Is Ted Cruz Satan? Discuss.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

I'm not so sure it's the anti-Western sentiment as much as the, well, ancient character of radical Islam's worst offenses. Beheadings, slavery, stonings... These are things radical Christianity got over a long ago, becoming far more subtle in its crimes against humanity. It's hard to look at a group behaving as the Taliban did, or Isis now is, and not reflexively conclude the texts they profess to follow literally must be the problem because... Well, what else but an ancient text would cause such ancient forms of barbarism?

Sidd, this is the sort of simplistic and silly stuff I was disagreeing with.

Sebby, do you realize that Islam's texts are much newer than the Bible and the Talmud?

[UNRELATED]Sebby, you'll like this.[/UNRELATED]

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally Posted by taxwonk

evil motherfuckers say to them, "You have lost your way; return to Allah and fight the infidels and you will be rewarded with power and wealth." Those people are preying on the weak and disaffected for the sake of increasing their own power and influence.

2. But what are they selling?

[taxwonk]

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski

2. But what are they selling?

They are selling attention. They offer acceptance and give the alienated a sense of belonging and purpose. They tell the desperate, lonely, disaffected that they matter.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally Posted by taxwonk

They are selling attention. They offer acceptance and give the alienated a sense of belonging and purpose. They tell the desperate, lonely, disaffected that they matter.

but it's sold as the religion.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

Sidd, this is the sort of simplistic and silly stuff I was disagreeing with.

Sebby, do you realize that Islam's texts are much newer than the Bible and the Talmud?

[UNRELATED]Sebby, you'll like this.[/UNRELATED]

You fucking moron. That's part of the point. The newest kid on the block is behaving like the most ancient degenerates. And Islam, despite being the youngest of the big three, is also ancient.

Seriously. You think anyone here doesn't know the chronology of the texts at issue?

I've made fun of Islam for borrowing from Christianity and Judaism in the past on god only knows how many occasions. Look it up. You're a mod.

Think before you post dumb shit attempting to demonstrate, cheaply and lazily, how much more nuanced your understanding is of the issue at hand. It's not so much because you make an ass of yourself doing so, but because you encourage Adder.

ETA:

Beheadings by sword = Ancient.
Stoning = Ancient
Enslavement/bazaar sale of women = Ancient
Blowing up Buddhist statutes because they offend the prophet = Ancient
Etc.

Do I seriously have to make a case describing how the Taliban is closer to the stone age than present day Christian/Hindu/Jewish fundamentalists? Did you really think arguing something imbecile as the suggestion I or anyone else here thought Islam was older than Judaism wouldn't get you flagged?

Cut the debate class nonsense. You know better.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

You fucking moron. That's the point. The newest kid on the block is behaving like the most ancient of degenerates.

Seriously. You think anyone here doesn't understand the ages of the texts at issue?

I've made fun of Islam for borrowing from Christianity and Judaism in the past on god only knows how many occasions. Look it up. You're a mod.

Think before you post dumb shit attempting to demonstrate, cheaply and lazily, how much more nuanced your understanding is of the issue at hand. It's not so much because you make an ass of yourself doing so, but because you encourage Adder.

Ask him what an HSA is.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

I'm done with it. PLF is right. This is a waste of time. And it's no fun anymore.

I'll see you all on the other board.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski

Ask him what an HSA is.

I'm just as big a part of the problem. Wonk nailed me earlier and I then dissembled and ducked his point. He had a good one about me generalizing and where I should have admitted he scored a point, I pivoted - like a dickhead lawyer - to avoid it.

That's what happens here.

Sidd nailed it all today. There really wasn't much more to say on the subject. And GGG had sincere points which, though I might disagree, are resonant. TM dropped the usual brutal logic.

The rest of it is shit.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

You fucking moron. That's part of the point. The newest kid on the block is behaving like the most ancient degenerates. And Islam, despite being the youngest of the big three, is also ancient.

Seriously. You think anyone here doesn't know the chronology of the texts at issue?

I've made fun of Islam for borrowing from Christianity and Judaism in the past on god only knows how many occasions. Look it up. You're a mod.

