[A.K85]

There must be a a strong reason why peaceful Buddhists would become so angry that they would use force as a last resort. Burma is xenophobic but at least Indians left the country peacefully when during the 1960's.

There are 2 sides to this story I believe....

[A.K85]

(Original post by izzaha)
Yes they have the right to kick them out but why treat them in such an inhuman way . did you not watch the video? People burned alive in their own homes, children murdered in front of their parents, these people are being slaughtered. Do they deserve this vile treatment?

Yes, do the minority groups of pakistan and bangladesh still deserve this treatment?

[Alpharius]

So basically the whole of Asia is a ****hole?

Not surprised by this news, it's just the latest atrocity to have come out of that region of the world. There will be more.

I also detect massive hypocrisy in this thread. Now the Muslims are the victims they are demanding an apology from the likes of the Dalai Lama, yet when Muslims are the culprits you say absolutely nothing, and none of their figureheads speak a word of condemnation towards their fellow muslims.

[Studentus-anonymous]

(Original post by IdeasForLife)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature...&v=cHTU1ZSxymc

Even the Aung San Suu Kyi who everyone talks about says nothing about it, just another stupid two faced leader.

Why does noone care about this?

I'm not just pointing a finger at the west , where is Saudi? Where is Pakistan etc? Surely with their military they could easily save them.

The same reason a lot of **** places aren't being helped, because it's not everyone else's problem.

I guess you could argue that Muslim solidarity demands that the Saudi's and such help buuuut....yeah no, Muslims have been fighting each other and doing their own thing just like the rest of humanity, that isn't going to fly. Also as far as I am aware neither Saudi Arabia and Pakistan have power projection capabilities sufficient to intervene. The reason the west can invade distant countries is because they have those capabilities. Look at Russia and China, huge armies, completely useless beyond their own borders. If America invaded Georgia it would have used amphibious landing craft and helicopters from marine assault ships and other vessels from a carrier group, with air support from said carrier. Russia had to ship it's troops and tanks by train to the border.


But accepting that it is morally justifiable to intervene, you're suggesting that we trade one 'minor' (if you'll allow the term, I'm sure it doesn't feel minor to those affected) ****ty situation for an invasion and much larger ****ty situation.

Military intervention usually only trades one bunch of people's suffering for another (usually a larger group).

Afghanistan, Iraq, Vietnam. There is a history of intervention that proves it wasteful for the country undertaking it, and destructive for the target country.

So for every call for intervention you have moral and practical arguments against.

[Clessus]

(Original post by A.K85)
Checked your link, the guy was explaining the sharia beleif system on womens half value testimony in court.

I know what he was saying, he was saying that it was okay, or 'pointless' due to Islam's views on rape. I agree that Islam's views on rape are reprehensable, but still, its a pretty disgusting thing to say, no matter how you try to handwave it.

[Study]

(Original post by Studentus-anonymous)
The same reason a lot of **** places aren't being helped, because it's not everyone else's problem.

I guess you could argue that Muslim solidarity demands that the Saudi's and such help buuuut....yeah no, Muslims have been fighting each other and doing their own thing just like the rest of humanity, that isn't going to fly. Also as far as I am aware neither Saudi Arabia and Pakistan have power projection capabilities sufficient to intervene. The reason the west can invade distant countries is because they have those capabilities. Look at Russia and China, huge armies, completely useless beyond their own borders. If America invaded Georgia it would have used amphibious landing craft and helicopters from marine assault ships and other vessels from a carrier group, with air support from said carrier. Russia had to ship it's troops and tanks by train to the border.


But accepting that it is morally justifiable to intervene, you're suggesting that we trade one 'minor' (if you'll allow the term, I'm sure it doesn't feel minor to those affected) ****ty situation for an invasion and much larger ****ty situation.

Military intervention usually only trades one bunch of people's suffering for another (usually a larger group).

Afghanistan, Iraq, Vietnam. There is a history of intervention that proves it wasteful for the country undertaking it, and destructive for the target country.

So for every call for intervention you have moral and practical arguments against.

Iraq, Vietnam was't really intervene it was more just attempting to take over their country.
At one point the west's leaders loved Saddam.

[jumpingjesusholycow]

(Original post by izzaha)
Yes they have the right to kick them out but why treat them in such an inhuman way . did you not watch the video? People burned alive in their own homes, children murdered in front of their parents, these people are being slaughtered. Do they deserve this vile treatment?

Erm. Since when was ethnic cleansing legal?

[Slushxx]

(Original post by At peace)
As for the Buddhist monks, I don't know what to say about them. They are the ones who walk barefooted so as not to kill the ants, and now they are ones with knifes and swords slicing men, women and children. Filthy terrorist!

Don't be silly, you're making the same generalisations that are made by those who consider all Muslims to be terrorists.

As for what's going on in Burma, it is truly despicable and I agree with those who are saying Western leaders shamefully hang on to Aung San Suu Kyi as a poster girl for peace.

Although I think it's good that more people are made aware of what's happening, why is it that Muslims only seem to get outrage and send forwarded texts when the victims of the crime are Muslims. It would be great to see the same response to other atrocities and human rights violations regardless of whether the victims are Muslims or not.

[At peace]

(Original post by Slushxx)
Don't be silly, you're making the same generalisations that are made by those who consider all Muslims to be terrorists.

Sorry if it came across like that. I didn't meant "all" monks, but the Burmese blood thirsty beasts. I'll edit my post to Burmese Terrorist monks.

Although I think it's good that more people are made aware of what's happening, why is it that Muslims only seem to get outrage and send forwarded texts when the victims of the crime are Muslims. It would be great to see the same response to other atrocities and human rights violations regardless of whether the victims are Muslims or not.

