I don't agree with some protests in defense of Charlie Hebdo

For the serious discussion of weighty matters and worldly issues. No off-topic posts allowed.

Moderators: Azrael, Moderators General, Prelates

morriswalters
Posts: 7073
Joined: Thu Jun 03, 2010 12:21 am UTC

Re: I don't agree with some protests in defense of Charlie H

Postby morriswalters » Tue Feb 10, 2015 11:02 am UTC

CorruptUser wrote:They joined up with a Yemeni terrorist organization. If a US group had recruited a Saudi person to commit mass murder, you'd say he was an American agent now wouldn't you?
Yes. I guess that question would be, did he go to Yemen to learn how to kill because he was already determined to, or did he go to Yemen and get convinced to murder there? I think we both know the answer to that. It isn't that Western Democracies are evil. I love the one we live in. But we are paying the price for trying to impose our vision of destiny on the rest of the world. The Middle East is a product of the Colonial Powers, from the borders of the Countries, to the formation of Israel. In France according to something I posted 70 so percent of the prison population in France is Muslim. We are certainly quick enough to feel outrage for the number of incarcerated People of Color in the US, yet no one commented on it when I posted it. Why do you think that is?
Derek wrote:Oh? Which Western democracies were shooting each other in the 30's? Because this is news to me.
I suppose now we are going to quibble over if Hitler was installed by a flawed Democratic process in the Wiemar Republic? However I will cede your point, the Wiemar Republic had ceased to exist by the time the war started and Italy had become a dictatorship by 1925.

User avatar
CorruptUser
Posts: 10548
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC

Re: I don't agree with some protests in defense of Charlie H

Postby CorruptUser » Tue Feb 10, 2015 1:54 pm UTC

Imperialism ended years ago, and the Mid-East has only grown more violent since then. Stop blaming "the west" for your problems already.

morriswalters
Posts: 7073
Joined: Thu Jun 03, 2010 12:21 am UTC

Re: I don't agree with some protests in defense of Charlie H

Postby morriswalters » Tue Feb 10, 2015 3:10 pm UTC

CorruptUser wrote:Imperialism ended years ago, and the Mid-East has only grown more violent since then. Stop blaming "the west" for your problems already.

They aren't my problems. And aren't likely to be since I live in Kentucky. I don't travel internationally and if I did, it wouldn't be to France or the Middle East. But I do like to read and feel no need to be mainstream in how I think. The timeline on Middle East terrorism started ticking somewhere around 1968 in terms of action(the PLO was chartered before that), the French didn't leave Algeria until 62. The British retreated after WW2 and left everywhere about the time of partition. So say 48. The Italians got the boot from Libya at the end of the war. Am I missing anything. And then Israel and the Arabs went at it until 79 when Egypt made peace. And yes the Middle East has gotten more violent.

User avatar
CorruptUser
Posts: 10548
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC

Re: I don't agree with some protests in defense of Charlie H

Postby CorruptUser » Tue Feb 10, 2015 4:10 pm UTC

It's incredibly complicated and incredibly simple at the same time. Saudi Arabia was created by fundamentalist desert bandits, but they let some of the fundamentalism (called Salafism) slide (specifically the eternal war with non-fundies) to become filthy stinking rich; in spite of having virtually no exports other than oil, SA has a GDP per capita greater than the US. They use this money to fund the spread of fundamentalism. But the fundamentalists they trained hate them for the peace and agreements with non-fundamentalists. They have the 4th most expensive military in the world but in 1979 when some people complaining that the Saudis were too liberal (they pretended to ban enslaving fellow Muslims in 1962 but this pissed off a lot of people), they couldn't do a damn thing and had to rely on the French who fucked up, so they are viewed as wearing the cross. Iraq pulled some shit in 1990 and rather than deal with it, they had their friends the Bushes invade. But this pissed off even more fundies. To appease the fundies and get foreign troops out of SA, the US invaded Iraq (among other reasons).

