Military History | How To Make War | Wars Around the World Rules of Use How to Behave on an Internet Forum
Infantry Discussion Board
   Return to Topic Page
Subject: Two Battalions That Should Never Meet
SYSOP    12/30/2012 10:51:18 AM
 
Quote    Reply

Show Only Poster Name and Title     Newest to Oldest
Pages: 1 2
cwDeici       1/3/2013 2:45:33 PM
well enough, rambling, good of u to ask questions, loL. :)
I guess I can't answer very well atm, but what I'm saying is studying this one has to look at the very rough sum total of the believers' actions and the source material.
 
I mean given the terrorist acts in the world list today one might believe Islam is almost the only violent religion in the world, but there are peaceful sects within Islam. Islam is definitely not having a good time right now, but at the same time --- it is one of the more violent 'join or die' religions (well, ultimately... usually it is just 'leave and die' and 'be homosexual or a women who's cheated and die' (though Judaism has done that too).'
 
Well, its up to you who to dislike and like, you CAN probably find one of the most peaceful major religions in the east if you look closely, if that's what you think is the most important - though given your comments it seems you're more like secular... which I GUESS might be the most peaceful - though atheism as practiced by communists definitely isn't.
 
Secularism as practiced by Christian-inspired liberalism (though not Christian itself anymore, more like the moral roots) is very peaceful though, moreso than Christianity in terms of the death penalty, gun control, but not abortion (my vetrinarian sister says fetuses actually feel pain more actuely at 1.5 months, though delayed... personally I'm ok with abortion up to 2 weeks or maybe even 1.5 months, but only for the sake of population control, crime control or for stem cell research - it's harsh to kill other living humans, but an unborn life is a bit less important than a more concious life... it's still murder in my mind, but I accept it... though most non-liberal Christians don't (I'm very pro-tech))
 
So yeah, people will be different, and some of the people who are different will be more violent than others. A big part of that difference is religion. But in the end all religion is, is a fundamental set of beliefs, whether in a God a value or whatever, highly sentient creatures will thus almost unfailingly be religious, even if they don't believe in a God.
We could wipe out such differences, and sometimes we should, but slowly convincing everyone not to believe in superior allmighty beings that are a bit more permissive of violence than other superior allmighty beings in order to reduce violence seems uneeded to me, unless the religion in question is very bad... like Islam and communism.
 
Quote    Reply

cwDeici       1/3/2013 2:47:47 PM
well, militant communism that is, not syndicalism and weaker socialist stuff (which has done so much for the world in many ways, though not all good)
 
Quote    Reply

Tucci78    ''Caedite eos....''   1/3/2013 5:18:26 PM
"...Novit enim Dominus qui sunt eius" (Arnaud Amalric at the sack of Béziers in 1209, which translates as "Kill them all. For the Lord knoweth them that are His.")
 
Which ought to be response sufficient to cwDeici's bit about how "Early Latin Christianity got very tactically violent at times, but was never strategically discriminative like most muslim societies who were more tactically peaceful...."
 
There's an interesting mosh-and-mangle in another of cwDeici's comments:  
 
"Secularism as practiced by Christian-inspired liberalism (though not Christian itself anymore, more like the moral roots) is very peaceful though, moreso than Christianity in terms of the death penalty, gun control, but not abortion (my vetrinarian sister says fetuses actually feel pain more actuely at 1.5 months, though delayed... personally I'm ok with abortion up to 2 weeks or maybe even 1.5 months, but only for the sake of population control, crime control or for stem cell research - it's harsh to kill other living humans, but an unborn life is a bit less important than a more concious life... it's still murder in my mind, but I accept it... though most non-liberal Christians don't (I'm very pro-tech))"
 
...which leads one to conclude that what he's thinking about (and has embraced) is the "Christian socialism" of the late 19th Century American progressives, who were big on voluntary interruption of pregnancy as a means of limiting the populations of the genetically (and culturally and ethnically and religiously) inferior "undesirables."  Numbered among these Christian socialists' ranks were the Bellamy cousins, both Nationalistsocialist Edward Bellamy (author in 1888 of the socialist utopian novel Looking Backward which so many of us were forced to read at the academic equivalent of gunpoint in high school or college) and hateful xenophobe failed Baptist minister Francis Bellamy (who created the Pledge of Allegiance to put little schoolkids in a condition of public "peer pressure" vulnerability which he and his fellow fascisti hoped would make the impressionable children more amenable to surrendering their individuality to the hivedwelling insect mentality conducive to socialism; see also the "Bellamy Salute."  
 
Which ought to freak you out.  Can you say "Sieg Heil!" boys and girls? 
 
 
 
 
Quote    Reply

trenchsol       1/4/2013 8:43:02 AM
Why are you people keep repeating the same things while trying to argue with me ? I said that Japanese religions do not encourage violence and that they are not involved with politics. Whatever Japanese soldiers did, it was not because their religion or clerics (if they could be called that way) encouraged them to do that. They did it for other reasons.
 
You can't say the same for Taliban, for example, right ?
 
I am not even saying that wars were fought because of the religion. I am just saying that things tend to get more messy when religion gets involved in politics.  I believe that wars are started when there is a conflict of interests. Such conflict can be handled in a number of ways, and the war is one of them. Violence is overrated today, by those who advocate it as well as those who are afraid of it. It is just a method of resolving conflicts, sometimes appropriate, sometimes not.  I believe it works the best when combined with other methods.
 
When religion gets involved, it tends to blur the real reasons of conflict and change the focus of it. It does not contribute to conflict resolution.
 
As for Asian people, my impression is that they are very polite up to the point when they decide not to be polite any more. Then they become very aggressive. It does not seem to be related to the way they handle religious matters.
 
DG
 
 
Quote    Reply
1 2



 Latest
 News
 
 Most
 Read
 
 Most
 Commented
 Hot
 Topics