• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Who To Blame For American Islamophobia?

Abu Rashid

Active Member
No, i just don't trust the locals.

You don't trust them because you know their feelings towards us. We've invaded and are laying waste to their country, of course their feelings towards us are going to be pretty harsh, and justifiably so.

Again, I ask you to try and put yourself in their shoes, and imagine how you'd feel if it were your country.

Afghanistan has been invaded so many times in the past 2 centuries by Christian nations. If Muslim countries did that to Australia, I shudder to think how Australians would feel about Muslims, considering how hateful some already feel, without Muslims even doing anything.

I know it's difficult, but you really should try to imagine it.

No, but people who insult the troops of the country they live in are pretty low. We should always support our troops. Without our support they're in harms way for what?

I'm sorry but I just don't buy this, and never have (even prior to being Muslim). I judge them based on my morals and logic, and both in this case tell me they're wrong and they're doing wrong.

I bet you'd support them if they weren't in a muslim country.

As I said, I judge it based on morals and logic, neither of which they conform to in their current deployment.

Do you think our troops in East Timor are bad as well because some locals died?

Well since you are accusing me of just opposing them in any Muslim country, that's hardly a good example, since Indonesia is a Muslim country. I do oppose East Timor, but for the same reasons I oppose the Middle East, it's nothing but an exercise in "Energy security" (read: oil-grabbing), at least in East Timor we satisfy the logic constraint though and we are getting something out of it ourselves.

TBC...
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
Like in Hiroshima and Nagasaki, you've got no concern whatsoever for civilians, and you'd have few qualms with torching millions in one hit. al-Qaedah pales in comparison to your kind of mindset.

Don't be so cavalier about demonizing the US for this. As I understand the decision to drop those bombs, they were to bring a quicker end to the war & result in less loss of life
overall. (Don't forget that firestorms from incendiary bombs were even deadlier.) The strategy worked, since the Japanese surrendered quickly thereafter. In this day & age,
we have a different sense of the propriety of using atomic weapons, & ought not be so judgmental of people with no prior experience with them.
 

rojse

RF Addict
I spend too much time on Facebook. My initial reaction was to look for the "Like" button.

Religious Forums has frubals instead, which is far, far better.

But it would be neat to see at the bottom of a post "one person has fruballed this post".
 

Abu Rashid

Active Member
Don't be so cavalier about demonizing the US for this. As I understand the decision to drop those bombs, they were to bring a quicker end to the war & result in less loss of life
overall.
Oh.. ok, sorry I'll amend that. "It's ok to kill and target civilians, so long as your intention is that it leads to a quick end to a conflict".

Hey, wait a minute, perhaps that was OBL's justification with 9/11? He could've spent decades engaged in little tit-for-tat conflicts with the U.S, but he thought he'd just do it all in one quick hit and bring them to their senses... sound alright to you? Or is such an excuse only valid for the U.S targeting civilians?

Don't forget that firestorms from incendiary bombs were even deadlier
Yes the conventional bombing of Tokyo killed just as many people. Even more of an indictment against the terrorist U.S.

Nagasaki and Hiroshima were spared conventional bombing, so as to gauge the full effect of nuking an untouched population.

In this day & age,
we have a different sense of the propriety of using atomic weapons, & ought not be so judgmental of people with no prior experience with them.

Come on, we've known what radioactive stuff does to people since the Curies died from first studying it, not to mention the fact plenty of tests were carried out beforehand. A sure bet is they didn't think it was going to turn the place into a thriving green garden.

Also by this dodgey 'logic' we could say OBL and crew didn't know what flying planes into packed buildings was gonna do, since nobody had done it before.

Really I'm pretty disappointed in your attempts to belittle these flagrant acts of terrorism against innocent Japanese civilians.
 
Last edited:

Peacewise

Active Member
It is one of the great sadnesses in my life, that australians and americans and some other western countries still live in a fantasy world where OUR LEADERS successfully convince us we are moral when we invade another country.

The western populace are oppressed in a more subtle way than where the bombs drop, but we remain oppressed none the less. I wonder if this is also true of other countries, but never having been to them and knowing that mainstream media is untrustworthy I can not truly know the state of these countries.
 
Top