Most of our society is based upon the society that took part in the Crusades. Not surprisingly, so is most of the Arabic areas. Even though there was a ton of stupid bloodshed, it mostly lead to the Renaissance of Europe because of the free trade of ideas from the scientifically superior Arabic nations to the barbaric tribes and armies of the West. Yeah, they were pretty primitive in comparison to most of those countries.
bowen on
not a doctor, not a lawyer, examples I use may not be fully researched so don't take out of context plz, don't @ me
You do realize that it's part of what they consider a long history of invasions and occupations by the west, right?
Here's what I said.
You'll note the long history of thing.
So you've got your Crusades. You've got imperial games after the fall of the Ottoman Empire in particular. You've got the establishment of Israel by force. You've got the seizure of the Suez Canal (to our credit, we didn't support that). You've got the more recent Iraq War.
enlightenedbum on
Self-righteousness is incompatible with coalition building.
it's hard to understand how any of this should in anyway equate to us feeling guilty about the crusades.
Hell, isn't what they did pretty much accepatable and expected back in thos days anyway? That was sort of how that time period rolled, if you catch my meaning.
And still, our current issue with the Middle East has nothing to do with anything from those days. Our beef with them is pretty new, historically speaking, and had nothing to do with religion. It might now, but religion wasn't even penciled in, and then erased, for reasons to invade.
You don't have to feel guilty about the crusades to try to understand how they influenced the middle east.
You are throwing out this "I don't see why I should feel guilty" canard as a way of dodging the entire issue of the western world's history in the middle east creating grievances that are still factor in our relations there. You don't feel personally guilty and there's really no reason you should. Using that as a cover for willful ignorance, on the other hand, is dumb.
ed: also, understanding the crusades as a purely religious war is lazy as fuck
Eat it You Nasty Pig. on
it was the smallest on the list but
Pluto was a planet and I'll never forget
0
Options
AtomikaLive fast and get fucked or whateverRegistered Userregular
I'm not saying you're wrong, I'm just saying it sounds like more special pleading. Apparently the Middle East can just act as ignorant as they want, while we just have to nod along.
Atomika on
0
Options
No-QuarterNothing To FearBut Fear ItselfRegistered Userregular
ed: also, understanding the crusades as a purely religious war is lazy as fuck
Maybe, but the volatile regimes in the Middle East still like to frame it that way when they need to fearmonger.
You could say the same thing about Republicans when it comes to speaking about terrorism. This is the same group that pitched "they hate us for our freedoms!" after all.
You don't have to feel guilty about the crusades to try to understand how they influenced the middle east.
You are throwing out this "I don't see why I should feel guilty" canard as a way of dodging the entire issue of the western world's history in the middle east creating grievances that are still factor in our relations there. You don't feel personally guilty and there's really no reason you should. Using that as a cover for willful ignorance, on the other hand, is dumb.
ed: also, understanding the crusades as a purely religious war is lazy as fuck
Ignorant on their part for trying to lump us in with it. And their reality isn't the real world reality. Yes, making it about what everyone else has ever done to them and then tying it together as their religion being under attack makes it easier to recruit, but it doesn't come close to the reality of their current situation.
You don't have to feel guilty about the crusades to try to understand how they influenced the middle east.
You are throwing out this "I don't see why I should feel guilty" canard as a way of dodging the entire issue of the western world's history in the middle east creating grievances that are still factor in our relations there. You don't feel personally guilty and there's really no reason you should. Using that as a cover for willful ignorance, on the other hand, is dumb.
ed: also, understanding the crusades as a purely religious war is lazy as fuck
Ignorant on their part for trying to lump us in with it. And their reality isn't the real world reality. Yes, making it about what everyone else has ever done to them and then tying it together as their religion being under attack makes it easier to recruit, but it doesn't come close to the reality of their current situation.
Yeah, in their current situation the US is actually the biggest asshole. Wait, shit.
enlightenedbum on
Self-righteousness is incompatible with coalition building.
