Egyptian Violence

[Diemen]

The problem with the question, (and he asked the same question about whether I knew gay people), is that when it is answered - it is automatically cliche ("some of my best friend are [fill in blank]"). Either that, or you're attacked for not befriending a person of that group. It's a trap.

I honestly don't think that was Irvine's intention. I don't think your knowing or not knowing American Muslims makes a difference, but they were brought up because you seem to be ignoring their existence when you make a statement like "Islam and theocracy are one and the same."

 

[AEON]

I honestly don't think that was Irvine's intention. I don't think your knowing or not knowing American Muslims makes a difference, but they were brought up because you seem to be ignoring their existence when you make a statement like "Islam and theocracy are one and the same."

I know a former co-worker, she was Muslim - but not very active in her faith.

I also had a few Egyptian friends in my college days - they were not that active in their faith either.

The statement "Islam and theocracy are one and the same" - is based on the teachings of Islam. I thought the article I posted pointed that out.

 

[Irvine511]

The problem with the question, (and he asked the same question about whether I knew gay people), is that when it is answered - it is automatically cliche ("some of my best friend are [fill in blank]"). Either that, or you're attacked for not befriending a person of that group. It's a trap.

ok.

find me a group of American Muslims who wish to restore the caliphate.

the wish for a theocracy is a response to economic crisis and uncertainty and cultural stasis brought about by colonial rule and then despotism more than anything else. things will be so much better once we get back to god. we're believers and we'll be rewarded for it.

 

[Irvine511]

The statement "Islam and theocracy are one and the same" - is based on the teachings of Islam. I thought the article I posted pointed that out.

i hear a lot of "build Christ's Kingdom here on earth" from Christians.

does that mean they want a theocracy?

 

[AEON]

i hear a lot of "build Christ's Kingdom here on earth" from Christians.

does that mean they want a theocracy?

No.

For the kingdom of God is not a matter of eating and drinking, but of righteousness, peace and joy in the Holy Spirit, - Romans 14:17

Neither shall they say, Lo here! or, lo there! for, behold, the kingdom of God is within you - Luke 17:21

 

[BVS]

The statement "Islam and theocracy are one and the same" - is based on the teachings of Islam. I thought the article I posted pointed that out.

I cannot stand this type of lazy pedestrian commentary. You and I both know that non-Christians(and even those that claim to be Christian) have all kind of false understandings of what is truly Biblical teaching of Christianity. You are that person to the Muslim faith, I know I've seen your sources over the years.

 

[Irvine511]

No.

says you.






(you see how that works?)

 

[Pearl]

i hear a lot of "build Christ's Kingdom here on earth" from Christians.

does that mean they want a theocracy?

I was about to say something along those lines. I'm sure there are plenty of Christians who would want to see a theocracy, but that doesn't mean the Bible calls for it (We've discussed this before, and I'm sure the consensus was Christ's Kingdom is more of a mindset than an actual government).

Now I haven't read the Qu'ran so I can't say if Islam truly is about a theocracy. I've heard the suspicions that it does, which is of course fueled by the actions of fundamentalists. I've known Muslims who were moderate and even liberal, and I highly doubt they would want to see a caliphate. Now the extremists are another matter. How many of them really exist, we can't be totally sure.

 

[AEON]

I cannot stand this type of lazy pedestrian commentary. You and I both know that non-Christians(and even those that claim to be Christian) have all kind of false understandings of what is truly Biblical teaching of Christianity. You are that person to the Muslim faith, I know I've seen your sources over the years.

Why do you feel it is necessary to point out the perceived weakness in Christianity to defend Islam?

Simply look at the nations that are dominated by Islam - is that a place where you would want to live?

 

[AEON]

says you.

No - says the Scripture I quoted.

 

[Irvine511]

Why do you feel it is necessary to point out the perceived weakness in Christianity to defend Islam?

Simply look at the nations that are dominated by Islam - is that a place where you would want to live?

so you think the issues faced by the Muslim world are created by Islam and not a history of colonialism, oil, and despots?

No - says the Scripture I quoted.

you're interpreting wrong. i have a better hold on the truth than you do. my view is more in align with what Jesus really taught, and what i know God wants.



