"Failure of global war on terror" Topic

Analysts are now concerned Taliban's victory will embolden jihadis.

However what is really interesting is that despite 20 years of supposed global war on terror, the numbers of people being attracted to becoming violent Sunni jihadis has increased 3-4 fold.

link

So countless bombings, invasions, drone strikes, special operations etc have done nothing to curb rise of violent fundamentalist Islam.

This is not a military problem, it's a religious revolution on par with Protestant reformation.

And that's going to require more than just LGBs, SEALs and MQ-9 Reapers and could well be unstoppable especially given developments in Islamic countries since 1970s.

It IS a significant setback, but NOT a failure, since we've killed thousands of jihadis around the globe.

Sadly, we released far too many of them, to return to the battlefield, instead of giving them military trials and then the requisite capital punishment, which is 100% effective at detering recidivism.

It is both a religious and a military problem, and no doubt for those already inside our borders, a police problem too.

It will be more important, now than ever, in properly sealing our borders, and screening anyone coming in on "holiday" or being granted legal immigrant status.

Once again instead of fighting a war we try to win applause by being the good guy or white knight.

How do you 'win' a war on terror?

You don't fight it in the open. You fight in the shadows.
You find the 'money men' and take them out (How many banks love holding on to customers' money whose accounts go inactive? Especially those with no heirs listed or coming forward?)
Hire assassins, hit men, bribe underlings and opposing factions to take them out.
Play dirty. Amp up their paranoia. Play very dirty…

From one of my favorite movies:

(Paraphrasing) It's a thoroughly nasty business
and requires a thoroughly nasty man to deal with it.

It IS a significant setback, but NOT a failure, since we've killed thousands of jihadis around the globe.

Which as proven is a waste of time as more just keep joining and the various US military inventions just pours more fire on the situation.

Indeed keeping Somalia or Afghanistan or Iraq or Libya or Mali as perpetual warzones creates misery for local populations and prompts young men into action. They might not even be zealots but rather view themselves as fighting foreign oppressors (indeed apparently some % of Taliban are like this).

It was just like killing "Vietcong" – it meant nothing in the overall war and the kill count KPI just promoted a culture of murder.

The other issue is that birth rates in these countries are huge and the populations are young. Playing decades long (this started in 1990s) and possibly century long whack-a-mole favours the fundamentalists in the long run.

Eg Afghan population median age is 18 which means most of those young Taliban fighters were born during the US occupation! Over 60% of the population of the country is below 24 so again most have only ever known US occupation.

All GWOT does is bleed out valuable and scarce western resources and dilutes focus from actual important areas. Indeed the fact the Chinese and Russians caught the Americans with their pants around their ankles in SC Sea and Ukraine is proof of this.

You find the 'money men' and take them out

Sorry but Qatar, KSA and UAE are off limits due to them being major US allies, major investors in western economies and alone prop up so many western arms manufacturers who would go out of business without sales to them (eg most F-15s ordered these days are for Saudis and Qataris- without them the F-15 line probably would have closed (though US has started buying new versions again).

Speaking of Qatar, Taliban leaders were airlifted from Doha into Kabul via Qatari Air Force C-17. Great US ally delivers enemy leadership straight into power and using US supplied military equipment to add insult to injury.

So basically any "war on islamist terror" is lost? Curious what next steps are.

There are no next steps for the west. They can continue playing whack a mole and pretend it matters whilst pandering to Sunni Islamist elites in the gulf.

By all counts increased Islamic conservativism will continue as will extremely high Islamic birth rates and high levels of Islamic immigration into west especially Europe.

Similarly the ethnic cleansing will continue through out the middle east (in 1900 there was far more religious diversity in all of middle east – since then high birth rates and open ethnic cleansing has wiped out many non-Islamic middle eastern populations). The exception will be Israel whose own demographic pressures with Haredis could result in the country suffering massive economic pressures.

The whole thing is being played out in demographics – by 2100 western Europe will feature countries that are predominantly Islamic or have large Islamic minorities that can start pursuing their own agendas, fuelled by guidance from Doha, Riyadh and Abu Dhabi and probably Istanbul.

The only winners in the game of "Whack-a-Mullah" are those who own the concessions.

Zen the only way to win over terror.
Again this stupid media lingo who can't call things by their name. Twist the words you will twist reality.
Terror is a mean like amphibious landing is.
Fight against islamists it is, but it itches the self annointed saints.
The proof you cannot make a proper figure of a partizan of terror in 2omm. You need more info, to dress him (or her or… equality) appropriately. Ho maybe naked coming out of the sea in front of a summer beach…

Depends on what you mean by lost. Has there been another 9\11?. They have moved on to 1 man and a knife attacks in Europe.

Certainly they have made advances in other parts of the world. But have the governments of those countries requested help? I do not know.

The "War on Terror", like the "War on Drugs" and the "War on Poverty" are stupid to begin with. You can't drop a bomb on terror, drugs, or poverty and declare victory. None of those are military problems with military solutions.

Yep, they are political campaigns devoid of any real goals other than enriching the MiC through military adventurism. It is an easy blanket to cover centuries of exploitive Western meddling in the Middle East. The US has ruthlessly exploited ME resources while supporting horribly violent and oppressive regimes while ignoring the widespread poverty and desperation this creates that feeds into extremism. We talk about cutting funds to terror, but continue to support the KSA and go after Iran, even as they were fighting ISIL and moving against the Taliban. We funnel massive amounts of arms into the area (often to groups that we later decide are the "enemy", and are shocked, just shocked, by all the violence that springs up.

It's a bad joke. Worse, this failed imperialistic approach drives extremism in our own country as reactionaries try to paint it as a war against Islam or some kind of clash of civilizations, trying to make it an ethno-centric conflict for which there is only one final solution. Disturbingly, posters on this very board seem to fantasize about this rather fondly.

Ummm, we've paid top dollar for those "ruthlessly exploited ME resources" to those marketing and selling them.

Trade IS a two-way street, and those in the ME have greatly benefited from it.

Sadly, the guy in charge doesn't like that we were and can be energy dependent for the first time history, so we'll once again be dependent for our energy needs on countries and people that hate us, that use less safe methods for extracting it than Americans did, and that require expensive and carbon-spewing transport to get it to us from the other side of the world. A very illogical plan there to gut our domestic energy industry, and distribution network – the Canada/US pipeline.

Two way street in that it benefitted both US oil interests and corrupt ME rulers? I suppose so.

Your attempt to turn failed US ME policy that transcends parties into an attack on the current US president is woefully misplaced. A single US/Canada pipeline is not even close to the US domestic energy industry or distribution network. The pipeline would just displace the existing trucks that currently ship the same product, so more profitable for the company, but no real effect on supplies. It's just a weak political talking point.

The current state of the US energy supply is little changed by the current administration, just as the previous administration made little difference. There has been a shift in time to greater consumption of natural gas and renewables as a percentage of total use. The EIA keeps a site that you may want to review for some basic facts:
link
Notice that overall consumption went down in 2020, but composition remains almost unchanged. Dropping use combined with record production has resulted in more domestic production than consumption in 2019-20, but hardly means we are "energy independent".

Petroleum still makes roughly a third of US energy consumption and is key to many areas of manufacturing. It also makes up about 90% of transportation energy. We also remain a net crude importer, though we have shifted to larger amounts from Canada as opposed to OPEC.
link

Note the big shift in refined imports/exports was in 2011 and has continued since then.

Also look up Biden's votes on military action as senator and what troop numbers in Afghanistan did under Obama. Maybe also look at who set the quick timetable for withdrawal with the Taliban and also release prisoners. You might be surprised. (Spoiler: It's not just Republicans who are hawkish on the ME, but the most recent disasters were started by one.)

I didn't know the Global War on Terror was over ?

AQ, ISIS, AS, BH, etc., are still around … ?

Did I miss something ?

Analysts are now concerned Taliban's victory will embolden jihadis.

