Again, tell me which of my statements is controversial. I assumed the fact that no WMDs were found, was general knowledge. Do u want me to type over the 400 page Senate Iraq war report?
Trump is turning a large portion of a whole country against all immigrants and has spread racism, hate, and fear in this way. In his mindset, it is either his way or the highway, so everyone who disagrees with him also is hated on. Violence against protesters at his rallies by his supporters is proof enough I think.
Religious extremists are all heated up because of just this and the wars? Politicians in those countries aren't? There are no attacks on Middle Eastern societies based on culture instead of religion? You explain how you claim to know why the U.S. went to war. You do not explain how you know the other side of the story.
I think you're wrong...If religion was removed their will be an extent of ppl who were using it just as a front but there are people who believe only the protection of their faith gives them just reason to terrorise and commit violent acts. Even many religious texts teach stories of "holy wars & battles" which many religious zealots may interpret as making violence ok by their god. You can't say these people weren't religious because they don't follow your views on religion, they follow their own views on religion and use them as a reason to act, to them their acts are meaningless without faith.
So u ask me to prove why something/some attacks did NOT happen? Proving a negative is not something that can be done... unless you account for all the people in the world and prove that they were doing something else... Sorry but I still can't tell what you want me to say ...
@Southlander I am not saying those people aren't religious, but I am suggesting that they may have been following ideas that weren't completely religious during those atrocities. Did the Christian God say go and kill Muslims and Jews, or did He say if you enemy strikes your face, offer him the other cheek? Did the Christian/Islamic God say go and get females circumsized (FGM) like many Sub-Saharran countries believe, or is that a practice that had been in the culture for thousands of years? Like I've said before, people are relying on human interpretations of human interpretations about a religion.
What other side of the story? The US attacked countries in the middle east. The other side of the story is that some countries of the middle east were attacked and they weren't too happy about that I guess...
Without the religion there is no human interpretation of a religion. They think they're view is right, you think it's wrong...that's where all the trouble starts with religion.
About the religion is the cause of most terror, is wrong. The extremists feel that the western counties have wronged them, specially when the current group is a American made problem. Should look it up when america tried and failed setting up a failed government party that the people disagreed with. Along with several other problems and issues. Saying its cos of religion is just as small minded as saying everyone is a terrorist in the Middle East. We as the west have been sending troops over to the east expecting them to roll over, then when they retaliate it's unjust and undeserving.
Correct southlander, Or u support the literal word of the scriptures and u can claim to belong to that religion Or u only follow your own interpretation of some or all of the written words, and then u are the only follower of ur own little misguided set of believes ...
I am not excluding myself from the fact that it my opinion is still an interpretation. I understand that I could very well be wrong. What I want is people to understand that there is more than one interpretation, and each interpretation has almost no chance at grasping what a religion is meant to be by itself. Like with scientific theories, a religion (in my opinion) should be interpreted through a collaboration of many ideas. In an academic essay, there can be many paragraphs, all talking about different ideas. What is common throughout them is a thesis that reaches out to a bigger idea. The idea might not be spot on, but it is more likely to be stronger than a thesis based on one single idea in one paragraph. It fails to look at other angles and provide a strong base for the thesis. Also, the idea of "I'm right, you're wrong" isn't just a segway to problems in religion. Politics, culture, economics, etc. It is the same with those as well.
I'm a Christian, but I disagree with this. Muslims are different than our European Western culture, but that doesn't mean our culture is the one true culture. Actually, many Muslims think that they celebrate more rights and freedoms than our culture and society. Its all about perception and perspective
I am not sure what science u are talking about, but a scientific theory is exactly a single clearly defined hypothesis where NO room for discussion is left. For example the subject of thermal expansion will predict exactly how much steel will expand with a certain temperature change. It is NOT a sommation of random people who all have different ideas whether it expands or contract in rising temperatures or where it depends on winged horses or people turning water into wine or people who can't investigate expanding steel behavior because it is a Saturday ...
@Mudvet I get what you are trying to do. My point was the amount of controversy and acceptance process of and for scientific theories. You don't just say, "Hey, I got a theory," and then it's a theory. The theory of Evolution is still being debated (which I find that most of Darwin's book on Evolution is about microevolution -- adaptations in individuals -- and not the macroevolution that talks about jumps in species to go from no legs to having legs. Even Darwin understand that the concept was too complex and incomplete. And this isn't to attack the Theory of Evolution, but rather to show that nothing is perfect.). The Big Bang Theory is still being worked on. To be clear, I'm not talking about Laws like Gravity or Thermodynamics, I'm talking about theories. Another example could be the Multiverse Theory that has been discussed in this thread, though I'm not gonna pretend that I know anything more about it than what has been spoken about in this thread.
You had put the spin on they attacked because of their religion in some way. The U.S. caused the right conditions for religious extremists to use Islam to justify attacking back at the West. How do you know this information? What is your source? It has been something, among other things, that you have been deflecting in this entire thread, only answering what you want to answer. For anything you don't know how to answer in a way that makes you come up top you ignore and shoot at different flaws that seem to find in only parts of my points. Again, anything that you know you can't argue and win, you ignore it. Sure, it might be effective if someone doesn't catch it, but I have been noticing every deflection.
I have recently learned that could also kind of put Buddhism in here in terms of the moral code. "Don't take a life, Don't tell lies, Don't steal, and Don't let commit adultery/****." Which is almost like some of the Commandments and moral codes of Islam/Christianity/Judaism.