Europe's Problem With Islam

[Great Confederacy of Commonwealth States]

That's what I said. Literally what I said. I would not blame 'the west' for a moment. It's a blanket term I used to make clear what I meant. We cannot even blame 'the west'. It's a group too diverse to make any conclusions on. When I use 'The West' in a historical context, I mean the empires and governments that were prevalent in the west until the 1950's.

So is it not okay for me to say " The middle east" when referring to there horrific regime and shariah influences?

But you didn't. You blamed the entirety of Islam, and when called for it, you defended the position that Islam was inherently violent. That's what we've been arguing. When called upon, I clarified my statement. You just dug a trench and went with it.

[North Calaveras]

I don't see my belief as a problem.

No shit.

then why did you say it was my "problem"

[North Calaveras]

So is it not okay for me to say " The middle east" when referring to there horrific regime and shariah influences?

But you didn't. You blamed the entirety of Islam, and when called for it, you defended the position that Islam was inherently violent. That's what we've been arguing. When called upon, I clarified my statement. You just dug a trench and went with it.

ah well i do blame islam.

[The Empire of Pretantia]

No shit.

then why did you say it was my "problem"

Because it's a problem and you have it.

[North Calaveras]

then why did you say it was my "problem"

Because it's a problem and you have it.

lol wut?

[New Werpland]

Oh please, you know damn well you can't find near the amount of deaths as a result of violent christianity as islam in the modern world.

Irrelevant, since you disregard that most Muslims aren't violent.

Also our fault.

Most Muslims may not be violent, but there are undeniable aspects of Islam that make it more violent than Christianity.

And I don't see how this is our fault?

[Great Confederacy of Commonwealth States]

That's what I said. Literally what I said. I would not blame 'the west' for a moment. It's a blanket term I used to make clear what I meant. We cannot even blame 'the west'. It's a group too diverse to make any conclusions on. When I use 'The West' in a historical context, I mean the empires and governments that were prevalent in the west until the 1950's.

You couldn't be more wrong.

The West. A combination of nations spanning from Turkey to California, from Australia to Ireland. That's 'The West'. Too diverse, I say.

Also, 2+2=5. Just to point out the hyperbole.

I've explained you time and time again why there are more Islamic terrorists. Until you have a good reason to argue against my points, stop pulling this moot point from the dark abyss.

You keep blaming the west but where are your crys against the "Vast majority of moderate muslims" that let these groups exist? They certainly have ample strength to remove them if they wanted to.

Because, again, the 'Moderate Muslims' are a diverse group of people we cannot put blame on. Single politicians and governments, we can put blame on. The US, Britain, France, to name a few. Belgium, Germany, Spain and the Netherlands too, looking at Asia and Africa. Those governments are at least partially responsible. At least, they were. You think that the moderate muslims just let these people be, which just goes to show how ignorant you are of what's happening. Assad, Iraq, the Arab league, the Free Syrian Coalition, all those are fighting against Al Nusra and ISIS. How are they not pulling their weight?

[Great Confederacy of Commonwealth States]

But you didn't. You blamed the entirety of Islam, and when called for it, you defended the position that Islam was inherently violent. That's what we've been arguing. When called upon, I clarified my statement. You just dug a trench and went with it.

ah well i do blame islam.

So, we're back to the drawing board. So, no, it's not okay for you to say 'the entirety of Islam' when talking about a small group of religious extremists.

Irrelevant, since you disregard that most Muslims aren't violent.

Also our fault.

Most Muslims may not be violent, but there are undeniable aspects of Islam that make it more violent than Christianity.

And I don't see how this is our fault?

Have you seen Middle Eastern borders, drawn by European diplomats after 1945? Recipe for disaster.

[The Empire of Pretantia]

Irrelevant, since you disregard that most Muslims aren't violent.

Also our fault.

Most Muslims may not be violent, but there are undeniable aspects of Islam that make it more violent than Christianity.

And I don't see how this is our fault?

We as a government are ultimately responsible for the foundation of multiple radical and extremist states that have existed in the middle east, as well as al qaeda.

[North Calaveras]

You couldn't be more wrong.

The West. A combination of nations spanning from Turkey to California, from Australia to Ireland. That's 'The West'. Too diverse, I say.

Also, 2+2=5. Just to point out the hyperbole.

You keep blaming the west but where are your crys against the "Vast majority of moderate muslims" that let these groups exist? They certainly have ample strength to remove them if they wanted to.

