Is the US at war with Islam/Muslims?

[Mr Rayon]

hey guys I recall reading somewhere that it was Saudi men who were responsible for the september 11 attacks on US soil...yet immediately after the US attacked Iraq as "payback"?

 

My question is, despte Saudi Arabia and the US being great allies, if the US were to wage war against Saudi Arabia for harbouring terrorists would they be able to do this without angering and involving the global Muslim population worldwide? Wouldn't future wars be impossible in Saudi Arabia as there are some senstive holy sites of worship there to Muslims?

 

I have heard also that in the US religion/politics are tightly intertwined things? Could it be that USA is in fact at war with Islam? What does everyone think?

[John Cuthber]

G W Bush attacked Iraq because

(1) His daddy had done it and

(2) it had massive oil reserves.

 

All the so called "justification" in terms of wmd was nonsense.

[Marat]

If the US attacked Saudi Arabia, it would be generally offensive to the Islamic world, given that it would probably involve foreign, infadel troops occupying holy sites such as Mecca and Medina.

 

In a general sense the US and the West generally cannot avoid being 'at war' with Islam, given that they represent such profoundly opposed ideologies. On the one side you have a post-Enlightenment, relativistic, scientific, positivistic, historicist, existentialist, materialistic, open-minded world of critical thinkers, and on the other side you have a pre-Enlightenment, dogmatic, religious, self-assured world of people submerged in the pleroma of their culture's values. Even absent the opposition of Christianity and Islam, the tensions between these general attitudes towards life would make their friendly co-existence impossible in an increasingly interconnected global world culture.

[CaptainPanic]

First of all: if the Western world (i.e. Europe + North America) would go to war against all Islamic countries, that would be such a massive conflict, it would undoubtedly be called "World War III".

 

I think that there are (unfortunately) many people in the Western world who would like to go to war with Islam. There are many people who's simplistic world view means they honestly think that Islam is a threat... And I think these people are incredibly dumb, for the following reasons:

Cultural influence

They say that Islam is trying to conquer the world. But, in fact, here is a map of all the countries where you can find McDonald's. Western economies dominate the world. Muslims around the world also watch Hollywood movies. They also listen to Lady Gaga. It's not uncommon for them to speak at least 1 European language (English/French/German).

Honestly... Who's culture is influencencing whom?

 

Military threat

(Warning, if you're a sensitive American, I would skip this paragraph, because I am about to downplay 9/11 to something that was only the collapse of 2 buildings, rather than the end of the world as you knew).

So, some guys hijack some planes. Crash into a building. 3000 people die. Who cares. America responds by starting 1 War on Terror, and 1 War for Oil, although we were told that the latter was to get the regime change. Almost 1,000,000 people died as a result... and it's still ongoing.

Honestly... Who is a military threat to whom?

 

The global Muslim population

There is no such thing as a global muslim population. They are not united. And they are not against us. There is one thing I can say counts for all the Muslims I know in the Netherlands: They are sick and tired of being discriminated against... and they are sick and tired of being called terrorists by ignorant white people who know nothing about them.

[swansont]

If the US attacked Saudi Arabia, it would be generally offensive to the Islamic world, given that it would probably involve foreign, infadel troops occupying holy sites such as Mecca and Medina.

 

In a general sense the US and the West generally cannot avoid being 'at war' with Islam, given that they represent such profoundly opposed ideologies. On the one side you have a post-Enlightenment, relativistic, scientific, positivistic, historicist, existentialist, materialistic, open-minded world of critical thinkers, and on the other side you have a pre-Enlightenment, dogmatic, religious, self-assured world of people submerged in the pleroma of their culture's values. Even absent the opposition of Christianity and Islam, the tensions between these general attitudes towards life would make their friendly co-existence impossible in an increasingly interconnected global world culture.

 

!

Moderator Note

The problem with generalizations is that they fall awfully close to stereotypes, and this puts it uncomfortably close to a violation of rule 1c.

 

To clarify — that many in the west hold the opinion that Islam possesses these characteristics is not the same as painting them as actually being that way. Given that many Muslims live in the west should be enough to show that the stereotype is not true.

[Stefan-CoA]

The one Muslim person that I know, has proven to be a better person than all people of all other religions that I know.

 

I think that the West's *cough* America *cough* aggression towards Islam is born from two distinct factors, their own Judeo-Christian framework of understanding and, well, oil.

