This page is no longer updated, and is the old forum. For new topics visit the New HOL forum.
'Christianity' vs 'Islam'
Register | Edit Profile | Subscriptions | Forum Rules | Log In
nickgusset  Shizzlehurst 17 Apr 17 1.56pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Stirlingsays
No, the nuclear arsenal are very much a option. That reality has kept us away from a world war for over seventy years. People from your side of the argument tried to surrender our arsenal while the soviet union was in full bloom. Even when they had plans for domination....proven by the invasions of Poland and other parts of Eastern Europe which quite rightly still have fears of Russia today. People like Corbyn are well meaning but bonkers and dangerous. Edited by Stirlingsays (17 Apr 2017 1.38pm)
|
|
 Alert a moderator to this post |
 |
 Stirlingsays 17 Apr 17 2.04pm |
   |
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by nickgusset
She is far from perfect..as is the Tory party but she makes mincemeat of your side of the argument in my view....and as evidenced by poll results and surveys.
'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen) |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
 |
| jamiemartin721 Reading 18 Apr 17 9.54am |
|
|---|---|
|
Its crazy religious zealot top trumps. Which is the most acceptable fundamentalist nonsense. The correct answer is none of them are acceptable to any kind reasonable person. Dumb c**ts armed with automatic weapons and a gospel of the truth are always a problem, irrespective of whether their crazy is in ascendant at present. All forms of fundamentalism are a dead end. Islamist fundamentalism is a threat to life in the west, where as Christian fundamentalists are a threat to the way of life of the west (given that in no way will Islamist Fundamentalism ever have the capacity to govern, influence policy or rule in the western nations). We should also be careful of a slightly growing sense of fundamentalism among secularists as well. Progress is not a natural state of affairs.
"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug" |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Stirlingsays 18 Apr 17 6.12pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by jamiemartin721
Its crazy religious zealot top trumps. Which is the most acceptable fundamentalist nonsense. The correct answer is none of them are acceptable to any kind reasonable person. Dumb c**ts armed with automatic weapons and a gospel of the truth are always a problem, irrespective of whether their crazy is in ascendant at present. All forms of fundamentalism are a dead end. Islamist fundamentalism is a threat to life in the west, where as Christian fundamentalists are a threat to the way of life of the west (given that in no way will Islamist Fundamentalism ever have the capacity to govern, influence policy or rule in the western nations). We should also be careful of a slightly growing sense of fundamentalism among secularists as well. Progress is not a natural state of affairs. Again, comparing Christian to Islamic fundamentalism is frankly ridiculous given that the scale in threat levels and required security cost isn't on the same planet let alone page. Any time this point is made this inappropriateness needs to be pointed out.
'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen) |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Oliver Bodega Bay 19 Apr 17 9.48am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by matt_himself
Which is nonsense. The recent strikes on Assad's bases, not civilian population centres, were a direct result of Assad using chemical weapons on his own people. Assad's actions were a war crime. It's a crazy and f***ed-up world that condemns the death of civilians by chemical weapons but not those by conventional ones (even ones with white phosphorus in them which is a war crime)
I have prepared one of my own time capsules. I have placed some rather large samples of dynamite, gunpowder and nitroglycerin. My time capsule is set to go off in the year 3000. It will show them what we are really like. |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
 Hrolf The Ganger 19 Apr 17 10.48am |
|
|---|---|
|
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| jamiemartin721 Reading 19 Apr 17 11.48am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Stirlingsays
Again, comparing Christian to Islamic fundamentalism is frankly ridiculous given that the scale in threat levels and required security cost isn't on the same planet let alone page. Any time this point is made this inappropriateness needs to be pointed out. The difference between the problem now, and the problem tomorrow. We shouldn't lose sight that in the US, the Christian Right and its fundermentalists can sway elections, and indeed count the vice president as one of their own. Personally, I'm less concerned about being killed in a terrorist attack in the name of allah, than the rise of Christianised political movements that have the influence and political capital, to make key life decisions for people on subjects such as assisted suicide, abortion, women's rights, contraception, education and so on. The first, well its an inevitable reality of the world we live in, and the war we are engaged in. Yes, its a key security issue for society. However, the later in terms of democratic threat is far more significant to society. Terrorism is a remote reality in that it occurs with no real capacity to influence our lives other than to take them, or harm us.
