What's up with Islam?

[Weatherlite]

Originally Posted by swing

If you look at the history of terrorism, one would notice the US was not specifically a target until the early 1990s.

Really? What about the kidnapping of Americans in Iran in 1979? How about the bombing of the Marine barracks in Beiruit in 1983? The bombing of the US embassy in Beiruit also in 1983? Bombing of US embassy in Kuwait...also in 1983? Assassination of a US Naval officer in Greece in 1983? Assassination of a US Political Office in Beiruit in 1984? Bombing of US Embassy in Beiruit AGAIN in 1984?

In December of 84 a Kuwaiti airlines jet was hijacked. When demands were not met they killed two AMERICANS, not Kuwaitis.

June 1985. Same deal....hijacked TWA flight 847. When demands not met they kill an AMERICAN.

Hijacking of the Achille Lauro October 85-January 86. When demands are not met who do they kill? A disabled AMERICAN in a wheelchair!

April 86-bombing of a German nightclub which is frequented predominantly by US servicemen.

December 87-a bar in Spain known to be a US servicemember hangout is bombed.

February 88-A Marine is kidnapped and killed by Hezbollah

April 88-Cab bomb explodes at a USO club in Naples, Italy.

April 89-Army Colonel is Assassinated in the Phillipines

Granted, during this same time there were a number of attacks on non-US facilities. There were 15 attacks on US assets or people in 10 years that can be said were DIRECTLY against the US. There were only 36 other terrorist acts during this same time! OH!!!! And out of those 36 other acts which weren't directly against the US, seven attacks killed US citizens. Quite a few of those attacks were against our allies. Sounds like we've been targeted since 1979 if you ask me!

Oh, BTW, don't bother arguing this point. I'm an Anti-Terrorism/Force Protection rep for the Air Force. That's my secondary job. My primary job is as an Explosive Ordnance Disposal Technician (bomb squad) and to defeat one's enemy you must know thine enemy. I know my shit.

[Weatherlite]

Originally Posted by swing

The US media doesn't come close to covering the casualities and the day-to-day life of the average Iraqi.

How do you know this for sure? Have you been over there during this war? I know a LOT of people who have been (some more than a year and a half) and they disagree with that statement completely.

Originally Posted by swing

If one were to believe the impression given by the American media, someone may be ignorant enough to think that most casualites are caused by the insurgents, which isn't even close.

I'll grant you that because of the simple fact that a bomb has a rather large killing radius. However, let's ask ourselves "Which group (the US and the insurgents) desires to kill non-combatants, ie women, children, elderly, innocent civilians, etc etc? If your answer is anything other than the insurgents then I pity you.

Originally Posted by swing

I'm not sure what rock you've been living under, but there has been an enormous campaign by Muslims condemning terrorism.

I sure as hell haven't seen it. I don't trust US media any farther than I can throw a car. I get my news off of every source possible and I haven't seen diddly shit about this. However, I will say that the small amount of outrage I have seen does come from the Muslims living in the Middle East. I feel it's truly pathetic how much US Muslims support the terrorists.

On a side note, and to help you understand me, I have spent nearly a year in various countries in the Middle East. I LOVE the culture, the environment, the food, the people....almost everything about it! If the US were more like them morally and ethically we would truly be a superpower in all aspects. I had a man who makes $30 a MONTH offer me lunch! I have seen a transformation among those who were pro-Taliban once they realized that we were trying to help. It's really cool to see that change happen in a man carrying an AK-47 when he realizes that you are not there to kill or oppress them but to destroy the bombs surrounding his village because you are worried for his safety and the saftey of the rest of his village.

I have received respect from total strangers simply because I am a human being. I have had great philosophical conversations with Muslims concerning religion and they never once considered me inferior or less than worthy because I was not a Muslim. They actually considered me equal to them because I was curious about their religion and the differences.

Overall they are a decent people. I just think that their whole system is backward. Until they can get out of the monarchy/fuedal system they live in they will never achieve true progress. They will always believe what they are being told by the clerics and the governments (that or they will follow the party line simply for fear of being ridiculed or killed.)

[Weatherlite]

Originally Posted by swing

However, they are morally and ethically superior. Their murder rate, rape, drug usage, robbery, and out of wedlock pregnancies are miniscule compared to ours. And contrary, to popular belief it has very little to do with the hudud (Islamic punishment), rather because it just isn't right.

