I didn't mean to pick it, I honestly misunderstood DScott's comment about kicking ass. But as long as people want to argue, I'm game.

I'm certain that our government -- an ally of Israel -- and the substantially Jewish media have not tried very hard to present the Muslim perspective, and that's why I try to address it here. I personally haven't made my mind up as to who's right or wrong, because I'm still trying to figure out what's going on.

Kick ass brother!! Make your points, then E&E.

Very well.
Look at any of the many fundamentalist Universities found here in our country.  NONE of them have research facilities that are worth a damn. NONE of them push the envelope in ANY field.  ZERO innovation.
This is true of Muslim Fundamentalist schools, throughout the world, too.

Most of the study at these schools is devoted to scripture, be it Biblical, Talmudic, or the Koran.
It's a very introverted way of expanding one's knowledge.

In most institutes of higher learning, once you begin work on a terminal degree (Doctorate, Phd, etc.), you must do something that no one has done before.
Your studies, or experiments must break ground.

There is no answer key in this type of study, no one to check anything other than your method.
This just isn't so at Fundamentalist Schools.

You asked, I answered.

That's a good point, although the Arabs didn't really invent algebra.  As in many other cases, they took the innovations of other civilizations and improved upon them.

[url]http://www.mnsfld.edu/~rwalker/Algebra.html[/url]

Don't knock the Arab accomplishments of the past.
There's no point.
They WERE quite a source of knowledge and innovation.

Lately, however, and for the forseeable future....

Nothing but ignorance.
They are either oppressed by corrupt dictators, or smothered by Islamic fanatics.
The only Arab thinkers that are contributing anything of value to the world, are in the WEST.

All-in-all [b]Blaze[/b], you seem to have a severe case of self-induced denial, blindness, ignorance of history, ethical confusion, lack of moral clarity and a simmering dislike of America.

Perfect molding clay to become a "useful idiot" for the anti-American destroyers like those who marched on Washington last weekend.

Ha! If you only had a brain!

Where did I EVER say that Muslim = Terrorist??

What I DO repeatedly say is that the "MoslemMaggots" are parasites on humanity and destroyers of Western Civilization.

Clean the straw out of your head [b]Scarecrow[/b] and pay attention! Let me give you MY quick definition of MY terms:

[b]MoslemMaggots[/b] = The filthy, medieval-minded, terrorist-supporting, infanticidal, fanatical Moslems who are hell-bent on destroying Israel and America. e.g. Yassar A'Rat, Saddam, Usama, Omar, Hamas, Al-Qaeda, the sheiks and all those who run most Muslim nations together with all those hordes of Palestinian and Arab vermin who strap bombs to their own children.

Now here's the tricky part... not ALL Muslims fall under this definition... see??
So don't try to do my talking for me - you're not that perceptive.

Finally, neither you [b]Scarecrow[/b] nor [b]Blaze[/b] has yet to address my original question:

WTF has the Muslim world contributed to humanity in the last 500 years????

Mac, don't waste so much energy.
Scarecrow is young, Canadian teenager.

If you weren't online, would you engage in such a debate with a teenager?

By asking questions and listening to the answers, I'm trying to overcome my ignorance of history.

Instead of slamming me, why don't you enlighten an idiot (me) by answering the questions I've posed on this thread?

According to your definition, bin Laden is not a MoslemMaggot. According to you, a MoslemMaggot is hell-bent on destroying America, whereas bin Laden would rather "live and let live" ([url]www.ar15.com/forums/topic.html?id=111192&page=1[/url]).

Why not? Why shouldn't Mac enlighten a teenager?

Wow Blaze, you are a warped piece of shit.  If you honestly believe that somehow my friends were "casualties of war" then you obviously do not understand the meaning of war.  

Bin Laden does not stand for any government or cognizable group of people (Unless you want to argue that ALL Muslim cocksuckers are behind him...), so what right does he have to declare a war?  Are you somehow infering that what he did is allowable?

How is "America in Islam?" Do we sit in their mosques?  Do we blast heavy metal during their prayer times?  No.  We have merely intervened in unjust attempts for countries to rule others.  When the world has made us the police officer, we must rise to the occassion, especially when a call is made to do so.  

Lastly, I would like to say FUCK YOU BOG, you're an incompetant bufoon who has no audience in this country.  We don't care about the muslim perspective anymore.  

I hope I have the opportunity of meeting you one day.  Your reprehensible comments deserve an ass beating of the century.  I'm glad people like Macallen are here to keep your ignorance and verbal vomit in check, he's an assett to this board and this country.  Speaking of which, why don't you take a trip to Iraq or Pakistan and show the Muslim cocksuckers your love for them.  We won't miss you.

fuck you too, boot-licker.

