The War on Iran (21 Viewers)
- Thread starter Bjerknes
- Start date
Liberal Democracy, not Democracy.Fuck sake Belarus is 'Democratic' it's leader is elected by the people.
A country where Human Rights are parts on national law and religion is a private matter of each citizen and informs nothing with regard to how the state is run.
That is the best available system, where Muslims Atheists Christians and Jews etc. etc. all get to have their own belief system but the STATE does what is right from a point of view of humanism.
People who think that X country should have Muslims laws of Y country should have christian laws are a cancer on this earth.
A country where Human Rights are parts on national law and religion is a private matter of each citizen and informs nothing with regard to how the state is run.
That is the best available system, where Muslims Atheists Christians and Jews etc. etc. all get to have their own belief system but the STATE does what is right from a point of view of humanism.
People who think that X country should have Muslims laws of Y country should have christian laws are a cancer on this earth.
Is it just me or did this guys English just improve way too exponentially way too fast 
That's the truth of the matter. Another thing we do best is to say 'if x didn't exist all the world problems would be solved'.
Well not necessarily. Humanity evolves both physically and mentally over time. The Dark Ages were perhaps necessary to find the regenerate the process of human growth. Besides, while your ancestors were burning shit, my ancestors were moving making forward 
(unlike right now :depressed)
Really? It would? Are you entirely convinced that all these conflicts that are fought for x reason are really what they're all about?
Do you think the conflict in southern Sudan and Darfur are because of religious and ethnic differences? Because from where I'm sitting it's all about oil baby.
That's the truth of the matter. Another thing we do best is to say 'if x didn't exist all the world problems would be solved'.
We'd be 1000 years more advanced because there were no dark ages 
(unlike right now :depressed) Really? It would? Are you entirely convinced that all these conflicts that are fought for x reason are really what they're all about?
Do you think the conflict in southern Sudan and Darfur are because of religious and ethnic differences? Because from where I'm sitting it's all about oil baby.
The whole Palestinian - Zionist conflict started from a religious prestigious with zionists claiming Palestine to be their promised land when at the same time many jews declined that and said that their holy book states no such thing. But to say that the 6-day war was a religious one is BS. Israel attacked Egypt, Syria, Jordan and the West Bank and occupied all the lands they were looking to have for one reason only and that is that they felt threatened by their neighbors who stated to build good armies and also contained may Palestinians who has just started their own armed move. So Israel had to move or else wait to be wiped out.
They always have that approach when they feel threatened, just ask the Iraqi's about their Nuclear reactor for that matter.
So you think by electing a leader democratically a country is called a democratic one
Saying that having a religious-democratic country will be a disaster is hypothetical as till this day there haven't been such a country as far as I know. But you're right about one thing though, having an athiest government will surely lead to less conflicts between religions, yet having such a government in an already religious country will start a genocide.
Im pretty sure that they didn't slaughter each other due to religious reasons but rather internal conflicts that religious people try to derive by putting religious motives in the fight thus attracting more attention from the people.
Couldn't have said it better myself, even in the states we have far to many people who don't even realize that they are in support of a merged church and state.
Exactly! and the U.S is a non-religious government, so having a non religious government wont stop some extreme religious people from starting their own war.
What?
They always have that approach when they feel threatened, just ask the Iraqi's about their Nuclear reactor for that matter.
So you think by electing a leader democratically a country is called a democratic one
Saying that having a religious-democratic country will be a disaster is hypothetical as till this day there haven't been such a country as far as I know. But you're right about one thing though, having an athiest government will surely lead to less conflicts between religions, yet having such a government in an already religious country will start a genocide.
Im pretty sure that they didn't slaughter each other due to religious reasons but rather internal conflicts that religious people try to derive by putting religious motives in the fight thus attracting more attention from the people.
Couldn't have said it better myself, even in the states we have far to many people who don't even realize that they are in support of a merged church and state.
What?
six days war was caused by religious conflict even if it was not about religion directly. How does that absolve religion from being blamed for it? I only brought it up specifically because you said wars but that whole conflict is pretty much a religious war.
1. I never said that getting rid of religion would stop wars in fact I said the opposite.
2. Even though the United States is not a religious government we have plenty of religious idiots and politicians who want it to be and are trying to turn it into that step by step. Church and State are not as separate here as they should be.
1. I never said that getting rid of religion would stop wars in fact I said the opposite.
2. Even though the United States is not a religious government we have plenty of religious idiots and politicians who want it to be and are trying to turn it into that step by step. Church and State are not as separate here as they should be.
The mental effects of believing that you are destined for paradise can't be underestimated. You take a guy know firmly believes that it all ends with death and try to get him to put his life at risk. It would be more difficult for politicians to get support for a war if the biggest 'Us VS Them' motivation - religion- didn't exist, thanks to globalisation ethnic and racial reasons don't fly with the electorate.
