2012-11-24, 20:24 | Link #81 | |
Banned
|
Quote:
Religious wars are wars for protecting your faith from prosecution from another faith. |
|
2012-11-24, 20:25 | Link #82 | ||
Honyaku no Hime
Fansubber
Join Date: May 2008
Location: In the eastern capital of the islands of the rising suns...
|
Quote:
Religion is a practice of faith and discipline, in otherwords, the emotional/heart side of a human being. Very easy to manipulate, very easy to get hurt (offences) very easy to be blind cause of it and very easy to use as a way to get people to do what you want on the basis of something they believe in. For the non-spiritual: It's like being in love here or getting done in by a playboy or gold-digger, only the playboy/gold-digger would be a money/power-hungry bastard/bitch, happy to use you for their personal gain or for fun, but you'd have placed faith in the relationship with them. Quote:
And as it's been said by other members, it's not a religious war. If you look closely at most faiths, they preach very similar basic beliefs, they're not that different. Religion has been and perhaps sadly always will be used to manipulate, but if it was the definite cause of human conflict, I'd be dead. Someone would have killed me in London for being Christian years ago, instead of growing up and living with neighbours and local businesses who all are comprised of Jews, Muslims, Hindus, Catholics and Methodists, wishing each other well on our respective religious holidays and living in peace. Where there's oil, there's money. Where there's money, there's power. Where there's power, there's greed. And where there's greed, they'll always be corruption of humans, who will happy kill and keep on killing, while innocents are sacrificed. Where is the Middle East heading, for another 30 years of dancing the same dance, even if the tune is changed. I dare say short of some natural/unnatural major disaster that consumes a mass number of human lives in all the countries there that force peeps to forget their issues and unite to help each other, nothing much will change except the continuing rise of body counts. Notice how humans actually gain a sense of unity/peace/oneness usually only when our mortality has been severely compromised by some greater force, sometimes movies get it right... (I notice I'm unusually pessimistic in regards to this conflict, after noticing the Gaza strip conflict back in the early 90s when I was a fledgling, to see nothing has really changed is disheartening) China and Tibet may get somewhere. Burma may get somewhere. The Middle East however has many players in this game, each with various objectives. Even if once upon a time, both sides lived in relative peace, what would it take to mentally shake up those in power enough to remember and work towards that, despite the radicals (as they'll always be radicals. You kill the boss of one, and for some reason their underlings try to be even more batshit crazy in the name of revenge) Here's hoping that cost isn't overly severe though.
__________________
|
||
2012-11-24, 20:29 | Link #83 |
Banned
|
Boosting you're being a religious person" by wearing the prescribe clothes always. Forcing your wife to wear a veil. Going to church every day but speaks of death to everyone.
Being religious in custom, dress and ADL but not in attitude is ridiculous. It's like saying, "I love God better than anyone else?" and I don't care of any human I killed.. |
2012-11-24, 20:34 | Link #84 | |
Honyaku no Hime
Fansubber
Join Date: May 2008
Location: In the eastern capital of the islands of the rising suns...
|
Quote:
PS: That's "Madam" to you.
__________________
Last edited by Mystique; 2012-11-24 at 20:48. |
|
2012-11-24, 22:15 | Link #86 | |
Deadpan Snarker
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: The Neverlands
Age: 46
|
Quote:
Now it's become a war of vengeance, where one side will attack the other in retalliation of what the other did in the past Where in previous clashes the casualties were between armies, it is now between households "They Killed my Father/Mother/Son/Daughter/Brother/Sister/Etc, and for that they must pay!"
