This discussion is now closed.

Check out other Related discussions

Just a reminder 9/11 led to the war in Iraq which killed 500,000+ Iraqi civilians

Saddam used chemical weapons on the kurds.He also used them in the iraq iran war so he definitely had chemical weapons at some point.Its not the US's fault that muslim countries are so ****ed up that even when you remove a horrific dictator who gassed his own people they still just descend into anarchy.

Yes and us brits and Americans should know that for a fact since we supplied them and encouraged the Iran-Iraq war.

Reply 61

QE2

20

Original post by zezno

@QE2 I mean, you as an Atheist, can never claim objective morality.

Correct. So you have been paying attention.

Therefore, say if were no Theists, having sex with animals, murder, could be seen perfectly normal to you.

Why do you think that subjective morality would allow murder or bestiality?

Countless Atheists won't even call bestiality and incest bad

Really? Which ones?
Bestiallity can be seen as subjectively "bad" because animals cannot give informed consent, in the context of a morality that views consent as important.
(Ironically, it is Islam that does not view consent as important. Explain that!

With incest, if there is fully informed consent, no abuse of responsibility and contraception is used, there is nothing inherently "bad" about it. It is only "subjective" social taboo that colours our attitudes. There have been societies where it was viewed as perfectly normal and no one complains about incest in species other than humans.
(Again, ironically it is "objective" Islam that accepts incest more than our "subjective" secular morality!)

You lost, once again.
You've lost every single debate against me.

You actually have no idea what a debate is, let alone how to conduct a successful one.

(edited 6 years ago)

Reply 62

satisfactionatlast

20

Original post by unitedblack

ISIS follow the quran literally, it's the 'peaceful' muslims cherry picking the Quran.

Only uneducated ignorants such as yourself think like this.

Reply 63

Alive97

10

Other countries had civilians die too

Reply 64

QE2

20

Original post by HabibSyed

Oh ya buddy. "Most". 100,000 people died due to the United States Armies, but atlest its not "most" responsible.

According to the independent Iraq Body Count, about 20,000 civilian deaths by violence were due to foreign coalition forces (about 10% of the total documented violent deaths).

Just recently, Rohingya muslims experience 3,000 dead from Bhuddist armies as well. Thats a 9/11, it didn't receive any coverage for a week though, because it wasn't New York, London or Paris.

Just because it doesn't come up on your Twitter feed or WhatsApp group doesn't mean that it isn't reported. Read a broadsheet or watch BBC News channel. It's all out there.

How dare you have the nerve to mock hundreds of thousand innocent deaths like that and be in devastation when 5 people in London are dead by some religious extremist.

The point here is that when these casualties are brought up it is usually by Muslims blaming "the west". Pointing out that it is local sectarianism that is actually responsible for the vast majority of the deaths is not "mocking" anyone.
While you can blame military intervention for creating a situation which gave extremist groups the opportunity to operate, you can only blame the extremists for the actual killing. The vacuum did not have to be filled with division and conflict. The various groups chose to rekindle all the vicious hatred that had been suppressed under Saddam.

(edited 6 years ago)

Reply 65

QE2

20

Original post by h333

Yh I don't think I am new to all this. It's so evil and disgusting. Never lose hope, God willing the evil and corrupt ones will be held accountable for their actions one day.

If god is going to punish them for their actions, why did he decree that they make those actions in the first place? Wouldn't it have been better for him to have decreed that the invasion never happened?

Or perhaps he should have allowed the invasion, but then not decreed that the various sectarian groups start killing each other on an industrial scale? Get rid of Saddam and establish a peaceful democracy. Win/win. That's what I would have decreed if I was Allah. Why do you think he chose not to?

Reply 66

TheDuo

13

Original post by zezno

QE2 seems triggered. Still killed hundred thousands. You're a terrorist sympathizer aren't you?

not as much as you evidently are for making a thread like this.

Reply 67

QE2

20

Original post by zezno

is that meant to be an insult lol.

Use your brain here, ISIS are a minority of the Muslim population, they follow it incorrectly, if they were following it correctly, the majority of the Muslim population would be...ISIS. Not difficult

Which parts are they following incorrectly?

Perhaps it is the majority of Muslims who are not following Islam correctly?

Example:
The Quran and sunnah allow the use of female captives for sex.
ISIS use female captives for sex and cite the Quran and sunnah as justification.

Who is following Islam more correctly in this respect, those who claim that using female captives for sex is permitted in Islam, or those who say it is not?

Reply 68

QE2

20

Original post by zezno

yes, ISIS are the true believers. That's why when it says "Do not kill", they kill. You're correct. You're smart.

The Quran and sunnah do not say "do not kill". They say "some people may not be killed" and "some people may be killed". (You should try reading them. It may help you when debating Islamic issues)

They do not kill those who the Quran and sunnah forbids killing. They kill those who the Quran and sunnah allows killing.
What they don't do is make any allowances for the last 1400 years of social and moral change.

