Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Can't we all get along?

Tags:
  • World News
Last response: in News & Leisure
Share
August 18, 2012 8:41:35 AM

Iran has spouted threats for a while. Now they claim their neighbors are an insult to humanity. I don't see this working out well for Iran.
http://news.yahoo.com/iran-israels-existence-insult-hum...

More about : question

August 18, 2012 11:59:32 AM

Me neither.

Look up "Never Again" and tell me what you think?
August 18, 2012 2:37:33 PM

aford10, that link redirects to an occupy story about a pepper spraying university cop.
Related resources
August 18, 2012 3:39:24 PM

Sorry, not sure what happened with the link, but should be fixed now.
August 19, 2012 6:29:24 AM

It is our very human nature to hate everyone except ourselves.

I ain't gotta explain it either!

Iran is in a deep hole right now; bombing Israel would be automatic suicide to the nation itself.
August 19, 2012 7:29:14 AM

As if the Jews havnt had enough hatred going against them.
A minority thats been more abused by a wider base of humanity in modern times than any, and yet, toleration of those that hate is abundant
August 19, 2012 11:26:21 AM

I can't see Israel waiting much longer because it is clear if Iran does manufacture enough weapons grade material they would deploy a bomb if they could.

I think that if Israel chose to strike it will not be a convential attack.

Their capability is massive even if you take the most moderate of guesses in terms of what is in their arsenal.

http://www.fas.org/nuke/guide/israel/nuke/farr.htm

None of the other Arab nations would retaliate against Israel if they nuked Iran either ... that scenario is just fluff.

There would be an ominous silence ... Why? Never again.

The hard core right wing party members are powerful and well supported.

http://www.neveragain.org/
http://www.torah.org/features/israelmatters/neveragain....
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewish_Defense_League
http://www.jdl.org/index.php/ideology-advocacy/core-ide...

I personally find this stuff terrifying to read ...

August 19, 2012 2:32:43 PM

The dirty little secret is every single Arab/Muslim country in the region is just as scared of Iran having nukes as Israel is.
August 19, 2012 2:53:48 PM

Iran has the capability to do a lot of damage to Israel. But Israel knows they have a lot of support, especially from the US. They almost seem to want a conflict, because they know they've got enough backup to crush Iran.
August 19, 2012 4:38:36 PM

Im not so certain theyd be forgiven if they glassed the dome of the rock tho
August 19, 2012 7:56:33 PM

Too bad I do not understand all the posts on this subject;
I think i agree with aford.
But if someone can explain me "glassed the dome of the rock tho" and some other things... i'll be glad
August 19, 2012 11:09:04 PM

gropouce said:
Too bad I do not understand all the posts on this subject;
I think i agree with aford.
But if someone can explain me "glassed the dome of the rock tho" and some other things... i'll be glad


The dome of the rock is an Arab temple built on top of the site of King Solomon's temple. Each side considers it sacred. The muslims believe that's where mohamed ascended into heaven. For the Christians, King Solomon's temple needs to be rebuilt.
August 20, 2012 4:46:50 AM

okay, now i understand.

Yes, I can see why no nation would want to nuke Israel. the Holy City is there, home to the three top Abrahamic religion: Judaism, Islam, and Christianity. Pretty much the whole world would be up in arms,( meaning being angry), and the picture would not look too good for our future.
August 20, 2012 8:35:43 AM

Oh "La coupole du Rocher" ! ok.
I didn't know that was "dome oh the rock" in your language.
Thx!

I do not think Israel can afford to bomb Iran.
It would take too many risks: Iran's response on the one hand, and conflict with allies of Iran and the Arab world on the other.
I do not think the majority of the Israeli population would agree with such an operation, it should only concern the extremists.
August 20, 2012 3:33:35 PM

I think that Iran is trying to goad Israel into attacking them so they can use it as an excuse for martyrdom and rally the rest of the muslim world against Israel. I do not think Israel would make a pre-emptive strike against Iran if they did get nuclear weapons, that would only make things worse. But I would not put it past Iran to launch a few rockets or toss a few mortars across the border...

