convert, your daughters could still be married to Muslims, but your sons? No, no, no. In a patriarchal society, that is an enforced humiliation.
Its meant to tell you who is in charge, same as when religious authorities used Christian money to build mosques where churches used to be. Islam isn't coercive in the same was libertarianism isn't. Within the parameters of its word games, its totally fine.

>What Islamic warlords did after Muhammad's death was not his fault. They quite clearly distorted his message for their own political goals.

No, it is his fault. It his direct responsibility that his most pious followers, following his teachings, made war on everyone around them, and then redefined the conquered through reference to themselves.

>>320037
>isis probably didn't kill any more than 300 westerners
300 too many. The west should just gas them and be done.

>>320028

Communists are basically libertarians who say that land reform needs to happen first and routinely.

>>319844
good for you. This should only trigger /pol/ m8, so if you're trying to post bait. >>>

The problem with Islam is that it hasn't had a modernization and probably won't
When all the intellectuals can only criticize the west for the failings of their religion you know you're in deep shit (literally every Islamic intellectuals go to criticism)

Even if a reformation of the religion occurred it most likely would be snuffed out early
It has to occur in the Middle East or few Muslims will follow it and it has to be able to withstand all the brokenness of those nations
Also have to make sure the heads don't get chopped off too early

Islam as it is doesn't function in a modern nation let alone the Western world

>>320037
They'll definitely kill more just gotta give them time but Isis is the perfect example of why reforming Islam into a modern religion is like fucking impossible

>>320050
>Communists are basically libertarians

Communists are basically half-assed AnCaps? Good to know.

>>320047

You'll have to be a lot more specific than that, I can't think of a major religion that hasn't caused the deaths of millions of people. Can you?

Do you think sane and normal people can support the military?

>>320042
"Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the Religion of Truth, from among the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizyah with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued."

Jews and Christians get to be second-class citizens and pay a submission tax. Hindus and other polytheists are just fucked.

>>320040
>And anyone who claims Muhammad was not a barbaric desert warlord is a deluded revisionist. He conquered countless Arabian cities, ordered the destruction of any and all non-Islamic religious icons, and exploited the weakness and decentralization of the Arabian states in order to establish his own cultural and religious hegemony over the entire peninsula. There's no way you could explain how Muhammad could both not enforce Islam and also somehow convert nearly all of Arabia to believe his shitty story in such a short period of time.
There's no way you could read an unbiased account of Muhammad's life and get this from it. Muhammad never killed anyone for the reason that they were not Muslim.

>>320060

That's actually not a bad description, like a less violent version of AnCap.

>>320064
>thinks Hindus are polytheist

>>320072
>Less violent

Care to explain the Red Terror then, senpai?

>>320049
Are you 12?

What a fucking brilliant strategy meeting that would be.

"Just gas them guys. It's that easy right? Just press this button right here and das it, they gassed. Worlds problems are over."

>>320064
>Jews and Christians get to be second-class citizens and pay a submission tax. Hindus and other polytheists are just fucked.

All of the major Abrahamic religions consider the others to be wrong, and have special rules for them when they live among them; and they all consider polytheists to be barely better than animals.

It's just that in the west we're mostly humanistic, not Christian, so the dynamic is a bit different.

File: cultural revolution.jpg (37KB, 500x351px) Image search: [Google]

37KB, 500x351px

>>320072
>less violent

>>320065
>Muhammad never killed anyone for the reason that they were not Muslim

So basically, in some fantastic way, he managed to raise an army of zealous desert nomads, be driven by his own new religious doctrines to fight and conquer the majority of Arabia, and he did all that without ever, even once, killing someone for not being Muslim? Or are you saying he would have to personally confront someone and ask them if they were Muslim, and kill them if they said no? Because that would be the more biased interpretation.

>>320082
That's because Christianity actually reformed to fit that humanism

>>320064
"Allah" refers to the God of monotheism. "People of the Book" means monotheists. Muhammad was tolerant of other monotheisms.

The condemnation of polytheists refers to the Quraysh, who were trying to kill Muhammad since he became a prophet and and constantly raided Medina.

>>320075

If it had ended in the distribution of land to the direct ownership of the people who worked on it, I might defend it as the violent reaction against land reform by the established elites. This didn't happen, so I can't defend it as part of communism.

How it ended is just fine by AnCap standards, the guys with the best use of violence ended up owning the whole country.

Like North Korea, the most AnCap country on the planet. Literally owned by one person.

>>320064
You're quote mining. The rest of it quite literally says do not force Islam on those who don't want it. They'll see Allah when they die anyway. Not to continue fighting an enemy that doesn't want to continue fighting. Etc.

Most of Islam's views on fighting unbelievers have to do with actually being oppressed by outside forces, fighting that oppression until they secure a state where Islam isn't persecuted. Even if that means peaceful coexistence with non believers.

The problem is what constitutes oppression is vague and often twisted to justify Jihad. To ISIS any Western involvement in the middle east is called oppression and used to justify their war.

>>320091
He was seen as continuing the tradition of monotheisms, from Abraham to Jesus, so many monotheists happily converted. And they were convinced God was on his side when he won battles against the Quraysh (who were trying to murder him)

>>320049
>>320059
i was simply pointing out that suffering in the west caused by islamic radicalism is nothing compared to what was happened and still happening to muslims today. looks like it is lost on you guys.

>>320059
your argument sounds really logical, if you ignore the fact that muslims are human as well. isis is not the perfect example of why reforming islam is impossible. isis will be the reason why islam will be reformed. humans can't endure constant state of war, hence millions of refugees flooding into gulf states, turkey and europe.

>>320091

Not the other guy, but there's a distinction between killing a non-Muslim who is opposing you and killing someone because they're a non-Muslim.

It's important to distinguish between the politics of early Islam and the religion aspect. Mohammed was a state-builder as well as a religious leader, and as far as state-builders went he was reasonably tolerant.

I would agree that he was a warlord, but he was as much of a warlord as Charlemagne, and arguably a lot nicer.

>>319902
Christians have Jesus Christ as their model, Muslims have a pedophile warlord as theirs. You do the math.

>>320120
"Warlord" implies he was bringing war to the people. This isn't true. He was, of course, a military leader, but his battles were done in self-defense.

And btw, he was a genius military leader. He's not a pacifist pansy.

>>319891
So are muslims just like us? Only wanna raise a family be happy and live win peace with everyone?

>>320110

One important fact that people seem to ignore is that the most violent Muslims who are violent in the name of Islam are not the ones who know the most about Islam, who follow the practices most diligently, and so on.

Sam Harris and the reactionaries are precisely wrong when they say that the more Muslim you are, the more violent you are. And it's irresponsible for them to publicly agree with the most violent Islamic clerics, so that teenage Muslims all over the world are convinced that IS the real Islam.

>>320079
Just gas the whole region then. You'd be losing nothing of value because all of the archaeological sites and natural resources would remain intact and the survivors would be much more manageable.

>>320102
>If it had ended in the distribution of land to the direct ownership of the people who worked on it, I might defend it as the violent reaction against land reform by the established elites. This didn't happen, so I can't defend it as part of communism.

So basically you're saying that if it worked then it would count as communism but since it didn't, it's not communism?

>>320119
>i was simply pointing out that suffering in the west caused by islamic radicalism is nothing compared to what was happened and still happening to muslims today. looks like it is lost on you guys.
Who cares? The human capital of the region is virtually worthless and the world at large would be better off without it.

>>320085
The only thing wrong with the GPCR is it was a bit excessive, people were too eager to make immediate changes.

>>319916
There's criticism of religion and then theres screaming that muslims want to take over the world, are all lying, are all secret terrorists, and support killing non muslims.

>>320125
By our standards, yeah he was a pedophile. By the standards of the time, not only was he not a pedophile, but moral towards his younger wife.

>>319995

I am a Communist, I read Marx habitually. And Lenin and Mao and Trotsky, even if I don't agree with all of them all the time. If a Communist appears to you 'reasonable' or 'normal', that is, integrated and non-violent, then they are reformists, or they are just posturing. Communism is violent. Anyone who tells you otherwise is trying to redefine what was explicitly stated by Marx and Engels to justify their kowtowing.

>I've never experienced any non-crazy fascists

I can understand them perfectly. Their principles are intelligible, and not at all crazy. I just don't agree.

The Quran is not the most important text in Islam, if you are actually going to follow it. There's little in there that you can't find elsewhere. Its the Hadiths and Surahs which are most distinctive of Muhammad himself, with regards to the other prophets. They are the ones in which you find all the steakey shit.

>>320047

>An ideology whose practice has resulted in the murder of millions, yes.
>You cannot be sane and normal while saying we should murder people.

The practice of liberalism has killed as many. All political theories, one way or another, lead to deaths, but only moralisers like you would claim that you 'can't be sane' while acknowledging this fact. Ideologies, by the way, don't kill people. You have the ideology, then you have the actual implementation. The former is meant to justify the latter, or at least that's how Marx formulated it when he wrote your argument for you.

Fucking /tg/ tier emotional argument.

