It seems like their ideologies are pretty good and there is a lot of misconceptions about Islam in the western world. Most of Muslim people I've met were very nice and peaceful, way better than most Europeans and Americans I've met.
Do you think Islam is really a religion of peace?
>>56550876
cair, pls go.
If you want to build bridges between the islamic and non islamic worlds, why don't you try to understand the plight of non-muslims living under muslim rule, and campaing for the recognition of their rights first?
It's obviously not a religion of war
>>56550876
>It seems like their ideologies are pretty good
kill yourself, literally
Islam is a cancer.
For God's sake, not all Islam is Wahabism.
>>56550876
All me-me's aside, Islam at it core is an admirable religion, to say the least.
To simply dismiss it as "cancer" or what have you is foolish. The issue is that the religion has been hijacked by numerous terrorist organizations, creating a loud minority of bloodthirsty savages.
This isn't to say that the religion itself is bad, it simply means that the religion has been purposefully meld around the greed and hatred of people who already held those values.
What is the cause of greed and hatred? Usually a mixture of money and geopolitics.
Already, the duo are incredibly volatile and can destroy entire nations.
Throw in a corrupted form of a religion and you have a terrible case to deal with.
>Is Islam really a religion of peace?
A thought-terminating cliche from the Bush administration, a lie so big it dares the listener to call it out.
Religions aren't in essence anything but what people make it. And the violence that Islam finds wherever it goes is evidence of its nature.
Well, it depends on who practices it. Turks for example have never been aggressive jihadi Muslims or Malays or Indonesians. Arabs and Persians though...
>>56555580
You must be blind, as there have been MANY terrorist attacks in both Turkey as well as Southeast Asia.
Turkey is generally more stable than Arab countries (such as Iraq, Syria, etc.)
When you have a stable country, people aren't pissed off as much.
It has little to do with race as it has to do with economic and political situations.
>>56555580
they don't blow shit up but they committed like 5 genocides, and if you count kurds as turks then they DO blow shit up.
>>56550876
I don't think it's more of a religion of peace than any others. Most religions have peace as a core value, since religion was really the only moral compass back in the day.
>>56550876
no.
t. ex muslim
>>56555830
Isn't most of that due to Wahabist propaganda being spread into Turkey though? Practically all of Islamofascism can be traced back to Saudi Arabia and Iran.
>>56555971
>and if you count kurds as turks
Oh boy you did it now.
>>56550876
No in the koran thing written towards the end of it override things written in the beginning. All the violent warmongering stuff is towards the end of the book
>>56556438
So the likes of Al Andalus tolerating other religions for a millennium while Christians were busy torturing other Christians to death was...?
>>56555172
Nothing admirable about it. It's stupid as shit.
>>56556470
Are you using the invasion of Iberia as an example of peaceful Islam?
Well, the Ottoman Empire had a rather enlightened religious policy compared to Europe at that time where anyone who didn't practice the state religion was a non-citizen and could be tortured/arrested/killed. The Ottomans never forced anyone to convert although you had to be a Sunni Muslim to have full rights as a citizen.
>>56556296
Iran isn't Wahhabi. You know so little about the situation, I'd just stop talking altogether. You really are embarrassing yourself.
>>56556726
>Implying Arabs, Turks, and Persians are the only invading peoples
>Implying implications
>>56550876
I don't give a fuck. It is an equally broad statement without any justifiable basis.
Other people should just fuck off already. That's what peace is all about.
>>56555971
Except neither case has to do with Islam.
The Armenian Genocide was political and so are the Kurdish bombings that we see today.
No matter how much you want to deny it, every single problem in this world can be traced back to politics, money, or a combination of the two. Kurds bombing Ankara has little to do with Islam and much to do with how the Kurds believe Turkey is oppressing them.
Keep spreading that falsehood and believe me that there will be more bombings to come, since you won't even know the root cause of it all.
