Islam: Is it inherently Evil?

[Tisme]

Traitor to who ? Israel-Palestine is none of our business.

He's obviously going to support TULIP instead. One of the ALP's key planks is freedom of association and freedom of expression, etc.

That organisation (TULIP) was setup because the half century of Labor and Union support of Zionism was discovered to be contrary to the two state scheme the socialists supported.

 

[luutzu]

So you are anti Israeli and pro Hamas......Well I guess that is your opinion which you are entitled to...Hamas are a terrorist organization and even hate the President of Palestine.

You seem to have forgotten the 1976 six day war waged against Israel by Egypt and the adjoining Muslim states of Palestine......Mushi Dyann was a very smart Israeli General and his intelligence operation was far to good for his Muslim invaders.......He humiliated them and in doing so took over the Golan Heights, the West Bank and the Gaza strip.

I say serves them right for attacking in the first place and it has stuck in the Palestinian's gizzet ever since.

You read a very alternate version of history noco.

Israel weren't happy with what the UN gave them, still not satisfy with what they've further taken from Palestine. So they thought... the Arabs are weak and stupid, we're the noblest military in the world... so let's go and expand Israel the way God intended.

Hence, they took Sinai Penninsula and other areas that the Arabs somehow thought belong to them for some reason.

That's when the Arabs got together to fight back.

From memory, the Yank also got involved and told Israel to get the heck back away from Sinai. The yanks didn't want any French/British and Israeli controlling that penninsular because the Suez Canal is too valuable and they have already got their man in Egypt knowing how things works around the place.

Anyway, Israel is trying to sell to us Aussies their methods of securing us against the Muslims. You know that they know what they're doing when they've done it for decades and there's still a problem.

That kind of experience any idiot can learn just by watching YouTube or read some history. But ey, who's going to make money if we all do readings instead of doing wars and buying drones?

 

[Tisme]

They must be on membership drive:

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/blogs/a...t/news-story/529bdeb347e4682d5f75dfa82f1d8897

 

[luutzu]

So you are anti Israeli and pro Hamas......Well I guess that is your opinion which you are entitled to...Hamas are a terrorist organization and even hate the President of Palestine.

You seem to have forgotten the 1976 six day war waged against Israel by Egypt and the adjoining Muslim states of Palestine......Mushi Dyann was a very smart Israeli General and his intelligence operation was far to good for his Muslim invaders.......He humiliated them and in doing so took over the Golan Heights, the West Bank and the Gaza strip.

I say serves them right for attacking in the first place and it has stuck in the Palestinian's gizzet ever since.

Here's an older John Pilger doco on Palestine/Israel.

 

[dutchie]

Yassmin Abdel-Magied must think Islam is a 'feminist religion' because the woman get flowers and chocolates before they get beaten up.


Muslim leader Keysar Trad says angry husband can beat his wife as 'last resort'
Mr Trad said chocolates and flowers should be first option known as 'counselling'


http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4250826/Muslim-Keysar-Trad-lashed-3AW-Neil-Mitchell.html

 

[moXJO]

Yassmin Abdel-Magied must think Islam is a 'feminist religion' because the woman get flowers and chocolates before they get beaten up.


Muslim leader Keysar Trad says angry husband can beat his wife as 'last resort'
Mr Trad said chocolates and flowers should be first option known as 'counselling'


http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4250826/Muslim-Keysar-Trad-lashed-3AW-Neil-Mitchell.html

From memory you could beat them with a stick (reed). So long as it was only so thick.

 

[noco]

You read a very alternate version of history noco.

Israel weren't happy with what the UN gave them, still not satisfy with what they've further taken from Palestine. So they thought... the Arabs are weak and stupid, we're the noblest military in the world... so let's go and expand Israel the way God intended.

Hence, they took Sinai Penninsula and other areas that the Arabs somehow thought belong to them for some reason.

That's when the Arabs got together to fight back.

From memory, the Yank also got involved and told Israel to get the heck back away from Sinai. The yanks didn't want any French/British and Israeli controlling that penninsular because the Suez Canal is too valuable and they have already got their man in Egypt knowing how things works around the place.

Anyway, Israel is trying to sell to us Aussies their methods of securing us against the Muslims. You know that they know what they're doing when they've done it for decades and there's still a problem.

That kind of experience any idiot can learn just by watching YouTube or read some history. But ey, who's going to make money if we all do readings instead of doing wars and buying drones?

The UN is loaded with Green lefties......What else would you expect......The sooner the USA pulls out of the UN the better....There will a domino effect with some other Western countries as well.

So the question is, would you be happy live under Sharia law in Australia?

 

[luutzu]

The UN is loaded with Green lefties......What else would you expect......The sooner the USA pulls out of the UN the better....There will a domino effect with some other Western countries as well.

So the question is, would you be happy live under Sharia law in Australia?

The UN is loaded with countries known as the whole world. Don't think anything green about it.

Why would I want to live under any religious law, Sharia or otherwise.

Some of the worst laws in Australia are based on its Christian heritage. Such as not permitting homosexuals to get married. wtf is that about beside wanting to please the Christians who thought God hate gays. Yup, of all the things God could hate being done in his name, on his planet, to his creations, being gay and being treated as equal citizens, that's a definite no no.

--------

Noco, the kind of country you, Pauline and Captain Abbott imagine Australia should be - thinking that such a country would be great for Australia and all Australians.

That country is Israel.

Go and see how Israel is doing; see how it is working out for its citizens - the White, Jewish ones.

 

[noco]

The UN is loaded with countries known as the whole world. Don't think anything green about it.

Why would I want to live under any religious law, Sharia or otherwise.