Jingoism like yours will provoke further strikes on our country.

From a historical perspective, the advance of the West came about when Western Europe replaced religious faith with reason. When religion was the cornerstone of European society, Europe was backwards.

Islam still appears to be going through its Dark Age, and this no doubt increases its resentment of the West.

The same America that supplied the Afgans with weapons in their war with the Soviets, the same America that protected Islamic Kuwait, the same America that fed Muslims in Somolia, the same America that protected Muslims in Kosovo!

Certainly, the US is not blameless in its treatment of the Islamic world. But America has done good in the Islamic world, and it has tried to do even more good, and yet America is still seen as the "Great Satan".

If the Saudi government demanded US withdrawel from Saudia Arabia, the US would indeed withdraw. The same is true for other Islamic nations where US forces are stationed, with the exception of a few places, such as Afganistan, where [i]Bin Laden[/i] has made our stay necessary with his attacks.

Ironically, Arafat and the PA seem to want US forces in [i]their[/i] little part of Islam!

The Saudi people want the US out. The Saudi government is not elected, it is a dictatorship.

BOG

This is the second multipage thread punctuated by your pithy "I'm just a little too clever for you to touch me" pot stirring.

For one who claims to be ignorant of history and motivation, your allegiance, or at least perspective, seems clear.

Muslim Fundimentalists call the US the great satan, and Israel the little satan.  Why?  If they are motivated primarily by religeous hatred, why is Israel second fiddle?

Our western, permissive, open democratic society is the antithesis of their view of how the world should be set up.

Make no mistake, they don't want us "out," as an end result.  They want to export their version of radical, oppressive Islam to the entire world.  That "20th hijacker" admitted today to praying forthe destruction of the US and Israel.  

Your comment about the arab world being held back by US installed/supported governing bodies is absurd.  Name a SINGLE arab democracy.  How about those who don't take us aid, say Lybia, Iraq, Iran, etc.  Afghanistan under the non-US supported Taliban was a thriving center of free thought and breakthrough scientific researc, right?  Oh, wait, instead they banned TV.  

There are no such democracies.

Your constant referencing of strategic bombing in WWII both distorts history and reeks of moral relativism.

Nagasaki and Hiroshima were legitimate targets during a declared war.  US military doctrine at the time (sorry, but winners write history, that's just the way it's always been) held that civilian population centers were legitimate strategic targets, both for their effect on morale and production.  The US determined that the Japanese people and the emperor needed a quick lesson in how bad things could get if they carried through their scorched earth policy that had been in place since the beginning of the island-hopping offensive.  

Estimates of 1.5 million US casualties if we were forced to invade the Japanese home islands tells me that the casualties of these 2 single bomb blasts were necessary and not collateral, neither were they murder.

Just because one side claims to be engaged in a "war," does not mean it is so.  Killing during wartime does not equal murder, although murder can be committed during war,witness Lt Calley (although not a declared war).  Murder is killing under specific circumstances defined by law.  Even the commandment says thou shalt not commit murder, it does not say thou shalt not kill.

"War" is a recognized form of intercourse between nations, it is not a convenient shield that a non-government can use to transform murder into something else.

EDITED TO ADD:

Try this for jingoistic:  Talk of our "attitude" bringing on more cowardly attacks against civilians SICKENS ME.

I am not interested in what any snivelling "We should look within ourselves, we must be to blame for these actions" pussy thinks.

Those attacks are on our way of life, not our policies.  They hate us for what we are and what we have, not for what we do.  
 

No, I don't think so. I believe that the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombings helped to bring the war to an end. Had we used other means--invasion or blockade--more Japanese civilians would have died than those who died at Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

Our fire bombing of Tokyo did not help to bring the war to an end (at least in any meaningful way), and it [i]might[/i] be viewed as simply an act of terror. The British attack on Dresden was not expected to have an effect on the outcome of the war. It [i]was[/i] a terror attack. The WTC attack of 9/11 had no military valued, and was also a terror attack. That said, the Brits who launched the terror attack at Dresden at least had good reason to be angry with their enemies, the same can't be said for those who launched the 9/11 attack.

Yes, but you get the government you deserve.

If Bin Laden's gripe is with his government, maybe he should attack it instead of us.  

Is it acceptable to call people "Niggermaggots"? Your bullshit wording is purely incapable of targetting just some radicals that you view within a religion, that simply being because you sir, are a bigot trying to cover up your true beleifs.

