NationStates Jolt Archive

After all of these attacks, there is something I haven't decided on: what role does Islam truly have in these terrorists organizations?

Now, for the poll options, I do not agree with the last two. The Muslims I know are very pleasant people who would not do the things these terrorists have done. I added the options merely because I know there are some people who think that. If you vote for either of the last two, please quote the Koran to back up your point.

I have to say that either the second or third option is the most likely. I personally chose the second one. The first one may be true, but the terrorists themselves use Islam as their reasoning, so it is not Western propaganda. It's probably a combination of two and three. The politically minded members of these organizations are using Islam as their excuse, and also using it to recruit members. Islamic people are very peaceful, and the terrorists are twisting the religion to suit their own purposes.

Indeed. Many of the terrorists, whether intentionally or not (and, in many cases, it is intentional) follow communist strategy and use communist tactics. Also, don't forget that many of the radical Islamic regimes, while technically not communist, are adamantly pro-Marxist and pro-Soviet (i.e., Libya, Iran, the PLO, Iraq).

In case you hadn't noticed - Islam plays a HUGE part of their movements. While their may be disagreement on their strict interpretation of the Koran, that is rather irrelevant to the fact that it IS their belief set that is their driving force.

Hey, it's not as if Christian Fundamentalists often espouse an adherence to scripture at odds with the mainstream Christian beliefs, and one that seldom really lives up to the tenents of Love Thy Neighbour or Turn the Other Cheek. We don't, however, argue if their agendas are based on their religion.


You can argue the validity of Al Qaeda's beleifs against a given interpretation of the Koran if you like, however all you would be trying to prove is that moderate mainstream Islam is not central to their actions which is rather irrelevant to the facts of the situation.

Indeed. Many of the terrorists, whether intentionally or not (and, in many cases, it is intentional) follow communist strategy and use communist tactics. Also, don't forget that many of the radical Islamic regimes, while technically not communist, are adamantly pro-Marxist and pro-Soviet (i.e., Libya, Iran, the PLO, Iraq).

Sorry, but this is just patently false. First of all, Marxist and Soviet are two VERY different things. Just because a country called itself communist doesn't mean it actually was. Second, Islamic regimes do not follow communist (or soviet) techniques. Islamic fundamentalists HATE socialists. Take Saddam for example. His goverment was widely hated by Islamic-statists because 1) it was a secular regime, and 2) they viewed him as socialist. Bin Laden used to personally refer to him as the "socialist infidel."

They are Islamic if they think of themselves as such, and follow the beliefs of Islam. The more appropriate question to this thread would be something like "Are the Islamic terrorists acting in the best interest of Islam?" or "Are the Islamic terrorists supported in their actions by Islam?" It's like asking if the IRA is actually Catholic. Yes, they are, for the most part at least, Catholic. As to whether or not they are acting in the best ineterest of Catholicism, I would say probably not.

I would argue that it is a political, cultural and economic movement wrapped up in religious clothing.

The radical form of Islam that many of the Jihadi movements espouse can fairly easily be traced as a political backlash against many of the current governments in the Mid-east. These governments allowed much of the populace to achive a level of economic success that was dissproportionate to their political participation. Thus there were many affluent, well educated people who had no say in how they ran their govenment. They soon railed against the governments who they saw as corrupt middlemen for the foreign interests that controlled their area. Without freedom to speak out against them in the public sector, these induviduals formed movements within the religious community which still had a level of protection from the government.

However to say it is merely political is to ignore the cultural implications that the Jihadi movements have taken on. Beyond simple power struggles, these movements have grown to encompass the "anti-west", the fullest, most wholehearted rejection of western influence and values. When compared to the corrupt governments of the region, the incorrupt, highly devout, and very strict Jihadi movements seem like an attractive option for many young men.

As a Muslim myself , I can safely say that these terrorists are not real Islamics.

They are nothing more than the English and French during the Dark Ages where they took advantage of a normally peaceful religon and twisted it to their needs.
"Oh, Gods on my side!"
"No, it's on our side. Your listening to Satan"
"Satan has cursed you! You must fall!"
"Lies!"

:rolleyes: The problem is everybody focuses on the religious aspect of terrorism. It really should be viewed as incidental. Maybe if more thought was given to the social problems that drive people to such acts of desperation we'd be alot closer to eliminating terrorism.

obviously no, they think they are, but they are not, same with any christian who kills someone

The Islamic terrorists simply use Islam as a cover for their actions. While it is true that the Qu'ran implys that Muslims should convert the heathens by the sword, Islam is supposed to be a fundamentally peaceful religion. The fundamentalists do exactly what the Christian fundamentalists do: they pervert the religion. With enough twisted logic, one can make any message he or she wants out a religious text.

