Are there any peaceful muslim nations?

I agree completely. However, I'm not really arguing in the same vien as the thread starter - I'm not saying there are no 'peacefull' Muslim nations. I am merely pointing out that - for whatever reason, wherever the fault may lay - Muslims are engaged in a disproportionate amount of conflict with thier non-Muslim nieghbors. My support for this, as outlined briefly above, is that if one looks at the borders of Muslim civilization, one will notice conflicts almost wherever Muslims come into contact with non-Muslims. Again, I must emphasize, I make no claims as to what the causes of this phenomena are, I seek merely to establish that it exists.

I'm probably not as well versed as you are in African conflicts, but I'd hazard to guess that a brief inventory of non-Muslim African conflicts would show that most are civil, political in nature, and cannot be accurately described as consisting of a single religion or culture coming into constant conflict with its nieghbors. I may be wrong; it's happened in the past. Prove me wrong.

A tally, eh? OK ...

It's a rough estimation of course (hence using "some" in front of each number), because I'm not all-knowing and various stuff can also be contested. But I doubt that contesting any one or two here and there will seriously impact the overall balance between the two totals. Note that some countries are in both sets of lists

Black/Christian Africa, war / violent conflict:

Angola
Congo (former Zaire)
Burundi
Rwanda
Liberia
Sierra Leone
Mozambique (still?)
Zimbabwe
Ethiopia
Eritrea
Nigeria
Uganda
Ivory Coast (?)
Somalia
and I think there was a violent coup in the Comoros recently.
makes some 15

No war / violent conflict:

South Africa
Lesotho
Swaziland
Botswana
Zambia
Madagascar (tho violence broke out at the last elections)
Malawi
Tanzania
Kenya
Namibia
Gabon
Central African Republic
Eq. Guinea
Cameroon
Benin
Togo
Ghana
Guinea
Congo/Brazzaville (?)
Mauritius
Guinea Bissau
Makes some 21

Total 36

Islamic world, war / violent conflict:

Western Sahara
Chad
Nigeria
Algeria
Sudan
Azerbajjan
Uzbekistan (tho its more the odd bomb than an ongoing violent conflict)
Indonesia (tho only on a small part of the huge archipelago)
Pakistan
Afghanistan
Iraq
Lebanon
Palestine
Somalia
Kosovo (tho not really a country)
Makes some 15

No war / violent conflict:

Morocco (I treat W-Sahara as separate country, see above)
Mauritania
Mali
Burkina Faso
Niger
Tunisia
Lybia
Egypt
Bosnia (fighting stopped 9 years ago, tho only thru international supervision)
Albania
Turkey
Turkmenistan
Kyrgiszstan
Tajjikistan (fighting stopped a few years ago?)
Malaysia
Iran
Syria
Jordan
Saudi-Arabia
Quatar
United Arab Emirates
Brunei
Oman
Bahrain
Yemen (save the odd election-time violence)
Makes some 25

Total 40

Totals work out slightly different from last time I counted, but the balance remains: 15 out of 36 Black/Christian African countries, and 15 out of 40 countries in the Islamic world are currently in war or violent conflict (either cross-border or internally), with some countries counted in both.

Eh ... now you are adding all kinds of things to what was a simple enough contention I was replying to.

I replied to this:

"The point is that Muslim countries are involved in a disproportionate amount of conflicts. Of course conflict is ubiquitous all over the world, but nowhere is it as virulant and widespread as the Muslim world."

This, the comparison in the tally above shows, is plain wrong. "Conflict" is as much or more ubiquitous in black/Christian Africa then in the Muslim world, thereby undermining your "disproportionate" thesis.

As for what conflicts are civil or political rather than religious, that is one can of worms. Some instances seem clear enough, like Uganda's, Christian "Army of the Lord". But I'm sure that case isnt as simple as that either. A great many conflicts that the "Clash of Civilisations" types try to reduce to a Western/Islamic dimension, in reality are as much political, ethnic, tribal, etc as they are religious or cultural.