File: islam 3.jpg (518KB, 700x900px) Image search: [Google]

518KB, 700x900px

>Islam

No thank you.

>>320137

Most Muslims are. Most everyone is.

File: discarded.jpg (75KB, 613x950px) Image search: [Google]

75KB, 613x950px

>>320141
>wanting to murder millions of people because of organizations flourished with american taxpayers money and oil sheik bucks to destablize regions and remove political opponents in order to ensure western interests in the area are safe

>>320120
He wasn't a warlord full stop. A warlord is a man with troops specifically loyal to him, without a state, just a band of soldiers. Muhammad was the head of a state, he was invited to that position of leadership, and the troops of that state were loyal to that state and to the doctrine of that state, not to him. If he died, they would have continued.

>[3:144] Muhammad was no more than a messenger like the messengers before him. Should he die or get killed, would you turn back on your heels? Anyone who turns back on his heels, does not hurt God in the least. God rewards those who are appreciative.

>>320141

>So basically you're saying that if it worked then it would count as communism but since it didn't, it's not communism?
>So basically

Oh lord, this is always followed by an intelligent statement.
He is saying that if it had worked, he would have regarded Red Terror as a legitimate policy. Since it didn't it is a part of communist theory he can't defend.

So, like, basically, like, um, yeah, just, like, the opposite of what you are, like, claiming.

>>320111
>so many monotheists happily converted
For some reason I find it really unlikely that thousands of people would be totally okay with converting to a new religion, with new beliefs and practices. They only converted because it was easy and because they had to, it doesn't mean they did it "happily".

>>320120
I'm not denying that Christian leaders were not at times more violent than Muhammad, but there are two distinct differences between someone like Muhammad and Charlemagne. While Charlemagne already had a nation, identity, culture, and religion with which to expand as an empire, Muhammad created a completely new state based around his own religion, and invoked violence from other Arabic leaders for it. Second, not all Christians derive their beliefs from Charlemagne's, but all Muslims do derive their beliefs from Muhammad. He was the guy who made it, and he was also a conquerer and enforcer.

>>320141
>I want to do a second holocaust killing over a billion people because i believe their religion is violent
Gee, i wonder whose the real violent one.

Islamophobes are borderline psychotic.

File: 1408983684802.jpg (182KB, 1024x1024px) Image search: [Google]

182KB, 1024x1024px

>>320141

>they're violent murderers therefore we're justified in violently murdering all of them

Hang on a minute friend isn't that exactly what ISIS says about us?

>>320149
>I am a Communist, I read Marx habitually. And Lenin and Mao and Trotsky, even if I don't agree with all of them all the time. If a Communist appears to you 'reasonable' or 'normal', that is, integrated and non-violent, then they are reformists, or they are just posturing. Communism is violent. Anyone who tells you otherwise is trying to redefine what was explicitly stated by Marx and Engels to justify their kowtowing.
It's my understanding that that definition of Communism came about during the Bolsheviks, as something different to Socialism, and that Marx meant something else by it.

>>320137
>implying

Yeah of course they are, after they behead you ofc.

Every Muslim hates a non-Muslim person just because they're "kuffar".

>>320155
Oh look it's another guy posting random shit completely out of context.

>>320141
>Justifying killing millions of people for nothing more than being within a specific region and having a certain ideology because a few assholes are justifying killing thousands of people for nothing more than being from a specific region and having a certain ideology

No seriously if you think genocide is the legit best solution you're either an edgy teenage faggot with no understanding of global politics or you're simply retarded.

Which is it?

>>320175
>For some reason I find it really unlikely that thousands of people would be totally okay with converting to a new religion, with new beliefs and practices. They only converted because it was easy and because they had to, it doesn't mean they did it "happily".
It was the new thang, it was trendy. It was sweeping the world. They didn't deliberate much in those days.

>>320155
Cherry picking at its finest.

>>320175
>uhammad created a completely new state based around his own religion, and invoked violence from other Arabic leaders for it.
No, that's wrong. Medina was a city state in Arabia, it had a lot of internal trouble, they invited Muhammad to be their leader, as an intermediary between the conflicting factions in the city. He convinced, through peaceful methods, the majority of the population to convert to Islam. Because of Muhammads past with Mecca, another city state, Medina was now at war with Mecca. The resulting war was won by the Muslims and Muhammad ended up controlling much land.

>>320169

Fair argument, I can agree with that. Mainly I was just agreeing on the principle that Mohammed was not exactly a peaceful man.

>>320183
The distinction was made during Marx's time. Hence the different Internationals.

>>320175
>and invoked violence from other Arabic leaders for it
False. They were trying to kill him before he traveled to Medina.
>and he was also a conquerer and enforcer
He didn't "conquer" violently; he only fought his enemies ... the people who were trying to kill him.

>>320204
But not by Marx himself, right?

>>320203

“Great empires are not maintained by timidity.”

― Tacitus

>>320175
>For some reason I find it really unlikely that thousands of people would be totally okay with converting to a new religion

Things actually worked like that back then. Forced conversion is not a good method when you're controlling lots and lots of people different from you.

>>320138
Yeah its not like Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi is an educated muslim scholar or anything.

>>320203
>Fair argument, I can agree with that. Mainly I was just agreeing on the principle that Mohammed was not exactly a peaceful man.
He wasn't a pacifist, but by the standards of his time, he was TREMENDOUSLY peaceful. He defied a multitude of traditions and laws that usually dictate violence and execution. He refused them.

>>320144
Except that he and his deeds are to be an eternal model for all muslims, then and now.

>>320175
> I find it really unlikely that thousands of people would be totally okay with converting to a new religion, with new beliefs and practices

not the guy you were responding to, you assume islam of founding years and the islam of today are identical. it wasn't and i mean islam didn't have to adapt a lot to embrace other semites in the area, they had the same or very similar cultures and practices.

also considering it was 7th century and the records coming to this day can be very biased but it is not too wild to assume people of arabic peninsula willingly converted. there is also the factor of islam being a liberating religion for slaves and the women of the peninsula.

>>320177

'Islam' is not over a billion strong. Purge the ulema, see how long it lasts without its pedophile jurists and imams.

>>320183

>It's my understanding that that definition of Communism came about during the Bolsheviks, as something different to Socialism,

Nope. Communism appeared round about the uprising of the Paris Commune, from where it gets its name. Marx argued that the Commune was a indication of what the revolutionary society would look like - the dictatorship of the proletariat.
Lenin distinguished between Communists and socialists. 'Socialists' of the Bernstein, and later Kautsky, stripe were supportive of WW1, or were mushy pap gradualists. Over time they slid towards the right, but continued to delude themselves into thinking they were still socialists. Lenin regarded Kautsky in particular to have stained the term beyond redemption, so 'communist' was used instead.

I use the two interchangeably, because I don't regard reformists as socialist, no need to after Keynes, and because Lenin was wrong on a lot of points, most notably that journalists can be trusted to write even handed works without calling folk scum.

>>320217
Just because you're educated doesn't mean you can't form your own ideology. Islam, at least with the extra material, is extremely open to interpretation. Most of ISIS laws and actions do not come from the qur'an but the huge volumes of hadith. There are as many which condemn what they do as well, which is why they pick and choose.

>All these posts and nobody brought up Salafis yet

kek, this argument will lead nowhere.

>>320167
Yep. Fuck 'em all.

>>320172
That's not what he said; check your grammar.

>>320177
No, I just want to get rid of the people currently living in the middle east and start fresh with those that manage to survive.

>>320181
If they want total war, we should give it to them. They've forgotten what it means to provoke the west and need a refresher course.

>>320188
If I thought that Islam could be refomed without such a dramatic event then I'd endorse that; as it stands I can't see another way forward that involves a reasonable timeline.

>>320225
So that would mean it would be acceptable to marry somebody for the political end of overthrowing a corrupt tyranny. What's wrong with that?

>>320155
You need to quote the entire quran to make sure you are in context and it has to all be in arabic or it doesnt count.

File: islam3.png (333KB, 729x1416px) Image search: [Google]

333KB, 729x1416px

Islam is awesome, it's the religion of peace and love.

Not like Saudi Arabia, as per Islamic law, sentenced someone to death today because he left the religion Islam.

So peaceful.

>>320231
>'Islam' is not over a billion strong. Purge the ulema, see how long it lasts without its pedophile jurists and imams.
There are 1.7 billion Muslims.

>>320186
>not muslim
>defending Islam
Hello, reddit.

>>320237

>If they want total war, we should give it to them

You're sounding more and more like some radical Islamist with every fucking post.

>>320237
Kindly fuck off with your genocidal ways you hypocrite fuck.

File: islam is nice.png (197KB, 1920x1195px) Image search: [Google]

197KB, 1920x1195px

Did you guys know that Islam embraces peace and love?

Zero (0) people have died in the name of Islam.

