Good article by Christopher Hitchens - Page 3 - cougarguard.com — unofficial BYU Cougars / LDS sports, football, basketball forum and message board

MikeWaters · 01-24-2007, 03:24 PM

Lebowski and SU seem to be saying that the Muslims in the Middle East are an overwhelmingly reasonable group of people with an extremely small number of bad actors, and that we have overreacted in our "war against terrorism."

Is this correct?

SeattleUte · 01-24-2007, 03:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MikeWaters

Does Islam lend itself to multiculturalism?

Yes. It can and has in the past. Here is a facinating artilce about how a long period of Islamic enlightenment helped to save Western Civilization.

http://www.nybooks.com/articles/17516

During this period Christians were burning heretics and books and Islam was tolerant to all creeds, and even begat real philosophers in addition to saving thousands of acres of books.

During much of this period in fact an Islamic Empire--the Umayyad Empire--replaced the majority of the Roman Empire geographically and absorbed many of its virtues, even closely resembling Byzantium for a period (it actually extended beyond the Empire's old boundaries, clear to China but failed in its effort to subjugate Europe).

Everything you say about Islam could have been said about Christianity for long periods of history. This is what drives me crazy about many Americans. No sense of the long winding path of history over 3,000 years. Listen to the secular humanist here, the relationship between civilization and ancient religions such as Islam and Christianity and Judaism and liberal society is not as simple or explicable as you and Sam Harris and Christopher Hitchins suppose. I'm aghast at how unable these atheists are to recognize their own dogmatic tendencies.

Western Civilization is not a respecter of geography. It started in Greece and the torch has been passed around all through the mediterranean and Asia as well as Europe and the U.S. Islam can be receptive to it as well. We will beat this menace the same way we beat the Communist menace.

Jeff Lebowski · 01-24-2007, 03:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MikeWaters

Lebowski and SU seem to be saying that the Muslims in the Middle East are an overwhelmingly reasonable group of people with an extremely small number of bad actors, and that we have overreacted in our "war against terrorism."

Is this correct?

No, that's not what I am saying. Ironically, that is typically the response I get from Tex when we debate the issue.

Radical Islam is dangerous, irrational, and a serious threat to our future. The real question is what is the best strategy for responding to that threat? We have not overreacted as much as we have made stupid strategic moves (invasion of Iraq, national building, etc.).

So, the real question is: What do I think we should do? I don't have time to adequately respond to that now, but I will try to do so later tonight or perhaps tomorrow.

In the meantime, perhaps you can elaborate on your suggested approach to winning a war against radical Islam.

MikeWaters · 01-24-2007, 03:40 PM

Funny. I am less optimistic about how something in 1000 A.D. portends for 2010 A.D.

Some have said that Islam has entered a Dark Age. Show me the evidence that they are wrong.

MikeWaters · 01-24-2007, 03:52 PM

I was speaking with a Jewish colleague. He suggested what others have said: that maybe the Muslims have to fail in their own efforts before anything can get better.

Build the wall, and let the Palestinians rules themselves without interference. We are already seeing this process take place.

Support Lebanon's govt.

Stop supporting non-democratric govt.s in the Middle East, even if those governments support us. That way we can stop pretending that these people are our friends. The new governments and their constituents will then have to make hard choices.

Form a new version of the UN, where only representative democracies are allowed, that respect basic human rights. Form cooperative economic agreements with these countries.

In that vein, force the Russians and Chinese to make a choice. Do you support terror, or not? Then we can stop pretending that they do not.

Take a more active role in Africa, where we are wanted. The goal is to bring Africa into the west, and to win the moral argument.

Where we can, take a much more active role in fighting narco-terrorism in the Western Hemisphere. I fear that institutions are tottering much more than we care to admit. Part of this would be developing a better relationship with Mexico.

In short, we need to build a global cooperative coalition that punishes radical Islam, and rewards Western ideals.

The choices that these countries have available to them should be stark and obvious.