How is anyone supposed to hold anything you say for any worth when you are reduced to insulting my screen name? All you ever do to reinforce your views is spiew insults just to draw attention away how [b]WEAK[/b] your position really is.

Why anyone listens to a individual who equates the actions of a few as the wrong doings of the whole supprises me to say the least.



More then you will in your whole lifetime.

Don't Muslims argue America is an aggressive opponent? Didn't Muslims declare war on America years prior to the 9-11 strike? How was 9-11 any more sneaky than Hiroshima? They had been warning us for years.

As if age is so important. Some people far older then me feel the exact same way. And by far age is not a measure of character. To brush me off simply because of age demonstrates the weakness of your position.

I know I'm not clever, but I'm stirring the pot because I'm afraid that if America continues its unthinking aggression, Muslims are going to kill my family in NYC and DC.Look how the money and arms flow. In bin Laden's opinion, "The American people should remember that they pay taxes to their government, they elect their president, their government manufactures arms and gives them to Israel and Israel uses them to massacre Palestinians."If we removed our military from their land, and then they tried to invade us, I would support their destruction.

I thought "muslims" weren't the enemy of the US?  You are stating here that "muslims" have declared war on the US.  Which is it?  If "muslims" have declared war on the US, why hasn't the US declared war on all "muslims"?  The government of the US has gone to great pains to NOT declare war on all "muslims".  How can this be if the US deserves to get what it got?  Wouldn't a country that deserves to have 3000 of its citizens murdered at work be evil enough to declare war on those that have declared war on it?

One quick question for you...do you condemn or condone the actions against the US on 9-11-2001.  This is an easy question.  Condemn or condone.

Since WW2, America has declared zero wars. Do you think all of our military targets since then have been illegitimate?
The Muslims have declared war on us, quite clearly; why don't you accept their declaration?
Got evidence?

If we withdraw from Saudi and the Saudis end up with a bad government, that's fine with me as long as they don't attack us over here.Bin Laden knows that the money is coming from Americans.

One quick question for you...do you condemn or condone the actions against the US on 9-11-2001. This is an easy question. Condemn or condone.
oooh scary...why does everyone think that is important and keeps asking it....anybody who doesn't condemn it is sick and stupid. Ask a better question----try this one who did it?

Blaze-Of-Glory said:

I know I'm not clever, but I'm stirring the pot because I'm afraid that if America continues its unthinking aggression, Muslims are going to kill my family in NYC and DC.



BOG, you are not clever....you are a coward.  This statement is very telling.  You base the positions you espouse on what might happen if we don't appease the bad people.  I'm so scared...someone might kill me or my family.  I will have to take their side so they don't come and get me.  

You are a COWARD through and through.

BOG

You claim "If we removed our military from their land, and then they tried to invade us, I would support their destruction"

This rings hollow for two reasons:

1) They do not have the means to "invade" us in any military sense.  Ergo you'll never have to "support" their destruction.  Note, though, that other than the Aleutians, the last invader of the US was Panch Villa, yet we have been engaged in several moral wars.  Japan did not invade the US before we declared war.  

2)  To the extent that they CAN invade us, they already did. Sept 11 was the extent to which they could project violence on the continental US and they did so.  Why do you not support their destruction?

Also, you make a vague "follow the money" argument to explain how the US indirectly kills "palestinians" through supporting Isreal, then inexplicably leap to the fear that unchecked "US agression" wil lead to the death of your family.

Define the agression we must check, and why should we?    

citadel...i will try to answer part of this...and see if we can agree. I do not agree with any terrorists actions. no matter who or why ok? US Ireland  Kosovo whoever.
But the big bad US has stuck it fingers in a lot of pies and then screwed up the situation...look at south america, kosovo, bosnia, kuwait...Does
any of this justify what we have seen? NO
Does it give someone enough anger to smack the US any way they can? YES

Terrorists supported by OBL.  

I condemn/condone 2001-09-11 no more/less than I condemn/condone the actions against Japan on 1945-08-06 and 1945-08-09. If someone presents me with a logical reason to stake a stronger stance in either direction, I'll follow.

If they do smack the US any way they can, they should NOT be surprised to get smacked back 1000 times as bad.

Just the type of response I would expect from a COWARD.

ok I will invite the heat on this one and run away....terrorists supported by OBL---Within 20 minute on Sept 11...one of the Jewish mouthpieces was on the air screaming the arabs did it..the flight instructor has said nope...those boys couldn't fly a cessna..the military did not intercept...the world trade centers collapsed like a implosion...Osama said nope I didn't do it....numerouis problems with news stories and reports...and all the supposed evidence has only been shown to Tony"twinkletoes" Blair....the list goes on and on...it stinks as bad as Waco
SMacked Back----yep---but all we got was airport security and native troops WHO FAILED TO Capture ubl. aND WHY DID WE HAVE THESE GUYS AFTER ONE OF THEIR OWN?
tO MANY QUESTIONS.....

