Total Posts:45|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

2 centuries of war

DanT
Posts: 5,693
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/1/2012 12:14:14 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
History tends to repeat it's-self. During the a millennia before 9/11 the Crusades was started. At the beginning of every new millennium a Holey war is started. First it was the crusades, now it is Global Jihad.

History tends to repeat it's-self. The crusades lasted 2 centuries, so it is reasonable to expect the same from the current war. War lasts until one side gives up. If we give up, we submit to Islamic Supremacy. The jihadists started the Holey War, and therefore are driven by their faith. For the Jihadists to surrender wold be to give up on their faith. It is fair to assume that the war would last 200 years, due to it's nature.
"Chemical weapons are no different than any other types of weapons."~Lordknukle
drafterman
Posts: 18,870
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/1/2012 12:22:11 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 11/1/2012 12:14:14 PM, DanT wrote:
History tends to repeat it's-self. During the a millennia before 9/11 the Crusades was started. At the beginning of every new millennium a Holey war is started. First it was the crusades, now it is Global Jihad.

History tends to repeat it's-self. The crusades lasted 2 centuries, so it is reasonable to expect the same from the current war. War lasts until one side gives up. If we give up, we submit to Islamic Supremacy. The jihadists started the Holey War, and therefore are driven by their faith. For the Jihadists to surrender wold be to give up on their faith. It is fair to assume that the war would last 200 years, due to it's nature.

Yes and no. The "Jihadists" generally consider this to be an extension of the Crusades, meaning that "war" was never really over. Wars can probably be seen as one line line of unending conflict interspersed with brief periods of little to no actualy armed conflict.
Heineken
Posts: 1,230
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/1/2012 12:24:05 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
Have you ever noticed that this premise is only applied to negative human behavior?
Could we equally apply "history repeats itself" in a positive light?

Like...
Winston Churchill was a great leader. Britain will get another one. History repeats itself.

Doesn't quite sound right, does it?

Could this elude to the doomed nature of our species?
Vidi, vici, veni.
(I saw, I conquered, I came.)
lewis20
Posts: 5,093
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/1/2012 12:25:10 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
Haha OK Rick santorum.
We must kill all brown people before its too late! Sharia law! Sharia law!
"If you are a racist I will attack you with the north"- Abraham Lincoln

"Do not wear clothing woven of two kinds of material" - Leviticus 19 19

"War is a racket" - Smedley Butler
darkkermit
Posts: 11,204
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/1/2012 12:25:34 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 11/1/2012 12:14:14 PM, DanT wrote:
History tends to repeat it's-self. During the a millennia before 9/11 the Crusades was started. At the beginning of every new millennium a Holey war is started. First it was the crusades, now it is Global Jihad.

History tends to repeat it's-self. The crusades lasted 2 centuries, so it is reasonable to expect the same from the current war. War lasts until one side gives up. If we give up, we submit to Islamic Supremacy. The jihadists started the Holey War, and therefore are driven by their faith. For the Jihadists to surrender wold be to give up on their faith. It is fair to assume that the war would last 200 years, due to it's nature.

Well with the exception of the US funding most of the middle eastern conflicts pre-9/11, it was them that started it.

LOL, at submitting to Islamic supremacy.
Open borders debate:
http://www.debate.org...
Stephen_Hawkins
Posts: 5,316
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/1/2012 1:18:08 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
To quote Hayek from "Keynes vs Hayek Round 2":

"Wow, one data point and you're jumping for joy!"

Let's look at 1 AD. No religious world war (that I know of).

Let's look at 999BC. No religious world war (that I know of).

Also, first crusade was 1096. Are we on about jihad wars? Cos they started in 650 and ended 650 years later... (roughly and debatable).
Give a man a fish, he'll eat for a day. Teach him how to be Gay, he'll positively influence the GDP.