__________________
|
|
2012-11-24, 22:21 | Link #87 | |
Banned
|
Quote:
|
|
2012-11-25, 03:20 | Link #88 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2008
|
Report: Israeli spy satellites spot Iranian ship being loaded with rockets for Gaza:
"According to the report, the cargo may include Fajr-5 rockets, like those that were fired by Hamas toward Israel and the stockpiles of which the Israel Defense Forces depleted during the recent round of fighting across the Gaza border, in addition to Shahab-3 ballistic missiles, which could be stationed in Sudan to pose a direct threat to Israel. “With a lot of effort, Iran has skillfully built a strategic arm pointing at Israel from the south,” an Israeli source was quoted as saying." "“Regardless of the cease-fire agreement, we will attack and destroy any shipment of arms to Gaza once we have spotted it,” an Israeli defense source told the Times." See: http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomac...-gaza-1.480303 Leave it to the Iranians to pour oil on the fire...... |
2012-11-25, 05:40 | Link #89 |
books-eater youkai
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Betweem wisdom and insanity
|
Iran is probably bettting than Israel don't want to fight 2 war at the same time. So when they are bombing the Hamas, Irael isn't much likely to send a dozen or more F16 against Iran's nuclear facility.
__________________
|
2012-11-25, 17:15 | Link #91 |
Adventure ∀logger
|
Just some news:
Israel successfully tests Magic Wand system - System meant to intercept any missile fired at Israel from a distance of at least 70 km, slated to become operational in 2014 http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7...311588,00.html Iron Dome has been doing great, anything better would be awesome.
__________________
|
2012-11-26, 01:22 | Link #92 |
Banned
|
Thank whatever anyone holds sacred, that the thread went back to more conversational, democratic, and less insulting posts from "experts" that think that they know the "absolute truth".
Middle East, with or without Indo-Iranian and Turko-Mongol extensions is as (maybe more) complicated and diverse issue than European Union; and oversimplifying one-sided views do not really help in understanding the situation. Dunno though how so many people still believe it's a good idea to: 1) let countries building up nuclear arsenals (Iran and Israel), while a few years ago were annihilating countries that didn't, yet under that excuse (Iraq). 2) fueling the hatred among people that are bound to react in a very negative manner, instead of helping them. 3) ditching allies (Iran, Iraq, Pakistan, Egypt) based on short-term interests, like military catering and warhead coating, launching whole wars that end up killing their own mercenaries along with many more local civilians. They could have tried reading a wider array of historical book, instead of memorizing the "analysis" of their (hired from someone) prof, that like Taliban have very specific interests to serve Dunno, isn't the objective of US, Putin and CCP to lead humanity into some kind of utopia (from their perspective)... but instead of doing that, they "chicken out" when things get hard to deal with and let messianic leaders butcher native and foreign population?!?!? I can understand why certain "schools of thought" try really hard to ignore what is going on around the world, in order to serve their sponsors; but long term even they should have realized (however much religiously abiding to their "fantasies"), that won't benefit even their sponsors, let alone themselves and their peers... e.g. the fall of the shah in Iran, the Taliban they trained and armed in Afghanistan, the dictator they supported in Iraq, and so on... all of them turned against them, and their childish understanding of the extended region's situation. That's even more short-sighted than Cameron's and Merkel's understanding of European solidarity |
2012-11-26, 12:54 | Link #94 | |
Banned
|
Quote:
West of Zagros mountains, south from the Anatolian plateau, east of the Western Egyptian desert, and north of the gulf of Aden / Arabian sea. Before ~1000 CE, Greeks and Romans were a significant to the region. During that period Persian states were more involved with europeans through Caucasus, Anatolia, and the modern Ukrainian steppe. This period is the 4/5th of the regions history, while... Only after ~1000 CE, Persians (through the involvement of Mongols and Turks, as well as the expansion of Islam eastwards) entered the regional politics in a significant manner... therefore today the region is extended to include Iran, Caucasus, Turkey, and all north Africa. |
|
2012-11-26, 13:39 | Link #95 | |
Deadpan Snarker
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: The Neverlands
Age: 46
|
Quote:
Let's be factual: It isn't proven that Israel or Iran already have Nukes Bu I think it's a damned good idea for a sovereign state to invest in such weapons the best example to do so IS Iraq, where if you have natural resources but no nukes, you're gonna be invaded and your country sold by the square mile by foreign entrepeneurs Something not likely to happen to -for instance- North Korea
__________________
|
|
2012-11-26, 14:41 | Link #96 |
formerly ogon bat
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Mexico
Age: 53
|
The wikipedia talks about the middle east and the greater middle east, case closed, next.
