How to end Islamic fundamentalism

#1
After reading a few posts tonight, one of them reminded me of a program called the West Wing tonight where the fictional Whithouse Cheif of Staff asked

"when will it stop, when the Stars and Stripes flies over Mecca?"

From what I remember, he wasn't being sarcastic or imperialistic, he simply could not see a solution that would please all and was asking a pleading question to a guy which he already knew would not have an answer.

The guy that posted the quote in the first place (Aunty Stella) made some valid points.

Now, I have posted this in the NAAFI and Current Affairs, lets see who comes up with the most workable solution. There's only one thing I ask, if you are going to come out with PC, think it through first to at least 30 years in the future.

Discuss.
 
#2
The thing is, if we play into these fundimentalists hands by 'declaring all out war on Islam', we are fecked, everyones fecked.

99% of muslims despise what the few are doing in the name of their religion. We need to get them on side I believe. With Islam being the largest growth religion, it isnt wise to be on the opposing side as it were. The religion is not the enemy, its the fcukwits who use it as an excuse. Gerry Adams take note.

If we react in a way that alianates almost half the worlds population (IE, burn down every corner shop, curry house and sweat shop- remember the line in The Italian Job were Michael Caine squares up to the Mafiosa and threatens to kick off with all the wops in UK if they attempt to stop their plan to blag the bullion?)

No way Mustafa, we need to reasure the Muslim populace that we are equal to them and will work to weed out the minority of extremists that shame their faith.


Failing that, reinstate a squadron of Vulcans and set course for Mecca, Bradford and Basingstoke (Basingstoke is a 5hithole and deserves it anyway).
 
#3
The only solutions are political - not military. You cannot force a sovereign people to do anything they don't want to, see India, Israel (us), S Africa (Apartheid), Afghanistan (USSR), Vietnam, Somalia, Iraq! (USA). IMHO the marginalisation of Muslim/Islamic fundamentalism can only be achieved by:

1. Solving the Israel/Palestinian issue (simply......)

2. Economic and political emancipation of the majority of Middle East/N African/ Asian peoples (simply...)

3. A recognition by the West that we are responsible for the vast majority of the problems (post WW1/2 partition, support for totalitarian regimes (Saddam, Shah, House of Saud)) and that there are no simple solutions. Even the 'easy' NI problem (only 2 factions and a few million people!) has taken us a couple of generations (since independence) with no final solution in sight.

Hmm best I don't hold my breath!
 
#4
Nice reply Flash. Someone suggested on another thread creating an Arrse party to take on BLiar and I think the twin track approach suggested is eminently sensible. Live in reasonable and calm co-existence with us or we will nuke you.

Works for me.
 
#5
The real problem we face with terrorists, and always have is that we try to apply our PC evolved behavior to deal with people who don't give a fcuk.

Just look at the spams after 9/11. Immediately arrest and hold without charge anyone named Mohammed. Who can blame them When the terrorists are killing your people civil rights take a back seat.

You can't deal with the wider Muslim world in the same way you deal with terrorists. How to find the balance eh?

I'm sure the secret is to engage with the majority of the moderate Muslim world to side with us against them. That will only come when we are prepared to be more accepting of them and their culture.

If that fails then we should nuke em.
 
#6
Y'see, (and this is going to cause trouble, but what can you do?)
I don't believe that it's only a tiny minority of either faith that is to blame.

The same thing has been said of the situation in my home for generations and in my opinion, it's simply not true.

The "combatants" here might be very small in number, but they enjoy if not the active or tacit support of their communities at the very least a state of splendid indifference to their activities as long as they affect only "the other crowd".

When someone is arrested or slotted for whatever they were up to, there is no thought of the crimes that they commited. Simply of Billy or Paddy the postman, barman, wee lad down the road... whatever and a kind of indignation which occasionally spills over into outright rage and further violence, which continues the cycle.

I believe the same to be true of the current global situation.

Honestly, how many of you have shed tears or thought more than twice about any native killed in Iraq or Afghanistan by the deployed Western forces?
 
#7
Every hand that holds an olive branch and a dove should have a feck off big knuckle duster and a flick knife in the other...as my Sunday School teacher used to tell us. He wasnt that daft I suppose.
 
#8
Bad CO said:
3. A recognition by the West that we are responsible for the vast majority of the problems (post WW1/2 partition, support for totalitarian regimes (Saddam, Shah, House of Saud)) and that there are no simple solutions. Even the 'easy' NI problem (only 2 factions and a few million people!) has taken us a couple of generations (since independence) with no final solution in sight.!
That one I find void BCO. It goes back to being an apologist for things committed or carried out by previous generations, how far do you take it?

I do not disagree in any way shape or form that we historically created the geography and the borders, but we did then go away.

Where do you draw the line? 10 years, 20, 50, 100, 200, 1000, 20000?

