Comments | jordan179: Why Islam So Viciously Hates the West

jordan179

Why Islam So Viciously Hates the West

Jun 28, 2009 13:18

(the following originated as a response to a post of polaris93 (http://polaris93.livejournal.com/1385947.html?view=832987#t832987) which was in return a response to one of my posts. How intellectually incestuous of me ( Read more... )

philosophy, islam, ideology

Leave a comment

Back to all threads

jordan179 July 17 2009, 00:46:15 UTC

One should not criticize the "city on the hill" mentality of another culture/religion without also critically examining the prevalence of the same attitude in one's own native country.

(*examines it*)

Well, for one thing, I notice that we are far less intolerant of other cultures than are the Muslim, especially the Islamist Muslim, countries. We, for instance, protect the right of all people to believe and worship as they deem fit within our borders.

I also note that our own triumphalism is far more based on reality than is the Muslim triumphalism. America is the dominant world Power, and of the other Powers, they are disproportionately Christian. In fact the only Great Powers which are not Christian are China and India ( ... )

Re: Super-Exploitation Through Commerce? the_brad July 22 2009, 18:45:05 UTC

So you believe that a different strategy was applied by the West to East Asia than to Africa

It would be foolish to assume that all strategies of any sort are applicable to all circumstances. You're the one going off trying to attack my statements for something more than they are:

and that it was the difference in this strategy rather than differences in the behavior of the locals that explain the fact that East Asia is today rich, and Africa poor?

Bomb Bomb Bomb jordan179 July 21 2009, 16:03:19 UTC

It seems especially bizarre that you imagine that the Muslims are offended by aerial warfare ("bombs") and thus become more hostile toward us, especially since Muslim Powers have cheerfully used air attacks when avaialble. Did you perhaps mean something else by "bombs," such as "military might in general?" If so, then Muslim Powers have also cheerfully used military might when available, and indeed glorified it to an extent that the West has not done since World War II.

Are you kidding? Muslims are not so much offended by the concept of a bomb as they are a bomb blowing up their home. If your home were blown up, would you be upset that it were from an aerial bomb as opposed to being crushed by a tank?

I direct you to your original statement:

I am simply suggesting that they dislike our bombs more than our god. If the Muslim world weren't facing our bombs, their opinion on our god may be different.which certainly sounded as if you were talking about aerial warfare in particular. The more normal formulation for military might in ( ... )

Re: Bomb Bomb Bomb the_brad July 21 2009, 20:50:49 UTC

Bombs were invented before aerial warfare, by the way.

Re: Bomb Bomb Bomb jordan179 July 22 2009, 00:26:39 UTC

Yes, I'm quite aware of this. Nevertheless, I think it's rather odd that you focus on the image of Western bombs killing civilians in this war, when the Western Powers carefully avoid killing civilians and the Islamofascists deliberately target civilians.

Re: Bomb Bomb Bomb the_brad July 22 2009, 07:50:50 UTC

Which doesn't make up for the fact that our attacks are far more effective. Sample numbers: 1% of 10,000 is a lot more than 1% of 100. Further, in my opinion, the "careful targeting" isn't so careful. Example: Israel "carefully" avoiding killing civilians in Gaza resulted in a 100:1 death ratio in Operation Cast Lead. Stay Classy, Israel.

Re: Bomb Bomb Bomb jordan179 July 22 2009, 12:13:00 UTC

Wait ... you expect us to be ashamed of the fact that our attacks are more effective than theirs?

Re: Bomb Bomb Bomb jordan179 July 22 2009, 12:14:46 UTC

Further, in my opinion, the "careful targeting" isn't so careful. Example: Israel "carefully" avoiding killing civilians in Gaza resulted in a 100:1 death ratio in Operation Cast Lead. Stay Classy, Israel.

The vast majority of those the Israelis killed in Cast Lead were Hamas fighters, not civilians. Which does strike me as "classy" -- are you saying that Israel should have striven to be less effective in battle?

Re: Bomb Bomb Bomb the_brad July 22 2009, 18:48:33 UTC

Re: Bomb Bomb Bomb jordan179 July 23 2009, 00:35:19 UTC

Oh wow. So if there were a sniper in a building in Washington D.C. taking pot shots at people walking home from work, would you support bombing the building? Because that is the level of precision you're talking about. Sure it gets the job done, but at a massively high, violent cost.

The difference is that Washington D.C. is not a war zone. One (rightly) uses higher levels of force to deal with enemies in war than one does to deal with criminals in civil life.

Re: Bomb Bomb Bomb the_brad July 23 2009, 23:37:01 UTC

Gaza is not technically a war zone. This implies there are two military powers duking it out, and that just isn't the case. Palestine lacks a standing army or even a proper defense force. Israel is attacking the entire region to collectively punish the occasionally violent militant wing of Hamas, a political party. But the conditions on the ground are war zone ghetto. So basically, it gets war zone status and the higher levels of force because the war zone treatment makes it into a war zone. This is circular logic.

Re: Bomb Bomb Bomb jordan179 July 24 2009, 09:45:42 UTC

Gaza became a war zone because Hamas, the rulers of the Gaza Strip, decided to launch rockets against Israel. It "gets war zone status and the higher levels of force" because Hamas started a war against Israel. This is not circular logic, it is quite normal logic -- start a war, and it may come home to you.

Re: Bomb Bomb Bomb the_brad July 22 2009, 18:51:10 UTC

In such scenarios where the "terrorists" can't be differentiated from regular people, social engineering, psyops, and prevention must be used, as opposed to traditional military tactics. Otherwise, you end up with massive civilian casualties and a people that will never align with you.

Re: Bomb Bomb Bomb jordan179 July 23 2009, 00:36:01 UTC

jordan179 July 21 2009, 18:22:40 UTC

"We" as individual Americans are indeed a tolerant people, but that is not what I am talking about. It is the collective "we" as the country of the United States of America which is not tolerant.

No, the "collective 'we'" of the United States of America in particular, and of the West in general, is notably more tolerant than the "collective 'we'" of just about any Muslim Power you care to name. America specifically enshrines the rights of freedom of speech and to worship in her Constitution; so do most Western Powers. Pretty much every Muslim country, in contrast, ascribes a special legal status to Islam, if it does not outright prohibit or make legally very difficult the practice of all other religions.

the_brad July 21 2009, 20:52:38 UTC

Your definition of tolerance is very narrow, indeed.

Back to all threads