And this isn't getting into the Muslim Brotherhood (including Al Qaeda) and the rest of the Mideast.

morriswalters
Posts: 7073
Joined: Thu Jun 03, 2010 12:21 am UTC

Re: I don't agree with some protests in defense of Charlie H

Postby morriswalters » Tue Feb 10, 2015 6:11 pm UTC

So what is your point? The Saudi's are important because "we" have to have oil. Europe and to a lesser extant the US needed the oil to fuel our economies. For a number of years we controlled the oil for our profit. Look at the original name of the oil company. Arabian-American Oil Company. And had that not been so Saudi Arabia would be a sleepy desert country with no influence at all, matter what their Religious predilections. And it always comes back to money and oil, cold war power plays, or trying to do the right thing.

Tyndmyr
Posts: 11443
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 8:38 pm UTC

Re: I don't agree with some protests in defense of Charlie H

Postby Tyndmyr » Tue Feb 10, 2015 6:13 pm UTC

morriswalters wrote:So what is your point? The Saudi's are important because "we" have to have oil. Europe and to a lesser extant the US needed the oil to fuel our economies. For a number of years we controlled the oil for our profit. Look at the original name of the oil company. Arabian-American Oil Company. And had that not been so Saudi Arabia would be a sleepy desert country with no influence at all, matter what their Religious predilections. And it always comes back to money and oil, cold war power plays, or trying to do the right thing.


So what, we should stop trying to do the right thing?

Not sure where you're going with this.

morriswalters
Posts: 7073
Joined: Thu Jun 03, 2010 12:21 am UTC

Re: I don't agree with some protests in defense of Charlie H

Postby morriswalters » Tue Feb 10, 2015 7:18 pm UTC

Tell me how to achieve the right thing? There are, give or take, about 29 million Saudi's. How would you go about convincing those 29 million men, women and children that their culture should switch over to a Western esthetic, with gender equality and all? Throw away all the things you don't like in their Religion. I'm curious as to how that might be done. I make the population of the Middle East at about 370 million. Will your plan work for them as well. What I am attempting to do is to show the futility of thinking that you can impose the right thing. However this is way out in left field from my original point. Which was that Charlie Hebdo should be compared in any way to the civil rights movement.

User avatar
Lucrece
Posts: 3558
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2008 12:01 am UTC

Re: I don't agree with some protests in defense of Charlie H

Postby Lucrece » Wed Feb 11, 2015 7:47 am UTC

Paul in Saudi wrote:They knew their actions would result in violence. They did not overly care. Innocent people died. They were jerks.

I do like the comparison to Westboro Baptist Church. Few people carry signs that say "I am Westboro."


I knew holding my boyfriend's hand in a fairly religious lower class neighborhood was gonna end up in a fight, so I guess I was an asshole when my boyfriend got punched at the time we got jumped by a group of men provoked by our brazen display of civil liberties.
Belial wrote:That's charming, Nancy, but all I hear when you talk is a bunch of yippy dog sounds.

morriswalters
Posts: 7073
Joined: Thu Jun 03, 2010 12:21 am UTC

Re: I don't agree with some protests in defense of Charlie H

Postby morriswalters » Wed Feb 11, 2015 10:46 am UTC

So you compare your personal right to associate with people dear to you, to the right to draw a satirical cartoon about a Religion you don't practice? You'll pardon me if I hold the first to be more important than the second. And I know you weren't talking to me.

User avatar
CorruptUser
Posts: 10548
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC

Re: I don't agree with some protests in defense of Charlie H

Postby CorruptUser » Wed Feb 11, 2015 12:43 pm UTC

Considering that Russia is arresting people for "homosexual propaganda" and many Muslim majority countries would execute you for even suggesting such a display be allowed, yeah... no. It's freedom of expression, the same thing. They are protected in the US by the constitution in the same line in the same amendment.

User avatar
Paul in Saudi
Posts: 262
Joined: Fri Sep 07, 2012 12:52 pm UTC
Location: Dammam, Saudi Arabia

Re: I don't agree with some protests in defense of Charlie H

Postby Paul in Saudi » Wed Feb 11, 2015 1:57 pm UTC

morriswalters wrote:Tell me how to achieve the right thing? There are, give or take, about 29 million Saudi's. How would you go about convincing those 29 million men, women and children that their culture should switch over to a Western esthetic, with gender equality and all?