Because, again, the 'Moderate Muslims' are a diverse group of people we cannot put blame on. Single politicians and governments, we can put blame on. The US, Britain, France, to name a few. Belgium, Germany, Spain and the Netherlands too, looking at Asia and Africa. Those governments are at least partially responsible. At least, they were. You think that the moderate muslims just let these people be, which just goes to show how ignorant you are of what's happening. Assad, Iraq, the Arab league, the Free Syrian Coalition, all those are fighting against Al Nusra and ISIS. How are they not pulling their weight?

problem is, this "resistence" isn't really about freedom it's just a power struggle.

Just because there fighting against al nusra dosn't mean these people are pro-freedom and are understanding, hell many of the times they argue against eachother about whos on gods side.

[New Werpland]

You couldn't be more wrong.

The West. A combination of nations spanning from Turkey to California, from Australia to Ireland. That's 'The West'. Too diverse, I say.

Also, 2+2=5. Just to point out the hyperbole.

The West is an idea not a geographic area, Europe may as well be a part of Asia. The only reason we don't refer to it as west Asia, is because of the radically different ideas held by it's inhabitants.

[The Empire of Pretantia]

The West. A combination of nations spanning from Turkey to California, from Australia to Ireland. That's 'The West'. Too diverse, I say.

Also, 2+2=5. Just to point out the hyperbole.

The West is an idea not a geographic area, Europe may as well be a part of Asia. The only reason we don't refer to it as west Asia, is because of the radically different ideas held by it's inhabitants.

He just described the west as an idea.

[Great Confederacy of Commonwealth States]

The West. A combination of nations spanning from Turkey to California, from Australia to Ireland. That's 'The West'. Too diverse, I say.

Also, 2+2=5. Just to point out the hyperbole.


Because, again, the 'Moderate Muslims' are a diverse group of people we cannot put blame on. Single politicians and governments, we can put blame on. The US, Britain, France, to name a few. Belgium, Germany, Spain and the Netherlands too, looking at Asia and Africa. Those governments are at least partially responsible. At least, they were. You think that the moderate muslims just let these people be, which just goes to show how ignorant you are of what's happening. Assad, Iraq, the Arab league, the Free Syrian Coalition, all those are fighting against Al Nusra and ISIS. How are they not pulling their weight?

problem is, this "resistence" isn't really about freedom it's just a power struggle.

Just because there fighting against al nusra dosn't mean these people are pro-freedom and are understanding, hell many of the times they argue against eachother about whos on gods side.

Again, ignorance. The Kurds are fighting for freedom. The Yezidi's are fighting for survival. Iraq is fighting for their sovereign territory and democracy. Assad is fighting for his position. The Free Syrian Army is fighting for democracy in Syria. So, how are these people not fighting for freedom. Your knowledge seems based on your own preconceived notions of the region.

The West. A combination of nations spanning from Turkey to California, from Australia to Ireland. That's 'The West'. Too diverse, I say.

Also, 2+2=5. Just to point out the hyperbole.

The West is an idea not a geographic area, Europe may as well be a part of Asia. The only reason we don't refer to it as west Asia, is because of the radically different ideas held by it's inhabitants.

Yeah, it's different from Asia, for sure. But the West on itself holds every single modernised nationstate between Austria and Mexico. Not really possible to make conclusions on. It certainly is a thing, but not really a helpful thing.

[New Werpland]

Most Muslims may not be violent, but there are undeniable aspects of Islam that make it more violent than Christianity.

And I don't see how this is our fault?

Have you seen Middle Eastern borders, drawn by European diplomats after 1945? Recipe for disaster.

What would they gain by provoking violence in some far away land? Even if it was made with malevolent intent it wasn't very successful, violence and destabilization in the middle east didn't start until the Arab Spring.

[New Werpland]

The West is an idea not a geographic area, Europe may as well be a part of Asia. The only reason we don't refer to it as west Asia, is because of the radically different ideas held by it's inhabitants.

He just described the west as an idea.

He described it as the combination of nations spanning from Turkey to the West Coast. That isn't much of an idea.

[Great Confederacy of Commonwealth States]

Have you seen Middle Eastern borders, drawn by European diplomats after 1945? Recipe for disaster.

What would they gain by provoking violence in some far away land? Even if it was made with malevolent intent it wasn't very successful, violence and destabilization in the middle east didn't start until the Arab Spring.

