Turn on thread page Beta
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Weejimmie)
    In terms of the world every Saudi is wealthy. I agree that there is comparative poverty within the country, and extreme wealth, which doesn't help, but Saudis do not face the prospect of starvation or dispossession.
    "Homelessness is part of poverty" and "Meals are hard to come by". Seems some do. That was from Begging Ban Exposes Saudi Poverty, which I posted before.

    I am not arguing that Saudi Arabia is as poor as those African countries you listed, but surely to describe someone living below the poverty line as "comparativley wealthy" is just incorrect. If they were "comparatively wealthy", they would not be living below the poverty line. (And as stated in those articles I posted, latest figures estimate that 20%-30% of Saudis are living below the poverty line.)

    You seem to fail to comprehend that to prove your point you must prove that every single Saudi (defined however you like) is comparativley wealthy, whereas I only have to prove that there is just 1 poor Saudi (using your definition) and your point is disproved. Despite the fact that your original post, on which I commented, mentioned nothing about being "comparatively wealthy" even had this been the case my figure of 20%-30% of Saudis living below the poverty line refutes this claim (I'm assuming you agree that the poverty line is an acceptable measure of "comparative wealth"?).

    In those African countries that you posted very roughly 60% of the population are living below the poverty line; just because the figure for Saudi is half that, it doesn't mean that the ones living below the poverty line are any less poor.

    (Original post by Weejimmie)
    Nearly all know that they will eat tomorrow.
    Why thankyou for backing up my point.

    (Original post by Weejimmie)
    As i said above, part of the motivation for islamic terrorists may be the comparative power and weakness of the islamic world, compared with the way they believe it was and should be, but concern about poverty in general doesn't play much part in their rhetoric or- for that reason- in their motivation.
    I am not arguing with this; at least with regards to their ideology. But isn't it possible that poverty and hopelessness help to create an ever widening pool of impressionable new recruits?
    Offline

    0
    (Original post by Vienna)
    Since I originally posted the link, I thought you might be interested in the Guardian's amateur response.

    http://media.guardian.co.uk/site/sto...534497,00.html

    and Scott Burgess' destruction of it.

    http://dailyablution.blogs.com/the_d...re_aslam_.html
    Does anyone know if the Guardian is losing subcribers since 7/7 ??
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by MolsakaG)
    I am not arguing that Saudi Arabia is as poor as those African countries you listed, but surely to describe someone living below the poverty line as "comparativley wealthy" is just incorrect. If they were "comparatively wealthy", they would not be living below the poverty line. (And as stated in those articles I posted, latest figures estimate that 20%-30% of Saudis are living below the poverty line...In those African countries that you posted very roughly 60% of the population are living below the poverty line; just because the figure for Saudi is half that, it doesn't mean that the ones living below the poverty line are any less poor.
    It may well do so: someone defined as living below the poverty line in one country is comparatively wealthy by another country's standards. When you are comparing one country with another the you have to make generalisations: the fact remains that Saudis not are poor by world standards simply because they receive an income which will enable them to survive.

    ...
    I am not arguing with this; at least with regards to their ideology. But isn't it possible that poverty and hopelessness help to create an ever widening pool of impressionable new recruits?
    Of course it is possible. It is probable in Pakistan, even, where poverty means the only education many children, and only boys at that, get is in bigotted madrassas which offer them neither the pleasure of knowledge nor the prospect of earning a living. I don't think poverty and hopelessness necessarily go together, though. In the UK the bombers may have felt hopeless because they had not found or had lost a purpose and hope within society [it's worth remembering that the most qualified was a classroom assistant and had not qualified as a teacher], but they weren't poor, except by local standards, and they could afford to go to Pakistan to compare their poverty with poverty there.
    One factor with some muslims is that they think knowledge of islam is superior to all other knowledge and qualifies them to rule others for their benefit. Living in a society which lives on very different assumptions must be very difficult fior them. One of the problems, though, is that bigotted beliefs offer hope. Jihadis are looking forward to a luxurious and sensuous eternity which made even the greatest imaginable luxury on earth look shoddy.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Weejimmie)
    It may well do so: someone defined as living below the poverty line in one country is comparatively wealthy by another country's standards. When you are comparing one country with another the you have to make generalisations: the fact remains that Saudis not are poor by world standards simply because they receive an income which will enable them to survive.
    I guess if you apply that thinking then everyone except the single person living in the most abject poverty can be considered "comparatively wealthy". And it seems some people aren't surviving!! "Salim Hassan said he couldn't afford to feed his nine children." (from 1 of those articles). If you compare that with Western Europe, North America, the Far East, Australasia and even neighbouring Gulf States I would not say it was "comparatively wealthy".

