"Dumb and Dumber"- Are Americans hostile to knowledge?

[orbital]

Don't believe me, go do your own research on who Mohamed was, and what his *religion* has become.
then come back and we can talk.

Just a quick note, as I don't want to hijack this thread which has nothing to do with Muslims.
I've been subject to Mohammed's life enough to last me 5 life times  Religion has been in Turkish High School curriculum as a required class since 1980. I was exempt from the class of course, but I still had to sit and listen to teachers talk about Mohammed's life and his 4 Caliphs and all that. Little we know today about Mohamed is actually factual, since Omar the Caliph basically burnt the original scriptures of Islam along with every book he could get his hands on, and basically rewrote the whole thing again. There are some dubious things about Mohammed's life (which is not the point here), but even apart from that he has ordered the deaths of hordes of people who did not convert. So I don't know if it was a case of "not practicing what he preached", but I don't have much respect for the man, nor the followers after him (perhaps with the exception of Ali the last of the four original Caliphs).

Anyway, all I wanted to say that it is important, IMO, to separate the religion itself from the people who are born under its flag by default.

[MishaK]

Orbital, this thread has been so all over the place, there is nothing you can do to substantially derail it any further.  Though, I'm not sure I get your point. Was this an indictment of Islam? If so, one could likewise point you to the numerous genocides and massacres found in the Old Testament. Neither of these are particularly useful guides for peaceful coexistence, if taken literally.

[paulb]

Just a quick note, as I don't want to hijack this thread which has nothing to do with Muslims.
I've been subject to Mohammed's life enough to last me 5 life times  Religion has been in Turkish High School curriculum as a required class since 1980. I was exempt from the class of course, but I still had to sit and listen to teachers talk about Mohammed's life and his 4 Caliphs and all that. Little we know today about Mohamed is actually factual, since Omar the Caliph basically burnt the original scriptures of Islam along with every book he could get his hands on, and basically rewrote the whole thing again. There are some dubious things about Mohammed's life (which is not the point here), but even apart from that he has ordered the deaths of hordes of people who did not convert. So I don't know if it was a case of "not practicing what he preached", but I don't have much respect for the man, nor the followers after him (perhaps with the exception of Ali the last of the four original Caliphs).

Anyway, all I wanted to say that it is important, IMO, to separate the religion itself from the people who are born under its flag by default.

Sure its  shame at how many muslims are led astray about who Mohamed really was.
As i'm sure there were many germans, russians, japanese who fell under the spell cast by these evil empires in the first half of this century, and did not deserve to die a  cruel death.
Why life works out as it does with many being led astray is somewhat of a  mystery. But this same phenomenon of darkness is working in the psyche of the islamic population.

[paulb]

Orbital, this thread has been so all over the place, there is nothing you can do to substantially derail it any further. 

well actually this discussion of the ignorance working in the  islamics is more vital and crucial to america's future  than is the ignorance of much of the american population.

[MishaK]

well actually this discussion of the ignorance working in the  islamics is more vital and crucial to america's future  than is the ignorance of much of the american population.

Not really. You vastly overstate the importance and power of radical Islam. Only American ignorance can harm America.

[paulb]

Not really. You vastly overstate the importance and power of radical Islam. Only American ignorance can harm America.

it will be decades before 9/11 is over and done with. much much pain still ahead my friend. At least if you are traveling by plane or by car.
Al Qaeda struck the knife deep

American ignorance plays second fiddle to islamic fascists.
I think you are the author of the topic *$100 oil*.  al qaeda is behind at least part  of that price.

[MishaK]

it will be decades before 9/11 is over and done with. much much pain still ahead my friend. At least if you are traveling by plane or by car.
Al Qaeda struck the knife deep

Nonsense. We inflicted those silly civil rights restrictions entirely on ourselves and they don't make air travel one bit safer. If you think that any of that silly rigmarole makes any difference in air safety, you must be enjoying some tasty kool-aid. That's all our own trauma and ignorance. TSA (=Thousands Standing Around) is a huge waste of money and an affront to human dignity. Only we can through our own trauma and ignorance turn our state into a police state and make flying more deadly for the public than it normally would be.