I agree, they are morally and ethically superior....in general and in theory. Most are. However, I have found that the wealthy and those who are in power are also the biggest hippocrates around. I can't even begin to count the number of Saudis and Kuwaitis who routinely break Islamic law. In Kuwait there was a town between Ali Al Salem and Kuwait City that we were forbidden to go into because of terrorist activities. Some of my Kuwaiti military friends confided in me that there was no more threat there than anywhere else. The real reason is because that was Kuwait's version of Bahrain....in other words that's where all of the alcohol, drugs and prostitution was. And Bahrain....even though a country's government allows alcohol, drugs, hookers etc doesn't mean that it's OK by the religion, right? And yet it's all legal there. And who do you always see? Yep...rich Saudis! You get other Arabs there too but mainly the Sauds.

My point is simply that for those who claim to be so holy and religiously pure they sure do break a lot of Allah's laws.

Before you point out that we are worse I'll say it....We are worse. But I don't see as many of us (proportionate to the population) being that bad of a hippocrate. Also, many western religions (Catholocism mainly) allow you to screw up all you want as long as you ask for forgiveness and repent for your sins so in essence, you are allowed to do it!

[swing]

Originally Posted by Weatherlite

Really? What about the kidnapping of Americans in Iran in 1979? How about the bombing of the Marine barracks in Beiruit in 1983? The bombing of the US embassy in Beiruit also in 1983? Bombing of US embassy in Kuwait...also in 1983? Assassination of a US Naval officer in Greece in 1983? Assassination of a US Political Office in Beiruit in 1984? Bombing of US Embassy in Beiruit AGAIN in 1984?

In December of 84 a Kuwaiti airlines jet was hijacked. When demands were not met they killed two AMERICANS, not Kuwaitis.

June 1985. Same deal....hijacked TWA flight 847. When demands not met they kill an AMERICAN.

Hijacking of the Achille Lauro October 85-January 86. When demands are not met who do they kill? A disabled AMERICAN in a wheelchair!

April 86-bombing of a German nightclub which is frequented predominantly by US servicemen.

December 87-a bar in Spain known to be a US servicemember hangout is bombed.

February 88-A Marine is kidnapped and killed by Hezbollah

April 88-Cab bomb explodes at a USO club in Naples, Italy.

April 89-Army Colonel is Assassinated in the Phillipines

Granted, during this same time there were a number of attacks on non-US facilities. There were 15 attacks on US assets or people in 10 years that can be said were DIRECTLY against the US. There were only 36 other terrorist acts during this same time! OH!!!! And out of those 36 other acts which weren't directly against the US, seven attacks killed US citizens. Quite a few of those attacks were against our allies. Sounds like we've been targeted since 1979 if you ask me!

Oh, BTW, don't bother arguing this point. I'm an Anti-Terrorism/Force Protection rep for the Air Force. That's my secondary job. My primary job is as an Explosive Ordnance Disposal Technician (bomb squad) and to defeat one's enemy you must know thine enemy. I know my shit.

Good for you regarding your credentials...that still doesn't mean much. The attacks you refer to concerning Lebanon were aimed at causing the US, France, and Israel to withdraw their occupation. As evidence, I quote President Ronald Reagan's memoir explaining the US decision to withdraw, "The price we had to pay in Beirut was so great, the tradedy at the barracks was so enormous...We had to pull out...We couldn't stay there and run the risk of another suicide attack on the Marines." These attacks in Lebanon (particularly Southern Lebanon) were also cause for the Israel Defense Forces (IDF), and the French to withdraw their troops as well. It may be interesting to note that 71% of all Lebanese suicide attackers were Christians, 21% were Communist/Socialists, and only 8% were Muslims. There were a total of 36 attacks, involving 41 attackers between 1982-1986 in Lebanon.

Iran is a very interesting saga. As we all know, the US insisted upon the backing of Muhammad Reza as the Shah, even against the will of the Irani people. In fact, when Iran held their first democratic elections during the early 1970's it was the US that sent the CIA into Iran, caused a coupe, and reinstalled the Shah. Although he was finally deposed during the Islamic Revolution in 1979, the US continued to hold on to their influence in the country. This brought about the Islamic Revolution which was also targeted at the US in their country. Again, some form of US occupation/interference was the cause.