Social Contract Theory debate: http://www.debate.org...
DanT
Posts: 5,693
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/1/2012 3:14:32 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 11/1/2012 12:22:11 PM, drafterman wrote:
At 11/1/2012 12:14:14 PM, DanT wrote:
History tends to repeat it's-self. During the a millennia before 9/11 the Crusades was started. At the beginning of every new millennium a Holey war is started. First it was the crusades, now it is Global Jihad.

History tends to repeat it's-self. The crusades lasted 2 centuries, so it is reasonable to expect the same from the current war. War lasts until one side gives up. If we give up, we submit to Islamic Supremacy. The jihadists started the Holey War, and therefore are driven by their faith. For the Jihadists to surrender wold be to give up on their faith. It is fair to assume that the war would last 200 years, due to it's nature.

Yes and no. The "Jihadists" generally consider this to be an extension of the Crusades, meaning that "war" was never really over.

No, the Jihadists seek Islamic Supremacy over the entire world. The crusades were only fought over Jerusalem.

Wars can probably be seen as one line line of unending conflict interspersed with brief periods of little to no actualy armed conflict.

After all the British are now allied with the US and the French; their mortal enemies from the 18th and 19th century. We are also now allied with Japan and Germany, our Mortal enemies from the 20th century.
"Chemical weapons are no different than any other types of weapons."~Lordknukle
R0b1Billion
Posts: 3,732
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/1/2012 3:28:32 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
This is pretty funny if it is sarcasm... if this is serious then I feel sorry for you :((((
Beliefs in a nutshell:
- The Ends never justify the Means.
- Objectivity is secondary to subjectivity.
- The War on Drugs is the worst policy in the U.S.
- Most people worship technology as a religion.
- Computers will never become sentient.
DanT
Posts: 5,693
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/1/2012 3:30:44 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 11/1/2012 1:18:08 PM, Stephen_Hawkins wrote:
To quote Hayek from "Keynes vs Hayek Round 2":

"Wow, one data point and you're jumping for joy!"

Out of context. that reference to economics not a score board.
Let's look at 1 AD. No religious world war (that I know of).


In the 1st century AD (66 AD) the First Jewish"Roman War began.
In the 10th century BC the Kingdom of Israel started conquering their neighbors.

Let's look at 999BC. No religious world war (that I know of).

Also, first crusade was 1096.
Yeah the 11th century BC. It's not exact, because slight variations can change when the event takes place.
Are we on about jihad wars? Cos they started in 650 and ended 650 years later... (roughly and debatable).
More details please?
"Chemical weapons are no different than any other types of weapons."~Lordknukle
DanT
Posts: 5,693
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/1/2012 3:40:17 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 11/1/2012 3:28:32 PM, R0b1Billion wrote:
This is pretty funny if it is sarcasm... if this is serious then I feel sorry for you :((((

The crusades were a Holey war. Both sides were fueled by religion. Same with global Jihad. Jihadists want Islamic supremacy and the rest of the world wants religious freedom.

When a war is fueled by religion, it lasts longer. The Jewish"Roman wars lasted 70 years until the Jews were finally crushed, resulting in the Romans enslaving and massacring the population.

The Crusades lasted 2 centuries because both armies were larger, and even more driven. It finally ended when the Catholic church deemed it a lost cause.

Now Jihadists are waging global Jihad. It would either end with the annihilation of radical Islam, or the submission of the rest of the world to Islamic rule.
"Chemical weapons are no different than any other types of weapons."~Lordknukle
DanT
Posts: 5,693
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/1/2012 3:42:49 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 11/1/2012 12:25:10 PM, lewis20 wrote:
Haha OK Rick santorum.
We must kill all brown people before its too late! Sharia law! Sharia law!

You can blow me off, but I am right. War is won when the other side surrenders. If we surrender the Jihadists will continue to attack us until we submit to their demands. If they surrender they have forsaken their radical beliefs. When it comes to religious wars, the wars are usually longer because surrender is unlikely.
"Chemical weapons are no different than any other types of weapons."~Lordknukle
GeoLaureate8
Posts: 12,252
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/1/2012 3:48:00 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 11/1/2012 3:42:49 PM, DanT wrote:
At 11/1/2012 12:25:10 PM, lewis20 wrote:
Haha OK Rick santorum.
We must kill all brown people before its too late! Sharia law! Sharia law!