0
Options
No-QuarterNothing To FearBut Fear ItselfRegistered Userregular
I'm not saying you're wrong, I'm just saying it sounds like more special pleading. Apparently the Middle East can just act as ignorant as they want, while we just have to nod along.
Because there's a difference between the richest first-world country on the planet, and the ME?
You don't have to feel guilty about the crusades to try to understand how they influenced the middle east.
You are throwing out this "I don't see why I should feel guilty" canard as a way of dodging the entire issue of the western world's history in the middle east creating grievances that are still factor in our relations there. You don't feel personally guilty and there's really no reason you should. Using that as a cover for willful ignorance, on the other hand, is dumb.
ed: also, understanding the crusades as a purely religious war is lazy as fuck
Ignorant on their part for trying to lump us in with it. And their reality isn't the real world reality. Yes, making it about what everyone else has ever done to them and then tying it together as their religion being under attack makes it easier to recruit, but it doesn't come close to the reality of their current situation.
Yeah, in their current situation the US is actually the biggest asshole. Wait, shit.
I'm not saying you're wrong, I'm just saying it sounds like more special pleading. Apparently the Middle East can just act as ignorant as they want, while we just have to nod along.
Because there's a difference between the richest first-world country on the planet, and the ME?
Of course there is. But this logic makes it difficult. It's hard to formulate diplomatic policy when one party is completely full of shit.
You don't have to feel guilty about the crusades to try to understand how they influenced the middle east.
You are throwing out this "I don't see why I should feel guilty" canard as a way of dodging the entire issue of the western world's history in the middle east creating grievances that are still factor in our relations there. You don't feel personally guilty and there's really no reason you should. Using that as a cover for willful ignorance, on the other hand, is dumb.
ed: also, understanding the crusades as a purely religious war is lazy as fuck
Ignorant on their part for trying to lump us in with it. And their reality isn't the real world reality. Yes, making it about what everyone else has ever done to them and then tying it together as their religion being under attack makes it easier to recruit, but it doesn't come close to the reality of their current situation.
Yeah, in their current situation the US is actually the biggest asshole. Wait, shit.
Based on what now?
Support for Mubarek and the Saudi Royal Family, invading Iraq, threatening Iran and Syria, unquestioning support for Israel no matter what heinous shit they pull...
enlightenedbum on
Self-righteousness is incompatible with coalition building.
You don't have to feel guilty about the crusades to try to understand how they influenced the middle east.
You are throwing out this "I don't see why I should feel guilty" canard as a way of dodging the entire issue of the western world's history in the middle east creating grievances that are still factor in our relations there. You don't feel personally guilty and there's really no reason you should. Using that as a cover for willful ignorance, on the other hand, is dumb.
ed: also, understanding the crusades as a purely religious war is lazy as fuck
Ignorant on their part for trying to lump us in with it. And their reality isn't the real world reality. Yes, making it about what everyone else has ever done to them and then tying it together as their religion being under attack makes it easier to recruit, but it doesn't come close to the reality of their current situation.
Yeah, in their current situation the US is actually the biggest asshole. Wait, shit.
Based on what now?
Support for Mubarek and the Saudi Royal Family, invading Iraq, threatening Iran and Syria, unquestioning support for Israel no matter what heinous shit they pull...
I'm still not sure what Iraq was really about. Oil, country foothold, Jr showing up Sr, not a clue honestly. But I do know they all have one thing in common; none of them were about attacking the religion of Islam.
You don't have to feel guilty about the crusades to try to understand how they influenced the middle east.
You are throwing out this "I don't see why I should feel guilty" canard as a way of dodging the entire issue of the western world's history in the middle east creating grievances that are still factor in our relations there. You don't feel personally guilty and there's really no reason you should. Using that as a cover for willful ignorance, on the other hand, is dumb.
ed: also, understanding the crusades as a purely religious war is lazy as fuck
Ignorant on their part for trying to lump us in with it. And their reality isn't the real world reality. Yes, making it about what everyone else has ever done to them and then tying it together as their religion being under attack makes it easier to recruit, but it doesn't come close to the reality of their current situation.