>>56557088
I didn't write anything like that, I pointed out the absurdity in Sven's """"argument"""".
>>56557180
He has a very good point.
Context at hand, the invasion of Iberia was based as fuck. Science brought to Europe, people of all faiths given dignity, etc.
Even for today's standards, what the Muslims did in Iberia helped it more than hindered it.
Now compare that shit to what the Iberians would later do to the Native Americans and then you'll see what the Sven was talking about.
>>56557171
You can only tie events and motives into the overlaying meshwork of politics, but not apply it as a reason.
Politics is people, interests and chosen procedures for attaining specific ends.
>>56557047
No, they're Shiite which is 90% the same thing as Wahabism. If anything, the only person embarrassing themselves is you.
>>56557248
>You can only tie events and motives into the overlaying meshwork of politics, but not apply it as a reason.
Politics is most definitely a reason for terrorist activity. That regulation is entirely arbitrary.
>>56557288
Yeah, except you conveniently left out the fact that Iranians and the Saudis fucking despise each other.
Again, just quit embarrassing yourself, tough guy.
>>56557242
Even if these memes were to be true, it doesn't make the invasion peaceful.
>>56557316
Of course you can call it a reason and people will realize what you mean, but it doesn't mean jackshit without further disambiguation.
>>56557396
Nobody is here to argue that the invasion of Iberia was peaceful.
Clearly "peaceful invasion" is an oxymoron.
But if you're gonna use Islamic Iberia as an example of how """TERRIBLE"""" Islam is, then you're doing a shitty job proving your point.
>>56557180
No, you deflected my question. Fallacy:ing the wrong guy here.
>>56556470
The al andlus meme is completely false
>>56557398
What disambiguation are you even referring to?
Geopolitics can be broken down by region. There's your disambiguation.
Why are Kurds fuckin' bombing shit? Look into the geopolitical tensions in that area.
Why is Syria fucked up? Same reason.
Again, religion is a scapegoat for political violence, not the other way around.
Nice taquitos mohammad jose ibn al-alamein
>>56556470
It is a bad example for you to use
>>56557510
" Under the Caliphate of Córdoba, al-Andalus was a beacon of learning, and the city of Córdoba became one of the leading cultural and economic centres in Europe and throughout the Mediterranean Basin and the Islamic world. A number of achievements that advanced Islamic and Western science came from al-Andalus including major advances in trigonometry (Geber), astronomy (Arzachel), surgery (Abulcasis), pharmacology (Avenzoar), and other fields. Al-Andalus became a major educational center for Europe and the lands around the Mediterranean Sea as well as a conduit for culture and science between the Islamic and Christian worlds."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al-Andalus
How people can be so historically illiterate in this day and age is beyond me.
Calling something a "meme" doesn't make it false. As a matter of fact, you're the one taking these memes too seriously.
>>56557353
It's a power play for regional dominance, and both use their own extremist brands of Islam as a political banner for imperialism.
>>56550876
compared to Christians.
Yes.
>>56556470
>Sweden
It is not funny anymore.
>>56557596
Fuckin' EXACTLY.
This is what I've been trying to get across to these idiots.
>>56557472
I am not using it as an example of how terrible Islam is, I am pointing out that the invasion of Spain does not make Islam a peaceful relgion. Then you tell me that in another alternate timelime it would certainly be worse, and that this is some kind of fact I have to accept. This is the actual recap of what has been posted so far.
>>56550876
wow you are a very unique liberal standing up to right wing hatred. surely you as an upper middle class white savior can save us
>>56557684
>I am not using it as an example of how terrible Islam is, I am pointing out that the invasion of Spain does not make Islam a peaceful relgion. Then you tell me that in another alternate timelime it would certainly be worse, and that this is some kind of fact I have to accept. This is the actual recap of what has been posted so far.