>>320238
>war is peace
>black is white

>>320240
>samples of max 1.500 people per country
>1.62 billion people are okay with murder according to this survey

AHHHHHHHAHHAH

>>320149
>The Quran is not the most important text in Islam, if you are actually going to follow it. There's little in there that you can't find elsewhere. Its the Hadiths and Surahs which are most distinctive of Muhammad himself, with regards to the other prophets.
You're right that the Qur'an isn't the only important text but it is in fact the most important, that has never been in contention. The sirat (a surah is a chapter of the Qur'an) and hadith are important but the former moreso than the latter. Hadith are of interest to scholars but people have always known they're kind of bullshit for the most part, and it's only in recent memory (when Islamic education has broken down and been rebuilt by fundamentalist wahhabi and salafi trends) that hadith are seen by anyone as "doctrinal" for lack of a better word. The exception are hadith qudsi.

>>320231
So you could get your "Communism" purely from Marx and say that it just means you believe in that vision of society.

File: quransns.jpg (190KB, 800x480px) Image search: [Google]

190KB, 800x480px

>>320246
But i am.

All the focus on Islam is on warfare.
But the majority of the Qur'an is about God and monotheism.

File: islam2.jpg (43KB, 540x351px) Image search: [Google]

43KB, 540x351px

The religion of peace guys.

Why are you not a muslim yet?

http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/quran/023-violence.htm

Islam is a peaceful loving religion.

>>320251
>That direct correlation between poverty and domestic violence
There's more to islamic countries than islam.

>>320237

I seriously don't understand how retards like you can feel justified in saying "They're violent so we should indiscriminately exterminate the entire region they're operating in." and this somehow makes sense in your head.

Like, if you ran a state, would you seriously advocate murdering everyone in an entire fucking subcontinent on the premise of "we're just fixing it" and not thinking this might be literally the exact rationale of all mass murdering barbarous nutjobs you consider to be savages worthy of extermination did?

Are you magically the exception because you're obviously so enlightened relative to everyone else or something?

>>320119
The gulf states are taking fuck all refugees.

>>320262
Based on that image Kazakhstan seems pretty okay.

This thread right now:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sIlNIVXpIns

>>320262
You know your images are working against your point right?

File: islam of peace.png (1MB, 1080x1920px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1080x1920px

>i-it's just fake graphs and lines taken out of context

Damn right!

>>320274
And it's 70% Muslim.

Culture, what the fuck is it?

File: islam peace.jpg (174KB, 986x1160px) Image search: [Google]

174KB, 986x1160px

Cmon guys, why don't you believe in the peaceful and loving religion that is Islam? You racist bigots!

File: islam.png (87KB, 727x669px) Image search: [Google]

87KB, 727x669px

Islam is the greatest, most peaceful and most loving religion in the universe.

>>320141
>So basically you're saying that if it worked then it would count as communism but since it didn't, it's not communism?

I'm saying if it did communism it would have been communism.

Establishing a dictatorship vanguard and then never dismantling it is not communism. In Soviet Russia, communism was used in rhetoric to defend the system.

>>320172

The Red Terror was not communist policy.

Violent resistance to the redistribution of wealth is to be expected, and if the Red Terror was this, it would be defensible.

>>320217

Is he the guy who wears the bomb-vest?

>>320237
>If they want total war, we should give it to them. They've forgotten what it means to provoke the west and need a refresher course.

Who is they?

The minority of people in the Muslim world who plan attacks against the west? If they want total war, we should cooperate with them?

>>320258

Nobody gets their communism purely from Marx.

>>320271
Its not about being humane or savage.
I dont mind being a savage, what I care about is my clan winning.
Simple as that.
We ar enot talking about who is gonna take out the garbage. We are talking about life and death and way of life.
I want my way of life to prosper and i want my countrymen and myself ot live well.
I dont mind exterminating whoever opposes us.

sigh

intelligent discussion is over guys

>>320283
Oh the irony

File: islam6.png (180KB, 369x395px) Image search: [Google]

180KB, 369x395px

>>320299
>intelligent discussion
>about Islam

Pick one.

>>320297
Get a tan and gas yourself. It's the only way.

>>320308
You just insulted yourself ...

>>320308

You do make it pretty fucking hard when you're too braindead for speak for yourself and resort to garbage /pol/ info infographics.

File: islam7.jpg (47KB, 576x1024px) Image search: [Google]

47KB, 576x1024px

Islam is peaceful.

Islam is love.

>>320308
Posting endless shitty graphs images is not intelligent discussion its bombardment. You're also probably the same guy who just said we should gas the entire mid east.

>>320297

Then trying to pretend you're any different to them comes off as pretty fucking insincere. You're just some edgy cunt and I'm guessing you're hardly out of your teens.

>>320244

Sure there are. Can't just be that in societies where a clerical class holds power, the millions of munafiq (google it) are afraid to make their real opinions known.

>>320254

I concede to your greater wisdom. Still, there are theories that the Quran was not an original work of Muhammad's.

>>320258

No, because the Commune failed. I take my pointers from Marx, but he couldn't have accounted for 1917, or 1918, or 1921, or 1927.

I don't like the phrase 'vision of society', it sounds too much like 'worldview' or 'lifestyle' - an 80s political buzzword.
I apply Marxian theories to the analysis of history, that doesn't mean I 'take my Communism' from him.

>>320318
>lets discussion what happens in war torn underdeveloped countries and then blame it on Islam

File: islamdanger.jpg (107KB, 550x700px) Image search: [Google]

107KB, 550x700px

Guys did you know that Islam promotes freedom and peace?

>>320324
>I concede to your greater wisdom. Still, there are theories that the Quran was not an original work of Muhammad's.
The Qur'an is quite obviously Muhammads work. It pretty much links up with his story and is a semi autobiography, but because it's not in an obvious direct way, but indirect, this makes it much more likely to be true. You have to read between the lines.

>>320318

Do you mean the book?

Do you mean Muslims in general?


You do know all the stuff in image related is permitted by the other of Abraham's religions.

And you forgot to list infant male genital mutilation.

>>320330

You know anon I didn't agree with you but then you helpfully posted a selection of unbiased and useful infographics that changed my mind.

Now I promote the extermination if Islam too! Let's shit up this thread together because we can both be too terrified of thinking for ourselves and instead resort to folders full of these garbage images that validate all the nonsense swimming in our heads!
Fuck books or history, too, who needs them when you have /pol/,

File: islam4.png (65KB, 840x532px) Image search: [Google]

65KB, 840x532px

I wish the whole world was under Islamic rule, it would be so much better. No wars, no deaths, no oppression.. just peace and love.

>>320330
>islam is just another fascist ideology used by power hungry fanatics on yet another conquest for world domination
lel, talk about contradicting your own point

>itt: books vs. pol graphs
You just had to put id's on this board you damn nip.

File: isis training.webm (2MB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1280x720px

>>320340

I like books.

http://www.amazon.com/Bill-Warner/e/B00FAWN654

webm related, peaceful people that believe in Islam doing their morning excercise

>>320296

>The Red Terror was not communist policy.

No, it was a proletarian policy. The wealth of society was redistributed, however, like in 19th century France, a growing state apparatus created a parasitic clade of bureaucrats. Even policies which work give rise to their own contradictions, comrade. In the process of redistribution, a class (or class-like formation for all you despondent Trots) emerged and appropriated much of that wealth. Was still 'progressive', if I'm allowed to use Carr's definition.

Doesn't make red terror less necessary, just means that its implementation must be adjusted.

>>320354
Ohhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh

You're the dickhead who keeps posting Bill Warner everywhere saying "What do u fink of this guy is he right?"

Fuck off

>>320027
Yeah, way more sex with underage girls. That is a great example of a holy man! Fucking retard.

File: venezuela-line for food.jpg (83KB, 810x455px) Image search: [Google]

83KB, 810x455px

>>319983
>open-minded

You mean they rape young boys. I wonder if you would call the Catholic Church open-minded for that too.

PS: Tariq Ali is an idiot who got Huntington wrong, like most people who criticized him

Oh, and Venezuela sucks. Anyone who supported Bolivarianism is now totally discredited.

>>320128
Dude, how was raiding caravans in self defense?
How is Jihad in self-defense?

>>320340
>replying to an autist

You just played yourself friendo.

Islamic radicalism can be cured by stable states, stable currencies, stable daily life and stable infrastructure. Which won't be a reality unless USA and their european and turkish buttbudies stop funding "rebels", organize a ground operation and rebuild the life they destroyed by funding hundreds of proxy organisations around the region.

File: islam1.png (335KB, 954x665px) Image search: [Google]

335KB, 954x665px

Did you guys know that Islam is the religion of freedom and peace?

Taqqiya? In my threads?

>>320368
>Dude, how was raiding caravans in self defense?
When they're selling your shit they stole from you.
>>320369
This. Central Asia is Muslim and has none of these problems. It is not due to Islam it is due to the problems of the land. Strife always results in extreme ideologies, in the Islamic world they will be Islamic, in the west it will be far right or far left, in the past in Europe it would be extreme Christianity. I could go on.

>>320357
I'm not that guy and I don't know who Bill Warner is, but you seem seriously threatened by the possibility that he might be right

>>320368
It is, when those goods in your caravan were yours in the first place.

>>320369
>Islamic radicalism can be cured by stable states, stable currencies, stable daily life and stable infrastructure.

