Expansionist States of Today

What about expansion in the space? I guess The US, Russia, The EU, Japan and China come at the top..

Originally posted by Josip #2 Islam. While not a state in itself, muslims first and foremost declare themselves as "muslims" and only after that as citizens of some states (unlike everyone else, more or less). The "panislamic state" is spreading fast via hyperpopulation (check demographics of Kosovo, last 50yrs), and once it reaches majority, the exodus of non-islamic population starts and the country becomes islamic republic. Panislamic state has a perfect strategy to counter military superior West, it uses western tools to achieve their goal (=democracy, and 'lets tolerate all'). Unlike other religions, Islam is the only religion (that i know of) which was founded by an imperialistic charismatic figgure (a conquerer, pillager of caravans etc), and the only that i know of, which clearly states that everyone should be offered to convert to Islam or die. Unlike the organized expansionist states such as USA for instance, the "panislamic state" is passive and at first seems more chaotic and divided, but is winning over the years.

I have by no means an intention to insult forum members, and i will abide to the rules of the forum, but if you expect of me to defend nazism or islam, im sorry, I'd rather not say anything then.

Originally posted by TheDiplomat Your knowledge on Islam bases on those sources that reinforce Islamophobia in the societies of European countries as well as in the United States.

Exactly. Since my opinion of islam is bad, it does reinforce islamophobia. My opinion of communism is also bad, and it reinforces islamophobia. My opinion of nazism is bad, and it reinforces naziphobia. My opinion of racism is bad, and it reinforces racisophobia. My opinion of Bush is bad, and it reinforces bushophobia.

So what are you trying to say? That no one should have any phobias and we should accept everything equally, or that phobias are OK if justifed? If you think my islamophobia is not OK because it's not justified, then we can debate about it, if im willing because really, I'd rather do something else than debate the obvious, just because some people are too lazy to read stuff.

there are numerous international disputes among these people

That's not questionable. What I'm saying is - that doesn't stop them from the common goal, just as the conflicts between European states didn't stop them from launching crusades.

Calling the Holy Prophet an imperialist also lacks of true intellectuallness. The Prophet did not suggest to colonize or kill non-Muslims

Look, you're from Turkey. So far 100% of muslims I've talked with, said they are not familiar with the biography of Mohammad nor Quran nor Suras, and that stuff they taught them in schools says all the best regarding Mohammad. Therefore, I'm very hesitant to enter any debate here because I have nothing to gain, but I have a lot to lose.


Now, you say that Mohammad did not colonize nor suggest to kill non-muslims? Right? Then how do you explain this:

Quran:
#  "Slay the idolaters wherever you find them. ... lie in ambush everywhere for them. If they repent and take to prayer and render the alms levy, allow them to go their way ..." (9:5)

# "Make war on them until idolatry shall cease and God˘s religion shall
reign supreme" (8:39)

# "Fight against such of those to whom the Scriptures were given ... and do not embrace the true Faith, until they pay tribute out of hand and are
utterly subdued." (9:29)

Sura 5:54
"O ye who believe! Take not the Jews and the Christians for your friends
and protectors. They are but friends and protectors to each other. And he
amongst you that turns to them (for friendship) is of them. Verily God
guideth not a people unjust."

4:101 "... For the Unbelievers are unto you open enemies."


Also:
http://humanists.net/alisina/janus_face_of_islam.htm

I hope that your reply will not be along the lines "that translation is invalid" or "you misunderstood it". Im sure you can use real arguments to counter mines. If not, I'll stick to my islamophobia, thanks.

Originally posted by Mughaal i will advise you to brush up on your Islamic Knowledge.

My knowledge of Islam isn't that of someone who has studied it for years and years, but my understanding and knowledge of Islam has so far proved to be better than all muslims I've faced. Therefore If you consider that my knowledge of Islam is insufficient, you can pick a topic and we can debate it. If i have free time and will to do it.

Let me tell you that I am not a scientist on Quran

That's OK because there's not much science in Quran :)

Therefore I do not know each sentence in Quran. But I also know that what you are doing here are ''out of context'' stuff to buttress your opnion.

Aha. Oh wow. So, you don't really know Quran, never really read it as a muslim, but you're 100% that someone else is wrong?

Im having a strange deja vu, because that's exactly the same thing everyone else told me. I had a christian guy telling me that im all wrong with whatever I said, and he never ever read a single line of any muslim text, book, or even article. Fascinating.

If you knew Islam, you would understand that one of the basic teachings of Islam about sins is that if you kill someone, you will be judged as if you killed the whole people in the world when it comes to the Judgement day. So Islam is very clear here..Killing anyone is one of the worst sins to be committed.

If you knew about Islam, you would know that there's a huge difference between muslim and muslim, and muslim and non-muslim.

If you say that islam is very clear here abou that, would you mind:
1) Providing me with a quote from a holy scripture
2) Explaining to me how come it was OK for Mohammad to pillage, torture cruelly people to tell him where they hid the treasure, and kill
3) Explain to me how come the greatest intelectuals of islamic world of today, are OK with killing, and actually promote the killing of infidels
4) Explain to me how, if killing anyone is wrong in Islam, how can it happen that every muslim soldier is yelling Allah'u akbar in battle? Are you saying that 100% of muslims including Mohhamad have a wrong interpretation of islam, and yours is correct?

To begin with, there is no one single state with a Muslim majority that has achieved industrialization and high standarts of living.