Big picture, I think the Muslim Brotherhood is intentionally gaining political control of the Middle Eat countries and slowly building towards a Caliphate. If a Caliphate were to unite the muslim countries, then Israel is surely doomed. If a Caliphate were to unite the muslim countries, the rest of the world would need to beware.
August 20, 2012 3:58:45 PM

Would Russia and China stand behind the Caliphate, or would Putin be wary by then of the middle East?
August 20, 2012 4:37:16 PM

dogman_1234 said:
Would Russia and China stand behind the Caliphate, or would Putin be wary by then of the middle East?
That's a good question. I think the Caliphate would look to China and Russia to legitimize themselves as a sovereign political body and help the Caliphate gain recognition on the world stage.

Providing the Caliphate does not state any intentions with extending Islamic influence into Russia and China. I think China and Russia would sanction the Caliphate taking control of Europe, North Africa, Asia Minor, and India stopping at the Chinese/Russian borders.
August 20, 2012 4:49:42 PM

So, a Soviet reversal where Communists try to build an Iron Curtain the retain the Islamic Political charge?
August 20, 2012 5:15:47 PM

China and Russia are not afraid of Muslim extremism. They are not burdened by the political correctness stygma of attacking Islam like the United States is. China and Russia will just kill them, no apologies, no questions asked, and no worries about collateral damage either.
August 20, 2012 5:19:24 PM

dogman_1234 said:
So, a Soviet reversal where Communists try to build an Iron Curtain the retain the Islamic Political charge?
I'm just guessing that Putin and the Russian people, as a whole, would not put up with an Islamic (i.e.; Sharia Law) take over of their country. Let's face it, if a Caliphate were to come into power and united the Muslim countries of Asia Minor, it would create an entirely new political dynamic, not only in the region, but also the world.

I don't know if it would be a reversal as much as the "Soviet Empire" is long gone and the communist political paradigm is outdated, I have no evidence to back it up, but I would think that a modern Russia would have to deal with a Caliphate from a completely new political perspective.


August 20, 2012 11:30:15 PM

Russis and China purged between 37 and 67 Million of their own people during the early years of their formation ... do you really think either want some kind of Muslim Caliphate on their doorsteps?

Sharia law is incompatible with both of their ideologies as much is it is incompatible with the Western Democracies.

There needs to be obvious seperation between religion and state ...
August 21, 2012 12:03:54 AM

Reynod said:
There needs to be obvious seperation between religion and state ...



Impossible to achieve in a free Republic or Democracy. People are religious. People run the state. It is impossible to separate ones religious beliefs with how they conduct a bureaucracy or govern from a high level.

There are certain checks and balances in place for the U.S. Government provided by the Constitution. That can not eliminate all religious influence on individuals though. Including cult and satain worship. Unfortunately.
August 21, 2012 1:36:50 AM

The original intent of separation of church and state, was to stop the church's from having so much influence and legal power, as they did back in the day. It wasn't about removing any mention of religion from anything having to do with the government.
August 21, 2012 4:21:50 AM

Oldmangamer_73 said:
Impossible to achieve in a free Republic or Democracy. People are religious. People run the state. It is impossible to separate ones religious beliefs with how they conduct a bureaucracy or govern from a high level.

There are certain checks and balances in place for the U.S. Government provided by the Constitution. That can not eliminate all religious influence on individuals though. Including cult and satain worship. Unfortunately.

Both Russia and China are atheistic, and if one thing Ive learned, they simply wont tolerate much religious activity whatsoever, and will brutally kill any Muslim attackers and/or those with a takeover mentality, utterly destroy them, all of them, and take out any other political enemies as well, making claims of colusion, otherwide known as their same old tactics.
August 21, 2012 6:14:07 AM

aford10 said:
The original intent of separation of church and state, was to stop the church's from having so much influence and legal power, as they did back in the day. It wasn't about removing any mention of religion from anything having to do with the government.

