If you hate Islam but supported Iraq......

[del]

Are you buying into rdean's conspiracy theory that we deliberately set up a theocracy in Iraq?

Even if that is true, religions are not the same as people, something most lefties have trouble understanding.

excellent non answer.

He posited a condition that is impossible for the universe to sustain, was I supposed to assume that he was being serious and treat his idiocy with respect?

i assume you have some type of reading disabilityy that doesn't allow you to process information in the written form or you're completely intellectually dishonest. he posited no such condition, despite your insistence to the contrary. even after he told you directly that he was not referring to an islamic theocracy, you continue to insist he did.

Are you buying into rdean's conspiracy theory that we deliberately set up a theocracy in Iraq?

Even if that is true, religions are not the same as people, something most lefties have trouble understanding.

Uh no.

Did you bother to read the OP?

I am speaking directly to the people who think that there is no such thing as a "moderate Muslim".

and yet you come back with this smarmy little tidbit.

Really? I must have missed the memo that changed that.

You mucked up your thread when you insisted that the goals of the war were to set up an Islamic theocracy. Since that was never a goal I get to mock you for you trying to rewrite history.

As for the rest, unless you can point to anywhere I said anything about there being no moderate Muslims, or where I said setting up those non existent moderate Mulims in power would help me in any way shape or form, I still get to mock you for trying to read my mind and failing. That also leaves me free to mock you, and muck up your thread.

Additionally, my guess is you will find that the set of people who think there are no moderate Muslims and the set of people who think setting up a Muslim government in Iraq do not overlap. That again leaves me free to mock you and muck up your thread because it is not based on reality. It is not my fault you totally fail at understanding that people are different simple because they disagree with your politics. This shows that you, personally, are weak minded and shallow, and is not a reflection on those who disagree with you.

I get to muck up your thread because you did not ask a question, you attempted to posit a paradox, and the universe does not permit paradoxes.

i'll give you credit for being able to kick the living shit out of your strawman, but for you to cast aspersions on anyone's intellectual capacity, including rdean and truthmatters, is laughable.

you are certainly a windbag, though.

too bad you're too much of a pussy to actually answer the question as asked.

have a most pleasant evening.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Irony are the right wingers who "ASSUME" that Christianity is more "gentle" and "loving" than Islam.

The truth is the western nations were able to throw off the oppressive yolk of religious righteousness and keep it off.

Some religious leaders in this country said that Katrina and 9/11 were judgments sent by God for allowing gays and feminists. Westerners have had a few hundred years of practice laughing at such nonsense, but suppose they hadn't. Republicans would be going after gays and feminists worse than they do going after the Hispanics.

Cursed be he who does the Lords work remissly, cursed he who holds back his sword from blood. Jeremiah 48:10 NAB

(Jesus speaking) "Do not think that I have come to bring peace upon earth. I have come to bring not peace but the sword. For I have come to set a man 'against his father, a daughter against her mother, and a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law; and one's enemies will be those of his household'". Matthew 10:34-36 NAB

This is rich. The king of idiocy is now trying to redefine irony.

Aren't you the guy that is complaining because those religious bigot Republicans set up a Constitutional Islamic theocracy.

Than you go and try and quote scripture to prove your point.

 

[Sky Dancer]

How do you reconcile the fact that you supported a war that relied largely on the notion that we could empower a moderate faction of a religion that you think is incapable of having a moderate faction?

Just curious. It's a question I have often asked warhawk Islamophobes and have never really gotten a good answer.

More succinctly: If you think Islam embraces an inherently evil doctrine that can not be refined, how could you support nation building in an Islamic country?

For those who opposed the war: If you are in favor of liberty and equal rights how do you square that with opposing regimes that suppress liberty and represent the epitome in oppression and favoritism? How can you support human rights in Darfur but not in Baghdad?

The Left are the biggest fucking hypocrites ever to walk the planet.

it's okay for pro-choice groups to bash christians for having the audacity to support all life, yet when it comes to islam's treatment of women....crickets...

Do you call a debate on abortion Christian bashing? Christians aren't the only ones to support life.

 

[ConHog]

For those who opposed the war: If you are in favor of liberty and equal rights how do you square that with opposing regimes that suppress liberty and represent the epitome in oppression and favoritism? How can you support human rights in Darfur but not in Baghdad?