(you see?)

 

[AEON]

so you think the issues faced by the Muslim world are created by Islam and not a history of colonialism, oil, and despots?

A combination of many factors - including Islam.

you're interpreting wrong. i have a better hold on the truth than you do. my view is more in align with what Jesus really taught, and what i know God wants.

okay...well then perhaps you should take issue with the way people are interpreting Islam's holy books, because it is this interpretation which is killing innocent people and keeping many of these countries enslaved.

 

[Irvine511]

A combination of many factors - including Islam.

do you blame the dark ages on christianity?

okay...well then perhaps you should take issue with the way people are interpreting Islam's holy books, because it is this interpretation which is killing innocent people and keeping many of these countries enslaved.

i think i do. i've repeatedly mentioned the treatment of gays and especially women (51% of any population's brain power) in many Muslim countries.

 

[BVS]

Why do you feel it is necessary to point out the perceived weakness in Christianity to defend Islam?

There you go again.

I am not defending Islam nor am I pointing out weaknesses. I feel like you're living in a heightened sense of victim-hood here. I'm just asking you to simply look at how badly some outsiders perceive Christianity and how often there are common misconceptions, or how often it can be warped by its "leaders". Can we agree on that? Now with that understanding are you going to tell me that you can without doubt tell me that the Muslim faith teaches that it has to be a theocracy? Really?

Simply look at the nations that are dominated by Islam - is that a place where you would want to live?

And now you simply look at the age of the religion, the economic and educational backgrounds of these nations...

 

[AEON]

do you blame the dark ages on christianity?

To a certain extent - at least in the way it (The Catholic Church) was applying the faith. I also give the Catholic Church credit for initiating the Enlightenment.

i think i do. i've repeatedly mentioned the treatment of gays and especially women (51% of any population's brain power) in many Muslim countries.

Good. Those things should be called out.

 

[AEON]

Now with that understanding are you going to tell me that you can without doubt tell me that the Muslim faith teaches that it has to be a theocracy? Really?

I can't say that it without a doubt - but I can say that there is currently a bloodbath going on in places like Egypt (hence the start of the thread) by those that certainly think their country should be an Islamic theocracy.

We're beyond debating the finer points of holy writings and how they should be interpreted. The fact is - people are actually dying in great numbers because of the Islamic theocracy interpretation (as correct or incorrect as that may be).

And now you simply look at the age of the religion, the economic and educational backgrounds of these nations...

Islam is not a new kid on the block and it certainly has control on the level of education (or lack thereof) of the people which directly impacts the economics. It's a negative feedback loop.

 

[BVS]

I can't say that it without a doubt - but I can say that there is currently a bloodbath going on in places like Egypt (hence the start of the thread) by those that certainly think their country should be an Islamic theocracy.

We're beyond debating the finer points of holy writings and how they should be interpreted. The fact is - people are actually dying in great numbers because of the Islamic theocracy interpretation (as correct or incorrect as that may be).

I agree, I just have little patience for those that fall for the "it's the religion's fault" propaganda. The last thing to fight propaganda with is more propaganda because then you start to lay the foundation for some "holy" war.

 

[LJT]

I can't say that it without a doubt - but I can say that there is currently a bloodbath going on in places like Egypt (hence the start of the thread) by those that certainly think their country should be an Islamic theocracy.

We're beyond debating the finer points of holy writings and how they should be interpreted. The fact is - people are actually dying in great numbers because of the Islamic theocracy interpretation (as correct or incorrect as that may be).


Islam is not a new kid on the block and it certainly has control on the level of education (or lack thereof) of the people which directly impacts the economics. It's a negative feedback loop.

Again the current 'bloodbath' in Egypt started when a secular military seized power from an Islamic government and then started slaughtering the followers of that government. The majority of the slaughter is fairly one way currently.

Assad is a secular dictator slaughtering religious Muslims in the resistance to his dictatorship. Being particularly adherent to any religion in the middle east is not the cause, is nowhere near being the cause of its instability. Islam does not have the overreaching power you claim it has.

