Capitol Hill Blue Forums Political Issues Iraq & Afghanistan Bush On Iraq: "Just Be Patient"

What is so hard to understand about the idea that a government can Islamic but not Islamist? An Islamic country is one that Islam is the state religion. An Islamist country is one that Islam to be the world's religion.

Particularly the Islamic law against the consumption of alcohol. That is a very serious violation of Islamic law.

Do you have a source for that/
Thx

I think that the distinction that Hatrack has been trying to express here is relevant... to the history of Arab Islamism (if not the thread). Although there may have been some confusion over terminology, I think we all understand the gist: There are ardent Muslim extremists who wish to reestablish a Caliphate. Historically, Islam has always had some more ardent followers who chose this path. The last Caliphate ended with the First World War and the eradication of the Ottoman Empire. This is not representative of all Islamic countries. Extremist Muslims (as extremists the world over), such as the Salafists will use any tactic which they see as effectively furthering their (warped) world vision. They are the "enemy" he has referred to throughout.

I would then, of course, make the point that they did not have a foothold in Iraq prior to our invasion, and have been inspired by our actions there. We have, unwittingly (or maybe purposefully) provided them with a cause to rally around and recruit against. The invasion was stupid policy, poorly executed, and I have little doubt will now have a lasting impact for our generation. Perhaps it was intentional. We have made a cohesive whole out of disparate and ineffectual parts by erecting the "boogyman" of "Al Qaeda." See, The Power of Nightmares; Is Al Qaeda Just a Bush Boogeyman? I believe that was exactly what the current administration intended, and is part of the neocon plan. Patience, of course, is demanded - because as long as we are looking at "them" we won't notice the depredations of the administration until, their fervent hope, it is too late to do anything about it. It is what is referred to in the trade as "the long con."

Yes, the Qur'an.

Yes, my point exactly.

Tinfoil hat time! The implication here is that the Administration has mortgaged the nation to the tune of over a half Trillion dollars by duping people into supporting the neo-con's dream of world domination under the guise of a defensive maneuver to prevent the fulfillment of the Islamist dream of world domination.

Can you believe it?

I hope you can do better than that general reference because the history of Islam... especially when the prophet was alive... is much more tolerant... and in fact, I had read several time that he instructed his followers to respect any "people of the book"... as such, you have remaining Christina groups even in Iraq which is near the center of even the caliphate.

It is true, Ardy, that whenever the Muslim world has felt security in its own place, it has been tolerant of other faiths. Like any entity that feels threatened, however, it becomes militant as a defense mechanism, and pogroms have also existed throughout the history of the faith. Once again, however, the thread it tugged toward the wrong history.... D**n me for responding!

Every time I point out a problem with your arguments you change your interpretation of what you said. This is kinda like the administration defining what most people consider torture as not being torture therefore we don't torture people.


OK I'll fall this again. What country is Islamist? (I mean you already said all of them and now you are saying what?)

If you have read the entire Qur'an, as I have, you will see that when the Prophet Muhammad, PBUH, was in a position of weakness he would be very diplomatic and say nice things. However, when he was in a position of power it was his way or the highway. Then after his or future Islamic armies had defeated their enemy it was a standard practice to flay the leaders of the defeated of army alive.