Israel does have nuclear warheads equipped on missiles on their submarines, that much has been known for decades, this is not a conspiracy theory. I somehow agree on the Nuke thing, but only in part, nukes will mean that your country will not be invaded, or that it will be destroyed so quickly you will not be able to say Carthage before the last bomb has exploded. Well, maybe you will be able to say Sodom and Gomorrah. |
2012-11-26, 14:45 | Link #97 | |
Gamilas Falls
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Republic of California
Age: 46
|
Quote:
My take was larger based on current maps that include Iran, Turkey, and Egypt to your region (though no farther). However I still contend that those areas should be counted within the context of todays material. Especially Egypt and Iran due to their direct influences in the region. The Greek significance would have been less without the Persian influence, and the Persians did control most, if not all the Fertile Cresent somewhere around 600BC, prior to the Greek invasion under Alexander. The Persians again held the region as the Romans decined, prior to the introduction of Islam during the 7th century CE. Add to this the Egyptians movements through the region prior to the Persians taking of the region (~1500 - 600 BC). Both Persian and Egyptians having heavy impact in the region around the Jordan River. Both friendly and hostile during these periods of control, and likely the military campaigns that would have to go through that area to engage their opponents. Modern Israel was a crossroad between major powers for much of the time before Rome, and again after Rome. Though after Rome, it took on the heavy religious significance for the major powers involved due to event that took place under Roman rule. Also the old definition would probably have been Near East, with the Middle East being Iran and India, and Far East being the Orient. In this context, the "Near East" was the Ottoman Empire for European purposes....usually in context with the conflict between the Christian European powers and the Islamic Ottoman Empire around the Eastern Mediterranian Sea. It has since been dropped in favor of "Middle East" sometime in the early 20th century (after the fall of the Ottoman Empire). The Near East sometimes included Iran and Egypt, but always included Turkey. However the Near East also excluded the Arabian Pennisula, so that term is moot in any context with the present Middle East.
__________________
|
|
2012-11-26, 15:36 | Link #98 | |||
Banned
|
Quote:
Quote:
But that is not an option for states that pursue expansionist policies, like Iran, Iraq, Israel, North Korea, China, Russia, USA, etc. Quote:
Nonetheless, I understand and personally agree with your view that Islam, Mongols, and Ottomans brought a unity to what most people today know as Middle East. It is this unity though that after the break-down of those "bonds", gave rise to national-socialism and religious fundamentalism in the wider region. |
|||
2012-11-26, 16:02 | Link #99 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2008
|
Quote:
current "Arab Spring" rebellions (unless the dictator wants to nuke their own country). Note that the U.S.S.R. had nukes aplenty, but still collapsed. These days, the internet and the cell phone are a bigger threat to a dictatorship than a foreign army, since greater communication empowers rebel movements. Though if the dictatorship supports terrorism, all bets are off. Which is why terrorist-supporting states like Iran & Pakistan are so hot to have a nuclear security blanket. Nukes would also give Iran even more ability to bully its neighbors. Which is why Saudi Arabia will try to acquire nukes if Iran gets the bomb: http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news...-1226268171576 All the more reason to stop Iran from getting the bomb. The big question is; What's the best way to go about it? |
|
2012-11-26, 16:15 | Link #100 | |
formerly ogon bat
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Mexico
Age: 53
|
Quote:
The simple truth is that after the fall of the USSR many countries have realized it is a liability to have the smaller countries possess nuclear weapons, because yesterdays ally might become tomorrows adversary, so for the USA Iran's anti-isreael stance is pretty convenient, sadly that does not work with pakistan and north korea. But even as bat-shit crazy as the Iranians are, they do not want to use nuclear weapons on israel since the wind would carry the radioactive resiude back to iran. The one to be worried about is the north koreans, since those are really insane, their people are dying of hunger and would no doubt love to go out with a big nuclear bang. |
|
Tags |
middle east |
Thread Tools | |
|
|