One at a time, I suppose. Or seventeen at a time in my class-period 8 class.

morriswalters
Posts: 7073
Joined: Thu Jun 03, 2010 12:21 am UTC

Re: I don't agree with some protests in defense of Charlie H

Postby morriswalters » Wed Feb 11, 2015 2:29 pm UTC

CorruptUser wrote:Considering that Russia is arresting people for "homosexual propaganda" and many Muslim majority countries would execute you for even suggesting such a display be allowed, yeah... no. It's freedom of expression, the same thing. They are protected in the US by the constitution in the same line in the same amendment.
I'll make it clear. Until or unless you are prepared to go to war, how Islam or the Russians think about anything inside their borders is of no interest to me. It is a lot like being hit by an asteroid, at this point I can't do a damn thing about it. I am perfectly willing to swat anybody who crosses the line to attack us, which we have done and are continuing to do. If Charlie Hebdo insists on pulling the nose of the Islamic shark, I will support Frances right to make the culprits life as short as possible, if they attack. But an editorial cartoon that portrays the Prophet just to show that you can do it isn't something that needs to be done. Particularly given that we have shown them in no uncertain terms that we can go anywhere and do just about anything we want to do, and that they have nothing that they can do to stop us.
Paul in Saudi wrote:
morriswalters wrote:Tell me how to achieve the right thing? There are, give or take, about 29 million Saudi's. How would you go about convincing those 29 million men, women and children that their culture should switch over to a Western esthetic, with gender equality and all?



One at a time, I suppose. Or seventeen at a time in my class-period 8 class.
That might work. Given time. :D

User avatar
Paul in Saudi
Posts: 262
Joined: Fri Sep 07, 2012 12:52 pm UTC
Location: Dammam, Saudi Arabia

Re: I don't agree with some protests in defense of Charlie H

Postby Paul in Saudi » Wed Feb 11, 2015 2:59 pm UTC

I know of nothing else that will work. That is why I am doing it.

User avatar
CorruptUser
Posts: 10548
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC

Re: I don't agree with some protests in defense of Charlie H

Postby CorruptUser » Wed Feb 11, 2015 3:10 pm UTC

So we shouldn't care about Russia killing the gays because it's not our country, but Muslims are right to send people to murder people in other countries because of something that doesn't even harm anyone in those countries?


Also Paul, yay, you are doing good work. I'm assuming. Keep it up.

morriswalters
Posts: 7073
Joined: Thu Jun 03, 2010 12:21 am UTC

Re: I don't agree with some protests in defense of Charlie H

Postby morriswalters » Wed Feb 11, 2015 3:38 pm UTC

CorruptUser wrote:So we shouldn't care about Russia killing the gays because it's not our country, but Muslims are right to send people to murder people in other countries because of something that doesn't even harm anyone in those countries?
You strawman me.
morriswalters wrote:I am perfectly willing to swat anybody who crosses the line to attack us, which we have done and are continuing to do. If Charlie Hebdo insists on pulling the nose of the Islamic shark, I will support Frances right to make the culprits life as short as possible, if they attack.
And right and wrong doesn't have a lot to do with it at this point. How many do you think you will have to kill to solve this problem? One of the problems is that your ability to see injustice exceeds your ability to do anything about it. We stood eye to eye with the USSR for quite a bit of my existence. And we were prepared to kill them to a man. But we never seemed to change the core of them. We may yet end up there again. If you want to solve the problem of extremist Islam I ask you again what are you prepared to do? As you have pointed out it has gotten worse since 68. Has anything we've done to this point made it any better? If Islam is the problem where do you go with that fact? What do you think we should do?

Paul in Saudi wrote:I know of nothing else that will work. That is why I am doing it.
We all do what we have to.

User avatar
CorruptUser
Posts: 10548
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC

Re: I don't agree with some protests in defense of Charlie H

Postby CorruptUser » Wed Feb 11, 2015 3:54 pm UTC

So in the shortest possible explanation, state what you are arguing.

Me: Freedom of expression is vastly more important than your desire to not be offended.

morriswalters
Posts: 7073
Joined: Thu Jun 03, 2010 12:21 am UTC

Re: I don't agree with some protests in defense of Charlie H

Postby morriswalters » Wed Feb 11, 2015 4:20 pm UTC

CorruptUser wrote:So in the shortest possible explanation, state what you are arguing.

Me: Freedom of expression is vastly more important than your desire to not be offended.
I support your right to say whatever you want, and if someone shoots your head off because they didn't like it, I'll hold the rope while they build the gallows. However if what you were saying didn't need to be said, I'll let your family carry your coffin to your grave and won't help. I can respect the idea while resenting a frivolous use. Did Charlie Hebdo need to say anything? Did the image of Mohamed speak any louder than a drone strike in Yemen or Pakistan?