Some of the worst laws in Australia are based on its Christian heritage. Such as not permitting homosexuals to get married. wtf is that about beside wanting to please the Christians who thought God hate gays. Yup, of all the things God could hate being done in his name, on his planet, to his creations, being gay and being treated as equal citizens, that's a definite no no.

--------

Noco, the kind of country you, Pauline and Captain Abbott imagine Australia should be - thinking that such a country would be great for Australia and all Australians.

That country is Israel.

Go and see how Israel is doing; see how it is working out for its citizens - the White, Jewish ones.

I would say Israel is doing just fine according to the link below.

You say you would not like to live under Sharia law and yet you are always coming to the defence of Muslims and Islam.

http://www.heritage.org/index/country/israel

 

[luutzu]

I would say Israel is doing just fine according to the link below.

You say you would not like to live under Sharia law and yet you are always coming to the defence of Muslims and Islam.

http://www.heritage.org/index/country/israel

I guess you haven't watch that doco then.

Yea sure it's a great country - if you're a White Jewish guy with connections and no sense of morality.

 

[luutzu]

I would say Israel is doing just fine according to the link below.

You say you would not like to live under Sharia law and yet you are always coming to the defence of Muslims and Islam.

http://www.heritage.org/index/country/israel

 

[Value Collector]

I don't think that killing civilians was justified when there are other options.

Why do you ?

I am not sure what the other options were, but in that case your arrguement is not against dropping the Nuke, but rather against the American and British ww2 bombing campaigns in general, because fire bombing cities every night for months on end kills civilians to, and they were already doing that.

 

[SirRumpole]

I am not sure what the other options were, but in that case your arrguement is not against dropping the Nuke, but rather against the American and British ww2 bombing campaigns in general, because fire bombing cities every night for months on end kills civilians to, and they were already doing that.

Perhaps you could read my previous posts where I suggested dropping the A bomb over an unpopulated area thus demonstrating its power and giving Japan the chance to surrender before it lost any more people.

 

[Value Collector]

Perhaps you could read my previous posts where I suggested dropping the A bomb over an unpopulated area thus demonstrating its power and giving Japan the chance to surrender before it lost any more people.

The US already had a huge industrial scale fire bombing and conventional bombing campaign running, their intent was to do damage to Japan, they were bombing all night every night, the A Bombs just sped up the damage they were already planning on inflicting.

 

[SirRumpole]

The US already had a huge industrial scale fire bombing and conventional bombing campaign running, their intent was to do damage to Japan, they were bombing all night every night, the A Bombs just sped up the damage they were already planning on inflicting.

I thought you said you were a moral person, in fact you spent acres of posts going on about morality in regards to gay marriage and now you justify holocaust with the flick of a pen.

Amazing.

 

[Tisme]

I thought you said you were a moral person, in fact you spent acres of posts going on about morality in regards to gay marriage and now you justify holocaust with the flick of a pen.

Amazing.

Dresden was up there and probably exceeded the kill count of Hiroshima.

 

[Value Collector]

I thought you said you were a moral person, in fact you spent acres of posts going on about morality in regards to gay marriage and now you justify holocaust with the flick of a pen.

Amazing.

I just recognise that there is a genuine moral dilemma here. In my opinion the nuclear weapons saved more lives than they took, make no mistake they are horrible, but they did end the war, so you have to balance the benefits against the cost.

The two cities that were destroyed by the nuke, would have been destroyed eventually anyway in the bombing campaign and people there would have died, along with continued deaths in other cities across Japan, plus soldiers, sailors and airmen of the Allies and Japan would continue.

So it's just a matter of choosing which crap outcome you want, and I think the nuke was less crap over all.

 

[SirRumpole]

The two cities that were destroyed by the nuke, would have been destroyed eventually anyway in the bombing campaign and people there would have died,

There is no certainty of that if the A bomb was demonstrated over an unpopulated area, an option that was available and which you continuously ignore. Japan had no counter to the A bomb and would most likely have surrendered. If they didn't , then further A bomb drops could happen.

 

[luutzu]

Dresden was up there and probably exceeded the kill count of Hiroshima.

Yea, apparently firebombs, high explosives and fragmented weapons kill more or just as much on those cities.

I guess it's more efficient to just drop one load.

----

Was listening to an old [2004?] interview with Noam Chomsky and David [sabanzon?]...

In it Chomsky describe how McNamara's job during world war 2 weren't just as a "statistician" as his official bio summarised them. But he was up there in the planning division for the firebombs.

Using great maths skills, knowledge of each city, he decides where, on what day, the kind of wind direction etc.... decides where to hit so that it'll cause the most civilian death with the least effort.

i.e. hit where there's tight-knit timber houses during the night where the wind will take it uphill... something like that. And of course since Japan ran out of air defenses by then, flight low so it's more accurate.

 

[luutzu]

I just recognise that there is a genuine moral dilemma here. In my opinion the nuclear weapons saved more lives than they took, make no mistake they are horrible, but they did end the war, so you have to balance the benefits against the cost.

The two cities that were destroyed by the nuke, would have been destroyed eventually anyway in the bombing campaign and people there would have died, along with continued deaths in other cities across Japan, plus soldiers, sailors and airmen of the Allies and Japan would continue.

So it's just a matter of choosing which crap outcome you want, and I think the nuke was less crap over all.

That's what I thought too... I'm sure we all thought that because that's what we're told.

That's why I was so shocked when I heard Zinn and some other historian saying that that's not true.

That the Soviet going East play a much bigger role than the nukes. That and considering other facts, there was never a real need to nuke any city.


I mean, the US cracked Japan's "codes" long before Pearl Harbour. Japan was not a serious challenge to the US military, not the kind that Hitler presented. And not at all when Europe was won and all eyes are on the Pacific with Japan having no navy or airforce left.