Reply 69

Plantagenet Crown

20

Original post by h333

Yh I don't think I am new to all this. It's so evil and disgusting. Never lose hope, God willing the evil and corrupt ones will be held accountable for their actions one day.

No one will be held accountable, people die and then rot. Divine justice clearly doesn't exist in physical reality which is why people had to come up with the concepts of heaven and hell to make themselves feel better.

Reply 70

QE2

20

Original post by zezno

My face when you don't even know those verses refer to the Battle of Badr. A battle of self-defence. The disbelievers mentioned are the people trying to kill the Muslims. They have persecuted them for 13 years, broken peace treaties. I bet you haven't even heard of the Battle of Badr lmfao! The Muslims tried living in peace, but were constantly persecuted without reason. This is reinforced by the scholars. Maybe you should try researching context, eh?

So if ISIS regard the last 13 years of invasion and occupation of Muslim lands as "persecution without reason", then they are justified in their "battle of self-defence"?
Thanks for clearing that up.

See, this is the problem with claiming that a vague, ambiguous and contradictory document from the ancient Middle East is perfect and binding for all people and all times. You get people like ISIS convinced that they are doing god's work - because there is a load of stuff about killing disbelievers and forcefully imposing Islam in it.

Reply 71

QE2

20

Original post by zezno

unitedblack I can't read what you're saying btw. You're blocked. You're so behind it's inconceivable. Educate yourself then come back to me.

For someone who always defeats atheists in debate, you seem very quick to block people who want to debate you.

When you say "defeat", I think you may actually mean "run away from".

Reply 72

QE2

20

Original post by RevisionGuide

I feel like nobody on TSR understands the concept of context. Context is crucial in interpretation as it has the power to change the entirety of a sentence or verse.

Why do you think that god's perfect and final guide for all humanity needs so much contextualisation and interpretation.
And why do you think that after 1400 years, even scholars can't agree on what it actually means?

Also, why do you think that it is only the verses that refer to killing disbelievers and imposing Islam and beating wives and using slaves for sex and gender inequality that need "contextualising", while all the less violend and intolerant verses need no such treatment and can happily be quoted without any explanation?

Reply 73

Plantagenet Crown

20

Original post by zezno

@QE2 I mean, you as an Atheist, can never claim objective morality.

Therefore, say if were no Theists, having sex with animals, murder, could be seen perfectly normal to you. Countless Atheists won't even call bestiality and incest bad because they themselves admit Atheism can never claim objective morality. Btw, your subjective opinions don't count.

You lost, once again.

You've lost every single debate against me.

So you think incest in inherently bad? Remind me again, according to your religion, who Adam and Eve's children had to have sex with to keep humanity going?

Reply 74

QE2

20

Original post by Stalin

The vast majority of Iraqis may have been killed by their fellow Iraqis, but it was the United States and its groupies - the UK, Australia, Denmark, Poland, etc - that made the death of hundreds of thousands of people, total carnage, and destruction of a country possible by toppling Saddam.

We're still waiting for those WMD's to surface.

I agree that the invasion was unjustified and badly planned. But the decision of the various sectarian factions to embark on an orgy of killing was entirely their own. They didn't have to.

When a Sunni blows himself up in a Shia mosque, that was not caused by the coalition. It was caused by centuries-old hatred.

Reply 75

QE2

20

Original post by h333

Yep some do and agree. I feel some do lack knowledge and some probably like to do it on purpose.

And when a Muslim quotes 5:32 as proof that Islam forbids killing (for example), do they do it through ignorance or on purpose?

Reply 76

QE2

20

Original post by zezno

Some don't even try, they just have pure hatred for us. Has to do a lot with upbringing I think

You need to take off that victim hood. People don't "hate you", they just dislike Islamic ideology. They may also then dislike those people who try to defend its more unacceptable elements like slavery, sex slaves, wife beating, executing gays and apostates, stoning adulterers, etc, etc.

But do you really blame them?
Is it wrong to dislike someone who thinks that slavery is acceptable and that a wife may be beaten as a final punishment for disobedience?

Reply 77

QE2

20

Original post by zezno

that makes it okay then?

You dislike western military intervention in the Middle East "because of what's going on in the world".
Others dislike Islamic ideology "because of what's going on in the world"

If you accept one position as justified, you must accept the other.

Reply 78

QE2

20

Original post by kqsruno

to all the weirdos that think muslims were at war with each other in Iraq (literally the dumbest thing i've read on the internet all day)...

You seem to be ill-informed on the issues then...
Under Saddam, Iraq was at war with Iranian Muslims, and fighting Kurdish Muslims and Madan Muslims within Iraq.
After the removal of Saddam, there has been a brutal conflict between Shia and Sunni Muslims in Iraq.
Have you not studied regional history or been following the news?

I am american myself.

Ah, that would explain it.