Tyndmyr
Posts: 11443
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 8:38 pm UTC

Re: I don't agree with some protests in defense of Charlie H

Postby Tyndmyr » Wed Feb 11, 2015 4:31 pm UTC

morriswalters wrote:Tell me how to achieve the right thing? There are, give or take, about 29 million Saudi's. How would you go about convincing those 29 million men, women and children that their culture should switch over to a Western esthetic, with gender equality and all? Throw away all the things you don't like in their Religion. I'm curious as to how that might be done. I make the population of the Middle East at about 370 million. Will your plan work for them as well. What I am attempting to do is to show the futility of thinking that you can impose the right thing. However this is way out in left field from my original point. Which was that Charlie Hebdo should be compared in any way to the civil rights movement.


It starts with honesty, and portraying things accurately. Supporting those who oppose their evils, and opposing them ourselves. It isn't *easy* to convince millions of people that they're doing something terrible, but it's not impossible.

morriswalters wrote:So you compare your personal right to associate with people dear to you, to the right to draw a satirical cartoon about a Religion you don't practice? You'll pardon me if I hold the first to be more important than the second. And I know you weren't talking to me.


Freedom of expression is freedom of expression. It needs to be supported across the board. I'm not gay, but if society thinks it's cool to censor two dudes making out, that's something worth fighting. Even when it doesn't affect me. Because sooner or later, the terrible attitude behind it WILL affect me. Ignoring it because it doesn't today is short sighted.

Stop telling people that their freedoms to do the things they care about are less important than your freedom to do things you care about.

morriswalters
Posts: 7073
Joined: Thu Jun 03, 2010 12:21 am UTC

Re: I don't agree with some protests in defense of Charlie H

Postby morriswalters » Wed Feb 11, 2015 5:10 pm UTC

Tyndmyr wrote:Stop telling people that their freedoms to do the things they care about are less important than your freedom to do things you care about.
So you deny me the right to disagree and to argue my position?
Tyndmyr wrote:It starts with honesty, and portraying things accurately. Supporting those who oppose their evils, and opposing them ourselves. It isn't *easy* to convince millions of people that they're doing something terrible, but it's not impossible.
Sometimes the best thing you can do is the same things you do with your kids, trust them to see the values you hold in such high regard by living them.

Tyndmyr
Posts: 11443
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 8:38 pm UTC

Re: I don't agree with some protests in defense of Charlie H

Postby Tyndmyr » Wed Feb 11, 2015 7:43 pm UTC

morriswalters wrote:
Tyndmyr wrote:Stop telling people that their freedoms to do the things they care about are less important than your freedom to do things you care about.
So you deny me the right to disagree and to argue my position?
Tyndmyr wrote:It starts with honesty, and portraying things accurately. Supporting those who oppose their evils, and opposing them ourselves. It isn't *easy* to convince millions of people that they're doing something terrible, but it's not impossible.
Sometimes the best thing you can do is the same things you do with your kids, trust them to see the values you hold in such high regard by living them.


I'm not denying you anything. I'm not the law, or a moderator, or otherwise wielding authority to stop you. I'm telling you what you SHOULD do.

There's nothing wrong with demonstrating values yourself, but I have yet to see a parent/child relationship that was even vaguely functional, yet lacked communication. Parents teach values in addition to living them. Your analogy is really strange.

cphite
Posts: 1369
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2011 5:27 pm UTC

Re: I don't agree with some protests in defense of Charlie H

Postby cphite » Wed Feb 11, 2015 8:44 pm UTC

morriswalters wrote:
cphite wrote:Part of the problem is that while this shit is going on - systemic murder, rape, torture, slavery - the PC crowd here in the civilized world demands that we consider these things nothing more than a difference of opinion - another viewpoint, if you will. Be careful not to call them out too harshly for stoning the rape victim to death; you might hurt someone's feelings.


Ok. Would you include Indonesia in that, 204 million.


I was going to say "no" but just now I read an article about Indonesia wanting to require virginity tests for girls graduating from school...

