Panem et Circenses

[SD Transplant]

Since I am the least qualified to comment or pretend to comprehend w/out a bias religion in general, I think I will recommend some insightfull reading by Mircea Eliade. He’s one of the first authors in the world to do a comparative historic review of religions in a book & publish it.

“The Sacred and The Profane: The Nature of Religion”
by Mircea Eliade

He was translated into many languages, and I know he’s published many more books along the same subject. My father, a retired journalist now, has been pushing me to read his work for the longest time. However, I am behind on my dad’s recommended reading list, so I am working on “Never Eat Alone” by Keith Ferrazi.

[lniles]

While you’re at it, check out Karen Armstrongs books. She was a Catholic nun and is now a prolific author on the history and origins of world religions. In particular to this discussion, see her book on Mohammad and Islam:

I’m athiestic but think calling Islam a “religion of the sword” is a naive to say the least, especially in comparison to the violence commited in cultures which are dominantly Christian or Catholic. The real crime is that our media only reports from certain perspectives which tend to bias one’s judgement. Forget the media, people! Read some history, travel, get a global perspective (yes I’ve done this including traveling all up over the middle east).

[lniles]

While you’re at it, check out Karen Armstrongs books. She was a Catholic nun and is now a prolific author on the history and origins of world religions. In particular to this discussion, see her book on Mohammad and Islam:

I’m athiestic but think calling Islam a “religion of the sword” is a naive to say the least, especially in comparison to the violence commited in cultures which are dominantly Christian or Catholic. The real crime is that our media only reports from certain perspectives which tend to bias one’s judgement. Forget the media, people! Read some history, travel, get a global perspective (yes I’ve done this including traveling all up over the middle east).

[NotCranky]

Allan, With Jesuit “soldiers of christ” and Teutonic ,an order of knights influences how could not be fiesty?

Please don’t think I am picking on you. I appreciate the chance to voice my ideas and you are giving me the opportunity to do that on a subject I feel is very important.

For my cognitive faculties, you are drawing way too many conclusions of the nature of Islam and muslims from examples that in my opinion belong to the correlation does not mean causation species of logical fallacies.

This is the paragraph in question from your post.
“However, it is interesting to note the decided lack of “moderate” Moslems when it comes to confronting Al Qaeda on their home turf. While I agree about the poor citizens in both Iraq and Afghanistan being killed in a war that was not of their choosing, would I also not be remiss in remarking upon the fact that the majority of the casualties being inflicted upon those people are from fellow Moslems? You’d be hard pressed to argue that point when Sunnis and Shia are killing each other with reckless abandon all in the name of Allah.”

I think it is natural for some Iraqis and Afghanis and others to see Al Qaeda as a natural ally, Does “the enemy of my enemy is my friend” seem applicable as much as some inherent defect in Islam? I think you might be giving religion way to much play in all of this. Perhaps because much of your reality is based in it from your Jesuit education and upbringing? In From my secular view point mostly I see Religious contexts as secondary and mostly mostivational in nature.
Primarily I see the fighting between the Shiites and Sunni to be political, the result of a occupation, a quasi- proxy war and a civil war all at the same time. Groups that happen to be divided along sectarian lines and christians(us)are all taking part. The sects which happen to also coincide with political divisions are greedily grasping for power as a result of a void created by the toppling of the dictatorship and the installation of an American puppet government. They are not fighting each other over interpretations of the Quran. If this is not true why didn’t they have an unrelenting “holy war” before we got there?

If we want to use a similiar example from Christendom let’s look at Ireland. Does the constant fighting between protestants and Catholics prove a tremendous flaw in the validity of Christianity or do you see beyond the religious issues to a battle for control betwen Irish nationals and the interests of the British? I see the later. The religious soldiers are pawns.

I don’t dislike or mistrust you because you are affiliated with a religion that has “Skeletons in the closet”. I do hope that the parent of that religion, Christendom does not pack the closet further with bones. I hope that you would ease up on your opinion of a people that happen to have a religious history in Islam and some skeletons in the closet.
I think the confusion detracts from what you have to contribute to your hopes to “find our way back to those ideals that made us great and assert a sense of decent leadership again.”

Then you said:
While I fear that the cause is lost in Iraq, I don’t disagree with the underlying rationale. I think nation building is worthwhile and I agree that justice is all important.

