Cautious optimism over Iranian nuclear deal as talks resume in Geneva

What an odd question.

I can only answer in the affirmative that we in the U.S. would choose to advance the interests of those who have a shared interest in democratic freedoms and values.

If American/Israeli/Western values like freedom, justice, and plurality are not excellent and admirable, then which values are? The indiscriminate leveling blade of communism? The crippling fascism and social fragmentation of islamism? The brutal, medieval sharia law of Islam?

“Shirley”, you’re not suggesting that we should promote values such as hate, misogyny, fascism, religious intolerance, etc., such as we see in The Islam.
The most conspicuous shared value between Israeli and US elites would seem to be a willingness to profit from the mass murder, maiming, and displacement of millions of innocent Muslims over that past sixty five years. If that's something "Shirley" respects, maybe she's Jewish?

Hysterical exaggeration doesn’t help your argument. I think you find it convenient to ignore the benefits of Western civilization while heaping praise on the poor oppressed moslems™ who are very adept at creating their own social, political and ethical disasters.

Are you really attempting to suggest that before the existence of modern Israel, or America, Moslems lived in placid harmony with their various neighbors throughout history? Because that simply isn't true. Directly after Muhammad's (swish) death, the Khalifah, Abu Bakr invaded Syria. Then came the complete devastation of the area between Gaza and Caesarea. In Jerusalem, the churches were burned to the ground (and the Temple Mount was stolen from the Jews). Thousands of peasants were massacred. The same happened in Mesopotamia. Again later in India, in Egypt, Algeria, and Persia. Islam has always been expansionist, violent, and xenophobic. It has always been spread by the sword, and through rapine.
Muslims can't hold a candle (or menorah) when it comes to swords and rape. For more than 1000 years the west has been plundering and raping Muslim lands while its apologists fixated on Muslim crimes.

"In classes on Western Civilization, students are seldom told that it is a predatory culture. The Greeks were constantly at war, if not with the Persians, with each other. Alexander was an early empire builder.

"So too were the Romans. Portugal and Spain were early predators of the Americas. Then came England, Holland, and France. We are all familiar with the predative nature of the Vikings.

"The Italians and Germans tried to colonize Africa. And when these nations were not trying to colonize the world, they were often at war with one another.

"Western Civilization is bellicose, and it has been at war with Islam at least since the Crusades which began in 1099 when the Holy Roman Empire sent armies to 'free the Holy Land from the infidel' and take control of trade routes to the Far East.

"The invading Christians created several Christian states, and the Muslims in the region vowed to wage holy war (jihad) to regain control. (Sounds familiar, doesn’t it?)"


Doesn't it?

Israel ? Just Another Hapless British Colony | Global Research
 
Someone needs to ask Frau Sherri if she really believes she's gaining any support for her cause by spewing such vile hatred. Does anyone notice that none of the posters on her side will touch her vile posts except avowed Nazis?

 
Last edited by a moderator:
"...Western Civilization ... has been at war with Islam at least since the Crusades which began in 1099 when the Holy Roman Empire sent armies to 'free the Holy Land from the infidel' and take control of trade routes to the Far East..."
No, Western Civilization has been at war with with Islam since the Muslims invaded and conquered the Levant - including the province of Palestine-Judea - during the 634-636 timeframe and seized it by force-of-arms from the Eastern Roman (Byzantine) Empire.

After centuries of encroachment by Islam into the territories of the Eastern Empire and after a series of particularly onerous outrages upon Christian churches and shrines and pilgrimage routes through the regions that would later become modern-day Turkey and Syria and Lebanon and Israel, the Eastern Roman (Byzantine) Emperor appealed to the Roman Catholic Pope in 1095, to try to convince the kings of Western Europe, to furnish large numbers of troops for an expedition in support of the Byzantine Imperial Army and Navy.

The Pope, in hopes of healing the recent (1000 A.D.) split or 'schism' between the Greek Orthodox Church and the Roman Catholic Church, assented to the request, and, through a personal tour and a slick marketing campaign, recruited large numbers of both amateurs and professional soldiers to staff multiple expeditionary forces to aid the Eastern Romans.

These Western forces included large contingents from France (including at that time much of modern-day Belgium and the Netherlands [Holland]), England, Germany-Austria (the Holy Roman Empire), various Italian kingdoms, Byzantine Imperial forces and Christian-Armenian (modern-day Turkey) forces; aligned against a similar number of Muslim sects and national or regional contingents.

But the First Crusade (1096-1099) would not have been necessary had the Muslims kept their asses out of the Levant and Palestine-Judea in the first place, 300-400 years before, and had they not been encroaching still further upon Byzantine territory during those intervening centuries.

The Crusades were a reaction to MUSLIM aggression, and NOT the other way aorund.

Just to be clear.

The Eastern Roman (Byzantine) Empire did not attack Muhammed and his successors (caliphs).

Muhammed and his caliphs attacked the Byzantine Empire.

Thereby setting the stage for the Crusades, years later.

Muslims.

Not Westerners.

Muslims.
 
Last edited:
Last edited by a moderator:
Last edited by a moderator:

Forum List

Back
Top