How about India, 177 million? Maybe Turkey, 74 million. Bangladesh, 148 million? Jordan, 6 million? How about the 2.5 million in the US? The 2.8 million in the UK. The 4 million in Germany. The 4.7 million in France? Are they all rapists and murders. Do they all practice slavery? Torture?


I'm not saying that all Muslims do these things or that all Muslim countries do these things... if that was unclear then I apologize. I was referring to countries like Saudi Arabia, Iran, Pakistan, Yemen, Sudan, and the like. Countries where women are routinely oppressed; and where people are routinely arrested, tortured, or even killed over matters of speech or religion.

In Saudi Arabia, for example, a woman who leaves her home without an escort can be beaten in the street; some have been outright murdered for accusations of adultery. This isn't being done by rogue elements; it's being done by officially sanctioned police forces, as a matter of law enforcement. People who speak against the regime, or against the religion, are arrested, beaten, tortured, and sometimes murdered - again, not by rogue factions but by the government itself.

And in regards to the question that prompted this: Yeah, our ways are superior to that. Our system of governance, while it certainly has flaws, is superior to any that uses torture and murder, and sometimes rape, as a primary means of law enforcement.

We won't discuss China or Russia.


Why not? They're excellent examples of regimes that treat their people badly without it being about religion.

I'll point out that the population of the Middle East is outdone by the population of Indonesia, Bangladesh, and India's Muslims. Roughly 450 million versus the Middle East's 371 million. Are there bad people in the Middle East, damn right. However I thought most of them wanted pretty much what I want. Food, shelter and families, and the money to enjoy them. You seem to be telling me I'm wrong. So I must be. I think I'm done here.


Again, I was referring specifically to countries and groups that are governed in the manner of Saudi Arabia, Iran, etc. I was not saying that all Muslims are bad, and if it came across that way then I apologize.

The point is, there is a fairly specific type of government in the world today - almost exclusively based on one specific religion - that represents some of the most harsh, backwards, and oppressive governance imaginable. And we should call it out as such, and not make excuses for it.

morriswalters
Posts: 7073
Joined: Thu Jun 03, 2010 12:21 am UTC

Re: I don't agree with some protests in defense of Charlie H

Postby morriswalters » Wed Feb 11, 2015 9:08 pm UTC

Most of the things I do around here are strange. It's who I am. I pretty much clarified my position to CorruptUser.
morriswalters wrote:I support your right to say whatever you want, and if someone shoots your head off because they didn't like it, I'll hold the rope while they build the gallows. However if what you were saying didn't need to be said, I'll let your family carry your coffin to your grave and won't help. I can respect the idea while resenting a frivolous use. Did Charlie Hebdo need to say anything? Did the image of Mohamed speak any louder than a drone strike in Yemen or Pakistan?
I believe that says everything I need to say on the subject of Charlie Hebdo.

I don't mind my neighbors business unless or until he comes in my yard. I don't question much of anything that he does that isn't covered by the social contract both of us live under. I don't share a social contract with any Muslim outside the US. I don't understand their culture, and while I'm sorry for any injustice they might do in their own country, I see nothing in it, that I feel any compelling need to do anything about. I'm sorry that you feel differently, but it is what it is. Anyhow it's been educational, lots of reading about the Middle East. It looks like we are going to put troops in again if Obama has his way. This is probably going to make me an independent. You question your mental health when Rand Paul starts to look more appealing than anyone else.

@cphite
I honor your position, I just don't agree with it. Who knows you may be right.

User avatar
CorruptUser
Posts: 10548
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC

Re: I don't agree with some protests in defense of Charlie H

Postby CorruptUser » Wed Feb 11, 2015 9:22 pm UTC

But it DOES need to be said. Because no one, no thing, should be beyond criticism. Ever. Is that hard to understand?

morriswalters
Posts: 7073
Joined: Thu Jun 03, 2010 12:21 am UTC

Re: I don't agree with some protests in defense of Charlie H

Postby morriswalters » Wed Feb 11, 2015 9:59 pm UTC

CorruptUser wrote:But it DOES need to be said. Because no one, no thing, should be beyond criticism. Ever. Is that hard to understand?
Okay, I'm going to assume your talking to me. Sure. But in point of fact what you seem to mean to me is that things you consider settled should never be criticized. Because that is just what I am doing. Questioning and criticizing. In an ideal world I'm pretty sure we want the same thing, but the world isn't ideal. Anyway.