For example, the Bosnian war. Primarily ethnic violence, fanned by political opponents, sauced with religious rhetorics. To summarise it as 'another Muslim/Christian conflict' would be near-ridiculous. Etcetera. Is the Palestinian conflict a religious one or a political-territorial one? Both, of course, tho I'd propose the latter constitutes the bone of contention, and the religious elements mostly came in to fuel the flames. Is the Azerbajjani/Armenian border conflict fundamentally different from the Ugandan/Congolese conflict? Can you really maintain that when Somalia collapses into tribal warfare, its to do with its partially Muslim make-up, whereas when the same happens in Sierra Leone, its "political or civil"? I dunno. In the eye of the beholder, I'd say.

Maybe a better question would be: Is there any active conflict in the world today that does not involve Muslims?

To expand on the several very excellent posts in this thread, this essay by Thomas Sowell helps explain why things are the way they are:

Why do they hate us?
http://www.jewishworldreview.com/cols/sowell031704.asp

Eh, yeah - for one, all of the ones in Christian/Black Africa I listed except for two or three.

The conflict in Nigeria directly has to do with Islam, and in the ones in Somalia and I dunno, Eritrea?, Muslims are involved. But in all the other 12 countries in Africa that I've roughly listed as afflicted by violent conflict, Muslims not an issue. So - yeah, thats a no-brainer.

Then there's also still Colombia, Ecuador and Peru, Sri Lanka, Nepal, Burma, Haiti (tho for the moment pacified) and Moldova (tho under cease fire), and I'm sure I'm forgetting some.

Okay, thank Nimh. Gotta get to work here for awhile but appreciate the info.

What in the world? The crime rate in the US is so bad because parents have not done their job in raising good kids. This is because of a jerk named Dr. Spock. correlate the history of our country with the crime-rate. Way back in this countries history get this we were considered a Flamin' backward Christian nation. Was their crime yes of course. But it was punished according to the Law of God. I will have you know that most of the laws in this country were founded on the Ten Commandments that is why lots of us don't want to see them go. Morale principles and codes of ethics do not compare to the Bible their is no book on earth like it. Why because God wrote it, thought the inspiration of the holy ghost( sorry I am off the point)
Now the crime rate can be tracked back to a lack of honor and attention to moral absolutes, Pure and simple. And many people say there are none. but I would ask you if a man straps C-4 to his body and kill 34 people was he right of wrong? Wrong you don't just kill people so hey there are moral absolutes. Do you want to fix the murder rate? I do so why not have stiffer harsher penalties for criminals that murder? If someone knew that they would be deprived of their life if they ever took one wouldn't that serve as a deterrent? The principles found in the Bible work for the good of all weather you believe or not. And America is proof of this. As long as you work hard and obey the laws you will have a hassel free life and the law will stay away from you. Skin color is not a factor in why we have crime. No one is born a Criminal, criminals are made and back to parents raising selfish kids once a child reaches a certain age he can't be helped and if he wants something bad enough he might kill because he was never required to focus on others. All he knows is that he wants something and will do anything to get it. Ok I hope people do not blast me I could be wrong but Color has no relation to the crime rate!!!!!!

Is the war in Black/Christian Africa based on Christianity? Or money, warlords and power?

Islamists are trying to eradicate non-Islamics from the earth--and are having quite a success in Sudan. They are also making quite a play recently for Uzbekistan as another Afghanistan, it seems.

Are African Christians attempting genocide as an offense, as well? Or putting up a defense? I hopnestly don't know the story there in-depth.

In other words, fighting and mayhem is one thing--the goal of eradication of other religions/ ethnicities, IMO, is the difference.

Christians and Muslims have been locked in civil war for a generation in the Sudan. But in both the case of the black christians and the black animists of Darfur, the motivation is much more likely racist than religious. Ultimately, as with ethnic cleansing in the Balkans, where Orthodox versus Muslim, or versus Catholic was a pretext, the entire struggle is about wealth, control, real estate, power. Indonesia, with a population in excess of 200,000,000, has a majority muslim population. Despite incidents of terrorism, which occur everywhere on the planet, with or without the excuse of religion, the vast majority of the Indonesian population lives in peace with no plans to exterminate non-muslims. The violence in Indonesia more often derives form the desire for independence in that stretched out, broken-up country, whether in Timor at the eastern end, or Sumatra at the western end.