The problem is that this is far too complicated for people who want a single, convenient explanation for why something is going wrong.

Islam is a very easy explanation for why the middle east is a shitshow that requires minimum thinking for maximum indignation.

>>320360
Go home Yankee.

>>320323
I am different in many ways simple by being me and them being them. Im better in my eyes because my life matters to me more than their lives.
This makes my decisions and the decisions of my group good and the decisions of a group like ISIS bad.
Only spoiled people, living a comfortable peaceful life, can be as big a hypocrites as some are here.
When its a matter of life and death for you and your loved ones you wont think if you fighting is morally just, you will fight for victory at all costs.
The spread of different values ideas and culture has many times been through warfare and conquests.
Its the west's weakness and humane attitudes to less capable civilizations that has made it start withering.
In its heyday it spread by conquest and might.
Now that Europe is absolutely worthless and seems to be set on self destructing itself, and the US is on the path to a more isolationist foreign policy the west will completely capitulate and together with its physical influence its cultural influence will also decline.

>>320393
>>320386
How would people steal stuff from Mohamed when he was already dirt poor at the time?

>>320386
>Central Asia is Muslim and has none of these problems.
Are you serious? Those countries have atrocious infrastructures, corrupt governments, and are routinely boycotted by international sporting committees for human rights abuses when they're not being chastised by the UN. I'm amazed that you're holding them up as some sort of paragon of ideal Islamic society, because they look awful

I figured out what Islam is after reading the Quran; an ideology to subjugate the world under Islam, and to make its people testify that there is no god but Allah, and that Muhammad is his messenger

>>320412
Not Muhammad but the Muslim community. If you were familiar with Islamic history you'd know about the exodus to Madina. The Makkans seized the property left behind by the Muslims that had to leave or else face persecution, if they belonged to a family that could protect them, or death. The raids take place in a context of cold war more or less.

>>320411
>In its heyday it spread by conquest and might.

You mean the Muslim Conquests up until the Umayyads?

>>320412
>stuff from Mohamed

Not from him, it was his followers' goods. Most of them left Makkah in a hurry and polytheists just took all those goods.

>>320261
What about the Hadith, the Sira?

>>320360
>Anyone who supported Bolivarianism is now totally discredited.
In the sense that Bolivarianism is too soft and should've already seized and shot everyone hoarding food and goods by now.

>>320396
Western powers can go only so far with their current stance on isis and middle east in general, as long as they keep nurturing the instability in the region to avoid having to do anything with their own fuck up radical islam will only get stronger and prevalent in these areas and radicals will overflow into their own countries.

Honestly fucking over generations of people and their own future and stability just to keep retards like this >>320411 content on the short run is just stupid.

>>320418
Kazakhistan is good enough, but some of them like Turkmenistan and Kyrgyzstan are pretty much hellholes in different ways.

Their people are better when it comes to the ethics, but they are ruled by meme-tier leaders, especially Turkmenistan.

>>320391
He posts a thread on him every single day and gets BTFO every single day.
Some of us think he actually is Bill Warner.

>>320418
They don't have Islamic problems. They have economic problems due to being in the middle of fucking nowhere and from soviet rule. I'm not holding them up as some ideal islamic society, im amazed you read that from my post, i just said they have none of these [islamic] problems. They're pretty stable countries. Stability is good and quells extremism.

>>320412
He had built up some money and property from his merchant days which the Meccans stole.

>>320368
Caravan-raiding was an Arab tradition. It was seen as one of the best ways of distributing wealth from the overly-rich to the overly-poor. It wasn't done violently, but sneakily. The caravan drivers considered it nothing more than a nuisance, and one of the many inconveniences of travel.

The word "jihad" in the Quran is always followed by "in the way of God". It means spiritual struggle. There are a few words in Arabic that can be translated simply as "war", and Jihad isn't one of them. The "Holy War" conception didn't come about until the crusades. Muhammad specified that some wars are just: when done in self-defense or against an oppressive violent tyranny. War is either just or unjust, but never "holy".

>>320470
A spiritual struggle... just like Mein Kampf!

>>320412
He wasn't dirtpoor back then, he became poor after many years of his leadership and conversion efforts.

His wife, back before he started his work, was one of the richer persons in Mecca actually.

>>320478
And the Bible.

>>320144
By your shitty logic, slavery was a-okay.

Have fun having no one think you are sane besides maybe other Muzzies.

The case for Islam is out you guys. A shit tier religion for shit tier people that only makes a society worse.

The "holy prophet" literally killed people, told people to kill people and fucked a child. Really? This is the best you got? All you have is stumbling apologia and dissonance (OH YEAH BTFO ISMALOPHOBE!). Stop making yourselves good kaffirs.

>>320488
Egg-zactly

>>320492

>By your shitty logic, slavery was a-okay.

>Have fun having no one think you are sane besides maybe other Muzzies.

And Christians and Jews.

>>320492
Except Muhammad freed a shit load of slaves, and bought them just so he could free them.

>>320501

>The "holy prophet" literally killed people, told people to kill people

Like Moses?

>>320470

>Caravan-raiding was an Arab tradition. It was seen as one of the best ways of distributing wealth from the overly-rich to the overly-poor.

Lets just ignore that this kind of 'tradition' would have bankrupted people in the West, and made life just that bit harder for the people from whom the Arabs stole all their money.

Can't blame them though, its the Sassanids' fault for not leaving well enough alone.

>>320501
You know Moses killed a lot of people right?
You know Popes have had a lot of people killed right?

>>320520
Yes, and Mohammed.

>>320537
Tactical Nihilism.

>MUH MOSES
>MUH POPES
>BTFO ISLAMOPHOBES

>>320527
>moralizing an ancient peoples

>>320543

Not believing in a religion is not the same as nihilism.

>>320458
>Implying many empires did not become more pacifist and degenerate until more barbaric people conquered them.

Sorry but this is a process that has gone on through out human history.
You can ignore it because of your individualism filtered glasses but its exactly this individualism that is wrecking the cultural and military influence of western nations.
If major changes to way of life or a threat to you or your family was on your doorstep you wouldnt disagree with me.

Problem is that its a gradual shift and when idiots like you realize danger is inevitable the fight will already have been lost.
"Self interested" people who care about themselves and the group that shares their ideals realize that by not expanding and propagating their values they inevitably invite other groups to spread theirs.

>>320501
>ad hominem attacks on a man ~1600 years dead

>>320546
>have to point out this fallacy in a board about "history"

The suffering is real.

>>320519
He also fucked a woman after her husband and father had been killed by his army

>>320537
>look this religion is just as bad as those other ones

great argument.
THEY ARE ALL SHIT but most importantly Islam is dangerous to ME and others like me more than those other two.

>>320555

Empires don't become pacifist, they over-extend and/or shorten their lines.

>>319844
>tfw no longer an Islamophobe

Well then go fuck yourself

>>320556
If your counter agrument to people worshipping a paedophillic murderer is that he was old then you gotta try harder faggot.

>>320360
I'm not talking about his views on Venezuela, I'm talking about his views on Islam. Venezuela is out of question here.

And if so, the pederasty in Ancient Greece was also rape.
Islam supported the sexuality, and as we can see in books like One Thousand and One Nights, the female sexuality was an issue.

What I meant was that Islam was once a religion that supported philosophy, science and even sexual 'liberation', all without wrecking morality of its civilization.

>>320577
>people worshipping a paedophillic murderer
No one worships Mohammad.

The God as described by Jesus, Abraham and Mohammad, however, is objectively a paedophilic murderer--I'll give you that much.

>>320560
You talking about Hind bint Utbah? She was a bloodthirsty bitch - literally. After her army killed Muhammad's uncle she cut out his liver and bit it.

Then converted to Islam.

>>320585
If they are not worshipping him why do they name their children after him? Why aren't they naming them Allah?

>>320247
>>320250
Blood deserves blood. It's the "they send of of ours to the hospital, we send one of theirs to the morgue" idea writ large; if they complain about the west's activities in the middle east and use that as a justification to attack western powers indiscriminately, we should take off the kid gloves and abandon "muh hearts and minds". Of course, the problem with this is that their religion glorifies death in warfare so you'd probably have to kill a lot of them before the idea sinks in.

>>320271
Because I have no love for them as a people or culture and hold no obligations to them. If the "moderates" in the middle east want to turn out the extremists in their midst and get back to quietly doing whatever it is their profession is, then bully for them and I'll be happy to let them alone. If not, then anyone that's even suspected of being a terrorist gets smoked. If they don't get the message then the punishment continues. Same goes for Europe; if you smack of Islamic extremism then you and everyone you know get black-bagged and are never heard from again, plain and simple.

>>320296
>Who is they?
>The minority of people in the Muslim world who plan attacks against the west?
Yes, chiefly, and those under their sphere of influence. If, for example, an Imam glorifies the Paris attackers to his followers then he and his family and his followers die.

>If they want total war, we should cooperate with them?
Yes, because the west would win. I'm willing to kill many millions of muslims to prevent even a handful of Europeans from dying.

>>320592
Because "Allah" means "the God" and that would sound retarded.

