Why Muslims are a dangerous people?!

 

Why did you ignore what started this problem with Iran?  Come on, this is not an honest debate at all, because it has excluded so much infiormation, vital to the discussion, which is now about Iran, not the whole of Islam.  

 

Okay, the number of executions in Iran have increased.  The increase of exclusions is not caused by Islam, nor the Koran, but political conflict and people such as yourself who demand their leaders prove their strength.  Perhaps Obama should take up the practice of increasing executions to prove his strength to please those who call him weak?   Be clear about what is happening here.  It is politics and human begins demanding their leaders show signs of strength during this time of political conflict that is causing the problem.  I use this validation of increased executions to support my argument that is politics and humans demanding leaders show signs of sthrenth and not Islam causing the problem.

 

 

 

 

Great, except you totally missed all the history and politics involved, just as Cyrus has.   This is a history forum.  Where is the history?   Without it, there is nothing intellectual about this discussion.

 

How do I address this?  What is happening in Iran is about politics, not religion.  If you all want to discuss religion and what people believe, that should be in a theology forum.   What is happening here is over whelming ignorance of the history of politics of today's reality, and Satan himself could do a better job of bring hell to earth. 

 

You should not even be having the discussion in this thread without the history of the British Empire and how countries fought to throw off British control.  Then the very good relationship with Iran based on the Iranian belief that the US was liberating Iran from British control, and how that went sour when it became clear the US was not liberating Iran, but trying to move in and take over where Britian left off.   The US has used the CIA to instigate revolts in several countries, to then put their chosen leaders in power, and this is because of the conflict between communism and capitalism.  This includes arming Sadam to fight a war with Iran.  Reagan slashed domestic budgets and poured money into military spending, including granting arms to mid east countries, which destablized the mid east and escallated not only the likelihood of war, but also the destruction of war. 

 

The US put a brutal man in power in Iran, and unlike the Iraquis, the Iranians revolted against him.  They were able to do this because the religious leadership was strong enough to unite the people.  Now the Iranians are divided on if the Shaw was weak and didn't use enough force to suppress opposition, or if his brutality and use of force caused the opposition?   But there is no doubt it was the US that put him in power and that the US did this because of capitalist, oil interest and the competition with the USSR to control this region. 

 

We can not over look the importance of the conflict between the USSR and the US in the conflicts in the whole region.  This is a history forum, and the discussion here should be full of history.  Okay, we have major players to discuss, Britian, the USSR and the US.  We could even go further back to the Bagdhdad  Railroad and WWI and WWII.   For sure, the focus should be on history.  Without the history, what is happening here is absolutely no different than what happens in a Muslim terrorist camp.  If you want to know why people do this, look at yourself. 

 

99% of of those attacks are because of reactions or revenge based on politics, where in the quran it says to blow up inocent people? 

 

The US and Iran were on good terms and we would not be having this discussion if that did not change. 

 

I am very concerned about the statment that Obama is weak, because I know darn well what is happening in Iran is leadership trying to prove they are different from the US and are strong.  Exactly how do strong people behave? 

 

I have been googling things like the death penalty because Cyrus made a good point about the execusions in Iran.  Human rights organizations are concerned about the honor killings and execution of justice in several of the Muslim countries.  Why this is so, is most certianly an intellectual matter, but is perhaps better discussed in the theology forum.  To whom does God give the authority and right to kill another?   Jews and Muslims disagree on this issue, and this may be a better way to approach the argument Cyrus is making.  Seriously we need to flesh out the religious issues from the political ones. 

 

Your thinking here demonstrates two fatal errors, and therefore, demands the defense of Muslims.  First you are over generalizing.  Second you are obmitting vitally important information.  And I think there is a third error, when it is agreed Christians have behaved as badly as Muslims, and you continue to argue as though it is only Muslims who do bad things.  This is almost like double speak, as you agree and then discard the agreement.  These religions are fundamentally the same.  BUT, there are differences worthy of discussion. 

 

The most obvious difference is many Islamic countries are where they were when their holy book was written.  These dudes were still riding camels when President Carter was in office.  All religions tend to hold people back, including Christianity.  We love our Amish who reject modern technology.   What makes the really big difference in progress or lack of it, is commerce.  At any time history, any place in the world, the city that was the hub of commerce, advanced far beyond the others.  We seriously blew our relationship with Baghdad, because Baghdad was the gateway between east and west for centuries, and therefore was advanced.  Saudi Arabia didn't advance until the oil money began flowing, and it has one of the worst human right records, and is most likely behind some of the worst terrorist acts, but their monarchy made a deal with the US and will be protected.  This is the kind of problem the US created in several coutries.   My God man, Saudi Arabia has had to leap for 600 AD to 2000 AD in 50 years.  Religion is only a small part of the problem.  The big problem is oil is the only resource many of these countries have, so they got left behind.  Afghanstan is totally lift behind.  We might as well be dealing with people on a different planet.  We would have absolutely no interest in Afghanstan, and therefore, they would know nothing about us, and we would nothing about them, if we didn't want this land for oil pipe lines, and if we had not gotten involved by giving Laden weapons and training, when the USSR was trying to subdue these people.

 

Cyrus, you obviously love history.  How did people live in 600 AD when Mohammed began preaching?   Forget the religion and think history.  We are dealing with people whose consciousness is the same as it was in 600 AD.  Remember the huge tsummi that killed a lot of people?  There is an island in this region untouched by anything near modern civilizations.  With good intentions we checked on the well fare of these people from a plane, and the natives threw rocks at the plane.  These primitive people reacted with the instincts of alligators.   These people got left back in time.  So did much of the Islamic world get left back in time.   Then our oil companies went in and took advantage of them.  This results in them uniting into OPEC, which includes non Muslim countries, and anti US countires.  I hate to do this, but there is no avoiding it, this boils down to the conflict between communist and capitalist countries, which is very much a conflict between rich and poor countries.  Have you heard the term "Ugly American"?   To be fair Cyrus, the problem is not one sided.  It is not just religion.  When we over generalize and omit information, we effectively create a lie, and that is what is wrong with this thread.