Like I said, it wasn't done on purpose. It was done out of ignorance, or because it was easier than actually giving two shits. Nevertheless, their carelessness caused a lot of violence, and the further incitement during the Cold War didn't help at all. Here, for ease of reference:

A European map of borders and ethnicities

and

A Middle Eastern map of borders and ethnicities

See the difference?

[Great Confederacy of Commonwealth States]

Have you seen Middle Eastern borders, drawn by European diplomats after 1945? Recipe for disaster.

What would they gain by provoking violence in some far away land? Even if it was made with malevolent intent it wasn't very successful, violence and destabilization in the middle east didn't start until the Arab Spring.

No, that was just the call for democracy. Those borders have caused unrest since the first hour of their enforcement.

[Great Confederacy of Commonwealth States]

He just described the west as an idea.

He described it as the combination of nations spanning from Turkey to the West Coast. That isn't much of an idea.

All those nations are part of the west. What the west is, no-one can say. It doesn't even have a clear definition.

[North Calaveras]

He described it as the combination of nations spanning from Turkey to the West Coast. That isn't much of an idea.

All those nations are part of the west. What the west is, no-one can say. It doesn't even have a clear definition.

omg lets cut the shit

the west as an idea is generally about freedom, stable democratic/republic government and technological advancement through enlightened era-style ideals

that is more or less "the west" in a nutshell

[New Werpland]

He described it as the combination of nations spanning from Turkey to the West Coast. That isn't much of an idea.

All those nations are part of the west. What the west is, no-one can say. It doesn't even have a clear definition.

I disagree, there is a very clear definition of the west. Wikipedia has an article if that helps make things more clear.

[New Werpland]

What would they gain by provoking violence in some far away land? Even if it was made with malevolent intent it wasn't very successful, violence and destabilization in the middle east didn't start until the Arab Spring.

No, that was just the call for democracy. Those borders have caused unrest since the first hour of their enforcement.

It was more of a call for Muslim Fundamentalism (excluding Egypt).

[Great Confederacy of Commonwealth States]

All those nations are part of the west. What the west is, no-one can say. It doesn't even have a clear definition.

I disagree, there is a very clear definition of the west. Wikipedia has an article if that helps make things more clear.

First paragraph: "...is a term referring to different nations depending on the context."

Yes, so very clear. I mean, it's downright scientific.

All those nations are part of the west. What the west is, no-one can say. It doesn't even have a clear definition.

omg lets cut the shit

the west as an idea is generally about freedom, stable democratic/republic government and technological advancement through enlightened era-style ideals

that is more or less "the west" in a nutshell

Not a really clear definition, is it? Was Spain part of The West before 1977? Is Japan part of The West? South Korea? The West is an undefined set of countries of which we have a vague understanding but no clear outline. Like Islam, really.

[North Calaveras]

I disagree, there is a very clear definition of the west. Wikipedia has an article if that helps make things more clear.

First paragraph: "...is a term referring to different nations depending on the context."

Yes, so very clear. I mean, it's downright scientific.

omg lets cut the shit

the west as an idea is generally about freedom, stable democratic/republic government and technological advancement through enlightened era-style ideals

that is more or less "the west" in a nutshell

Not a really clear definition, is it? Was Spain part of The West before 1977? Is Japan part of The West? South Korea? The West is an undefined set of countries of which we have a vague understanding but no clear outline. Like Islam, really.

yes it is very clear actually

those nations you speak of including korea and japan are now heavily influenced by "Western ideals" which are generally freedom, democracy and technological advancement

[Great Confederacy of Commonwealth States]

No, that was just the call for democracy. Those borders have caused unrest since the first hour of their enforcement.

It was more of a call for Muslim Fundamentalism (excluding Egypt).

Where was it a call for Muslim fundamentalism? In Egypt, the Muslim Brotherhood took over for a while, but ask Mursi how he's doing now. It really was a call for democracy, instigated by youths on social media. Syrian resistance fighters are still fighting Assad AND IS at this very time. It was a call for liberation from dictators.

[Great Confederacy of Commonwealth States]

First paragraph: "...is a term referring to different nations depending on the context."

Yes, so very clear. I mean, it's downright scientific.


Not a really clear definition, is it? Was Spain part of The West before 1977? Is Japan part of The West? South Korea? The West is an undefined set of countries of which we have a vague understanding but no clear outline. Like Islam, really.

yes it is very clear actually

those nations you speak of including korea and japan are now heavily influenced by "Western ideals" which are generally freedom, democracy and technological advancement

Then give me a clear definition! Something that holds true every time. Without failing. Because only if such a definition is possible, can something be called 'very clear'.