Yeah, in their current situation the US is actually the biggest asshole. Wait, shit.
Based on what now?
Support for Mubarek and the Saudi Royal Family, invading Iraq, threatening Iran and Syria, unquestioning support for Israel no matter what heinous shit they pull...
I'm still not sure what Iraq was really about. Oil, country foothold, Jr showing up Sr, not a clue honestly. But I do know they all have one thing in common; none of them were about attacking the religion of Islam.
You don't have to feel guilty about the crusades to try to understand how they influenced the middle east.
You are throwing out this "I don't see why I should feel guilty" canard as a way of dodging the entire issue of the western world's history in the middle east creating grievances that are still factor in our relations there. You don't feel personally guilty and there's really no reason you should. Using that as a cover for willful ignorance, on the other hand, is dumb.
ed: also, understanding the crusades as a purely religious war is lazy as fuck
Ignorant on their part for trying to lump us in with it. And their reality isn't the real world reality. Yes, making it about what everyone else has ever done to them and then tying it together as their religion being under attack makes it easier to recruit, but it doesn't come close to the reality of their current situation.
Yeah, in their current situation the US is actually the biggest asshole. Wait, shit.
Based on what now?
Support for Mubarek and the Saudi Royal Family, invading Iraq, threatening Iran and Syria, unquestioning support for Israel no matter what heinous shit they pull...
I'm still not sure what Iraq was really about. Oil, country foothold, Jr showing up Sr, not a clue honestly. But I do know they all have one thing in common; none of them were about attacking the religion of Islam.
Again, not our fault. What they see and what the truth is has nothing to do with us. Hasn't Obama tried to make it clear that we are not against their religion?
Yeah, it's too bad our actions don't back us up (in their world view). And our actions here have shown a pretty sizable fuck Muslims minority, which is of course, how this thread started.
enlightenedbum on
Self-righteousness is incompatible with coalition building.
SO according to this guy it was because Iraq was the biggest easiest hand to smack? Strange fellow, by the way. Has a bit of a serial killer demeanor about him.
Again, not our fault. What they see and what the truth is has nothing to do with us. Hasn't Obama tried to make it clear that we are not against their religion?
Of course its not our fault. But "not our fault" doesn't make it go away. So you can either throw up your hands and let them think its a all out war on their society from the evil west or you can do what you can do stem that view, and calling our war against terrorists a crusade is a bad idea if you want to do that.
This is politics and war, you can't just decide "not our fault" and ignore the issue.
SO according to this guy it was because Iraq was the biggest easiest hand to smack? Strange fellow, by the way. Has a bit of a serial killer demeanor about him.
Also, the most respected foreign policy pundit in the country!
enlightenedbum on
Self-righteousness is incompatible with coalition building.
SO according to this guy it was because Iraq was the biggest easiest hand to smack? Strange fellow, by the way. Has a bit of a serial killer demeanor about him.
For speaking ill of Thomas Friedman, I hereby demote you to First Lieutenant Howdy.
I'm not saying you're wrong, I'm just saying it sounds like more special pleading. Apparently the Middle East can just act as ignorant as they want, while we just have to nod along.
It's more like, to reach long term agreements with middle eastern political factions in the service of more expansive trade and better human rights and also you know, less war, we will need to develop an understanding of the middle eastern view of foreign relations. It is not enough to say "well it isn't our fault" when to people in the middle east, the last hundred odd years of western colonialism look an awful lot like a continuation of the policies adopted by many of the same national powers during the (attempted) territorial expansion that was the crusades.
Is it entirely fair that the modern west continue to get flack for the actions of our medieval forebears? No, it isn't. It also isn't entirely fair that we continue to get flack for the weimar-era maneuvering that's largely responsible for the current state of the middle east.