You can blow me off, but I am right. War is won when the other side surrenders. If we surrender the Jihadists will continue to attack us until we submit to their demands. If they surrender they have forsaken their radical beliefs. When it comes to religious wars, the wars are usually longer because surrender is unlikely.

Here's a start, maybe we should stop funding the Jihadists first.
"We must raise the standard of the Old, free, decentralized, and strictly limited Republic."
-- Murray Rothbard

"The worst thing that can happen to a good cause is, not to be skillfully attacked, but to be ineptly defended."
-- Frederic Bastiat
DanT
Posts: 5,693
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/1/2012 3:48:14 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 11/1/2012 12:25:34 PM, darkkermit wrote:
At 11/1/2012 12:14:14 PM, DanT wrote:
History tends to repeat it's-self. During the a millennia before 9/11 the Crusades was started. At the beginning of every new millennium a Holey war is started. First it was the crusades, now it is Global Jihad.

History tends to repeat it's-self. The crusades lasted 2 centuries, so it is reasonable to expect the same from the current war. War lasts until one side gives up. If we give up, we submit to Islamic Supremacy. The jihadists started the Holey War, and therefore are driven by their faith. For the Jihadists to surrender wold be to give up on their faith. It is fair to assume that the war would last 200 years, due to it's nature.

Well with the exception of the US funding most of the middle eastern conflicts pre-9/11, it was them that started it.

What came first the chicken or the egg? The fighting started before we gave aid, which is why we gave aid to Israel. It's stupid to allow an ally to be conquered by hostile nations.
LOL, at submitting to Islamic supremacy.

You are aware that the Global Jihad predates to 9/11, because the goal of radical Islam is Islamic supremacy???.... It has nothing to do with the US.
"Chemical weapons are no different than any other types of weapons."~Lordknukle
darkkermit
Posts: 11,204
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/1/2012 3:58:38 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 11/1/2012 3:48:14 PM, DanT wrote:
At 11/1/2012 12:25:34 PM, darkkermit wrote:
At 11/1/2012 12:14:14 PM, DanT wrote:
History tends to repeat it's-self. During the a millennia before 9/11 the Crusades was started. At the beginning of every new millennium a Holey war is started. First it was the crusades, now it is Global Jihad.

History tends to repeat it's-self. The crusades lasted 2 centuries, so it is reasonable to expect the same from the current war. War lasts until one side gives up. If we give up, we submit to Islamic Supremacy. The jihadists started the Holey War, and therefore are driven by their faith. For the Jihadists to surrender wold be to give up on their faith. It is fair to assume that the war would last 200 years, due to it's nature.

Well with the exception of the US funding most of the middle eastern conflicts pre-9/11, it was them that started it.

What came first the chicken or the egg? The fighting started before we gave aid, which is why we gave aid to Israel. It's stupid to allow an ally to be conquered by hostile nations.

Not saying that there wasn't fighting previously, only that its stupid to state that these were unprovoked attacks, when we've been involved in the middle east pre-9/11. The fighting in the middle east didn't involve the US but we got involved anyways. We are not Israel.

LOL, at submitting to Islamic supremacy.

You are aware that the Global Jihad predates to 9/11, because the goal of radical Islam is Islamic supremacy???.... It has nothing to do with the US.

Do you think islamic forces have any freakin' chance of defeating the western world? Do you really think islamic forces would try to conquer the western world. Let me give you a hint, we are in their territory. They are not in our territory. Whose forcing their beliefs on who?
Open borders debate:
http://www.debate.org...
GeoLaureate8
Posts: 12,252
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/1/2012 4:01:49 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 11/1/2012 3:48:14 PM, DanT wrote:
What came first the chicken or the egg? The fighting started before we gave aid, which is why we gave aid to Israel. It's stupid to allow an ally to be conquered by hostile nations.

