FRIHOST FORUMS SEARCH FAQ TOS BLOGS COMPETITIONS
You are invited to Log in or Register a free Frihost Account!


Europeans and Americans, your thoughts on "Eurabia"





S3nd K3ys
Heard about this on the news the other nite. Very disturbing.

Basically, what they're talking about is the radical and rapid movement by Islam to take over Europe and use it to promote jihad through-out the world.

Quote:
Islamic threat to Europe likened to Nazis
By Tony Blankley

THE WASHINGTON TIMES

September 12, 2005

First of three parts

The threat of the radical Islamists taking over Europe is every bit as great to the United States as was the threat of the Nazis taking over Europe in the 1940s.

We cannot afford to lose Europe. We cannot afford to see Europe transformed into a launching pad for Islamist jihad.

While we in the United States and Europe have vast resources for protecting ourselves, we have thought ourselves into a position of near impotence.

Beyond the growing number of Muslims committed to terrorism is the threat from the Islamic diaspora's growing cultural and religious assertiveness -- particularly in largely secular Europe, where Muslim cultural assimilation has not occurred.
Source

It's my opinion that, if left alone, they will succeed. At least in Europe. Then the USA will be forced to take an even bigger role in the 'policing' of the world. If Europe fails, it will be a very tough battle.

Quote:
If Europe doesn't rise to the challenge, Eurabia will come to pass. Then Europe will cease to be an American ally and instead become a base of operations (as she already is to a small degree) against us.


Just a few years ago, there were a few hundred thousand Muslims in Europe. Now there are 20,000,000, and the numbers are growing.

Your thoughts??

nik
dont' think about all arabians as terrorists and dont' think that they are all after you becouse they dont.... the terrorists are only very few of them..
Quote:
"It's my opinion that, if left alone, they will succeed. At least in Europe. Then the USA will be forced to take an even bigger role in the 'policing' of the world. If Europe fails, it will be a very tough battle. "


and even if they will try something they will never ever sucsess in no europe... becouse of uk and russia and everyone else... that will be ww3 and no one want' this to happend..
jkalvin
Well, to address the Eurabia notion:

For one, not all Arabs are Muslim, and of those that are Muslim, very few are extreme fundamentalists bent on terrorism or any other malicious act. It's like Christian Protestant extremism: the vast majority of Baptists are peaceful, but a few don't mind blowing-up the occasional abortion clinic or Oklahoma City Federal Building.

Secondly, while religious extremism of all kinds is definitely a growing problem in the world, world leaders in Europe are addressing this issue expeditiously. Just off the top of my head I know that Italy, France, and Great Britain have all deported Islamic radicals that openly advocate violence.

I certainly don't claim to know the future, but Eurabia is about as silly as it gets. There is a much better chance that North Korea and Iran become bed buddies in the next decade and take over Iceland as a massive nuclear base to dominate the world, and the chances of that are pretty damn slim. Wink
S3nd K3ys
I have no doubt that the majority of Muslims are not terrorists. I also have no doubt that the last 3 or 4 generations of most muslim children have been raised to hate the freedoms/beliefs we posess, (unless, of course, as was the case preceding 9/11, they are in the US waiting to make their attacks, and enjoying everything the US has to offer), and that is being carried on from generation to generation, and more and more of them are getting 'extreme', meaning more and more terrorists are being raised.

Quote:
However, the overwhelming political fact deriving from the ferment in Islam is that, to some degree, some percentage of Muslims are prepared to murder -- and are murdering -- great numbers in what they feel is their religious duty.

Many more Muslims are, to some degree, supportive or protective of these killers. Even more Muslims, while not supportive of such tactics, share many of the terrorists' religious convictions and perceptions.




Quote:
world leaders in Europe are addressing this issue expeditiously


I really haven't noticed that strong of an effort by Europe, can you provide some references for me? Blair is strong, but the people don't want to follow him into war. Same in USA. The Pope denounced terrorism, which is helpful, but sadly not enough.
jkalvin
From The Times London:
Quote:
It is believed that Whitehall officials and lawyers are still studying the files on a number of extremists, their behaviour while in Britain and their immigration status to ensure that moves to deport them are legally watertight. By comparison, Italy and France have thrown out a number of imams since the July 7 bombings and have said that more will go. The Netherlands, Spain and Germany also announced that, after the London atrocities, they, too, had begun moves to deport radical Muslims who had praised terrorist attacks.


