So I'm reading the Wikileaks book, and it's infuriating.

[Anung Un Rama]

Hey, guess what: It's not a HUGE fucking "IF" https://en.wikipedia.or

Hey, guess what: It's not a HUGE fucking "IF"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Early_Muslim_conquests
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Middle_East

"We" were the U.S.A. and the Soviet Union. And yes we could've taken it all. One at a time. What country would've been able to stop us?

Right, but that is before Geneva convention. Drop a good 20 nukes in Afghanistan, let it die down, send in air force then ground troops to clean up and we could conquer it in 2 months tops.










You don't have to admit you're wrong, it'll be obvious to those reading the thread. As promised, I'm done here. See ya.

g/wiki/Early_Muslim_conquests
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Middle_East

"We" were the U.S.A. and the Soviet Union. And yes we could've taken it all. One at a time. What country would've been able to stop us?

Right, but that is before Geneva convention. Drop a good 20 nukes in Afghanistan, let it die down, send in air force then ground troops to clean up and we could conquer it in 2 months tops.










You don't have to admit you're wrong, it'll be obvious to those reading the thread. As promised, I'm done here. See ya.

Your referencing "The History of the Middle East" is laughable, but not nearly the epic fail of using what happened between 600 and 700 AD to support your position.

I was tempted to stop reading after this, but I'm glad I didn't. I would have hated to miss your proposing dropping "20 nukes in Afghanistan".

And then I wouldn't have been able to give you your badge:

 

[Islam Imamate]

You don't have to admit you're wrong, it'll be obvious to those reading the thread. As promised, I'm done here. See ya.

Its not though

 

[Blackened]

Your referencing "The History of the Middle East" is laughable, but not nearly the epic fail of using what happened between 600 and 700 AD to support your position.

I was tempted to stop reading after this, but I'm glad I didn't. I would have hated to miss your proposing dropping "20 nukes in Afghanistan".

And then I wouldn't have been able to give you your badge:

Its not though

.



635 Muslim Crusaders besiege and conquer of Damascus

636 Muslim Crusaders defeat Byzantines decisively at Battle of Yarmuk.

637 Muslim Crusaders conquer Iraq at the Battle of al—Qadisiyyah (some date it in 635 or 636)

638 Muslim Crusaders conquer and annex Jerusalem, taking it from the Byzantines.

638—650 Muslim Crusaders conquer Iran, except along Caspian Sea.

639—642 Muslim Crusaders conquer Egypt.

641 Muslim Crusaders control Syria and Palestine.

643—707 Muslim Crusaders conquer North Africa.

644 Caliph Umar is assassinated by a Persian prisoner of war; Uthman ibn Affan is elected third Caliph, who is regarded by many Muslims as gentler than Umar.

644—650 Muslim Crusaders conquer Cyprus, Tripoli in North Africa, and establish Islamic rule in Iran, Afghanistan, and Sind.

656 Caliph Uthman is assassinated by disgruntled Muslim soldiers; Ali ibn Abi Talib, son—in—law and cousin to Muhammad, who married the prophet's daughter Fatima through his first wife Khadija, is set up as Caliph.

656 Battle of the Camel, in which Aisha, Muhammad's wife, leads a rebellion against Ali for not avenging Uthman's assassination. Ali's partisans win.

657 Battle of Siffin between Ali and Muslim governor of Jerusalem, arbitration goes against Ali

661 Murder of Ali by an extremist; Ali's supporters acclaim his son Hasan as next Caliph, but he comes to an agreement with Muawiyyah I and retires to Medina.

661—680 the Caliphate of Muawiyyah I. He founds Umayyid dynasty and moves capital from Medina to Damascus

673—678 Arabs besiege Constantinople, capital of Byzantine Empire

680 Massacre of Hussein (Muhammad's grandson), his family, and his supporters in Karbala, Iraq.

691 Dome of the Rock is completed in Jerusalem, only six decades after Muhammad's death.

 

[dissolved]

So long as you acknowledge that this wasn't the original argument we can go down this thread.

What was the point of this thread? American imperialism is evil and TS is sick and tired of Muslims being put in a bad light because America has done and is doing bad things?

If you asked me, the following posts were touching on the fact that we're in a war and what are we going to do about it.

1) America has done bad things, has some bad things on the go. I'm all for introspection, criticism and changed policies and practices. This has to be ongoing.

