quote:

But lets not start criticising each other's beliefs just because what YOU believe is right.

Agreed. It's much better to criticize other people's beliefs because they're completely irrational.

quote:

Originally posted by George Smiley NeoPhono, could you give me the source for your opinions?

Sure, I actually listed it earlier. It's from the Council on Foreign Relations (LINK)

Here's what they say:

quote:

Does al-Qaeda have a charter or manifesto? In an al-Qaeda house in Afghanistan, New York Times reporters found a brief statement of the “Goals and Objectives of Jihad”: 1. Establishing the rule of God on earth 2. Attaining martyrdom in the cause of God 3. Purification of the ranks of Islam from the elements of depravity In 1998, several al-Qaeda leaders issued a declaration calling on Muslims to kill Americans—including civilians—as well as “those who are allied with them from among the helpers of Satan.”

I take number one to mean the establishement of a fundamentalist Islamic society throughout earth, not just the middle east.

Why do you assume that? Establishing the rule of God on Earth could mean in my back garden...why do you assume it means the entire world? Do you have a source for that?

quote:

Originally posted by George Smiley Why do you assume that? Establishing the rule of God on Earth could mean in my back garden...why do you assume it means the entire world? Do you have a source for that?

Just my interpretation. When someone says "earth" I usually take it to mean the whole earth. I could look around though.

EDIT: Here's a copy of the original NY Times article that led to the list. LINK

Here's a link to the text of Osama's 1998 fatwah calling for the death of Americans. LINK

quote:

The ruling to kill the Americans and their allies--civilians and military--is an individual duty for every Muslim who can do it in any country in which it is possible to do it, in order to liberate the al-Aqsa Mosque and the holy mosque from their grip, and in order for their armies to move out of all the lands of Islam, defeated and unable to threaten any Muslim. This is in accordance with the words of Almighty God, "and fight the pagans all together as they fight you all together," and "fight them until there is no more tumult or oppression, and there prevail justice and faith in God." This is in addition to the words of Almighty God "And why should ye not fight in the cause of God and of those who, being weak, are ill-treated and oppressed--women and children, whose cry is 'Our Lord, rescue us from this town, whose people are oppressors; and raise for us from thee one who will help!'" We -- with God's help -- call on every Muslim who believes in God and wishes to be rewarded to comply with God's order to kill the Americans and plunder their money wherever and whenever they find it. We also call on Muslim ulema, leaders, youths, and soldiers to launch the raid on Satan's U.S. troops and the devil's supporters allying with them, and to displace those who are behind them so that they may learn a lesson. Almighty God said "O ye who believe, give your response to God and His Apostle, when He calleth you to that which will give you life. And know that God cometh between a man and his heart, and that it is He to whom ye shall all be gathered." Almighty God also says "O ye who believe, what is the matter with you, that when ye are asked to go forth in the cause of God, ye cling so heavily to the earth! Do ye prefer the life of this world to the hereafter? But little is the comfort of this life, as compared with the hereafter. Unless ye go forth, He will punish you with a grievous penalty, and put others in your place; but Him ye would not harm in the least. For God hath power over all things."

Last edited by NeoPhono on Mar-13-2004 at 14:45

It doesn't say anywhere the 'entire' Earth does it? It says ON Earth, which means anywhere ON Earth. You have only interpretated that way because that is what you want to believe cos it fits nicely into your opinions of Muslims and what you would like to see done to them no? It somehow justifies that in your mind...

Okay, assume that you are right, al queda want to take over the world. Still doesn't make sense to invade every islamic country in the world that do support them in any way though (or in no way as in the iraq case).

lets compare their thinking with yours, you don't seem to understand. I actually see many similarities with the bush administration and al queda (yeah i know you can't really compare them, but still). Al qaeda believe strongly in islam, they want to spread it all over the world, and they want to kill all the ones that don't believe in islam. The bush administration on the other hand, strongly believe in the capitalism market, democracy, free speech etc. and they want to spread it all over the world and kill everyone who don't believe in it (for example al queda). I hope you see the similarities, i know you know what you think is right or wrong and i know what i think is right or wrong.
You think it's right to attack for example iraq to get rid of an dictator, and to establish democracy etc. yeah, sure that sounds good for us who believe in this. BUT there certainly is a lot of people (not necessarily fundamentalists) that thought saddam was a good ruler and that everything was good before. BUT that now think USA are the biggest idiots out there who has destroyed everything so that they now actually support the fundamentalists (or any other islmaic countrys, much like all western countries condemned the 9/11 attacks). Compare this to your own case, after you was attacked by al qaeda on sept 11, a lot of people, that before wasn't supporters of a war against islamic states, now are supporters of that. i'm not sure if you understood my train of thoughts there, it can be hard to realize, but you have to learn to think in others thoughts...

quote:

Al-Qa'ida's goal is to "unite all Muslims and to establish a government which follows the rule of the Caliphs." Bin Laden has stated that the only way to establish the Caliphate is by force. Al-Qa'ida's goal, therefore, is to overthrow nearly all Muslim governments, which are viewed as corrupt, to drive Western influence from those countries, and eventually to abolish state boundaries.