I hope somehow we can have a decent ending to this situation. Imagine the new wounds it has caused that will cause people to be vunerable to extremism. We will reap what we have sown probably.I am not greatful that my children will grow up to that rotten fruit but I will tell them we are in great part responsable.

I simply don’t agree that Nation building for any higher purpose was on the table. Besides there were lots of parties or coalitions that might have liked to have done the nation building given the oil and the strategic importance of influencing the region . Maybe they would have been more diplomatic and had less brutal results. Perhaps Iraq would have had an eventual solution on their own just might not have been so much in our interests and I don’t think we had grave concerns over Iraqi quality of life issues. I think there are problems in the world we could have easily influenced for the better that we have let go to the ruin of many more lives, mainly in Africa. greed maybe even desperation took over our leadership.

You will probably continue to have a hard time putting your finger on your mistrust of Muslims. I think we have an deeply conditioned fear and hatred of Muslims and especially Arabs. It probably has roots in the fact that they were one of the last non-european expansionistsa dn the target of there expansion was Christendom . I do believe there has been a a propaganda campaign during my entire 45 years on this planet and can only imagine that people raised under Christian traditions are even more conditioned.
Spastic hateful commentary on this blog from devout Christians and my observations of George Bush plying his constituents seem to confirm this belief. For the record. I am not intolerant.

[NotCranky]

Allan, With Jesuit “soldiers of christ” and Teutonic ,an order of knights influences how could not be fiesty?

Please don’t think I am picking on you. I appreciate the chance to voice my ideas and you are giving me the opportunity to do that on a subject I feel is very important.

For my cognitive faculties, you are drawing way too many conclusions of the nature of Islam and muslims from examples that in my opinion belong to the correlation does not mean causation species of logical fallacies.

This is the paragraph in question from your post.
“However, it is interesting to note the decided lack of “moderate” Moslems when it comes to confronting Al Qaeda on their home turf. While I agree about the poor citizens in both Iraq and Afghanistan being killed in a war that was not of their choosing, would I also not be remiss in remarking upon the fact that the majority of the casualties being inflicted upon those people are from fellow Moslems? You’d be hard pressed to argue that point when Sunnis and Shia are killing each other with reckless abandon all in the name of Allah.”

I think it is natural for some Iraqis and Afghanis and others to see Al Qaeda as a natural ally, Does “the enemy of my enemy is my friend” seem applicable as much as some inherent defect in Islam? I think you might be giving religion way to much play in all of this. Perhaps because much of your reality is based in it from your Jesuit education and upbringing? In From my secular view point mostly I see Religious contexts as secondary and mostly mostivational in nature.
Primarily I see the fighting between the Shiites and Sunni to be political, the result of a occupation, a quasi- proxy war and a civil war all at the same time. Groups that happen to be divided along sectarian lines and christians(us)are all taking part. The sects which happen to also coincide with political divisions are greedily grasping for power as a result of a void created by the toppling of the dictatorship and the installation of an American puppet government. They are not fighting each other over interpretations of the Quran. If this is not true why didn’t they have an unrelenting “holy war” before we got there?

If we want to use a similiar example from Christendom let’s look at Ireland. Does the constant fighting between protestants and Catholics prove a tremendous flaw in the validity of Christianity or do you see beyond the religious issues to a battle for control betwen Irish nationals and the interests of the British? I see the later. The religious soldiers are pawns.

I don’t dislike or mistrust you because you are affiliated with a religion that has “Skeletons in the closet”. I do hope that the parent of that religion, Christendom does not pack the closet further with bones. I hope that you would ease up on your opinion of a people that happen to have a religious history in Islam and some skeletons in the closet.
I think the confusion detracts from what you have to contribute to your hopes to “find our way back to those ideals that made us great and assert a sense of decent leadership again.”

Then you said:
While I fear that the cause is lost in Iraq, I don’t disagree with the underlying rationale. I think nation building is worthwhile and I agree that justice is all important.

I hope somehow we can have a decent ending to this situation. Imagine the new wounds it has caused that will cause people to be vunerable to extremism. We will reap what we have sown probably.I am not greatful that my children will grow up to that rotten fruit but I will tell them we are in great part responsable.

