Just because you and I agree that it is right doesn't mean they do. We are discussing the ramifications of a belief that is not held to a global standard and as such it is meaningless if you and I decide freedom of speech is "correct".
Of course it isn't meaningless.
It determines if we think the mob in Afghanistan is a bunch of barbaric morons or not.
And exactly why should we not hold Islam, as the world's second largest religion, to global standards?
Muslims interact with the global community.
About time they realized that.
When has that ever compelled intervention? It hasn't.
You have no obligation to stay there.
Errr... Do you know why the UN was founded and what its purpose is?
Granted, that purpose hasn't always been fulfilled at the standard we would like, but the purpose is there nonetheless.
I suppose that's what happens when you prop up murders, rapists, and thieves like the NWA who have little support from the general populace; the effort to keep said installed government in power.
And who would you suggest instead?
The Taliban?
There ain't a whole lot of alternatives here.
That is a vague term, what do you mean by "global Islam"?
Sorry. I should have been more accurate. Let me explain what I mean.
Over the past few years we have seen many inexcusable actions committed by various Muslim groups, including such things as the murder of Theo van Gogh, the attempted murder of William Nygaard (in relation to the publication of Salman Rushdie's book), the attacks on the Danish cartoonists, and now the attack on the UN offices in Afghanistan.
These barbaric events have taken place over several years, by different Muslim groups and in different countries, and this has taken place without the uproar of so called 'peaceful Muslims'. No condemnation of note. No 'these people aren't proper Muslims'. No reaction to speak of.
Is it any wonder that the general public sees the religion of Islam as anything but peaceful, and by many, as a direct threat to our way of life?
That would imply that said book ascribes violence in the name of its desecration. That is why I do not agree with the term.
I'm confused.
Could you elaborate somewhat on what you mean here please?
I have provided an extensive list on another topic about various incidences regarding these two wars. The vast majority of servicemen work in a hostile environment and are systematically desensitized until the only thing that becomes an issue is personal safety.
What do you mean by 'systematically'?
Who are independent from the government. So as I stated, why did you not see this happen in Turkey?
I have already answered that. Twice.
A major part of the country's income is due to tourism, something which it cannot afford to loose. Turkey is also attempting to become a member of the EU, and in order to do that the government has to uphold certain standards.
Also, in Turkey, unlike in Afghanistan, the government is actually in something resembling control.
Ah I do not know who he is, but tend to view personal belief in evolution as irrelevant in the workforce. It certainly is holding society back if that's what you mean.
That is exactly what I mean.
Such disdain for science is abysmal for the future of any country.
When it comes to building functioning stable nations, education is king.
What do you mean too much to lose?
See above.
A citizen does not consider such things when he individually takes up the call to protest, you are talking in bureaucratic terms.
Unlike the citizens of Afghanistan, the citizens of Turkey are not desperate.
For many of the Afghan people, religion is all they have. Not so in Turkey.
And yet you did not see any such incidence of violent protest outside of Afghanistan in the entire Muslim world. You don't think there is a implication for this?
I have given examples of comparable actions over the last few years in various countries above.
"You should either explain yourself"
Right.
Here is the thing; our way, that is the way of thinking and the way of doing things as we do in most of Northern Europe, works a hell of a lot better than the way things are done in any Muslim country on the planet. And it certainly works better than the way they do things in Afghanistan.
I'll be happy to support this empirically if need be.
Personally I live in what is arguable the best functioning country in the world (I can back this up too if need be) and it is one in which Freedom of Speech is held as an essential part of society and it is also one of the most secular countries in the world.
So forgive me if I have what you call a 'superiority attitude', but I know, and I can prove, that our way is better.
You said "respond to violence with violence". Protestors who flooded the U.N compound were shot and killed.
And the only reason they got in in the first place was because the guards had been told not to shoot them. UN personnel have strict orders when it comes to situations like this. If they hadn't you might just be looking at a bunch of dead protesters instead of a raided installation.
Some countries have achieved that goal yes.
Could you give me some examples?
Regardless the "help" I see in Afghanistan currently is not helping anything in the long term.
Building schools, trying to uphold a semblance of government, building infrastructure... Not helping? :sarcastic