>>320592
Why to Italians and French and Hispanics name their daughters Maria? Why are there so many Mexicans named Cesar?

They must be polytheistic af.

>>320592
The same way no one named John, Peter, David, etc, had parents that worshiped their namesakes.

>>320592
>Why aren't they naming them Allah?
That's blasphemous.

Why do Christians name their children Jacob, Joshua, Abraham, etc. and not God/Yahweh?

>>320603
It sounds equally as retarded as Mohamed

>>320590
Nah, it was some rich woman. Can't remember her name though, just what happened to her. I'm not sure, but I think it was the same woman where a guard had to watch over her and Muhammads lovemaking because she might have tried to kill him

>Islam advocates the marriage of children
>Muhammad literally married his wife at 6 years old
>consummated when she was 9
Jesus Christ you're a retard for using islamaphobe. Someone called me a bible thumper and that the pope likes to touch little boys, does that make them a catholicaphobe? Gee golly better go bomb some abortion clinics in holy war. Point is people need to stop complaining about being made fun, it's part of life.

>>320600
>Yes, chiefly, and those under their sphere of influence. If, for example, an Imam glorifies the Paris attackers to his followers then he and his family and his followers die.

So how do you plan to investigate and arrest the people who actually planned and supported the Paris attacks?

>Yes, because the west would win. I'm willing to kill many millions of muslims to prevent even a handful of Europeans from dying.

I see, kill millions of random Muslims, and you'll eventually get the ones who planned the Paris attacks?

You are willing to kill many millions of Muslims who did not support the attacks? This will somehow discourage future attacks?

And yet when some Muslims killed a handful of Europeans, that's enough to make YOU want to keep fighting forever, yes?

>>320607
>>320605
>>320603
>>320604
No one pointing out that "Jesu" is a common as fuck name

>>320613
>Someone called me a bible thumper and that the pope likes to touch little boys, does that make them a catholicaphobe?

Probably

>>320501
There's a lot of knowledge in this post. To the bitter Rasheeds in this thread, I ask you to let go of your anger and let go of Islam. It's a political ideology designed to legitimize expansion and war, and nobody should base their life around it if they want to continue to have a society in a thousand years. Let go.

>>320610
You seem pretty juvenile. How old are you?

4chan isn't a good place for kids, really. You're liable to get the wrong ideas from shitposters and do something violent. Go join a club or a sports team in your middle school, make some friends.

>>320617
I don't live in Mexico

>>320613
>Islam advocates the marriage of children
>Muhammad literally married his wife at 6 years old
>consummated when she was 9
No, he married her at 9 and consummated when she went through puberty, so 12 or 13. That was normal in those days.

>>320555
>your whole post

You have absolutely zero idea about struggle. The threat is already at my doorstep, I am Turkish.

It is probably very easy for you to throw words around like fighting the evil and gassing millions when you are a ocean away from the real fight.

I can understand why you might think your government owning to their fuckup in the middle east unneccessary because the trouble is far away from you but I cannot accept a guy who has no stake in this play assuming moral superiority on this subject.

>>320629

So she was about the same age as Mary when she had her first child?

>>320623
There are angry people in every religion, friend. What you blame Islam for doing is borne of a volatile region with Western influence. Naturally they are going to be reactionary and hate Western ideals and attach to extremist beliefs, just as many in the West are doing.

>>320624
You think telling the truth is wrong? Thats juvenile to you?
What isn't retarded about naming a child about a 7th century CHILDfucker?

You are now crossing the threshhold of being wrong to outright Taqiya.

>>320648
>Taqiya

>>320648
Why in Allah's name are you on a history board?

>>320648
No, it's just that your "argument" is riddled with fallacies and hypocrisies, coupled with a vacancy of any sort of knowledge beyond what /pol/ has stuffed into your horribly impressionable young mind.

>>320623

Are you trying to suggest to me that the societies that prospered over a long term didn't have ideologies that legitimized expansion and war?

The fact that the west is CONSTANTLY getting involved in wars on (outwardly) humanitarian grounds is evidence enough even western cultures still idealize 'just wars'.

>>320615
>So how do you plan to investigate
Through the normal channels.

>and arrest the people who actually planned and supported the Paris attacks?
>arrest

lelno. They end up in a shallow grave covered in pig blood, or if they're out of the reach of the domestic authorities they get blown into gibbets.

>I see, kill millions of random Muslims, and you'll eventually get the ones who planned the Paris attacks? You are willing to kill many millions of Muslims who did not support the attacks? This will somehow discourage future attacks? And yet when some Muslims killed a handful of Europeans, that's enough to make YOU want to keep fighting forever, yes?

Why are you so focused on Paris? I just used that as an example; I'm talking about ALL anti-western actions by muslims. They need to learn that their actions have consequences beyond the slap-on-the-wrist shit of the last few decades.

>>320636
Roach

>>320648
its called kitman when sunnis do it m8

File: holy shit what a fucking faggot.jpg (78KB, 540x659px) Image search: [Google]

78KB, 540x659px

>>320661

Oh I see, you want to get your goals handled through excessive responses and fearmongering tactics.

That's a good idea. Perform abhorrent acts of terror to get your way. That'll teach those terrorists.

>>320629
To be honest, there is hadiths that say she was married at 6 and consummated at 9, but there is also hadiths of the same rating (sahih rating) that together make her age older (I forget exactly, but if you do the math, these ones suggest she was no younger than 14 or older at marriage)

The reason why the 6-9 thing is so commonly cited is because it is explicitly said in a hadith as opposed to the ones that suggest she's older, which requiring synthesizing accounts of hadiths ~ plus, since Muslims did not seem to have a problem with the idea of her being that age, they did not seek to see if that information was contested at all in the hadiths (which, as I have stated, there are contradiction hadiths to her being so young at the time)

>>320661
>Through the normal channels.

Which are?

>lelno. They end up in a shallow grave covered in pig blood, or if they're out of the reach of the domestic authorities they get blown into gibbets.

If you find the right guys wouldn't it make more sense to try them in court?

>Why are you so focused on Paris? I just used that as an example; I'm talking about ALL anti-western actions by muslims. They need to learn that their actions have consequences beyond the slap-on-the-wrist shit of the last few decades.

And you're saying that you're willing to kill millions of Muslims who had nothing to do with anti-Western actions; your theory seems to be that this will reduce anti-Western sentiment.

Yet a handful of Westerners being killed by Muslims is enough for you to declare permanent genocidal war on them?

>>320648
>Taqiya
This isn't /pol/. Learn what the term means. If you think the guy is lying about something, call that lying, because it definitely isn't "taqiyya" in this case.

>>320546

I'm not moralising, you retard, and I don't see why you qualify that statement with 'ancient'. Its just as tedious to moralise over the actions of modern people.

The only reason that caravan trade was necessary was because A. the Persians and Romans liked to LARP ancient wars and B. the Red Sea was clogged up with pirates.

It wasn't redistributing wealth from rich to poor if even the poor suffered as a result, it was just raiding. Trying to paint it as some egalitarian political action, now that is a modern projection onto an ancient people.

>>320559

>le i'm so above this board may may

Kill yourself, bandwagoning cattle.

>>320661
>middle east in absolutely chaos with random deaths everywhere
>slap-on-the-wrist

File: quran.jpg (647KB, 1366x768px) Image search: [Google]

647KB, 1366x768px

>>319844
Just read this.

tfw I am no longer an Islamophile

>>320661
>They need to learn that their actions have consequences beyond the slap-on-the-wrist shit of the last few decades.

Do you want to know how many more Muslims have died from western bombs than westerners from Muslim bombs?

You are such a fucking vapid fuckwit.

Most people know very fucking well that terrorism gets them bombed. The people that don't care about excessive western response are the fucking TERRORISTS.

Every time we bomb the shit out of the middle east we create an atmosphere where well armed radicals can usurp power. If you want to stop terrorism you need a stable government, not a fucking bombing campaign.

>>320658
You aren't really countering my arguments. My """"""""""arguement""""""""""" comes from the fact that Mohammed's marriage to the underage Aisha is a universally bad thing if you don't believe paedophillia is wrong I supposed I should stop now. The OP was about why isn't an "Islamophobe," and my intent was to change that.

How am I wrong? Would that not change your opinion if you knew a pedophile? Or are you just trying to call me juvenile so you can go into more denial?

>>320688
Doesn't look like a translated edition anon. I don't think you could read it. Do you dislike Arabic script or something?

>>320686
>middle east in absolutely chaos with random deaths everywhere
Guess where that chaos stems from: Western interference in regional politics.

Do you really think more Western interference is the answer, here?

>>320673
The 6 - 9 thing doesn't make sense though; the 9 - "puberty" one does, because that was commonplace at that time. If it was 6 - 9, why would he wait?

>>320664
Ayy smart boi

>>320696
I personally think he married her when he was older. All I'm saying that there is indeed hadith that give 6-9.

>>320692

Not him, but bitching about a behaviour as immoral when it wasn't immoral at the time is just anachronistic. Are you really just assuming that everyone at any period goes "I shouldn't do this, what will people in the 21st century think?"

