Site Search:
 
TEFL International Supports Dave's ESL Cafe
TEFL Courses, TESOL Course, English Teaching Jobs - TEFL International
Korean Job Discussion Forums Forum Index Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

Diversity is our strength!
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... , 14, 15, 16  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Korean Job Discussion Forums Forum Index -> Current Events Forum
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
bucheon bum



Joined: 16 Jan 2003
Location: DC area

PostPosted: Tue Jun 24, 2014 11:33 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

aq8knyus wrote:
Quote:
Iraq WAS a hot bed of opression- just like dictatorships everywhere- but violence? Not until the USA rolled in, woo hoo!


I know this is not my argument, but there was quite a lot of violence involved in the gassing of thousands at Halabja.

There was also a lot of violence in the aftermath of the Gulf War where a sectarian terror was launched against the Shia.


The Shia rose up against Saddam's regime after the Gulf War, encouraged by the United States. Saddam put the rebellion down. Yes, it was violent. That was also in 1991.

Halabja was in the early 80s. Two instances of violence, one of which was opression to the extreme (versus two sides in violent conflict with one another).

And Iraq in the 50s and 60s was a mess too, with little political stability. I wouldn't attribute that to Islam though.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Kuros



Joined: 27 Apr 2004

PostPosted: Tue Jun 24, 2014 5:16 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Let's be charitable. Its the heat.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
Chaparrastique



Joined: 01 Jan 2014

PostPosted: Tue Jun 24, 2014 5:22 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

bucheon bum wrote:
I wouldn't attribute that to Islam though.


Consistently the most of the worlds terror and conflict is caused by muslims who claim to be acting in the name of islam.

Islam is an intolerant religion that instructs its adherents to kill infidels. Its no coincidence that the countries in its grip always have and always will be marked by backwardness and oppression. Unless you think slavery, forced marriages of young girls and honor killings is a mark of an advanced society.

These gun-toting fanatics chant allah-u Akbar every five seconds but you still think none of it is related to islam?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
aq8knyus



Joined: 28 Jul 2010
Location: London

PostPosted: Tue Jun 24, 2014 6:38 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

bucheon bum wrote:
aq8knyus wrote:
Quote:
Iraq WAS a hot bed of opression- just like dictatorships everywhere- but violence? Not until the USA rolled in, woo hoo!


I know this is not my argument, but there was quite a lot of violence involved in the gassing of thousands at Halabja.

There was also a lot of violence in the aftermath of the Gulf War where a sectarian terror was launched against the Shia.


The Shia rose up against Saddam's regime after the Gulf War, encouraged by the United States. Saddam put the rebellion down. Yes, it was violent. That was also in 1991.

Halabja was in the early 80s. Two instances of violence, one of which was opression to the extreme (versus two sides in violent conflict with one another).

And Iraq in the 50s and 60s was a mess too, with little political stability. I wouldn't attribute that to Islam though.


The US encouraged the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait?

Halabja was ethnic cleansing and saw the use of WMD on a civilian population.

I have no problem with accepting the idea that the US is a force for evil, I just dont think Saddam was better.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
On the other hand



Joined: 19 Apr 2003
Location: I walk along the avenue

PostPosted: Tue Jun 24, 2014 9:19 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
The US encouraged the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait?



I think BB meant that the US encouraged the SHiities to rise up.

Though as for the alternative interpretation(ie. US encouraged Saddam to invade), you could do a google on "April Glaspie".
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
bucheon bum



Joined: 16 Jan 2003
Location: DC area

PostPosted: Wed Jun 25, 2014 6:08 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

aq8knyus wrote:
bucheon bum wrote:
aq8knyus wrote:
Quote:
Iraq WAS a hot bed of opression- just like dictatorships everywhere- but violence? Not until the USA rolled in, woo hoo!


I know this is not my argument, but there was quite a lot of violence involved in the gassing of thousands at Halabja.

There was also a lot of violence in the aftermath of the Gulf War where a sectarian terror was launched against the Shia.


The Shia rose up against Saddam's regime after the Gulf War, encouraged by the United States. Saddam put the rebellion down. Yes, it was violent. That was also in 1991.

Halabja was in the early 80s. Two instances of violence, one of which was opression to the extreme (versus two sides in violent conflict with one another).

And Iraq in the 50s and 60s was a mess too, with little political stability. I wouldn't attribute that to Islam though.