The incidents you mentioned were already included in my previous responses. It isn't anything new or shocking. But the reason is the same, the withdrawal of US/Israeli occupation from the Arab lands.

[swing]

Originally Posted by Weatherlite

How do you know this for sure? Have you been over there during this war? I know a LOT of people who have been (some more than a year and a half) and they disagree with that statement completely.


I'll grant you that because of the simple fact that a bomb has a rather large killing radius. However, let's ask ourselves "Which group (the US and the insurgents) desires to kill non-combatants, ie women, children, elderly, innocent civilians, etc etc? If your answer is anything other than the insurgents then I pity you.


I sure as hell haven't seen it. I don't trust US media any farther than I can throw a car. I get my news off of every source possible and I haven't seen diddly shit about this. However, I will say that the small amount of outrage I have seen does come from the Muslims living in the Middle East. I feel it's truly pathetic how much US Muslims support the terrorists.

On a side note, and to help you understand me, I have spent nearly a year in various countries in the Middle East. I LOVE the culture, the environment, the food, the people....almost everything about it! If the US were more like them morally and ethically we would truly be a superpower in all aspects. I had a man who makes $30 a MONTH offer me lunch! I have seen a transformation among those who were pro-Taliban once they realized that we were trying to help. It's really cool to see that change happen in a man carrying an AK-47 when he realizes that you are not there to kill or oppress them but to destroy the bombs surrounding his village because you are worried for his safety and the saftey of the rest of his village.

I have received respect from total strangers simply because I am a human being. I have had great philosophical conversations with Muslims concerning religion and they never once considered me inferior or less than worthy because I was not a Muslim. They actually considered me equal to them because I was curious about their religion and the differences.

Overall they are a decent people. I just think that their whole system is backward. Until they can get out of the monarchy/fuedal system they live in they will never achieve true progress. They will always believe what they are being told by the clerics and the governments (that or they will follow the party line simply for fear of being ridiculed or killed.)

I spent May 10-July 15 in Iraq, Syria, Jordan. Of course, I wasn't surprised to learn Al-Jazeera was banned in Iraq at the behest of the U.S. I have travelled EXTENSIVELY throughout the Middle East. Both during my military service, and afterwards while working on my Ph.D in Middle Eastern Studies. I speak arabic quite well, and am exceptionally familiar with the culture. This does not include my tour from 1994-1995. My return after my enlistment concluded in 1996, 1997, 1999-2000, 2002, 2004, and most recently a couple of months ago.

I spent two-and-a-half weeks in Iraq, and had the opportunity to speak with 5 individuals who stated they belonged to one of the many insurgency groups. From what I was informed, the targets are specifically geared at US troops, Iraqi troops, and Iraqi recruits. And I quote (excuse the rough translation), "By no means do we attack the innocent. Unfortunately, the bombs may explode prematurely. It does not benefit us to kill civilians, and lose our support base. Afterall, we are fighting for them." If the US can "accidently" drop a 1000lb bomb on a house repeatedly, why isn't it plausible for the insurgency to make errors as well?

I agree, you will hardly find a more decent people than Arabs. My very first visit in the UAE, a group of men stopped me as I was walking past a cafe, and begged my to drink shai with milk. I never experienced anything like that before.

[swing]

Originally Posted by Weatherlite

I agree, they are morally and ethically superior....in general and in theory. Most are. However, I have found that the wealthy and those who are in power are also the biggest hippocrates around. I can't even begin to count the number of Saudis and Kuwaitis who routinely break Islamic law. In Kuwait there was a town between Ali Al Salem and Kuwait City that we were forbidden to go into because of terrorist activities. Some of my Kuwaiti military friends confided in me that there was no more threat there than anywhere else. The real reason is because that was Kuwait's version of Bahrain....in other words that's where all of the alcohol, drugs and prostitution was. And Bahrain....even though a country's government allows alcohol, drugs, hookers etc doesn't mean that it's OK by the religion, right? And yet it's all legal there. And who do you always see? Yep...rich Saudis! You get other Arabs there too but mainly the Sauds.

My point is simply that for those who claim to be so holy and religiously pure they sure do break a lot of Allah's laws.