On the other hand, it's entirely fucking dumb to try and wave those realities away by saying "it wasn't our fault" as though our historical memory should only be thirty or so years long and every new (western) political movement should be able to expect a clean slate in its middle eastern dealings. Because even if we could fairly expect that (questionable at best), it doesn't reflect the reality that we have to deal with.
Eat it You Nasty Pig. on
it was the smallest on the list but
Pluto was a planet and I'll never forget
SO according to this guy it was because Iraq was the biggest easiest hand to smack? Strange fellow, by the way. Has a bit of a serial killer demeanor about him.
For speaking ill of Thomas Friedman, I hereby demote you to First Lieutenant Howdy.
Thomas Friedman is a stupid, selfish, plutocratic, clueless jackass who can't write for shit.
enlightenedbum on
Self-righteousness is incompatible with coalition building.
0
Options
AtomikaLive fast and get fucked or whateverRegistered Userregular
I'm not saying you're wrong, I'm just saying it sounds like more special pleading. Apparently the Middle East can just act as ignorant as they want, while we just have to nod along.
It's more like, to reach long term agreements with middle eastern political factions in the service of more expansive trade and better human rights and also you know, less war, we will need to develop an understanding of the middle eastern view of foreign relations. It is not enough to say "well it isn't our fault" when to people in the middle east, the last hundred odd years of western colonialism look an awful lot like a continuation of the policies adopted by many of the same national powers during the (attempted) territorial expansion that was the crusades.
Is it entirely fair that the modern west continue to get flack for the actions of our medieval forebears? No, it isn't. It also isn't entirely fair that we continue to get flack for the weimar-era maneuvering that's largely responsible for the current state of the middle east.
On the other hand, it's entirely fucking dumb to try and wave those realities away by saying "it wasn't our fault" as though our historical memory should only be thirty or so years long and every new (western) political movement should be able to expect a clean slate in its middle eastern dealings. Because even if we could fairly expect that (questionable at best), it doesn't reflect the reality that we have to deal with.
I guess I'm just impatient and pessimistic about the West's chances of changing the culture over there. It's very likely that progressive Western liberalism will never be a reality over there in our lifetimes, if ever. And once either the oil runs out or a viable alternative is found, our policy towards the Arab peninsula will become much like ours towards Africa, i.e., "fuck 'em."
SO according to this guy it was because Iraq was the biggest easiest hand to smack? Strange fellow, by the way. Has a bit of a serial killer demeanor about him.
For speaking ill of Thomas Friedman, I hereby demote you to First Lieutenant Howdy.
Thomas Friedman is a stupid, selfish, plutocratic, clueless jackass who sounds like a serial killer.
Fixed. I don't know the guy well enough to back up your part of it, or argue against it. But the fixed part is incontestable.
I'm not saying you're wrong, I'm just saying it sounds like more special pleading. Apparently the Middle East can just act as ignorant as they want, while we just have to nod along.
It's more like, to reach long term agreements with middle eastern political factions in the service of more expansive trade and better human rights and also you know, less war, we will need to develop an understanding of the middle eastern view of foreign relations. It is not enough to say "well it isn't our fault" when to people in the middle east, the last hundred odd years of western colonialism look an awful lot like a continuation of the policies adopted by many of the same national powers during the (attempted) territorial expansion that was the crusades.
Is it entirely fair that the modern west continue to get flack for the actions of our medieval forebears? No, it isn't. It also isn't entirely fair that we continue to get flack for the weimar-era maneuvering that's largely responsible for the current state of the middle east.
On the other hand, it's entirely fucking dumb to try and wave those realities away by saying "it wasn't our fault" as though our historical memory should only be thirty or so years long and every new (western) political movement should be able to expect a clean slate in its middle eastern dealings. Because even if we could fairly expect that (questionable at best), it doesn't reflect the reality that we have to deal with.