The US encouraged the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait?

Halabja was ethnic cleansing and saw the use of WMD on a civilian population.

I have no problem with accepting the idea that the US is a force for evil, I just dont think Saddam was better.


I didn't say the US was a force of evil. I was just saying Islam was not the initial cause of violence in Iraq.

And no, the US did not encourage the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait. It encouraged Iraqi Shiites to rise up at the end of the Gulf War.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
trueblue



Joined: 15 Jun 2014
Location: In between the lines

PostPosted: Wed Jun 25, 2014 6:36 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:

And no, the US did not encourage the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait. It encouraged Iraqi Shiites to rise up at the end of the Gulf War.



Good point...
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Chaparrastique



Joined: 01 Jan 2014

PostPosted: Wed Jun 25, 2014 6:52 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

trueblue wrote:
Quote:

And no, the US did not encourage the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait. It encouraged Iraqi Shiites to rise up at the end of the Gulf War.



Good point...



Yes. The US is to blame for whatever muslims do.

Honor kilings, terrorist groups, massacres. Its all really our fault and has nothing to do with islam. I see that now.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
bucheon bum



Joined: 16 Jan 2003
Location: DC area

PostPosted: Thu Jun 26, 2014 12:47 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Chaparrastique wrote:
trueblue wrote:
Quote:

And no, the US did not encourage the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait. It encouraged Iraqi Shiites to rise up at the end of the Gulf War.



Good point...



Yes. The US is to blame for whatever muslims do.

Honor kilings, terrorist groups, massacres. Its all really our fault and has nothing to do with islam. I see that now.


Reading comprehension fail. Good job.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Chaparrastique



Joined: 01 Jan 2014

PostPosted: Thu Jun 26, 2014 8:24 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

bucheon bum wrote:
Reading comprehension fail. Good job.



You subverted my original point. A quick re-cap.

I said most of the worlds conflicts today are Islam-related. They're caused by islam, not by the US.

I also pointed out that islamic societies are inherently violent, oppressive and backward due to islam, and have been for centuries- long before the US was even created.

You side-tracked by pointing out that in one, localized, specific case the US encouraged a subsection of muslims into violence (did they really need much encouragement?). An interesting side-point, but not one that dents my argument at all.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
bucheon bum



Joined: 16 Jan 2003
Location: DC area

PostPosted: Fri Jun 27, 2014 9:43 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Chaparrastique wrote:
bucheon bum wrote:
Reading comprehension fail. Good job.



You subverted my original point. A quick re-cap.

I said most of the worlds conflicts today are Islam-related. They're caused by islam, not by the US.

I also pointed out that islamic societies are inherently violent, oppressive and backward due to islam, and have been for centuries- long before the US was even created.

You side-tracked by pointing out that in one, localized, specific case the US encouraged a subsection of muslims into violence (did they really need much encouragement?). An interesting side-point, but not one that dents my argument at all.


I did not sidetrack it. I was saying your claim was wrong and that your examples were not correct (such as Iraq). Pretty straight forward. Other posters then digressed on the subject of the Gulf War, which I responded to.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Kuros



Joined: 27 Apr 2004

PostPosted: Sat Jun 28, 2014 8:41 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Let's move back on topic, shall we?

Titus and Bigverne's anti-immigrant sentiment may be shared in Europe, but America trends against anti-immigrant sentiment.

Quote:
Americans' views on immigration have varied a bit in the past 15 years, with the dominant view shifting between decreasing immigration and maintaining it at the current level. Some of these changes may reflect the ebb and flow of Americans' reactions to the 9/11 attacks in 2001 as well as rocketing unemployment in 2009, with both events triggering a temporary surge in anti-immigration sentiment.

However, the Gallup trend also chronicles a separate narrative: a steady increase in public support for increasing immigration, rising from 10% in 1999 to 21% in 2012 and 22% today.


If this were any other board, I would post the poll graph as an image. Confused
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
bigverne



Joined: 12 May 2004

PostPosted: Sun Jun 29, 2014 5:30 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
a steady increase in public support for increasing immigration, rising from 10% in 1999 to 21% in 2012 and 22% today.


Would be interesting to see what percentage of those favoring greater immigration are themselves immigrants.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
trueblue



Joined: 15 Jun 2014
Location: In between the lines

PostPosted: Sun Jun 29, 2014 5:38 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
Would be interesting to see what percentage of those favoring greater immigration are themselves immigrants.