The Islamic terrorists simply use Islam as a cover for their actions. While it is true that the Qu'ran implys that Muslims should convert the heathens by the sword, Islam is supposed to be a fundamentally peaceful religion. The fundamentalists do exactly what the Christian fundamentalists do: they pervert the religion. With enough twisted logic, one can make any message he or she wants out a religious text.

bingo, we have a winner

Islamic terrorist leaders use religion to recruit followers and to provide cover for their ulterior motives.
How anyone can say Islam is a scapegoat of Western propaganda is beyond me. The west haven't portrayed Islam as violent, the terrorist leaders have. Any damage done to the reputation of Islam lies at the feet of these terrorist leaders who have abused their religion for their own purposes.

I think the correct answer is "D. All of the above."

Practically every one of those statments are true to some extent.
The Extremists that are giving the Islamic faith a bad name are using the religion to recruit more followers against America.
Mind you...the U.S is EARNING that hatred by its deeds.

Holy War is allowed under Islam, but the actual rules...(yes..there are rules) say that harming innocents or even anything green and growing, is an abomination.

You should never confuse real Muslims, with these crazy bastards.

Islam.. Christianity... whatever. Religions are bad and are being abused all the time due to the shitty writings in "holy" books and people who consider themselves above everyone else due to their religion backing the mup. I say get rid of all religions, dont just blame Islam.

Noone is "just blaming Islam". The thread is about Islamic terrorists and whether they are truly Islamic. Therefore the discussion concerns Islam and not Christianity, Judaism, Buddhism etc etc.

I am an atheist so see no role for religion in this world but lets face it, it is always going to be part of society.

Once again, religion has been used for one's selfish and greedy gains.

Sad. Very sad.

Religion is a personal experience - you can't force anybody to accept it. The way those crazies are manipulating religion is absolutely revolting and corrupting what religion really is.

But religion can be a source of hope to people!

But religion can be a source of hope to people!


Sure. I'm Christian myself. I mean those people who twist the true meaning of religion for their own gain. Things that are good, when shaped by people, can come out bad.

I picked the third choice. The roots of fundementalism, started by a cleric who I believe was named Ali al-Quab, was rooted in Islam, however radical. He believed that the West lost its moral base, and has twisted the Arab world into a land of corrupt, inefficient dictatorships, and seething nationalism (which he interpreted as against the Koran). It spread easily in the Wahabi culture of Saudi Arabia, and when they went as mujahadin to Afghanistan, it got further perverted again. Pakistani imans, who saw the US and USSR as exploiting them, preached to these guys, and in the end, made them into robots. Fundementalism was once legitamit, even by Western standards. But it was perverted from a purely religious movement to a political one, using Islam to justify their actions. It's sort of what happened to many legitamit ideas, like communism. In theory, it isn't bad, and perhaps in practice, it may not be to bad. However, it degenerated into a socialist dictatorship, with the state surviving to make a few people happy. Fundementalism has gone down a similar path.

Take some corruption.
Add a dash of recruitment ploy.
Taking bits an pieces of selected texts.
Stuff it with gunpowder.
Mix them all together.
Put it in the oven of the self righteous.
Let it heat up for a while.
Wait for it to explode.
Wonder what happened.
Find a scapegoat.
Give everybody a free t-shirt.
Hope the mess will clean itself up.
Repeat.

Take some corruption.
Add a dash of recruitment ploy.
Taking bits an pieces of selected texts.
Stuff it with gunpowder.
Mix them all together.
Put it in the oven of the self righteous.
Let it heat up for a while.
Wait for it to explode.
Wonder what happened.
Find a scapegoat.
Give everybody a free t-shirt.
Hope the mess will clean itself up.
Repeat.
LOL!!!

This is a war against two religons and must be treated as such. The reason sucide bombers bomb people is to change christians to muslims. So therefore we need to fight islam as a whole.

This is a war against two religons and must be treated as such. The reason sucide bombers bomb people is to change christians to muslims. So therefore we need to fight islam as a whole.

A little coffee with your flamebait?

This is a war against two religons and must be treated as such. The reason sucide bombers bomb people is to change christians to muslims. So therefore we need to fight islam as a whole.

NUTZ!

For the sake of your intellegence, I hope that was flamebait. I really do.

