Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Steevee)
    I do often find Muslims have a pre-determined opposition to Iraq and Afghanistan simply because they're in 'Muslim lands', and of the 3 Muslims I know in person, 2 of them do spout the ridiculous non-arguments about the West just wanting the oil and so on. Which is a little concerning.

    A point I'd like to raise though, related to the OP, is the hypocriosy of the apologetic Left and some Muslims.

    When the likes of the EBL and BNP protest, it's a sign of 'Islamaphobia', and such protests are often used in a wider context and applied to the odd story in the Daily Mail to portray and 'Islamaphobic Agenda', that is to say that they feel the majority of people need to be 're-educated' on Islam. However, these groups are just as far in the minority as the radicals we see on the street in support of Islamism. Indeed, you see far more outcry and opposition to the first set of people than you do the second. It seems to me a case of double standards, which is not unexpected really, but worth commenting upon.
    Non-arguments? What exactly was the war in Iraq for, then? It certainly wasn't because Saddam was genuinely thought to have weapons of mass destruction.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by halbeth)
    Non-arguments? What exactly was the war in Iraq for, then? It certainly wasn't because Saddam was genuinely thought to have weapons of mass destruction.
    There were a wide variety of reasons all coming together for Iraq. There was the worry about the pursuit of Nuclear Weapons, intelligence agencies predicted he could have a viable Nuclear weapon within 3 years, he also already had chemical and biological weapons. He was severely threatening regional security aswell as being very anti-western. There was of course his human rights record, which I'm not suggesting was a reason for the intervention in and of itself, but it was certainly a factor.

    Now when I talk about non-arguments, I'm talking about a few specific ones. 'It was just so they could steal the oil!' Which is a ridiculous argument to make when you actually look at the statistics and figures as regards oil exports/imports, who the contracts went to after the rebuilding phase and so on. And of course they ever clasic, 'It's partly an excuse for a Western war on Islam!' Which I'm sure everyone can see the massive flaws with.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by slickrick666999)
    I'm sure they all dont. But many of them seem to.

    The troops are out there fighting terrorist maniacs who want to kill us, and reguarly kill their own people. (Muslims are often biggest victims of Al-Qaeda/Taliban)

    It's obvious to me that they have little affiliation toward the troops, but more toward those countries just because they're Muslim. I do not hear so much complaints of terrorists or Islamists here in Britain compared to complaints about the troops..

    We've seen marches and protest against our troops where they're spat on and called 'baby killers' by 'British' Muslim protesters. Not all soldiers are 'baby killers'. We often hear of 'Western Propaganda' as they claim, (I thought they were Westerners too?) yet we do not hear of the Eastern propaganda against the US, UK, Israel in Islamic nations which is also very strong. The 'baby killer' term is just ridiculous also. Are they angry with the war, or just because they're Muslim countrys? from where I'm standing, it's quite clear who they view as 'their own'.

    Also, why no protests from Muslim troop protesters... whenever Islamist preach hatred against the UK? where are they then? not a word, no reaction, no riots. Are they only willing to challenge our Troops or a Far-Right rally? that's the only time I see them out in the street getting angry. Whenever there's an opportunity to scream racism :confused: Or maybe, it's just non-muslims who they're willing to challenge. :confused:

    P.S - I disagree with the war on terror.

    Edit: I also see a lot more complaints about the war in Iraq etc. then the likes of Anjem Choudhry. Why is nobody protesting him? Why was there stronger anger/reaction to Bin Laden's killing then the poppy burning?
    Generalisation after generalisation. Sounds to me like you watched Four Lions and got a bit carried away...
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Steevee)
    There were a wide variety of reasons all coming together for Iraq. There was the worry about the pursuit of Nuclear Weapons, intelligence agencies predicted he could have a viable Nuclear weapon within 3 years, he also already had chemical and biological weapons. He was severely threatening regional security as well as being very anti-western. There was of course his human rights record, which I'm not suggesting was a reason for the intervention in and of itself, but it was certainly a factor.

    Now when I talk about non-arguments, I'm talking about a few specific ones. 'It was just so they could steal the oil!' Which is a ridiculous argument to make when you actually look at the statistics and figures as regards oil exports/imports, who the contracts went to after the rebuilding phase and so on. And of course they ever clasic, 'It's partly an excuse for a Western war on Islam!' Which I'm sure everyone can see the massive flaws with.
    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/poli...eat-to-UK.html

    http://www.airpower.maxwell.af.mil/a...cc/tracey.html

    Ok, so the WMD thing is pretty much debunked. Apparently a lot of them ended up in Syria. In any case, Saddam didn't have them and intelligence didn't think he did.

    By this point he'd already made reparations to Kuwait, and the UK, USA and France's containment and no-fly zone policy had made him anything but a threat to the region for a considerable amount of time.

    http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-18560_162-592330.html

    'He obtained one Pentagon document, dated March 5, 2001, and entitled "Foreign Suitors for Iraqi Oilfield contracts," which includes a map of potential areas for exploration.'