No doubt … while the US has it's "Dunkirk" moment …

This is not a military problem, it's a religious revolution

And that will signal something to the Western World will not want to see happen … But it is regardless …

Wait didn't someone tell me there was no GWOT ? ardo was that you ? I can't find the thread ? Yet …

Another jihad across Europe ? No Charles Martel or El Cid this time … [And before some of you guys smarter than me, ardo, want to give me a history lesson. I know the good, the bad, and the ugly, of those two guys from long ago.] …

Has there been another 9\11?. They have moved on to 1 man and a knife attacks in Europe.

There was never going to be another 9-11 regardless of drone strikes or military interventions. 9-11 type events were stopped by expansion of domestic surveillance state and expanding police powers as well as increased global cooperation. You know things like Department of Homeland Security, Patriot Act. Five Eyes etc etc.

Certainly they have made advances in other parts of the world. But have the governments of those countries requested help?

Libya, Syria and Iraq certainly didn't ask the US for help but the US was happy to turn them into realistic terrorist/insurgent camps.

US special forces are confirmed to be operating in 90++ countries. Some of this is due to help requested but often it's due to US simply wanting to be there (eg Syria or Iraq) or installing puppet regimes (eg Somalia or Afghanistan) and then needing to keep them afloat.

Without the US intervening I suspect Islamist style republics/emirates would be emerging much more often.

And that will signal something to the Western World will not want to see happen …

The western world is in denial and wants to believe deep down inside the whole human population is a bunch of western style consumers.

The west is essentially gutless and weak.

Personally I respect the strength and ambition China and Russia are showing.

Wait didn't someone tell me there was no GWOT ? ardo was that you ? I can't find the thread ? Yet …

Yes it was virtue signalling. And the proof is in the pudding – the global expansion of violent Islamism in the 20 years it started as well as expansion of conservative Islamism in nominally secular states like Egypt, Turkey, Malaysia, Indonesia and Tunisia.

Another jihad across Europe ?

Who needs a jihad when your demographic size allows you considerable sway over legislation (or exemptions from legislation) or even winning elections outright.

It's already happening eg in Germany with the emergence of "parallel societies" whereby Muslims run their own underground legal and social systems based on sharia and islamic practice without reference to German laws or cultural norms.

In Britain this kind of thing is semi-legalised via mechanisms such as Muslim Arbitration Tribunal which allow settlement under Sharia law (provided they don't violate British law).

However as we all know Sharia Law badly discriminates against women so any such arbitrations would probably be against interests of women.

And as the main purpose of this Tribunal is to avoid the British court system. Thus whether it doesn't matter if the verdict is legal under British law as it s whole purpose is to avoid British law!

And just now there's a legal case in Britain that could change elements of British law to comply with equivalent elements of sharia law:

link

Meanwhile in Australia Islamic polygamy is also legalised provided the marriages were overseas. Islamic families can legally collect multiple Wife Pension payments and other social welfare for multiple wives.

This is Islam in the west at 3-5% of population. Extrapolate now to 40% or over 50%. You're looking at total Islamification of social norms and legal practices.

No need for jihad. And the west openly embraces Islamification through increasingly uncontrolled immigration and insane "diversity" policies that actually promote retention of bad cultural practices (how often is criticism of other cultures viewed as racist).

The Muslims have their own human rights convention (Cairo Declaration on Human Rights in Islam) which completely reduces women and non-muslims to second class citizens as in accordance with Sharia law.

US special forces are confirmed to be operating in 90++ countries.

Yes, but as we all know that is the unclassified number.

No need for jihad. And the west openly embraces Islamification through increasingly uncontrolled immigration and insane "diversity" policies that actually promote retention of bad cultural practices (how often is criticism of other cultures viewed as racist).

Indeed …

Just saw a report, that I had heard before a while ago. In places like Germany, Sweden, etc. Syrian & Afghan refugees welcomed to the nations. Have raped or raped and killed local young girls & women.

Now no doubt those numbers are small and not generally the norm. But that means little to those girls and their familys'. However, those Euro gov'ts don't want to really "push" the truth … as they will be called "racist", islamophobic, etc.

So those horrors continue, I guess …

The Muslims have their own human rights convention (Cairo Declaration on Human Rights in Islam) which completely reduces women and non-muslims to second class citizens as in accordance with Sharia law.

I hope you are somehow wrong. Or this is overblown ?

But even if we don't always agree, you are very good at research, etc. Even I have to admit at times I HAVE learned something.

But now we will be labeled racist and islamaphobic ?

It was not a failure for weapons and munitions manufactures.

I hope you are somehow wrong. Or this is overblown ?

Under original Sharia and related Haddiths, women's legal rights are much lower than men's. For example a man is allowed to strike his wife provided that it doesn't cause visible injury. Or you need two women's testimony to counter a single man's testimony (and in Shia only male testimony counts). Under sharia sexual slavery of non-muslim women was acceptable.

"Authorised" non-muslims (Christian, Jews, Hindus, Buddhists etc) are referred to as " dhimmi " have a different set of rights to Muslims – eg no public/overt religious observances in front of muslms, they have to pay a special tax and they couldn't serve in government or military.

Now the Cairo Declaration on Human Rights took many elements of the 1948 UN Declaration of Rights but it also applied a lot of the old sharia laws and Haddith interpretations.

- Property rights are only applicable to men.

- Many references to sharia law including traditional punishments.

- Religious freedom is heavily diluted eg it is illegal for anyone to convert from Islam to another religion or atheism (which is also case in Sharia law).

- No freedom on sexual practices, preferences etc.

- Freedom of speech only guaranteed as long as it conforms to sharia.

- Freedom from torture is also guaranteed unless it is prescribed in sharia.

So you can chop someone's hand off for theft or stone a woman for adultery or execute someone for converting from Islam to another religion/no religion.

About the only time the Declaration actually veered from sharia was slavery which it banned outright but which is still practiced in some Islamic states.

A total of 45 Islamic countries (from 57 member Organisation of Islamic Cooperation) signed up to Cairo Declaration even though it has been condemned by UN and many western legal and human rights organisations.

---

But you can see how the definition of right and wrong varies culturally and how the west (in its current format) cannot defeat global islamism.

The solutions are binary as both systems are mutually exclusive.

E.g. Westerners believe you have the right to chose your religion, whereas to Muslims you are absolutely unable to convert from Islam to anything else.

E.g. Westerners believe in females having same rights as men, whereas in Islamic interpretation women have different rights to men.

E.g. Westerners believe in right to sexual freedom, whereas to Muslims but also many non-Muslims in Russia, Asia, Africa and elsewhere, this is regarded as abhorrent.

Note once upon a time Christians were pretty fundamentalist too but the Renaissance and then Enlightenment wiped out fundamentalist Christianity as well as as fundamental Judaism to a large degree (though fundamental Judaism is growing fast now thanks to Haredis massive birth rates).

This is why in the past Muslims, Christians and Jews could live together (albeit with Christians as second rate citizens) – their rules were from different religious texts but the principles were similar.

Today the secular Christian/Jewish world is diametrically opposite to Islam which is increasingly conservative.

This is what noted political scientist Samuel Huntington was talking about in his "Clash of Civilisations" thesis.

----

It's also what separates western conflict with Russia/China from western/everyone else conflict with Islam.

The Islamic conflicts are driven by ideas/ideology/life philosophy whereas the Chinese/Russian conflicts are driven by typical nationalist quests for power, wealth, territory and control (sure Chinese call themselves Communist but their modern system is right wing authoritarianism).

"There was never going to be another 9-11 regardless of drone strikes or military interventions".

Interesting, since I just saw a headline yesterday saying the UK expects a radioactive materials, or bomb attack on its country by 2030. I've read similar in the past, a decade or more ago about the USA too.

Iran or Pakistan will probably provide the materials for this, though of course, North Korea is another possibility too.