American ignorance plays second fiddle to islamic fascists.

"Islamic fascists" lack the power to be real major players on the world stage. That's why they have to practice asymmetric warfare and try to hurt us in a way that is militarily insignificant but psychologically sufficiently devastating for us to start hurting ourselves as a result.

I think you are the author of the topic *$100 oil*.  al qaeda is behind at least part  of that price.

No, I'm not. But in any case, it has nothing to do with radical Islam. It has everything to do with peak oil (increasing demand exceeding the ability of producers to supply more), our inability to wean ourselves away from our addictions to late 19th-century technologies and a truly boneheaded war in the wrong place at the wrong time.

[paulb]

Nonsense. We inflicted those silly civil rights restrictions entirely on ourselves and they don't make air travel one bit safer. If you think that any of that silly rigmarole makes any difference in air safety, you must be enjoying some tasty kool-aid. That's all our own trauma and ignorance. TSA (=Thousands Standing Around) is a huge waste of money and an affront to human dignity. Only we can through our own trauma and ignorance turn our state into a police state and make flying more deadly for the public than it normally would be.

"Islamic fascists" lack the power to be real major players on the world stage. That's why they have to practice asymmetric warfare and try to hurt us in a way that is militarily insignificant but psychologically sufficiently devastating for us to start hurting ourselves as a result.

No, I'm not. But in any case, it has nothing to do with radical Islam. It has everything to do with peak oil (increasing demand exceeding the ability of producers to supply more), our inability to wean ourselves away from our addictions to late 19th-century technologies and a truly boneheaded war in the wrong place at the wrong time.

Good post.

yes i know the "air safety commission and procedures* are wasteful and cause more stress and harm THAN ACTUAL GOOD. you know the government is only good for big crackpot wasteful ideas. this is what washington is very best at, stupid wasteful programs that only harm americans in the end. though of course the FEDS *mean well*.
I agree al qaeda is not our real enemy, its more washington. But Washington playing as a   puppet on a string, danicing to al qaeda's music.
Meaning *the war on terror*, *lets help pakistan, lets help afganistan, lets help iraq, lets help, XYZ countries fight al qaeda* all paid for by our grand childrens money.
So Bush on his death bed can tell his grand kids, "i did it all for you, i fought al qaeda tooth and nail, all because i love you so much"

Agree, america had decades to work towards other means of alternative energy, slowly weaning off TOTAL dependence on oil.
had the FEDS started some research programs back in the 70's, by now there would be some reductions on how dependent we are  on oil.

[MishaK]

I agree al qaeda is not our real enemy, its more washington. But Washington playing as a   puppet on a string, danicing to al qaeda's music.
Meaning *the war on terror*, *lets help pakistan, lets help afganistan, lets help iraq, lets help, XYZ countries fight al qaeda* all paid for by our grand childrens money.

You can't be agreeing with me, because I never said Washington is the enemy.

Agree, america had decades to work towards other means of alternative energy, slowly weaning off TOTAL dependence on oil.
had the FEDS started some research programs back in the 70's, by now there would be some reductions on how dependent we are  on oil.

Oh, it's not just that. It's a dogmatic belief in avoiding demand side regulation and lack of central city planning. If one had discouraged the creation of suburbs and exurbs and taxed gasoline since the oil crisis (like most of Europe does), Americans would be driving much smaller, more efficient cars (and the car makers would have been incentivized to produce them, instead of moving production of lucrative gas-guzzlers to Canada where they're exempt from fleet-average MPG regulation), taking public transport, living closer to work and shopping, living in more energy-efficient smaller homes or apartments and would be generally wasting less money and resources on heating and transportation, which is where most of our oil consumption comes from.

[paulb]

You can't be agreeing with me, because I never said Washington is the enemy.

