Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 61 (9209 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: The Rutificador chile
Post Volume: Total: 919,503 Year: 6,760/9,624 Month: 100/238 Week: 17/83 Day: 0/8 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   So let's look at why the Islamic world might be annoyed by the West?
jar
Member (Idle past 95 days)
Posts: 34140
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 91 of 174 (315571)
05-27-2006 8:53 AM
Reply to: Message 90 by tsig
05-27-2006 12:57 AM


Re: who struck first
As I told Brenn, this is Off Topic for this thread. Please try to stick with the topic.

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

This message is a reply to:
 Message 90 by tsig, posted 05-27-2006 12:57 AM tsig has not replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 95 days)
Posts: 34140
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 92 of 174 (315583)
05-27-2006 10:00 AM


From one of the smallest to one of the largest.
The area we now call Iraq is one of the largest of the Nation States in the Middle east. It had never really been one country, even while under the Ottomans it was considered as three separate administrative areas, Mosul in the north west, Baghdad in the center and Basra in the south east. The peoples, cultures, religions and history of the three areas were also quite different, the area around Mosul being predominently Kurdish, Baghdad dominated by Arab Sunnis and the area around Basra predominately Shia with many Persians as well as Arabs.
The Sykes-Picot Agreement recognized those ethnic, religious, political and cultural differences, placing Mosul in the area of French influence, Baghdad in the area of British influence and the key ports and oil well rich Basra district in the area of full British control.
Throughout the war the Allies, particularly the French and British, had used promises of true independance to gain the support of various Arab, Kurdish and Persian factions in harassing the Turks. The Treaty of Sevres mentioned earlier promised the Kurds a homeland. Time after time various British senior officers and diplomats suggested that independant states would be established, however at the same time those same Great Powers were signing secret agreements that showed a totally different purpose.
By 1918 and 1919, the Arabs of the Middle East were beginning to push to see some of those promises fulfilled.
Back in 1915, the British had promised to support the creation of an Arab Nation if the Hashemite Tribes under the Sharif of Mecca would rise up in rebellion to the Turks. Most of the negotiations were conducted by Sir Henry McMahon from Cario. The Sharif of Mecca was Sharif Hussein.
You can read the written correspondence between the two here.
By 1920 the Arabs had grown weary of waiting for either the French or British to follow through on what the Arabs saw as a commitment from the allies. In addition, there had been a revolution in Russia and the new Bolshevik government released copies of the secret Sykes-Picot Agreement. Their purpose was probably to show that the allies could not be trusted to honor commitments, and in the Middle east, the publication of the Sykes-Picot Agreement certainly gave that indication.
In 1920 the Arabs held a conference in Damascus and chose Faisal, son of the Sharif of Mecca as King of an Independant Syria. Syria was within the area under French Control according to the Sykes-Picot Agreement and neither France or Great Britain recognized him. He was deposed almost immediately by French General Henri Gouraud and he went into exile in Europe.
A year later, the British held a conference in Cario to decide what to do about the areas under their direct control or influence in what is now Iraq. As in other areas, Arab Nationalism was a factor in the area as the British and French were seen as just another Imperial Power, no different than the Ottomans that preceeded them. A British Officer was killed and riots broke out, much of the countryside was totally out of contriol and the British regained control only through the use of airpower and their standing land forces.
The Cairo Conference made it clear that some more stable form of goverment was needed and the British turned to that same son of the Sharif of Mecca that had just the year before been King of Syria.
Faisal Hussein was installed as the King of Iraq. The nation was drawn up to include all three of the disparate sections even though at the time it was acknowledged that there was no basis for combining them into one nation. As mentioned above, culturally, historicaly, religously and politically the three areas were quite different. Even the spoken languages of the three areas were different.
The Constitution for the new nation was drawn up to be a Parlimentary Monarchy like Great Britain, and the first act was to sign a treaty with Great Britain giving Great Britain total control over financial, military, judicial and foriegn relations.
To ligitimize the selection a plebiscite was held. Faisal was chosen by an astounding 96% of the vote.