I simply don’t agree that Nation building for any higher purpose was on the table. Besides there were lots of parties or coalitions that might have liked to have done the nation building given the oil and the strategic importance of influencing the region . Maybe they would have been more diplomatic and had less brutal results. Perhaps Iraq would have had an eventual solution on their own just might not have been so much in our interests and I don’t think we had grave concerns over Iraqi quality of life issues. I think there are problems in the world we could have easily influenced for the better that we have let go to the ruin of many more lives, mainly in Africa. greed maybe even desperation took over our leadership.

You will probably continue to have a hard time putting your finger on your mistrust of Muslims. I think we have an deeply conditioned fear and hatred of Muslims and especially Arabs. It probably has roots in the fact that they were one of the last non-european expansionistsa dn the target of there expansion was Christendom . I do believe there has been a a propaganda campaign during my entire 45 years on this planet and can only imagine that people raised under Christian traditions are even more conditioned.
Spastic hateful commentary on this blog from devout Christians and my observations of George Bush plying his constituents seem to confirm this belief. For the record. I am not intolerant.

[Allan from Fallbrook]

Rustico: I certainly don’t think you are picking on me, and the point of discourse is to be able to articulate differing viewpoints in a friendly environment.

I mentioned both the Germans and the Jesuits for the very reason you picked up on. Yup, there is a lot of stuff in both histories that is cringe making, but that is also the nature of history.

I also do not for a second believe that if oil weren’t present in Iraq, we would be there. “Trade follows the flag” is a truism now, was during the days of the British Empire and the Roman Empire as well. We are an empire, in name if not deed, but a fairly enlightened one to a certain extent. Of course, if history truly judges us, we are also a pretty brutal bunch in our own way.

That being said, I also think a fair reading of history will condemn Christians and Moslems alike. Islam is not a religion of peace and the “religion of the sword” comment is derived from Sura 9:5 in the Qu’ran (“The Sword Verse”) that makes it explicitly clear how Islam is to be spread to the non-believers.

While there are undoubtedly political motivations and machinations inherent to the fighting between the Sunnis and Shia, the larger issue is one of Quranic interpretation and this has inspired internecine warfare between the two sects for a lot longer than we have been in Iraq.

I really don’t have any ingrained dislike of Moslems or Islam, any more than I have a natural dislike of Buddhism, Shintoism or the Jehovah’s Witnesses. Belief in God and religiosity/spirituality are intensely personal decisions and not subject to my judgments as to whether or not they are correct. However, as with Nazism, Communism or the New York Yankees, some things are intrinsically wrong.

From a religious standpoint, any religion that actively seeks the subjugation of non-believers and does so in the name of God is a problem. If that is fundamentalist Christianity or fundamentalist Islam makes no difference to me. Last time I checked though, we didn’t have a group of priests or rabbis flying jumbo jets into skyscrapers. That they did so at the behest of their religion speaks volumes.

I hear what you are saying about the responsibility of America and reaping what we have sown, but what then is the answer for that part of the world? Self-government? Along the lines of what? Iran? Libya? Syria? Lebanon? Give the people in those countries the right to choose and I would support their choice. I have no doubt that the Muslim Brotherhood and Hamas would do well in elections. So be it. If it is the choice and voice of the people, than that is what counts.

As far as the Protestants and Catholics in Ireland, look to the British. Home Rule has been an asbolutely unmitigated disaster for the Crown. Give Northern Ireland the same rights as Southern Ireland as far as franchise and self rule and most, if not all, of the problems would go away.

[Allan from Fallbrook]

Rustico: I certainly don’t think you are picking on me, and the point of discourse is to be able to articulate differing viewpoints in a friendly environment.

I mentioned both the Germans and the Jesuits for the very reason you picked up on. Yup, there is a lot of stuff in both histories that is cringe making, but that is also the nature of history.

I also do not for a second believe that if oil weren’t present in Iraq, we would be there. “Trade follows the flag” is a truism now, was during the days of the British Empire and the Roman Empire as well. We are an empire, in name if not deed, but a fairly enlightened one to a certain extent. Of course, if history truly judges us, we are also a pretty brutal bunch in our own way.

