Palestenian-Israeli Conflict

Who took the Israeli quotes as the full story? I think your previous posts merited a response like that.
 
i posted counta propaganda. it was to illustrate that you are not the only one who can post text and links from crackpot websites.



so you admit your so called evidence is worthless. i love it

anyway i tire of this bickering
 
Aren't you the one that said Muslims would know their religion best? After all the Apostates site is run by former Muslims.

But no, posting what other people have to say about Isam is no more stating Islam is evil than posting: "And the Lord spake unto Moses, saying, Avenge the children of Israel of the Midiaites: afterward shalt thou be gathered unto thy people...And they warred against the Midianites as the Lord comanded Moses; and they slew all the males.." (Numbers 31, 1-2,7) the same as saying Jews are merciless killers and Judaism is evil. The question you should be asking is how those verses are being interpreted today in the West Bank.
 
Rwanda, to my understanding was not a religious war at all. It was purely a tribal war. Although I do understand that they have had a large number of conversions to Islam since.

I think you are mistaken about the idea that the Muslims are the ones with the most dead in each of these conflicts.
 
I would hope so. I'd like to think he has an opinion based on more than just 'well, duh,...I think this', and I was getting tired of asking something beyond that.
 
Well, you are right. I need to find numbers supporting what I say, because what I said is a rough guess from what I have read in news articles. Maybe I'll search tonight. I might be wrong, but I'm pretty sure that at least in Iraq, Palestine, Bosnia, and Chechnya Muslims are the ones with the most dead.
 
No, that would be you who posted something claiming it was evidence, and then dismissed your own argument by claiming out of context quotations were a form of falacious reasoning. All I did was point out your inconsistency.
 
More or less have to agree with you on this one. Although I would say that quoting out of context is a common problem on all sides in all issues.



Except for Rwanda, it really is proof of what he said. I don't think there can really be any denial that most of the conflicts of the last 20 or so years have involved Muslims. The real question is why. I would say that he is wrong in that he is implying it is because all Muslims are bloodthirsty people that want to take over the world.
 
By the UN standard imposed on us, yes. But many Americans feel that since our 300 million people is far less than 22% of the worlds population, we should pay a lot less.
 
But unlike the Jihadists, the Christians involved do not normally cite their religion and the will of God as a primary reason for the fighting. Christianity abandoned that idea centuries ago and the Church no longer has the power to coofftopicnd armies.
 
To some extent, but nowhere to the same degree. Turkey is nearly 100% Muslim. Christians make up less than 5% in Sudan, less than 1% of Somalia, 8% of Indonesia, less than 2% of the India/Pakistan population.

In those conflicts that Christians make up more than a small minority, is religion really the issue? I don't think it was in Bosnia or Rwanda.
 
Since we pay the most, do we get the biggest vote? Other than the Security Council which gives us a veto, just like others that pay a tenth of what we pay?
 
your words not mine, once again you confuse the rantings of islamaphobic
xenophobes with facts.
 
Good to see that you still seem to think that religion and and socio-cultural context are mutually exclusive.

Sadly... they're not.
 
George Bush: 'God told me to end the tyranny in Iraq'

Blair's mad mission from God
 
but you pay proportionately less. Its like the aid row, America says they pay so much more money, but its less in terms of the US' economy. A christian would point you to the gospel story involving the old woman and the charity box.
 
Back
Top