This entire silly thesis is the more disgusting because it can so easily be turned into a call for crusade, for holy war. That there are lunatics of all stripes who wish to exterminate others is not to be doubted. That there is a pan-Islamic program to exterminate the infidel not only reeks of witless conspiracy theory, it is dangerous to the mental health of society.

Gotta agree with all of that, Set ... well said.

Cheers, Boss, you are most kind . . .

Well, I'm not advocating the widescale murder of Muslims.

I do, however, believe the greater danger than this thread, is a knee-jerk reaction against any who criticise or question Islam.

A holy war HAS been invoked, and non-Muslims aren't the ones who did it.

When the rite of passage for any religion is shipping off to a madrass, or a 'camp' where hate, kidnapping lessons and gun use is part of the program--it bears a good look, rather than turning the other way.

When a widespread religion teaches and practices the devaluation of females--from just 'less than' in some countries--to rape, the enslavement of girls, barbarism, torture and murder, in other countries--it demands our attention. I don't think any of us should continue looking the other way.

Lucky thing thats not the case then, isnt it?

Islamist fanatics are an issue; Islam is not.

"Shipping off to a 'camp' where hate, kidnapping lessons and gun use is part of the program" is not yer average "rite of passage" for a Muslim, as you well know.

The distinction is clear. By ways of a parallel, in Europe we have a serious problem with right-wing radicals: skins, neo-fascists, antisemites, etc. Too many of 'em - and alarmingly growing in numbers. To say that any further skin kids shipping themselves off to some neo-nazi camp where hate and violence are part of the program "bears a good look", is to make an obvious point; to say in consequence that such stuff is apparently "the rite of passage for Europeans" would approach the lunacy fo saying the same about Muslims.

Let's re-phrase a bit of your comment above, Sofia.

When the rite of passage for any culture/group/organization is shipping off to a 'camp' or school where hate, kidnapping lessons and gun use is part of the program--it bears a good look, rather than turning the other way.

I hope you feel this way about groups everywhere.

All Europeans don't believe in the "divine" writings of the same book--

If you wanted to lump the skinheads and find distinctions among them, THAT would be a fairer analogy. They have the same *beliefs*, but I imagine some of them haven't firebombed a synagogue or smashed heads outside a gay bar. Some of them may not be comfortable with, or compelled to commit violence to bring about the world they desire--but they fervently believe in their superiority...(skinhead's common thread)

Certainly, there are non-violent Muslims--but they do all learn from the same book (have a common thread), and women, even in Europe and the US, who submit to Islamic tenets are devalued. There is an inexcusable thick cord of oppressive sexism with harsh punishments, and an excuse for --or even call to-- violence, running through this religion--and it should be open to discussion.

I will look into distinctions of US, European and the more virulent madrasses, but there are potent similarities.

Anyway, I'll put this here:

Uzbek blasts blamed on Islamic extremists
Saturday, July 31, 2004 Posted: 5:13 PM EDT (2113 GMT) CNN

TASHKENT, Uzbekistan (AP) -- President Islam Karimov blamed suicide bombings against the U.S. and Israeli embassies on the same group behind similar attacks earlier this year, pleading in a nationwide TV address Saturday for Uzbeks to spurn extremist Islamic influences.

He spoke after a police officer guarding the U.S. Embassy died overnight from injuries in Friday's attacks, which also hit the chief prosecutor's office in the Uzbek capital, said general prosecutor's spokeswoman Svetlana Artikova. That raised the death toll to at least six, including the three bombers.

While not naming the group behind the attacks, Karimov pointedly mentioned Hizb ut-Tahrir, a secretive extremist Islamic group that has spread across Central Asia since the Soviet collapse.