Ethnic warfare is of course a large factor but the predominnent portion of that is religious/belief based. As for Sudan, well that a de facto dictatorship, I think we need to exclude that.
Ethnic warfare is of course a large factor but the predominnent portion of that is religious/belief based. As for Sudan, well that a de facto dictatorship, I think we need to exclude that.
T
So you think by electing a leader democratically a country is called a democratic one
Saying that having a religious-democratic country will be a disaster is hypothetical as till this day there haven't been such a country as far as I know. But you're right about one thing though, having an athiest government will surely lead to less conflicts between religions, yet having such a government in an already religious country will start a genocide.
Im pretty sure that they didn't slaughter each other due to religious reasons but rather internal conflicts that religious people try to derive by putting religious motives in the fight thus attracting more attention from the people.
Exactly! and the U.S is a non-religious government, so having a non religious government wont stop some extreme religious people from starting their own war.
What?
So you think by electing a leader democratically a country is called a democratic one
Saying that having a religious-democratic country will be a disaster is hypothetical as till this day there haven't been such a country as far as I know. But you're right about one thing though, having an athiest government will surely lead to less conflicts between religions, yet having such a government in an already religious country will start a genocide.
Im pretty sure that they didn't slaughter each other due to religious reasons but rather internal conflicts that religious people try to derive by putting religious motives in the fight thus attracting more attention from the people.
Exactly! and the U.S is a non-religious government, so having a non religious government wont stop some extreme religious people from starting their own war.
What?
You're entangling Nations,Countries and States there a bit but let me pick up on a few of the points you made.
'Secular' not Atheist government - how would this start a genocide?
A religious government by it's definition would be elitist and discriminate against people who did not believe. An example would be why shouldn't I be allowed drink beer in an 'Islamic' state? I don't believe Islam is true, why should it have pwoer over me?
Oh Yeah you're right - let's go kill muslims, ahh christians are attacking us fight back, that's not a religious conflict at all. If you are contending that every conflict is about numerous things of course they are but in this religion was the decisive factor
The United States Government is so retardedly religious it borders on Treason.
So what do you suggest the United States do, bomb your own country? Set up more coups in Iran for regime change? We already fund the Jundallah for them to stage terror attacks in the region, should we increase operations on that front?
I don't think war with Iran is in any of our interests. It would be the start of World War III.
All I want is what is best for the Iranian people without the loss of life.
I don't think war with Iran is in any of our interests. It would be the start of World War III.
All I want is what is best for the Iranian people without the loss of life.
Fair enough.
BS, there's always a reason to start a war and people put their lives at risk not always for what they believe in but also for money, nationality,..etc.
If you think that by not having a religious reasons to start wars there aint be any then with all due respect, you know shit.
I thought so.
I don't give a damn if you studied Democracy or not Dan, the point is, electing a president democratically doesn't necessarily implies that a country is democratic.
Many countries in fact have the freedom of choice when voting a president yet they lack that when its about protesting, strike, freedom of speech..etc.
Now your second point makes me truly laugh, if you think secular government haven't been involved in genocides world wide whether that was directly or indirectly then I dunno what to say. Lets take Vietnam, Korea and Iraq for example, weren't there many War crimes accusations there which many of them were actually acknowledged by the U.S thus opening an investigation and prosecuting the involved ones?
And the whole U.S and British regime, did they stay shut about the war crimes that was happening in Rwanda, Congo and even Nigeria at that time for many diverse reasons, despite that being against their "morals".
Ofcourse it is, religion will always be a factor when you're talking about a war that involves two parties with different religion, ideas and thoughts for that matter. Yet saying that religion itself is the reason behind such conflict is retarded to say the least.
And your last sentence there is
Word.
BS, there's always a reason to start a war and people put their lives at risk not always for what they believe in but also for money, nationality,..etc.
If you think that by not having a religious reasons to start wars there aint be any then with all due respect, you know shit.
I thought so.
I don't give a damn if you studied Democracy or not Dan, the point is, electing a president democratically doesn't necessarily implies that a country is democratic.
Many countries in fact have the freedom of choice when voting a president yet they lack that when its about protesting, strike, freedom of speech..etc.
Now your second point makes me truly laugh, if you think secular government haven't been involved in genocides world wide whether that was directly or indirectly then I dunno what to say. Lets take Vietnam, Korea and Iraq for example, weren't there many War crimes accusations there which many of them were actually acknowledged by the U.S thus opening an investigation and prosecuting the involved ones?
And the whole U.S and British regime, did they stay shut about the war crimes that was happening in Rwanda, Congo and even Nigeria at that time for many diverse reasons, despite that being against their "morals".
Ofcourse it is, religion will always be a factor when you're talking about a war that involves two parties with different religion, ideas and thoughts for that matter. Yet saying that religion itself is the reason behind such conflict is retarded to say the least.
And your last sentence there is
Word.