Oh, it's not just that. It's a dogmatic belief in avoiding demand side regulation and lack of central city planning. If one had discouraged the creation of suburbs and exurbs and taxed gasoline since the oil crisis (like most of Europe does), Americans would be driving much smaller, more efficient cars (and the car makers would have been incentivized to produce them, instead of moving production of lucrative gas-guzzlers to Canada where they're exempt from fleet-average MPG regulation), taking public transport, living closer to work and shopping, living in more energy-efficient smaller homes or apartments and would be generally wasting less money and resources on heating and transportation, which is where most of our oil consumption comes from.

But you did say *we inflicted those stupid high stress enforcements on air travel*.
IOW Washinton has created the belief that the *Al Qaeda Ghosts* are out to get us.
Thus *ck every american, ck even every senator and even your mother, brother, strip search even the  children, as you never know*

I need to pick up that book on intelligent surburb design.

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/159726136X/ref=ord_cart_shr?%5Fencoding=UTF8&m=ATVPDKIKX0DER&v=glance

[M forever]

So if a military develops new technologies they shouldn't actually use them...because it's a sign they lack confidence. Got it.

I don't think you got what I actually said, but I already explained that, so you can go back and re-read the post(s). There are other reasons not to use a WMD, and the awareness that nuclear weapons simply go one step too far no matter what the situation is luckily prevented all who have it from dropping another one. Although I am sure a lot of Americans would have liked to see a few more dropped on Vietnam rather than be defeated by a tiny, tiny underdeveloped country (or actually, just half of it), a testimony to military incompetence on a grand scale if there ever was one.

So because America is so lacking in confidence we go around proclaiming we're going to nuke everyone...with the Middle East as a ground zero. Got it.

(Pure fantasy...)

Pure fantasy? Unfortunately not. Only a couple of posts after your one:

Genocide is when the people don't ask for it. The japanese asked. Just as the muslims are begging to get clobbered. One day someone will do it. And it will not be the USA.

Thanks for this impressive demonstration of what I just said. You can sit down now, Paul.

[head-case]

Although I am sure a lot of Americans would have liked to see a few more dropped on Vietnam rather than be defeated by a tiny, tiny underdeveloped country (or actually, just half of it), a testimony to military incompetence on a grand scale if there ever was one.

That is a specious comparison.  The use of nuclear weapons in WWII was conceivable because that was a war in which vital interests of the US were truly at stake; the continued independence of the US would be at risk in a world which was taken over by the axis powers.   No such threat existed in the Vietnam war, and the use of such a weapon against a guerrilla army would not be effective anyway.

[paulb]

Thanks for this impressive demonstration of what I just said. You can sit down now, Paul.

my O my.
A true german spirit in full colors.
Commands and the ye ol' *HEIL* attitude.
The past hurts doesn't it M?
Admit it.

[paulb]

Although I am sure a lot of Americans would have liked to see a few more dropped on Vietnam rather than be

fact is most americans were dead set against the viet nam war. it was a  very stupid engagement, start to finish.
Whereas most germans applauded the nazi dealings.
Right now in america the Pentagon rules, for the most part, by its own decrees.
If a  vote were taken by the american people half the pentagon budget would be cut.

[M forever]

my O my.
A true german spirit in full colors.
Commands and the ye ol' *HEIL* attitude.
The past hurts doesn't it M?
Admit it.

It only hurts when you don't process and learn from it. Which most Americans, like you and some other posters here, have never done. Which is also one thing (one more thing of many) in which we Germans as a whole are far more advanced than you guys. In Germany, the open discussion of the crimes of the past has been going on for decades. People like you, who try to find some kind of justification for horrible crimes committed by your country, are despised by most educated Germans, for good reasons.

And look at yourself. I just pointed out that you said "the Japanese asked to be nuked", a statement so horrible that it can only stand uncommented, and the only defense you can come up with is defaming me as a Nazi. Another very typical American thing, BTW, which does not reflect well on you.