Before you point out that we are worse I'll say it....We are worse. But I don't see as many of us (proportionate to the population) being that bad of a hippocrate. Also, many western religions (Catholocism mainly) allow you to screw up all you want as long as you ask for forgiveness and repent for your sins so in essence, you are allowed to do it!

There is a difference between a Muslim country and an Islamic country. And most Muslims would agree that a true Islamic state is non-existent. Most Muslim countries allow the selling of alcohol. In most Gulf countries the alcohol is served in hotels for the foreigners, with the exception of the city of Sharjah (United Arab Emirates) which doesn't allow it to be sold at all. Kuwait, and Bahrain (the Two Seas) are a different issue, although Bahrain isn't as bad as Kuwait. I disagree that prostitution and drugs are legal in Bahrain. It is acceptable for Westerners to openly partake in those activities, but the citizens have to be discreet about it.

When discussing wealthy Sa'udis we are talking about a small group of people who believe they are the elite of the Arabs. It's quite common for many of them to even practice homosexuality at a young age, because regulations do not apply to them. But I have met a number of wonderful wealthy Sa'udis who are the most religious people I've been around. One of my best friends Zain is an example. His father is a Vice-President for ARAMCO, and Zain is a Physics professor at the King Fahd University. I stayed with his family a few years ago, and it was one of the best experiences I ever had. But, the majority of Sa'udis are religious and pious individuals.

[CyniQ]

Originally Posted by swing

What is interesting is Bin Laden's choice of words. He doesn't say "Christians," rather he says
"Crusaders." Also he refers to the "Zionists" not the Jews. Which clearly shows that his grievance is not with any particular religious ideology, rather it is with the actions carried out by the belief. Secondly, I my statement was regarding any other religion with detailed regulations granting combatants and non-combatants rights, not mercy. Where in the Bible does it state that it is forbidden to kill women, children, or the elderly? As I stated, to the best of my knowledge this is unique to Islam. Provide your evidence if you believe otherwise.

Forgive me for my laborious research, but I believe one should speak from evidence rather than their ass. I wish more people shared this view.

There's nothing interesting about anything Bin Laden says. He is a murderer of children. He therefore cannot, IMO, be considered a reputable source for any information at all. He's obviously a lunatic.

But to address his statements.

White supremacists do not say African-American, they say "ni**er" (forgive me). Does that mean that they make some differentiation between African Americans and "ni**ers"? "Crusader", "Zionist". Demagogues frequently use such inflammatory language to stir the emotions of the people. Emotion, not truth, is after all, what their power is based on. It's typical hate-speech.

With regard to the Bibles instruction on dealing with enemies. In the old testament there were these two tablets, a guy named Moses had them, on one of the tablets it said, "Thou Shalt Not Kill" (loosely translated). Christians have been commanded, as I said, to "turn the other cheek", "return evil for evil to no one", "those who live by the sword will die by it", and to not keep account of the injury but forgive not seven times (as was the Jewish custom) but seventy-seven times. Killing and violence of any type is forbidden by Christ. He didn't even fight to save his own life.

[CyniQ]

Originally Posted by swing

It would be interesting to note that Algebra, Geometry, much of what we know about has come from the Muslim world. The Oxford History of Islam states, "Science was an extensive cultural undertaking that occupied the minds and energies of many of the leading intellectuals in medieval Muslim societies. Indeed, science was practiced on a scale unprecedented in earlier or contemporary human history." Research your history, and provide evidence before you make ignorant statements.

This coming from the guy that insisted that Arabs invented handwashing...

Morally and ethically superior?? To whom? Not me. My morals and ethics do not permit me to murder innocents. The Islamists are largely, in my uneducated opinion, the most despicable people on the face of the earth. You ask what other religion grants quarter to enemy combatants? I ask you, what other religion condones murder? You can't call the acts of these terrorists, combat. What other religion on the face of this earth would condone the actions of the Islamists in Darfur?

I don't generally lump people into broad labels like this. I admit that it's not fair to call all muslims evil, and in truth, I am very accepting of all peoples. But the claims you're making have no basis, and are blatantly ludicrous. Morally superior??? I'm sorry, I can't get over that. Based on what, exactly? You don't think teen pregnancy would decrease in this country if every daughter caught knocked up was murdered by her father? You are a first class MORON.

[swing]

Originally Posted by CyniQ

This coming from the guy that insisted that Arabs invented handwashing...