User avatar
CorruptUser
Posts: 10548
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC

Re: I don't agree with some protests in defense of Charlie H

Postby CorruptUser » Wed Feb 11, 2015 10:06 pm UTC

morriswalters wrote:
CorruptUser wrote:But it DOES need to be said. Because no one, no thing, should be beyond criticism. Ever. Is that hard to understand?
Okay, I'm going to assume your talking to me. Sure. But in point of fact what you seem to mean to me is that things you consider settled should never be criticized. Because that is just what I am doing. Questioning and criticizing. In an ideal world I'm pretty sure we want the same thing, but the world isn't ideal. Anyway.


Can you reword this into something that makes sense?

BattleMoose
Posts: 1993
Joined: Tue Nov 13, 2007 8:42 am UTC

Re: I don't agree with some protests in defense of Charlie H

Postby BattleMoose » Wed Feb 11, 2015 10:58 pm UTC

What can we do about it (human rights abuses in the Middle East)?

As individuals really not that much. Personally I find the general human rights abuses absolutely disgusting and want absolutely nothing to do with it. I won't work for those countries, visit them, or fly their airlines, as much of a personal boycott as I can. Even signed petitions to abandon the Sister City relationship between St Petersburg and Melbourne. Sure, they haven't noticed and aren't likely too.

But its very common place for people to fly Emirates or other such airlines. If there were ever companies to boycott, these are them.

morriswalters
Posts: 7073
Joined: Thu Jun 03, 2010 12:21 am UTC

Re: I don't agree with some protests in defense of Charlie H

Postby morriswalters » Wed Feb 11, 2015 11:15 pm UTC

These are the money quotes.
Because no one, no thing, should be beyond criticism.
But in point of fact what you seem to mean to me is that things you consider settled should never be criticized.
That is a little more to the point than I normally try to be but it should be clear.
BattleMoose wrote:What can we do about it (human rights abuses in the Middle East)?
We are going to send troops to help wipe out ISIS evidently.

User avatar
CorruptUser
Posts: 10548
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC

Re: I don't agree with some protests in defense of Charlie H

Postby CorruptUser » Wed Feb 11, 2015 11:42 pm UTC

I don't think I understand what you are saying. Please elaborate.

BattleMoose
Posts: 1993
Joined: Tue Nov 13, 2007 8:42 am UTC

Re: I don't agree with some protests in defense of Charlie H

Postby BattleMoose » Thu Feb 12, 2015 12:21 am UTC

morriswalters wrote:
BattleMoose wrote:What can we do about it (human rights abuses in the Middle East)?
We are going to send troops to help wipe out ISIS evidently.


Human rights abuses in the Middle East are certainly not confined to ISIS.

User avatar
CorruptUser
Posts: 10548
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC

Re: I don't agree with some protests in defense of Charlie H

Postby CorruptUser » Thu Feb 12, 2015 12:37 am UTC

And if our idea of "moderate rebels" is Al-Nusra, yeah, don't even bother. Turkey wants Assad gone? Let THEM sort it out.

morriswalters
Posts: 7073
Joined: Thu Jun 03, 2010 12:21 am UTC

Re: I don't agree with some protests in defense of Charlie H

Postby morriswalters » Thu Feb 12, 2015 1:18 am UTC

BattleMoose wrote:
morriswalters wrote:
BattleMoose wrote:What can we do about it (human rights abuses in the Middle East)?
We are going to send troops to help wipe out ISIS evidently.


Human rights abuses in the Middle East are certainly not confined to ISIS.

Nope. Absolutely not. And that was more sarcasm than serious answer, since the prez just asked Congress for permission to send in the troops. I don't know, is the honest answer. What is your goal? Look at the Damage. Syria, Iraq, Yemen, Libya, Sudan, Somalia, Afghanistan, and a nuclear armed Pakistan that doesn't control all its own territory. Adding to the misery is Russia and the Ukraine. The US doesn't have either the desire or the capacity to fix those problems. We aren't going to do anything to Saudi Arabia, nor Egypt, nor Iran. What could we do? If we up and decide to invade Syria who knows what could happen. And the thought of Israel bombing Iran leaves me cold.
CorruptUser wrote:I don't think I understand what you are saying. Please elaborate.
No. And I'm going to leave it at that. I may be responding to you in anger, you deserve abetter response than that.

