Democracy - a good system?

You are probably right.

 

True, but as you said they are extremist clerics, not devot Muslems. Jihad in its true definition is: Perpetual and obligatory Holy War conducted by the Muslem state and community for the advancement of Islam (and since the Abbasid caliphs, this has been given a more defensive and less military interpretation, leaving the "Holy War" to the diplomats).

As you can see, these terrorists are not trying to spread Islam as they know its useless, what they are doing is nothing more or less than terrorism, not jihad or holy war.

I see Mcdonalds as the usual 2 faced corparation much like the cigarette manufactures. The commercials McDonalds puts out are doing nothing but getting people addicted to hamburgers, much like the cigarette companys made smoking look "fabulous".

 

But the problem I see is an almost complete absence of mainstream Moslems standing up and condemning the extremists, worldwide. This attitude, for whatever reason, destroys any chance the Moslem community has of convincing others that they wish to be taken seriously in the world community.

 

From jihad to McDonalds and back! I love this forum!

 

It's Castelot's fault. Indeed, only on this forum, step right up and join!

SgtBob, finaly I agree with you on something. The Muslem community as a whole is doing far too little to distantiate from the terrorists, thus spreading the false image of a bloodthirsty mob. They should change this attitude now, because it clearly invokes uncontrolled American counter-rage.

 

Why? I think MacDonalds is the worst "restaurant" anywhere. I think I'd rather eat in some whole in the wall place than there.

 

This is kind of embarrassing. I meant "do not." I just didn't proof read it.
Sorry. Hope that clears it up some.

 

By the way Greg Pitts, Pizza Hut is awesome.

I guess everyone has different taste buds.

 

How can it be a "peaceful" road? When Muhammad was alive and the centuries soon after that, Islam swept across Northern Africa and Arabia. It was convert or die. What would you do? That's why most people converted. He marched on Mecca and captured it. Is that a peaceful way?
Yes, some muslims may believe in a peaceful way. But all it takes is some extremists to do damage. Look at the violence in Indonesia; Nigeria; the slavery in Sudan; the Arab Muslims in some African countries (I think Sudan) killing the Black Muslims; the middle east; etc. My uncle lives in Nigeria. He hears about the attacks on Christians only some 50 miles away from him. You can look to the news to see the clashes in Indonesia and the middle east.

I never said that all muslims were violent. I'm sure that there are plenty of kind and friendly muslims. My uncle (different one) knew quite a few in Bahrain. But you can't ignore the facts. I can't think that the sentiments are that different between those in the conflicts and those staying at home. When I speak about this, I mean the muslims in the troubled areas, not the U.S. or in europe.

 

Ok, thanks for your side. I like to hear others opinions. Yeah, I don't like McDonalds either.

 

Good point SgtBob. Iran, Eygpt, Syria, Chechnya, all places with Muslem populations, have not really given themselves good names so even if they did stand up against the extremists, it might fall on deaf ears.

Also, their populations include large amounts of these extremists, so their government is afraid of any backlash inside their country if they stand up against the terrorists.

 

That's exactly one of the things I've been trying to say.

 

This is not the way in which the Arabs conquered most of North Africa in the seventh century. In the early decades of their dominance, all religions that were like the Islam were respected and allowed; monotheists, that is. No one was forced to convert, it was just presented as giving a person some privileges. You were a second-rank civilian as non-Muslem but you weren't exterminated or slaughtered.

Also these Muslems were mostly newy-converted Arabs themselves, and their drive was more of a refound unity than a new religion.

 

Ok, but they still were split (and still are) into their tribes. I know that the Muslims in Spain were very peaceable with their Christian and Jewish neighbors, but I'm still not sure about the early converts.

 

Yes, the Moors got along well with thier neighbors, meaning they did not continously attack. But they weren't Christian, so someone had to kill them.

 

During the middle ages, wars of religon were common everywhere. The Christians did it - so did the Muslims. Considering the love of war most peoples possessed then, you cannot blame the muslims. These wars were political at heart, and religon always takes a backseat to politics.

 

Dictatorship.

 

Dictatorship is what we want to avoid.

 

i would agree with Alarik about dictatorship. it would work but our problem with it is the fact that most former dictators have been evil and have tried for world power or use thier strength against the people, becuase the power corrupts them. becuase you must remeber that all power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutly.
but if you think about it a dictatorship may actually suit countries that have failed to find a suiting goverment

 

So what are you saying? Dictatorship is what we need, buts its bad? That it should replace democracy in the U.S?

The only way a dictatorship could work well for an extended period of time, is if it wasn't a dictatorship. If there were a few checks and balances to weaken the dictator.