2) Islam is at war with non-Muslims. This ongoing 1400 year war has never changed. Their morals for war practice and policy as well as end-goal is also unchanged. What is the West and the world generally going to do about it? In my opinion we are already in a world civil war (call it WWIII if you like).

I'm not sure what you are posting about.

 

[Islam Imamate]

.



635 Muslim Crusaders besiege and conquer of Damascus

636 Muslim Crusaders defeat Byzantines decisively at Battle of Yarmuk.

637 Muslim Crusaders conquer Iraq at the Battle of al—Qadisiyyah (some date it in 635 or 636)

638 Muslim Crusaders conquer and annex Jerusalem, taking it from the Byzantines.

638—650 Muslim Crusaders conquer Iran, except along Caspian Sea.

639—642 Muslim Crusaders conquer Egypt.

641 Muslim Crusaders control Syria and Palestine.

643—707 Muslim Crusaders conquer North Africa.

644 Caliph Umar is assassinated by a Persian prisoner of war; Uthman ibn Affan is elected third Caliph, who is regarded by many Muslims as gentler than Umar.

644—650 Muslim Crusaders conquer Cyprus, Tripoli in North Africa, and establish Islamic rule in Iran, Afghanistan, and Sind.

656 Caliph Uthman is assassinated by disgruntled Muslim soldiers; Ali ibn Abi Talib, son—in—law and cousin to Muhammad, who married the prophet's daughter Fatima through his first wife Khadija, is set up as Caliph.

656 Battle of the Camel, in which Aisha, Muhammad's wife, leads a rebellion against Ali for not avenging Uthman's assassination. Ali's partisans win.

657 Battle of Siffin between Ali and Muslim governor of Jerusalem, arbitration goes against Ali

661 Murder of Ali by an extremist; Ali's supporters acclaim his son Hasan as next Caliph, but he comes to an agreement with Muawiyyah I and retires to Medina.

661—680 the Caliphate of Muawiyyah I. He founds Umayyid dynasty and moves capital from Medina to Damascus

673—678 Arabs besiege Constantinople, capital of Byzantine Empire

680 Massacre of Hussein (Muhammad's grandson), his family, and his supporters in Karbala, Iraq.

691 Dome of the Rock is completed in Jerusalem, only six decades after Muhammad's death.

Where did I deny the Muslim conquests? If anything I educated you on the topic, after which you went to Wikipedia to learn more. To be fair that is a good trait, actually researching something before continuing to post about it instead of continuing to speak from ignorance.

 

[Blackened]

What was the point of this thread? American imperialism is evil and TS is sick and tired of Muslims being put in a bad light because America has done and is doing bad things?

If you asked me, the following posts were touching on the fact that we're in a war and what are we going to do about it.

1) America has done bad things, has some bad things on the go. I'm all for introspection, criticism and changed policies and practices. This has to be ongoing.

2) Islam is at war with non-Muslims. This ongoing 1400 year war has never changed. Their morals for war practice and policy as well as end-goal is also unchanged. What is the West and the world generally going to do about it? In my opinion we are already in a world civil war (call it WWIII if you like).

I'm not sure what you are posting about.

Seriously. Dude has to be a complete idiot to think we can't conquer Afghanistan if we didn't play by the Geneva convention.

"I'm going to laugh at your comment of dropping nukes, because I don't have a rebuttal".

 

[Blackened]

Where did I deny the Muslim conquests? If anything I educated you on the topic, after which you went to Wikipedia to learn more. To be fair that is a good trait, actually researching something before continuing to post about it instead of continuing to speak from ignorance.

I knew of the Islamic conquests, though not of the details. I took a few history classes in college (well, the two mandatory ones), so I knew that shit went on.

So what if I had to go to wikipedia? My premise held true, thus my conclusion is solid.

Eat dick.

 

[Anung Un Rama]

What was the point of this thread? American imperialism is evil and TS is sick and tired of Muslims being put in a bad light because America has done and is doing bad things?

If you asked me, the following posts were touching on the fact that we're in a war and what are we going to do about it.

1) America has done bad things, has some bad things on the go. I'm all for introspection, criticism and changed policies and practices. This has to be ongoing.