User avatar
CorruptUser
Posts: 10548
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC

Re: I don't agree with some protests in defense of Charlie H

Postby CorruptUser » Thu Feb 12, 2015 2:01 am UTC

Meh, in all honesty we should be buddy buddy with the current regime running Egypt. They may be sweeping their opposition under the rug, but considering what their opposition really is, yeah, not going to lose any sleep over that.

In their own words.

BattleMoose
Posts: 1993
Joined: Tue Nov 13, 2007 8:42 am UTC

Re: I don't agree with some protests in defense of Charlie H

Postby BattleMoose » Thu Feb 12, 2015 2:31 am UTC

morriswalters wrote:
BattleMoose wrote:
morriswalters wrote:
BattleMoose wrote:What can we do about it (human rights abuses in the Middle East)?
We are going to send troops to help wipe out ISIS evidently.


Human rights abuses in the Middle East are certainly not confined to ISIS.

Nope. Absolutely not.


What on Earth are you on about? This is absolutely objectively true.

User avatar
Lucrece
Posts: 3558
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2008 12:01 am UTC

Re: I don't agree with some protests in defense of Charlie H

Postby Lucrece » Thu Feb 12, 2015 7:35 am UTC

If he wants confirmation, just look at good ol' Saudi Arabia, who had the nerve to send someone to those solidarity marches for Charlie Hebdo while they've beheaded dissenters and sentenced a guy just running a blog to public lashings. But they got money and oil to offer to the west, so nobody cares whereas ISIS is of no economic benefit.

I'm pretty sure the Saudis and their tyrannical kin are very happy to have ISIS around; they're like the WBC of muslim theocrats. Takes the magnifying glass off all of them.
Belial wrote:That's charming, Nancy, but all I hear when you talk is a bunch of yippy dog sounds.

morriswalters
Posts: 7073
Joined: Thu Jun 03, 2010 12:21 am UTC

Re: I don't agree with some protests in defense of Charlie H

Postby morriswalters » Thu Feb 12, 2015 11:18 am UTC

BattleMoose wrote:What on Earth are you on about? This is absolutely objectively true.
That would be as in you are absolutely correct, not as in it isn't true. Poor phrasing.
Lucrece wrote:If he wants confirmation, just look at good ol' Saudi Arabia, who had the nerve to send someone to those solidarity marches for Charlie Hebdo while they've beheaded dissenters and sentenced a guy just running a blog to public lashings. But they got money and oil to offer to the west, so nobody cares whereas ISIS is of no economic benefit.

I'm pretty sure the Saudis and their tyrannical kin are very happy to have ISIS around; they're like the WBC of muslim theocrats. Takes the magnifying glass off all of them.
I don't need confirmation. As I just said a case of poor phasing.

User avatar
CorruptUser
Posts: 10548
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC

Re: I don't agree with some protests in defense of Charlie H

Postby CorruptUser » Thu Feb 12, 2015 1:39 pm UTC

Lucrece wrote:If he wants confirmation, just look at good ol' Saudi Arabia, who had the nerve to send someone to those solidarity marches for Charlie Hebdo while they've beheaded dissenters and sentenced a guy just running a blog to public lashings. But they got money and oil to offer to the west, so nobody cares whereas ISIS is of no economic benefit.

I'm pretty sure the Saudis and their tyrannical kin are very happy to have ISIS around; they're like the WBC of muslim theocrats. Takes the magnifying glass off all of them.


Go farther than that. The Bushes are very close with the Saudi royal family (including the bin Ladens, who at this point are Saudi royals). In spite of any rhetoric, we were never buddy-buddy with Saddam. We had opposed him in the 70s with our puppet ally, the Shah. But Iranian revolution, etc etc. Then Saddam invades Saudi's buddy, the Kuwaitis, in 'revenge' for saving them from the Iranian menace (Iran initially called for all Shia to back them and conquer the Islamic world). In spite of having all this wealth and the world's 4th most expensive military, the Saudis had their best buddy Bush Sr take out Saddam for them. But they issued a fatwa that allowed US troops to be stationed in Saudi Arabia. This was the final straw for the rest of the Salafis; no true Salafi would let Christians into their territory to kill Muslims. So Saudi Arabia lost quite a bit of face in the Islamic world as a result. When we didn't oust Saddam, we had to keep soldiers in Saudi Arabia to protect it. For years they were asking the US to finish the job and get rid of Saddam, but as long as he was threatening the Saudis they couldn't kick the US out because that would mean they had to start defending themselves. The second Iraq war wasn't just about "WMD's" and "Oil", it was about restoring the Bush family's best buddy the House of Saud's "legitimacy" throughout the Islamic world. And we put up with them because the Wahhabis are content to be filthy stinking rich and dominate the Islamic world, while the Salafis want to conquer everyone. There is a reason the Salafist group, the Muslim Brotherhood, is considered a terrorist group by Russia.