Israel: 200+ nukes
Iran: 0 nukes

Israel refused to sign the Non-proliferation Treaty. Iran has signed it and obeyed it. (Enriched uranium is allowed.)

LOL, at submitting to Islamic supremacy.

You are aware that the Global Jihad predates to 9/11, because the goal of radical Islam is Islamic supremacy???.... It has nothing to do with the US.

It's not a serious threat. It is overblown. Islam is growing, but so is Buddhism at an equal rate. Violent extremism is the problem.

.
.
.
.
"We must raise the standard of the Old, free, decentralized, and strictly limited Republic."
-- Murray Rothbard

"The worst thing that can happen to a good cause is, not to be skillfully attacked, but to be ineptly defended."
-- Frederic Bastiat
CiRrK
Posts: 670
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/1/2012 4:03:13 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 11/1/2012 3:58:38 PM, darkkermit wrote:
At 11/1/2012 3:48:14 PM, DanT wrote:
At 11/1/2012 12:25:34 PM, darkkermit wrote:
At 11/1/2012 12:14:14 PM, DanT wrote:
History tends to repeat it's-self. During the a millennia before 9/11 the Crusades was started. At the beginning of every new millennium a Holey war is started. First it was the crusades, now it is Global Jihad.

History tends to repeat it's-self. The crusades lasted 2 centuries, so it is reasonable to expect the same from the current war. War lasts until one side gives up. If we give up, we submit to Islamic Supremacy. The jihadists started the Holey War, and therefore are driven by their faith. For the Jihadists to surrender wold be to give up on their faith. It is fair to assume that the war would last 200 years, due to it's nature.

Well with the exception of the US funding most of the middle eastern conflicts pre-9/11, it was them that started it.

What came first the chicken or the egg? The fighting started before we gave aid, which is why we gave aid to Israel. It's stupid to allow an ally to be conquered by hostile nations.

Not saying that there wasn't fighting previously, only that its stupid to state that these were unprovoked attacks, when we've been involved in the middle east pre-9/11. The fighting in the middle east didn't involve the US but we got involved anyways. We are not Israel.

LOL, at submitting to Islamic supremacy.

You are aware that the Global Jihad predates to 9/11, because the goal of radical Islam is Islamic supremacy???.... It has nothing to do with the US.

Do you think islamic forces have any freakin' chance of defeating the western world? Do you really think islamic forces would try to conquer the western world. Let me give you a hint, we are in their territory. They are not in our territory. Whose forcing their beliefs on who?

No. But the Islamic world can definitely hold the West hostage with a variety of WMD arsenals, developed mid-range missle and ICBM programs, the use of terror cells and stategic use of oil production. The ultimate goal of the jihadist is to create a pan-islamic state which can compete with the West and essentially kick all Western influence from the islamic world. If you have read any jihadist literature (which is very interesting btw) you will clearly see the goals they have in mind.
Stephen_Hawkins
Posts: 5,316
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/1/2012 4:04:34 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 11/1/2012 3:30:44 PM, DanT wrote:
At 11/1/2012 1:18:08 PM, Stephen_Hawkins wrote:
To quote Hayek from "Keynes vs Hayek Round 2":

"Wow, one data point and you're jumping for joy!"

Out of context. that reference to economics not a score board.

It was tongue-in-cheek (hence the reference to a fictional youtube rap-debate). Did we really not get that? The point is still relevant.

Let's look at 1 AD. No religious world war (that I know of).


In the 1st century AD (66 AD) the First Jewish"Roman War began.

1) Not a religious war, but a taxation war
2) A revolt, not a war (and I still don't understand why any historian calls it a war, probably something to do with an old name before good information)
3) Was not between religious factions.
4) Lasted 7 years, unless we include seperate wars, which make it last a total of twelve years.

In the 10th century BC the Kingdom of Israel started conquering their neighbors.