I am not using it as an example of how terrible Islam is, I am pointing out that the invasion of Spain does not make Islam a peaceful relgion. Then you tell me that in another alternate timelime it would certainly be worse, and that this is some kind of fact I have to accept. This is the actual recap of what has been posted so far.
By itself, the Islamic invasions of Iberia do not make Islam appear peaceful.
But when you compare this invasion to... say..... when the Christians arrived in the New World, they make the Muslims look like fuckin' humanitarians.
That's the point that you're not getting. We already established that invasions are never peaceful. But if we compare an invasion led by Muslims and one led by Christians, we find that the Muslims have historically been more peaceful by FAR, and this is a fact whether you like it or not.
>>56557789
Both muslims and christians have commited genocides at different times. Why we are discussing Christianity at all, I don't understand. The comparison between the colonization of the new world and the moorish invasion is a rather poor one as well. There's a lot of factors that are different, not just religion.
Islam is the only actual religion that remains, I admire it
>>56557962
Why wouldn't you compare Islam to another Abrahamic religion? Wouldn't you want to contextualize the subject of the discussion?
Furthermore, there is nothing that makes the comparison between the Islamic invasions of Iberia and the Christian invasions of the New World a poor one.
Sure, there were different factors, but all invasions are centered on the demand for territory, resources, and proselytism. Said invasions are no exception to this rule.
Again, if we were to compare Islamic invasions to the invasions carried out by Christians at around the same era, we find again and again that the Muslims are consistently the most 'peaceful'.
>>56557604
>>56558080
look at all these peaceful muslims ((((
all they wanted to do was kill peaceful europeans around the Mediterranean (((((((
>>56550876
Nope. It's a fucked up death cult that promotes violence, death and superiority. Most Muslims are terrorists.
>>56558183
And I can easily pull up a map of Christians killing Muslims, Jews, and Pagans tenfold. What is your point, exactly?
>>56558224
>And I can easily pull up a map of Christians killing Muslims, Jews, and Pagans tenfold.
lol no you can't
>>56558256
whatisbyzantineempire.jpg
whatisspanishempire.jpg
whatisportugueseempire.jpg
Quit embarrassing yourself.
>>56558309
>whatisbyzantineempire.jpg
You mean the European civilization who's capital to this day is under Islamic rule and has had most of their population killed? And those European powers that improved every land they touched??? THE HORROR.
>>56558080
Because by taking a single event in world history, and compare it to another resembling one, you can make any narrative you want.
I am aware of the nature of an invasion. What makes it a poor comparison is among other things:
There had been no contact before the discovery of the new world, the native americans were by and large another species.
Technological gap between the two were vastly larger in case of the new world, moors were not in a position to kill 90% of Iberians.
>>56558366
Invade and get invaded, bitch.
>>56557576
>>56557576
Yes nice Wikipedia source.
Most people know it wasn't nice for Christians
You guys may find this interesting:
>What the Modern Martyr Should Know: Seventy-Two Grapes and Not a Single Virgin: The New Picture of Islam
Written by Norbert Preßburg, a German linguist who gives an overview about what Islamic Studies in Germany brought to light since the 70s.
very recommendable!
http://www.amazon.com/What-Modern-Martyr-Should-Know/dp/1468129031/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1458353696&sr=8-1&keywords=Norbert+G+Pressburg
>>56558435
Fun fact: everything in that red circle used to be Christian. That only stopped when Muslims made them convert or be killed.
>>56558385
>Because by taking a single event in world history, and compare it to another resembling one, you can make any narrative you want.
True, to an extent.
There was a sizable technological gap between the Muslims and the Iberians, though. Definitely not as big as that between the Europeans and the Native Americans, but you have a point there.
That still does not excuse the countless thousands of Native Americans who were forcibly converted and enslaved in the name of muh jebus, though.
Even when you factor in disease, the Spanish rule over the natives was brutal as fuck.