Morally and ethically superior?? To whom? Not me. My morals and ethics do not permit me to murder innocents. The Islamists are largely, in my uneducated opinion, the most despicable people on the face of the earth. You ask what other religion grants quarter to enemy combatants? I ask you, what other religion condones murder? You can't call the acts of these terrorists, combat. What other religion on the face of this earth would condone the actions of the Islamists in Darfur?

I don't generally lump people into broad labels like this. I admit that it's not fair to call all muslims evil, and in truth, I am very accepting of all peoples. But the claims you're making have no basis, and are blatantly ludicrous. Morally superior??? I'm sorry, I can't get over that. Based on what, exactly? You don't think teen pregnancy would decrease in this country if every daughter caught knocked up was murdered by her father? You are a first class MORON.

I will not stoop myself to such childish acts as namecalling like some people on this board. Unlike many, I am well capable of conducting a mature, rational, and intelligent discussion. When I participated in my Public Debate courses, one of my tactics were to get my opponents emotionally stirred, so they would abandon reason. I was less successful when I came across the more intelligent of my opponents. You...way to easy!
Anyway...I never said "Arabs invented handwashing." Second, you never supported your premise concerning other religions providing rights to their enemies. Therefore, I can only surmise that you accept defeat regarding that argument. Third, I challenge you to provide one single verse from the Qur'an, the Sunnah, Hadith, or fatwa from the Ulema (Islamic scholars) condoning the killing of the innocent. There are a number of references in the Bible condoning, and even commanding the killing of innocent men, wome and children. I have noticed that you tend to make a large number of ignorant, claims but never once have you provided any legitimate source.
Yes, I do claim they are morally superior to you. Most arab men would never refer to women as you have in some of your previous posts.

[swing]

Originally Posted by CyniQ

There's nothing interesting about anything Bin Laden says. He is a murderer of children. He therefore cannot, IMO, be considered a reputable source for any information at all. He's obviously a lunatic.

But to address his statements.

White supremacists do not say African-American, they say "ni**er" (forgive me). Does that mean that they make some differentiation between African Americans and "ni**ers"? "Crusader", "Zionist". Demagogues frequently use such inflammatory language to stir the emotions of the people. Emotion, not truth, is after all, what their power is based on. It's typical hate-speech.

With regard to the Bibles instruction on dealing with enemies. In the old testament there were these two tablets, a guy named Moses had them, on one of the tablets it said, "Thou Shalt Not Kill" (loosely translated). Christians have been commanded, as I said, to "turn the other cheek", "return evil for evil to no one", "those who live by the sword will die by it", and to not keep account of the injury but forgive not seven times (as was the Jewish custom) but seventy-seven times. Killing and violence of any type is forbidden by Christ. He didn't even fight to save his own life.

Only an ignorant person would dare assume what is in another person's mind. And to utilize Bin Laden's statement is perfectly adequate. In fact, when psychologists study serial killers, pedophiles, and rapists they gain their most valuable information from interviewing those who commit the crimes. It would only be fitting to explain why Bin Laden's attacks Americans by his statments and interviews. Why should I believe Bush, afterall since the invasion of Iraq almost 25,000 Iraqi civilians have died. I wouldn't expect you to understand the significance of Bin Laden's statement. The arabic is quite emphatic. There is a distinct difference when speaking arabic regarding description. When describing Christians (in a peaceful reference) we almost always use the term "Nasarah" or "Messihi." However, when there is conflict there are different terminologies used, "Kafir" (disbeliever), "Mujrimeen" (criminals), "Dhalimeen" (oppressors), etc. If one knows anything about the arabic language or culture, the choice of one's words means a great deal in their statement. And Bin Laden has a keen mastery of the Arabic language.

Concerning the Bible, Exodus 32:27 And he said unto them, Thus saith the LORD God of Israel, Put every man his sword by his side, and go in and out from gate to gate throughout the camp, and slay every man his brother, and every man his companion, and every man his neighbour.
God has the people kill each other for dancing naked around Aaron's golden calf.
God tells the sons of Levi (Moses, Aaron, and the other members of their tribe that were "on the Lord's side") to kill their family and friends for dancing naked around Aaron's golden calf. "And there fell of the people that day about 3000 men."
To kill or not to kill.

32:28 And the children of Levi did according to the word of Moses: and there fell of the people that day about three thousand men.