2) Islam is at war with non-Muslims. This ongoing 1400 year war has never changed. Their morals for war practice and policy as well as end-goal is also unchanged. What is the West and the world generally going to do about it? In my opinion we are already in a world civil war (call it WWIII if you like).

I'm not sure what you are posting about.

The argument one-sided beatdown I was having administering to @Blackened was regarding his idea that "we" bequeath land in the ME, land Muslims have lived in for over 1000 years, for the Muslims to live on. The entire proposal falls flat on its face.

You're bringing up a much more interesting and complex tangent of Christianity's decline in the M.E. If you want to talk about that then lets, but not as a defense of a guys who is citing shit that happened in 625AD and proposing dropping 20 nukes on Afghanistan.

 

[Blackened]

The argument one-sided beatdown I was having administering to @Blackened was regarding his idea that "we" bequeath land in the ME, land Muslims have lived in for over 1000 years, for the Muslims to live on. The entire proposal falls flat on its face.

You're bringing up a much more interesting and complex tangent of Christianity's decline in the M.E. If you want to talk about that then lets, but not as a defense of a guys who is citing shit that happened in 625AD and proposing dropping 20 nukes on Afghanistan.

That's not a rebuttal.

Seek alliance when destroyed, good idea. Maybe it will provide you the social support you need.

The argument was basically "we can just take it because they just took it". Those that can admit they were wrong have my respect. I try to on here. I can't respect a man that won't admit when he was wrong.

 

[Islam Imamate]

I knew of the Islamic conquests, though not of the details. I took a few history classes in college (well, the two mandatory ones), so I knew that shit went on.

So what if I had to go to wikipedia?

Its not a big deal, in fact like I said its good if anything, but you just posted an info dump for some reason, as if I didn't know about it despite correcting you on it.

My premise held true, thus my conclusion is solid.

What premise?

Eat dick.

Any dick?

 

[Anung Un Rama]

That's not a rebuttal.

Seek alliance when destroyed, good idea. Maybe it will provide you the social support you need.

The argument was basically "we can just take it because they just took it". Those that can admit they were wrong have my respect. I try to on here. I can't respect a man that won't admit when he was wrong.

shoo

 

[Blackened]

Its not a big deal, in fact like I said its good if anything, but you just posted an info dump for some reason, as if I didn't know about it despite correcting you on it.

What premise?

Any dick?

Don't feel like going repeating it again (would be the 5th time).

 

[Islam Imamate]

Don't feel like going repeating it again (would be the 5th time).

You mean the premise I rebuked already? That might makes right and the US and USSR were so generously gifting the world its sovereignty by not nuking it into oblivion?

 

[Blackened]

You mean the premise I rebuked already? That might makes right and the US and USSR were so generously gifting the world its sovereignty by not nuking it into oblivion?

It was a pathetic rebuttal to be honest.

 

[Islam Imamate]

It was a pathetic rebuttal to be honest.

A pathetic rebuttal for a pathetic argument so its fitting.

 

[Blackened]

A pathetic rebuttal for a pathetic argument so its fitting.

Not really, the argument was sound.

A. If ownership of land can be attained by use of force

B. Then ownership of the Islamic land can be attained by use of force



A. After WW2, The United States and the Soviet Union were dominant world powers who CHOSE to stop the reign of empires and colonization (some treaty, can't remember the name).
B. Therefore we gave the world (including Islamic land) the right to self determination by not conquering it.








How did you rebut it?

@Kafir-kun Waiting

 

[Islam Imamate]

Not really, the argument was sound.

A. If ownership of land can be attained by use of force

B. Then ownership of the Islamic land can be attained by use of force



A. After WW2, The United States and the Soviet Union were dominant world powers who CHOSE to stop the reign of empires and colonization (some treaty, can't remember the name).
B. Therefore we gave the world (including Islamic land) the right to self determination by not conquering it.








How did you rebut it?

I rebutted it by showing that it would not be possible for either the USSR or the US to occupy the lands of the Middle East indefinitely given neither could occupy single countries in the region indefinitely.

You responded by saying they could've nuked the entire place and then settled it, as if ethnically cleansing the entire Middle East with nuclear weapons was a task either power was up for.