 

It is understandable that many people in Arab countries are becoming anti-West. How would you like it if the world's most powerful and aggressive country comes to your doorstep, tells you your way of life is worthless, kills a few people, imposes their own regime and form of government and then stays on as a baby-sitter to make sure things go their way? Not only that, but most people are powerless to stop the influence of American culture. So, on the one hand you have this parasitic infection of the country with a bully and on the other hand you've got your own culture being held hostage by Lady Gaga and McDonalds.

 

In my opinion the best thing the West can do is just leave the Muslim world alone. If the people want revolution, they will do it themselves. That is the only healthy revolution. As soon as the good 'ol stars 'n stripes pop up to steal the show, it's pretty much over for that country. Because, c'mon, who's going to bomb your tyrannical government for free?

 

I agree with CaptainPanic on all points.

 

I'm not saying that the violence on either side is appropriate. I can just understand the frustration of the Muslim world better than the arrogant aggression of the Western world.

[Doc. Josh]

*demonstartion of power* not war...... Peace to the middle east.............not war...... we dont want their oil just ensure we can *share* it forever..... A enormous IMO!!!

[Marat]

Anti-discrimination values are moral, whereas the history of cultural influences attempts to be as scientific and objective as possible. Given that values and facts are essentially distinct (vide David Hume, Treatise on Human Nature (Oxford: Clarendon), ed. by P. Nidditch, 1978, pp. 469 f.), and as a matter of logic you can never derive an 'ought' (as in 'you ought not to use stereotypes') from an 'is' (the facts of cultural history), with a 'Science' rather than a 'Morals' Forum there will always be a danger that the facts will refuse to comply with values, just as Galileo's telescope refused to comply with the Vatican's assumption of what a moral dogma required it to show.

 

I think we can at least agree that since the Renaissance, the Enlightenment, Historicism, Cultural Relativism, Positivism, and Existentialism never appeared in Islamic culture the way they did in the West, these historical forces have to have had some impact on the way people generally think in these different societies -- at least if the discipline of cultural history has any claim to objective foundation. And if it is accepted that these undeniably real cultural-historical forces did have an impact in one culture and not in another, then their continuing effects today have to cause a deep gulf in the way the West and the Islamic world think, even granting that within those two camps there are varying versions of Western and Islamic thought, with Lebanon being much more 'Western' in its thinking than Saudi Arabia, and Iran pre-1979 being much more Western than Iran today.

[John Cuthber]

Incidentally, how can the US be at war with a significant fraction of itself?

[Mr Rayon]

Incidentally, how can the US be at war with a significant fraction of itself?

 

I wouldn't label 0.8% as being a "significant fraction".

[John Cuthber]

I would.

There are certainly too many to ignore.

Anyway, they would be the "low hanging fruit" if you were trying to wage war against Islam, why not start with the ones nearby?

[Brainteaserfan]

hey guys I recall reading somewhere that it was Saudi men who were responsible for the september 11 attacks on US soil...yet immediately after the US attacked Iraq as "payback"?

 

My question is, despte Saudi Arabia and the US being great allies, if the US were to wage war against Saudi Arabia for harbouring terrorists would they be able to do this without angering and involving the global Muslim population worldwide? Wouldn't future wars be impossible in Saudi Arabia as there are some senstive holy sites of worship there to Muslims?

 

I have heard also that in the US religion/politics are tightly intertwined things? Could it be that USA is in fact at war with Islam? What does everyone think?

They should be. Not that I'm in favor of war, but read surah 9:5:

 

When the sacred months are over slay the idolaters wherever you find them. Arrest them, besiege them, and lie in ambush everywhere for them. If they repent and take to prayer and render the alms levy, allow them to go their way. God is forgiving and merciful.

[Dekan]

The United States of America, should have been the supreme realisation of Science and Civilisation. The "Shining City on a Hill".

 

It came close to being that in the 1950's and 1960's.

 

Ever since then, it's gone downhill. (We all know why, but none dare name the reason)

 

If the US had been allowed to fulfil its historic role, it would have united the world under American leadership. Then there would have been no need for "wars" against Islam and the Muslim peoples. These peoples deserve respect for their great cultural and scientific achievements, and there is absolutely no reason why the US should be "at war" with them.

 

Except for the one reason, which can't be mentioned.

Edited June 8, 2011 by Dekan