"Westerners believe you have the right to chose your religion, whereas to Muslims you are absolutely unable to convert from Islam to anything else".

While some Muslims may falsely believe that, and may attempt to attack and kill those that violate that "law", many have done exactly that, since they see how evil Islam can be, especially when strictly adhered to, and they have rejected that from their lives.

Thresher, Muslims don't falsely believe they can't convert. It is a part of their religion as much as though shall not covet thy neighbours wife or worship false idols is part of yours.

Of course in real life we can do anything and believe in anything. Personally I am an atheist and to some degree a nihilist (life ultimately has no intrinsic meaning or value).

But I would get killed in some Islamic countries for expressing my opinions as much as Abdul and Fatima would get killed for converting from Islam to nihilistic atheism or Christianity or Hinduism or whatever.

Now the Cairo Declaration on Human Rights took many elements of the 1948 UN Declaration of Rights but it also applied a lot of the old sharia laws and Haddith interpretations.

So the UN is an "enabler", so to speak. However, there are many islamic nations in the UN. So I guess there was no choice.

But I would get killed in some Islamic countries

Yes, just for being an "infidel", which covers a lot of people. Most of us !

UN wasn't an enabler- the Cairo Declaration was designed to replace the UN HR convention for Muslims. Islamic countries voluntarily opted for Cairo Declaration even though it wasn't accepted by UN.

Well the UN HR is there now trying to help muslims … regardless. So are many infidels like the US/NATO forces. As long as some are so wedded to the archaic dogma of Sharia Law, the world will be a worse place. No matter what the UN, etc., etc., does …

As long as some are so wedded to the archaic dogma of Sharia Law,

Not some, many and in some cases most. Hence the success of Islamists in elections in Egypt and Turkey.

Even here in Australia many Islamic community leaders push for sharia law to be accepted in Australia as an alternative to Australian law, especially for family matters.

You and I might view Sharia as evil, they view it as divine and our godless, western ways as debauched and evil.

I remember one Pakistani taxi driver in Melbourne telling me and my wife how he would not let his daughters ever dress as "loose" as Australian women. I've known an Egyptian psychiatrist who refused to provide a credit card imprint to a hotel on grounds that usury was against Sharia (terrible doctor too – he'd literally shout at mentally ill patients and their families).

It goes to show how just because they've come here to Australia for economic purposes, doesn't mean they've abandoned their wish to live under sharia.

And it applies to others – my wife encounters a lot of caste issues amongst the Nepali community that fuels violence against women. We have had issues with Indian doctors refusing to listen to their superiors on the grounds of the superiors being lower caste.

No caste system in Australia but it's clearly something these people don't want to let go of even though its terribly detrimental to a lot of people.

"Even here in Australia many Islamic community leaders push for sharia law to be accepted in Australia as an alternative to Australian law, especially for family matters.

You and I might view Sharia as evil, they view it as divine and our godless, western ways as debauched and evil".

Which IS proof that the Western religions and cultures are NOT compatible with those that have adopted Islam and Sharia law.

Not some, many and in some cases most. Hence the success of Islamists in elections in Egypt and Turkey.

That is becoming more clearer to the West … But if one says and believes it they are labelled racists & islamophobic …

You and I might view Sharia as evil, they view it as divine and our godless, western ways as debauched and evil.

As long as that is their "beloved" beliefs … there will be always be trouble between them & the West. Directly or indirectly …

Which IS proof that the Western religions and cultures are NOT compatible with those that have adopted Islam and Sharia law.

Of course again that makes many in the West "racists & islamophobic" …

"Of course again that makes many in the West "racists & islamophobic" …".

Or, logical, practical, smart, and far less likely to be attacked by radicals from within.

I note that even though the Swiss have many of their people armed with assault rifles at home, due to their homogenous society, they are not subject to the many downsides of multiculturalism, or to terrorist attack from Islamic radicals, unlike what many nations throughout Europe are now suffering through.

Or, logical, practical, smart, and far less likely to be attacked by radicals from within.

I agree … but from what I've seen from some of those in leadership positions are more concerned about the threat of those from within than radical islamsists trying to kill us at home.

They are fools … 'nuff said …

some of those in leadership positions are more concerned about the threat of those from within

Patriots are seen as a threat to western political elites as they question the validity of the political leaderships' globalisation agendas.

Can't promote "free trade" (ie offshoring and use of third world slave labour) if the locals are rallying against it.

Agreed … It is clear to me and I hope others see our leadership has sold the middle class blue collar, the low wage white collar and military members & families up river without a paddle or even a boat.

It is astonishing. I cannot believe what I am reading on this board.

A bunch of absurdities, fallacies and distortions about Islamic religion, all based on ignorance and ethnocentrism.

Lots of absurdities and misconceptions mentioned by people who know nothing about Islamic religion, people such as arealdeadone, Thresher01, Legion 4 and others.

This is a forum devoted to wargames and related military aspects. Please, avoid talking about religious matters which you do not understand.

You do not know the real meaning of religious concepts such as Sharia or Jihad. Sharia is not a law. You do not understand this concept. Your opinions are based on Western definitions made up by journalists, tabloids and biased Western writers.

You should study using Islamic primary and secondary sources. You will discover that Sharia is not a set of laws. Positive law and jurisprudence is called 'Fiqh', not Sharia, and Penal Code is called 'Hudud'. Sharia is a spiritual concept. Nothing to do with your absurdities.

I can recommend a basic bibliography about Islamic Sharia.

Regarding the 'compatibilities' between the Western civilization and Islam, it should be noted that the Western civilization is not the universal pattern which everyone in the universe must follow. It is just an historical product, developed in specific space and time.

Other civilizations have their own values, principles and ways of understand human life and society. They should look for their own ways and paths in order to develop their societies, based on their own culture and characteristics. They do not need 'Western Renaissances and Enlightenments' (two childish historical myths).

Other civilizations have their own values, principles and ways of understand human life and society. They should look for their own ways and paths in order to develop their societies, based on their own culture and characteristics.

They do. Doesn't mean their values fit modern universal values especially those adopted by so many countries (eg UN Human Rights convention).

They do not need 'Western Renaissances and Enlightenments' (two childish historical myths

Wow just wow. You are literally denying the existence of two out of three movements (third being industrial revolution) that dragged Europe from feudal societies and that over many centuries brought the common people in the west relative wealth and prosperity, that extended life spans from under 40 to over 80, that cured diseases etc etc.

The fact you typed your tirade against western culture on a computer is a direct result of all these 3 (western scientific thought, rise of western secularism, western emphasis on improving equality and prosperity for all, western industrial developments etc etc – all parts developed via Renaissance, Enlightenment and the Industrial Revolution).

As for Sharia, Fiqh and Hudud are parts of Sharia and assist implementation of Sharia in everyday life (Hudud is literally the punishments and Fiqh the legal element of Sharia).

A lot of the really brutal stuff comes from Koran itself eg striking disobedient wives or whipping/flogging people for adultery or lopping hands off or killing people for converting from Islam (apostacy). These are all part of the Hudud.

Islam is very complex and so complex that to implement all of its various components is to create a totalitarian society like those practiced in Iran, KSA, ISIS or Taliban and to just slightly lesser degrees UAE.

Much like Nazism or Stalinist Communism, Islam covers literally every aspect of society and human relations – everything from taxation to sexual relations to legal issues to business practices (eg ban on usury) to relations between Muslims and non-Muslims to human rights or lack thereof.

it should be noted that the Western civilization is not the universal pattern which everyone in the universe must follow. It is just an historical product, developed in specific space and time.

It's the pattern that pushed humanity into a whole new era of understanding and improved lives of hundreds of millions.

No other society has done that and those that have (eg North Asia) have embraced a lot of western ideals (noting even Communism is a western invention).

Lots of absurdities and misconceptions mentioned by people who know nothing about Islamic religion, people such as arealdeadone, Thresher01, Legion 4 and others.