Poverty is the driver of the lack of education not Islam. Something we are only too happy to support in the likes of Saudi Arabia. Plus Islam is not one thing, its as fractious as Christianity is with the different interpretations in it. It's teachings vary from imam to imam and depending on how much adherence they give to the sayings to Muhammad (I forget the proper name for these) as opposed to the Quran. Plus of course many of things that get blamed on Islam are derived from cultural traditions mainly from Saudi Arabia such as the idea that women have to be completely covered.

 

[AEON]

Again the current 'bloodbath' in Egypt started when a secular military seized power from an Islamic government and then started slaughtering the followers of that government.

I don't think it is as simple as that.

The majority of the slaughter is fairly one way currently.

Are Christians burning mosques?

Assad is a secular dictator slaughtering religious Muslims in the resistance to his dictatorship. Being particularly adherent to any religion in the middle east is not the cause, is nowhere near being the cause of its instability.

Assad will slaughter anyone. And Syria is complicated (as is Egypt) - because we have to ask ourselves which form of totalitarianism is worse - Islamic or Secular? We would obviously hope that a functional democracy would prevail, but how many of those are up and running in the Middle East? Do you expect Al Qaeda in Syria or the Muslim Brotherhood will bring democracy?

Islam does not have the overreaching power you claim it has.

How do you gauge such a thing? The percentage of women wearing burqas? The number of minarets blasting prayers five times a day? If you don't want to call this "Islam" -would it make you more comfortable if we simply named it "Middle and Near Eastern Non-JudeoChristian Civilization"? Whatever this "entity" is - at this time in history it is entirely unstable and it's weighing down global progress in the way we treat women and minorities.

Poverty is the driver of the lack of education not Islam.

As Irvine pointed out - when half the population can't go to school based on gender, the culture ( and therefore the economics) is going to suffer.

Something we are only too happy to support in the likes of Saudi Arabia. Plus Islam is not one thing, its as fractious as Christianity is with the different interpretations in it.

It is used in the same context as the word Christendom.

It's teachings vary from imam to imam and depending on how much adherence they give to the sayings to Muhammad (I forget the proper name for these) as opposed to the Quran.

Hadith.

Plus of course many of things that get blamed on Islam are derived from cultural traditions mainly from Saudi Arabia such as the idea that women have to be completely covered.

Plus of course many of things that get blamed on Islam "Middle and Near Eastern Non-JudeoChristian Civilization" are derived from cultural traditions mainly from Saudi Arabia such as the idea that women have to be completely covered.

 

[LJT]

I never claimed it was as simple as that but the current bout of violence did begin with what everyone is desperately trying to not call a military coup.

Bah a fairly facetious answer, this what im trying to get you away from 'Middle and Near Eastern Non Judaeo Christian civilisation", there is no 'entity' that is the cause. Real structural economic problems, distribution of resources and wealth along with despotic leaders, will lead to an appeal to religion in a populace, which is a simpler explanation for why things are the way they are for people, it is also useful as a method of control, people can entrench their right rule as divine right much as in the dark ages in Christendom, but it is not the reason they were in power or how they maintained that power, leaders such as Assad, Gaddaffi, the Saudi Royal family all tried and are trying to keep their people's subjugated in order to maintain their political and economic advantages, they will do that with religion, politics, violence and their wealth, but religion is not the answer to why the place is a shit hole, you seem to be ignoring any historical context for why the region exists like it does.

The economic and political instability existed long before you have the current breed of islamic extremists.

The Christians may be getting attacked and murdered in Egypt, i'd still venture more muslims are getting killed by their own military. Plus its just silly to put forward the whole idea that one religion is much better than the others. When the Maronite Christians were the dominant force in Lebanon they were just as cruel and sadistic as any muslim during their civil war. Any religion when so dominant will tend towards theocracy, just look at conservatives and how they view women should be treated, while I am not giving that equivalency to how certain strains of Islam treat women and homosexuals there is a similar strain of thought between them. It just so happens we have a very watered down version of Christianity on the go these days.

Still I hear no answers to what should be done about it? Blaming it on Islam is washing away our own culpability in maintaining the Saudis as they are, who are one of the biggest funders of terrorism, but we are either to cowardly or greedy to confront that. Shit in supporting the rebels in Syria we were looking to allow arms shipments to Islamic groups.