Muslims who care about their Muslim brothers and sisters have always raised there voices for any innocent person. It's not for appreciation of people, it's our religious duty.

I can only speak for myself, and I condemn this just as much as what happened to the Sikhs yesterday.

[Iqbal007]

(Original post by Alpharius)
So basically the whole of Asia is a ****hole?

Not surprised by this news, it's just the latest atrocity to have come out of that region of the world. There will be more.

I also detect massive hypocrisy in this thread. Now the Muslims are the victims they are demanding an apology from the likes of the Dalai Lama, yet when Muslims are the culprits you say absolutely nothing, and none of their figureheads speak a word of condemnation towards their fellow muslims.

No one here is speaking on an apology, but we asking why the likes Aung San Su Kyi nor the Dali Lama aren't speaking out about this, both are very peaceful and they should say something about this considering their stance on violence and oppression.
Plus Muslims do, their have been numerous fatwa's against terrorism and against such radical groups, even Muslims on here condemn those who do it when they are Muslim.

[abzy1234]

(Original post by At peace)
Sorry if it came across like that. I didn't meant "all" monks, but the Burmese blood thirsty beasts. I'll edit my post to Burmese Terrorist monks.

Muslims who care about their Muslim brothers and sisters have always raised there voices for any innocent person. It's not for appreciation of people, it's our religious duty.

I can only speak for myself, and I condemn this just as much as what happened to the Sikhs yesterday.

This is the attitude that we need from Muslims. The heavily biased social media which has been spreading in websites which denounce Buddhists as sole persecutors, are silly and unwise.

Please try and remember this is an ethnic clash, not a religious clash whatsoever.

[izzaha]

(Original post by jumpingjesusholycow)
Erm. Since when was ethnic cleansing legal?

I didnt realise it was ethnic cleansing i take that back.

[Freier._.lance]

I wonder if there'll ever be a time when people will say " we don't care who you are, but we'll fight for you, and won't try to brush the problem onto someone else....". The real travesty is that after this discussion is all done and dusted here in this thread, everyone here will go back to their lives, and nothing will be done.

[At peace]

(Original post by abzy1234)
This is the attitude that we need from Muslims. The heavily biased social media which has been spreading in websites which denounce Buddhists as sole persecutors, are silly and unwise.

Please try and remember this is an ethnic clash, not a religious clash whatsoever.

Thanks!

(Original post by Freier._.lance)
I wonder if there'll ever be a time when people will say " we don't care who you are, but we'll fight for you, and won't try to brush the problem onto someone else....". The real travesty is that after this discussion is all done and dusted here in this thread, everyone here will go back to their lives, and nothing will be done.

So true. I can't help but think, we are losing our humanity. . .fast!

If the numbers are true [I personally think they are] then more than 25,000 people have been killed, burned alive, raped, beaten and sliced to death and the UN has decided it's all an imagination.

[Awyk]

(Original post by 4metal)
Obviosuly the Burmese hate muslims. It's their country and they have a right to kick them out if they want.

To be a Muslim means you are following Islam and Islam is a religion so if a native Burmese reconverts to Islam is Burma no longer his/her country? It's like saying a British man reconverts to Islam and should loose his passport. Sometimes people don't make sense and sometimes these people need a hit round the head with a chair

[A.K85]

(Original post by Iqbal007)
No one here is speaking on an apology, but we asking why the likes Aung San Su Kyi nor the Dali Lama aren't speaking out about this, both are very peaceful and they should say something about this considering their stance on violence and oppression.
Plus Muslims do, their have been numerous fatwa's against terrorism and against such radical groups, even Muslims on here condemn those who do it when they are Muslim.

What did you ever do for Dalai Lama and Tibet?
What have you done for the Buddhists in Bangladesh?

Enough of this islam propaganda.

[A.K85]

(Original post by Awyk)
To be a Muslim means you are following Islam and Islam is a religion so if a native Burmese reconverts to Islam is Burma no longer his/her country? It's like saying a British man reconverts to Islam and should loose his passport. Sometimes people don't make sense and sometimes these people need a hit round the head with a chair

I disagree. Islams loyalty lies with fellow muslims and the uma, not the nation state.

[Theafricanlegend]

And peoople say all muslims are violent and want to take over the world, what bullsh1t.

[PopaPork]

(Original post by Awyk)
To be a Muslim means you are following Islam and Islam is a religion so if a native Burmese reconverts to Islam is Burma no longer his/her country? It's like saying a British man reconverts to Islam and should loose his passport. Sometimes people don't make sense and sometimes these people need a hit round the head with a chair

Unfortunately due to the intolerance of Islam we do now have a country where this is correct in that you have to be a muslim to be a citizen if you change your faith and survive you will lose your citizenship.

There’s an old saying that is appropriate here

What's sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander.

[Alpharius]

(Original post by Iqbal007)
No one here is speaking on an apology, but we asking why the likes Aung San Su Kyi nor the Dali Lama aren't speaking out about this, both are very peaceful and they should say something about this considering their stance on violence and oppression.
Plus Muslims do, their have been numerous fatwa's against terrorism and against such radical groups, even Muslims on here condemn those who do it when they are Muslim.

Contradiction.

You are asking them to condemn them, something the spiritual leaders of Islam never do, despite your claim. If anything Islamic spiritual leaders usually make excuses for the terrorists.

And all the good these fatwa's have done; Some American Imam; "I know, lets condemn all Islamic terrorists to death!
(despite the fact that most of these terrorists are so fanatical they are looking to martyr themselves, making the threat a little mute)"