Like I said, they just accepted the way the world was moving. Colonies everywhere had independence movements that were gaining momentum so the two new superpowers decided it was time for the old guard to accept their diminished place in the world. But its not as if either superpower was altruistic as they both tried to impose themselves on countries afterward, they just realized the old method was no longer viable. The old method being conquest. This became evident when major occupations, like Vietnam and Afghanistan, failed to achieve their objectives.

 

[Blackened]

I rebutted it by showing that it would not be possible for either the USSR or the US to occupy the lands of the Middle East indefinitely given neither could occupy single countries in the region indefinitely.

You responded by saying they could've nuked the entire place and then settled it, as if ethnically cleansing the entire Middle East with nuclear weapons was a task either power was up for.

Like I said, they just accepted the way the world was moving. Colonies everywhere had independence movements that were gaining momentum so the two new superpowers decided it was time for the old guard to accept their diminished place in the world. But its not as if either superpower was altruistic as they both tried to impose themselves on countries afterward, they just realized the old method was no longer viable. The old method being conquest. This became evident when major occupations, like Vietnam and Afghanistan, failed to achieve their objectives.

Hey, look here! An actual rebuttal. A good one too. Attacks the premise that they wouldn't have conquered the world as they weren't willing to expend the energy. Why couldn't you have made this post 50 posts back and saved us both a lot of time? This is the type of post I like to see. There have no good "rebuttals" that held any merit from you or the other guy hitherto, but I'll try to weasel my way out of this one though

There is little evidence that the U.S. wanted to expand territory, but Stalin was always keep on an ever expanding buffer zone. It was always said that Stalin wanted to expand communism, but who knows really?

I'll try to argue that they accepted the way the world was moving (aside from the "buffer zone"), but they didn't have to. Whether or not they were willing to expend the energy becomes irrelevant as it most certainly could've been done and empires could've kept expanding.

 

[Islam Imamate]

Hey, look here! An actual rebuttal. A good one too. Attacks the premise that they wouldn't have conquered the world as they weren't willing to expend the energy. Why couldn't you have made this post 50 posts back and saved us both a lot of time? This is the type of post I like to see. There have no good "rebuttals" that held any merit from you or the other guy hitherto, but I'll try to weasel my way out of this one though

I made these points earlier though

You're right but at the same time even force is on my side. The Vietnamese and Afghans ejected those two superpowers you said generously gave the world the gift of sovereignty. If they could do that do you really think either the USSR or the US could occupy the whole Middle East? We couldn't even occupy Iraq for ten years.

What they did was realize the direction the world was heading.

There is little evidence that the U.S. wanted to expand territory, but Stalin was always keep on an ever expanding buffer zone. It was always said that Stalin wanted to expand communism, but who knows really?

Both countries wanted to dominate the world but they both realized that this wasn't feasible via conquest. It was about alliance building and soft power and whatnot. At its ugliest America would help install dictators favorable to our interests. But even in our own region,Latin America we didn't attempt direct conquest.

I'll try to argue that they accepted the way the world was moving (aside from the "buffer zone"), but they didn't have to. Whether or not they were willing to expend the energy becomes irrelevant as it most certainly could've been done and empires could've kept expanding.

I don't think it most certainly could've been done. No single military on the planet could stand up to either of the two superpowers. But conquering involves occupation and there are examples in the 20th century of occupations by both failing in the medium term.

Tbh I think even the old school colonizers in France and the UK probably realized that the era of imperialism and conquest was ending by the time they colonized the Middle East. That's why their colonies were called mandates and protectorates, because it was implicitly acknowledged that the European occupation was temporary and for the ultimate purpose of handing over sovereignty to the natives.

 

[dissolved]

The argument one-sided beatdown I was having administering to @Blackened was regarding his idea that "we" bequeath land in the ME, land Muslims have lived in for over 1000 years, for the Muslims to live on. The entire proposal falls flat on its face.

You're bringing up a much more interesting and complex tangent of Christianity's decline in the M.E. If you want to talk about that then lets, but not as a defense of a guys who is citing shit that happened in 625AD and proposing dropping 20 nukes on Afghanistan.

Let me tell you that there is a reason Gad Saad's youtube casts almost always touch-on or go back to the resident fear he has of Islam encroaching-upon western civilization. He of course came from Lebanon and saw it first hand.

Wafa Sultan has also reduced her speaking engagements in the last year and a half and has actually struggled with depression as a result of what she's seeing in the Islamification of the West.

I don't care about WR beatdowns.