Are You With Or Against It ???

[muslem]

HI
IWANT TO ASK YOU THIS QESTION




ARE YOU WITH OR AGAINST THE ISRAEIL ATTACK IN LEBANON?? AND WHY?

[Fabrizio]

Your use of red, white and blue might sway the voting.

[pianoman11686]

If he/she used white, we wouldn't see the text now, would we? http://www.wirednewyork.com/forum/images/icons/icon10.gif

[Ninjahedge]

Muslem, to be nice, I will avoid stating some of the obvious...


But if you wanted to know, why don't you just read some of the threads here that have to do with the middle east, Iraq, Iran, Israel and teh rest.

You might get a better idea of what we are thinking than coming in and asking us all in capital blue letters.

[Fabrizio]

If he/she used white, we wouldn't see the text now, would we? http://www.wirednewyork.com/forum/images/icons/icon10.gif

[krulltime]

I bet the white text are some clues that can help us answer this test question.

[lofter1]

The hidden invisible text ploy :cool:

Muslem: It's so complicated that my mind reels -- both sides have taken it too far, both Hezbollah and Israel.

There are "dirty hands" on all sides of this...

If your neighbor said, "You can't live in your home" then what would you do? How would you react?

If your neighbor said, "You and your kind should be wiped from the face of the earth", then what would you do? How would you react?

If your neighbor said, "We won the last war -- we call the shots and we decide your fate", then what would you do? How would you react?

If your neighbor said, "If you touch me then I will kill you and your mother and your children", then what would you do? How would you react?

[MrSpice]

Can he type his question with bigger letters? I would be afraid to say anything in response to this dude.

[milleniumcab]

What a question... What an idiot...

[muslem]

iam very sad to read this from you
oh my god :eek:
is this your opinion? the red ,blue and capital letters
iam very sorry i thought that you live in the earth but now iam sure that you live in the moon
sure you didnt understand any thing
there are hundred of people die evry day on the other hand here we talk about the capital letters ,red and blue
thaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaank you very much

[Fabrizio]

You also spelled Israel wrong.

[ZippyTheChimp]

http://www.sonrise.com/images/smiley%20face.jpg

Have a nice day.

[muslem]

You also spelled Israel wrong.


and you also didnt understand any thing:D

[ZippyTheChimp]

iam very sad to read this from you
oh my god :eek:
is this your opinion? the red ,blue and capital letters
iam very sorry i thought that you live in the earth but now iam sure that you live in the moon

Streets full of people, all alone
Rows full of houses, never home
Church full of singing, out of tune
Everyone's gone to the moon.

[lofter1]

You also spelled Israel wrong.


And "qestion"

Muslem: You jump into this forum (where many thoughtful and intelligent people come to visit) and scream a question, but tell us little of yourself or your thoughts.

Kind of like the guest at a party who grabs a drink and yells, "What is wrong with the world?"

Most of the other people at the party would turn away thinking "not someone to talk to" ...

[ablarc]

You jump into this forum (where many thoughtful and intelligent people come to visit) and scream a question, but tell us little of yourself or your thoughts.

Kind of like the guest at a party who grabs a drink and yells, "What is wrong with the world?"

Most of the other people at the party would turn away thinking "not someone to talk to" ...
Well put, lofter1.

[milleniumcab]

^^ Well put...

[milleniumcab]

Sorry ablarc, I did not see your post before posting mine...But here we agree , again..

[ablarc]

^ When someone says something we agree with, no reason we can't all pile in and tell him.

[Zerlina]

"In a gentle way, we can shake the world"... that's what Ghandi said and I wish it would become true... sooner or later...

[Ninjahedge]

iam very sad to read this from you
oh my god :eek:

OK, so what does this have to do with anything?

is this your opinion? the red ,blue and capital letters

If you are trying to confuse us, you have. You have gone through special effort to select different font colors and sizes for some reason, but your broken English only makes it sound rather blunt and, quite frankly, uneducated.

You might as well have come in and said:

"Why you no hate them??!?!?!?? What is you???? You are with feeling I have not knowing understand?"

It is not that we think you do not HAVE something to say, but when you come in and call attention to yourself, you better know how to SAY it.


iam very sorry i thought that you live in the earth but now iam sure that you live in the moon

Again with the English. We live ON the earth, not IN the earth. Little tip here. When you try to insult someones intelligence, try not to sound stupid while doing it, K?

sure you didn't understand any thing

And whose fault is that? When the people around you do not understand the question you are asking, it is not them that are having the problems communicating.

there are hundred of people die evry day on the other hand here we talk about the capital letters, red and blue

On the other hand here? What are you saying? "On the other hand" is usually a term used to express contrast, such as rich and poor, happy and sad, etc etc. You are using colloquialisms (Sayings, slang) that do not fit.

