The Iraqi Nightmare

[OilSheikh]

Why not let other neighbouring states step up for a change?

Well, they didn't ask the US or us to go and inave Iraq. When Saddam invaded Kuwait, they did ask then. And, that was justified.

[wasabi]

Just like IS don't represent the totality or even majority of Islam, so those pages don't represent what most Christians think either. As mentioned before, just generalising doesn't add anything meaningful and instead obscures any understanding that might help in these situations.

Indeed not - but there are a significant number of members of IS who seem to have enough of a shared ideology to do what they do. Or we wouldn't have the crisis we're having.

The old cop-out of they're just a few extremists/terrorists is getting increasingly strained IMO. A group this powerful represents a signficant prortion of the mainstream population. Like UKIP, many don't like it, but it doens't automagically go away by talking around it. Not when they can wipe out entire tribes of hundreds (or more?) they don't like.

[Smudger]

And you think by reading one verse you're suddenly an expert? No wonder there are so many wars if people are so ignorant about what other people believe. These books are not textbooks or instruction guides. Do you even understand the context of that verse, let alone what was happening at the time etc?

I don't claim to be an expert, but I do know enough to say that I can't possibly tell someone else that I can interpret their holy book better than they can. Why do you think Christians and Jews the world over aren't at war with everyone else if you think that's what their religion is telling them to do?

We need more communication and understanding, not ill-informed assertions of what other people should and should not think.

Can you tell me where I told anyone what to think? It seems you're telling me I shouldn't think that either book condone the killing of non-believers. Those chapters were merely a sample, they're not the only ones I have read. It seems that anyone can interpret these books any way they want, as long it it agrees with your view.

Christian and Jews were at war with everyone else at some point in history. The Crusades? Jericho? The Cathars?

[OilSheikh]

So, Maliki was Shia and Abadi is also Shia. What was the point then ?
The US seems to be supporting the Kurds a great deal. These are the same Kurds who wanted their own country of Kurdistan and were trying to break away from Iraq during Saddam's times and also occupied an area of Turkey near the border.
So, basically, they are the same as Tamils. And, we all know what happened to the Tamils.
And, these same Kurds have occupied cities near their zone. The US needs to help the Iraqi govt. crush them , rather than helping them.

[kalniel]

Indeed not - but there are a significant number of members of IS who seem to have enough of a shared ideology to do what they do. Or we wouldn't have the crisis we're having.

The old cop-out of they're just a few extremists/terrorists is getting increasingly strained IMO.

No-one has attempted any such cop out, I'm just asking that you make the distinction between an organisation and a religion. IS are undoutably bad, but you can't draw any conclusions about Islam or worse, religion as a whole, as a result (unless you engaged in very irrational ignoring of evidence from other Islamic societies).

A group this powerful represents a signficant prortion of the mainstream poulation. Like UKIP, many don't like it, but it doens't automagically go away by talking around it. Not when they can wipe out entire tribes of hundreds (or more?) they don't like.

I don't agree - I don't think they represent any of the mainstream religious population, let alone the mainstream Islamic population.

Can you tell me where I told anyone what to think?

I quoted it in my original post.

It seems you're telling me I shouldn't think that either book condone the killing of non-believers.

Not at all - you're free to believe what you like. It's just incredibly disrespectful, not to mention ill-informed, to imply that you know better what a religion believes than the practitioners, authorities and experts of that religion and to be telling them what they think their holy book means. It's precisely this lack of respect and assumption that causes these horrendous events in the first place.

Christian and Jews were at war with everyone else at some point in history. The Crusades? Jericho? The Cathars?

And yet they don't seem to be at the moment. How can that be the case if your interpretation is obviously what Christians and Jews believe?

Perhaps, just as now, some people in the past were using religion as a cover for their own means. There have plenty of similar empire building campaigns throughout history without religion as a driving factor.

Where religion can exist without violence, and where violence can exist without religion, the logical conclusion is that you cannot form a necessary causation between religion and violence.

Instead there must be something specific about this situation which is not represented in other Islamic societies (or Christian, or Jewish, since you want to bring them into the mix, or any other peaceful religion for that matter). My interpretation of the original reason for this topic was to ask exactly what that specific something is, given it cannot simply be 'religion'.