 

[AEON]

Still I hear no answers to what should be done about it?

Yes, that is the million dollar question. I'm hopeful that solar grid parity, electric cars, and 3D printing (reduces need for shipping) - technology that simply cuts off the oil money. We're still another 10-15 years from that occurring, and it well certainly cause more instability in the region in the short term - but it would hopefully "quarantine" their issues until they can resolve them on their own.

Blaming it on Islam is washing away our own culpability in maintaining the Saudis as they are, who are one of the biggest funders of terrorism, but we are either to cowardly or greedy to confront that.

Again, I don't think peace and equality are so easily achieved in Islamic countries - even with the economic stability that a post-scarcity world brings.

 

[LuckyNumber7]

Again the current 'bloodbath' in Egypt started when a secular military seized power from an Islamic government and then started slaughtering the followers of that government. The majority of the slaughter is fairly one way currently.

Assad is a secular dictator slaughtering religious Muslims in the resistance to his dictatorship. Being particularly adherent to any religion in the middle east is not the cause, is nowhere near being the cause of its instability. Islam does not have the overreaching power you claim it has.

Poverty is the driver of the lack of education not Islam. Something we are only too happy to support in the likes of Saudi Arabia. Plus Islam is not one thing, its as fractious as Christianity is with the different interpretations in it. It's teachings vary from imam to imam and depending on how much adherence they give to the sayings to Muhammad (I forget the proper name for these) as opposed to the Quran. Plus of course many of things that get blamed on Islam are derived from cultural traditions mainly from Saudi Arabia such as the idea that women have to be completely covered.

The current 'bloodbath' is a result of a militant Islamist organization taking to arms after their radical leader was dethroned from his ensuing reign of terror. You know, the same organization that took to arms to break their 'leader' Mohammed Morsi out of prison in 2011. Yes, he was in prison.

To say the majority of the 'slaughter' (if that's what you're calling it) is one way is inaccurate. As with the situation in Syria, the only word that is getting out is that of the 'freedom fighters' AKA militant terrorists.

What happened in Egypt? Islamists took advantage of an overthrow in government and successfully gained power through means of forgery and bribery. Morsi tried to seize complete power and failed. The majority of the nation stood out against Morsi and his government and demanded him to give up his autocratic path that threatened the minority in Egypt, and he said no. The majority spoke out, and there was an ultimatum. The military spoke the will of the people. The opposition now, rebels, are of the minority. They're armed, and they're fighting back.

Just ask yourself... if this happened here in this country, would it be tolerated? The totalitarian actions of Morsi. The destruction of the minority's house of worship. The militant protesting and arming of individuals. No. Not one bit. If Obama tried to change the constitution and silenced all Republicans, he would be removed from power. If individuals destroyed mosques, they would be arrested. If individuals protested in arms, they would be killed on the spot.

 

[AEON]

Since you mentioned Syria and there have been reports of another chemical weapon attack - do you think it is feasible that Islamic "freedom fighters" would use gas on the citizens and then blame it on Assad in order to provoke the West to come in on their side?

Of course it's feasible.

We should avoid the situation in Syria - as tragic as it is for the ordinary people that live there. I would send in drones and robots if we had enough.

 

[LJT]

Truth be told we have no idea one way or the other how accurate the initial elections were, but Morsi's election was fairly supported by the West. There is plenty to say it was a fair election and plenty to say it was not. We don't really have a clue. We have no idea if the majority of Egyptians supported or not the dethronement of Morsi. The rebels are fighting back after their political party has been banned and raids on their offices and the forceful breaking up of protests, the initial protests did not appear to be violent. And though they are now they are woefully outnumbered by a military preventing people having proper funerals (preventing bodies being buried within 24 hours) reports of families being made to say that a person clearly shot died of natural causes.

There is no right side in this conflict in Egypt, why do you think the likes of Baradei has left the interim government?

 

[LJT]

Since you mentioned Syria and there have been reports of another chemical weapon attack - do you think it is feasible that Islamic "freedom fighters" would use gas on the citizens and then blame it on Assad in order to provoke the West to come in on their side?

Of course it's feasible.

