Are there any peaceful muslim nations?

@gungasnake,

Quote:

any other group of people in history having gone through the same experience would have learned some manners and made adjustments to their own conduct

But they were quiet and unassuming, then came oil and Israel.

1 Reply

@oralloy,

Quote:

the U.S. froze Japanese assets in the U.S. on 26 July 1941 and on 1 August established an embargo on oil and gasoline exports to Japan.[11] The oil embargo was an especially strong response because oil was Japan's most crucial import, and more than 80 percent of Japan's oil at the time came from the United States....The U.S. embargoes gave Japan a sense of urgency. It would either have to agree to Washington's demands or use force to gain access to the resources it needed.

In their final proposal, on 20 November, Japan offered to withdraw their forces from southern Indochina and not to launch any attacks in southeast Asia provided that the U.S., Britain, and the Netherlands ceased aiding China and lifted their sanctions against Japan

Read the above. Which part is nonsense ?

1 Reply

@oralloy,

Quote:

Not when it is 750 years of one side invading the territory of the other side.

Rubbish. During that time they were allied, had truces, wars were started by both sides, your knowledge is either limited or you are just a hater.

Quote:

I am in fact capable of working such things out.

Your bias has no limits then.

Quote:

The land of Israel belongs to the Jews.

So there is no problem if the Muslims take it off the Christians, is there ? Who did the Jews take it off of ?

Quote:

The Byzantine Empire was the remnants of the Roman Empire

Rubbish. Unbelievable simplification due to a total lack of knowledge of the differences between the two.

Quote:

Correct. None of the Roman Empire belonged to Muslims.

But it belonged to the Romans.... Drunk

Quote:

Ionus wrote:

Quote:
How many large cities were destroyed by Islam?

Don't know. Does it matter?

In any comparison between the Roman conquests and the Muslim conquests, yes, it does matter.

1 Reply

@coldjoint,

Quote:

I am disappointed in Ionus. Losing the debate he has to pull out the "hate" word.
What is so hard in understanding where the hate and aggression come from? There are indisputable proofs in words and actions. People do not want to hate Islam, Islam wants to hate(non-Muslims) us.

I'll let others decide who is losing the debate. You seem to be using the "hate" word. Is that failing your own standards or are they different to what you want from me ?

2 Replies

@Ionus,

Quote:

You seem to be using the "hate" word.

How else would you describe how Islamic scripture views the non-Muslim? If you call it anything else you are in denial.

1 Reply

@coldjoint,

It does take proselytizing to a more aggressive manner then other religions. But hate is a result being generated by both sides in the war.

1 Reply

@Ionus,

Quote:

But hate is a result being generated by....

The Koran and the people that teach it. The other side fights a defensive war. Which means it really does not matter how they feel.

0 Replies

@Ionus,

Quote:

Yes. Many invasions kept the population intact. This is proven by DNA.

So what you mean is you don't like using 'butchering' for
- invaders running swords through mens guts & spilling their intestines out - which a butcher does to animals (to remove intenstines)
- invaders chopping of mens limbs with swords...which a butcher does to animals) etc.
- invaders slicing open flesh...which a butcher does to animals, etc.

The accuracy of the word is not in question, just your opinion on it's use.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------

It is not fine for you to assume that everyone has the same motivations as you (they simply don't). And it therefore not fine that use of an accurate word like 'butchery' must be used in hate.

Such know-it-all 'we're all the same so I know what you must feel towards ### by use of a single word'...is indulging in nonsense. The question you need to ask yourself is - why are you holding so desperately to a conviction that, after over 100 of my posts, this single word must equal hatefulness on my part.
-------------------------------------------------------

If you know anything about haters:
- haters are inherently insecure. When personally attacked, they almost always attack back personally. Perhaps you'd care to show where in this entire thread, I do this?
- they can't substantiate their position with much evidence (I have something in the vicinity of 50-70 links throughout this thread, each linking to one of: lists of events, individual events, quranic quotes, quotes of muftis etc)
- their arguments go all over the place, without a common, logical thread (this can exist without hate, but it is almost always present in hate).