The group, whose Arabic name means Party of Liberation, claims to disavow violence **in its quest to create worldwide Islamic government.**
(...)
-------
I thought it appropriate to relate this to Christianity, as I imagine some may say there is all manner of carnage in the Bible. There is. But, the word Christian is derived from Christ's name, and anyone who has read Him has no backing in His words or teachings that murder is OK under any circumstances--and He never called anyone to kill or try to establish a worldwide Christian government.

Conversely, Mohammad wrote the Quoran. He is the author of the 'good' and the murderous parts.

Does the Quoran incite 'conquest or annhiliation' of non-Muslims?
Doesn't it give 'excuses or exceptions' for murder of non-Muslims?

Has anyone seen documentaries inside various madrasses? Or read articles by women in Islam, who say the religion must be rehabilitated due to treatment of women--even Islamic women in the US and Europe?

I do not condemn all Muslims, and I'm no student of the Quoran. I'll be glad to read excerpts, which prove me wrong. And I do plan to read further. But, I've heard plenty of excuses not to give a detailed look at Islam-- I've heard people on this board say there is no such thing as Wahhabism--
I don't think the subject should be closed to discussion, though I surely don't mind opposing opinions.

Teaching in madrasses may vary-- But, I wonder if the absence of guns reflects an absence of hatred. I'll bring some articles about madrasses. I'll be glad to see any that oppose what I have seen and heard.

We same wonder here if there are any peaceful Christian nations?

USA ( I need pages to mention how peaceful they is)
UK
Italy
Spain (I hope they have changed)
Serbia (thousands of Muslims in huge massacres)
Holland* (with good history in occupying Arabs lands)
Hungary*
Denmark*
Canada (killed good number of Muslims in Somalia)
The Christian side if Nigeria (burned Muslims alive)
Russia (Killing Muslims of Chechnya )
Salvador*
Philippine (killing good number of Muslims every year at south)
Portugal*
Australia*
Poland*
Ukraine*

Of course I don't need to mention France (occupied several countries and killed 1 million in Algeria (not to mention what they did at another countries)

Do I have to mention them all peaceful nations of Christians?

Just compare the number of Muslims died in front of the number of Christian?

*Those you call Alias (I didn't mention them all) and we call invaders and killers.

How funny to read parts this thread. * Dual thinking *

you made me luagh today...hahahhahaah

how deep information , people, you know about Islam

Mohammed did not exactly write the Qu'ran perse but rather dictated it over a relatively short period of time late in his life. At least that is what I have been told. He is believed by Islam to be the last and greatest of the great prophets.

Yah. But not all Muslims have the same "beliefs" as Al-Qaeda or the fanatics who are taught hate, kidnapping lessons and gun use in madrasses, so that parallel stops quickly enough.

Most madrasses dont teach kidnapping lessons and gun use, and most Muslims, I believe, dont go to madrasses.

Just because all Europeans are white, doesnt make them all racists. Just because all Muslims believe in Allah, doesnt make them all adherents of the most violent, hateful fanatics who practice kidnapping and shooting by ways of "rite of passage".

Countless parallels possible. In Poland, strict Catholics still think the Jews carry the blame of having killed Jesus; Radio Mariya spouts anti-semitic hate. In the US, radical Christians try to firebomb abortion clinics, attack doctors who do abortions. I'm NOT equating their actions or the danger they pose to that posed by Islamist militants - that would be facile. I AM submitting that just because these Christians share "the same beliefs [..] in the "divine" writings of the same book" as all other Christians, doesn't make their extremist thoughts and actions somehow something that would characterise "the Christians".


There has been such a cord through Christian history too and YES, the Muslim equivalent should be "open to discussion" too.

How opening up the topic of sexism in Islam equates with positing that "shipping off to camps where hate, kidnapping lessons and gun use is part of the program" is the standard "rite of passage" for Muslims, however, is a mystery to me. Sounds more like panic-mongering blanket prejudice to me.

Its like saying that the Christian religion promotes hatred and violence - and when confronted about the silly generalisation, falling back on claiming that all you wanted to do was "open up for discussion" the excesses of radical anti-abortion activists, say. Seems a bit disingenious.