1) The war started centuries before then, and continued for centuries after
2) No reason, short of the Bible, to believe the wars were religious in nature (and due to the Bible claiming all wars were religious, it is not trustworthy in this specific regard on its own.
3) Lasted much longer than the two centuries.

So it's not at the turn of the millennia, not for religious reasons, and not for 200 years.

Let's look at 999BC. No religious world war (that I know of).

Also, first crusade was 1096.
Yeah the 11th century AD. It's not exact, because slight variations can change when the event takes place.

Much closer 12th century AD than where we are. So why not make the prediction for the 22nd? Because there's not enough impact and one data point over a thousand years is not evidence.

Also, the crusades lasted much closer 400 years.

Are we on about jihad wars? Cos they started in 650 and ended 650 years later... (roughly and debatable).
More details please?

I assumed we were talking about crusades lasting 200 years, we can include all crusades, e.g. the Islamic Caliphates.

Also, explain the metanarrative that would lead to a religious holy war every thousand years.
Give a man a fish, he'll eat for a day. Teach him how to be Gay, he'll positively influence the GDP.

Social Contract Theory debate: http://www.debate.org...
darkkermit
Posts: 11,204
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/1/2012 4:08:53 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 11/1/2012 4:03:13 PM, CiRrK wrote:
At 11/1/2012 3:58:38 PM, darkkermit wrote:
At 11/1/2012 3:48:14 PM, DanT wrote:
At 11/1/2012 12:25:34 PM, darkkermit wrote:
At 11/1/2012 12:14:14 PM, DanT wrote:
History tends to repeat it's-self. During the a millennia before 9/11 the Crusades was started. At the beginning of every new millennium a Holey war is started. First it was the crusades, now it is Global Jihad.

History tends to repeat it's-self. The crusades lasted 2 centuries, so it is reasonable to expect the same from the current war. War lasts until one side gives up. If we give up, we submit to Islamic Supremacy. The jihadists started the Holey War, and therefore are driven by their faith. For the Jihadists to surrender wold be to give up on their faith. It is fair to assume that the war would last 200 years, due to it's nature.

Well with the exception of the US funding most of the middle eastern conflicts pre-9/11, it was them that started it.

What came first the chicken or the egg? The fighting started before we gave aid, which is why we gave aid to Israel. It's stupid to allow an ally to be conquered by hostile nations.

Not saying that there wasn't fighting previously, only that its stupid to state that these were unprovoked attacks, when we've been involved in the middle east pre-9/11. The fighting in the middle east didn't involve the US but we got involved anyways. We are not Israel.

LOL, at submitting to Islamic supremacy.

You are aware that the Global Jihad predates to 9/11, because the goal of radical Islam is Islamic supremacy???.... It has nothing to do with the US.

Do you think islamic forces have any freakin' chance of defeating the western world? Do you really think islamic forces would try to conquer the western world. Let me give you a hint, we are in their territory. They are not in our territory. Whose forcing their beliefs on who?

No. But the Islamic world can definitely hold the West hostage with a variety of WMD arsenals, developed mid-range missle and ICBM programs, the use of terror cells and stategic use of oil production. The ultimate goal of the jihadist is to create a pan-islamic state which can compete with the West and essentially kick all Western influence from the islamic world. If you have read any jihadist literature (which is very interesting btw) you will clearly see the goals they have in mind.

That does not mean that the islamic state wants to expand to the western world which they'd have no chance of achieving.

Its not as if we're super dependent on the middle east for oil, since there are other sources of oil as well.

http://upload.wikimedia.org...

http://en.wikipedia.org...
Open borders debate:
http://www.debate.org...
lewis20
Posts: 5,093
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/1/2012 4:12:43 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 11/1/2012 3:42:49 PM, DanT wrote:
At 11/1/2012 12:25:10 PM, lewis20 wrote:
Haha OK Rick santorum.
We must kill all brown people before its too late! Sharia law! Sharia law!