>>56558445
It kind of was actually, El Cid himself served some muslim lords
>>56558445
This is /int/, cunt. We use wikipedia on the daily for citations, and now when it doesn't fit your warped narrative, it becomes questionable? Fuck off. Hypocrites are my biggest pet peeve.
>>56558496
>Fun fact: everything in that red circle used to be Christian. That only stopped when Muslims made them convert or be killed.
Source or gtfo.
You don't even make any sense. If they killed the Christians there, why wouldn't they kill the Christians in Iberia when they clearly had the chance to do so?
Oh... yeah... because it never happened and you just like to talk out your ass.
The most a Christian would have to do would be to pay a tax (jizya) which would grant them protectorate status. Funny thing is, the Jizya tax was already a tax that Muslims had to pay either way -- it was just given a different name.
And the cherry on top? The jizya didn't apply to literally half the population of Christians and Jews: disabled, elderly, women, children, and those who couldn't afford it didn't need to pay anything. THE HORROR!!!
>>56557576
>" Under the Caliphate of Córdoba, al-Andalus was a beacon of learning, [...]
This is a romantic 19th century meme.
Truth is: Al-Andalus was progressive and liberal only during its first two centuries.
>>56550876
Muslims are LITERALLY modern day nazi's.
I'm not sure how people don't see the connections aside from hating the jewish faith.
>>56558728
False. Islamic Iberia was progressive up until the Abbasid Dynasty fell. By then, it was almost 1300.
The Muslims conquered Iberia in the early 700's. That's close to 7 centuries as opposed to your "merely 2 centuries".
As a sidebar, decentralized Muslim rules remained in Iberia up until the year 1492, but were largely independent from a major Caliphate such as the Umayyad or Abbasid Caliphates.
These guys are the ones you're referring to. They were mainly dicks to the Christians, which is what led to the reconquests.
>>56558515
I've never denied that the Spanish rule in America was brutal. It is not exactly relevant though.
>>56558549
The paragraph in itself is not that telling, naturally a muslim city in Europe would be ideal for muslims trading and trade between West and East was what made Cordoba an economical centre,. It does not say anything about the average Iberian, how christians were treated or similar. A lot of this is really poorly documented(according to wikipedia) with exclusively biased texts from either side(moors/euros), so to say that the Iberian peninsula gained from the invasion with the slightest of certainty is fucking absurd.
In that case it is actually very akin to stormtroopers' argument of how Europeans developed African countries through colonization.
>>56558649
Islam came about after the founding of the Byzantine Empire, the empire was founded upon Christianity. This is not somethign that should be sourced in a discussion about history.
>>56558908
"The non-Muslims were given the status of ahl al-dhimma (the people under protection), with adults paying a "Jizya" tax, equal to one dinar per year with exemptions for old people, women, children, and the disabled. Those who were neither Christians nor Jews, such as pagans, were given the status of Majus.[26] The treatment of non-Muslims in the Caliphate has been a subject of considerable debate among scholars and commentators, especially those interested in drawing parallels to the coexistence of Muslims and non-Muslims in the modern world.[27]
Image of a Jewish cantor reading the Passover story in al-Andalus, from a 14th-century Spanish Haggadah
when the Jews of al-Andalus prospered, devoting themselves to the service of the Caliphate of Córdoba, to the study of the sciences, and to commerce and industry, especially trading in silk and slaves, in this way promoting the prosperity of the country. Southern Iberia became an asylum for the oppressed Jews of other countries.[31][32]
Under the Almoravids and the Almohads there may have been intermittent persecution of Jews,[33] but sources are extremely scarce and do not give a clear picture, though the situation appears to have deteriorated after 1160.[34] Muslim pogroms against Jews in al-Andalus occurred in Córdoba (1011) and in Granada (1066).[35][36][37] However, massacres of dhimmis are rare in Islamic history.[38]
The Almohads, who had taken control of the Almoravids' Maghribi and Andalusi territories by 1147,[39] far surpassed the ... fled east to more tolerant Muslim lands,[40] while others went northward to settle in the growing Christian kingdoms.[42]"
That can apply to anything. History is written by the victors. Historians can only make conclusions by what it given to them. Anything beyond that is simply conjecture.