What the Taliban, AQ & ISIS profess is Islam is NOT. All the Moslems I know told me that … And they are good people …

As well as my common sense tells me these jihadis/terrorists are not real followers of Islam …

ardo I think you are well suited to have a chat with Ruchel, on about … well … anything. My is on ardo … Let the games begin !

BTW Ruchel … show me where I was wrong about anything I said about Islam was wrong or negative ? You are a teacher … teach me …

As well as my common sense tells me these jihadis/terrorists are not real followers of Islam

In which case you're not paying attention to how people live in those countries.

Eg Pakistan and Jordan have tried to get rid of honour killings (not prescribed under Islam and nominally against Islamic law but it's still a tacit element of religious adherence much like Christmas trees which also aren't in bible).

And both Jordan and Pakistan have failed. And these people carry these beliefs to their new western homelands – eg 47% of all spousal murder in Norway is conducted by immigrants and primarily Islamic ones who are less than 5% of the population.

Most Muslims live in third world conditions that haven't changed much since the 7th century.

And even the formerly "secular/moderate"* Muslims are becoming more conservative and fundamentalist. Even Obama talked about this in an interview with the Atlantic – he grew up in Indonesia and talked about how Saudi Wahhabist/Salafism has crept up into Indonesian society over the last 20 years.

This has happened in Indonesia, Malaysia, Turkey and to some degree Tunisia.

Personally I knew metalheads in Morocco and Egypt who talked about how their societies was becoming more Islamist and people were less accepting of their choices and they needed to get out (try being an bisexual female metalhead with an interest in avant garde art in Islamic Morocco).

Even most real Christians I knew were intolerant (and often hypocritical) – they pretended to be moderate but were scathing of homosexuals or people who chose to live their lives differently. I used to have Christian friends tell me my life was being lived wrong (they can go do you know what to themselves)!

Moderate religion doesn't really exist. You can't claim to follow a religion and then not adhere to its religious tenants. You cant be Catholic and then chow down a 300 gram porterhouse steak on Good Friday. You can't be a dedicated Jew and work on the Sabbath. You can't be a dedicated muslim and then recognise female testimony when the creed tells you it's only worth half as much as a male.

I've noticed moderate Christians religions in Australia are becoming businesses – eg local Baptists are selling their churches on the grounds that it doesn't really suit their current service model which includes provision of government funded support services to Muslims, Hindus and Buddhists!

Church of England is selling up nearly all of its churches including ones with active congregations. Their main focus now is Anglicare, which is one of these "community sector organisations" that the government is funnelling hundreds of millions to to provide services once provided by government.

I'm an atheist by the way. Nothing against religion and I love religious art and architecture. I've been inside dozens of churches from local Anglican chapels to Sagrada Familia in Barcelona and St. Peter's Basilica in the Vatican to admire the architectural and artistic beauty. I would love to visit mosques as well but alas most of the world the beautiful ones are in are also scary, unstable places!

In which case you're not paying attention to how people live in those countries.

I have seen in the media how some in those nations do still live in the 7th Century. Again you can't always trust what the media says. But I had a feeling those were a minority of the followers of Islam that were fundamentalists or radical …

Most Muslims live in third world conditions that haven't changed much since the 7th century.

Admittedly from the media and online that does seem to be the situation … Many villages and towns are the traditional sand brick, etc. construction, etc. clothing, houses, traditions, etc., have changed little in centuries. Since biblical times in some cases it appears.

The moslems I know mostly from Jordan & Palestine don't give me that impression ? That they are in the "7th Century" … They seem like nice people and live in and like modernity. I don't think I will ever see them as a terrorist. But we know that is always not the case, sadly. I am not fool enough to think otherwise with my military background and former career as a PI. Even as a PI at times I pretended to be someone who I was not …

As I have said many of the moslem women I see wear the hijab, one I know never wears it. However there are a couple who wear an entire black "burka" with only their eyes showing. The other moslem women told me they were Egyptian ? As I was interested in knowing the difference, etc. I don't engage those in conversation in all black. And it seems the other moslem women don't either … So my journey and study continues.

You cant be Catholic and then chow down a 300 gram porterhouse steak on Good Friday.

LOL ! Well I know many Catholics and Roman Catholics who have violated that ! Where I live traditionally many places including churches sell & serve fish on Friday. It is traditional with many of the Christian Italian and Eastern European backgrounds who live here. I grew up that way every Friday and on Christmas Eve we ate fish. And I liked it then and do now.

My one Roman Catholic friend will not eat meat during Lent. I have violated that many times ! I guess I'm going to Hell … I guess eating fish often will not get me out of that sentence …

Wow just wow. You are literally denying the existence of two out of three movements (third being industrial revolution) that dragged Europe from feudal societies and that over many centuries brought the common people in the west relative wealth and prosperity, that extended life spans from under 40 to over 80, that cured diseases etc etc.

Those 'movements' were full of contradictions and immoralities. Those 'movements' included the roots of the worst ideologies and atrocities that people have ever suffered.

The fact you typed your tirade against western culture on a computer is a direct result of all these 3 (western scientific thought, rise of western secularism, western emphasis on improving equality and prosperity for all, western industrial developments etc etc – all parts developed via Renaissance, Enlightenment and the Industrial Revolution).

You are wrong. Before those ‘movements' there were many philosophers, scientists, artists, writers, poets, religious authorities, wise people and so on. And from all cultures, not just the Western one: India, Islamic countries, China, …

People such as Lao Tzu, Shankara, Plato, Plotinus, Virgil, Ibn Arabi, Ibn Rushd, Rumi, Meister Eckart, Thomas Aquinas, Moshe ben Shem-Tov (Moses de Leon), and many others, are excellent authors and magnificent sources. All of them lived before those ‘movements'. There were many centuries of traditional culture before your beloved movements. My tirade against modern Western culture is a direct result of learning from all those traditional masters.

Western emphasis on improving equality and prosperity for all? Is it a joke? Do you ever hear about colonialism and neo-colonialism?

The prosperity of Western countries has implied, and implies today, the ruin and poverty of many other countries (exploitation and plunder of their resources and economic dependency).

As for Sharia, Fiqh and Hudud are parts of Sharia and assist implementation of Sharia in everyday life (Hudud is literally the punishments and Fiqh the legal element of Sharia).

You are wrong again. Sharia is a spiritual concept, a set of values and principles which a believer should follow (in every aspect of life) in order to reach ‘Haqiqa', the real knowledge of God. The meaning of Sharia is (approximately) ‘street'.

Sharia is totally independent from Fiqh and Hudud. For example, Islamic communities in Europe follow Sharia principles despite the fact that Fiqh and Hudud do not exist in European countries. Sharia is eternal, Fiqh and Hudud may change. In fact, many times Fiqh and Hudud become distorted and degenerate, and they are in contradiction with Sharia.

A lot of the really brutal stuff comes from Koran itself

Another absurdity. Koran, like other Revelations, uses a symbolic language. Western people tend to read in a literal way, not in a symbolic one. If you want to understand the Koran, you need three ingredients: knowledge of Islamic symbolism, knowledge of hermeneutics, and knowledge of Arabic language (one word has different meanings and derivations). Translations into European languages are totally inaccurate and useless.

Islam is very complex and so complex that to implement all of its various components is to create a totalitarian society like those practiced in Iran, KSA, ISIS or Taliban and to just slightly lesser degrees UAE.

Again, a bunch of prejudices and fallacies. You do not understand anything about Islam. Islam does not prescribe any kind of political system. You do not find anything about states and political systems in Koran or hadiths.

