Apologies... I dip in out of the Hol... I have yet to understand certain poster's characteristics

Because history defines the present, and feeds into it. Its important, to me at least, to see the manner in which historical events in society result in changes to society and its structure. When we talk about European countries, like the UK, many have a history of largely uninterrupted generations of historical development stretching back over a thousand years.

A lot of countries in the middle east, really came into existence as independent countries following the rise in national liberation movements following the end of empire.

So when we look at Iran as a country, its history is about 30-40 years old, since undergoing a dramatic revolutionary change.

Typically significant developments in history, that are positive, tend to grow out of periods of unrest and disruption, and the necessity of a country and its people to change driven by the desire for something to prevent that problem occurring.

Poor monarchy, the black death and finally the English civil war, over a period of several hundred years, eventually results in the establishment of the house of lords and commons - and ultimately democracy in the UK, not because it felt right to do so, but events in history stimulated a desire not to go back to problems of the past.

The Reign of King John, a disasterous period in England, begings a process in history, that eventually establishes the idea of a fair and impartial judiciary, jury trials (and legal system) we have today (with the establishment of magna carta).

These events cannot just be implemented on a society, a society has to realise the necessity of that change. The Athenians invented democracy, not because they were moral, but to try to ensure the ruinous period of the tyrannies could not happen.

Its interesting that the two most oppressive movements of Europe, Communism and Fascism/National Socialism, have their history in three of the youngest countries in Europe (Post Monarchistic Russia, and an Independent Germany and Italy), effectively countries that had 'cut ties' significantly with their historical progress.

History is very significant, it defines nations in the same way that experiences define individuals. The end result of tyranny in the middle east, will most likely ultimately, result in systems that increasingly diminish the capacity of tyranny. At least historically speaking - this isn't a certainity, but generally countries become increasingly less oppressive as they age over generations.

But realistically Saudi, Iraq and Iran for example, are very young nations.

At least that's how I see it.

"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug"
[Link]

There isn't anything quite so clearly stated, but there are a lot of different statements about the necessity to fulfil all obligations, contracts and promises, provided they do not contradict the requirements of being a Muslim. There is quite a lot of material its seems about the importance of being a good neighbour and keeping your work, and following leaders.

Of course it then depends on what is and isn't Islamic - it gets down to interpretations and different sects of Islam.

Its all really about interpretation. Plenty of Christians break the law every day as well.

"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug"
[Link]

Strictly speaking Catholics and Protestants were - not all Christian faiths and sects were persecutory, really its specifically those two, and particularly the Catholic church. Plenty of Christian movements, like some sects of Islam, don't really have a history of killing in the name of god, in the 20th century.

Ironically, until more modern times, the Middle East was a relatively safe place for non-Catholic Christian movements.

Religion is often used as a means of monopolisation of political right - The Catholic church was pretty clear that it was exterminating the competition.

"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug"
[Link]

People's stupidity knows no bounds Seth, but read the latest posts on the Trump thread - my exchange with Superfly and Ouzo Dan's post.

My feeling is that most faiths have moved on whereas Islam is still in the middle ages - You have sort of confirmed my assertion that your average "christian" hasn't read most of the bible whereas your average Muslim has read the Khoran to the extent he knows it backwards.

Still... interesting observation mate.

Edited by Hoof Hearted (11 Dec 2015 11.47am)

We might have let the genie out of the bottle in some respects but it is mostly a chicken and egg situation with Islamic groups.

It's easy to blame the British for their treatment of the middle east pre wars or American aggression but the truth is that nothing happens in a vacuum and
we might just as well speak about the crusades.

I know it's the intellectual thing to do to be objective and philosophical on such matters but in the end one has to assume that British interests were uppermost when making any policy decision of the past. We ultimately always have to remember who's side we are on and put philosophy aside.