    Maybe it's just me; but I find it hard to describe someone who is starving as "comparatively wealthy".

    (Original post by Weejimmie)
    Of course it is possible. It is probable in Pakistan, even, where poverty means the only education many children, and only boys at that, get is in bigotted madrassas which offer them neither the pleasure of knowledge nor the prospect of earning a living. I don't think poverty and hopelessness necessarily go together, though. In the UK the bombers may have felt hopeless because they had not found or had lost a purpose and hope within society [it's worth remembering that the most qualified was a classroom assistant and had not qualified as a teacher], but they weren't poor, except by local standards, and they could afford to go to Pakistan to compare their poverty with poverty there.
    "The problem in Saudi Arabia is that the middle class is shrinking," said Turki Hamad, a Saudi political scientist. "And the more poverty you have, the more fundamentalism you have." (again from 1 of those articles). Poor people are less likely to be "corrupted" by Western influences, and for some their zeal increases because religion is all that they have. As mentioned in those articles, they may feel resentment towards Western "guest workers", who get (comparatively) brilliant jobs with excellent benefits. I live in the Gulf, and Westerners, especially Americans, are sought after by oil companies etc., and although where I live there are relatively few "poor" locals, from the way that other expatriate workers (even educated Muslim Arab ones) are treated, I can easily believe that should this spread to the local population there would be great(er) Western resentment.

    I agree that poverty and hopelessness do not always go together, but they do often compliment each other.

    (Original post by Weejimmie)
    One factor with some muslims is that they think knowledge of islam is superior to all other knowledge and qualifies them to rule others for their benefit. Living in a society which lives on very different assumptions must be very difficult fior them. One of the problems, though, is that bigotted beliefs offer hope. Jihadis are looking forward to a luxurious and sensuous eternity which made even the greatest imaginable luxury on earth look shoddy.
    That is true, but is that not the same of some people from other religions, some people from other ethnic backgrounds, some people from other countries? I don't think it is exclusively Muslims that think that. Well isn't that the point of Heaven? Surely that is the same for all other religions that believe in Heaven?
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    Answer the rst later, as i'm in a hurry, but:[QUOTE=MolsakaG]
    That is true, but is that not the same of some people from other religions, some people from other ethnic backgrounds, some people from other countries? [quote] Islam, however, tends to combine the two_ knowledge of islam is supposed to be of benefit on earth, whereas other religions [except protestantism, of course] encourage ardent believers to focus on heaven.
    I don't think it is exclusively Muslims that think that. Well isn't that the point of Heaven? Surely that is the same for all other religions that believe in Heaven?
    Islam- at the moment at least- is the only one that some people believe offers a short cut to get to heaven, though, if you take a few other people with you.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Weejimmie)
    but:Islam- at the moment at least- is the only one that offers people a short cut to get to heaven, though, if you take a few other people with you.
    That is not true!
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    Sorry. Amended. Post in haste, repoent at leisusre.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Douglas)
    Does anyone know if the Guardian is losing subcribers since 7/7 ??
    No, but theyve had resignations.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by doodle)
    yeh..politely :eek:
    it'd REALLY help if u all stopped tlkng bullshi* to be honest coz u lots dont even know what ur talking about when it comes to islam,its more than what u think it is,its more than what ur fed by the media,islam is a WHOLE,u cant jus pick out things you dont like about it,to understand it and accept it you have to know the full background and details of evrything..as 4 the parliment thing,wht do u mean by they "fight.."
    well erm- they literally fight in parliament!!

    Lets face it, islam represents some of the most un-settled people in the world! No wonder nobody wants Iran to have nuclear weapons!
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by tom391)
    Another example of a collossal generalisation; the post is full of more.

    You seem to be confusing a tiny minority of extremists with an entire faith; the vast majority of muslims can in no way be generalised in the same breath as terrorists - any more than any other type of people.

    To say that muslims do not believe in democracy is absurd.

    What about the Muslims of Britain who voted in the election? What about the elections in Iraq?

    If given a decent chance, i imagine 99.9.....% of muslims would embrace democracy.........or at least as many as anybody else.

    my thoughts exactly.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Latayah)
    my thoughts exactly.
    99.9%...I havent read all of the Quran, so perhaps you can tell me where it advocates democracy ahead of Islamic law.
 
 
 

983

students online now

800,000+

Exam discussions

Find your exam discussion here

Poll
Should predicted grades be removed from the uni application process
Useful resources

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

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