The First Crusade

[Guest]

(moe666 @ May 14 2007,01:33) The Zoroastrian religion is dead, since they do not take converts and both parents have to be born Zorastrians. Even in India its population is aging and not being replaced.

It used to be the dominant religion from northern China to the Caucasus. It is not quite dead yet. And their unwillingness to take converts was not the only factor in its near demise.

Freddie Mercury was a Zoroastrian, but AIDS got him.

[Snick]

(Groundhog @ May 13 2007,23:58) Snick, I do think we need to question why some colonial subjects seem to have thrown off horrible abuse ...e.g., Korea was the richest and culturally most advanced Asian country in the 19th century, but was leveled and completely destroyed by the Japanese after 1911; China suffered horribly under Japanese rule ... yet both have bounced back to be power houses ... Africa, the Gulf States, and Latin America have never recovered, yet all had advanced cultures at one time.

Hard Work and Education...it really is that simple.

Look at Hong Kong and Singapore, two of the smallest "states" (can't say country for HK) in the world, and yet two of the most successful. Why ?, because the ONLY asset they had was their citizens and they had to become well educated and hard working.

The Arab world is doubly cursed, having Oil has proven to be horrible for a developing country( it promotes Autocratic centralized governments AND it prevents a 'normal' economy from emerging since the Oil brings in money distorting everything else); the other curse is Islam which is anti-education and anti-free thought (In Islam the Koran has ALL THE ANSWERS, anything outside the Koran is heretical).

Latin America is an interesting case, it should be doing better than it is. There is even a joke "Brazil is the country of the future...and always will be". There are many explanations, too many to cover, but some of them include a lack of emphasis on education, a dependency on the State, and a huge disparity in landownership (10% owning 90% in some countries).

Africa -- ugh --- Nothing ever seems to go right for Africa. Even a "success" like Zimbabwe can be turned into a disaster in a few years by an entrenched government willing to do anything to stay in power.

[strocube]

So are you a Shi'ite or a Sunni?

Because it is the Iraqis who are slaughtering innocent people in Iraqi, not the soldiers from the UK or USA.

I'm an athiest actually.
Are you kidding me? Right, the the Iraqis dropped hundereds of thousands of tons of bombs on the country and then started with the depleted uranium shells. Who was that? The Iraqis? Are you sure?
Not mention the fact that none of this was going on until after the U.S. invasion/occupation. They FUCKED IT UP!

[Guest]

[quote]
(sangabriel @ May 13 2007,15:07)

The problem is Islam. It needs to look internally and reform itself.

Aren`t you the one talking about "colonial fuck-up theory"? And now talking about how other people should change their religion...  I like your consistency

[Guest]

[quote]
(rob30 @ May 14 2007,03:44)

(sangabriel @ May 13 2007,15:07)

The problem is Islam. It needs to look internally and reform itself.

Aren`t you the one talking about "colonial fuck-up theory"? And now talking about how other people should change their religion...  I like your consistency

Thank you, but I have no idea what you are talking about.

[Guest]

(strocube @ May 14 2007,02:30) So are you a Shi'ite or a Sunni?

Because it is the Iraqis who are slaughtering innocent people in Iraqi, not the soldiers from the UK or USA.

I'm an athiest actually.
Are you kidding me? Right, the the Iraqis dropped hundereds of thousands of tons of bombs on the country and then started with the depleted uranium shells. Who was that? The Iraqis? Are you sure?
Not mention the fact that none of this was going on until after the U.S. invasion/occupation. They FUCKED IT UP!

Put the crack pipe down.

[kartika]

You have to look at the leadership issues in the Islamic world. Or lack of leadership I should say. Gadaffi in Lybia, Sadat and then Mubarak in Egypt, Royal families in Saudi, Kuwait, Jordan & others, Assads in Syria, Sadam in Iraq, The Shah and then the Ayatollahs in Iran, Military dictators in Pakistan, Talliban in Afganistan, Suharto in Indonesia, Mahatiar in Malaysia. Only a strong oppressive govt seems to survive in these places and once in power they are virtually impossible to remove, regardless of how bad they are.
You have to feel for them in a way. Sort of like having Bush as president for the next twenty-five years Now there's a scary thought.

[kartika]

Just a question for those debating the colonial, (and I did include the world wars in my original post), fuck up theory. The geatest source of misery in the Middle-East since I can remember, has been the Palestine/Israel dispute. Who decided on the creation of Israel and defined it's borders after the war if it wasn't the colonial/wartime/western powers (call them what you like). It certainly wasn't the people living on the land at the time. Not being anti anyone here - just reflecting on history.