You can find immoral behaviors in any pre-modern societies that we find abhorrent now. Things like the founding fathers being slave owners and all sorts of other shit. The greeks and Romans were shameless childfuckers too but we don't seem to fault them for it.

>>320695
Countries have messed with the affairs of other countries all over the world. And yet it's the muslim countries do suicide bombings for god. But sure, go ahead and say it has nothing to do with the religion and that it's all the fault of those dirty imperialists.

Having said that, you're right in that we should fuck off and leave the ME. It's not worth it and we can't help

>>320685
That's how they explained it to themselves. It began as pure raiding, sure, but nobody saw any need to get outraged over it. It was just annoying to the caravan drivers, and the majority of Arabs rationalised it by saying that it redistributed wealth. The point is though is that Muhammad didn't invent it, endorse it, or forbid it. It was just a thing Arabs did.

File: A BOMB.jpg (119KB, 524x519px) Image search: [Google]

119KB, 524x519px

>>320636
8% of your country supports ISIS. A much larger portion support the """""moderate""""" rebels

>>320692
You're applying your modern Western morality to that of an illiterate caravaneer from 1600 years ago.

Biologically, puberty is the "starting point" for procreation, and from my understanding Mohammad waited until she went through puberty. Objectively, he's not a pedophile--the society that brought you up taught you to wait until 16/17/18 yrs. His did not.

>>320712

And you see all over the world that regions that get intentionally fucked with and destabilized have the highest instances of radical militants murdering people.

The middle east is such a prominent example because it gets so publicized, but this shit happens in Asia and Africa too.

>>320718

What percentage of Americans support the troops?

>>320719
You think that the only thing that makes Paedophillia wrong is morality? Not science? Not psychology?

>>320745
What the holy fuck are you talking about

>>320636
You have no idea where i am from you idiot. I do not live in a peaceful country.
Groups of people can only coexist peacefully if they share enough ideals.
If two groups do not they will fight one way or the other until one changes its values by will or by force.
As it stands many of the followers of islam are incompatible with western ideals so a fight has started as a result of the decline in the power of western nations like the US Europe and the USSR.
It is not new or unexpected. It has been going on for more than a thousand years.
There are some fundamental differences between both sides that force the two to fight and they will fight until one has a decisive victory. I am interested in western powers winning but they cannot win without aggression if the other side employs it.

>>320745

The only thing that makes anything right or wrong is morality. Almost by definition.

>>320745

Tell me again about how anybody before this century had any of the foundations of science and psychology to inform us about what we could consider to be a rational age of consent? Not to mention the age of consent is controversial even now.

Biologically, as soon as you're pubescent you can have kids. This is the way human beings have functioned for an overwhelming majority of our history. Pretending everyone has to know and think the way we do now is absolutely fucking moronic.

>>320718
>getting your facts from pew research

fucking pleb. anyway, i know that there are isis supporters in turkey but it is nowhere near %8. it is also true that turkish population either supports "moderate" rebels or kurdish guerillas. unfortunately the true nature of those proxies are not known to general public in turkey, however the veil is slowly peeling off because some of our proxies started to fuck us over.

don't get me wrong you are a cunt but i would never condone anything that my government does.

>>320755
The problem is that you're defining "Islam" as by definition in opposition to "the West". The majority of Muslims don't live in the Middle East. The majority of Muslims live in democracies. The majority of Muslims in non-democratic countries want to live in democracies. There's nothing inherently anti-Western about Islam. To assume there is unsophisticated and ignorant.

>>320775
>The majority of Muslims in non-democratic countries want to live in democracies.

If only the State Department also wanted those countries to be democracies.

>>320767

Arguments over age of consent have very little to do with arguments about pedophilia.

>>320755
>Groups of people can only coexist peacefully if they share enough ideals.
>If two groups do not they will fight one way or the other until one changes its values by will or by force.

i know this has been said in the thread before and i am not even memeing but you share a lot of common grounds with isis.

>>320775
Islam in the sense of the actions of its followers.
The defacto truth is that Islam has been fighting non muslims for more than a thousand years and this war continues now as the grip the west had on muslim nations has been loosened.
If the Europeans were more persistent instead of greedy they would have infused more of their culture into their middle eastern colonies instead of just mining them for money.
This would have been the end of militant anti westenr Islam but they did not go through with their cultural colonialism and now militant anti western Islam is gaining more strength again.

>>320790
The Muslims are saying the same thing

>>320797

They have very much to do with it when you're spouting moralizing bullshit.

In point of fact? Yes, Mohammed slept with young girls, though it's debatable whether they were prepubescent.

In terms of morality? They didn't work on the same fucking wavelength as us, and most societies didn't. Applying western values to every historical society and going "hurrdurr they're evil degenerates" is retarded, not to mention people are VERY selective about when and where they apply their values, and do it only when convenient for them.

>>320800
Its simply how things happened in the past and there is absolutely no reason to think we live in some magical time.

>>320802
Everything you said there applies to the vast minority of Muslims. The thing to infer from this is obvious: it must be something other than Islam that causes them to do it, despite the explanation they themselves give.

Hell, that last part doesn't even apply a lot of the time. Bin Laden said explicitly that he was pissed off because of Western interference.

>>320802
>Islam in the sense of the actions of its followers.

>The defacto truth is that Islam has been fighting non muslims for more than a thousand years and this war continues now as the grip the west had on muslim nations has been loosened.

Christians haven't? States have bloody borders.

>If the Europeans were more persistent instead of greedy they would have infused more of their culture into their middle eastern colonies instead of just mining them for money.

The nineteenth century was relatively peaceful in the region, European rule was ruinous as it was in most places.

>This would have been the end of militant anti westenr Islam but they did not go through with their cultural colonialism and now militant anti western Islam is gaining more strength again.

European conquest of the Middle East was the START of anti-western sentiment. Remember that the Arabs were promised their own independent republic that included what is now Syria, Lebanon, Iraq, Kuwait, Jordan, Israel, Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Yemen, and Oman; but the British and French went back on the deal.

>>320810
You are an idiot because Muslims believe his actions should be followed and repeated NOW.
His actions are a model of perfect behavior for eternity according to islam.
This means that even today, when we do have psychology, they, according to their religion, should still merry and fuck 9 year olds.

>>320839
>b-but what about christians
>b-but what about europe

Jesus fucking christ

>>320755

>>320800 Like this anon said, you sound exactly like a Salafi straight outta Syria.

I've actually talked with a ISIS supporter before and I've heard the same type of justification from that guy.

>>320837
Thats because He thought that a muslim caliphate would not rise and was not possible in his time. His aim was to first get westners out of the middle east.
He did believe in pan islamism and muslim prophecy much like ISIS do.

Daily reminder that there are no clear facts on the age of Aisha but she could've been anywhere between 15-19 when her marriage was consummated.
http://www.muslim.org/islam/aisha-age.htm
Daily reminder that hadith were compiled during the budding shi'a sunni formations and that sunnis (including Aisha herself) sought to give Aisha greater influence than Fatima, with the young marriage and consummation an emphasis of her "purity".

>>320849

Comparing people to their contemporaries is perfectly fucking rational when discussing whether people are behaving excessively.

Going "x group are radical nutjobs" obviously fucking invites comparison to other groups.

>>320810

So you're saying Mohammed is no different from any major male character in the Bible or the Book? That's fine.

I apply the values of today to all times. But to do this you have to understand the values of the time, and it's correct to praise people who did better in moral terms than their situation would imply.

You can praise Mohammed for being more opposed to slavery than the pre-Islamic Arabs were. And by modern standards he was a supporter of slavery. There is no contradiction there.

>>320720
Agreed. They need to ban you and the rest of /pol/

>>320720

What's 'their job'? Censoring any discussion that triggers you?

>>320863

The difference between christianity and christians to islam and muslims is like day and night.

Islam is inherently dangerous to the world.

>>320857
>His aim was to first get westners out of the middle east.
This is incredibly wrong I don't even know where to start.

What you're calling "pan-Islamism" is monotheism; Muhammad was tolerant to other monotheisms. The reason he wanted everyone to believe in God because it was, essentially, synonymous with morality. He wanted the world based on the rules he established in Medina, which were egalitarian, gender equal, against (the initiation of) violence, and economically altruistic.

>>320882

Removing fucking pro-Islam shit.

There's nothing good with Islam, tons of negative with Islam though.

