Mullah Sought After Boys Flee School In Chains

In the hands of extremists you are indeed correct. And there are a lot of cuckoos over there. But we have them here as well. Remember David Koresh and Jim Jones? How about the Arian Nations and "skinheads". You don't get more pathological or extremist than that. They consider(d) themselves "Christians" but their actions are(were) hardly what I think Christ wanted from us. There are good and bad in every single religion. And it is grossly unfair and ignorant to paint an entire race of people or religon with a broad brush based on the actions of some. I steadfastly refuse to fall into the "paranoia" trap because I have lived among good and bad over there, and good and bad over here.

I haven't read the book, but I agree with the basic idea (as exemplified by Truman's actions).

I guess my main concern is that, generally, it not be a conclusion jumped to lightly.

That said, I think that with what we know about Islam and the governments that protect it, something on the order of what Lurker suggested is a conclusion that can be reached quite reasonably.

I differentiate that carefully considered position, which involves some justifiable mass bombing, from the position of people who just want to wipe out whole populations for vengeance. I'm not saying I've seen the latter here, but in person, I've known people to suggest the latter in anger.

I think the latter is dangerous both because it tends to both: (1) make many sensitive emotion-driven people unduly, unjustifiably, suspicious of courses of action like the carefully-considered former (specifically, I saw previously-moderate students in university go far anti-war after their relatives suggested nuking the entire middle east), and (2) more importantly, because, to the extent it is accepted, it gets a different set of people thinking in terms of fruitless vengeance instead of calculated survival-and-life-oriented pragmatics.

I hope this is clear - my main point is that I agree with you, but I differentiate our position from another one that exists, which is less calculating.

Explain the crusades.

Look around! What Islamazis do today is what they have ALWAYS done!

They do not create, they conquer established regions and live off what others accomplished.

And, we will be seeing something similar to the Crusades again...only this time Mecca and Medena will be a real nice mirror!

And your "Friends", by not protesting what the Mullahs do and say, and showing up en masse to counter the so-called "extermists", only give aid and comfort to the enemies of Mankind! So they and you have no reason to beeyotch when they get lumped into the "evil" category.

I agree with regard to painting a whole race of people one way, but as far as painting a religion, I think it is different. This is because, if there is a holy text, you have a standard for what the religion is. Further, if there is a set of beliefs commonly held even aside from the holy text, insofar as you can characterize and describe them, you can make judgments about them.

So, looking at these two things, first what the holy text says and second what its self-described adherents believe, this is what I think, so far as I know:

My impression about Islam is that the text itself condones some very nasty stuff (forced conversions, war to spread Islam, etc., among them). The problem with this is that, even if what some of the self-described Muslim people currently believe is much saner than what the book says, there is always a risk that some leader among them will start guilting them, or otherwise pressuring them, into falling in with the book. As I understand it, this is what happened with the 7/7 bombers.

I think this is a bit different than with a religion in which the text does not support things as extreme as forced, violent conversions. Yes, you will still get the occasionally nut job creating a cult supposedly on the basis of the religion, but this is going to be a less common, less systematic occurrence (all else being equal) than for a religion where those actions actually are supported by text.

I think the main equivalent in Christianity is not people like Koresh or Jones, whose cults I don't think had any more unique connection to Christian texts than do any run of the mill Christian church, but rather people like Tolstoy.

Tolstoy worked out a Christian-based theory on war and violence such that, if we had followed in WWII, it would have resulted in the extermination of Jewish people, and the worldwide rise of Nazism. If we follow it now, it could lead to worldwide Islamic rule. Tolstoy did this on the basis of quotes like "resist not evil" and "turn the other cheek". I think that a lot of the anti-war left is actually intellectually descended from this line of thinking, but secularized, and unaware of its roots.

(To any Christians reading this, I don't mean to be insulting, but this is a concern of mine. I've got a copy of the Bible, and it seems to say what Tolstoy says it does. If my understanding is wrong, I'd like to know why.)

One little correction - "Islam" is not a race.

Now - I have to disagree with you about whether a religion is "good" or "bad". On the whole, Islam does not seem to have many good things to add to humanity. This issue of cartoons really points out the differences. As has been pointed out, ad nauseum on other threads, no Hindus, Christians, Jews, Buddhists, Shintos, whatevers, have reacted with violence to cartoons of their "sacred cows". Not even disgusting and offensive desecrations like crucifixes in urine, or Madonnas with elephant dung, or Anne Frank in bed with Hitler, or blown up Buddhas, or burned Bibles. None.

You are correct, I kind of mis-spoke. But seeming as how nearly the entire middle east is Muslim, it might as well be, however I will stand by everything else I have said. I refuse to condemn an entire race or religion of people because of the actions of extremists. I have met and worked with far too many good Muslims to fall into that paranoid, misinformed, propaganda trap. As far as the people on this board that disagree with me, that's their right. And I will just have to agree to disagree. But I have lived amongst them, and I know I am right about the majority of them.

Everything I have read of Islam does not make me feel a bit comfortable. Can there be good people who are Muslims yes there can be. But what you have to ask yourself if it comes down to the life of another Muslim or a Nonmuslim who would they save first and what does the Koran tell them to do? For christians the ones I know it makes no difference if you are christian you are to love one another. I am sure there were many good German people who could not stop what was going on during the time of Hitler but when it comes down to it good people either did nothing or went along with him and many many people died. But right now and in the future many many people are going to die it's just a matter of time because of people like the President of Iran. He wants things to get bad so he can bring on the 12th Imann and the world needs to be in great chaous and conflict for it to happen. And he really believes this and is going to make it happen. And many good people of all faiths and of no faith are going to be hurt.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.