I am breaking this away from another topic where this was brought up, where anonymous1 was arguing about moderates and said:
They don't have a problem in relation to Israel and opposition to it on moral grounds and sending sticky plasters - they do have a problem against those who argue the govt is illegitimate and needs replacing militarily, ie the Islamic hukm of jihad! Moderates are already compromising on this and attacking those who call for a military solution via jihad - look at the posts on this site for example.
So is the destruction of Israel our goal?
I don't think it should be - IMO the goal should be that the Palestinians are no longer oppressed and are free to live their lives, practice their faiths (there are non Muslims there too).
While I cannot see a peaceful resolution to the conflict in the near future, I also do not see a non-peaceful solution working out.
Even if the "Muslim armies" could unite and defeat Israel, simply replacing one regime with another does not guarantee what I consider to be the end goal of getting rid of oppression.
So you think the Zionist ideology can bring about peace and tranquility?
Maybe God got it wrong with Islam - all he had to do was reveal democracy and zionism and the world would be a very happy place.... hmmmmm
yes attack away instead of discussing real issues.
If you look at Pakistan, East Pakistan was badly managed and eventually broke away after genocide took place there. Look at Pakistan still and people in Sindh, in baluchistan and in the frontier province want to break away.
Look at Iran and they have the Kurdish problem which is shared by Iraq, Syria and Turkey.
If you have a look at Egypt, Syria, Jordan, Lebanon and these have had real problems with the Palestinian refugees and still keep them in refugee camps. The majority have even been to war AGAINST the Palestinians.
Go to many other countries and you also have problems where people feel hey are overlooked and none of these are superstates.
When there was an empire - the Arabs decided they wanted none of it and fought an insurgency siding with the Brits against the Turks and yes, many Arabs HATED the Turks. There was also issue of the Armenian genocide (which the ottoman empire took steps to recognise etc before the empire was dissolved and secular turkey decided to not recognise it).
War may be A solution to Israel, but past history does not indicate that. More, being ruled by Muslims does not guarantee that the lives of the Palestinians will be any better.
"For too long, we have been a passively tolerant society, saying to our citizens 'as long as you obey the law, we will leave you alone'" - David Cameron, UK Prime Minister. 13 May 2015.
All the problem cases you cite are due to secular nationalists and their ideology!
The Young Turks who hijacked the last few years of the Ottoman Caliphate undertook a massacre; secular Pak leaders and their couterparts in Bangladesh fought and killed Muslims for their nationalistic ideas (which are similar to yours!); some Arab activists caused agitation whilst large proportions of the masses did not support them during the late years of the Ottoman Caliphate, the division and failure and economic decline that subsequently followed can be seen in most of the failed states that arose (with exceptions of those who luckily found oil beneath their lands - from Allah - and no joy from their deviant ideologies!)
The solution to Israel as I have said is Islam - that is my belief and faith - if someone thinks Zionism is great so be it... you are welcome to follow whatever ideology you personally wish - but if you propagate it I will oppose it as kufr should not be propagated!
Even the ones with bangladesh where the people eventually broke away to make a separate state?
How does show secular nationalism?
"For too long, we have been a passively tolerant society, saying to our citizens 'as long as you obey the law, we will leave you alone'" - David Cameron, UK Prime Minister. 13 May 2015.
I was just thinking about this a few minutes ago! I was wondering wether people in the west could have been introduced to Islam if the Ottoman empire still existed etc and everything was like the old world.
It is a question.
but at the same time, we should not accept the suffering of others simply as "something that happens" because some things can be changed.
"For too long, we have been a passively tolerant society, saying to our citizens 'as long as you obey the law, we will leave you alone'" - David Cameron, UK Prime Minister. 13 May 2015.
In Ye Olde days the Europeans had been introduced to Islam and reacted with the Crusades. There was basically a clash of cultures and religions which resulted in bloodshed for many years.
If Israels destruction became the movement of all Muslims today, we would simply see another world war. and the Jews would not accept Islam! They rejected Mohammad as a prophet and regard him as a false prophet to this day.
(deleted the duplicate)
I was not trying to relate that to Israel, it was just a general remark.
At the time of the crusades, that I would assume was different because the armies were often going huge distances to fight an enemy in a foreign land on the say so of other people. Not the best way to study what they believe.
It is easier to make a foreign peole be a bogeyman than it is to make a local people, but this can be managed too - with some help from the people and some manipulation, but it is IMO much much harder.
"For too long, we have been a passively tolerant society, saying to our citizens 'as long as you obey the law, we will leave you alone'" - David Cameron, UK Prime Minister. 13 May 2015.
