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
sorkoi2003    RE:Nomad32   12/8/2004 2:02:38 AM
"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." But MG don't you think he only had one idea in the book of imperial overstreach and that was it... but I will have look at the book again- I agree about post 1985.
 
Quote    Reply

PlatypusMaximus    RE:being nit picky race, ethncity etc   12/8/2004 2:29:35 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. Arab I know someone who would like to argue on the sarge's behalf, stand by, I'll put him on the line. "There more to racism than identifying people by 'race' as biological category." of course, there are the distinctions in the polemics of racism vs. race vs. ethnicszzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
 
Quote    Reply

mike_golf    RE:Nomad32   12/8/2004 9:50:54 AM
Sorkoi wrote: "But MG don't you think he only had one idea in the book of imperial overstreach and that was it... but I will have look at the book again- I agree about post 1985." Yes, his main idea was imperial overstretch and he was trying so hard with that idea (plus his mildly anti-US position) that he totally misunderstood the world situation post 1985. Clearly why historians should not study events too close to them in time :-). However, his study of economics and industry and whether a great power is rising or falling was quite well done for the time period of 1500 to 1950.
 
Quote    Reply

Nomad32    RE:Nomad32   12/8/2004 1:18:11 PM
I partially agree on Kennedy. His post 1950 analysis was colored by the Japanophobia that was present in the mid to late 80's. They were about to eat our lunch, we're doomed, we're doomed... etc, and he tied that all into the apogee-decline dynamic he described that other challengers for dominance went through. However the central point about the west never having a fully dominant imperial power is still important. The competition between states in the west drove the military, technological, and economic growth. Since 1950, the US has been a dominant (imperial or not based on your political views) power. The question is can the internal competition inside the American political system provide enough stimulus to maintain the dynamism that had been created in the west earlier by state to state competition. Thompson and Modelski (U. Washington ?) go into the dominant power cycles more directly and systemically with their long cycle theory based on naval ascendancy (more than 50% of global naval power). Their book is almost unreadable (sometimes it seems that their premise is that if you throw enough calculus at history/political science it is more scientific), but the central thought is that geopolitical dominance goes in 90-100 year cycles based upon the winner(s) of a round of general wars. The two or so chapters that contain more prose than graphs lay this out pretty well and convincingly. Blainy is an Australian (U. Melbourne) who did a pretty good book on the causes of wars. Distills it down to an abacus paradigm. I have the Bayly book (a saturnalia present a few years back), although I have never read it. I may take look at it after I finish looking at Black again.
 
Quote    Reply

JMAC    RE:JMAC- and moseques   12/8/2004 1:57:25 PM
Sork - let me help you - I didn't make a generalization, I said that fare was typical. You obviously haven't made your case. The best way to judge Muslims is by observing Muslims and their mullahs - not governments (ie Iran). Too many Muslims were seen celebrating 9/12 - respect goes out the window - we Americans need not give respect willy-nilly to a group who celebrate such atrocities. The real issue: Muslims need to earn our respect. How? How will they earn our respect and still remain Muslim? I'll give you a hint: bend over backwards to really live at peace with US and Israel. Make sure the moderate muslim voice becomes the dominant voice - make sure there's actual reform in Islam. Ironically, if you'd have tuned into Memri you'd have seen this latest friday sermon from the notorious pulpits of the PA: http://www.memri.org/bin/latestnews.cgi?ID=SD82404 but note this: "All this differs from earlier sermons aired by PA TV [2], which were mostly broadcast from the Shiekh 'Ijlin Mosque, where regular preachers, such as Sheikh Ibrahim Madhi and Sheikh Ibrahim Mudeiris (PA employees), would frequently call for Jihad and martyrdom operations, and included anti-American, anti-British and Antisemitic messages." That's a start - but a very small one. I still think Bush is to thank for this - Bush and the US Forces are about to bring democracy to the heart of Islam. This has exposed the terrible hypocrisy in that religion, and we must hope that the moderate reform voice will prevail over the militant mullahs that currently have a stranglehold on it. I'm no islamophobe, I even have hope for them - but there's no way we can respect the current militant form - we must continue to disrespect it until it truly reforms itself into "Peace" Until the friday sermon that preaches Peace with the US and Israel becomes the typical fare. JMAC
 