The Left are the biggest fucking hypocrites ever to walk the planet.

it's okay for pro-choice groups to bash christians for having the audacity to support all life, yet when it comes to islam's treatment of women....crickets...

Do you call a debate on abortion Christian bashing? Christians aren't the only ones to support life.

While I acknowledge what you are saying Sky, and certainly Christians don't own a monopoly on morality, you have to admit that abortion threads do invariably turn into Christian bashes.

 

[Kalam]

i know you didn't say that. i was combining your comment about converting them to christianity with the common theme that we went to war with iraq to control their oil.

Forgive me for misunderstanding you... I've been having trouble with that recently.

i just have a hard time seeing how the US "getting rid of your dictator and allowing you to vote for you next president" is such a horrible thing. and yes, i will admit that's me just being an arrogant american. i don't know, maybe in the islamic world, saddam hussein's iraq is a model of freedom. or iran is a beacon of freedom.
i really have to plead ignorance. you obviously know more than i do. what is the model of freedom in the muslim world?

All non-Islamic styles of governance - including Saddam Hussein's secularism and Iran's Shi'ite despotism - are manifestations of kufr, disbelief. No "Muslim" government currently in existence has properly implemented Shari'ah, so it's our duty to dismantle them all and replace them with a society that is distinctively and indisputably Islamic. Our models of freedom are the sources of our beliefs and laws - the Qur'an and the teachings of Muhammad, the Messenger of God (SAWS).

it seems obvious, based on the treatment of women, we have different ideas of what freedom means.

Perhaps. It should be noted that Islam as it was originally revealed bears little resemblance to today's so-called Muslim world. In Muhammad's time, women were warriors, teachers, commanders, and active participants in the Muslim community; not chattel as they often are today.

and kalam, i know what i wrote came off as sarcastic, but it's not meant to be. i might be very naive to think that i have a lot of freedoms here, and i think it would be better if more islamic countries shared those same freedoms. i think if that happened, the world would be safer. it would also mean islam would have less of a grip over its people (much like christianity has lost influence in the western world)

Islam and Christianity are fundamentally different. Islam is not simply a religion in the sense that Christianity and Judaism are religions; it's a comprehensive system that provides structure and guidance for every aspect of a Muslim's life should he or she choose to adhere to it. I think it would be better if the rest of the world could experience the miracle of Islam as well, but I realize that imposing this way of life on others would only create enmity.

 

[hipeter924]

i know you didn't say that. i was combining your comment about converting them to christianity with the common theme that we went to war with iraq to control their oil.

Forgive me for misunderstanding you... I've been having trouble with that recently.

i just have a hard time seeing how the US "getting rid of your dictator and allowing you to vote for you next president" is such a horrible thing. and yes, i will admit that's me just being an arrogant american. i don't know, maybe in the islamic world, saddam hussein's iraq is a model of freedom. or iran is a beacon of freedom.
i really have to plead ignorance. you obviously know more than i do. what is the model of freedom in the muslim world?

All non-Islamic styles of governance - including Saddam Hussein's secularism and Iran's Shi'ite despotism - are manifestations of kufr, disbelief. No "Muslim" government currently in existence has properly implemented Shari'ah, so it's our duty to dismantle them all and replace them with a society that is distinctively and indisputably Islamic. Our models of freedom are the sources of our beliefs and laws - the Qur'an and the teachings of Muhammad, the Messenger of God (SAWS).

it seems obvious, based on the treatment of women, we have different ideas of what freedom means.

Perhaps. It should be noted that Islam as it was originally revealed bears little resemblance to today's so-called Muslim world. In Muhammad's time, women were warriors, teachers, commanders, and active participants in the Muslim community; not chattel as they often are today.

and kalam, i know what i wrote came off as sarcastic, but it's not meant to be. i might be very naive to think that i have a lot of freedoms here, and i think it would be better if more islamic countries shared those same freedoms. i think if that happened, the world would be safer. it would also mean islam would have less of a grip over its people (much like christianity has lost influence in the western world)

Islam and Christianity are fundamentally different. Islam is not simply a religion in the sense that Christianity and Judaism are religions; it's a comprehensive system that provides structure and guidance for every aspect of a Muslim's life should he or she choose to adhere to it. I think it would be better if the rest of the world could experience the miracle of Islam as well, but I realize that imposing this way of life on others would only create enmity.

One step at a time. Look on the bright side. Europe is easy pickings as they have their heads up their ass and fall for anything (including Islam):

Here's your mid 21st century birthday present.