In fact, political Islamism is a modern ideology born in the post-colonial period as a reaction. Islam is basically a personal spiritual path congruent with a balanced social life (Islamic community or Umma). So, you can be a good Muslim person in any political system. Islam goes far beyond political systems. The rise of totalitarian governments (not societies) has nothing to do with Islam. It has other causes.

much like Nazism or Stalinist Communism, Islam covers literally every aspect of society and human relations

A despicable comparison based on ignorance, prejudice and intellectual misery. Islam is not just a religion in a Western sense (just a marginal aspect of Western life), it is a ‘Din', that is, it comprises all aspects of personal and social life. But Islam is a voluntary choice. You may choose to be Muslim, Christian or Jewish. Those governments that oblige people to be Muslim are against Islam. In fact, that obligation does not exist in most countries with a majority Islamic population.

As Koran says: ‘There is no compulsion in religion'. (Al-baqara 2:256), and the common interpretation is: If you compel somebody to be a Muslim then they wouldn't really be a Muslim, because to be a Muslim means that you have to be a Muslim at heart.

It's the pattern that pushed humanity into a whole new era of understanding and improved lives of hundreds of millions'

And ruined the lives of hundreds of millions of other people as well.

New era of understanding? Yes, the understanding of neurotic consumerism and schizophrenic materialism.

As well as my common sense tells me these jihadis/terrorists are not real followers of Islam …

You are right. Please, see the conclusions and declarations offered in the International Islamic Conference in Grozny (2016).

Most Muslims live in third world conditions that haven't changed much since the 7th century.

You know very well how they lived in the 7th century, don't you? Because you lived in that century and you know well their values and their way to understand human life. But those poor guys did not have washing machines, gigantic cars, large houses, doughnuts, a new smart phone every month, obesity, virtual pornography, sex tourism, TV, big supermarkets, …

in which case you're not paying attention to how people live in those countries.

Your conclusions are simplistic. Human life has many different dimensions, in every country and in every civilization. Your conclusions are full of ethnocentrism. All societies have good things and bad things; your opinions depend on your own values and prejudices.

In any case, you should not judge a whole country or culture bearing in mind just some defects but taking into consideration many other social aspects.

In fact, I have a totally different point of view about the countries you have mentioned. You only see defects. I see community values, social solidarity and true religious values. I see the lights and the shadows, but you are obsessed with the latter.

All societies, including Western ones, have their own lights and shadows, their defects and virtues. Western societies have many despicable characteristics too. I can list them, but I would need many pages. So, you should recognize your own sins before accusing other cultures and civilizations.

Your conclusions about religions are simplistic and unfair.

Firstly, you can find hypocrisy and disloyalty in every human organization, not just in religions: family, political parties, ideological groups, corporations, trade unions, work environment, sport clubs, Colleges, business, charity organizations, wargames associations, and so on.

Secondly, all traditional religions have been aware of the weaknesses and strengths of human nature. They know that true believers are always a minority. Religious doctrines and their eternal values are not affected by human sins.

The moslems I know mostly from Jordan & Palestine don't give me that impression ?

Jordan is one of the few shining lights and is highly urbanised though that does not indicate anything approaching modern values.

Eg Honour killings are still allowed in Jordan (despite King Abdullah II trying to ban them) and women can be arrested for disobeying their male "guardians" or having unauthorised relations. Having unmarried sex risks a 3 year prison sentence for a woman (not for men). Women who have children out of wedlock have their children taken away from them.

As stated King Abdullah II is triyng to fight all this – in 2017 he managed to repeal a law that protected rapists.

However he is fighting against Jordanian society itself – for example surveys of school children in Jordan revealed nearly 50% of boys and 22% of girls agreed with honour killings.

Palestine is different too and an anomaly – let's not forget Hamas was legally elected in West Bank in 2006! One reason Fatah has scrapped elections in West Bank is because they know Hamas would probably win there too!

Afghanistan is 74% rural with a literacy rate of 46%!

If you look at rest of Islamic world it's far worse for women, LGBTI, non-Islamic minorities etc all due to increasing growth of Islamism.

In fact some of the most fundamentalist Islamic societies are some of the richest and most urbanised ones – UAE, Qatar, Brunei and Saudi Arabia.

Living in a city doesn't mean you are modern. In fact many in third world cities live lives that are positively archaic – no running water/sewerage, no electricity, no medical services, no social services.

Eg over 60% of people living in Indian megacities like Mumbai or New Dehli have no running water or sewerage! Over 50% of people living in Teheran are the same.

Some interesting comments gents, I am learning something.
I just came back from the Y outdoor pool, very hot here. I spent some time with my one friend who is Palestinian. And his lovely little daughters, 3 & 8 IIRC. He tells me about things I didn't know. Some very interesting conversations.

Introduced him to someone I just met there today. She is from the UK, and her father was in Palestine during WWII.

Also talked again to a nice German lady who was born in Nuremburg in '45. Another German lady I talk to was born in Torgau in East Germany …

So I had an interesting and informative day at the pool …

And no one argued about anything … plus the UN was no where in sight …

Those 'movements' were full of contradictions and immoralities. Those 'movements' included the roots of the worst ideologies and atrocities that people have ever suffered.

So? Every other culture has committed mass atrocities including Muslims.

You are wrong. Before those ‘movements' there were many philosophers, scientists, artists, writers, poets, religious authorities, wise people and so on. And from all cultures, not just the Western one: India, Islamic countries, China, …

No I am not wrong. And I never denied the influence of others (some of whom are westerners eg Plato or Moshe ben Shem-Tov who incidentally was a Spaniard and just slightly predates formal start of Renaissance). I was merely pointing out commonly accepted historical fact that the Renaissance, Enlightenment and Industrial Revolutions brought about the great progress in human knowledge and the greatest improvements to human living standards over a period of 500 years.

Western emphasis on improving equality and prosperity for all? Is it a joke? Do you ever hear about colonialism and neo-colonialism?

The prosperity of Western countries has implied, and implies today, the ruin and poverty of many other countries (exploitation and plunder of their resources and economic dependency).

Actually since 1960s most countries have been able to do as they please. Some have got their act together like North Asians and used western ideas to propels themselves to new levels of prosperity and power. Others such as those in Latin America or Africa have been unable to beat their own worst cultural tendencies and have rotted.

Even then thanks to western ideas such as agriculture or modern medicine life has improved vastly for many citizens in those countries.

Another absurdity. Koran, like other Revelations, uses a symbolic language.

It's not symbolic. It's actually very prescriptive.

Eg Koranic verse 4:34 that allows domestic violence against women and demands complete obedience from women.

Men are the protectors and maintainers of women, because Allah has given the one more (strength) than the other, and because they support them from their means. Therefore the righteous women are devoutly obedient, and guard in (the husband's) absence what Allah would have them guard. As to those women on whose part ye fear disloyalty and ill-conduct, admonish them (first), (Next), refuse to share their beds, (And last) strike them (lightly); but if they return to obedience, seek not against them Means (of annoyance): For Allah is Most High, great (above you all).

So if wifey is disobedient you can strike her lightly but you can't strike her if she does as she is told!

There's nothing symbolic here – it's about as clear cut as you can get.

As for Apostasy there's multiple verses that deal with them including prohibiting non-Muslims from trying to convert muslims.

And you ignore the existence of Haddiths which are legally binding interpretations of Islam.

Eg Sahih al-Bukhari which is one of 6 major Sunni haddith compilations that make up its legal and scriptural dogma.

"The blood of a Muslim who confesses that none has the right to be worshipped but Allah and that I am His Apostle, cannot be shed except in three cases: In Qisas for murder, a married person who commits illegal sexual intercourse and the one who reverts from Islam (apostate) and leaves the Muslims."

Note Muhammad was no Gandhi or Martin Luther – he was more similar to the Taliban ie a warlord who put many non-believers to the sword.

And denying links between the Koran, Sharia, Haddiths, Fiqh and Hudud would be like arguing there are no connections between the US constitution and federal and state law.

Again, a bunch of prejudices and fallacies. You do not understand anything about Islam. Islam does not prescribe any kind of political system. You do not find anything about states and political systems in Koran or hadiths.