>>56559000
Founded upon Christianity, yet was notorious for persecuting Christians left and right.
There's a reason why the Byzantines got pummelled by the Muslims. Not even the Christians liked them.
You can use the "muh victim card" to defend the Byzantine Empire all you want, but they were sour cunts, especially toward the end of their reign.
>>56559002
I am well aware, so that talking in absolutes about how Iberians gained from the invasion like you did in
>>56557242
is fucking retarded.
Why do you care so much about painting islam in anything but a negative color? They would be better off with any other ideaology and their societies are all totally irredeemable garbage with no achievements. it's spiritual communism
>>56559096
It wasn't talking in absolute, because I said "context at hand".
>>56554598
>Islam is a cancer.
>
Were gonna build a wall over your fucking ass
>>56559096
And the Iberians DID gain from the Invasion of Iberia.
You can't simply ignore the entire other side of history and then accuse me of "talking in absolutes".
The Iberians gained from it culturally, scientifically, and economically. This is non-negotiable history.
Was Muslim Iberia perfect? Of course it wasn't. Nobody here is saying that. But when you put things in fuckin' context and when you remember that this was fuckin' 900 AD that we're talking about, what happened in Spain, Portugal, and parts of France during that time period was remarkable.
>>56559170
In the context of Arabs already having invaded Iberia? You can't know what would happen without the invasion, just like I can't decide whether India would be more or less shit without British intervention.
>>56559079
The exact same can be said about the Reconquista, someone was obviously not pleased.
>>56559259
We're talking about a much longer period than 900 AD, and I discussed this kind of thought process in my previous post.
>>56550876
Former Muslim here.
If I didn't know any Muslims personally, I think i might be a /pol/ack. They were still accepting of me after they found out I had renounced my faith, even though I was a total fedora about it.
To me, it doesn't matter what the Quran or the Bible says. I am nice to everyone now. It genuinely brings me happiness.
>>56559302
>>56559302
No. In the context of every other invasion during that time.
Name me one occupation between 700 AD and 1600 AD that was as peaceful and progressive as that of Muslim Iberia.
>The exact same can be said about the Reconquista, someone was obviously not pleased.
Tis' true, as I have stated in:
>>56558889
Doctrinally speaking, Islam is a religion of offensive war. There are certainly many good people who are Muslims, but that's because most people are innately good. Islam makes it easier to be violent by encouraging its followers to be like Muhammad, a man known for polygamy, invasion, and rape.
>>56559347
I mean, it doesn't matter what your holy book says as long as you are a nice person.
>>56554457
What?
>>56559420
So the invasion was a blessing because it could be worse looking at other invasions. That doesn't do it for me.
>>56559345
900 AD wasn't meant to be taken as a literal number by itself. It was just an example.
Of course, the Muslims ruled from 700 all the way to 1492.
The vast majority of the time, was mainly progressive. I'd say that as soon as the Abbasids left and the area became decentralized, it all went to shit.
>>56559473
Looking at things from the eyes of a man living in a 21st century welfare state is a terrible way to contextualize things.
>>56550876
Sure.
>>56559537
You're doing the same thing.
>>56559432
most Muslims just simply ignore the rapey parts. I didn't even know about it until I was 18, but then again, I wasn't very devout.
>>56559564
No, because I don't apply today's standards to the standards of a thousand years ago. That'd be ridiculous.
Most people aren't out to vindictively fuck with other people's lives for no reason.
In this sense, every religion that doesn't screen its adherents for peaceniktivity is a peaceful religion.
Because most people are generally good most of the time.
>>56559551
This reeks of reddit-tier atheism
>tfw qu'ran probably isn't that bad but i can't be fucked to read it
>>56559588
Not true.