Does Christ not say in the bible, "do not think I have come to bring peace, rather I have come to bring the sword?"

There are tons of quotes that I can use from the bible to support my premise the bible is full of support of violent actions towards combatants and non-combatants. If you need more please let me know. Unlike you, whenever I refer to someone's religious text I provide evidence.

[Grizzly]

Originally Posted by swing

Most arab men would never refer to women as you have in some of your previous posts.

They don't need to call them names. They beat them instead.

And I don't know if we're making a distinction between Arabs who live here and Arabs who live there, but most of the Arabs I know are trashy pieces of shit who claim allegiance to the TAP Boys(a street gang) and call women all sorts of names as they are slinging drugs to send the money back to their towelheaded relations on the other side of the pond so they can blow us up on this side. (No shit. True story. Ali Ali the kid I went to high school with was arrested, along with several family members, for manufacturing and distributing ecstasy in conjunction with terrorist activities.)

While we're on the subject of women, I was going to bring this up when Cyniq forgot to mention it, but no other group of nations or religion in the world has such a poor record when it comes to gender equity. Fuck the right to vote. Those bitches(like how I did that? ) don't even have the right to voice their opinions or wear what they want.

[swing]

While we're on the subject of women, I was going to bring this up when Cyniq forgot to mention it, but no other group of nations or religion in the world has such a poor record when it comes to gender equity. Fuck the right to vote. Those bitches(like how I did that? ) don't even have the right to voice their opinions or wear what they want.[/quote]

Obviously, you've not been to the Middle East. If you go anywhere outside of the Kingdom (and by the way, there are restrictions for men concerning their dress as well) you will find that many women dress as they choose. In fact, many fathers try to convince their daughters not to wear the Islamic dress (hijab). In the MAJORITY of instances, it is a complete and total choice the woman makes. Again, men have dress codes as well.
But while we are dealing with the rights of women. The Muslim wife has rights afforded to her that are not present under Christianity. In shariah (Islamic Law) for instance,

-she has the right not to work if she chooses. Her husband cannot tell her, "we are short on money so why don't you find a part-time job," it is his responsibility to provide for the family.

-if she does CHOOSE to work, her money is her money. Meaning, her husband can make $30,000/yearly, and she makes $150,000/yearly. She has absolutely no responsibility to contribute her income to the household. And if she does contribute, it is her right to demand repayment.

-if her husband can afford it, he is to provide her with a servant.

-the husband is to consult her regarding all affairs of the house

-she does not have any responsibility to cook or clean.

I can continue, but it would pointless. My wife and I have many Muslim friends. In fact, we both recently converted after an indept study of the religion. It was only a matter of time for me, due to my field of study. And, I have spent a considerable amount of time in the Middle East, and will return in December. Approximately, 90% of my friends are either Arab or Pakistani. And my wife was absolutely astonished to realize that Arab women run their homes...and I mean RUN their homes. Arab women (especially Palistinian women) are notorious for expressing their opinions to their husbands and anyone else who doesn't want to hear. Man, it is hilarious to hear people make these generalizations based upon the US media. Anyone believing Arab men dominate their women is an idiot. In fact, there is more spousal abuse in the US than in all of the ME. In Egypt, if a husband beats his wife then it is acceptable to kill him. In America, you rape a woman and the most you serve is 5 years in prison.

[Weatherlite]

Swing, nice rebuttal but I still have to disagree with you on a couple of points. Perhaps it's because you only spent 2 1/2 weeks in Iraq. I don't know. Maybe it was during a relatively peaceful time or in a more peaceful town. All I can relate is what I have learned from my EOD brothers who have spent time in Talil and Baghdad.

I agree that it is possible for anyone to make a mistake. However, the number of "mistakes" that the terrorists are making when it comes to planting and setting off these bombs is ridiculous. They are not mistakes. I know a lot about the firing systems they are using over there. It either goes off when you want it to or it doesn't go off at all. Period. They don't use timed devices....they don't use random delays. These things are command detonated which means that someone must "push the button" in order for it to go off. Yes, there are other ways for them to be set off but they have not been in use in Iraq.

Second topic....the attacks prior to 1990. I agree 100% as to the reasons behind the attacks. Never argued that point. I'm simply stating that we were the targets. Yes? No? In some, such as Beiruit, other countries were targeted at the same time but the fact remains that we were targets much earlier than the 1990's.