People still bitch about slavery and the British and have no clue that it was us that were the first to abolish it and to shell american slave forts, we are accused of buying slaves when people have no idea that it was african chiefs that sold them to us, we are accused of creating borders such as iraq, iran etc with no idea that these borders were created by international treaty with agreement from all factions that were relevant at the time.

Historical apologists p1ss me off. Britain still gets more flack from her actions 200 years ago than Germany gets from hers 16 years ago.

The raw truth is that we were a colonial power, things were different then, we got some right, and we got a lot wrong. There are countries that benefited from our influence and there are countries that have chosen to go on their own path. Whatever they are now is down to NOW, not "before".

If people continue to blame us for all their ills, I think that it is only fair for us to blame every ****** that ever came here between our primordial stage and 1066, that gives me several million years of blame to associate to.
 
#10
Aunty, the thing may be to act towards your opponants disjointed view of history. What they may see as an injust period of time, we may not. Where do you draw the line? Where do you forgive? Where do you start off from. Each faction has its own opinion and point of view. How far back do you go or do you just draw a snady line on the deck? Each side has their own agendas for whatever reasons. The key is to find the balance.

My balance after half a gallon of Asbach at present is 'Reinstate the V force bombers, head east, turn the desert into a err desert, defrost Maggie, invade Papua New Guinea then enslave all members of The Peoples Popular Front of Ipswich into hard labour whilst ensuring all drivers of BMW 5 series endure a fate worse than a fate worse than death. Oh and Remove Bliars vital organs then sell them on Ebay making sure the reserve is never met.
 
#11
The Lord Flasheart said:
Oh and Remove Bliars vital organs then sell them on Ebay making sure the reserve is never met.
You're starting them @ 1p then?
 
#12
The Lord Flasheart said:
Aunty, the thing may be to act towards your opponants disjointed view of history. What they may see as an injust period of time, we may not. Where do you etc etc
Fair play flash.

Luckily, I am not in charge of nuclear weapons, otherwise there would be no problems at present as I would have threatened everyone that "doesn't get on", with a Trident.

Those that still failed to get on would have been treated to the car park demo.
 
#13
No, I lied. Ive set a reserve of £100 million quid. Not even the Terrahawk, Cherie would pay that.


Seperated at birth. Kryton from Red Dwarf and the Mound of the hound of the Baskervilles, Mrs Bliar?

Sounds like a new thread needs starting untermench.
 
#14
Actually.... If you could get a concensus from the major nuclear powers, along the lines of "be nice or you get to see MIRV technology close up, briefly" you might be getting somewhere. A kind of nuclear armed UN peacekeeping force.

The thing is I'm not entirely sure that the somewhere you'd be getting to is somewhere I want to be.
 
#15
I'm patently out of my depth here.....
 
#17
I don't, but this time tomorrow with a suitable cargo of the black stuff and some fine Jamesons on board I may well be able to convince anyone, self included, that I do.
 
#18
Talking about ISLAMIC FUNDAMENTALISM... I WONDER WHERE JEWISH FUNDAMENTALISM WENT, OR THAT OF PATT ROBERTSON (His comments were very racist this week while he was in israel):

A news item that would never make it to the front pages of the US press caught my attention the other day. It seems that some Israeli rabbis have decreed the Israeli Army not shy away from killing Palestinian civilians in the context of the ongoing military campaign against armed groups resisting the illegal occupation of their lands.

Writing to Shaul Mofaz, the Israeli defense minister, the rabbis stated that killing enemy civilians is “normal” during the time of war and that the Israeli occupation army should never hesitate to kill non-Jewish civilians.

The signatory parties to this heinous edict include Haim Druckman, a former Knesset member and leader of a large religious youth movement known as the Bnei Akiva Society; Eliezer Melamed, who heads a West Bank religious college; and Youval Sharlo, the head of another Talmudic college in Petah Tikva which combines Talmudic studies with active military service.

Another prominent rabbi, Dov Lior, in the illegally occupied Jewish settlement of Kiryat Arbaa in the territories near Hebron issued a statute some time back stating that non-Jewish civilians may be killed to save Jewish lives, soldiers and civilians alike. The rabbi argued that non-Jewish lives had no sanctity, especially during the time of war.

Now here’s a rabbi who feverishly advanced the cause of the killing of Palestinian civilians in Rafah in southern Gaza earlier this year, saying that “it is very clear in light of the Torah that Jewish lives are more important than non-Jewish lives”.

What would possess these men of the cloth to justify the killing of the innocent? In articulating their murderous theological positions, Lior and other like-minded rabbis rely on an old Talmudic maxim that states that it is an imperative religious duty to kill enemy civilians in wartime.

They quote a Talmudic ruling, stating, “Our lives come first”.

“The Christian preaching of ‘turning the other cheek’ doesn’t concern us, and we will not be impressed by those who prefer the lives of our enemies to our lives,” they say.