    And a person being anti-western in belief is a valid justification to declare war on them, is it?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    1. Not all muslims do.

    2. Those that do, and are British citizens, are traitors. Simple.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by halbeth)
    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/poli...eat-to-UK.html

    http://www.airpower.maxwell.af.mil/a...cc/tracey.html

    Ok, so the WMD thing is pretty much debunked. Apparently a lot of them ended up in Syria. In any case, Saddam didn't have them and intelligence didn't think he did.

    By this point he'd already made reparations to Kuwait, and the UK, USA and France's containment and no-fly zone policy had made him anything but a threat to the region for a considerable amount of time.

    http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-18560_162-592330.html

    'He obtained one Pentagon document, dated March 5, 2001, and entitled "Foreign Suitors for Iraqi Oilfield contracts," which includes a map of potential areas for exploration.'

    And a person being anti-western in belief is a valid justification to declare war on them, is it?
    Debunked is pretty subjective. THere is strong evidence to suggest that Saddam did have Biological and Chemical weapon stockpiles. The claim was not that he had Nuclear weapons, but was in pursuit of them and could concievably have a viable Nuclear device in a matter of years, which was true. This presented a huge risk to regional security by itself.

    As for the assertion that Saddam was contained? We saw numerous violations of UN Resolutions and the 1991 cease-fire during his reign.

    The US also have plans for the invasion of Canada and Mexico, it is pragmatic to plan for all circumstances.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    I think the head of MI5 when Blair was in power stating it is a pretty good indicator, myself
    Offline

    5
    ReputationRep:
    The real question is: why doesn't everyone hate the troops?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by slickrick666999)
    X
    Well firstly I am a Muslim and I absolutely do not hate our troops in the slightest and it would have been nice if your thread at least read "Why do SOME UK Muslims hate troops".

    I truly have such a respect for all those men and women who have the courage to go to war, what ever country they fight for. Its something I could never do. So again I do not hate any of our troops and I sincerely hope they all come home to their families safely regardless of their religion/race/political views whatever. War is such a nasty thing

    I may as a Muslim have issues with why we go to war sometimes but that does not mean I hate the troops, I do passionately dislike the politicians who are motivated by war for their personal agendas but why is that the soldiers fault? They are just fighting for their country and following their orders. I truly admire our troops I really cannot say that enough. If anything I wish they were better treated and given more support.

    My question to you is what do I have to do as a UK Muslim for you to realize that I don't hate you or anyone for that matter, although we may have differences it doesn't mean I hate anyone? You are correct in that I have never joined a rally but I do a lot of other things for charities and volunteer groups I do everything I physically can but at the end of the day I am still human bro and this thread just generalized my entire religion and assumed that I hate our troops. Do you have a single Islamic book in your entire house bro/sis that you actually have read?

    So just so we are clear I do not hate our troops and wish they all return to their families safely. I really do.

    Islam really isnt what a lot of people see on CNN. On the topic of war do you know how Muslims are commanded to treat prisoners of war? I don't mean what you see on FOX News I mean actually according to the teachings of Islam:

    "And if any one of the polytheists seeks your protection, then grant him protection so that he may hear the words of Allah . Then deliver him to his place of safety. That is because they are a people who do not know."
    http://Quran.com/9/6-7

    In battle we are not just meant to grant our opposition protection, we are meant to relocate them personally to some where safe. Yusuf Ali, a 20th century Muslim scholar, said

    Even those the enemies of Islam, actively fighting against Islam, there may be individuals who may be in a position to require protection. Full asylum is to be given to them, and opportunities provided for hearing the Word of Allah...If they do not see their way to accept Islam, they will require double protection: from the Islamic forces openly fighting against their people, and from their own people, as they detached themselves from them. Both kinds of protection should be ensured for them, and they should be safely escorted to a place where they can be safe.

    If Islam demands that prisoners of war be treated with such protection and respect then how do you think I am commanded to treat my fellow citizens (even if they are actively against my religion).

    I just wish more people would read what Islam really is about

    Take care my bro/sis
    Peace
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Dejah Thoris)
    Just because you don't agree with me doesn't make my post any less relevant to the question the OP asked.

    I'm sorry but the general public Muslim or otherwise in the UK doesn't hold our troops in high regard and I can't say I blame them.
    No it wasn't that, it was the offensive remark you made. Now try again.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by halbeth)
    I've not actually seen anyone in this thread properly hate on the troops.