This is a war against two religons and must be treated as such. The reason sucide bombers bomb people is to change christians to muslims. So therefore we need to fight islam as a whole.
That's why we bomb muslims! To change muslims to christians! (How the dead people change their religion?) Now I got it. Thanks!

As a Muslim myself , I can safely say that these terrorists are not real Islamics.

They are nothing more than the English and French during the Dark Ages where they took advantage of a normally peaceful religon and twisted it to their needs.

I think this is very interesting part of our history. It's true that catholists led European culture to Dark ages after centuries of much higher culture. Muslims saved our culture and thaught us all the things which scientist in Europe had forgotten and led us to the age of new Renaissance. Unfortunately since that Wahabian culture has risen and the fanatic interpretation of Islam (as most western people know it) has been strong for centuries.

What amazes me is that they have the cheek to insult religions like Christianity, but we are not the ones urging our children to kill themselves in order to be accepted in heaven. What kind of a God would ask for that. The answer - NON, its just those blasted Islamic 'Clerics' who are using the threat of Gods 'wrath' to gain control.

:rolleyes: The problem is everybody focuses on the religious aspect of terrorism. It really should be viewed as incidental. Maybe if more thought was given to the social problems that drive people to such acts of desperation we'd be alot closer to eliminating terrorism.

Agreed. If religion is just their cover, we need to eliminate the real stuff that produces hate.

Are they Islamic? Definantly not.

Indeed. Many of the terrorists, whether intentionally or not (and, in many cases, it is intentional) follow communist strategy and use communist tactics. Also, don't forget that many of the radical Islamic regimes, while technically not communist, are adamantly pro-Marxist and pro-Soviet (i.e., Libya, Iran, the PLO, Iraq).

Libya, the PLO and Iraq (under Saddam) (as well as Syria) are all secular and state "socialist", not Islamic.

Vas.

i always get a good giggle when superstitious folk try to claim that other superstitious folk aren't the right kind of superstitious folk. are the terrorists Muslims? well, i'd say the terrorists have as much right to call themselves Muslim as anybody, since they can cite just as much scripture as the next Islamic deciple (and probably more, sometimes). after all, Christians can't agree on how to interpret their book, and Jews fight all the time about theirs, and even the cuddly Buddhists can't always see eye to eye between their sects. you're all worshiping the same mumbo-jumbo, so what's the problem? if you don't like HOW somebody goes about it then that's fine to complain about, but don't try to tell them they aren't a member of their religion just because you dislike how they express it.

Indeed. Many of the terrorists, whether intentionally or not (and, in many cases, it is intentional) follow communist strategy and use communist tactics. Also, don't forget that many of the radical Islamic regimes, while technically not communist, are adamantly pro-Marxist and pro-Soviet (i.e., Libya, Iran, the PLO, Iraq).

ur quite right there- Sadaam Hussein modelled himself on Stalin- hence the statues, and the general physical similarity.

This is a war against two religons and must be treated as such. The reason sucide bombers bomb people is to change christians to muslims. So therefore we need to fight islam as a whole.

Firstly I think that you must realise the aim of Islam is ALWAYS to please Allah (The One God.) According to whatever scripture you follow, I have NEVER come across any that encourage suicide- and in the case of Islam- if in battle a Muslim is asked to respect even the lives of a tree, I ask you how much respect therefore do you think one must have for their own life? (The conduct of war is stated in Hadith such as Bukhari.)

At the end of the day suicide bombers should not carry out such an act, simply as there are no examples or direct allowances of it in the Holy Quran- which Muslims MUST follow without doubt or any "ifs" and "buts."

However, if suicide bombers nonetheless carry out this act then the reasons must be examined- what would make some one so desperate as to take their own life? Personally, and may I say that this is only a personal thought, but I feel ashamed of Muslims (as one myself) who cannot recognise the plight of other Muslim brothers or sisters, especially as they have suffered so long as to have to express themselves in such a violent fashion.

Enodscopia- Christians and Muslims have a lot in common, and both nations should strive towards peace. Both nations have the right to spread their beliefs amongst eachother- no matter what, we both believe in The One God, who we aim to please. :)

Now, for the poll options, I do not agree with the last two. The Muslims I know are very pleasant people who would not do the things these terrorists have done. I added the options merely because I know there are some people who think that. If you vote for either of the last two, please quote the Koran to back up your point.I voted for the second to last but in a different way then you mean. I think that the Terrorists are following the teachings of a violent minority sect within Islam- they aren't representative of the beliefs of mainstream Islam, any more then Franco was representative of Catholicism.