>>320846
“A great misconception prevails as to the age at which Aisha was taken in marriage by the Prophet. Ibn Sa‘d has stated in the Tabaqat that when Abu Bakr [father of Aisha] was approached on behalf of the Holy Prophet, he replied that the girl had already been betrothed to Jubair, and that he would have to settle the matter first with him. This shows that Aisha must have been approaching majority at the time. Again, the Isaba, speaking of the Prophet’s daughter Fatima, says that she was born five years before the Call and was about five years older than Aisha. This shows that Aisha must have been about ten years at the time of her betrothal to the Prophet, and not six years as she is generally supposed to be. This is further borne out by the fact that Aisha herself is reported to have stated that when the chapter [of the Holy Quran] entitled The Moon, the fifty-fourth chapter, was revealed, she was a girl playing about and remembered certain verses then revealed. Now the fifty-fourth chapter was undoubtedly revealed before the sixth year of the Call. All these considerations point to but one conclusion, viz., that Aisha could not have been less than ten years of age at the time of her nikah, which was virtually only a betrothal. And there is one report in the Tabaqat that Aisha was nine years of age at the time of nikah. Again it is a fact admitted on all hands that the nikah of Aisha took place in the tenth year of the Call in the month of Shawwal, while there is also preponderance of evidence as to the consummation of her marriage taking place in the second year of Hijra in the same month, which shows that full five years had elapsed between the nikah and the consummation. Hence there is not the least doubt that Aisha was at least nine or ten years of age at the time of betrothal, and fourteen or fifteen years at the time of marriage.”

Living Thoughts of the Prophet Muhammad, 1992 U.S.A. edition, p. 30, note 40.

>>320849

You said that Europeans could have ended anti-western sentiment if they were stricter in their control over the Middle East; but it's the European conquest and exploitation of the Middle East that caused anti-western sentiment that didn't exist previous to this.

That was the point I was talking about mostly.

The rest is just making sure people understand that Islam is not unique in being at war for most of it's history. Europeans actually conquered the whole world, Muslims didn't.

>>319844
>being scared of a bunch of mudskin devilworshippers

LEL

>>320884
>Islam is inherently dangerous to the world.

In the way all religious belief is, or in some special way?

>>320884

You're acting like Christians didn't subjugate an entire continent in the course of a few decades under the pretext of bringing Christian civilization to heathens.

Islam isn't inherently dangerous to a fucking thing, radical Islam is and radical Islam is a modern phenomenon that rose out of anti-western sentiment. And all you need to do is open up a 19th-20th century history book to see why people are mad at the fucking west and why the middle east is an unstable shithole.

>>320889

So censoring people that disagree with you, you mean.
Do you feel threatened by discussions that don't conform to your beliefs? Do you want 4chan to be your personal little hugbox so nobody threatens your safe space?

>>320846
>>320894
With that in mind, 14/15 yrs is pretty reasonable; post-pubescence, and actually the AoC of many Western nations (Austria, Italy, Germany).

>>320850
Thats fine since ISIS cannot be destroyed by words or arguments.
They can only be destroyed by military might and thus for one to eradicate them one has to adopt an aggressive stance.
You and your nation/group cannot ignore reality and must adopt a strategy that respects the actions of your neighbors and/or enemies.
It would be absurd to stay peaceful if your enemies are being aggressive persistently.
Yes, If a neighboring nation starts a war with your than yours must also fight.
"If you want peace prepare for war" as the quote goes.
Once such hostilities begin you must reach a decisive victory to end all hostilities.

>>320894
Even without this, the fact that we know definitively that he WAITED to consummate the marriage must mean he was waiting for SOMETHING. Why would he wait it was just a flat-out pedophile?

>>320888
Yes yes yes Islam is humane democratic and feminist.
Please fuck off.

Islam is just a pleb world domination cult

Kill anyone who disagrees with you
Conquest is good, 72 virgins
Have multiple wives and outbreed them

The Quran is a joke, its like Old Testament for retards

>>320919
>They can only be destroyed by military might and thus for one to eradicate them one has to adopt an aggressive stance.

We've seen with every fucking war against guerilla ideological radicals this century that you can bring down the fist with all the might of a superpower and not fucking do a thing but create more ideological radicals.

Both the Soviets and Americans tried time and time again and failed repeatedly, all that excessive military response creates is more resentment.

>>320896

You're talking to someone else.

I just pointed out how stupid you sound on the internet.

Europeans managed to, Islam tried hard but didn't manage and I wake up every morning thankful for that.

>>320907
>b-but muh christianity

I am well aware of what has happened under the name of christianity, however that was many many centuries ago and it's not going on today. There's a very big difference.

Islam is inherently dangerous, radical Islam has been going on for centuries and centuries it literally has nothing to do with modern anything. Thousands of jihads has been launched upon Europe and Africa in the name of Islam, long before modern Europe even existed.

>>320916

Nah I'd rather just be censor Islam, it's not something the world needs right now, actually the world has never needed Islam.

>>320927
Read a fucking book

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_feminism

>>320946

Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha

>>320949
Hmm yes very sophisticated argument

>>320919
Yeah, that worked out so well last time in Afghanistan and Iraq right?

ISIS is the direct result of destabilisation in Levant by Iraq invasion. Al-Qaeda pretty much exists thanks to the American support back in Afghan-Soviet war.

>>320946
>Here let me rape you
>Wear this ninja outfit
>You can't drive
>You can't vote
>Here meet my 3rd wife, you can be my 4th

LEL

fuck off faggot

File: 100790_154_2.jpg (42KB, 476x500px) Image search: [Google]

42KB, 476x500px

>>320933
>however that was many many centuries ago and it's not going on today.

Try the last two you fuckwit.

>radical Islam has been going on for centuries and centuries

Like radicalism of any ideology. The Wahabism we're dealing with in the likes of ISIS is a 20th century phenomenon.

>Nah I'd rather just be censor Islam, it's not something the world needs right now, actually the world has never needed Islam.

Stop being such an over-sensitive fucking baby, maybe. People will disagree with you, and you can go ahead and support your argument with facts when they do. You can have a discourse, not beg the mods to ban them because you got offended and want all the opinions you hear to be the ones that you agree with.

>>320964
ISIS was created and funded by Israel

>>320959
>Islamic feminism

If there's one thing I've learned it's that leftists and islamists are impossible to argument with.

Head in sand.

>>320967
>Islam = Saudi Arabia

>>>/pol/

>>320896
>Islam never faught the west before colonialism

How purposefully blind can you be?
What caused anti european sentiment is the fact they did not force their culture down the throat of their colonies. They did have a good impact and did spread some good things but it was not enough and the moment europe lost power as a result of the world wars it was over.
It had to be all or nothing.
They needed to conquer these nations and make them into western nations in the fullest sense.
Now its too late to care who is to blame and for what.
We now have a certain reality that needs to be dealt with. from a western point of view it means brutality that is taugh for flabby Europeans to accept, which is why they are now accepting the very thing they should be opposing into their midst.
Their preoccupation with moralistic questions and guilt are making them abandon their culture and values.

>>320584
>Islam supported the sexuality, and as we can see in books like One Thousand and One Nights, the female sexuality was an issue.

That's like saying Medieval Europe was open about sexuality because of the Roman de la Rose

>>320975
May I ask for proofs? I've heard nothing but vague theories about this claim so far.

>>320906
In a special way as in our time followers of islam are being violent in its name.

>>320973
>in the name of christianity

kek

>wahabism

Sure, that doesn't change the thousands of jihads and invasions of both Africa and Europe for many centuries that are still going on to this day.

>stop being a sensitive baby

Not sensitive at all. Islam has brought the world nothing it needs, just get rid of it already tbqh.

>>320978
At least the Saudis are modern

Most of the Islamic countries are great if you want to live in a mud hut in the desert and fuck goats

Fuck Muslims they are savage barbarians incompatible with modern society in large numbers

>>320933
Not him, but if something is inherently dangerous, whether its followers act dangerous or not should not matter, as the religion itself is timelessly dangerous. Your argument of "that was many many centuries ago and it's not going on today" is irrelevant. Whether Christians have stopped being violent has no barring on if the abstract religion Christianity is violent or not. Similarly, if you believe Islam is inherently violent, then even if in 200 years from now, if at that time Muslims are known to be peaceful, you should still believe that the religion is still violent.

As such, do you believe that Islam is inherently and Christianity is not? If so, why?

File: saudi.png (605KB, 620x413px) Image search: [Google]

605KB, 620x413px

Islam is peace and love to be honest with you.

>>320907
"radical" chaotic islam has been part of Islam from the very start. Read some muslim history.

>>320989
Look at who they aren't attacking.

Israel is using them as a wrecking ball and will pick up the pieces

>>320992
>defending Saudi Arabia in a desperate attempt to justify bigotry

>>320998

If Christianity today was what it was say, 1500 years ago I would be against it just as much as I am Islam, but it isn't so I am not. Although I disagree with religion as a whole, Christianity today poses no threat to humanity, Islam does, always has been and always will.

Islam has not changed one bit since 632, it's still the same retarded religion and it always will be, Mohammed was the last messenger after all.

>>320981
Not him, but you made a strawman. Having anti-western sentiments is not the same as fighting the Western counties. In the old days, Muslims empires fought the West, but it wasn't the case as it oftenly is now that they actively despise Western values and Westerns themselves. To them, there was land to be taken, nothing personal kid (Europeans).

All you need to know about Islam is countries in which the majority of people are Muslims.

They are all war torn shitholes. Of course, not all but the vast majority.

Look at how well they integrate in Europe. Fucking savages.

Its good they suck at conventional warfare because we are going to fuck their shit up when the time comes.

