Military History | How To Make War | Wars Around the World Rules of Use How to Behave on an Internet Forum
Iraq Discussion Board
   Return to Topic Page
Subject: Americans must respect Islam
salaam al-aqaaid    5/13/2004 10:18:35 AM
The outrageous atrocities commited by Americans at the Abu al-Grayyib prison complex speaks to a need for the United States Americans to give sensetivity training to its entire military so that they will no longer offind Muslims with the contemptious use of women as prison guards and unsavery adiction to homosexual pornographies. These things are offinsive to the Muslims community. Have you no shame? You must remove all women and homosexuals from contact with Muslim prisoners. This is offinsive.
 
Quote    Reply

Show Only Poster Name and Title     Newest to Oldest
Nomad32    RE:Nomad32   12/7/2004 8:28:55 PM
>though what you call the Marx taliban Sorry, being polemical for amusement purposes. I did think it was funny that he started off with how the book was a "product of post-war triumpahlism..." and other post-modernist cant, then went back to say that he still saw the basic thesis of interacting civilizations across the ecumene that spawned processes that eventually resulted in the 'rise of the west', which is pretty close to anathema to the post-modernist camp. >his argument in regard to Sung China was farily important He did emphasize the importance of the Sung, so much so that he conceeded that he would have given China pride of place for the section dealing with the period 1000-1500 rather than the Turks, Mongols et al. if he wrote the book over again. Then he referred to a chapter in Pursuit of Power, which I have not had a chance to go back and read yet. No answer on why I wasn't impressed with Black. I read it several years ago. I am going to try to dig the book back out and take another look, until I do that the only answer I can give is that his arguments just weren't particularly memorable. Which was not the case with McNiell, Parker, Geoffery Blainey, or Paul Kennedy.
 
Quote    Reply

PlatypusMaximus    RE:Nomad32   12/7/2004 8:55:10 PM
AK, after giving your wild claims some thought, I've decided to pluck my eyes out.
 
Quote    Reply

sorkoi2003    RE:JMAC- and moseques   12/7/2004 9:24:28 PM
Sork - better yet, why don't *you* put your money where your mouth is - find me, well, one Friday sermon from a middle eastern mosque (PA Egypt Saudi Sudan Syria Iran etc...) that advocates *peace* with the US, or Christians, or Israelis. Show us that *this* moderate sentiment far outweighs the militant anti-US sentiment please. By all means... " Because I am not making ridiculous generalizations about things that I only know about about from culling from a handful website or reading the works of orientalist polemcists. I have never heard a "friday sermon' "teaching hatred". There is probably less hatred in most 'friday sermons' than there is on this thread regarding Islam/Muslims, Europeans (exept the British), 'liberals'(in US context).... Read the 2nd chapter report on Strategic communications- you can find it on the Pentagon website.
 
Quote    Reply

PlatypusMaximus    RE:JMAC- and moseques   12/7/2004 10:36:04 PM
the report says Muslims do not hate our freedom, but rather they hate our policies. What's your point? You then say we have a narcissistic attitude as to why we were attacked. (by evildoers) I could argue that freedom and policy go hand-in-hand in America, but God (if that word is permissible here) knows, I don't want to sound narcissistic. Policy...could they be any more vague? Could I be any more sarcastic? Do I have any more rhetorical questions? We were attacked because we support the great nation of Israel, or policy, if you will, and the rabid dogs know how much of their nonsense Israel will put up with.
 
Quote    Reply

sorkoi2003    RE:Nomad32   12/7/2004 11:23:23 PM
"I can give is that his arguments just weren't particularly memorable. Which was not the case with McNiell, Parker, Geoffery Blainey, or Paul Kennedy" I would go along with you about Mcneill and Parker, I can't remember much of blainey (which may or may not be signficant) but I thought that Kennedy was one of those zietgiest books- which seem important at the time but age very badly- I prefer Michael Mann Sources of Social Power esp vol. 1. BTW I did mentin the Bayly book the birth of modern- you might find it interesting (to argue with or against) but given your feelings about the "Marxist taliban" I wonder whether its worth mentioning: John Hobson, Andre Gunther Frank, James Blaut, Kenneath Pomeranz or J. Goldstone (though are more about critique of internalist explainations of the rise of the west- rather than just the Parker's military revolution.
 
Quote    Reply

mike_golf    RE:Nomad32   12/7/2004 11:37:03 PM
Sorkoi wrote: "I thought that Kennedy was one of those zietgiest books- which seem important at the time but age very badly" I'd have to disagree. Kennedy came to some poor conclusions about the shape of the world post 1985 in his "Rise and Fall of the Great Powers" but I think his study of 1500 to 1950 has stood the test of time quite well. Just ignore everything after 1950, he was too close to it.
 
Quote    Reply

chemist    Reminder-AK is NC17   12/8/2004 1:00:50 AM
Jeez. I keep saying this. YOu think I'm kidding. YOu must be of good cheer, not entirely plastered, adult, and not easily offended to deal with AK(well, the totally plastered sometimes helps)..
 