Basically, the Fathers did not want a Theocracy, not another church of England and HRC Church power fight. Too many lives were at stake and corruption was awry. Not good for a young republic.
August 21, 2012 12:41:33 PM

JAYDEEJOHN said:
Both Russia and China are atheistic, and if one thing Ive learned, they simply wont tolerate much religious activity whatsoever, and will brutally kill any Muslim attackers and/or those with a takeover mentality, utterly destroy them, all of them, and take out any other political enemies as well, making claims of colusion, otherwide known as their same old tactics.


Yup, remember what they did to the Muslims in Cheznya(sp?), and in Russian Georgia? They just come kill you and they don't care about women or children or collateral damage either.
August 21, 2012 3:09:15 PM

Oldmangamer_73 said:
China and Russia are not afraid of Muslim extremism. They are not burdened by the political correctness stygma of attacking Islam like the United States is. China and Russia will just kill them, no apologies, no questions asked, and no worries about collateral damage either.
I totally agree that if a Muslim Caliphate were formed and if they imposed themselves on Russia and China, both countries would open a can of whoop-a$s and make mince meat out of them.

But I can't help but wonder that if a Caliphate were to take control of the Muslim nations in the Middle East and Northern Africa, that Russia and China would find a common enemy in Europe and America and be complicit when the Caliphate began nation building.

August 21, 2012 3:26:50 PM

chunkymonster said:
I totally agree that if a Muslim Caliphate were formed and if they imposed themselves on Russia and China, both countries would open a can of whoop-a$s and make mince meat out of them.

But I can't help but wonder that if a Caliphate were to take control of the Muslim nations in the Middle East and Northern Africa, that Russia and China would find a common enemy in Europe and America and be complicit when the Caliphate began nation building.



Indeed. That scenario almost sounds like a Tom Clany novel, eh?
August 21, 2012 6:27:41 PM

So, let me get thsi straight:

Islam is becoming a political stroinghold in the Middle East and Northern Africa.
Islam *may* initiate a Caliphate that sets a single party system across the whole of Asia Minor.
China and Russia will be pushed and shoves, pocked and prodded by the Caliphate to do their bidding...( like take out the infidel western nations)
China and Russia are not idiots...especially Putin, and they will create in increased diplomatic resistance.
China and/or Russia may in turn retaliate if Asia Minor decides to act upon that resistance; I cannot say if there would be another 9/11 on Russia, China, or anywhere else, but it may be possible...but i would not sweat it.

Conspiracy theory? Yes. Will it happen...well...
August 21, 2012 9:50:23 PM

I find atheist the least tolerant of peoples, its as if grace didnt exist within them.
This is something the Muslims will understand, and is why Israel is hated so much to this day, as they are all too familiar with it, even if diguised in the past
August 21, 2012 10:45:36 PM

How do you get atheism form Islam? I don't get it.

I agree atheists do not understand why people believe in a higher power, but to say they are the least tolerant is a fallacious statement. It is like saying all Christians are bigoted creatures, there is not proof of such statement. Everyone is human; we all do crud to each other.
August 22, 2012 1:15:51 AM

dogman_1234 said:
How do you get atheism form Islam? I don't get it.

I agree atheists do not understand why people believe in a higher power, but to say they are the least tolerant is a fallacious statement. It is like saying all Christians are bigoted creatures, there is not proof of such statement. Everyone is human; we all do crud to each other.


I believe that JDJ said he has seen that in his own experience. That statement doesn't necessarily claim that it is a blanket truth, or hardened fact. It's just that, his experience.
August 22, 2012 6:10:32 AM

I would add, it was atheistic leaders who slaughtered the Jews, and having lived thru this, knows what it takes to stop them, as religious zealousness is the only other thing that comes close to it, as in opposite poles, where neither are truly interested in what is truly to be believed

Many a leader has used their followers in their followers beliefs to do their bidding, and its usually religious fervor, where the leader doesnt believe at all
August 22, 2012 11:46:24 AM

Hitler was a Christian ... not an atheist.