>>320978
Bro, give up. Your smelly brown religion is obejectively terrible. Its extremely laughable that you could still think you are winning a pro-islam arguement.

>>319844
reza aslan is an ubershill -- beware, hes tricky

File: islam8.png (15KB, 597x52px) Image search: [Google]

15KB, 597x52px

Islam actually promotes feminism and equality.

>>320932
Its because they were not wars of conquest and total domination.
The west is afraid to fight and spill blood.
It shows too much mercy to its enemies and not enough resolve to properly conquer nations.
Not to mention that Afghanistan was a result not of Soviet russia failing to take it over but it failing because of Us backing of military groups in Afghanistan.
The russians lost to the US there, not the afghans.
today the US is simply too soft to properly win wars and take over countries.

>>321002
While I agree with the reasoning and think that ISIS is useful for Israel's goals, especially to create the perfect situation for a Kurdish state allied with Israel in the middle of ME with lots of oil and surrounded by rivals/enemies (Turkey, Armenia, Iran etc), I still need some proofs to utter it without sounding like a conspiracy theorist around non /pol/ boards.

>>321008
Western Tolerance
>Bobby likes to fuck other men in the ass
>Cool story Bobby don't touch me

Islamic Tolerance
>Mohammed likes the boys
>*Decapitates Mohammed*

File: vilksw.jpg (68KB, 583x730px) Image search: [Google]

68KB, 583x730px

Guys Islam promotes tolerance and peace.

Just ask this guy.

>>321035
I hope you are being sarcastic but I can't tell because everyone on here is a fucking liberal faggot

>>320981

>How purposefully blind can you be?

I know the history of the region. It didn't begin yesterday, or a hundred years ago.

>What caused anti european sentiment is the fact they did not force their culture down the throat of their colonies. They did have a good impact and did spread some good things but it was not enough and the moment europe lost power as a result of the world wars it was over.

Nothing to do with conquering the Middle East and holding it for forty years? The problem was that the conquest was not complete ENOUGH?

>They needed to conquer these nations and make them into western nations in the fullest sense.

Give me an example of this working in real life.

>Now its too late to care who is to blame and for what.

Except that you are happy to blame Islam and Muslims.

>We now have a certain reality that needs to be dealt with. from a western point of view it means brutality that is taugh for flabby Europeans to accept, which is why they are now accepting the very thing they should be opposing into their midst.

I would say that we should change our tactics, two centuries of brutal treatment just made them hate us.

>Their preoccupation with moralistic questions and guilt are making them abandon their culture and values.

Wait, who?

And are you saying you don't oppose Islam because of it's values, only because you're not already a Muslim?

>>321016
>If Christianity today was what it was say, 1500 years ago I would be against it just as much as I am Islam, but it isn't so I am not. Although I disagree with religion as a whole, Christianity today poses no threat to humanity, Islam does, always has been and always will.
Did you read my post? Your line of reasoning makes no sense, In that case, if you were alive 600 years ago, you would be saying " Christianity does [pose a threat], always has been and always will."

Religions are abstract. Whether the followers are violent or not has no barring on if the religion itself is violent. You deem that on the religions own merits. If you don't then you fall into a trap, because then there is no reason Muslim behavior can't change just as Christian behavior changed. Just because so-and-so happened to be violent in your lifetime and so-and-so was violent centuries before doesn't change that reality.

>>321058
You shouldn't promote femenism but you shouldn't treat women like animals. There is a reason the third world remains the third world

>>320990

All followers of Islam?

>>321066

Except that Islam directly promotes all kinds of dangerous shit. Everything from pedophilia, slavery and rape to murder and holy war.

That's reality.

How can muslim behavior possibly change when the best muslims one can be is to live like Mohammed?

>>321062
Colonialism was not decisive enough, yes. Its aim was to economically exploit, not conquer.
You either achieve a decisive victory or you are forced to fight again.
This can be see through out history.
An example of this working in real life? Take any country that stopped existing after it was conquered by another or was transformed by its conqueror. I am sure even Europe can supply a plethora of such examples.
How about the US itself? Sure it broke free eventually but northern America was infused with western values and people and now two modern countries exist there.

Of course i am happy to blame Islam cause it is the source of my current problems. Its a problem for the west and needs to be dealt with.
There are no right and wrongs. There are only the victors and the losers who cease to exist.
Moralistic arguments have their place in times of peace, not when war has already started.

>Their preoccupation with moralistic questions and guilt are making them abandon their culture and values.

Europe.

>>321080
Of course not. So what? never have absolutely all citizens or members of a group faught a war.
Its always a part. Sometimes bigger sometimes smaller.

>>321016
>Islam has not changed one bit since 632, it's still the same retarded religion and it always will be
Also just saying, Muslim ppractice is neither monolithic nor frozen in time. You may view certain groups as being in a "600AD"-mindset, but even those groups have made adaptations of some kinds.

>>321089
>Except that Islam directly promotes all kinds of dangerous shit. Everything from pedophilia, slavery and rape to murder and holy war.
All of your posts have indicated you think Islam = Muslim behavior, which is not the case.

Also, so you believe Christianity is different than Islam in such regards?

>How can muslim behavior possibly change when the best muslims one can be is to live like Mohammed?
Either they have a different understanding of Muhammad's alleged intents and beliefs (example. "Oh, a traditional view says Muhammad killed the guy for disbelieving. No, that's mistaken, the guy was killed for instigating conflicts. That was the reason for him being killed. This is not a precedent for Muslims to kill just for disbelief" and/or they start viewing certain actions as time-specific or allowances only the prophet was allowed to do.

File: 1400898873573.jpg (56KB, 600x532px) Image search: [Google]

56KB, 600x532px

Islam makes more sense than Christianity desu

>>321136

Islam is Islam

>muh different understanding

Sure, still doesn't change the fact of what the Islamic books say or the fact that there's a fuckton of people who have understandings that are a direct threat to humanity.

>>320600
Not you, but my biggest issue with Christianity is theologically - especially with the trinity concept

>>321121

>Colonialism was not decisive enough, yes. Its aim was to economically exploit, not conquer.
>You either achieve a decisive victory or you are forced to fight again.

Africa still gives more to the western world in loan repayments than it gets in charity; but people still believe that the western world sends money to Africa. That's a pretty decisive victory.

>An example of this working in real life? Take any country that stopped existing after it was conquered by another or was transformed by its conqueror. I am sure even Europe can supply a plethora of such examples.

I need an example of the kind of country you were talking about earlier;

>>They needed to conquer these nations and make them into western nations in the fullest sense.

I hate to do your job for you, but I can think of Japan, and nowhere else. And even then Japan did most of the work itself, countries in Asia that were colonized are nowhere near Japan in development.

>How about the US itself? Sure it broke free eventually but northern America was infused with western values and people and now two modern countries exist there.

Nope. The United States was not brought into the western world, the western world expanded into North America, expelling and killing rather than assimilating the natives.

>Of course i am happy to blame Islam cause it is the source of my current problems. Its a problem for the west and needs to be dealt with.
>There are no right and wrongs. There are only the victors and the losers who cease to exist.
>Moralistic arguments have their place in times of peace, not when war has already started.

War with the individuals who plan, enact, and support terrorist attacks, yes, if you want to call a police action a war; but surely not war on all Muslims?

>Europe.

This is not happening in Europe. That's ridiculous. Culture changes over time.

>>321173
I mean to cite >>321164, not what I did

>>321131

So which Muslims are you at war with, then?

No Muslim country recognized by the UN has declared war on us, have they?

>>320670
Yeah, pretty much. European militaries, intelligence agencies, etc. are all head-and-shoulders above anything in the middle east except Israel so if we just plain stopped fussing over the means to the end we'd be in an excellent position.

>>320681
>If you find the right guys wouldn't it make more sense to try them in court?
No, they don't get to put on a dog-and-pony show. They get the Osama treatment - death followed by a covert disposal in an unannounced location and an announcement after the fact.

>And you're saying that you're willing to kill millions of Muslims who had nothing to do with anti-Western actions; your theory seems to be that this will reduce anti-Western sentiment.
I don't think it will reduce it, I think it will deracinate it. Either the various and sundry Islamic groups in the middle east cease hostilities or we'll give them nowhere to hide.

>Yet a handful of Westerners being killed by Muslims is enough for you to declare permanent genocidal war on them?
It's only incidentally genocidal and even then not totally so; it's about their behavior and the religion at the crux of it.

>>320686
Yep. Even without NBC options, the actions of the west have involved a small portion of their available military resources and in many cases those resources have been used extremely inefficiently.

>>320689
>Every time we bomb the shit out of the middle east we create an atmosphere where well armed radicals can usurp power. If you want to stop terrorism you need a stable government, not a fucking bombing campaign.
Oh, I agree. Bombing the government instead of the terrorists is a fucking awful idea because tyranny and tribalism are the only paradigms that have ever brought the region any semblance of order. But as things stand now, after the massive clusterfuck of the last 14 years, there really aren't any regional powers who can do what needs to be done with ISIS on the door stop. Get muslims out of Europe and then tend to the foreign situation.

>>321338
Those are some mighty fine edges there lad.