It doesn't prescribe a political system in the modern sense. It prescribes an entire platform for how to live one's life. Under Islam the Emir or Sultan or President's or Legislative Assembly role is to implement laws within the confines of Islam.

It's why most Islamic countries have many violent anti-female laws. It's why up to 19th century, Islamic countries did have different laws for non-believers.

In fact, political Islamism is a modern ideology born in the post-colonial period as a reaction. Islam is basically a personal spiritual path congruent with a balanced social life (Islamic community or Umma). So, you can be a good Muslim person in any political system. Islam goes far beyond political systems. The rise of totalitarian governments (not societies) has nothing to do with Islam. It has other causes.

There are other causes.

But rebirth conservative/fundamentalist Islam is the equivalent of Protestant Reformation. It's viewed in Islam as a turning away from corrupt secular systems back to a more pure form of religion and life.

ou may choose to be Muslim, Christian or Jewish.

But I cannot chose to be an atheist now can I? That gets me stoned (or at best jailed).

Those governments that oblige people to be Muslim are against Islam. In fact, that obligation does not exist in most countries with a majority Islamic population.

As in most such things, the government doesn't have any control. As mentioned Pakistan bans honour killings and Jordan tries to. People still do it. It's still cultural practice.

Persecution of non-Muslims is endemic in Islamic parts of the world. Try being a Coptic Christian in Islamic Egypt or a Buddhist Chinese in Malaysia or a Christian in Pakistan.

And this is often done by the people, not by their governments!

And ruined the lives of hundreds of millions of other people as well.

So did your Islamic empires.

New era of understanding? Yes, the understanding of neurotic consumerism and schizophrenic materialism.

If you hate west so much you can move to Afghanistan where they've just toppled the pro-neurotic consumerism and schizophrenic materialism goverment in favour of a more religiously pure one.

Ironic too you're on a wargaming site – wargaming is materialism – all that accumulation of plastic and lead.

In fact, I have a totally different point of view about the countries you have mentioned. You only see defects. I see community values, social solidarity and true religious values. I see the lights and the shadows, but you are obsessed with the latter.

I see countries and societies where my wife and daughter would be second class citizens without same rights and protections as afforded in the west.

I see countries and societies where my little girl could be murdered or gaoled for mere act of sex.

I see countries and societies where my LGBTIQ+ friends and colleagues would be murdered if they came out into the open.

I see countries and societies where my own belief system (atheism) would have me murdered or at best persecuted.

I see countries where even my love of heavy metal music would get me gaoled as happens in most Islamic countries (even supposedly secular Malaysia has banned heavy metal and people into metal have been gaoled in a variety of Islamic countries).

Suffice to say my whole way of life and those of many people I know is banned in most Islamic countries.

Suffice to say my whole way of life and those of many people I know is banned in most Islamic countries.

Very interesting … but as I knew before, I'm very glad to have been born in the USA. Where we don't have to be subjected to something like Sharia Law, etc.

Another good reason I chose to defend this country for over a decade. Among other reasons of course …

If you hate west so much you can move

Some good advice for a number of those who live in the USA & take their freedoms for granted. They think they are oppressed, etc.

So? Every other culture has committed mass atrocities including Muslims.

Well, that is my point. No culture or civilization is intrinsically better than others.

I was merely pointing out commonly accepted historical fact that the Renaissance, Enlightenment and Industrial Revolutions brought about the great progress in human knowledge and the greatest improvements to human living standards over a period of 500 years.

And I was merely pointing out commonly accepted historical fact that those three movements brought about the worst ideologies and procedures ever seen: nationalism, colonialism, social Darwinism, communism, fascism, Nazism, and so on, and, as a result, the greatest atrocities and the greatest deterioration of human living standards in many countries around the world.

Actually since 1960s most countries have been able to do as they please.

Another fallacy. You should study the historiographical concept of Neo-colonialism (new colonialism), and the new patterns of dependency.

It's not symbolic. It's actually very prescriptive.

It is absolutely symbolic, even those verses. In fact, there are many different theories about the real meaning, deep meaning, of those ‘prescriptive' verses. It depends on the hermeneutics and the level of knowledge on Arabic language. In short, it depends on accurate exegesis.

For example, about the verse 4:34 that you have mentioned, there are totally different approaches based on a correct and cultivated Koranic exegesis. You should read the works of excellent scholars and authors such as Amina Wadud and Asma Barlas.

And you ignore the existence of Haddiths which are legally binding interpretations of Islam.

No, I do not ignore their existence. I know the collections of Hadith. They are the cornerstone of Sunna. But, like Koran, they need a correct and accurate exegesis. Most Western translations are rubbish, and they are completely useless.

Most Islamic prescriptions are focused on a personal inner struggle in order to achieve a personal development and self-growth. For example, the concept of ‘Greater Jihad' is referred to that inner struggle, even though Koran and Hadith use aggressive explanations. That aggressive language, which is totally misunderstood by Western people, is symbolically applied to a personal inner struggle, and not to massive social punishments (the typical Western distortion). By the way, ‘Lesser Jihad', as a real war, is restricted to defensive war.

Note Muhammad was no Gandhi or Martin Luther – he was more similar to the Taliban ie a warlord who put many non-believers to the sword.

Another typical absurdity, and another example of ethnocentrism and intellectual misery. If you want to learn something accurate about the real significance of Muhammad, you should study from reliable Islamic primary and secondary sources.

But it seems that you prefer outdated biographies written by a bunch of biased and inept Western authors, people who cannot read Arabic language and people who use repeated stereotypes instead of reading and studying authentic sources. In short, intellectual misery and intellectual laziness.

it doesn't prescribe a political system in the modern sense. It prescribes an entire platform for how to live one's life.

Exactly, the fundamental moral guidelines for how to live one's live, according to God's will. It is a personal path inside the Islamic community (Umma).

There are many Islamic communities in many countries around the world, in countries with many different political systems. So, political systems are of secondary importance.

And denying links between the Koran, Sharia, Haddiths, Fiqh and Hudud would be like arguing there are no connections between the US constitution and federal and state law.

Have you read carefully my previous posts? It is evident you haven´t.
Please, do not manipulate my words. It is dishonest.

I have not denied those links. But they are different things and different concepts. Most Western people, you included, do not know anything about Sharia. As I have explained many times before, Sharia is not positive law, Sharia is not jurisprudence, Sharia is not a list of punishments. This is the typical Western misconception based on ignorance and intellectual laziness.

I repeat it: Sharia is a spiritual concept, a set of values and principles which a believer should follow (in every aspect of life) in order to reach ‘Haqiqa', the real knowledge of God.

It is easy to understand, right? But you prefer to make up your own concept of Sharia based on your own distorted imagination.

Again, I can recommend a basic bibliography about Islamic Sharia if you want to learn from real sources.

It's viewed in Islam as a turning away from corrupt secular systems back to a more pure form of religion and life.

No, that is not viewed in Islam, it is viewed in marginal groups such as Salafism/Wahhabism. Islam is absolutely diverse. There is no hierarchical structure in Islam (no Pope, no cardinals, no bishops, no priests, no just one doctrine, no just one authority and power,…).

But I cannot chose to be an atheist now can I? That gets me stoned (or at best jailed).

Another childish absurdity. In most countries where Islam is the majority religion you can choose to be an atheist. Nobody will go to your home in order to ask you whether you are an atheist or a Buddhist.

So did your Islamic empires.

No. The level of destruction caused by Western ideologies and procedures was far higher: colonialism, nationalism, fascism, communism, Nazism, WWI, WWII, ….

I see countries and societies where my wife and daughter would be second class citizens without same rights and protections as afforded in the west.
I see…

An example of poetic propaganda.
It is evident that you have a totally inaccurate knowledge about most Islamic countries. Your opinions are based on distortions offered by Western journalists and mass media. It is evident that you have never lived in those countries.

It is ridiculous and childish. Those people have their own lives and problems. I assure you that you are not so important for them, and your favourite music and your belief system are totally irrelevant to them.