We were convinced that the people needs and requires this faith.
We have therefore undertaken the fight against the atheistic movement,
and that not merely with a few theoretical declarations: we have stamped it out.

-Adolf Hitler, in a speech in Berlin on 24 Oct. 1933


He never directly quoted Neitsche ... only Schopenhauer.

There are no references in his writings of uberman.

I studied some of his stuff at university in philosophy and sociology.

Evil warped turd of a man ... made me ill watching some of those videos of his speeches.

http://www.nobeliefs.com/Hitler1.htm
August 22, 2012 12:19:18 PM

Oldmangamer_73 said:
Impossible to achieve in a free Republic or Democracy. People are religious. People run the state. It is impossible to separate ones religious beliefs with how they conduct a bureaucracy or govern from a high level.

There are certain checks and balances in place for the U.S. Government provided by the Constitution. That can not eliminate all religious influence on individuals though. Including cult and satain worship. Unfortunately.


http://www.nobeliefs.com/Tripoli.htm
August 22, 2012 12:56:09 PM

Reynod said:
Hitler was a Christian ... not an atheist.

We were convinced that the people needs and requires this faith.
We have therefore undertaken the fight against the atheistic movement,
and that not merely with a few theoretical declarations: we have stamped it out.

-Adolf Hitler, in a speech in Berlin on 24 Oct. 1933


He never directly quoted Neitsche ... only Schopenhauer.

There are no references in his writings of uberman.

I studied some of his stuff at university in philosophy and sociology.

Evil warped turd of a man ... made me ill watching some of those videos of his speeches.

http://www.nobeliefs.com/Hitler1.htm



Indeed. Great effort has been put forth over the many past decades to re-write the Catholic church's involvement with the NAZI movement. Hitler and many of his highest generals and advisors were Roman Catholic. Many argue they were part of a very select group of Catholics/cultists. Almost all were classical Jesuit educated and trained.

I will say this again. The Catholic church may have hijacked Christianity in the minds of many around the world but not in my mind. The Holy Roman Catholic religion is an evolution of the pagan worship of Jupiter and Saturn. St. Peter's Bascilica was built on top of the temple to Jupiter for Pete's sake (pun intended).

---------------------------------------------------------
The Religion of Hitler (1998)
John Patrick Michael Murphy


In George Orwell's, 1984, it was stated, "Who controls the past controls the future, who controls the present controls the past."

Who is going to control the present - fundamentalism or freedom? History is being distorted by many preachers and politicians. They are heard on the airwaves condemning atheists and routinely claim Adolph Hitler was one. What a crock! Hitler was a Roman Catholic, baptized into that religio-political institution as an infant in Austria. He became a communicant and an altar boy in his youth, and was confirmed as a "soldier of Christ" in that church. The worst doctrines of that church never left him. He was steeped in its liturgy, which contained the words, "perfidious Jew." This hateful statement was not removed until 1961. Perfidy means treachery.

In his day, hatred of Jews was the norm. In great measure it was sponsored by the two major religions of Germany, Catholicism and Lutheranism. He greatly admired Martin Luther, who openly hated the Jews. Luther condemned the Catholic Church for its pretensions and corruption, but he supported the centuries of papal pogroms against the Jews. Luther said, "The Jews deserve to be hanged on gallows seven times higher than ordinary thieves," and "We ought to take revenge on the Jews and kill them." "Ungodly wretches" he calls the Jews in his widely read Table Talk.

Hitler seeking power, wrote in Mein Kampf. "... I am convinced that I am acting as the agent of our Creator. By fighting off the Jews. I am doing the Lord's work." Years later, when in power, he quoted those same words in a Reichstag speech in 1938.

Three years later he informed General Gerhart Engel: "I am now as before a Catholic and will always remain so." He never left the church, and the church never left him. Great literature was banned by his church, but his miserable Mien Kampf never appeared on the Index of Forbidden Books.

