Democratic Communist Federation wrote:Ostroeuropa wrote:That's how insane our power is. We can up and decide no individuals of a particular variety will exist in the countryside of the middle east and get maybe a passing grade. (Though it does mean perpetual low-level war.)
I agree. The U.S. would likely be responsible for most of the devastation.De-Islamification of the middle east might be more desirable and practical than christianization.
That's Western colonialism. The Western world has no right to dictate the religious allegiances of people in other societies.
Daily reminder that Islamic countries are the only countries with the death penalty for apostasy.
Also, rights are meaningless without force to back them up. I may technically have the right to my own personal property, but if someone holding a pistol climbs through the window and says: Hand over your wallet, my rights are going to sit the fuck down and shut up. There's a
quote for this kind of situation that I think fits pretty well: "There is freedom of speech, but I cannot guarantee freedom after speech." And when Idi Amin fucking Dada notices the flaws in your argument, you need a better argument.
In this case, the Western world which doesn't have problems like stoning, homophobia leading to death, suppression of free speech (mostly), civil wars (Although that one's usually not exclusively the ME's fault), women having very few rights, blah blah blah, seems to be pretty justified in telling Middle Eastern cultures that some of their practices look barbaric. Yeah, some of these are cultural values, not being in civil war seems to be pretty good for everyone. Coincidentally, how many people do you think have gone free after committing crimes because the only witness against them was a woman? Oops.