 

[Kalam]

i know you didn't say that. i was combining your comment about converting them to christianity with the common theme that we went to war with iraq to control their oil.

Forgive me for misunderstanding you... I've been having trouble with that recently.


All non-Islamic styles of governance - including Saddam Hussein's secularism and Iran's Shi'ite despotism - are manifestations of kufr, disbelief. No "Muslim" government currently in existence has properly implemented Shari'ah, so it's our duty to dismantle them all and replace them with a society that is distinctively and indisputably Islamic. Our models of freedom are the sources of our beliefs and laws - the Qur'an and the teachings of Muhammad, the Messenger of God (SAWS).


Perhaps. It should be noted that Islam as it was originally revealed bears little resemblance to today's so-called Muslim world. In Muhammad's time, women were warriors, teachers, commanders, and active participants in the Muslim community; not chattel as they often are today.

and kalam, i know what i wrote came off as sarcastic, but it's not meant to be. i might be very naive to think that i have a lot of freedoms here, and i think it would be better if more islamic countries shared those same freedoms. i think if that happened, the world would be safer. it would also mean islam would have less of a grip over its people (much like christianity has lost influence in the western world)

Islam and Christianity are fundamentally different. Islam is not simply a religion in the sense that Christianity and Judaism are religions; it's a comprehensive system that provides structure and guidance for every aspect of a Muslim's life should he or she choose to adhere to it. I think it would be better if the rest of the world could experience the miracle of Islam as well, but I realize that imposing this way of life on others would only create enmity.

One step at a time. Look on the bright side. Europe is easy pickings:

Here's your mid 21st century birthday present.

Islam needs to be brought back to the Muslim World before we turn our gaze outward. None of you will want to embrace our way of life until we provide you with a prosperous, concrete example of Islam in action. Forcing it on you prematurely rather than waiting for you to come to it of your own accord would give rise to insincere declarations of faith and undermine the system's viability. No thank you.

 

[ConHog]

Forgive me for misunderstanding you... I've been having trouble with that recently.


All non-Islamic styles of governance - including Saddam Hussein's secularism and Iran's Shi'ite despotism - are manifestations of kufr, disbelief. No "Muslim" government currently in existence has properly implemented Shari'ah, so it's our duty to dismantle them all and replace them with a society that is distinctively and indisputably Islamic. Our models of freedom are the sources of our beliefs and laws - the Qur'an and the teachings of Muhammad, the Messenger of God (SAWS).


Perhaps. It should be noted that Islam as it was originally revealed bears little resemblance to today's so-called Muslim world. In Muhammad's time, women were warriors, teachers, commanders, and active participants in the Muslim community; not chattel as they often are today.


Islam and Christianity are fundamentally different. Islam is not simply a religion in the sense that Christianity and Judaism are religions; it's a comprehensive system that provides structure and guidance for every aspect of a Muslim's life should he or she choose to adhere to it. I think it would be better if the rest of the world could experience the miracle of Islam as well, but I realize that imposing this way of life on others would only create enmity.

One step at a time. Look on the bright side. Europe is easy pickings:

Here's your mid 21st century birthday present.

Islam needs to be brought back to the Muslim World before we turn our gaze outward. None of you will want to embrace our way of life until we provide you with a prosperous, concrete example of Islam in action. Forcing it on you prematurely rather than waiting for you to come to it of your own accord would give rise to insincere declarations of faith and undermine the system's viability. No thank you.

Are some of you even reading what this guy writes. He admits to the religion's core beliefs.

Kalam , have you beaten any "whores" who dared to allow their wrists to be exposed in public lately?

 

[hipeter924]

Forgive me for misunderstanding you... I've been having trouble with that recently.


All non-Islamic styles of governance - including Saddam Hussein's secularism and Iran's Shi'ite despotism - are manifestations of kufr, disbelief. No "Muslim" government currently in existence has properly implemented Shari'ah, so it's our duty to dismantle them all and replace them with a society that is distinctively and indisputably Islamic. Our models of freedom are the sources of our beliefs and laws - the Qur'an and the teachings of Muhammad, the Messenger of God (SAWS).


Perhaps. It should be noted that Islam as it was originally revealed bears little resemblance to today's so-called Muslim world. In Muhammad's time, women were warriors, teachers, commanders, and active participants in the Muslim community; not chattel as they often are today.