Link

quote:

Originally posted by George Smiley It doesn't say anywhere the 'entire' Earth does it? It says ON Earth, which means anywhere ON Earth. You have only interpretated that way because that is what you want to believe cos it fits nicely into your opinions of Muslims and what you would like to see done to them no? It somehow justifies that in your mind...

Much the same way you intepret "on earth" to not mean the entire earth. If I say "I want to be the coolest person on earth," what does that mean? Do I not mean the entire earth? I guess I have to say "I want to be the coolest person on the entire earth," from now on so I don't confuse anyone. Since Islam is already present on the planet I interpret someone saying to spread the rule of God on earth to mean the entire planet. If it wasn't here to begin with, I can see your point.

It's a mute point however if you merely look at the definition of Jihad which Osama called for. It is by his definition a holy war to spread Islam throughout the entire earth.

LINK

quote:

Originally posted by St_Andrew You think it's right to attack for example iraq to get rid of an dictator, and to establish democracy etc. yeah, sure that sounds good for us who believe in this. BUT there certainly is a lot of people (not necessarily fundamentalists) that thought saddam was a good ruler and that everything was good before. BUT that now think USA are the biggest idiots out there who has destroyed everything so that they now actually support the fundamentalists (or any other islmaic countrys, much like all western countries condemned the 9/11 attacks).

The reason it was right to attack Iraq to get rid of Saddam wasn't because dictatorships are evil and democracy is oh-so-great, it was because Saddam's regime had no respect for individual rights. It wouldn't matter if 99.9999% of all the people in Iraq thought Saddam was the greatest - as long as that other 0.0001% were being deprived of their fundamental rights as individuals, then there is a moral imperative to protect them.

Now, whether or not that's what the U.S. is doing... is another question altogether.

quote:

Originally posted by Arbiter The reason it was right to attack Iraq to get rid of Saddam wasn't because dictatorships are evil and democracy is oh-so-great, it was because Saddam's regime had no respect for individual rights. It wouldn't matter if 99.9999% of all the people in Iraq thought Saddam was the greatest - as long as that other 0.0001% were being deprived of their fundamental rights as individuals, then there is a moral imperative to protect them.

according to your morals, yes. according to someone else morals, no.

according to al qaeda it's moraly right to attack US cause some 0.0003% of the american people are islamic fundamentalists.

quote:

Originally posted by St_Andrew Okay, assume that you are right, al queda want to take over the world. Still doesn't make sense to invade every islamic country in the world that do support them in any way though (or in no way as in the iraq case). lets compare their thinking with yours, you don't seem to understand. I actually see many similarities with the bush administration and al queda (yeah i know you can't really compare them, but still). Al qaeda believe strongly in islam, they want to spread it all over the world, and they want to kill all the ones that don't believe in islam. The bush administration on the other hand, strongly believe in the capitalism market, democracy, free speech etc. and they want to spread it all over the world and kill everyone who don't believe in it (for example al queda). I hope you see the similarities, i know you know what you think is right or wrong and i know what i think is right or wrong. You think it's right to attack for example iraq to get rid of an dictator, and to establish democracy etc. yeah, sure that sounds good for us who believe in this. BUT there certainly is a lot of people (not necessarily fundamentalists) that thought saddam was a good ruler and that everything was good before. BUT that now think USA are the biggest idiots out there who has destroyed everything so that they now actually support the fundamentalists (or any other islmaic countrys, much like all western countries condemned the 9/11 attacks). Compare this to your own case, after you was attacked by al qaeda on sept 11, a lot of people, that before wasn't supporters of a war against islamic states, now are supporters of that. i'm not sure if you understood my train of thoughts there, it can be hard to realize, but you have to learn to think in others thoughts...

I do realize where others are coming from. I too would like a world where we could sit down and iron out all of our differences. However, I do not believe this to be the case.

I also do not see the Bush administration attacking civilian targets to bring about its change. I also do not see them trying to install relgious, repressive governments, methods of rule looked upon with disdain on this board in other threads (especially the American religious right so prevelant in its government), but seemingly looked over in this one.

Only time will tell in Iraq. It is unarguably in a state of turmoil. I do not know many countries that have undergone such change and have come out smelling like roses the day after. To me, it is much too early to tell for sure if the installation of a diplomatic government was in anyones best interest. I do know however that it was in both my and the Iraqi peoples best interest to remove Saddam. You could argue that last point, but that is my opinion.