You can blow me off, but I am right. War is won when the other side surrenders. If we surrender the Jihadists will continue to attack us until we submit to their demands. If they surrender they have forsaken their radical beliefs. When it comes to religious wars, the wars are usually longer because surrender is unlikely.

I know, they aren't going to surrender right? So we have to kill every single Muslim right?
"If you are a racist I will attack you with the north"- Abraham Lincoln

"Do not wear clothing woven of two kinds of material" - Leviticus 19 19

"War is a racket" - Smedley Butler
Lordknukle
Posts: 12,788
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/1/2012 4:38:47 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
Until we have proof that the entire populous of the Middle East wants to submit the US to Sharia Law, then your argument is completely unfounded. You're erroneously basing the perceptions of a whole continent based on a group of "radical extremists." Sure, there are a lot of people who want to see the US burn down to the ground. However, most people are moderates.
"Easy is the descent to Avernus, for the door to the Underworld lies upon both day and night. But to retrace your steps and return to the breezes above- that's the task, that's the toil."
Lordknukle
Posts: 12,788
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/1/2012 4:39:44 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
Anyways, the Jihadists attacked us because we provoked their aggression via attempted global hegemony (Afghanistan, Iraq, wanting to bomb Iran and start a World War, etc....).
"Easy is the descent to Avernus, for the door to the Underworld lies upon both day and night. But to retrace your steps and return to the breezes above- that's the task, that's the toil."
DanT
Posts: 5,693
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/1/2012 5:02:39 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 11/1/2012 3:58:38 PM, darkkermit wrote:
At 11/1/2012 3:48:14 PM, DanT wrote:
At 11/1/2012 12:25:34 PM, darkkermit wrote:
At 11/1/2012 12:14:14 PM, DanT wrote:
History tends to repeat it's-self. During the a millennia before 9/11 the Crusades was started. At the beginning of every new millennium a Holey war is started. First it was the crusades, now it is Global Jihad.

History tends to repeat it's-self. The crusades lasted 2 centuries, so it is reasonable to expect the same from the current war. War lasts until one side gives up. If we give up, we submit to Islamic Supremacy. The jihadists started the Holey War, and therefore are driven by their faith. For the Jihadists to surrender wold be to give up on their faith. It is fair to assume that the war would last 200 years, due to it's nature.

Well with the exception of the US funding most of the middle eastern conflicts pre-9/11, it was them that started it.

What came first the chicken or the egg? The fighting started before we gave aid, which is why we gave aid to Israel. It's stupid to allow an ally to be conquered by hostile nations.

Not saying that there wasn't fighting previously, only that its stupid to state that these were unprovoked attacks, when we've been involved in the middle east pre-9/11.
Yeah, because of their unprovoked attacks on our allies. We been involved in the middle east because it was vital to national security. Every time we promote another country during a conflict it is because we are protect our own national security interests.

The fighting in the middle east didn't involve the US but we got involved anyways. We are not Israel.

What do you mean it didn't involve us? Are you nuts, or just ignorant?
LOL, at submitting to Islamic supremacy.

You are aware that the Global Jihad predates to 9/11, because the goal of radical Islam is Islamic supremacy???.... It has nothing to do with the US.

Do you think islamic forces have any freakin' chance of defeating the western world?
It's called unconventional warfare. A superpower can lose to a rag tag force of irregulars under the right conditions. They just need to hold out the longest. Warfare is not won y killing people, it's won by breaking your enemy's will to fight on.
So long as they can recruit people willing to die for their cause, they can continue the war.
Do you really think islamic forces would try to conquer the western world. Let me give you a hint, we are in their territory. They are not in our territory.
Did I say they wanted to conquer us? No, I said they wanted Islamic supremacy. Religious supremacy =/= conquest. The catholic church held religious supremacy over Europe for centuries, but they didn't conquer Europe.
Whose forcing their beliefs on who?
They are forcing their's on us. We are not trying to assimilate them. They attacked us, because they hate the culture of the western world.
"Chemical weapons are no different than any other types of weapons."~Lordknukle
lewis20
Posts: 5,093
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/1/2012 5:04:11 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 11/1/2012 5:02:39 PM, DanT wrote:
They are forcing their's on us. We are not trying to assimilate them. They attacked us, because they hate the culture of the western world.