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

  
macaroniandcheese 
Suspended Member (Idle past 4184 days)
Posts: 4258
Joined: 05-24-2004


Message 93 of 174 (315592)
05-27-2006 10:49 AM
Reply to: Message 81 by Faith
05-26-2006 10:40 PM


Re: History can't explain Islam's murderous actions
your culture looks nothing like my culture. thank you very much. i was raised to be a world citizen and understand the workings behind things. i don't think they are justified, but we are not blameless victims. war takes two. it always takes two. unless it takes fifty.
and these "cultures" (both american and christian) have devalued me every day of my life. why should i have any use for them?
i don't have a hidden agenda. my agenda is very open. solve the problem and stop blaming the other side. if we ever bothered to actually help people; if we ever bothered to actually share the knowledge about running a stable government that we have managed to learn while having our heads in our asses; if we ever bothered to give people more than just free money with our developmental strings attached; maybe we could actually accomplish goals. it's just like missionary work. people who go and cure disease and build houses and infrastructure and share their hearts along the way do save people. people who go scream on the street corner about how everyone walking past them is going to hell get eggs thrown at them.
and you're 'if you love it so much then why don't you marry it' is juvenile and further very uneducated. only one or two specific groups weak burkhas. muslim women in india wear saris and have partially exposed stomachs; indonesian muslim women wear bright colors and the clothing of their native culture. in other words, your smear is weak and laughable.
OFF TOPIC - If you must read content, use the Peek button, but Do Not Respond to this message or continue in this vein.
AdminPD
Edited by AdminPD, : Off Topic Warning
Edited by AdminPD, : Rendered Invisible

This message is a reply to:
 Message 81 by Faith, posted 05-26-2006 10:40 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 94 by Faith, posted 05-27-2006 11:25 AM macaroniandcheese has not replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1701 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 94 of 174 (315599)
05-27-2006 11:25 AM
Reply to: Message 93 by macaroniandcheese
05-27-2006 10:49 AM


Re: History can't explain Islam's murderous actions
You are totally naive about the nature of Islam.
OFF TOPIC - If you must read content, use the Peek button, but Do Not Respond to this message or continue in this vein.
AdminPD
Edited by AdminPD, : Off Topic Warning and rendered Invisible.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 93 by macaroniandcheese, posted 05-27-2006 10:49 AM macaroniandcheese has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 95 by AdminPD, posted 05-27-2006 11:39 AM Faith has not replied

  
AdminPD
Inactive Administrator


Message 95 of 174 (315600)
05-27-2006 11:39 AM
Reply to: Message 94 by Faith
05-27-2006 11:25 AM


Alert - Timeout Warning
Brennakimi and Faith,
Stop Do not continue your off topic posts. If you continue this line of discussion, I will give you both a suitable timeout.
This warning also applies to anyone else continuing their line of discussion.
Please, stick to the thread topic.
Please direct any comments concerning this Admin msg to the Moderation Thread.
Thank you

This message is a reply to:
 Message 94 by Faith, posted 05-27-2006 11:25 AM Faith has not replied

  
Sour
Member (Idle past 2504 days)
Posts: 63
From: I don't know but when I find out there will be trouble. (Portsmouth UK)
Joined: 07-27-2005


Message 96 of 174 (315612)
05-27-2006 1:01 PM
Reply to: Message 81 by Faith
05-26-2006 10:40 PM


Re: History can't explain Islam's murderous actions
I disagree that this is not about your OP, it's just that you deny its hidden agenda, but go ahead and make your case and then we will see.
I think you are inferring an agenda where one doesn't exist. I understand that the purpose of this thread is to see if past actions of Western powers might give inhabitants of the Middle East reason to feel aggrieved. Why not take that in good faith? No one is justifying murder by either side, and while Jar may or may not have liberal, fascist or any other tendancies is not relevant.
I think it has been shown that the area and its inhabitants have been treated badly by any standards. I have limited knowledge of the areas history, and that which I have is related to the actions of the British in the early 20th century.
A young Winston Churchill as Secretary of State for War and Air said in May 1919 :
"I do not understand this squeamishness about the use of gas. We have definitely adopted the position at the Peace Conference of arguing in favour of the retention of gas as a permanent method of warfare. It is sheer affectation to lacerate a man with the poisonous fragment of a bursting shell and to boggle at making his eyes water by means of lachrymatory gas.
I am strongly in favour of using poisoned gas against uncivilised tribes. The moral effect should be so good that the loss of life should be reduced to a minimum. It is not necessary to use only the most deadly gasses: gasses can be used which cause great inconvenience and would spread a lively terror and yet would leave no serious permanent effects on most of those affected."
from Companion Volume 4, Part 1 of the official biography, WINSTON S. CHURCHILL, by Martin Gilbert (London: Heinemann, 1976). My italics.
For me this is the crux of the argument. Who are we to judge and execute others for their percieved barbarity? That the argument can still be made that it is acceptable to protect our future by killing in the present under the guise of securing resources says more to me about how little we have learnt, and how easily we(as a species) can justify horrors by labelling others as inhuman.
In an earlier post you said :
Their pride in their culture, long dead and degenerated, and the certainty that Allah is to triumph over us all is what drives them.
I think this is a fairly common opinion, and I agree that certainty in faith is driver of evil, but I don't think your view (or anyones) of their culture gives us the right to arbitrarily move in, draw lines in the sand and tell them how much better our way is. I simply don't buy it, it's prideful meddling.
This is clearly an emotive topic, but whether I agree or disagree with the actions taken by the aggrieved should not affect my ability to see a potential reason for that grievance.
Edit: I started replying before the post from AdminPD saying do not continue this line. I tried to be on-topic as well as respond. I hope this is ok.
Edited by Sour, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 81 by Faith, posted 05-26-2006 10:40 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 97 by Faith, posted 05-27-2006 7:25 PM Sour has not replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1701 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 97 of 174 (315652)
05-27-2006 7:25 PM
Reply to: Message 96 by Sour
05-27-2006 1:01 PM