We should avoid the situation in Syria - as tragic as it is for the ordinary people that live there. I would send in drones and robots if we had enough.

Assad is the one that has current access to the chemical weapons, your getting into conspiracy theories with that thinking.

 

[AEON]

Assad is the one that has current access to the chemical weapons, your getting into conspiracy theories with that thinking.

I didn't say it actually happened - but I certainly think it is feasible.

Are these the chemical weapons that were shipped out of Iraq pre-invasion? Are they homegrown? Is there some chain of custody you're aware of? Are they all accounted for? How can you say that Assad is the only one with access to chemical weapons?

Also - it doesn't make sense that Assad would do the one thing that would bring the Western military against him - but stranger things have happened.

The bigger point is this - neither side in that war can be trusted. We just fought these same "freedom fighters" in Iraq and Afghanistan, now they suddenly love us?

 

[LJT]

You would have to take the view then that the insurgents are using chemical weapons on their own people. That makes less sense. Its a mess we should stay well clear of I agree.

 

[LuckyNumber7]

Truth be told we have no idea one way or the other how accurate the initial elections were, but Morsi's election was fairly supported by the West. There is plenty to say it was a fair election and plenty to say it was not. We don't really have a clue.

Yes, we do. Bribery of the poor was widely noted during the election. Who cares if the west supported it? The west can be wrong. The west is wrong. Ask the Egyptian people.

We have no idea if the majority of Egyptians supported or not the dethronement of Morsi

Explain the massive turnouts for his ouster protests. Explain his approval rating of his people being somewhere in the 20% region. Explain the massive unprecedented celebrations following his removal from power. The Egyptian people, majorly, wanted him gone.

The rebels are fighting back after their political party has been banned

Their political party that just so happens to be a wing of an extremist organization that promotes terrorism.

and raids on their offices and the forceful breaking up of protests, the initial protests did not appear to be violent.

The protests were not broken up with gunfire and Molotov cocktails. They were broken up and met with militant resistance. That is what such an organization does. The same type of organization that will have snipers aiming at police hiding in a mosque, and then playing innocent when someone innocent dies because police open fire in their general direction when one of their heads get blown off.

Are you familiar with everything that is going on in Egypt? How about rebels firing RPGs at a bus filled with police officers returning from vacation, and then executing each individual roadside with a bullet to the head. Peaceful my ass.

Blah blah blah stop buying into the stupid ass story of a "freedom fighter against an oppressive regime". The Egyptian military is ENTIRELY in the right here, with failure to operate properly being their downfall.

 

[LJT]

I'm not buying into the freedom fighter against an oppressive regime? So we're all for military coups and dictatorships now days?

Yes massive groups turned up against Morsi, large groups turned up in support of him as well. In Belfast there where i'm from there were massive protests on the 12th against the parades commission decision, doesn't mean they were right or that is what exactly the whole of the public opinion was on the issue.

Just because there were large protests does not mean we know exactly the wealth of support for either side. My general understanding is Morsi is far more popular in the countryside than he was in the cities and was generally from those of a poorer background.

So we can't trust the voting in Egypt but we can trust approval figures? I mean approval figures everywhere are pretty shit for whoever is in power.

I do not approve of Morsi's actions while in power but that does not mean I approve of the military who even after Mubarak sought to maintain their own power in the country. While I can approve of ousting a crappy regime I am not going to give them my complicit approval to do what they like. You could probably list forever incidents from either side in a conflict about who is the worse and I have no doubt the islamic groups involved are doing terrible things, I however do not think it makes the military the ones in the right, they are the ones with the ability to commit much greater wholesale slaughter than any terrorist.

 

[AEON]

You would have to take the view then that the insurgents are using chemical weapons on their own people. That makes less sense. Its a mess we should stay well clear of I agree.

Well - it looks like we're getting involved...

Military strikes on Syria 'as early as Thursday,' US officials say

Missile strikes against Syria could be launched “as early as Thursday,” senior U.S. officials said Tuesday as the White House intensified its push toward an international response to the suspected use of chemical weapons.
The “three days” of strikes would be limited in scope, and aimed at sending a message to Syria's President Bashar Assad rather than degrading his military capabilities, U.S. officials told NBC News.