Think before you post dumb shit attempting to demonstrate, cheaply and lazily, how much more nuanced your understanding is of the issue at hand. It's not so much because you make an ass of yourself doing so, but because you encourage Adder.

ETA:

Beheadings by sword = Ancient.
Stoning = Ancient
Enslavement/bazaar sale of women = Ancient
Blowing up Buddhist statutes because they offend the prophet = Ancient
Etc.

Do I seriously have to make a case describing how the Taliban is closer to the stone age than present day Christian/Hindu/Jewish fundamentalists? Did you really think arguing something imbecile as the suggestion I or anyone else here thought Islam was older than Judaism wouldn't get you flagged?

Cut the debate class nonsense. You know better.

Clearly your profundity was too subtle for me.

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

You fucking moron. That's part of the point. The newest kid on the block is behaving like the most ancient degenerates. And Islam, despite being the youngest of the big three, is also ancient.

Seriously. You think anyone here doesn't know the chronology of the texts at issue?

I've made fun of Islam for borrowing from Christianity and Judaism in the past on god only knows how many occasions. Look it up. You're a mod.

Think before you post dumb shit attempting to demonstrate, cheaply and lazily, how much more nuanced your understanding is of the issue at hand. It's not so much because you make an ass of yourself doing so, but because you encourage Adder.

ETA:

Beheadings by sword = Ancient.
Stoning = Ancient
Enslavement/bazaar sale of women = Ancient
Blowing up Buddhist statutes because they offend the prophet = Ancient
Etc.

Do I seriously have to make a case describing how the Taliban is closer to the stone age than present day Christian/Hindu/Jewish fundamentalists? Did you really think arguing something imbecile as the suggestion I or anyone else here thought Islam was older than Judaism wouldn't get you flagged?

Cut the debate class nonsense. You know better.

Yeh, lots of bad shit. Of course, there's other bad shit in the world. Ask yourself, would you rather go out at Abu Gharib or with a beheading?

One of the things you are seeing with ISIS in terms of military strategy is a fundamentalist version of shock and awe, a policy we carried out behind a ton of armor and often from the safety of drone control rooms. A key goal for IS is to absolutely terrify people so they will surrender or run, making the military conquests much easier.

Similar approaches were used by Christians in the Balkan ethnic cleansing and the Ugandan genocide, though things like gang rapes (including of children) and mutilation were the Christians' preferred weapons of choice, and in each of those cases the places to run was much more limited so the death toll considerably higher. If they had our armor and our weaponry, more of their killing would be civilized like ours - you know, blowing people's limbs off so they bleed to death at a wedding, bombs filled with shrapnel so they shred a lot of flesh, whether they kill or maim. But we like to be smug and say we're civilized. It's an old story.

Once again, not denying that lots of bad stuff happens in countries that are Islamic, but I fail to see Islam as intrinsically or particularly evil. The reason to care about the debate has nothing to do with some smarmy asshole of a comic's ratings or whether a two-bit Hollywood pretty boy gets excited on TV. The reason to care is that ultimately Islam is goingto be one component of the various solutions in the Middle Eastern countries dealing with radical Islam, and the mix of bigotry and phobia that characterizes American's dealing with Islam is a barrier to that.

Also, if we really looked hard at what fuels political Islam, we would be dealing very, very differently with our good friends in Saudi Arabia, who are at the very root of the problems and always have been, and also very differently with many people in places like Lebanon, Turkey, and even Iran, where there are Islamic groups we could work with who would be a more effective alternative to some of the bad guys.

Salaam.

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

I'm done with it. PLF is right. This is a waste of time. And it's no fun anymore.

I'll see you all on the other board.

Oh come on. Just visit here on the days when you're in a black mood and need to wail on Hank's idiocy a little for therapy. I'll happily pour you a nip of your choice when you visit.

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally Posted by taxwonk

They are selling attention. They offer acceptance and give the alienated a sense of belonging and purpose. They tell the desperate, lonely, disaffected that they matter.

Big piece of Islam's appeal. There is a very strong social justice and empowerment of the dispossessed element in Islamic theology.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy

Yeh, lots of bad shit. Of course, there's other bad shit in the world. Ask yourself, would you rather go out at Abu Gharib or with a beheading?