They attack us because we kill a half million kids in Iraq and our secretary of state says she thinks that's ok. That's why they attack us.
They hate our culture, what a load of BS.
"If you are a racist I will attack you with the north"- Abraham Lincoln

"Do not wear clothing woven of two kinds of material" - Leviticus 19 19

"War is a racket" - Smedley Butler
DanT
Posts: 5,693
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/1/2012 5:04:53 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 11/1/2012 4:38:47 PM, Lordknukle wrote:
Until we have proof that the entire populous of the Middle East wants to submit the US to Sharia Law, then your argument is completely unfounded.
I'm not arguing that. I said "Islamic Extremists". This is not nation against nation, it's the world against Islamic extremist organizations.

You're erroneously basing the perceptions of a whole continent based on a group of "radical extremists."

Nice Straw man

Sure, there are a lot of people who want to see the US burn down to the ground. However, most people are moderates.

And they are not Jihadists.
"Chemical weapons are no different than any other types of weapons."~Lordknukle
DanT
Posts: 5,693
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/1/2012 5:06:10 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 11/1/2012 5:04:11 PM, lewis20 wrote:
At 11/1/2012 5:02:39 PM, DanT wrote:
They are forcing their's on us. We are not trying to assimilate them. They attacked us, because they hate the culture of the western world.

They attack us because we kill a half million kids in Iraq and our secretary of state says she thinks that's ok.
BS

That's why they attack us.
BS
They hate our culture, what a load of BS.
Yes I agree they hate our culture, and what you said earlier is a load of BS
"Chemical weapons are no different than any other types of weapons."~Lordknukle
Stephen_Hawkins
Posts: 5,316
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/1/2012 5:07:23 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 11/1/2012 5:06:10 PM, DanT wrote:
At 11/1/2012 5:04:11 PM, lewis20 wrote:
At 11/1/2012 5:02:39 PM, DanT wrote:
They are forcing their's on us. We are not trying to assimilate them. They attacked us, because they hate the culture of the western world.

They attack us because we kill a half million kids in Iraq and our secretary of state says she thinks that's ok.
BS

Are we saying "BS we never did that" or "BS that's not the motivation"?

They hate our culture, what a load of BS.
Yes I agree they hate our culture, and what you said earlier is a load of BS
Give a man a fish, he'll eat for a day. Teach him how to be Gay, he'll positively influence the GDP.

Social Contract Theory debate: http://www.debate.org...
Mirza
Posts: 16,992
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/1/2012 5:08:57 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
There are Muslims everywhere, and no sane person will proclaim war on jihad. It's a sacred thing for Muslims.

An Islamic state powerful enough to compete with any other country will probably come. I support a movement for that.
Lordknukle
Posts: 12,788
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/1/2012 5:13:15 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 11/1/2012 5:04:53 PM, DanT wrote:
At 11/1/2012 4:38:47 PM, Lordknukle wrote:
Until we have proof that the entire populous of the Middle East wants to submit the US to Sharia Law, then your argument is completely unfounded.
I'm not arguing that. I said "Islamic Extremists". This is not nation against nation, it's the world against Islamic extremist organizations.

You're erroneously basing the perceptions of a whole continent based on a group of "radical extremists."

Nice Straw man

Sure, there are a lot of people who want to see the US burn down to the ground. However, most people are moderates.

And they are not Jihadists.