Re: History can't explain Islam's murderous actions
I think you are inferring an agenda where one doesn't exist.
Perhaps you aren't familiar with jar's anti-Christian pro-Islam opinions. Or familiar with the history of Islam itself.
Historical political events simply are not the reason for their terrorist behavior, no matter how indefensible the actions of the West.
And if this thread is to explain why they might be "annoyed" enough to do us harm, do the actions of Britain and France explain why it was the US that was targeted on 9/11 and not Britain or France?
I agree that certainty in faith is driver of evil
Well, there we have the politically correct moral equivalence formula, ALL faith is evil. Doesn't matter what the faith is in, all faith is evil, doesn't matter if the faith is in a teacher who said (at least half the time) that killing unbelievers is perfectly fine and pleases God, or in a teacher who said murder is never OK and we are to bless our enemies.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
Edited by Faith, : added last line.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 96 by Sour, posted 05-27-2006 1:01 PM Sour has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 98 by jar, posted 05-27-2006 7:54 PM Faith has replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 95 days)
Posts: 34140
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 98 of 174 (315659)
05-27-2006 7:54 PM
Reply to: Message 97 by Faith
05-27-2006 7:25 PM


You know faith, you really need to stop misrepresenting people.
Perhaps you aren't familiar with jar's anti-Christian pro-Islam opinions.
Please show where I have been anti-Christian or retract that allegation and apologize. I have constantly said that I am a Christian, that it is a beautiful religion, and that what I oppose is the perversion of Christianity in the messages of the Fundamentalists and Christian Right.
As to Islam, all I have ever said is that those same Christians that pervert the Christian message also pervert the message of Islam. Further I have supported that position with direct references to the Qur'an IN CONTEXT as opposed to the quotemining done by those who misrepresent Islam.
Now it's time you quite pulling this thread off topic with your utterly nonsensical posts. You have not posted one single fact throughout this thread or one single supporting treaty, document or map. I expect your next post in this thread to be an apology and that any future messages in this thread will be on topic and fully supported by actual historical documents and references.

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

This message is a reply to:
 Message 97 by Faith, posted 05-27-2006 7:25 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 99 by Faith, posted 05-27-2006 8:02 PM jar has replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1701 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 99 of 174 (315661)
05-27-2006 8:02 PM
Reply to: Message 98 by jar
05-27-2006 7:54 PM


Re: You know jar, you need to stop smearing your opponents
You slam the true Christians jar, in extremely nasty terms, so you get no apologies from me for telling the truth that you aren't a Christian. Your calling yourself a Christian doesn't impress me any more than the beliefs of Bible Christians impress you. Yours is the perversion of Christianity. We can keep this up all day you know.
And your MO, o great Admin jar yet, is slander of your opponents, though you have never been suspended for it or chided in any way for it. How you got this pass for violating every forum guideline I can only guess. Edit: You are the worst offender when it comes to giving unsupported opinions on this board too, while being the loudest at condemning it in others, who offend far less than you do in that regard.
It is on topic to address your title, which concerns why Islam might be ANNOYED with the West. We are addressing the topic of the thread when we say it is not for any historical reasons but for reasons inherent in their belief system.
If you want to discuss the history of the region, I think you need to change the title of your thread.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
Edited by Faith, : to add bolds

This message is a reply to:
 Message 98 by jar, posted 05-27-2006 7:54 PM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 100 by jar, posted 05-27-2006 8:05 PM Faith has replied
 Message 107 by macaroniandcheese, posted 05-28-2006 1:13 AM Faith has not replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 95 days)
Posts: 34140
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 100 of 174 (315663)
05-27-2006 8:05 PM
Reply to: Message 99 by Faith
05-27-2006 8:02 PM


Re: You know jar, you need to stop smearing your opponents
So once again Faith you cannot support your assertions. The readers will note.