I guess I'm just impatient and pessimistic about the West's chances of changing the culture over there. It's very likely that progressive Western liberalism will never be a reality over there in our lifetimes, if ever. And once either the oil runs out or a viable alternative is found, our policy towards the Arab peninsula will become much like ours towards Africa, i.e., "fuck 'em."
Enlightened and reasonable cultures have existed in the past there, and they can again.
SO according to this guy it was because Iraq was the biggest easiest hand to smack? Strange fellow, by the way. Has a bit of a serial killer demeanor about him.
For speaking ill of Thomas Friedman, I hereby demote you to First Lieutenant Howdy.
Thomas Friedman is a stupid, selfish, plutocratic, clueless jackass who can't write for shit.
Enlightened and reasonable cultures have existed in the past there, and they can again.
True, but I think the leverage won't be in place until the Middle East is broken and bankrupt. As long as they have such a large share in the petroleum trade, things aren't going to change.
But then again, look at India, who has a much less oppressive religious culture. It's getting better, and it's a much friendlier place than most Arab countries, but it's still a horrible shithole with rampant poverty.
Youtube some of the more popular serial killers. A lot of them have a very subdued and quiet demeanor. It's really odd when they start talking about how they did it. You'd think a change in tone would accompany recounting the good times one had gutting people.
Posts
He probably means Spain.
Here's what I said.
You'll note the long history of thing.
So you've got your Crusades. You've got imperial games after the fall of the Ottoman Empire in particular. You've got the establishment of Israel by force. You've got the seizure of the Suez Canal (to our credit, we didn't support that). You've got the more recent Iraq War.
Hell, isn't what they did pretty much accepatable and expected back in thos days anyway? That was sort of how that time period rolled, if you catch my meaning.
And still, our current issue with the Middle East has nothing to do with anything from those days. Our beef with them is pretty new, historically speaking, and had nothing to do with religion. It might now, but religion wasn't even penciled in, and then erased, for reasons to invade.
3DS: 1521-4165-5907
PS3: KayleSolo
Live: Kayle Solo
WiiU: KayleSolo
Their perspective is pretty flawed.
Anyway, I was just curious why anyone would think we would feel even a little guilty about the crusades.
3DS: 1521-4165-5907
PS3: KayleSolo
Live: Kayle Solo
WiiU: KayleSolo
It is what it is.
You have to deal with reality, not what we wish they would feel like.
I'm gonna go with re-electing the guy who invaded Iraq and generally pissed all over them. But ok.
Plus most of the shit we did in the Cold War.
You are throwing out this "I don't see why I should feel guilty" canard as a way of dodging the entire issue of the western world's history in the middle east creating grievances that are still factor in our relations there. You don't feel personally guilty and there's really no reason you should. Using that as a cover for willful ignorance, on the other hand, is dumb.
ed: also, understanding the crusades as a purely religious war is lazy as fuck
Pluto was a planet and I'll never forget
Maybe, but the volatile regimes in the Middle East still like to frame it that way when they need to fearmonger.
Pluto was a planet and I'll never forget
I'm not saying you're wrong, I'm just saying it sounds like more special pleading. Apparently the Middle East can just act as ignorant as they want, while we just have to nod along.
You could say the same thing about Republicans when it comes to speaking about terrorism. This is the same group that pitched "they hate us for our freedoms!" after all.
Ignorant on their part for trying to lump us in with it. And their reality isn't the real world reality. Yes, making it about what everyone else has ever done to them and then tying it together as their religion being under attack makes it easier to recruit, but it doesn't come close to the reality of their current situation.
3DS: 1521-4165-5907
PS3: KayleSolo
Live: Kayle Solo
WiiU: KayleSolo
Yeah, in their current situation the US is actually the biggest asshole. Wait, shit.
Because there's a difference between the richest first-world country on the planet, and the ME?
Based on what now?