True, but I guess most people do not do their own research. Only sticking to what is served up to them by the mass media (often controlled by governments). Others like to only accept evidence that already backs up their own one sided views..
I know that you simply posed the question for the sake of debate, but I do think that if ever the Islamic world decided en mass to retake the entire middle east and wipe Israel off the map, a war like none seen before would erupt between the Islamic world and the "west". And on that same basis, if the (so called) west attacked Islam (say a nuclear strike upon Mecca) then the entire Islamic world would be galvanized and united for the sake of their common enemy.
both positions not good imho...
And as for the Persian passion. I will always remember Neda Agha-Soltan!
Why? Is this because of collective guilt felt by Europeans etc?
I think there is a possibility for a war that while not limited, will not be something that extend everywhere.
Unless by "wiping off the map" you mean some nuclear strike.
"For too long, we have been a passively tolerant society, saying to our citizens 'as long as you obey the law, we will leave you alone'" - David Cameron, UK Prime Minister. 13 May 2015.
//I know that you simply posed the question for the sake of debate, but I do think that if ever the Islamic world decided en mass to retake the entire middle east and wipe Israel off the map, a war like none seen before would erupt between the Islamic world and the "west".//
Whoever tries to get rid of the evil Israeli regime in Tel Aviv in such a way would no doubt be most naive...
Even the "dumb" Americans under Bush did not just start wars - one has to build a case, one has to create or utilise pretexts (like they did 9/11) so the world is with you - only when you make a major mess of things and ignore world politics and go it alone gung ho style like Iraq do you piss everyone off and have problems...
I think one of the major prolbems today is that Muslims have no real understanding of politics, they take fabricated history as gospel, they accept political concepts and notions from other ideologies not seeing the ones that emerge from their own ideolgoies, they cannot think outside the political frameworks that have become established (the Matrix effect!) and think of solutions people call for in the most simplistic way (wiping Israel off the Map means nuking them! WTH!)
I regularly discuss with non-Muslims, and if I have to speak honestly, their level of thinking, the ability to critique, think through and analyse complex issues, is far better than most "Muslims" I have spoken to... it's a sad indictment of the intellectual decline the Muslim world suffers from...
Or maybe all the intelligent Muslims have realised that there is no point wasting their time discussing things with you.
Don't just do something! Stand there.
Changed your tune
#Before you look at the thorns of the rose , look at it's beauty. Before you complain about the heat of the sun , enjoy it's light. Before you complain about the blackness of the night, think of it's peace and quiet... #
I am interesting in knowing wether anon1 likes very many Muslims out there.
"For too long, we have been a passively tolerant society, saying to our citizens 'as long as you obey the law, we will leave you alone'" - David Cameron, UK Prime Minister. 13 May 2015.
LOL!
Maybe you can point me to some intelligent Muslims? And modernists in my opinion are not intelligent - just followers who attempt to synthesize Western thought into Islam...
What's a modernist (I mean in your opinion)?
Don't just do something! Stand there.
Followers in thought of scum like Ali abd al-Razaq...
Who is?
Don't just do something! Stand there.
Someone who was condemned and expelled from Al-Azhar (before it was "reformed" by secular nationalist govts to churn out "new breed of conformist" scholars) for his heretical ideas attacking Islamic heritage and ideas, notably that of the Islamic Caliphate...
Well I think it is fair to say Israel is not really secular. Sure anyone of any religion can live there, but only one religion matters in public life and it would be unlikely a none Jewish person could lead their Government.
Likewise the same could be said of the UK, as it is still law that the Prime Minister cannot be a Roman Catholic (which was why Tony Blair waited until he had resigned before officially converting).
And I will agree that there is no perfect secular democracy yet on earth, but it is the best system yet devised!
Secularism does not eliminate religion - communism does - it marginalises it or removes it as a competing contender in the political realm of governance.
Thus Britain and Israel are secular - they are not theological states.
LOL what happened to your 'logic' all of a sudden?
"Israel is secular because it's not communist"
I think your losing it..
Don't just do something! Stand there.
Read what I wrote - and not what you imagine I wrote!
you're
In no country do I observe that Islam was the answer to a question of collective welfare. I would like it if every hippy was very clear that when they stand with Muslims the overall ambition is Islam and nothing else. I hate seeing people duped.
Let me clarify that. By their own declarations a few members have made clear this applies to them, and likewise other members have expressed views suggesting it doesn't. I am only taking on the one and not the other, please don't be offended by my wording.
Having to fabricate what I write now - well done!