Quote    Reply

SGTObvious    Sad, Sorkoi. You STILL can't find my post??   12/8/2004 2:55:17 PM
He STILL can't find my Islamic Architecture thread- barely a few lines away! he says: "Under what heading- I must have missed it." The thread with YOUR NAME on it, dunce. To wit: http://www.strategypage.com/messageboards/messages/35-37576.asp Don't tell me you had no idea this board had more than one topic. Good freakin lord. As I said: "I told you, you are out of your league here." And he asks: "As I don't know what you do in 'real life'" Well, clearly you're at an unfair disadvantage, then. Let me straighten you out here. I am someone who not only knows words like "Stylobate" and "volute", but gets to use them in sentences on the job. I restore historic stone, brick, and terra cotta masonry. Have done it for 15 years now. Like I said, it's my turf, and if you want to challenge me on things architectural... I suggest something made of wood, I'm not into carpentry. But stick with clay and stone and you're up against a badger in his own hole. I'm not too shabby with some other stuff. I can do more than quote names of Authors. I can actually have thoughts. Try one. Instead of just crying, "you're just stupid" in the face of something you don't like, maybe you could throw out a premise, present an explanation, and then give a few examples. What, specifically, ails you about my ideas with Empires? Can you actually frame a counter-argument, better than "no, you're wrong?" Gee, that's convincing. I bet if you yell louder, you'll be even more so. Try typing in all caps, just for effect. I still challenge you to provide original features of "Islamicate" architure, and rather than try, you protest: Let's go back, shall we: "Do you mean to say that something does not have an original feature does not exist- rather a strange ontology." First, you left out a crucial "that", without which your sentence makes no sense. Second, like it or not, architectural styles are characterized by specific features. If you were in an Architecture class, and you said "That's Art Deco." and the professor asked "what makes you say so?" you had better name some common features. If you wished to debate a professor and say, "no, I think that particular feature is more Georgian than Federal" you had better come up with examples of the feature existing primarily in Georgian designs before being adopted into the Federal style. Not all examples of the style use all features, but the features define the style. I have shown that the post-Conquest Islamic architecture presented no original features, and merely furthered the development of styles already in existence. As an example of why this should not then be called "Islamicate", heres a Reductio al Absurdum (I think that's how it goes, Latin spelling's not my strong spot) argument: Consider the Totem Poles of the natives of the Pacific Northwest. This art form reached its peak well after the region was "Conquered" by the US, UK, and later, Canada. The finest Totem poles you might see in the Museum of Natural History in NYC, or in Stanley Park in Vancouver, or in Victoria, or in Seattle, were all carved in the 20th century. In fact, many were carved specifically for sale to US or Canadian governments. So, if the Dome of the Rock is "Islamicate" architecture, clearly, a Totem Pole carved in Alaska for the government of the city of Seattle (like the one in Pioneer Square) must be representative of "American Colonial Woodworking". Silly, right? We recognize that the Totem Pole is not "American", (as opposed to "Native American") it is the continuation and development of a pre-existing cultural form, despite the conquest of that culture by another. Same with "Islamicate" Architecture. It is the continuation and development of a pre-existing form.
 
Quote    Reply

Nomad32    RE:Nomad32   12/8/2004 3:00:45 PM
A much better review of Thompson-Modelski can be found here: http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0JIW/is_4_54/ai_83295121/pg_1 [middle of page 1] (Got to it vis a google search on "Thompson Modelski long cycle naval") Interesting reading because it has a general survey of Geopolitical Theory from Mahan/MacKinder/Spykman to Hunntington/Fukiyama..
 
Quote    Reply

sorkoi2003    RE:Nomad32   12/8/2004 4:40:29 PM
Thanks for the review- I might even dare you to have a look at Guther Frank's Re-Orient or James Blaut (despite your aversion to 'Marxist taliban'- does it apply to ex-Marists?). The only difficulty have with Modeleski and Thompson is like you said the use of maths as way of shoring up thier historical narrative. Robert Gilpin's book on hegemonic war and world power is also argues for shifts in world leadership and changes in world leadership. One could argue that US victory in the Cold War is the conditon of possiblity for US global hegemony- though it would be interesting to see whehter the 'war on terror' fits in this pattern. That is, it a 'hegomic war' or merely the name by which US hegemony is exercised cf Athenian empire (Doyle, Morris). BTW Bayly I was refering to was one that come in 2004 a few months ago... hence, it migt be the saturnalia gift (or maybe it could be it depends how deep saturnalia can go upturning the laws of physics).
 
Quote    Reply

chemist    RE:being nit picky race, ethncity etc   12/8/2004 4:42:34 PM
"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. Arab " I'm not seeing much of a difference here. So, Irish Roman Catholics in the US would be considered a new ethnic group by use of your rule? It's been tried over here before, but the logic fails. Identity politics and where one draws lines seem to be more a matter of personal esthetics than anything else. I would counter that Sarge is making one of geographic community more than ideological or race. Hence, why many in the States call everyone near the Arabian penn(though many are not ethnically Arab, like the Iranians who are technically Persian.) Arab. I'm also not seeing the benefits of the new taxonomy. It just seems a new iteration of Huntington's cultural wars thesis..
 
Quote    Reply

chemist    RE:JMAC- and moseques-sorkoi and a bag of nuts.   12/8/2004 4:47:56 PM
Well, I yell at the Coke machine when it steals my money, the bastard. All I wanted was a Coke, and it wouldn't give it to me!(bad song reference)..
 
Quote    Reply



 Latest
 News
 
 Most
 Read
 
 Most
 Commented
 Hot
 Topics