That makes me wonder, in relation to what is happening in the United States, as of now.

Are those who immigrated to the U.S. legally and "by the numbers", speaking out against those who simply are walking across the boarder?

It reminds of studying about Irish immigration to the United States, in the 19th century...thought of as the scum of the earth...not wanted. Ironic, as during this time, especially during the Civil War, the mantra of equality and freedom did not apply to the Irish....
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Steelrails



Joined: 12 Mar 2009
Location: Earth, Solar System

PostPosted: Sun Jun 29, 2014 10:43 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
I also pointed out that islamic societies are inherently violent, oppressive and backward due to islam, and have been for centuries- long before the US was even created.


What country prior to about 1965 hasn't been inherently violent, oppressive, and backward? There's a handful of small nations that got by through trading and merely being greedy and useful to bigger violent, oppressive nations, other than that, not too many I can think of.

I mean, take someone 100 years old from Europe. Within their lifetime there has been the butchery of WWI, the various interwar conflicts, colonial empires, World War II and the Holocaust, more colonial crap, the Cold War and various "police actions" and finally the Middle East Adventures, brought peaceably together by an economic-political union that far from putting a damper on nationalism, has caused it to rekindle thanks to its labyrinthine system of government and penchant for putting in puppet governments through polite coups.

Or maybe an American. World War I, a country that veered dangerously close to a mixed robberbaron-mafia state, the KKK, World War II, Jim Crow, the Cold War, Korea, Race Riots, Vietnam, whack-a-dictator, the rise of a Federal Police State and bought-out justice system, and Mess-o-potamia.

We may be ahead of the Muslims in terms of oppression and violence, but it's the equivalent of being a stride or two ahead in a 10,000 meter race that is only about 1,000 meters underway. Nothing to really sit in judgment over.

Quote:
said most of the worlds conflicts today are Islam-related. They're caused by islam, not by the US.


Most of the conflicts today are the result of colonial borders drawn up through Sykes-Picot which didn't give a crap about the people involved, just how it benefited the ruling powers.

The second big consideration is that a lot of this is tribal/ethnic, with religion merely serving as a rallying cry.

Also, the big tinderbox in all of this isn't Usama Bin Laden or George W. Bush. Flashback to 2010. Insurgency in Iraq has had enough of Al-Qaeda in Iraq and things were limpin along in a positive direction. However a fateful decision, bipartisan, tried to make a big push towards ethanol. What this did was spike grain prices around the globe. This disproportionately affected countries with high populations, but low amounts of arable land, countries that were already experiencing a labor glut.

To quote Thomas PM Barnett- "We grow ethanol to protect ourselves from instability in the Middle East, thereby driving up the price of food, causing instability in the Middle East".

What does this have to do with Islam being the source? In 2010 a Tunisian street vendor, already having to shell out more and more money for food, and tired of paying bribes, decides to light himself on fire. The Tunisian president even visits him in the hospital because he knows what kind of trouble he is in, and shortly flees the country, following what we call 'The Arab Spring', but what they call the Bread Riots. What follows is a takedown of Egypt, Libya, Yemen, Bahrain on the brink, governmental instability in a few others, and most importantly, a sustained Civil War in Syria.

60 years of failed US foreign policy in the region adds up to no viable political alternative in the Middle East to a group like the Muslim Brotherhood. Think if in Latin America, all we did was back strongmen and who bought out the communists and bankers and the only people protesting were the Roman Catholic Church. Shortsighted "lets find the usual villains" types in the US government and media foolishly call for Assad's ouster, learning nothing of the benefits that Saddam Hussein had, for all his troubles. This of course allows ISIS to rekindle.

Religion exacerbates and inflames everything and turns it nastier than a typical conflict, but it is not the primary cause.


Last edited by Steelrails on Sun Jun 29, 2014 11:10 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Korean Job Discussion Forums Forum Index -> Current Events Forum All times are GMT - 8 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... , 14, 15, 16  Next
Page 15 of 16

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


This page is maintained by the one and only Dave Sperling.
Contact Dave's ESL Cafe
Copyright © 2013 Dave Sperling. All Rights Reserved.

Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group

TEFL International Supports Dave's ESL Cafe
TEFL Courses, TESOL Course, English Teaching Jobs - TEFL International