NOT To Black Owl (anymore)
1BC Civ Forums
1BC Civ Forums
Home      Members   FAQ   Links
Welcome Guest ( Login | Register )
      


12345»»»

NOT To Black Owl (anymore)Expand / Collapse
Author
Message
5/17/2008 11:57 AM


Impeached by a patch

Impeached by a patch

Last Seen:
Yesterday @ 7:03 AM


Posts: 1,826
Visits: 3,491

Since I wanted to keep the Out on a Limb thread on topic, I took the initiative to answer your question in a separate thread

Black Owl (5/17/2008)
Just wondering why there is contradiction at all? And I have asked you directly. So, just to be fair, and get the air clean for further discussion.

When you say, "I refuse to denounce violent Jihad...." are you infact refusing to denounce terrorism? And if you "don't support a Jihad against the west...." then whom?

And really Konrad, yours is just one small voice in the grander scheme of things, as is mine. I don't care what you actually believe or support in that grander scheme. I just don't like the color grey. Now, the contention has been quoted, if not by me then others who are much better at digging through this stuff.


When I said that I refuse to denounce violent jihad, what I meant was the following: There are circumstances in which waging a war is not only justifiable, but a religious duty.

I did not mean to take a stance to terrorism. Jihad and terrorism are conceptually different things, in no way dependent on each other. You can do jihad without doing terrorism, and vice versa.

What I meant with the last part was that I don't support the (self-proclaimed) jihad of Al Qaida & co against "the West". I did not mean to express support for any ongoing, contemporary jihad. When it comes to contemporary jihads, I'm split on the Chechnyan and Israeli ones, and reject the rest.

But there are a few jihads in near history which I without doubt think were truly holy and just: The Afghani jihad 1980-88 and the Bosnian jihad 1992-95. The former saved an Islamic people from having state atheism imposed on it. The latter saved an Islamic people from genocide.


I hope these answers satisfy you. If not, feel free to ask on. Requests for clarifications, entirely new questions, all goes.
5/17/2008 11:14 PM


First Lieutenant

First LieutenantFirst LieutenantFirst LieutenantFirst LieutenantFirst LieutenantFirst LieutenantFirst LieutenantFirst Lieutenant

Last Seen:
9/17/2008 9:34 PM


Posts: 1,966
Visits: 4,411

No, that will do.  As far as the terrorism thing.

It's all I've been asking for, and your answer is most sincerely appreciated.  The reason I felt that was needed was, yes, for clarification.  You know my thoughts on this I think.  If we are to progress as a spieces beyond our violent ancestry, and make a better world of things, regardless of which religion, (or not), we have to start with the most insane things.  Like killing Woman and Children in a market square with a Human bomb to push a religious agenda.  Not saying you.  I'm talking about Religious Terrorists.  No, stopping terrorism for terrorism sake is not going to fix the world.  Too many loonies out there.  But somewhere, somehow there is a way to stop the choosing of innocents as targets in a war whose only aim is religious indoctrination.  It is a reptilian response of the lowest order, atleast in my mind.  I know they say their land is being defiled.  Fine, I suppose I'd feel the same way if hordes of Muslims crossed the Mexican border.  But that is not what is happening in the Middle East, or anywhere.  It is the INTOLERANCE of religious fundamentalists.  They need an ogre to stimulate the masses to follow their ideology.  The west can be pointed too as the "Great Satan" because people are free to choose their own ways.  That does create bad apples that can be pointed at.  But Konrad, I really wish you would follow through on something you said almost a year ago.  That you might move, or visit the US.  You will find that the media does just a good a job of overstating the bad here as they do in the Middle East.  Visit any small town USA and you'll find descent, hard working, very GOD fearing folks, or not but they still live by a code of honor and dignity.  As I'm sure you would in the Arab world.  It's only the news that makes it look like we have all succumbed to Satan, or our animal passions.  This is very important for you to know.  It is why some of us have objected very strongly to some of your posts, and even more enlightening, is the fact while some Americans here might disagree strongly, they non the less defended you.  That is what we do here.

Thank you for taking the time to answer with much thought and clarity.  And thank you for salvaging "Out on a Limb".

5/17/2008 11:21 PM


Grognard fantôme

Grognard fantôme

Last Seen:
Today @ 11:08 PM


Posts: 7,349
Visits: 9,703

few jihads in near history which I without doubt think were truly holy and just: The Afghani jihad 1980-88 and the Bosnian jihad 1992-95. The former saved an Islamic people from having state atheism imposed on it. The latter saved an Islamic people from genocide.

So "violent jihad" is justified as long as it is in self-defense?

Why call it "violent jihad" then? Why not just call it self-defense?

5/18/2008 9:25 AM


Impeached by a patch

Impeached by a patch

Last Seen:
Yesterday @ 7:03 AM


Posts: 1,826
Visits: 3,491

Well, a holy war is a holy war is a holy war

If you check the On Jihad thread again, you will find that jihad is not entirely limited to self-defence.
5/18/2008 10:42 AM


Grognard fantôme

Grognard fantôme

Last Seen:
Today @ 11:08 PM


Posts: 7,349
Visits: 9,703

How can "war" be "holy?" I thought war was "hell?"
5/18/2008 11:17 AM


Culture-Monger

Culture-MongerCulture-MongerCulture-MongerCulture-MongerCulture-MongerCulture-MongerCulture-MongerCulture-Monger

Last Seen:
Today @ 9:44 PM


Posts: 6,262
Visits: 8,866

It's when people discuss holy wars I find myself agreeing with Roadkill. :/
5/18/2008 11:41 AM


Udderly ridiculous

Udderly ridiculous

Last Seen:
Today @ 10:39 PM


Posts: 3,679
Visits: 4,451

lol. Good point, Cleo. I tend to agree.

Whether they are Christian knights killing men, women and children to wipe Jerusalem clean in the Crusades, or Islamic suicide bombers detonating themselves in markets full of civilians, to any number of things of that nature that have been committed in history, I think Roadkill is right on that stuff.

It seems legit and just to those who commit them at the time, but... sheesh.
5/18/2008 6:21 PM


Elite Pathogen

Elite PathogenElite PathogenElite PathogenElite PathogenElite PathogenElite PathogenElite PathogenElite Pathogen

Last Seen:
Today @ 7:58 PM


Posts: 4,420
Visits: 10,971

Except if someone is coming to prevent you from being allowed to practice your religion, don't you have a moral right to fight that?  That could be viewed as "Holy War" could it not?  This has always been how I interpreted Konrad's disputed post on acceptable violent Jihad.  The problem comes when you start justifying things on this.  There's got to be a limit.  Like, if you say, you're not letting me practice my religion by burning newborn babies, ya gotta draw the line. 
5/18/2008 6:32 PM


Elite Pathogen

Elite PathogenElite PathogenElite PathogenElite PathogenElite PathogenElite PathogenElite PathogenElite Pathogen

Last Seen:
Today @ 7:58 PM


Posts: 4,420
Visits: 10,971

When it comes to contemporary jihads, I'm split on the Chechnyan and Israeli ones

Really?    Why are you split on the Israeli situation?  Isn't Israel the side who has tried to make concessions only to be smacked in the face time and again?  Is there anything that justifies the killing of innocent Israelis by Palestinians or is it just the concept that the Palestinians' plight is just?