3DS: 1521-4165-5907
PS3: KayleSolo
Live: Kayle Solo
WiiU: KayleSolo
Of course there is. But this logic makes it difficult. It's hard to formulate diplomatic policy when one party is completely full of shit.
Support for Mubarek and the Saudi Royal Family, invading Iraq, threatening Iran and Syria, unquestioning support for Israel no matter what heinous shit they pull...
I'm still not sure what Iraq was really about. Oil, country foothold, Jr showing up Sr, not a clue honestly. But I do know they all have one thing in common; none of them were about attacking the religion of Islam.
3DS: 1521-4165-5907
PS3: KayleSolo
Live: Kayle Solo
WiiU: KayleSolo
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HOF6ZeUvgXs
Many of them don't see it that way.
3DS: 1521-4165-5907
PS3: KayleSolo
Live: Kayle Solo
WiiU: KayleSolo
SO according to this guy it was because Iraq was the biggest easiest hand to smack? Strange fellow, by the way. Has a bit of a serial killer demeanor about him.
3DS: 1521-4165-5907
PS3: KayleSolo
Live: Kayle Solo
WiiU: KayleSolo
Of course its not our fault. But "not our fault" doesn't make it go away. So you can either throw up your hands and let them think its a all out war on their society from the evil west or you can do what you can do stem that view, and calling our war against terrorists a crusade is a bad idea if you want to do that.
This is politics and war, you can't just decide "not our fault" and ignore the issue.
Also, the most respected foreign policy pundit in the country!
For speaking ill of Thomas Friedman, I hereby demote you to First Lieutenant Howdy.
It's more like, to reach long term agreements with middle eastern political factions in the service of more expansive trade and better human rights and also you know, less war, we will need to develop an understanding of the middle eastern view of foreign relations. It is not enough to say "well it isn't our fault" when to people in the middle east, the last hundred odd years of western colonialism look an awful lot like a continuation of the policies adopted by many of the same national powers during the (attempted) territorial expansion that was the crusades.
Is it entirely fair that the modern west continue to get flack for the actions of our medieval forebears? No, it isn't. It also isn't entirely fair that we continue to get flack for the weimar-era maneuvering that's largely responsible for the current state of the middle east.
On the other hand, it's entirely fucking dumb to try and wave those realities away by saying "it wasn't our fault" as though our historical memory should only be thirty or so years long and every new (western) political movement should be able to expect a clean slate in its middle eastern dealings. Because even if we could fairly expect that (questionable at best), it doesn't reflect the reality that we have to deal with.
Pluto was a planet and I'll never forget
Thomas Friedman is a stupid, selfish, plutocratic, clueless jackass who can't write for shit.
I guess I'm just impatient and pessimistic about the West's chances of changing the culture over there. It's very likely that progressive Western liberalism will never be a reality over there in our lifetimes, if ever. And once either the oil runs out or a viable alternative is found, our policy towards the Arab peninsula will become much like ours towards Africa, i.e., "fuck 'em."
Fixed. I don't know the guy well enough to back up your part of it, or argue against it. But the fixed part is incontestable.
3DS: 1521-4165-5907
PS3: KayleSolo
Live: Kayle Solo
WiiU: KayleSolo
Enlightened and reasonable cultures have existed in the past there, and they can again.
Pluto was a planet and I'll never forget
I demote you to ArhatBum.
True, but I think the leverage won't be in place until the Middle East is broken and bankrupt. As long as they have such a large share in the petroleum trade, things aren't going to change.
But then again, look at India, who has a much less oppressive religious culture. It's getting better, and it's a much friendlier place than most Arab countries, but it's still a horrible shithole with rampant poverty.
Youtube some of the more popular serial killers. A lot of them have a very subdued and quiet demeanor. It's really odd when they start talking about how they did it. You'd think a change in tone would accompany recounting the good times one had gutting people.
3DS: 1521-4165-5907
PS3: KayleSolo
Live: Kayle Solo
WiiU: KayleSolo