"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug" |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| jamiemartin721 Reading 19 Apr 17 11.51am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Oliver
It's a crazy and f***ed-up world that condemns the death of civilians by chemical weapons but not those by conventional ones (even ones with white phosphorus in them which is a war crime) There isn't not really, although there is arguably a slight difference in terms of intention (most US and Allied air strikes aren't directly or deliberately targeted at civilians - more or less.). Maybe more absurd is the idea that its ok to deploy chlorine gas as a weapon (which both sides in Syria have been doing) but not VX or Sarin, on the basis that Chlorine gas has an industrial use.
"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug" |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
Kermit8  Hevon 19 Apr 17 12.13pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by jamiemartin721
There isn't not really, although there is arguably a slight difference in terms of intention (most US and Allied air strikes aren't directly or deliberately targeted at civilians - more or less.). Maybe more absurd is the idea that its ok to deploy chlorine gas as a weapon (which both sides in Syria have been doing) but not VX or Sarin, on the basis that Chlorine gas has an industrial use. THE US committed an horrendous what would be called a war crime today during the Korean War. They deliberately targeted and killed 1,000,000 walking to sanctuary/or walking away from war zone civilians - men, women and children - because, and wait for this, perhaps they may have been some enemy soldiers amongst them. Talk about using a sledgehammer to crack a nut.
Big chest and massive boobs |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| jamiemartin721 Reading 19 Apr 17 12.23pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by jamiemartin721
The difference between the problem now, and the problem tomorrow. We shouldn't lose sight that in the US, the Christian Right and its fundermentalists can sway elections, and indeed count the vice president as one of their own. Personally, I'm less concerned about being killed in a terrorist attack in the name of allah, than the rise of Christianised political movements that have the influence and political capital, to make key life decisions for people on subjects such as assisted suicide, abortion, women's rights, contraception, education and so on. The first, well its an inevitable reality of the world we live in, and the war we are engaged in. Yes, its a key security issue for society. However, the later in terms of democratic threat is far more significant to society. Terrorism is a remote reality in that it occurs with no real capacity to influence our lives other than to take them, or harm us. As a note, I don't consider Christian Fundamentalism to be a security threat but a threat to the ideals of democracy and personal freedoms.
"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug" |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
NickinOX  Sailing country. 19 Apr 17 12.25pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Kermit8
THE US committed an horrendous what would be called a war crime today during the Korean War. They deliberately targeted and killed 1,000,000 walking to sanctuary/or walking away from war zone civilians - men, women and children - because, and wait for this, perhaps they may have been some enemy soldiers amongst them. Talk about using a sledgehammer to crack a nut. That bastion of pro-Americanism, the Guardian, pointed out these claims came straight from North Korea, and that they were false. Now, that doesn't excuse the US targeting of civilians at No Gun Ri where reliable reports indicate several hundred civilians were murdered. Mind you, that pales in comparison to the tens (if not hundreds) of thousands murdered by the communists or by Syngman Rhee's soldiers. But don't let the facts get in the way.
If you come to a fork in the road, take it. |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| jamiemartin721 Reading 19 Apr 17 12.26pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Even the perpetrator states that it wasn't about religion but a hate crime against whites.
"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug" |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
Login / RegisterNew users
Registration is now on our new message board
Existing users
To login with your existing username you will need to convert your account over to the new message board.
Sponsors
All images and text on this site are copyright © 1999-2024 The Holmesdale Online, unless otherwise stated.
Web Design by Guntrisoft Ltd.