Rabbi Lior has gone public with his praise and eulogy for Baruch Goldstein, a New Yorker Jew settler who in 1994 mowed down 29 Arab worshippers while they were offering their prayers at Hebron’s Ibrahimi Mosque. Referring to the terrorist Goldstein as a “great saint”, the rabbi stated that a “thousand non-Jewish lives are not worth a Jew’s fingernail”.

And while some rabbis within Conservative and Reform Judaism do not share the Orthodox and Ultra-Orthodox view of non-Jews, they have very little political influence in Israel and are generally viewed with disdain by the powerful Orthodox and Ultra-Orthodox branches, which view them as inferior Jews.

These religious terrorists shield themselves behind the cloak of faith to vent and promote their murderous intent. And judging from the slaughter of the innocent that is currently in progress in Gaza and elsewhere, they appear to have succeeded. Just imagine. A public proclamation for the execution of the innocent! A message of terrorism so blatant and such an affront to humanity. And yet nary a condemnation in the US press. Ever wonder why?

A sea of pathetic cries of ‘anti-Semitism’ would smother any bold and honest editor who dared attempt print such truth into submission, and into a different profession.

Not really different than what OBL might preach? But You get to hear what he says ONLY!
 
#19
Everyone cites "settling the Israel-Palestine issue" as the basis for moderating radical Islamic behaviour in the Middle East. While it would help, does anyone fondly imagine it would be the panacea leading to the end of terrorism?

For most Arab governments, Palestinians are merely convenient pawns in a game to eliminate Israel. Damascus, Cairo and Riyadh deny Palestinians in their countries basic rights and treat them as cheap labour. Lebanon does not allow them to vote or own property. The Gulf Arabs let them perform the menial jobs, or at best accept those professionally qualified as doctors or teachers to work without allowing them citizenship. Syria has been using them a s cannon-fodder for decades. They are generally despised by their "brother Arabs" because they are seen as either troublemakers(the Lebanese blame them for stoking the fires of cviil war and the Hashemite Jordanians regard them as a threat to internal stability) or a burden on the state as permanent refugees.

Those same Arab governments have two motives for supporting Palestinian claims in the region. The first is to rid themselves of the economic and security burden of hosting them and the second is to swamp Israel.

Israel is heavy-handed, but it remains the only truly democratic state in the Middle East. More than 1.4m Arabs choose to live there as Israeli citizens because the alternative is to eke out a miserable living under a corrupt and discredited Palestinian authority in the autonomous territories under Yasser Arafat's dictatorship.

All of this is a symptom of something far more fundamental. Corrupt dictatorships which have developed into family businesses - Syria and Saudi Arabia being prime examples - economic stagnation and religious oppression have left all of the Arab states wallowing in a cesspit of their own making. While their populations increase and their standard of living and infrastructure crumbles around them, they are quite simply jealous of Israel's economic and military success.

That jealousy translates into hatred of the West, since Israel is regarded as a western state transplanted onto Arab territory. The Arabs produce nothing worthwhile. They have no technology apart from what they import and no major industries capable of staking a competitive claim in global terms.

Their oilfields in the Gulf are dependent on western technology and know-how and they resent it deeply, yet still do little or nothing to lessen that dependence. The royal families of the oil-rich states plunder the wealth without making any real advances on ploughing the revenue back into diversification for a future when black gold will no longer prop up their rule. They allow clerics a virtual free rein to dominate every facet of life. In combination, the result is stifled initiative, lack of progress and a groundswell of resentment whose expression could, until recently, be channeled away from dissatisfaction with their leaders and targeted on Israel and the relatively prosperous West.

If Israel did not exist and there was no Palestinian issue to be addressed, it would change nothing. The only way to break the cycle is to break the grip of a medieval religion which is, despite its proponents' defence on this site, basically intolerant ijn its outlook and strategy. "There is no god but the one god and his name is Allah" is not the catch-phrase of a tolerant philosophy. Islam as it exists today is militant, expansionist, envious of others' prosperity and rooted 700 years in the past, choking off all avenues towards change

If there is an answer, it must come from within and that will inevitably be a bloody business. The new generation pushing for liberalisation in Iran may be the vanguard of change. But the Muslim religious establishment will resist to the bitter end and the West will reap the fallout.

Since Arabs respect only strength, the West's only answer is to show no weakness, be on its guard, and prepared to act decisively and, if necessary, ruthlessly in defence of its culture and lifestyle. We cannot and must not allow Islam to become the tail that wags the dog. Rant switch to off.
 
#20
Stella wrote
'People still bitch about slavery and the British and have no clue that it was us that were the first to abolish it and to shell american slave forts, we are accused of buying slaves when people have no idea that it was african chiefs that sold them to us'

Do I know you? I have been saying this for years.
john
 

Similar threads

Latest Threads