morriswalters
Posts: 7073
Joined: Thu Jun 03, 2010 12:21 am UTC

Re: I don't agree with some protests in defense of Charlie H

Postby morriswalters » Thu Feb 12, 2015 2:43 pm UTC

OK, I'll take the bait. We went to war because The Saudi's and the Bushes are man friends. Lucrece is pissed because the Saudi's don't practice human rights according to the western way. I have no idea what BattleMoose is thinking. Is there a point? Your are presented with a fait accompli. I don't care that the Saudi's sent a representative to France. So what? Do you think they were going to declare solidarity with their extremist brethren in France? It was a dog and pony show. See and be seen. Obama stayed home and you see what that got him. You want to demonize the Saudi's, ok. Now what? The reality is, they can afford to not care. They are pumping oil as fast as they can an selling it just as fast. And we buy it. All of which has nothing to do with the cartoon. For the record since my writing skills appear to be sinking.

Yes, most if not all of the States in the Middle East are guilty of egregious human rights violations.
Yes, elements of the Islamic culture would just as soon bury us as breathe.

Tyndmyr
Posts: 11443
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 8:38 pm UTC

Re: I don't agree with some protests in defense of Charlie H

Postby Tyndmyr » Thu Feb 12, 2015 3:49 pm UTC

BattleMoose wrote:
morriswalters wrote:
BattleMoose wrote:What can we do about it (human rights abuses in the Middle East)?
We are going to send troops to help wipe out ISIS evidently.


Human rights abuses in the Middle East are certainly not confined to ISIS.


Certainly.

But one could make the case that ISIS, being sort of extreme, are worse than average.

But yeah, even more moderate folks in the region have some very uncomfortable views(and sometimes, acts). Still, improvement is improvement.

User avatar
CorruptUser
Posts: 10548
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC

Re: I don't agree with some protests in defense of Charlie H

Postby CorruptUser » Thu Feb 12, 2015 4:19 pm UTC

Actually Saudi Arabia HATES Daesh (aka ISIS), because Daesh has as their first goal to conquer all the Arab countries. Which is what their parent organization the Muslim Brotherhood wanted. The MB has the end goal of the entire world being a single Salafist theocracy, with themselves running it of course. One of their leaders, Sayyid Qutb, wanted to do it quickly and violently. Qutb's spiritual successor Zawahiri planned to conquer the 'near enemy' (Arab 'apostate' countries, especially the Saudis who "wore the cross"), then the 'far enemy' (Israel), then move on to Europe, then the US. He was sidestepped by Osama, who decided to attack the US first to cut off support to Saudi Arabia, THEN start conquering the Arab world, then world domination. Zarqawi was more in line with Zawahiri, but he was killed and Al Bagdahdi took over. Al Bagdahdi is the guy running the Islamic state. His plan is to conquer the Arab world, then Israel, then Europe, then Russia, then the entire world. The goal is the same as the MB, and that can't be overstated; the MB has no problem with violence if it advances their goals; they just believe that nonviolence is more effective in some situations, and given how stupid western media had been when they pretty much took over Egypt, they were kind of right.
Last edited by CorruptUser on Thu Feb 12, 2015 4:49 pm UTC, edited 1 time in total.

morriswalters
Posts: 7073
Joined: Thu Jun 03, 2010 12:21 am UTC

Re: I don't agree with some protests in defense of Charlie H

Postby morriswalters » Thu Feb 12, 2015 4:48 pm UTC

Got that. Do you have a germ of an idea what to do about it, other than printing satirical cartoons?


Return to “Serious Business”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 17 guests