BOG

Your cleverness is getting ahead of you.

YOU selected WWII, Dresden, Nagasaki et al as examples of the moral equivalent of Sept 11 or blowing up a pizza parlor.  WWII was a declared war.

I never said our actions in undeclared military projections of force are "unjust," in fact I did nto comment on them at all.

"Declaring War" is a term of art in terms of US Contitutional law, complicated by the UNconstitutional "war powers act."

The portion of my reply you quoted answers your question about "muslims" "declaring war."

They cannot, they are neither a government nor a nation, they are a mob, using any definition.

Again, "declaring war" is not as simple as any person without authority saying they are at war.

My "evidence" that they hate us for what we have is YOUR failure to name an action/aggression other than your vague money trail that would incur their wrath.      

Get away from the computer quickly and put your tinfoil hat back on....."THEY" are reading your brain waves through the computer.

Flying a plane is a lot easier than taking off or landing.....they did neither.

I personally know people stationed on the east coast who were supporting planes that were scrambled to intercept the second airliner that hit the 2nd tower.  They were too late.  What is your personal experience here?

So why do you care about them? Let's just ignore them.I see 9-11 as a retaliatory strike, not an initiation of aggression. If we withdraw from Islam and they continue to strike, I will agree that they are unreasonable aggressors and should be dealt as such.

America is aggressive through its military occupation of Saudi Arabia against the popular will of the Saudis.

And yours is what I would expect from a jingoistic boot-licker who exhibits no rational thought.

"So why do you care about them? Let's just ignore them"

I care about them becasue they killed almost 3,000 of my countrymen in office buildings only seven months ago.  Their inability to "invade" us does not render them impotent.  YOU placed the false "If they invade us, then they'll be a threat" hurdle, not me.

"I see 9-11 as a retaliatory strike, not an initiation of aggression. If we withdraw from Islam and they continue to strike, I will agree that they are unreasonable aggressors and should be dealt as such."

Where exactly is "islam?"  Retaliation for what, and don't cite a nebulous nonsensical bit of pablum like "imperialism."   Tell me what they retaliated for.

"America is aggressive through its military occupation of Saudi Arabia against the popular will of the Saudis. "

Tell me when the last Saudi was injured, let alone killed, by a US serviceman serving at the request of the Saudi government.  Do you even know what kind of US presence is in Saudi Arabia now?  Define "occupation."

2)   "....they already did......."
Who is "they ?"


The actual number is hard to come up with but it appears the United States pays Israel about $5 billion per year in direct gifts and loans designed to never be repaid to kill Palestinians.

That $5 billion per year is badly needed to bring our own military back up to par after 8 years of Clinton.

Nothing vague about it: American military occupies Saudi Arabia against the popular will of the Saudis; American-funded killing of Palestinians.

Just so we're clear, is it your position that the act of hijacking civilian airliners and crashing them into office buildings by NONGOVERNMENTAL individuals is the moral equivalent to the aversion of an invasion of Japan by using atomic weapons during wartime?

Saudi Arabia is not a democracy.  The people don't get to decide what happens there, the royals do, and they asked us to place military forces there.

Evidence that the fundimentalists HATE us for what we have?

What was their target, not once, but twice, first in the prior failed truck bomb, then with the airliners?

The World TRADE Center.  They felt that this was the center of our economic and materialistic universe, our Mecca.    

5subslr5-

He won't agree that we need to destroy Bin Laden becasue they can't invade us in the military sense.  How convenient.

Sept 11 was a military invasion, at least as big an invasion as they could muster.  

ra·tion·al   Pronunciation Key  (rsh-nl)
adj.
Having or exercising the ability to reason.
Of sound mind; sane.
Consistent with or based on reason; logical: rational behavior. See Synonyms at logical.

I don't see in the definition of rational any mention of strapping on a bomb and blowing up malls and ice cream shops, murdering old ladies and infants?  Or flying planes into buildings?    So supporting this type of behaviour makes you rational?  Don't think so.

WELL THE JEWS ARE CLEARLY BETTER THIEVES, WHEN IT COME TO STEALING AN IDEA.

So now the money is to kill Palestinians?  Prove it.


I think the Kinks put it so eloquently:

Paranoia, big destroyer