In other words...should hate exist, you would be able to provide much more than the use of a single word by me....which is accurate but not to your taste.

It's time to stop deluding yourself about others supposed 'hate', and ask yourself why you are doing so.

1 Reply

@Ionus,

Ionus (to Coldjoint) wrote:

You seem to be using the "hate" word. Is that failing your own standards or are they different to what you want from me ?

Going by your inferrence that my single use of the word 'butchery' = hate....would you apply hate to the Quran calling non-muslims:
-dogs
- the worst of beasts
- cattle
- monkeys
- swine
- corrupt
- liars
- untrustworthy
- satan followers (this is in relation to 'people of the book')
- losers.

Would you call it hate to further reinforce that with instructions to muslims regarding non-muslims:
- don't be friends with them
- don't take them as helpers
- don't take commands from them
- don't believe them

All above previously substantiated by Quranic quotes.

You ask others about whether they hold to differing standards, so I would ask the same of you - what is your position on the Quran talking about non-muslims in such a way? Does it equal hate against non-muslims?

1 Reply

@Ionus,

Quote:

But they were quiet and unassuming, then came oil and Israel.

Any rational people would have seen that as a double blessing. Money from oil for good works and a neighbor known for intellectual achievement, a peaceful disposition and a cheery willingness to lend helping hands. All the slammites had to do was find a place somewhere in the vast swath of territory known as the slammite world to put the ******* palisavages and they could all be living in splendor by now.

1 Reply

@vikorr,

Yes, vikorr, there are Muslim terrorists. Where have you been the last 60 years ?

0 Replies

@coldjoint,

Yes, coldjoint, there are Muslim terrorists . Where have you been the last 60 years ?

0 Replies

@coldjoint,

The ability for Muslims to lie came from being spies in Mecca . It is long overdue for a change . Many Muslims are unhappy with these aspects of their religion . I for one find their ability to lie and still be morally upright about as palatable as the God of the OT .

1 Reply

@vikorr,

You applied butchery to one side to engender emotions . It also implies one side is defenseless .

If you say you dont hate Muslims, would you say you love them ?

1 Reply

@vikorr,

Quote:

Does it equal hate against non-muslims?

Yes, it does . Is that why you hate them ?

1 Reply

@gungasnake,

There is nothing wrong in what you say . They were how ever prevented and are still prevented from resettling by their own authorities who dont care for their people only power . Arafat said his best weapon was the womb, meaning he will out breed the Israelis and the world will have to do something with so many people living in camps . Hasnt worked so far, but the cruelty they are subjecting their own people to...shocking.

0 Replies

@Ionus,

Quote:

The ability for Muslims to lie came from being spies in Mecca

I see the ability to lie is in the blood? Passed down genetically? That is what you sounds like you are saying.

The ability to lie is taught to each generation through the Koran and Mohammads example in the Hadiths.

1 Reply

@Ionus,

Ionus wrote:

You applied butchery to one side to engender emotions . It also implies one side is defenseless .

vikorr wrote:

Is butchering an inaccurate word for what is done by all sides during invasions in the era we were talking about?

You're now arguing for arguments sake, right?

Quote:

Yes, vikorr, there are Muslim terrorists. Where have you been the last 60 years ?

And where have I been discussing current terrorism with you, rather than history? Your facetiousness is misplaced.

1 Reply

@Ionus,

Quote:

Yes, it does . Is that why you hate them ?

You couldn't rise to the challenge to provide more than a single word (which is accurate but not to your taste) in over 100 of my posts...so now you just keep resorting resort to nonsensical taunting?

Well, if it floats your boat Rolling Eyes

1 Reply

@coldjoint,

Quote:

I see the ability to lie is in the blood? Passed down genetically? That is what you sounds like you are saying.

If that is your best attempt, you are not very good at this, are you ?

Quote:

The ability to lie is taught to each generation through the Koran and Mohammads example in the Hadiths.

Not even close. The ability to lie is in all humans . What you wish to describe is the authority to lie . No, dont thank me, you clearly need the help .

2 Replies

Are there any peaceful muslim nations?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know