    In any case, our army strength is something around 400,000 - it's not there as an anti-invasion force. Its purpose is currently to fight for whatever our government perceives as British interests abroad. We're really not going to be under any significant threat of invasion any time soon - unless you think we're about to have another Napoleon and France might suddenly fancy their chances?
    Obviously you've come after the MOD edit was done.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Kousar)
    Why would someone go to war if they don't agree with it? We're not in the 1900s and we don't have conscription anymore.
    I've yet to hear one soldier that has joined the Army just to go and fight in Afghanistan, and Iraq before that and for no other reason. (And I know a few) Most soldiers did not agree with the Iraq war, but still fought in it since it is their job. Just the same way as you might work for a mining company (not saying you do) but do not agree with much of the environmental destruction mining causes. Or you might work for a Coffee bistro, but do not agree with the way coffee farmers get ripped off by the TNC's.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    Just because a Muslim doesn't support the British army, it does not mean they necessary support Al-Qaeda/Taliban.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by the mezzil)
    I've yet to hear one soldier that has joined the Army just to go and fight in Afghanistan, and Iraq before that and for no other reason. (And I know a few) Most soldiers did not agree with the Iraq war, but still fought in it since it is their job. Just the same way as you might work for a mining company (not saying you do) but do not agree with much of the environmental destruction mining causes. Or you might work for a Coffee bistro, but do not agree with the way coffee farmers get ripped off by the TNC's.
    I think you're totally missing the point. Choosing to participate implies support. If you don't like it you can drop out, and people do eventually. Once they feel the war is in reality, no good.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TechnikAli)
    Great post.



    What are you basing this notion that hatred toward the troops is very very strong on? The fact is there's more educating of young people against extremism and how to identify it. There's community action from mosques working with the police. There's active action taken against people preaching hatred under the guise of Islam.

    What action would you like to see? I don't believe that the minute numbers of people preaching hatred should be given a platform or the attention that they want. There's no negotiating with people with extreme views, and extreme views are not limited to Islam.



    Where do you want to see them? Muslims in politics (MPs and councillors) are not invisible, and they wear the poppy just like their colleagues. Are you saying they should go over and beyond what everyone else does, just to prove that they care more than everyone else?

    There's a WW1/2 memorial in France where you will see literally hundreds of gravestones carved with the names of Muslim soldiers who fought as Allies. There's also a huge number of Muslims who died in other regions of the world in WW2 in support of Britain. WW2 was not just a war for Europe or Christianity. Muslims have as much to remember on Remembrance Day as anyone else. Do you remember those troops as well as the British? My grandfather was delivering supplies to the Allied troops across Europe via ships. Muslims do not hate our troops, they have in fact a long history of supporting them.

    I can find someone to lay out a lecture or sermon against extremism in all it's form if you can find me a platform on the BBC to do so?
    You've articulated this really well TechnikAli, couldn't have done it any better.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by halbeth)
    The hilariously ironic thing is that Saddam's regime was actually far more secularist than anything that is likely to emerge in the new Iraq. Believe me, the war in Iraq was not hating on muslims, it was a war over politics and oil, and I imagine few muslims mourn the Ba'athist regime.

    Muslims get angry because of the high civilian casualties of both wars. That's the reason an awful lot of non-muslims get angry too. Of course muslims feel a connection to them, though: THEY'RE MUSLIM.

    I'm by no means condoning the acts of Anjem Choudary and his ilk. He is a disgusting man. Nevertheless, the death toll for UK troops in Iraq is 179. The death toll for civilians is estimated to be around 120,000. People hate a war that should never have been fought. With very rare exceptions such as the likes of Choudary, people hate THE WAR. Hating the war is not the same thing as hating the troops.
    Ran out of rep rating so here's one

    (Y)
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by slickrick666999)
    Muslim do not have a history of supporting British wars. If you also look at history, Muslims also fought on behalf of Adolf Hitler and fought against us in the war. Don't you know that?

    Hitler described Christianity as gutless and praised Islam on numerous occasions.
    Jus' sayin'



    I find it odd that you're saying "Oh Muslims fought for Adolf Hitler" when many Christians did too, and people of other religions as well. If you look at history, you'd also notice, that Algeria refused to hand over it's Jewish population despite being bullied by Germany to do so

    It's obvious he would praise his allies ie: the grand Mufti was a Muslim and he wanted the same things that Hitler did. He'd have praised a Christian if they wanted the same thing....
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Azarimanka)
    1. Not all muslims do.

    2. Those that do, and are British citizens, are traitors. Simple.
    Why are you a traitor? I don't *hate* the army. I criticise the hell out of it, but that's different to hating it
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by de_monies)
    Why are you a traitor? I don't *hate* the army. I criticise the hell out of it, but that's different to hating it
    Yea. So that's fine. Those that do hate it are traitors
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Kousar)
    I think you're totally missing the point. Choosing to participate implies support. If you don't like it you can drop out, and people do eventually. Once they feel the war is in reality, no good.
    One may choose to be a part of something without supporting all aspects of it. I choose to be a part of the UK electoral system, that doesn't mean I suport all parts of it. A Police Officer may choose to be in the Police Force but not support every law.

    What they support is the spirit and general aim of the organisation. With the Police it is to protect and serve, to enforce law for the betterment of society, though you may not agree with all of those laws. With the Army you may not support the conflict in Iraq, but you may support the mission of the British Army whilst they are there. To help rebuild, to remove the insurjents and to protect civilians.
 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Brussels sprouts
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.