One of the things you are seeing with ISIS in terms of military strategy is a fundamentalist version of shock and awe, a policy we carried out behind a ton of armor and often from the safety of drone control rooms. A key goal for IS is to absolutely terrify people so they will surrender or run, making the military conquests much easier.

Similar approaches were used by Christians in the Balkan ethnic cleansing and the Ugandan genocide, though things like gang rapes (including of children) and mutilation were the Christians' preferred weapons of choice, and in each of those cases the places to run was much more limited so the death toll considerably higher. If they had our armor and our weaponry, more of their killing would be civilized like ours - you know, blowing people's limbs off so they bleed to death at a wedding, bombs filled with shrapnel so they shred a lot of flesh, whether they kill or maim. But we like to be smug and say we're civilized. It's an old story.

Once again, not denying that lots of bad stuff happens in countries that are Islamic, but I fail to see Islam as intrinsically or particularly evil. The reason to care about the debate has nothing to do with some smarmy asshole of a comic's ratings or whether a two-bit Hollywood pretty boy gets excited on TV. The reason to care is that ultimately Islam is goingto be one component of the various solutions in the Middle Eastern countries dealing with radical Islam, and the mix of bigotry and phobia that characterizes American's dealing with Islam is a barrier to that.

Salaam.

As you're sincerely interested in fostering greater understanding here, I'll reply.

The shock and awe argument is good. I think it appears a lot more savage to actually slice off a head, or bomb statues, than fire bullets from drones, but your point does hold. And there's no argument that our bombing innocents from helicopters is any less barbaric simply because it's done from a disconnected perch. Still, I think the important issue here is the West's perception. And our perception is that beheadings and selling women, and fundamentalism generally, are stone age behaviors. (Nevermind the irony in us judging foreign fundamentalists given the idiocy of our bible belt.)

I'd like to make clear - I do not support any suggestion Islam is inherently evil. Nor do I think Maher does. I think it's just a religion like any other (though my criticisms of each are unique, my level of respect for them is the same from faith to faith [I think anyone praying to a man in the sky is deluding himself, and the texts are all absurd fictions]).

My position would be that Islam is going through a rough patch like Christianity did during its brutal periods. I think we agree more than we disagree.

Were it only the public discussion took place in the manner we've had it here, rather than between a firebrand comedian and college students.

But then-- Maher and Berkeley have ignited the discussion. There is benefit there.

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

As you're sincerely interested in fostering greater understanding here, I'll reply.

The shock and awe argument is good. I think it appears a lot more savage to actually slice off a head, or bomb statues, than fire bullets from drones, but your point does hold. And there's no argument that our bombing innocents from helicopters is any less barbaric simply because it's done from a disconnected perch. Still, I think the important issue here is the West's perception. And our perception is that beheadings and selling women, and fundamentalism generally, are stone age behaviors. (Nevermind the irony in us judging foreign fundamentalists given the idiocy of our bible belt.)

I'd like to make clear - I do not support any suggestion Islam is inherently evil. Nor do I think Maher does. I think it's just a religion like any other (though my criticisms of each are unique, my level of respect for them is the same from faith to faith [I think anyone praying to a man in the sky is deluding himself, and the texts are all absurd fictions]).

My position would be that Islam is going through a rough patch like Christianity did during its brutal periods. I think we agree more than we disagree.

Were it only the public discussion took place in the manner we've had it here, rather than between a firebrand comedian and college students.

But then-- Maher and Berkeley have ignited the discussion. There is benefit there.

Ultimately, we have a different view of Maher. I can't listen to a sentence out of his mouth on Islam without three or four cringes, and when he's called on any one of them, even if its on one of his simple factual errors, he digs in. If he has no defense, he refocuses on some new invective. His ignorance is simply breathtaking, and loudmouthed ignoramuses are part of the problem. And his views on Islam focus on things like his mother of bad ideas statements and his views that it is in some way particularly evil at its core.

[Not Bob]

25 years since the Berlin Wall fell. Nice to be reminded that change can be a good thing.