Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
x Turn on thread page Beta
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:




    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Getting some random English white novelist doesn't make your post more credible
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    How is it so many people are mesmerised by a man from 1400 years ago?

    Folklore
    Gullibility
    Indoctriniation from birth
    Horrific repercussions for not doing so?

    Takbiiiiiiirrrr ALLLAANNN AKCMALLL
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Tawheed)




    Mr Hussain was the leader of Iraq before America invaded and removed this tyrant.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TheSexyApple)
    Getting some random English white novelist doesn't make your post more credible
    This isn't about being 'credible'. It is about a historical event, that actually occured, that has hit tidal waves to even appeal to individuals not even in the same religion.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Betelgeuse-)
    How is it so many people are mesmerised by a man from 1400 years ago?

    Folklore
    Gullibility
    Indoctriniation from birth
    Horrific repercussions for not doing so?

    Takbiiiiiiirrrr ALLLAANNN AKCMALLL
    Dickens, Ghandi, many , many non-muslims globally of all faiths, colours, and creeds being inspired by Hussain a.s do not i believe, fall into those catagories you have stipulated.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Tawheed)
    Dickens, Ghandi, many , many non-muslims globally of all faiths, colours, and creeds being inspired by Hussain a.s do not i believe, fall into those catagories you have stipulated.
    Wow its a mystery to me then! Must be something in the water of the Billions that are not "inspired"
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Melancholy)
    Mr Hussain was the leader of Iraq before America invaded and removed this tyrant.
    Whilst killing a million people in the process.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TheCondor)
    Whilst killing a million people in the process.
    And saving countless others.Try telling your cheap line to the Kurds, or the citizens of the southern marshes, who saw their relatives purged by the hundreds of thousands in the most inhumane ways; or to the Iraqis starved of resources appropriated by the Hussain family; to the Kuwaitis who had their land illegally annexed and oil fields burned until the west intervened; etc. We are mandated to intervene when genocide occurs - when whole communities are gassed - when terrorists are given diplomatic passports. We signed up to the genocide convention. Most civilian deaths were (and still are) caused by Isamic insurgents - and you want the west to apologise for this?. Jog on. At least, to move across borders for the moment, the Afghans now have elections, can have their females educated, and are less oppressed by the backward Islamic fundamentalist Taliban.

    The experience in Syria (whose casualty rate [i.e. rate of deaths per month] is higher than in the Iraq theatre) suggests that it doesn't take western intervention to destabilise middle-eastern despots and cause destructive civil wars.

    Revolutions and transfers from an old order (dictatorship) to democracies have historically never been without sacrifice - but the conflict is inevitable, and the west, this time, is on the right side of history.

    I look forward to the day when Israel is not the only properly prosperous democracy in the middle-east, and when preachers of hate (who existed long before events after 9/11 - Bin Laden's first targets were against Indian Hindus and Indonesian democrats who he wanted to be subjected to an Islamic empire through threats of bombings) no longer hold sway in such a tortured part of the planet.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Melancholy)
    And saving countless others.Try telling your cheap line to the Kurds, or the citizens of the southern marshes, who saw their relatives purged by the hundreds of thousands in the most inhumane ways; or to the Iraqis starved of resources appropriated by the Hussain family; to the Kuwaitis who had their land illegally annexed and oil fields burned until the west intervened; etc. We are mandated to intervene when genocide occurs - when whole communities are gassed - when terrorists are given diplomatic passports. We signed up to the genocide convention. Most civilian deaths were (and still are) caused by Isamic insurgents - and you want the west to apologise for this?. Jog on. At least, to move across borders for the moment, the Afghans now have elections, can have their females educated, and are less oppressed by the backward Islamic fundamentalist Taliban.

    The experience in Syria (whose casualty rate [i.e. rate of deaths per month] is higher than in the Iraq theatre) suggests that it doesn't take western intervention to destabilise middle-eastern despots and cause destructive civil wars.

    Revolutions and transfers from an old order (dictatorship) to democracies have historically never been without sacrifice - but the conflict is inevitable, and the west, this time, is on the right side of history.

    I look forward to the day when Israel is not the only properly prosperous democracy in the middle-east, and when preachers of hate (who existed long before events after 9/11 - Bin Laden's first targets were against Indian Hindus and Indonesian democrats who he wanted to be subjected to an Islamic empire through threats of bombings) no longer hold sway in such a tortured part of the planet.
    I highly doubt that the American army saved more people than they killed.

    Saving Kuwait from annexation was during the gulf war not the Iraqi war in 2003. For that I thank the American army and give them credit for saving the people of Kuwait (albeit it was in their interest to do so)

    But the American government knew what they would be causing as a result of their invasion of Iraq. They knew that without Sadam Iraq would become unstable. They knew that by removing Sadam the chances of a democratic leader being elected would be little to none.

    They knew that the region would be destabilised and that there would be a rise of Islamist movements across Iraq that would want to kill the Christians, yazidi's etc.

    So basically what The US did in the Iraq war was save the Kurds (who still aren't that safe) from Sadam in return for putting Muslim and non-Muslim Arabs in danger.

    And if the US is so caring of the Mid East than why don't they send ground troops in instead of bombing (just for show) and finish off ISIS and all the other Islamist movements in Iraq and Syria. Oh wait, doing that would allow bashar and his army to regain control of Syria, and that wouldn't be good for the US's interests would it, as bashar is aligned with Russia.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Erm, guys. this post isn't abbout Saddam Hussein. It's about the grandson of muhammad and his story. It's a pretty inspiring story if you read it. You might wanna take a look? It was only an invitation, jeez.
 
 
 
Reply
Submit reply
Turn on thread page Beta
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: November 12, 2015
Poll
Do you agree with the proposed ban on plastic straws and cotton buds?
Useful resources

Groups associated with this forum:

View associated groups

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.