We are talking about the letters because your question was amorphous and not easily addressed. It is like asking "How you feel about life".

Good luck getting an answer. It just does not lend itself to anything you can really discuss without branching off all over.

thaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaank you very much


Um, you would be welcome if you would have followed my first bit of advice and took some time to read the other threads in this forum. You would have gotten a better idea of who you were talking to and been able to ask a more relevant, pertinent question.

IOW, you would have asked a bunch of people you knew something you could talk to them about instead of doing the equivalent of Spam E-Mail.

[OmegaNYC]

"In a gentle way, we can shake the world"... that's what Ghandi said and I wish it would become true... sooner or later...

Amen.

[Outerbanks Lookout]

Ignoring all the nonsensical, provoking language used by Muslim, in his rebuttal, I think the blame can be placed partly on people who say things like this:

Are You With or Against It

People these days are so reluctant to open their minds, even the slightest bit, and would rather try and put, multifaceted regional conflicts, like the Israel/Lebanon crisis, in nice, neat pretty boxes. Things aren't always that simple -- and rarely will they ever be black and white. There is grey area in almost anything – especially something this fervent and emotional.

If we consider – maybe even for a second, that there might actually be middle ground, only then, in my opinion, can we precede to civil, diplomatic avenues (this is a very achievable goal). Otherwise, further retaliation will only lead to exacerbation and god forbid – all out war.

Even Israel has made concessions, first retracting their initial statement that said, in so many words, there will be no cessation until Hezbollah is neutralized, to a much more moderate request – there will be cessation on air-strikes if they agree to distance themselves with a 5 mile buffer…

[pianoman11686]

I've got a simple answer for you: religion. It may not fit in a neat, pretty box, but it gets the job done.

[Outerbanks Lookout]

I've got a simple answer for you: religion. It may not fit in a neat, pretty box, but it gets the job done.

When I say blame, I'm referring to why the solution has not surfaced, not what spawned the conflict in the first place.

Religion, of course, is the reason (mainly) for the bloodshed -- like so many other wars/conflicts.

[kliq6]

religion and hate/dislike of others have caused most wars this world have seen ad well as lead to most Holacusts

[SilentPandaesq]

But religion is just a facet of the larger problem. Man’s (or woman’s) desire to have authority over others is the problem. Religion is just one of the easier ways to accomplish this. Corrupt men and women conjuring up supernatural reasons to justify why their particular likes and dis-likes should be adhered to. Why people they don’t like should be wiped clean from the Earth. This isn’t to say that faith is bad, just that you should never trust a man in a funny hat.

[Ninjahedge]

Religion is not THE reason, it is the reason that man makes up to validate his own instincts and what he feels is right or wrong.

Depending on the era, the religion in place would imitate the hierarchy of the ruling body, from a simple prophet, to a parliamentary body of deities with a head ruler, to a monarchistic god and his slew of lesser royal saints, vassals and servants.

What is believed to be good or bad usually also follows some social standard for the time and is used to manage the interaction of people with each other. Things such as money, sex, physical might and other traits/behaviors are all used to shape what people want to believe is good or bad.

Almost all religion, at one time or another, believes that killing is bad, but killing of another that does not believe is OK, provided they are "evil" in their heresy. This is a VERY human behavior. Territorial and pack-like.

There are other examples as well, both for the good of man, and his detriment, but almost all follow some pattern of establishment of authority.

And eventually that works out into finding the Alphas and the Omegas in the group and making the subjects of the Alphas follow the will of their leaders as if it were their own.



But, bottom line is simple. Xenophobic power hungry dogs that we are, humans will constantly try to take land, resources, and anything else they feel they need to survive. Even when those base needs are met, any difference between man is seen as an advantage that must be had and is competed for as to secure the legascy of their offspring.

So we take and fight and kill. We then find gods that say it is ok, provided we do this and that, and we are assured of our own primal instincts as if they were more than mere animals.

We are evry smart, but with that intelligence came a pride that refuses to allow us to admit our own species shortfalls and inherent primal nature.

[ZippyTheChimp]

"In a gentle way, we can shake the world"... that's what Ghandi said and I wish it would become true... sooner or later...
Sadly, despite Ghandi's efforts, the independence of India was accompanied by much violence, and two religious groups had to be ushered into their own nations. Now they rattle nuclear missiles at each other.

[pianoman11686]

Religion is not THE reason, it is the reason that man makes up to validate his own instincts and what he feels is right or wrong.

I think you're blurring the lines here. Religion, in and of itself, is a human creation; whether it was made up as a sort of validation is irrelevant. The point is, religious differences are the root cause of too much hostility, historically and currently, and I refuse to believe that either side can acknowledge the basis of religion as the source of the problem. It has become too powerful among some people for an objective perspective like that to exist: "My religion is the one and only truth, my God is the one and only God. I'm right, you're wrong. If I die trying to kill you, I will go to heaven, you will not."