Quote    Reply

PlatypusMaximus    RE:Reminder-AK is NC17   12/8/2004 1:32:57 AM
AK's posts are music to my ears. He claimed SWB could possibly be....I'm not gonna say it. So I read the info and concluded that it was just deceiving eyes.
 
Quote    Reply

sorkoi2003    RE:Oblivious never woke up   12/8/2004 1:52:58 AM
"It's been posted for days now." Under what heading- I must have missed it. "I told you, you are out of your league here." As I don't know what you do in 'real life' probalby hard to judge which league you are in- or whether we are playing the same sports. But don't worry about - the main thing you try and sometimes playing against better oppostion can be good learning experience. " You still haven't met my challenge of proving such a thing as "Islamicate Architecture" atually exists." I did not think it was serious challenge. I would only refer to many hundreds of books with title of Islamic architecture or many University courses with such titles... unless of course you are the opinion all these things are simply hoaxes like the Sino-Soviet split. " by identifying a SINGLE ORIGINAL FEATURE." Do you mean to say that something does not have an original feature does not exist- rather a strange ontology. Which is probably unsustainible since of what you are saying is not orginal but the rehashing of dated scholarship does that mean you do not exist? What is exactly orginal about you? " What's the matter? Stuck?" No. Just amused by your persumptions- (is that the reason why you never made it to Lt.Obvisous)? "I thought so." Did you really. I hope the experience did not wear you out and you will be willing try some more thinking. "You respond to detailed explanations..." Alas I am not sure what detailed explanations you refer unless you mean 19th century histography that you spout with so much convinction. "with your sweeping "proclamations of truth" that are presented without explanation." If there something you don't understand (that damm thinking can be so difficult) you can ask again. Its not alway easy to know where to begin with someone who knows so little. " I have no time for such nonsense." Of course, you don't when you have nonsense of yours to work. " After telling me (wrongly) that the arab homeland was in the fertile crescent," I never said that Arab homeland was in the fertile crescent. "... you then say ethnic study is Passe?" I don't think I said that. "Nonsense. Your words are a bucket of camel snot. All I did was prove you wrong, and you run and cry that the whole subject is obsolete. Hah! If it is Passe, then why did YOU bring it up?" You are one who fixed upon 'races' not I. " You think my theory of empires is wrong?" Do you have theory of empires? Being a saloon bar bore does not count as being a theorist. When you shown that you have read something about empires we can have a reasoned discussion. " Then provide competing evidence!" Evidence is dependant on theoritical framework which constitutes particular bits of data as information of relevance. " Instead, your own evidence (Alexander) supports ME..." Alexander was an example, it only supports you because your ignorance about empires so great. Since I recall you objected to my passing comment that centre of Islamicate empire from 660s-1258 was the fertile crescent. You objection was based on the assumption that Islamicate empire is empire of the Arabs, Arabs are racial grouping and their homeland is what is now Saudi Arabia. Therefore, centre of the Islamicate empire must be Arab peninsula. I do not know of any serious scholar who argues that centre of Islamicate empire was peninsula by 660s. Who do you know who says this? "....so you run and cry like a wimpering child..." You powers of imagination certainly exceede your claims for telepathic abilities. Let me put your mind at easy- there is nothing in these exchanges that would cause me to be upset - my ego is not that involved or vulunerible to your rantings. These little performance may terrify children- but they do not impress me. "serious scholars" whom you neither name nor quote nor discuss!" Which scholars of empires or architecture have you cited claims? Not even Fletcher with his historical non historical architecture... "Hah! You could be a troll, but you are not annoying enough." I am begining to think you are a troll- but that could be insult to all the other trolls. "You are just a True Beleiver, one who has never heard challenging facts one who has never before found himself in an argument with someone who can provide a whole post about the Christian architecture of the Dome of the Rock, so instead of arguing back, you cry and hide!" I really do hope you have more in your life than this webpage. I mean is this what you do when people disagree with you 'cry and hide'. Try not to project so much. "Give us some history..." Of what. You know so little. Try Hodgson or Ira Lapidus or Francis Robinson or Fred McGraw Donner... "or some genuine architectural analyis," Of what constitutes an architectural style? " or go back to your cave and whimper!" Most of us humans live in houses - maybe you lived the cave too long hence your tendency to wh
 
Quote    Reply

sorkoi2003    RE:being nit picky race, ethncity etc   12/8/2004 1:59:28 AM
"So, Islam is an ethnicity now? Why jump Sarge for his use of Arab when you make a similar charge?" 1. No Islam is religion- Muslims are becoming an ethnicity. 2. I make a distinction between ethnicity (sense of being a community) and 'race'(as biologically grounded collectivity) which Sgt Obivious does not. 3. Muslims and Arabs are not the same thing. 3. Arabs
 
Quote    Reply



 Latest
 News
 
 Most
 Read
 
 Most
 Commented
 Hot
 Topics