Islam and Christianity are fundamentally different. Islam is not simply a religion in the sense that Christianity and Judaism are religions; it's a comprehensive system that provides structure and guidance for every aspect of a Muslim's life should he or she choose to adhere to it. I think it would be better if the rest of the world could experience the miracle of Islam as well, but I realize that imposing this way of life on others would only create enmity.

One step at a time. Look on the bright side. Europe is easy pickings:

Here's your mid 21st century birthday present.

Islam needs to be brought back to the Muslim World before we turn our gaze outward. None of you will want to embrace our way of life until we provide you with a prosperous, concrete example of Islam in action. Forcing it on you prematurely rather than waiting for you to come to it of your own accord would give rise to insincere declarations of faith and undermine the system's viability. No thank you.

Like you did in the middle ages? Or am I forgetting the invasion of Persia, the Byzantine Empire, Spain and the Balkans.

 

[Kalam]

Are some of you even reading what this guy writes. He admits to the religion's core beliefs.

This is me being idealistic. All of this would take centuries to come to fruition, if not longer. My actual concerns are far more immediate.

Kalam , have you beaten any "whores" who dared to allow their wrists to be exposed in public lately?

You can always be counted on to flaunt your ignorance of Islam whenever it's being discussed.

 

[hipeter924]

Are some of you even reading what this guy writes. He admits to the religion's core beliefs.

This is me being idealistic. All of this would take centuries to come to fruition, if not longer. My actual concerns are far more immediate.

Kalam , have you beaten any "whores" who dared to allow their wrists to be exposed in public lately?

You can always be counted on to flaunt your ignorance of Islam whenever it's being discussed.

Like finding an under age girl to f**ck?

 

[ConHog]

Are some of you even reading what this guy writes. He admits to the religion's core beliefs.

This is me being idealistic. All of this would take centuries to come to fruition, if not longer. My actual concerns are far more immediate.

Kalam , have you beaten any "whores" who dared to allow their wrists to be exposed in public lately?

You can always be counted on to flaunt your ignorance of Islam whenever it's being discussed.

Really? I can number all of the "modern" Islamic countries in terms of the treatment of women in the world on one finger.

Do you really argue that Islam isn't designed to treat women as property? yes I know you try to do just that. It's sad.

 

[Kalam]

Like you did in the middle ages?

Yes. I'm assuming you're referring to the Umayyads. With few exceptions (such as Umar ibn 'Abd al-Aziz), the Umayyad "caliphs" were far more concerned with expanding their territorial boundaries than they were with preserving their society's Islamic character, and Islam ultimately suffered because of it.

 

[Kalam]

Really? I can number all of the "modern" Islamic countries in terms of the treatment of women in the world on one finger.

You really don't get it, do you?

Do you really argue that Islam isn't designed to treat women as property? yes I know you try to do just that. It's sad.

Which early Christian or Jewish women helped lay much of their religions' theological and jurisprudential foundations? Which women of yours led armies or fought alongside males in battle? Which debated freely with your early leaders and offered them counsel on a regular basis?

Islam liberated women from their status as property when Jahiliyyah was the law of the land (as it now is once again.) Islam taught women that their beliefs and deeds were equal to those of males in the sight of Allah (SWT.)

 

[ConHog]

Really? I can number all of the "modern" Islamic countries in terms of the treatment of women in the world on one finger.

You really don't get it, do you?

Do you really argue that Islam isn't designed to treat women as property? yes I know you try to do just that. It's sad.

Which early Christian or Jewish women helped lay much of their religions' theological and jurisprudential foundations? Which women of yours led armies or fought alongside males in battle? Which debated freely with your early leaders and offered them counsel on a regular basis?

Women in Christianity - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Islam liberated women from their status as property when Jahiliyyah was the law of the land (as it now is once again.) Islam taught women that their beliefs and deeds were equal to those of males in the sight of Allah (SWT.)

That's odd, your paragraph seems to say that when the people were igornant of Islam (and you claim they are now) women were free, but when they weren't under Jahiliyyah

Jahiliyyah - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

but instead followed Islam , well women weren't so free.


I'm telling yall now, this guy is an extremist. Read what he writes very carefully.

 

[Kalam]

Women in Christianity - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Thanks for the info, but that doesn't quite answer my questions.