The typical Western attitude, the same conclusion based on ignorance and lack of self-criticism: ‘my culture is the best ever, my culture is the universal pattern, my culture is almost perfect, my culture is… And the consequent conclusion: the other cultures are rubbish.

Western societies and governments, so liberal and tolerant, do not hesitate to kill hundreds of thousands of civilian people (women and children) in the name of economic and strategic interests. Horrible atrocities: invasions, bombings, support to dictators, support to paramilitaries, and so on. The advanced Western societies, supposed champions of Human Rights, are in reality champions of hypocrisy and greed.

Another fallacy. You should study the historiographical concept of Neo-colonialism (new colonialism), and the new patterns of dependency.

Neocolonialism applies in a few instances (mainly ex French), not all. No one forced Argentina or Nigeria to be economically incompetent. No one forced Rwandans to massacre each other. No one is stopping India from achieving its ambitious except its own corrupt and inept government and bureaucracy.

Etc etc.

Amina Wadud and Asma Barlas

Who are not mainstream authors – one is an American convert and who is busy irritating most of mainstream Islam with some very American ideas and the other (Barlasi's) whose point is "Islam's not anti-women, it's just that men made it that way" (despite the very obvious facts such as Koran specifically outlines woman's place in society and it was written by a man (Muhammad) who married a 6-7 year old girl.)

Sharia is a spiritual concept, a set of values and principles which a believer should follow (in every aspect of life) in order to reach ‘Haqiqa', the real knowledge of God.

According to you. According to most, including muslim scholars it's the law! Many muslim countries base their laws Sharia.

And what are the Taliban, ISIS, Wahhabists, Salafists trying to do – replace secular law with Sharia! So it's not just spirituality for them either.

No, that is not viewed in Islam, it is viewed in marginal groups such as Salafism/Wahhabism. Islam is absolutely diverse. There is no hierarchical structure in Islam (no Pope, no cardinals, no bishops, no priests, no just one doctrine, no just one authority and power,…).

Agreed. Except fundamentalist Islam of all sorts (including both Shia and Sunni) is a growth religion thanks to Sunni Persian Gulf Arabs and Shia Iran.

Another childish absurdity. In most countries where Islam is the majority religion you can choose to be an atheist. Nobody will go to your home in order to ask you whether you are an atheist or a Buddhist.

Buddhists are acceptable under Islam.

Under Islam you can worship other "accepted religions" but it has to be within your own home and not displayed overtly.

But you are clueless if you think I could go around Islamic countries openly being an atheist

Many human rights agencies have reported on persecution of atheists/agnostics in Islamic countries. The persecution is both formal (law) and social (eg mobs beating up atheists/agnostics).

There are 13 predominantly Islamic countries where apostasy* is punishable by death:

- Afghanistan,
- Iran
- Malaysia
- Maldives
- Mauritania
- Nigeria – only part Muslim.
- Pakistan
- Qatar
- Saudi Arabia
- Somali
- Libya
- United Arab Emirates
- Yemen

Sudan recently amended laws to not have the death penalty.

*Apostasy and atheism are related – if a Muslim declares themselves to be atheist they have left Islam which is apostasy.

And even where death penalty is not implemented there is social and official persecution of atheists/agnostics eg Algeria atheists and agnostics cannot inherit while in ​"secular" Tunisia and Egypt, atheists are often gaoled.

Even in Indonesia which is one of the most secular Islamic societies (despite fundamentalism growing and being strong in some parts for decades like Aceh), atheists have been beaten up by mobs.

And you don't even address the brutal and disgusting treatment of LGBTIQ+ people in Islamic countries which is often death penalties!

It is evident that you have a totally inaccurate knowledge about most Islamic countries.

Actually you're the one who has not put down a single fact except attack the west.

The advanced Western societies, supposed champions of Human Rights, are in reality champions of hypocrisy and greed.

True but life is still so much better in the west than in even rich Islamic countries like KSA or Brunei where people are persecuted and even murdered for living life how they want to.

As I keep saying, if you hate the west I'm sure the Taliban would welcome you with opens arms!

Neocolonialism applies in a few instances (mainly ex French)

That is untrue. Neo-colonialism is a worldwide system of dependency. You are a leftist, so you should read works by authors such as Samir Amin or Immanuel Wallerstein. You can learn something from them.

No one forced Rwandans to massacre each other.

Are you sure? There were many Western interests, mainly economic interests, involved in those massacres.

Who are not mainstream authors

There are no ‘mainstream authors' in Islam. Again the same ethnocentric prejudices. It is clear that you do not know anything about Islam. And I can add many other modern authors who are experts on accurate Koranic exegesis.

Koran specifically outlines woman's place in society and it was written by a man (Muhammad) who married a 6-7 year old girl.)

Again the same fallacy about woman's place in society . Please, study true Koranic exegesis instead of repeating old misconceptions and distortions based on ignorance and intellectual laziness.

Regarding the same old song repeated by outdated Western biographers about the supposed marriage with a ‘6-7 year old girl', it is another fallacy.

You should read Islamic primary sources and modern research based on them. The conclusions about the girl's age are very different.

But you prefer to read outdated biographies written by people who cannot read Arabic language and have never seen Islamic primary sources. Their sources are old fallacies written by ignorant Western authors with a fanatical Christian agenda.

According to most, including muslim scholars it's the law!

No, most Islamic scholars know how to differentiate between Sharia and Fiqh/Hudud. But you, due to your total ignorance about Islam, are unable to understand that difference.

And what are the Taliban, ISIS, Wahhabists, Salafists trying to do – replace secular law with Sharia! So it's not just spirituality for them either.

No, they are trying to replace, not just secular laws, but other Fiqh/Hudud with their own distorted version of Fiqh/Hudud. They know nothing about true and eternal Sharia. It is a concept that they cannot understand.

Except fundamentalist Islam of all sorts (including both Shia and Sunni) is a growth religion thanks to Sunni Persian Gulf Arabs and Shia Iran.

Yes, they are trying to do that but it is not easy because Islam is complex and diverse and it does not accept a forced homogeneity.

There are four juridical schools of thought in Sunni Islam, and one main Shia school. There are dozens of theological schools of thought, dozens of sects and dozens of regional characteristics. There are dozens of spiritual brotherhoods (Sufism).

Many human rights agencies have reported on persecution of atheists/agnostics in Islamic countries. The persecution is both formal (law) and social (eg mobs beating up atheists/agnostics).

Those are broad generalizations oversized by Western mass media and tabloids. In fact, in most Islamic countries, in everyday life, there are no such persecutions.

In any case, true Islamic doctrine do not admit and do not accept any kind of violence against other religions and ideologies (atheism included), except for defensive purposes. People who take part in those persecutions are not true Muslims.

As I have mentioned in my previous posts, Islamic doctrine is focused on personal inner struggle. The use of concepts such as ‘apostasy' is related to a personal disloyalty to God. So, it is applied only to Islamic believers. Symbolically, apostasy is against human nature, against the natural relationship with the Creator (God) and, due to this fact, it is seen as a daunting challenge. It has nothing to do with public persecution.

‘And had your Lord willed, those on earth would have believed – all of them entirely. Then, would you compel the people in order that they become believers?'
Koran 10:99.

And you don't even address the brutal and disgusting treatment of LGBTIQ+ people in Islamic countries which is often death penalties!

Not in most Islamic countries. Do you think LGBTIQ people are killed everyday in the streets and the jails by Islamic mobs? Are you aware of that absurdity? You are a victim of mass media propaganda.

Most primary sources confirm that during the Pre-colonial era, homosexuality was tolerated. But the new Islamist ideologies, from post-colonial period, changed this situation in several countries. Nowadays, some Islamic countries need to find a new balanced attitude according to the true and original Islamic doctrines.

Actually you're the one who has not put down a single fact except attack the west.

Actually, I have contested all the fallacies and absurdities you have mentioned about Islam.