Depending on the era, the religion in place would imitate the hierarchy of the ruling body, from a simple prophet, to a parliamentary body of deities with a head ruler, to a monarchistic god and his slew of lesser royal saints, vassals and servants.

I guess you're trying to further the notion that religion grows out of natural human behavior, but your statement is just too general. Monarchies existed for thousands of years up until a few hundred years ago, and there were all kinds of religions: monotheistic, oligopolistic, pagan, and variations therein.

What is believed to be good or bad usually also follows some social standard for the time and is used to manage the interaction of people with each other. Things such as money, sex, physical might and other traits/behaviors are all used to shape what people want to believe is good or bad.

While this has some truth to it, it nonetheless fails to identify the real problem. Most religions, more or less, agree on a lot of things, like the difference between good and bad. The differences arise in the details: when we worship our different holidays, what types of buildings we worship in, what the titles of our religious leaders are, what holy manuscripts we read from, and, most importantly, who/what our God is. Strangely enough, the only thing that I find more than one major religion to agree on is the Holy City (Jerusalem), and we know that's been in dispute for over 2,000 years. As for the details, well: can you begin to picture how absurd it is that we've fought over such mindless things for so long?

Almost all religion, at one time or another, believes that killing is bad, but killing of another that does not believe is OK, provided they are "evil" in their heresy. This is a VERY human behavior. Territorial and pack-like.

There are other examples as well, both for the good of man, and his detriment, but almost all follow some pattern of establishment of authority.

And eventually that works out into finding the Alphas and the Omegas in the group and making the subjects of the Alphas follow the will of their leaders as if it were their own.

Authority. We need that. What we don't need is being brought up to believe certain unreasonable things about our religions, not the least of which is the belief that "all the others are wrong; ours is the one true religion." I have nothing against authority, but when it's religiously motivated? That's when you get state-sponsored wars carrying out God's "will": creating Hell on Earth. Ironic, isn't it?

But, bottom line is simple. Xenophobic power hungry dogs that we are, humans will constantly try to take land, resources, and anything else they feel they need to survive. Even when those base needs are met, any difference between man is seen as an advantage that must be had and is competed for as to secure the legascy of their offspring.

So we take and fight and kill. We then find gods that say it is ok, provided we do this and that, and we are assured of our own primal instincts as if they were more than mere animals.

But that's precisely the point. Why do we need religion to assure us that what we're doing is correct and just? There's a difference between that, and engaging in an armed conflict to obtain land or resources. At some point, the government realizes the cost is not worth the eventual benefit. That's why countries pull out of wars. When you involve religion, it becomes a fight to the death, because it's the ultimate of wars. It's the fulfillment of the divine plan. Try justifying any religious war that has occurred in human history, and argue further that it would have still gone down regardless of the existence of religion, or the presence of religious differences. You can't.

We are evry smart, but with that intelligence came a pride that refuses to allow us to admit our own species shortfalls and inherent primal nature.

We've evolved a good amount as a species. We're smart enough to realize that we don't have to extinguish each other, that everyone deserves to live peacefully no matter who they are. But, there's that caveat again: we're not a secular species yet. Last time I checked, Islam has a long list of grievances against the Jews and the Christians, and they're in for the long haul. I wonder how many people will die before this next holy war is finished.

[Ninjahedge]

I think you're blurring the lines here. Religion, in and of itself, is a human creation; whether it was made up as a sort of validation is irrelevant. The point is, religious differences are the root cause of too much hostility, historically and currently, and I refuse to believe that either side can acknowledge the basis of religion as the source of the problem. It has become too powerful among some people for an objective perspective like that to exist: "My religion is the one and only truth, my God is the one and only God. I'm right, you're wrong. If I die trying to kill you, I will go to heaven, you will not."

I was not saying that religion was not the cause, but the problem is, you have to see how and why religion is created.

People would like to believe that a diety is out there that made all these rules up and then commands his people to do as he says ("he" being used as the general pronoun used to describe god in most societies, not necessarily the truth... ;) ).

The truth is, THEY made the rules up and assigned them to a religion. A lot of Catholocism does not come from the words printed in the bible, but from priests interpretations of them, many coming thousands of years AFTER the fact.

You try to give logic to an unprovable law or history, people shoot you down. But you phrase it right and say "god said it" people follow without questioning.


I guess you're trying to further the notion that religion grows out of natural human behavior, but your statement is just too general. Monarchies existed for thousands of years up until a few hundred years ago, and there were all kinds of religions: monotheistic, oligopolistic, pagan, and variations therein.

Do not kill.
Do not hurt another.
Do not sleep with your neighbors wife (protection of possible progeny, making sure YOUR genes are the ones benig passed on...)