That's odd, your paragraph seems to say that when the people were igornant of Islam (and you claim they are now) women were free, but when they weren't under Jahiliyyah

Jahiliyyah - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

but instead followed Islam , well women weren't so free.

Wait... what?

I said that Islam liberated women from Jahiliyyah. During the period of Jahaliyyah, they were considered property. They could be sold, inherited, buried alive during infancy if they were seen as a financial liability... Islam specifically forbade all of those things. The resurgence of some of those practices is a symptom of neo-Jahiliyyah.

I'm telling yall now, this guy is an extremist. Read what he writes very carefully.

I'm glad that you've found my posts worthy of your attention. Don't worry, Pole Rider reported me to the CIA a while back for "promoting jihad."

 

[ConHog]

Women in Christianity - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Thanks for the info, but that doesn't quite answer my questions.

That's odd, your paragraph seems to say that when the people were igornant of Islam (and you claim they are now) women were free, but when they weren't under Jahiliyyah

Jahiliyyah - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

but instead followed Islam , well women weren't so free.

Wait... what?

I said that Islam liberated women from Jahiliyyah. During the period of Jahaliyyah, they were considered property. They could be sold, inherited, buried alive during infancy if they were seen as a financial liability... Islam specifically forbade all of those things. The resurgence of some of those practices is a symptom of neo-Jahiliyyah.

I'm telling yall now, this guy is an extremist. Read what he writes very carefully.

I'm glad that you've found my posts worthy of your attention. Don't worry, Pole Rider reported me to the CIA a while back for "promoting jihad."

jahalia (Arabic: جاهلي&#1577 is an Islamic concept of "ignorance of divine guidance" or "the state of ignorance of the guidance from God"[1] or "Days of Ignorance

so by defintion of your own words when Muslims ignore Islam and the word of Allah women are free, whey they heed Islam women are not free.

You're a freaking nut. But at least you try to be sneaky about it.

 

[theHawk]

How do you reconcile the fact that you supported a war that relied largely on the notion that we could empower a moderate faction of a religion that you think is incapable of having a moderate faction?

Just curious. It's a question I have often asked warhawk Islamophobes and have never really gotten a good answer.

More succinctly: If you think Islam embraces an inherently evil doctrine that can not be refined, how could you support nation building in an Islamic country?

I fully supported overthrowing Saddam Hussein and his regime. Never cared for the whole nation building aspect. I've always said Bush was too liberal in his belief that Islam is a "religion of peace" and that Iraq could be built into some kind of peaceful society.

You are absolutely right, Islam is a religion that is inherently evil, and cannot and does not coexist with Western ideals of freedom and democracy.

What we should of done was carpet bomb the country pillar to post and we would have had far fewer casualities on our side. Of course the liberals would of screamed about it, but as it turns out they did anyway when we did it Bush's politically correct way.

 

[Kalam]

jahalia (Arabic: جاهلي&#1577 is an Islamic concept of "ignorance of divine guidance" or "the state of ignorance of the guidance from God"[1] or "Days of Ignorance

Correct...

so by defintion of your own words when Muslims ignore Islam and the word of Allah women are free, whey they heed Islam women are not free.

I still have absolutely no idea how you arrived at this conclusion. I said the exact opposite; maybe you should read my posts again.

You're a freaking nut. But at least you try to be sneaky about it.

I'm always open about my beliefs. Don't blame your reading comprehension errors on me.

 

[ConHog]

How do you reconcile the fact that you supported a war that relied largely on the notion that we could empower a moderate faction of a religion that you think is incapable of having a moderate faction?

Just curious. It's a question I have often asked warhawk Islamophobes and have never really gotten a good answer.

More succinctly: If you think Islam embraces an inherently evil doctrine that can not be refined, how could you support nation building in an Islamic country?

I fully supported overthrowing Saddam Hussein and his regime. Never cared for the whole nation building aspect. I've always said Bush was too liberal in his belief that Islam is a "religion of peace" and that Iraq could be built into some kind of peaceful society.

You are absolutely right, Islam is a religion that is inherently evil, and cannot and does not coexist with Western ideals of freedom and democracy.

What we should of done was carpet bomb the country pillar to post and we would have had far fewer casualities on our side. Of course the liberals would of screamed about it, but as it turns out they did anyway when we did it Bush's politically correct way.

Incorrect.

What we should have done was sent a SF team in and killed Saadam and he sons and then told Iraq do what you wnat but we'll be back for the next guy if he messes with us.