Yes, we can’t forget about other Western countries, such as Britain and France.
It’s unfortunate that people in power (both Muslim, non-Muslim, foreign and domestic) create problems for the common person. It’s not that Muslims have problems, it’s the powers in charge force these problems on people and use Muslims as a scapegoat.
You seem to have quite a hatred for Muslims and Islam. That’s quite unfortunate that you are hateful person.
I do hope you are getting some professional hope for your deep psychological and insecurity issues.
Classic victim syndrome. As long as you keep blaming someone else, this problem will not go away.
You still haven't posed a counter-argument to what I said. (Possibly due to the hatred that blinds you).
The problems will not go away as long as the people who have an interest in keeping these problems going keep remaining unaccountable. These people or groups can be both Muslims and non-Muslims.
I have already disproved your theory that its not just US thats responsible for Islamic extremism. Don't know what else you are looking for...
Right and I thought we agreed that extremism is caused by imperialism, occupations, economic disparities, social inequalities, and political disenfranchisement. We also agreed that Britain and France share that blame, along with the US for propping up despots (who also share the blame as well.)
Right and I thought we agreed that extremism is caused by imperialism, occupations, economic disparities, social inequalities, and political disenfranchisement. We also agreed that Britain and France share that blame, along with the US for propping up despots (who also share the blame as well.)
The causes you have listed may have played a role, but they are inadequate as a full explanation, because they fail to offer any insight into why there is such strife between Muslim majorities and non-Western, non-Muslim minorities (like in the Sudan) or between Muslim minorities and non-Western, non-Muslim majorities (like in India).
The causes you have listed may have played a role, but they are inadequate as a full explanation, because they fail to offer any insight into why there is such strife between Muslim majorities and non-Western, non-Muslim minorities (like in the Sudan) or between Muslim minorities and non-Western, non-Muslim majorities (like in India).
So what is your explanation then? How do these reasons fail to offer a full explanation or insight, in your opinion? What mental process did you go through to reach such a conclusion? Can you give an example where these reason are not-applicable?
There is strife in other countries as well, and religion typically plays a secondary role. Since strife is very common in 2011 among most of the world and Muslims are 1/5 of the world's population, you will indeed see Muslims in these conflicts. It seems to me you would rather blame the religion and its followers (while brushing aside legitimate causes such as imperialism, occupations, sanctions, etc.) because you think that they are inherently evil due to your blind hatred for Muslims and Islam.
Firstly, I neither have blind hatred towards Islam/Muslims and neither am I blaming the Muslims entirely. However, I find your blaming the west/America for everything ridiculous and a function of your victim syndrome.
I am no expert, but I would suggest you read the book **Clash of Civilizations **by Harvard Prof. Samuel Huntington which offers possible reasons for the strife.
To summarize, there are 3 reasons mentioned in the book -
One is the fact that Islam, as a religion, started out violently - not only with Muhammad himself, but also in the following decades as Islam spread by war throughout the Middle East.
A second issue is the so-called “indigestibility” of Islam and Muslims. According to Huntington, this describes the observation that Muslims do not easily assimilate to host cultures when new rulers arrive (for example, with colonization), nor do non-Muslims easily assimilate to a culture under Islamic control.
A final factor is demographic. In recent decades there has been a population explosion in Muslim countries, leading to a huge increase in unemployed males between the ages of fifteen and thirty. Sociologists in the United States know that this group creates the most social disruption and causes the most crime - and that in a relatively wealthy and stable society.
In Muslim countries, however, we find little such wealth and stability, except perhaps among a few of the political elites. Thus, the disruption potential of that group of males is much greater.
Firstly, I neither have blind hatred towards Islam/Muslims and neither am I blaming the Muslims entirely. However, I find your blaming the west/America for everything ridiculous and a function of your victim syndrome.
No, it's just not America and the West, but also the Muslim despots who accept American and Western aid. It's definitely a two-way street.
[QUOTE]
I am no expert, but I would suggest you read the book **Clash of Civilizations **by Harvard Prof. Samuel Huntington which offers possible reasons for the strife.
[/QUOTE]
I read this book when I was 17 (ten years ago) and I have also read many articles since then debunking said outdated book, including watching lectures by Edward Said criticizing this book. Anything else?
Religion isn't necessarily the end all and be all to everything. Geo-politics usually trumps religion in most cases. An example of this is Shia Iran's support of Orthodox Christian Armenia against Shia Azerbaijan in the territorial dispute of Nagorno-Karabakh.
I read this book when I was 17 (ten years ago) and I have also read many articles since then debunking said outdated book, including watching lectures by Edward Said criticizing this book. Anything else?
Said is not the only critic of Huntington's theory, however Huntington's basic theory that people's cultural and religious identities will be the primary source of conflict in the post-Cold War world has been proven over time, especially as regards to Islam/Muslims.
Said is not the only critic of Huntington's theory, however Huntington's basic theory that people's cultural and religious identities will be the primary source of conflict in the post-Cold War world has been proven over time, especially as regards to Islam/Muslims.
Right, and I disagree that religion is the primary source.
Said is not the only critic of Huntington's theory, however Huntington's basic theory that people's cultural and religious identities will be the primary source of conflict in the post-Cold War world has been proven over time, especially as regards to Islam/Muslims.
Player how have you posted a pic under your name tell me how it is done? or anybody else
Why don't the US arrest him, or are they supporting him?
US is quite smart first they ask these type of dogs to do some dirty work see the reaction and than say we condenm it they think whole world is fool enough to belive them
Please visit this website. I don’t know you, but I know for sure you know not much about Islam what I know for sure. I also would recommend you to watch “The Message”. You can watch it on youtube.
The Book “Clash of Civilization” is not really a Book to read and then talk about Islam.
Didn’t you make the observation that Today Europe doesn’t assimilate refugess from North-Africa? Islam was never spread with violence in the beginning. If this was the case, Today’s World would’ve been Muslim. Your opinion about Islam is very biased. I would recommend you to study more about Islam, esepecially from the neutral view of point. Otherwise it doesn’t make sense to debate with you.
Why don’t you talk to an adult who might be able to explain to you how to debate/discuss in a mature manner ?