Quote:
|
Originally Posted by stevo
Now you're making assumptions here, will. You can't speak for the dead suicide bomber, you don't know that he was desperate.
|
I'd call it a safe assumption. I doubt that people who are simply dissatisfied and unhappy would be willing to safrafice themselves to make a political statement like a suicide bomber.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by stevo
you don't know anything about him. You can assume all you want, but unless you've actually spoken to someone who'se driven a bomb-laden truck into a mosque or strapped himself full of explosives packed with ball bearings, you don't know that they were really desperate or really why they do what they do.
|
Now who's making asumptions? I happen to know a lot of people in Iraq, Palestine and now Lebanon. A lot of the information about suicide bombings I get come from their experiences and friends instead of MSNBC or a book written by a professor in Texas. I consider their take on this to be reliable and when I base my understanding on their experience I do so with confidence.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by stevo
How is a sunni gunning down shiites on the streets of baghdad a strategic response to the socioeconomic powerplays by the US and UK? The gunman is still a terrorist, trying to instill terror in others. Is he desperate? I don't know, and neither do you.
|
Why do they have weapons? The US and UK have been playing God with the ME, and while we supply Israel with everything from munitions to nuclear weapons, Saudi Arabia supplies extreemists in order to counter that. They are living in violence based in bigotry, so it is to be expected that the bullets will be spread across anyone they hate. The thing is: the person you describe isn't a terrorist. Terrorists use fear as a tool, they simply are killing each other out of hate. That isn't terrorism. Suicide bombings are terrorism. Attacking areas that should be safe or that represent things like economics, religon, military power, political power etc. would be terrorism.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by stevo
By the way, the first thing muhammed did when he started his religion was create an army and start conquering. I don't think Jesus and the apostles did that. It wasn't until much later that christianity was used as a justification for war, however war and islam are bound at the hip.
|
The first thing that Muhammed did was write the Qu'ran.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Qur'an 49:13, 23:52
BEHOLD, We have created you all out of a male and a female,
and have made you into nations and tribes, so that you might come to know one another...
This community of yours is one single community,
since I am the Sustainer of you all: remain, then, conscious of me.
|
The community is one community is a preaching of peace between nations, not conquoring.
All the battles that took place during the Prophet's lifetime, under the guidance of the Qur'an and the Muhammed, have been surveyed and shown to have been waged only in self-defense or to pre-empt an imminent attack. I doubt we in the US are in any position to condemn a preemptive military action.
War and Islam are not bound at the hip any more than any other religon.