True but life is still so much better in the west than in even rich Islamic countries like KSA or Brunei where people are persecuted and even murdered for living life how they want to.

Maybe better than in KSA or Brunei, but not than in most Islamic countries.

if you hate the west I'm sure the Taliban would welcome you with opens arms!

Another proof that you have not understood anything about what I have written in all my previous post. It is a waste of time because you lack a basic knowledge about Islam. It is like discussing with children.

I am not interested in the Taliban, I am interested in Islam. Two different things.

But you prefer to read outdated biographies written by people who cannot read Arabic language and have never seen Islamic primary sources. Their sources are old fallacies written by ignorant Western authors with a fanatical Christian agenda.

No, they are trying to replace, not just secular laws, but other Fiqh/Hudud with their own distorted version of Fiqh/Hudud. They know nothing about true and eternal Sharia. It is a concept that they cannot understand.

So according to you neither westerners nor muslims don't understand Islam. Only you know Islam.

Not in most Islamic countries. Do you think LGBTIQ people are killed everyday in the streets and the jails by Islamic mobs? Are you aware of that absurdity? You are a victim of mass media propaganda.

They simply don't openly acknowledge their sexuality (like in west up to 1980s or later).

Again you deny the work of many human rights agencies and organisations such as Pew who have documented endemic religious repression. Again you know, they apparently don't.

As for not murdering apostates or atheists, AGAIN YOU IGNORE THE REALITY ON THE GROUND and ignore 1300 years of Islamic written legal documentation, religious interpretation and practice.

And in fact you're actually disregarding whole heaps of written Islamic law, doctrine etc that does specify murder and amputation of limbs and domestic violence because they don't suit your narrative.

It's like claiming Nazis didn't kill Jews because Hitler never specifically specified it in Mein Kampf even though in this case the written word clearly specifies "strike your wife", "amputate a hand," "stone the harlot."

There are four juridical schools of thought in Sunni Islam, and one main Shia school. There are dozens of theological schools of thought, dozens of sects and dozens of regional characteristics. There are dozens of spiritual brotherhoods (Sufism).

Sure. Except even those 4 Sunni and 1 Shia school have similar advice – hence killing adulterers is acceptable practice in both Sunni KSA and Shia Iran.

Finally lots of variation in Christianity but literally half of all Christians are Roman Catholic. Quakers sure seem nice with their abstinence from booze and helping folks out and thinking everyone is pretty good and whatnot but they are 400,0000.

Maybe better than in KSA or Brunei, but not than in most Islamic countries.

So you're saying that people in Pakistan or Turkey or Egypt have better living standards than westerners in Europe, USA or Australia/New Zealand?!?

Even if we exclude flawed GDP based indicators:

Human Development Index
Top 30 countries all western.

Top 50 countries – 5 Islamic (KSA (40th), UAE (31st), Qatar (45th), Bahrain (41st), Brunei (47th) ). Note Argentina is 46th despite forever collapsing economy and Romania is 49th and Russia 52nd despite both countries having mass poverty, inequality, corruption etc.

Major Islamic countries by population:

Turkey – 54th
Egypt – 116th
Pakistan – 154th
Indonesia – 107th
Iran – 70th
Iraq -123rd

Gender Inequality Index
Top 30 – all western
Top 50 – 5 Muslim countries – UAE (31st), Albania (42nd), Qatar (43rd), Kazakhstan (44th), Bahrain (49th).

Russia is 50th and China is 39th.

K

If indeed life was so super awesome in Pakistan or Afghanistan or Egypt or Mauritania, then why the hell are so many Muslims emigrating to west?!?

And if it's so super awesome why are so many disenfranchised young men being drawn to fight for ISIS or whatever local Islamist terror groups?

Major Islamic countries by population:

KSA – 56th
Turkey – 68th
Egypt – 108th
Pakistan – 135th
Indonesia – 121st
Iran – 113th
Iraq -123rd

Democracy Index
Top 50 countries – all non-Islamic, primarily western.

Top Islamic democracy – Indonesia (64th – flawed democracy). Was Tunisia at 54th place but the latest coup has not been taken into account.

In fact only two other Islamic states are listed as democracies and flawed at that – Albania (71st) and Bangladesh (76th)

China is 151st (authoritarian ) and Russia 125th (authoritarian)

KSA – 156th (authoritarian)
Turkey – 104th (hybrid regime)
Egypt – 138th (authoritarian)
Pakistan – 105th (hybrid regime)
Iran – 152nd (authoritarian)
Iraq -118th (authoritarian)
UAE – 145th (authoritarian)

Not all Islamist regimes but most have elements of Islamism.

Worst countries for religious freedom
No index per se but U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom has following countries as worst offenders.

Islamic majority
Afghanistan
Algeria
Azerbiajan
Egypt
Eritrea
Indonesia
Iran
Iraq
Kazakhstan
Malaysia
Nigeria
Pakistan
Saudi Arabia
Syria
Tajikistan
Turkey
Turkmenistan
Uzbekistan

Non-Islamic
China (persecuted Islamic minority)
Cuba
India (persecuted/repressed large Islamic minority)
Myanmar (persecuted Islamic minority along with persecuted pretty much everyone else!)
Nicaragua
North Korea
Russia (largish repressed Islamic minority)
Vietnam

So much for your idea that Islamic countries have living standards on par with west or that they have religious freedom.

Oh and as LGBTIQ= rights, here's a list from BBC where homosexuality is illegal: – I've highlighted Islamic majority ones.

As you can see it is illegal to be LGBTIQ= in most Islamic countries. In 13 Islamic countries it is punishable by death.

Again deny this all you want but it's reality.

Afghanistan – Islamic

Algeria – Islamic

Antigua & Barbuda

Bangladesh – Islamic

Barbados

Bhutan

Brunei – Islamic

Burundi

Cameroon

Chad – Islamic

Comoros

Cook Islands

Dominica

Egypt – Islamic

Eritrea – Islamic

Eswatini

Ethiopia -

Gambia

Ghana

Grenada

Guinea

Guyana

Iran – Islamic

Jamaica

Kenya

Kiribati

Kuwait – Islamic

Lebanon – Islamic

Liberia

Libya – Islamic

Malawi

Malaysia – Islamic

Maldives – Islamic

Mauritania – Islamic

Mauritius

Morocco – Islamic

Myanmar

Namibia

Nigeria – Islamic

Occupied Palestinian Territory (Gaza Strip) – Islamic

Oman – Islamic

Pakistan – Islamic

Papua New Guinea

Qatar – Islamic

Saint Kitts and Nevis

Saint Lucia

Saint Vincent and The Grenadines

Samoa

Saudi Arabia – Islamic

Senegal

Sierra Leone

Singapore

Solomon Islands

Somalia – Islamic

South Sudan

Sri Lanka

Sudan – Islamic

Syria – Islamic

Tanzania

Togo

Tonga

Tunisia – Islamic

Turkmenistan – Islamic

Tuvalu

UAE – Islamic

Uganda

Uzbekistan – Islamic

Yemen – Islamic

Zambia

Zimbabwe

Note Jordan not on the list because it's like super advanced compared to rest of Islamic world and homosexuality is not illegal.

However there are no legal protections for LGBTIQ+ in following areas:

Anti-discrimination laws in employment
Anti-discrimination laws in the provision of goods and services
Anti-discrimination laws in all other areas (incl. indirect discrimination, hate speech)
Same-sex marriages
Recognition of same-sex couples
Step-child adoption by same-sex couple
Joint adoption by same-sex couples
Access to IVF for lesbians
Commercial surrogacy for gay male couples

They also still might get arrested for public displays of affection as ""disrupting public morality".

So Jordan is progressive because they allowed LGBT the right to exist but not much more than that. In surveys 90+ of all Jordanian respondents did not think LGBT should be accepted as morally acceptable.

So if the current King's successor is a bit more religiously focused, he will probably revoke the current rights.