That being said, I also think a fair reading of history will condemn Christians and Moslems alike. Islam is not a religion of peace and the “religion of the sword” comment is derived from Sura 9:5 in the Qu’ran (“The Sword Verse”) that makes it explicitly clear how Islam is to be spread to the non-believers.

While there are undoubtedly political motivations and machinations inherent to the fighting between the Sunnis and Shia, the larger issue is one of Quranic interpretation and this has inspired internecine warfare between the two sects for a lot longer than we have been in Iraq.

I really don’t have any ingrained dislike of Moslems or Islam, any more than I have a natural dislike of Buddhism, Shintoism or the Jehovah’s Witnesses. Belief in God and religiosity/spirituality are intensely personal decisions and not subject to my judgments as to whether or not they are correct. However, as with Nazism, Communism or the New York Yankees, some things are intrinsically wrong.

From a religious standpoint, any religion that actively seeks the subjugation of non-believers and does so in the name of God is a problem. If that is fundamentalist Christianity or fundamentalist Islam makes no difference to me. Last time I checked though, we didn’t have a group of priests or rabbis flying jumbo jets into skyscrapers. That they did so at the behest of their religion speaks volumes.

I hear what you are saying about the responsibility of America and reaping what we have sown, but what then is the answer for that part of the world? Self-government? Along the lines of what? Iran? Libya? Syria? Lebanon? Give the people in those countries the right to choose and I would support their choice. I have no doubt that the Muslim Brotherhood and Hamas would do well in elections. So be it. If it is the choice and voice of the people, than that is what counts.

As far as the Protestants and Catholics in Ireland, look to the British. Home Rule has been an asbolutely unmitigated disaster for the Crown. Give Northern Ireland the same rights as Southern Ireland as far as franchise and self rule and most, if not all, of the problems would go away.

[NotCranky]

Allan,
Thanks for your time today. I particularly enjoyed your last post.
Best wishes

[NotCranky]

Allan,
Thanks for your time today. I particularly enjoyed your last post.
Best wishes

[Allan from Fallbrook]

Rustico: Thanks for your time as well. I appreciate both the consideration and the opportunity to engage in what was a very fun dialogue for me.

Of course, you need to remember to watch the Germans (and the Jesuits for that matter). Turn your back on us, and the next thing you know we’re in Poland!

Regards

[Allan from Fallbrook]

Rustico: Thanks for your time as well. I appreciate both the consideration and the opportunity to engage in what was a very fun dialogue for me.

Of course, you need to remember to watch the Germans (and the Jesuits for that matter). Turn your back on us, and the next thing you know we’re in Poland!

Regards

[bsrsharma]

I quoted Polybius (“Those who don’t learn from the lessons of History are doomed to repeat them”)

I think this quote is normally attributed to George Santayana.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Life_of_Reason

[bsrsharma]

I quoted Polybius (“Those who don’t learn from the lessons of History are doomed to repeat them”)

I think this quote is normally attributed to George Santayana.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Life_of_Reason

[CardiffBaseball]

PG chirping in here and sorry for putting up that post on mutilation (though it does boil my blood).

My question is for Rustico (or anyone really) and mostly it is because my understanding of the Sunni/Shia conflict is fairly minimal. However my reading of your rant is that you downplay this conflict as being political in nature. My limited interpretation suggests this divide is much more serious than say the Irish/English protestant/Catholic divide. Or, am I am misunderstanding you?

My thoughts on why Sadaam was so brutal was precisely to quell or keep the factions from killing one another, using whatever means necessary. Isn’t there one camp of Bush critics who consider this area as incapable of civility, and therefore not worthy of losing men in battle?

[CardiffBaseball]

PG chirping in here and sorry for putting up that post on mutilation (though it does boil my blood).

My question is for Rustico (or anyone really) and mostly it is because my understanding of the Sunni/Shia conflict is fairly minimal. However my reading of your rant is that you downplay this conflict as being political in nature. My limited interpretation suggests this divide is much more serious than say the Irish/English protestant/Catholic divide. Or, am I am misunderstanding you?

My thoughts on why Sadaam was so brutal was precisely to quell or keep the factions from killing one another, using whatever means necessary. Isn’t there one camp of Bush critics who consider this area as incapable of civility, and therefore not worthy of losing men in battle?

[Author]

Posts