[Smudger]

N
I quoted it in my original post.

Where am I telling people what to think? I'm expressing what I think the books say. People don't have to agree with me. You clearly don't, and that's fine. But you have a problem with me saying what I believe.

Not at all - you're free to believe what you like. It's just incredibly disrespectful, not to mention ill-informed and not up to the usual Hexus intelligent standards, to imply that you know better what a religion believes than the practitioners, authorities and experts of that religion and to be telling them what they think their holy book means. It's precisely this lack of respect and assumption that causes these horrendous events in the first place.

Again, I'm not implying I know better. I'm expressing my interpretation of what it says. You can disagree, I don't care, but I won't call you stupid for disagreeing, as you are there. Ad hominen attacks weaken your argument.

[kalniel]

Ok, so what do you think Christians, Jews and Muslims believe? When you were saying their book tells them to kill people I (perhaps wrongly) assumed you thought that Christians, Jews and Muslims believed they should kill people.

If you're now saying that you have a different interpretation to their holy books than they do, that's clearer for me and I take back my comments.

[Smudger]

I believe that the books say that, but moderate 'theists' (to stop me having to keep writing C,M and Js) might be thinking 'nah, that kind of thinking belongs to the time of writing, you can't apply it now'. The issue is that fundamentalists seem to take it as the word of god that applies eternally. And it's not just Muslims, there seems to be a rise in the US and Australia of Christian fundamentalism as well, which is troubling.

[kalniel]

I believe that the books say that, but moderate 'theists' (to stop me having to keep writing C,M and Js) might be thinking 'nah, that kind of thinking belongs to the time of writing, you can't apply it now'. The issue is that fundamentalists seem to take it as the word of god that applies eternally. And it's not just Muslims, there seems to be a rise in the US and Australia of Christian fundamentalism as well, which is troubling.

From a Christian point of view it's tricky because Christianity didn't exist at the time of writing - the Old Testament is largely a collection of events etc. pre-redemption and have since been superseded by that rather big event - to continue in that belief would be to deny that Christ happened, by which time I think you'd struggle to call yourself Christian by most interpretations of the definition. Not to say that there aren't probably still some non-mainstream interpretations that present some sort of argument for their actions, not to mention plenty of people who've tried to use it to force their own agenda, particularly in power/country grabbing etc. but Christianity is fundamentally a peaceful, loving religion - the only commands are love god and love your neighbour.

I don't know enough about the whole of Jewish or Muslim texts to interpret what they believe, but if their beliefs are demonstrated by the majority of believers then I'd have pretty good reason to think they were also, on the whole, peaceful.

The question is, how has this particular situation arisen, given that it's not a problem in Western theist societies?

I'd guess that it's mostly people using Islam as a tool for their own ends, just as other people have done with other religions in the past. How to counter it is tricky, but reducing poverty, increasing education and providing a grounds for all groups to be included and at least able to have communication with each other for better understanding would be a start. That way mis-understandings can be reduced, and through discussion common viewpoints and interpretations can be derived.

[j1979]

Ok, so what do you think Christians, Jews and Muslims believe? When you were saying their book tells them to kill people I (perhaps wrongly) assumed you thought that Christians, Jews and Muslims believed they should kill people.

If you're now saying that you have a different interpretation to their holy books than they do, that's clearer for me and I take back my comments.

One modern translation of the Quaran, is not saying directly to kill Jews. Yet they are strongly hinting at it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Noble_Q...Hilali-Khan%29

This is just one translation, yet it is now the most distributed version of the Quaran in english speaking world. You can read it here. http://www.noblequran.com/translation/

Here are some extracts.

1:7"The Way of those on whom You have bestowed Your Grace, not (the way) of those who earned Your Anger (such as the Jews), nor of those who went astray (such as the Christians)."

2:44. Have you not seen those who were given a portion of the book (the Jews), purchasing the wrong path, and wish that you should go astray from the Right Path.

2:47. "O you who have been given the Scripture (Jews and Christians)! Believe in what We have revealed (to Muhammad ) confirming what is (already) with you, before We efface faces (by making them like the back of necks; without nose, mouth, eyes, etc.) and turn them hindwards, or curse them as We cursed the Sabbath-breakers. And the Commandment of Allah is always executed."