>>56558889
I am sorry, I only can give yout this article in German, published in the Swiss newspaper "Die Weltwoche"
http://derprophet.info/inhalt/der-mythos-vom-toleranten-al-andalus/ (couldn't find the article in their archive)
>"Al-Andalus" as a 19th century fairy tale
>to contrast catholic church with proclamed Al-Andalus' liberality
>the Muslims seen as Rousseau's noble savages (Bayle, Montesquieu, Voltaire)
>Herder: Muslims are "Europe's teachers", Europe's first enlightment
[...]
Al-Andalus is the 18/19th century's Atlantis, a better and ideal mirror image.
The Article is very intresting, I am sure you'll find a similar one in English with the given keywords.
(and btw, yes, I know the article is posted on the webside of what seems to be at least an anti-islamic organisation)
>>56559618
Fuck that, no. I believe most people are twats.
It's just awkward air and societal pressure (also laws) that keeps everyone in check.
>>56559628
Alright bud, I'm only a guy who's spent his entire life around Muslims, what do I know?
>>56559654
>http://derprophet.info/inhalt/der-mythos-vom-toleranten-al-andalus/ (couldn't find the article in their archive)
your link is broken. And on top of that, that site looks sus as hell.
>>56559606
And how do I do this in a bigger way than yourself?
>>56559702
Fair enough.
>>56559623
I did read it and it is tbqh
>>56559588
That's true for many SEAsians, but of those for whom Arabic is a native language, they do actually read their text from a young age. Moreover, someone who learns that about their own religion which they firmly believe could potentially realise that they were doing their own religion "incorrectly" and change their morality. There's much less potential for that in every other religion.
>>56559740
Because you try to reason things out by pretending that the world of a thousand years ago functioned in the same way of the world today.
People thought differently, worked differently, and acted differently.
If Russia, in 2016 AD, invades Norway, I'm sure the whole global community would be appalled by it. Heck, we'd have a Third World War on our hands.
However, if something similar were to happen in say, 1016 AD, then it'd be viewed differently, because invasions and conquering were commonplace.
>>56559732
first paragraph is:
>800 Jahre lang stand Spanien unter islamischer Herrschaft. Die maurische Epoche gilt als das goldene Zeitalter der kulturellen Blüte und der religiösen Toleranz unter Muslimen, Christen und Juden. Der Mythos von al-Andalus, zu schön, um wahr zu sein.
>>56559623
I googled these passages and they are all legit.
After reading sick shit like that, there's no way a sane human being would still support it.
Call me a cuck but as long as they integrate into society and don't act like shitheads Islam is okay.
>>56559842
Where am I doing this exactly? Because I can't agree with your accusation. My problem here is how the invasion of is first described as peaceful(by a swede not you) and then described as an undeniable positive development of the Iberian peninsula. Which is fucking absurd on the level of claiming the same for the development under the colonial age.
>>56559910
>as long as they integrate into society
More like they're going to integrate your society into theirs.
>>56559910
The thing is that europeans imported them by the million and send them all to one place, so they are not intergrating at all, if they were a small amount an wide spread, they would intergrate.
>>56559915
You're disregarding scientific development just because the Muslims "invaded"
Of course they invaded. Invasion was as common as rice back in those days.
Invasion in 2016 = / = Invasion in 710.
I cannot stress this to you enough. Look, you're a great guy, I can tell. You have high ethics. But this is just not the time to apply 21st century ethics to history.
>>56560134
>"invaded"
There certainly was an invasion, no need to be ambigious about it.
You're disregaring the technological advances in India, Ghandi himself should be thankful. I am not comparing a with a hypothetical invasion in 2016, that is your idea.
>>56550876
>>56560066
>More like they're going to integrate your society into theirs.
and this exactly is what happened in Al-Andalus
>>56560134
t. mehmet muhammad aladeen wahabai achmed alalaha akbar