That's true. And it has something to do with Islam. You say they have yet to develop themselves, but how is that exactly going to happen if muslims are stuck in the 7th century? This is a history forum, I'm quite sure everyone here knows at which point did Europe start a massive growth and development.

Because Muslims place a very high value on the life after

Agreed. They place very high value on afterlife, which means they have no problems suiciding themselves in this life to earn the 'eternal reward' as they see it.

He only waged wars in the DEFENSE of Islam

Yes, I agree. And considering that every infidel who exists is insulting for islam, Mohammad and other muslims need to wage wars for the defense of islam until everyone else is either exterminated or converted.


Edited by Josip - 14-Jul-2007 at 09:16

islam is a political definable state, Josip? This isnt a thread on religion.

Even after these conflicts, a large population of Serbia (as well as Serbian emigration) still has territorial claims for Bosnia and parts of Croatia. In 1914 it was Serbia who started First World War by assassinating Austrian archduke

AFIAK a Serb pulled the trigger not Serbia.

Originally posted by TheDiplomat have you ever heard of the term ''theology'', which is a field of Social Scienses? It deals with science, and Quran is also a part of scientific research.

I was playing a joke on you.  Hence the smiley at the end.

And what you attempted to prove were defintely ''out of context''... You should have put whole suras in order to be able to prevet the objective guy. But You took one sentence out of the whole context in order to buttress your point of view.

See, you're saying I took it out of context, but you don't even know anything of that part, which means that technically you cannot know if it's out of context or not, you're not able to defend it, and you're still saying I'm wrong.

Considering that I
1) did a quote
2) stated where that can be found
3) provided a link to a nicely argumented website (which i know you dont consider valid but still)

...it's quite disappointing that all you can say is "taken out of context" and that i should "quote the whole Quran". I'm sorry but that's just silly, and I have no desire to go into it.

You also call yourself an "objective guy" while being from Turkey. Considering that you
P1 dont know the context
P2 say it's wrong
---------------------
Conclusion: You're biased.

ps: I didn't take one sentence, I took several sentences.

Your concerns does not earn explanations, because such fabricated presentation of history is hopeless. If you wanna really get deep into the subject, just diversify your sources on history.

So, what you're trying to say is, Quran isn't a relevant source when it comes to a discussion of Islam?

Fabrication of history oh sure, let's see, exact quotes from Quran vs your opinion based on fluff and ignorance, with no arguments or logic. Great. I'll take fabricated history any day.

Slowly or in a middle pace Muslims are developing themselves. Some countries already have high GDP per capitas like UAE- where average GDP per capita is above 35.000$. Muslims are not stuck in 7.century.

We will see when the oil runs out.

So a couple of psychos who committed suicide in the name of religion and killed other people are the true representatives of this religion

That's right. Word by word.

despite the fact that overwhelming majority of Muslims strongly condemn

You will have more luck finding the Loch Ness monster, than finding that overwhelming majority.

Originally posted by HEROI Josip,what is with the demographic change of Kosova in the last 50 years??????

OK let's take last 100yrs for a better picture. Kosovo, a Serbian cradle so to speak, has today 95%+ Albanians. The thing is, no one else really wants to live there anymore.

btw,
http://www.bizforum.org/population-mus.htm
Compare that with natality of the western countries, or the lack thereof (except immigration)

Or are you now suporting Serb propaganda that Kosovans were people-factory

That's not propaganda, that's the truth. Hyperpopulation wins in peace, it beats democracy so easily over the years that's it's not even a joke.

And as for me supporting Serb propaganda, I'm Croat. We have the least reasons in the world to support Serb propaganda, but if they're right I'll say they're right.

Before 50 years ago there wa not a single statistic conducted by indipendent body on population numbers in Kosovo

Austrians and French, for start.

Originally posted by Leonidas islam is a political definable state, Josip? This isnt a thread on religion.

As I said, it's not politically definable state, that's why im closing the discussion from my part, because I have no desire to debate with fanatics who will not accept facts because they dont fit their life philosophy, and if I type them down they'll just say it's wrong and won't look it up themselves because they are afraid that the quotes are not out of context.

AFIAK a Serb pulled the trigger not Serbia.

I don't see the difference. If Serbia had something against it, it would put the guy into jail. Since Serbia refused to extradite the man to Austria-Hungaria, it's a bit silly to say that the whole attack was an accident and Serbia has absolutely nothing to do with it. Next thing you know, someone will say Serbia was actually supporting the Austria and the fact that they didn't want to extradite him is fabricated. The fact that Serbia was behind that is just too much for some people to hear.. i mean, sure it's not Serbia who wanted a piece of Bosnia and had a conflict with Austria... it's all science fiction. I'm new to this forum, but so far it seems no different than other forums so I think i'll just leave. It's full of people who are ready to accept what they want to accept, regardless of all evidence pointing otherwise.

Originally posted by Josip You also call yourself an "objective guy" while being from Turkey. Considering that you P1 dont know the context P2 say it's wrong --------------------- Conclusion: You're biased. ps: I didn't take one sentence, I took several sentences.

You are wasting your time with this guy.

These words are enough to show his aim. As we all know, There is not relation between nazism and islam but he used two in one sentence. (Lets not forget, There was not any reason to use nazism word too)

no my friend, I just dont want waste my time with your schizophrenic ideas like this.

Originally posted by TheDiplomat He only waged wars in the DEFENSE of Islam.

Don't get me wrong. I don't think Mohammed was more evil than any other medieval ruler, but this statement is simply false.