2:123." It will not be in accordance with your desires (Muslims), nor those of the people of the Scripture (Jews and Christians), whosoever works evil, will have the recompense thereof, and he will not find any protector or helper besides Allah."

It's basically a heavily modified version of the Quaran. and the main common theme apart from Allah, is that the reader should hate the Jews. Something to brush under the carpet, at least it should be, but more British Muslims read this than any other version.

[wasabi]

but Christianity is fundamentally a peaceful, loving religion - the only commands are love god and love your neighbour.

Umm - there are 10.

[Smudger]

That's a good point. The Christian Fundies in the US usually quote scripture from the OT when condemning people and trying to form laws, (usually to try to oppress women and homosexuals).

As for why it happens in Islamic society and not western theist societies, I guess you could say that theism in the west has been through that stage, with the campaigns I mentioned before, and Islam is 700 or so years behind. The other thing is, Islamic scholars were at the forefront of scientific and mathematical discovery, but now groups like ISIS and the Taliban eschew technology (other than the weapons they use) and progressive thought (banning women from education, teaching only what agrees with the Quran, etc).

[kalniel]

It's basically a heavily modified version of the Quaran.

I think that statement is key. Even wikipedia states it's dubious that this is the most widely distributed, and distribution doesn't account for readership, and readership doesn't account for belief. So I can see where you're coming from, but it's a bit of a reach IMHO to suggest that Muslims hate Jews and imply that they should be killing them.

But regardless, how does that fit with the situation in Iraq? I didn't think there are all that many Jews in Iraq.

[kalniel]

Umm - there are 10.

In the Old Testament, sure (not to mention the hundreds of other Jewish laws), but if you know your history you know that pre-dates Christianity. See Matthew 22:36-40 and John 13:34 for eg.

[peterb]

Umm - there are 10.

10 quoted in the Old Teastament - but in the New

36 “Teacher, which is the greatest commandment in the Law?”
37 Jesus replied: “‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.’
38 This is the first and greatest commandment.
39 And the second is like it: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’
40 All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments.”

The second seems (to me) to be a pretty good guide for society...

There are probably more similarities between the basic tenet of Islam and Christianity than there are differences. In many places, Jes, Muslims and Christians have lived alongside each other peacefully, until some power hungry fanatic has used religious differences to divide and rule. It happened in Kosovo, and its happening again. Going back, it happened in Germany between 1920 and 1935 and it isn't difficult to find instances even further back in time, Constantinople (Istanbul) in the 5th and 6th centuries, and again in the 16th.

[j1979]

I think that statement is key. Even wikipedia states it's dubious that this is the most widely distributed, and distribution doesn't account for readership, and readership doesn't account for belief. So I can see where you're coming from, but it's a bit of a reach IMHO to suggest that Muslims hate Jews and imply that they should be killing them.

But regardless, how does that fit with the situation in Iraq? I didn't think there are all that many Jews in Iraq.

Well, the Jews are the main object of hate in this version of the Quran, but all Kaffir's (Non Muslims) are to be treated as second class and inferior in all versions of the Quran.

Islam is portrayed as supremacist religion, in the vast majority of versions of the Quaran.

http://islam.about.com/od/qurantrans...lish_quran.htm
"This popular translation by Dr. Muhsin Khan and Dr. Muhammad Al-Hilali is beginning to surpasse Abdullah Yusuf Ali's translation as the most popular English rendering of the Quran. Some readers, however, are distracted by the extensive notes contained in the body of the English text itself, rather than in footnotes."

Yes the fact it's modified is Key, yet whether people understand the way it's modified or worse still choose to ignore it is worrying.

This version of the Quaran is the Wahabist projection of Islam and the reason it's relevant is because this (the Arabic version) is what ISIS / IS adhere to.

The Arabic version also contains many verses that talk about tanks ect.

Mohsin Khan's interpretation and re-writing from arabic:

"And make ready against them all you can of power, including steeds of war (tanks, planes, missiles, artillery, etc.) to threaten the enemy of Allah and your enemy, and others besides whom, you may not know but whom Allah does know. And whatever you shall spend in the Cause of Allah shall be repaid unto you, and you shall not be treated unjustly. "

This is the Quran IS are reading.