A lot of the rules seem to stem from societal dictates, not from any particular dietal affiliation. The rest are mostly "Do not take the lords name in vain" kind of thing saying, basically, that your religion is important and you should respect (and tacitly implied OBEY) it.

While this has some truth to it, it nonetheless fails to identify the real problem. Most religions, more or less, agree on a lot of things, like the difference between good and bad. The differences arise in the details: when we worship our different holidays, what types of buildings we worship in, what the titles of our religious leaders are, what holy manuscripts we read from, and, most importantly, who/what our God is. Strangely enough, the only thing that I find more than one major religion to agree on is the Holy City (Jerusalem), and we know that's been in dispute for over 2,000 years. As for the details, well: can you begin to picture how absurd it is that we've fought over such mindless things for so long?

The root of this comes when you remove logic from the system of validation. It makes it easier to say to someone that God said this than to explain to them the real reasons or teh real history.

Look how much trouble we had, and are still having, explaining creation! People would rather believe in a VERY simple, almost soap-opera like story about instant creation, good and evil, and sibling rivalry than the whole evolution story which has more backing to it.

Why? Simply because when it was first devised, most people out there did not even know the world was round, let alone anything about the universe we live in. They would rather have a story of gilgamesh sticking his thingy in the ground and "creating" the tigris and euphrates than the whole big bang. they would rather have god setting up the standard work-week and creating everything then than to have to wait 4.5 billion years for the earth to be created.

Hell, many had no concept of what a billion was!

So you tell a nice story to keep everyone happy and tell them that God said it. You are done! they believe it because they want to, it matches with what they feel is right and wrong, it is easy to understand (it does not make them feel stupid) and God said it, so it must be right!

Problem comes in later. After you have put n this metaphor, or these rules for conduct and used EMOTION to make them binding, you cannot use logic to argue them away.

It is VERY hard to do that in a relationship, nevermind in a whole segment of society. The only way to get them to change their mind is to change the way they feel, and that is not easily done.

Authority. We need that. What we don't need is being brought up to believe certain unreasonable things about our religions, not the least of which is the belief that "all the others are wrong; ours is the one true religion." I have nothing against authority, but when it's religiously motivated? That's when you get state-sponsored wars carrying out God's "will": creating Hell on Earth. Ironic, isn't it?

That last part about all others, that is mans embellishment on what was a set of laws meant to bring order to their world. It worked great until onw group met another that had different ideas.

And, like I said, when emotion is used as the primary validation for a law, you can't just argue it away by logic, no matter how clear the logic may be.

As for irony, the whole thing about man against man in the name of religion IS mans greatest weakness. It is its own weak ego trying to make sure its world, the one it was raised on and bases its entire life on, is the right one above all others.

The people who are strong enough to get over this are the ones that do not volunteer to die for things that they know were only made to help everyone out, not to kill them in the name of.

What is the purpose of killing people in the name of an instrument whose primary use was societal integration?

But that's precisely the point. Why do we need religion to assure us that what we're doing is correct and just? There's a difference between that, and engaging in an armed conflict to obtain land or resources. At some point, the government realizes the cost is not worth the eventual benefit. That's why countries pull out of wars. When you involve religion, it becomes a fight to the death, because it's the ultimate of wars. It's the fulfillment of the divine plan. Try justifying any religious war that has occurred in human history, and argue further that it would have still gone down regardless of the existence of religion, or the presence of religious differences. You can't.

That is what I said before. Religion is the easiest thing to use to motivate, but the hardest to control later on. Anger is another. It is easy to get a bunch of men all fired up to go in and "Attack the enemy", but it is hard to do that, and at the same time say "do not rape their women, destroy their land and generally be an all around bad guy".

We've evolved a good amount as a species. We're smart enough to realize that we don't have to extinguish each other, that everyone deserves to live peacefully no matter who they are. But, there's that caveat again: we're not a secular species yet. Last time I checked, Islam has a long list of grievances against the Jews and the Christians, and they're in for the long haul. I wonder how many people will die before this next holy war is finished.

The only way we can get out of this is to lessen the socioeconomic differences between peoples enough so that the primary motivating force, difference, is removed.

As much as the islam extremists might have you believe that they are all willing to die to get this and that, I think these 18 years olds would be less willing to sacrifice themselves for 72 virgins if they had a real possibility of getting some at the prom!

Women would be less likely to strap themselves with explosives if they had the money to feed their family and not have to accept the offer of payment, with the nice bonus of devine grace, in lieu of their lives.

This would not be the cure, but lessen the difference and therefore the "voltage" that is created by such polar extremes. They would still fight, but hopefully a lot less violently (such as we see with our own political system of backstabbing and the like).

Hopefully this would allow us enough time to evolve as a species that is not made for conquering of new environments and defending against al that might come their way, including others of the same species, into one that would be more in tune with what this world is becoming.

[HoboSapian]

I'm always with it