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

This message is a reply to:
 Message 99 by Faith, posted 05-27-2006 8:02 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 101 by Faith, posted 05-27-2006 8:08 PM jar has not replied
 Message 102 by iano, posted 05-27-2006 8:48 PM jar has not replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1701 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 101 of 174 (315664)
05-27-2006 8:08 PM
Reply to: Message 100 by jar
05-27-2006 8:05 PM


Re: You know jar, you need to stop smearing your opponents
Once again you imply offense by your opponent that is your own.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 100 by jar, posted 05-27-2006 8:05 PM jar has not replied

  
iano
Member (Idle past 2197 days)
Posts: 6165
From: Co. Wicklow, Ireland.
Joined: 07-27-2005


Message 102 of 174 (315672)
05-27-2006 8:48 PM
Reply to: Message 100 by jar
05-27-2006 8:05 PM


Smear: Jars bread and butter.
The readers will note.
It is my sincere hope that they do Jar. Your smear tactics are there for all to see.
I might as well row in with something that I am fairly certain I have refrained from doing before now. Whatever the position of my opponants who claim to be Christians, I would never dream of suggesting that they are not: for I do not know for sure and must accept that diversity of opinion exists and that knowledge of the Bible does not a Christian make. People can get the wrong end of the stick, including me, and still be Christians.
But for the sake of 'the reader' who you so frequently suppose queue up to watch our shenanigans, I feel in your case I must make an exception. The purpose is not to offend or hurt but to make it quiet clear to others what it is you are doing.
You are not in any way shape or form a Christian. Others oppose the gospel from without. They go to battle wearing the markings of the opposition and stand in position where one can expect an honourable enemy to stand. And in so far that there is honesty and honour in that I commend them. But you are fighting behind enemy lines. You don the uniform of your Christian enemy and seek to wreak havoc from within the enemies camp.
Such people, when found, are taken out and shot for the dishonourable way they chose to fight.
BANG.
Edited by iano, : typos

This message is a reply to:
 Message 100 by jar, posted 05-27-2006 8:05 PM jar has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 103 by AdminNWR, posted 05-27-2006 9:00 PM iano has not replied
 Message 150 by lfen, posted 06-04-2006 2:46 PM iano has not replied

  
AdminNWR
Inactive Member


Message 103 of 174 (315674)
05-27-2006 9:00 PM
Reply to: Message 102 by iano
05-27-2006 8:48 PM


Rule 10
10. Always treat other members with respect. Argue the position, not the person. Avoid abusive, harassing and invasive behavior. Avoid needling, hectoring and goading tactics.
Please follow the forum guidelines.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 102 by iano, posted 05-27-2006 8:48 PM iano has not replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 95 days)
Posts: 34140
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 104 of 174 (315682)
05-27-2006 9:33 PM


From big back to small, from Iraq to Kuwait.
We discussed Iraq, one of the largest, least homogenous areas in the Middle east. Now let's look at Kuwait, one of the smallest and most homogenous.
Tiny Kuwait would not be a place you would expect Great Britain to spend much time except for one thing. It has a deep water port at the northern end of the Persian Gulf, one that was more secure than the port at Basra. The British were always interested in deep water ports and so Kuwait moved far higher on it's list of interesting places, just as Bahrain was an alternative to the Iranian port of Bushire.
The significance of Kuwait increased when Germany announced a Berlin-Baghdad railway that would eventually extend to the port at Kuwait. That changed the situation immediately and Kuwait moved near the top of Great Britians interest list.
In 1899 Kuwait became a Protectorate of the British Empire. In 1913 or so, Britain was given a monopoly on exploration and production of oil reserves in Kuwait.
Kuwait though made it quite clear that their relationship with Great Britain was no more than political reality. They realized they were small fish surrounded by larger predators and saw the relationship with Great Britain as not by choice, but necessity.
You can read more about the history of Kuwait at the map room

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

Replies to this message:
 Message 114 by Phat, posted 05-28-2006 1:15 PM jar has replied

  
Admin
Director
Posts: 13108
From: EvC Forum
Joined: 06-14-2002


Message 105 of 174 (315684)
05-27-2006 9:34 PM


Forum Guidelines Warning
I'll just add my voice to AdminNwr's by requesting of members that they please discuss the topic and not their opponents and what horrible people they are. I read back 4 or 5 messages trying to find the origin of where things got personal but didn't hit bedrock, so I don't know who's to blame, and I don't care. Just stop.

--Percy
EvC Forum Director

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024