I'm afraid that international economic interests favor terrorism, in that they fear disruption of relationships with states that either support or condone terrorism or radical Islamic states (China and Russia). That means that we are willing to recognize this and tackle it.

MikeWaters · 01-24-2007, 03:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jeff Lebowski

No, that's not what I am saying. Ironically, that is typically the response I get from Tex when we debate the issue.

You may not believe this, but SU does.

MikeWaters · 01-24-2007, 03:57 PM

You guys didn't address one of Hitchens' main points: that the attack by OBL may have in fact been a favor, by bringing the main issue of our times quickly to a head.

SU would argue that this view is false. That OBL is an entity to himself, and that a clash of civilations would have been unlikely outside of 9/11.

SeattleUte · 01-24-2007, 04:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MikeWaters

Some have said that Islam has entered a Dark Age. Show me the evidence that they are wrong.

I'm the one who called them medieval. Islamic dominated nations are experiencing a prolonged period of cultural decline that became really evident in the Nineteenth Century. See Bernard Lewis' What Went Wrong? This represents a recurring phenomenon in world history and is invariably associated with religious absolutists gaining political control of a people coupled with isolation from enlightened elments of the world's peoples (which have existed someplace throughout recorded history). See Lewis, supra. This is why many people fear Mitt Romney as president.

MikeWaters · 01-24-2007, 04:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SeattleUte

This is why many people fear Mitt Romney as president.

LOL, who are these "many people"?

The evangelicals? LOL. Yes they fear a religious person in the White House.

SeattleUte · 01-24-2007, 04:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MikeWaters

LOL, who are these "many people"?

The evangelicals? LOL. Yes they fear a religious person in the White House.

My Jewish friend Jacob Weisberg for one.

01-24-2007, 03:24 PM	#21
MikeWaters Demiurge Join Date: Aug 2005 Posts: 36,365	Lebowski and SU seem to be saying that the Muslims in the Middle East are an overwhelmingly reasonable group of people with an extremely small number of bad actors, and that we have overreacted in our "war against terrorism." Is this correct?

01-24-2007, 03:40 PM	#24
MikeWaters Demiurge Join Date: Aug 2005 Posts: 36,365	Funny. I am less optimistic about how something in 1000 A.D. portends for 2010 A.D. Some have said that Islam has entered a Dark Age. Show me the evidence that they are wrong.

01-24-2007, 03:52 PM	#25
MikeWaters Demiurge Join Date: Aug 2005 Posts: 36,365	I was speaking with a Jewish colleague. He suggested what others have said: that maybe the Muslims have to fail in their own efforts before anything can get better. Build the wall, and let the Palestinians rules themselves without interference. We are already seeing this process take place. Support Lebanon's govt. Stop supporting non-democratric govt.s in the Middle East, even if those governments support us. That way we can stop pretending that these people are our friends. The new governments and their constituents will then have to make hard choices. Form a new version of the UN, where only representative democracies are allowed, that respect basic human rights. Form cooperative economic agreements with these countries. In that vein, force the Russians and Chinese to make a choice. Do you support terror, or not? Then we can stop pretending that they do not. Take a more active role in Africa, where we are wanted. The goal is to bring Africa into the west, and to win the moral argument. Where we can, take a much more active role in fighting narco-terrorism in the Western Hemisphere. I fear that institutions are tottering much more than we care to admit. Part of this would be developing a better relationship with Mexico. In short, we need to build a global cooperative coalition that punishes radical Islam, and rewards Western ideals. The choices that these countries have available to them should be stark and obvious. I'm afraid that international economic interests favor terrorism, in that they fear disruption of relationships with states that either support or condone terrorism or radical Islamic states (China and Russia). That means that we are willing to recognize this and tackle it.

01-24-2007, 03:57 PM	#27
MikeWaters Demiurge Join Date: Aug 2005 Posts: 36,365	You guys didn't address one of Hitchens' main points: that the attack by OBL may have in fact been a favor, by bringing the main issue of our times quickly to a head. SU would argue that this view is false. That OBL is an entity to himself, and that a clash of civilations would have been unlikely outside of 9/11.