He was not excommunicated or even condemned by his church. Popes, in fact, contracted with Hitler and his fascist friends Franco and Mussolini, giving them veto power over whom the pope could appoint as a bishop in Germany, Spain and Italy. The three thugs agreed to surtax the Catholics of their countries and send the money to Rome in exchange for making sure the state could control the church.

Those who would make Hitler an atheist should turn their eyes to history books before they address their pews and microphones. Acclaimed Hitler biographer, John Toland, explains his heartlessness as follows: "Still a member in good standing of the Church of Rome despite detestation of its hierarchy, he carried within him its teaching that the Jew was the killer of god. The extermination, therefore, could be done without a twinge of conscience since he was merely acting as the avenging hand of god..."

Hitler's Germany amalgamated state with church. Soldiers of the vermacht wore belt buckles inscribed with the following: "Gott mit uns" (God is with us). His troops were often sprinkled with holy water by the priests. It was a real Christian country whose citizens were indoctrinated by both state and church to blindly follow all authority figures, political and ecclesiastical.

Hitler, like some of today's politicians and preachers, politicized "family values." He liked corporal punishment in home and in school. Jesus prayers became mandatory in all schools under his administration. While abortion was illegal in pre-Hitler Germany he took it to new depths of enforcement, requiring all doctors to report to the government the circumstances of all miscarriages. He openly despised homosexuality and criminalized it. If past is prologue, we know what to expect if liberty becomes license.

As a young child, I remember my late father, Martin J. Murphy, practicing a speech and loudly quoting the following: "Light up the mountain. Bring out the wild and fiery steed. Let it be known, that I, Gustavus, have insulted the King." Thinking for yourself and speaking your true thoughts - now that's a real family value.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"The Religion of Hitler" is copyright © 1998 by John Patrick Michael Murphy.
The electronic version is copyright © 1999 Internet Infidels with the written permission of John Patrick Michael Murphy.

http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/john_murphy/reli...
August 22, 2012 4:43:31 PM

I was waiting for this:
I am convinced that I am acting as the agent of our Creator. By fighting off the Jews. I am doing the Lord's work." Years later, when in power, he quoted those same words in a Reichstag speech in 1938.

He was not a Christian, he believed in self.
Only thru self can one act this way.
One can believe in self, and claim God put them there, but, knowing and believing are 2 different things.
I am that I am means something here, and was tossed aside by Hitlers self.
He was no more a Christian than he was an acting atheist
August 23, 2012 10:19:37 AM

And now on to the UFO's.

This is the natural progression once Hitler is brought up ... or a sidestep into Islammic exremists ... then the Unibombmer ... then UFO's.

August 23, 2012 1:01:45 PM

Reynod said:
And now on to the UFO's.

This is the natural progression once Hitler is brought up ...
I'm partial to the Nazi Bell experiment...
August 24, 2012 12:31:31 PM

chunkymonster said:
Let's face it, if a Caliphate were to come into power and united the Muslim countries of Asia Minor, it would create an entirely new political dynamic, not only in the region, but also the world.

Not going to happen. Right now, both Saudi Arabia and Iran are in a struggle to see who is going to dominate the Gulf region. No one not living here has any real idea of the antipathy that the Sunnis feel toward the Shia.

Side note: All Saudi maps refer to The Gulf as the "Arabian Gulf".
August 24, 2012 5:44:00 PM

It is the Persian Gulf. Persians were there before arabs...if I am not mistaken.
August 24, 2012 5:51:41 PM

You are mistaken - sort of. :) 

Arabs were always there. It's just that when Persia was a country, then empire; all the Arabian peninsula encompassed was a collection of feuding tribes.
August 25, 2012 1:48:19 AM

Well, I can't say that I'm surprised Saudi Arabia would try to call it the Arabian Gulf. It's only natural to try to make a claim like that. Tho, it seems like everything is under dispute in that area.

For what it's worth, it's the Persian Gulf here in the US.
!