Difference between Islamic countries and Mulsim countries.....very true. I didn't mean to generalize it. I just abhor their rhetoric about how they live by Islamic law and yet still violate it.

As for the argument about being morally and ethically superior.....well, I ask you Cyniq, imagine making $30 a month for 10 hours of work a day, five days a week, in 120-140 degre heat. (BTW, those hours are the actual time spent working and does not include breaks or travel time) You are digging 3 foot wide and 4 foot deep holes into soil so hard that it takes pick axes to break into it. When you go home you live in a 15x20 room with about 25 other people (some of whom do not speak the same language as you) and you save every penny you have to send home to your family so that they may join you one day in this paradise. Have that in your mind yet? Now, would you offer some American Military member some of your precious lunch when he already has a lunch that's twice as large as yours? What about when you learn that the military member is forbidden from sharing his lunch with you punishable under the UCMJ? Would you really consdier sharing your food?

That is exactly how it happened with me in Oman. To him it was not only the right thing to do but was also an honor to do so. He wasn't trying to earn brownie points with Allah as some might do in Christianity. It was simply a part of his religion and lifestyle. (lifestyle being highly influenced by religion)

However, on the other side of the coin they do have some other qualities which make the majority look bad. I think we've already covered most of them.

As for the treatment of criminals and women....well, we mainly hear about Saudi Arabia, the Taliban regime and other extreme governments. Even in Hussein led Iraq the laws and the treatment of women wasn't as bad as you think it was. Yes, there are still some who practice clittoral circumcision of girls. There are men who practice homosexuality because of some belief (it may be true..I don't know I'm not a Muslim) that they have a choice of straight or gay at some point in their life. There are harsh punishments such as cutting off hands, stoning a woman to death because her husband cheated on her (must be her fault, right?), etc etc. Question is this...where did we hear it from? The media. Which media? The same one that we bitch about because they only tell one side of the story...the one that meets their agenda and the one that gets ratings!

Do these bad things happen? Yes. Do they happen everywhere? No. I have witness many Muslim women wearing western clothes. By choice! In fact, I have even seen Kuwaiti women wearing two piece bathing suits! Yes, they were Kuwaiti and not TCN's or westerners. It was Kuwaiti day at a resort near Camp Doha but I still got to see them.

And yes, Arab women are VERY vocal! They will let ANYONE within shouting distance know their opinion. (hell, in Afghanistan there was a little girl who approached us during an explosive operation and asked for water--I'm assuming this because she kept holding up an empty jug of water and made filling motions. We had none to give and sent her on her way. I swear I could still hear her bitching a mile away!!!) This is in the more westernized countries. In the more backward countries it is often the opposite unfortunately.

I'm not sure about all of the rights that Swing says women have. I've seen some countries in which all of that has seemed to be true (I never bothered to read their law books) and I have seen countries in which women were barely more than baby machines.

Regardless, having experienced both our society and theirs I do have to say that overall I prefer ours but they have some definite advatages and in some ways are superior to us. In many ways they are still inferior though. Nothing wrong with that. Just shows that progress is made all around....just at different rates.

[Grizzly]

Originally Posted by swing

-she has the right not to work if she chooses. Her husband cannot tell her, "we are short on money so why don't you find a part-time job," it is his responsibility to provide for the family.

-if she does CHOOSE to work, her money is her money. Meaning, her husband can make $30,000/yearly, and she makes $150,000/yearly. She has absolutely no responsibility to contribute her income to the household. And if she does contribute, it is her right to demand repayment.

-if her husband can afford it, he is to provide her with a servant.

-the husband is to consult her regarding all affairs of the house

-she does not have any responsibility to cook or clean.

Those aren't rights. Fundamentally, anyhow. In most cases, those are actually plain retardisms. The first two and the last one are just stupid. Actually, the servant one is stupid, too.

Any woman unwilling to help out in the financial running of the house is worthless. Furthermore, she sure as fuck does have a responsibility to cook and clean. While this fairy tale husband is off making billions of dollars to support her sorry ass, she absolutely has the resposibility to cook for the chillins and to clean so they don't catch any germs. That's her responsibility whether some stupid book says it isn't or not.

And people wonder why I say religion is retarded.