It's a few organizations that would have no chance of taking down the largest superpower in the world, under the assumption that they actually want to burn the US down to the ground instead of acting in self-defence.
"Easy is the descent to Avernus, for the door to the Underworld lies upon both day and night. But to retrace your steps and return to the breezes above- that's the task, that's the toil."
lewis20
Posts: 5,093
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/1/2012 5:14:21 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 11/1/2012 5:06:10 PM, DanT wrote:
At 11/1/2012 5:04:11 PM, lewis20 wrote:
At 11/1/2012 5:02:39 PM, DanT wrote:
They are forcing their's on us. We are not trying to assimilate them. They attacked us, because they hate the culture of the western world.

They attack us because we kill a half million kids in Iraq and our secretary of state says she thinks that's ok.
BS

Which part?
From Bin-Laden's letter for why they committed 911-
"You have starved the Muslims of Iraq, where children die every day. It is a wonder that more than 1.5 million Iraqi children have died as a result of your sanctions, and you did not show concern."

"I think this is a very hard choice, but the price--we think the price is worth it."
Madeleine Albright when asked
"We have heard that a half million children have died. I mean, that's more children than died in Hiroshima. And, you know, is the price worth it?"
"If you are a racist I will attack you with the north"- Abraham Lincoln

"Do not wear clothing woven of two kinds of material" - Leviticus 19 19

"War is a racket" - Smedley Butler
DanT
Posts: 5,693
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/1/2012 5:21:58 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 11/1/2012 4:04:34 PM, Stephen_Hawkins wrote:
At 11/1/2012 3:30:44 PM, DanT wrote:
At 11/1/2012 1:18:08 PM, Stephen_Hawkins wrote:
To quote Hayek from "Keynes vs Hayek Round 2":

"Wow, one data point and you're jumping for joy!"

Out of context. that reference to economics not a score board.

It was tongue-in-cheek (hence the reference to a fictional youtube rap-debate). Did we really not get that? The point is still relevant.

Let's look at 1 AD. No religious world war (that I know of).


In the 1st century AD (66 AD) the First Jewish"Roman War began.

1) Not a religious war, but a taxation war
Also a religious war. Zealotry was the main cause of the first war.
2) A revolt, not a war (and I still don't understand why any historian calls it a war, probably something to do with an old name before good information)
It was a Civil War.
3) Was not between religious factions.
Zealotry
4) Lasted 7 years, unless we include seperate wars, which make it last a total of twelve years.

66"136 AD..... 136 - 66 = 70
In the 10th century BC the Kingdom of Israel started conquering their neighbors.

1) The war started centuries before then, and continued for centuries after
2) No reason, short of the Bible, to believe the wars were religious in nature (and due to the Bible claiming all wars were religious, it is not trustworthy in this specific regard on its own.
3) Lasted much longer than the two centuries.

Well my point was that it was likely to last a minimum of 2 centuries, so your point is mute.
So it's not at the turn of the millennia, not for religious reasons, and not for 200 years.

Let's look at 999BC. No religious world war (that I know of).

Also, first crusade was 1096.
Yeah the 11th century AD. It's not exact, because slight variations can change when the event takes place.

Much closer 12th century AD than where we are. So why not make the prediction for the 22nd? Because there's not enough impact and one data point over a thousand years is not evidence.

Again, it's not exact. My point was not that every 1,000 years there is a religious war. My point was that the current war will likely last 2 centuries. History repeats it's self but you cannot set a watch to it. As I have already pointed out, variations in events make it impossible to predict. What sparks the event, how long we remember the lessons from history, and ect. all effect the length of the intervals. after x amount of time we forget the lessons history has taught us, and certain events can spark a repeat of history.
Also, the crusades lasted much closer 400 years.

1095-1272 AD
Are we on about jihad wars? Cos they started in 650 and ended 650 years later... (roughly and debatable).
More details please?

I assumed we were talking about crusades lasting 200 years, we can include all crusades, e.g. the Islamic Caliphates.

Also, explain the metanarrative that would lead to a religious holy war every thousand years.

As I have already stated. Once we forget our lessons from history, certain events can trigger a repeat of history. That is why learning history is important; so we can avoid the same mistakes.
"Chemical weapons are no different than any other types of weapons."~Lordknukle