[orbital]

Orbital, this thread has been so all over the place, there is nothing you can do to substantially derail it any further.  Though, I'm not sure I get your point. Was this an indictment of Islam? If so, one could likewise point you to the numerous genocides and massacres found in the Old Testament. Neither of these are particularly useful guides for peaceful coexistence, if taken literally.

I don't know if it is an indictment, and if it indeed is, I do not limit it to Islam by any means. My point was to answer Paul's query when he talked about what his (Mohammed's) followers had done with Islam. Mohammed, from what we were taught, was not exactly a man of peace. There are numerous wars that he himself led with the object of converting the other side to Islam which generally led to massacres. It is often said that he also uttered the famous saying, "Your religion is yours, my religion is mine." However, his actions do not seem to compliment what is attributed to him saying about tolerance and it often seems like he changed his stance on the issue depending on the situation. He is, in a way, more human than both Jesus and Moses and it is ironic that depictions of him are strictly forbidden (perhaps for this very reason).

[karlhenning]

fact is most americans were dead set against the viet nam war.

The fact is, that was not true at first, Paul.  Popular discontent with the Viet Nam conflict was a late development.

You are as poor a general historian as you are a musicologist.

Say, you aren't "hostile to knowledge," are you?

[paulb]

I apologize if you took my *heil* smirk out of context, too personal. In no way do I intend that as *nazi*, just refering to  that little attitude you  carry  at times.

Its good to know that germany does look at its past and makes the proper adjustments in her psyche.
I agree, most americans are unaware of just how aweful the USA was in viet nam. *unforgivable sins* that must be dealt with.
Honestly there is a  theory that when a  certain country's population expands too fast, the result can be  a escalation in war efforts.
Not sure if this theory holds , but if you look at man's history of the past 8000 yrs, there  may be some validity about it.
But truthfully, most educated americans do not want war. At least all the people i know are set against the wars we are engaged in.
Why the pentagon has the power to spend future generations monetary funds, generate large debt obligations,  I for one would like to know.

Everyone knows the threats of al qaeda, but how much are we antogonizing the *enemy* by having these monsterous size war machines invade islamic countries?

[M forever]

The nuclear weapon has enormous destructive power, but its effect isn't different than the cumulative effect of an attack with many conventional weapons.   Genocide is when, over the course of ten years, you make lists of every supposedly sub-human creature you need to kill and then you go down that list, collecting them in concentration camps and killing them until there are none left (unless someone stops you first).

So you are saying that it is better to just push a button and let a couple hundred thousand people evaporate within a few seconds than to make lists of who you want to kill? It certainly is more effective, I give you that, and it doesn't produce as much paperwork.
You don't necessarily need to make lists for genocides anyway. But in your mind, making a list is bad, just killing off a vast number of people is good? So, following your own logic, terrorists who select specific targets are bad, and those who just fly large aircraft into tall public buildings to kill as many as possible with no "lists" or planning are good? Another interesting - an surprising - point, I must give you that, too.

In the battle of Iwo Jima, just a few months before the end of the war, the US needed to attack an island defended by 21,000 japanese troops with 100,000.

Are you saying that the Japanese are 5 times better fighters than the Americans? Or, given that they had the defensive advantage, maybe just 3 times better? Another surprising point from you.

Where are the Nanjing or Death Railway Manga Comics BTW?

Interesting that you can't find it in you to be interested in the terrible fate of a - probably - innocent civilian victim without pointing to events that person - probably - had nothing to do with. So, following your logic here, you are saying that innocent American civilians can be targeted because the US government and military have committed acts of aggression elsewhere? I am surprised to see you actually support terrorism. That's what it comes down to.

[paulb]

The fact is, that was not true at first, Paul.  Popular discontent with the Viet Nam conflict was a late development.

that was because few people really knew the mechanics of the war, the hows/whys/wherefores were all in the shadows.
Its true though, it was a  late development due to more awareness of what was actually going down.
had the facts been known at the start, most would have said "ain't no way", *just what is the purpose?*
Americans are not as dumb as you think.