You can read the rest of that article, here.

It is inaccurate to say that most Muslims hate America or American values. Most of the world loves America and is influenced by American values. When it comes to Muslims, their values aren't any more contradicted in the US than they are in Europe. A lot of the Muslim animosity arises from the United States' undying support for Israel, to the detriment of Palestine.

As for the Pope, Catholic Europe is actually quite secular / godless and doesn't really listen to the Pope. He doesn't need to denounce terrorism; it's already wildly unpopular here among the voting population. Wink
lib
S3nd K3ys wrote:
I also have no doubt that the last 3 or 4 generations of most muslim children have been raised to hate the freedoms/beliefs we posess, (unless, of course, as was the case preceding 9/11, they are in the US waiting to make their attacks, and enjoying everything the US has to offer), and that is being carried on from generation to generation, and more and more of them are getting 'extreme', meaning more and more terrorists are being raised.

That's a little too strong and harsh...
Quote:
A new survey shows that support for terrorism and suicide bombings has declined in several Muslim countries. The survey, conducted by the Pew Global Attitudes Project -- part of the Washington-based Pew Research Center -- also shows that many people in Muslim countries share Western concern over Islamic extremism.

source

And also, I randomly googled "Muslim Support for terrorism".. see the results

I don't know about you, but I've seen a decline in Google results lately (possible because they have gone public), so I also searched on Yahoo for the same thing... here are the results.

As for your opinion that Muslims have started becoming more extremist and promoting terorism in the last 3-4 generations, well, it's only that... an opinion.

Why don't you take another look at it... perhaps the media is feeding this to the people so that they remain supportive of the war in Iraq, and perhaps supportive if Bush continues this war into Syria.

S3nd K3ys wrote:
Then the USA will be forced to take an even bigger role in the 'policing' of the world.
Coming up with reasons for the US to police other countries? I think the word to use instead of police is "control" or "influence" judging by how the US polices other nations.
xalophus
I'll first try to do a little background analysis.
Quote:
The threat of the radical Islamists taking over

The keyword, as we all realize is radical.
We cannot say, Islam is trying to take over the world, it's the radical religious leaders who nurture such notions.

We also might have noticed the certain "coincidence" that most globally noted acts of terrorism in the recent times have allegedly been perpetrated by radical muslims.
It's not the religion to be blamed, nor are the religious teachings.
Also not to imply that Islam is less tolerant of people of other faiths.

It's just that muslims mostly live in non-secular countries whose very foundation is religion.
They are ruled by religious leaders.
A recent survey by BBC called "Who runs your world" reveals some very interesting findings.
In a section dedicated to south asia, people from the "not-so-friendly" neighbours Pakistan and India tell the whole story -
Quote:
On the question of who had the most influence on decisions taken in personal lives.. A total of 18% of Pakistanis answered religious leader, while none of the Indians surveyed did.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/4246054.stm

Now isn't there are good chance that the few of these 18% people who agree that they are influenced by religious leaders (not just religion itself) can be brain-washed into a hostility towards other people ?
and that their hostility will be primarily directed towards anybody whom their religious leaders can successfully portray as anti-Islam ?
Namely US of A ?

Looking back half a century, these two countries are essentially the same people, and were one country until 1947.
The difference, however, is that the very foundation of Pakistan was religion, whereas India chose to remain secular.
And in case you are wondering, there are about as many muslims in India as in Pakistan.

Now onto the Eurabia part,
Quote:
It's my opinion that, if left alone, they will succeed. Then the USA will be forced to take an even bigger role in the 'policing' of the world.

I disagree to this.
It's because of this American "Policing" and their "not leaving other countries alone" that they are targeted in the first place.
It's the short-sighted American policy of teaming up with the lesser evil to get rid of the bigger enemy that makes them the most hated country and the prime target of organised terrorism.
America backed Saddam in fighting Iran.
America armed Taliban guerillas to fight the Soviets.
And now America is kiddie-treating Pakistani intelligence and military to fight off Taliban.

It's no coincidence that a lot of America's short term allies eventually turn against them.
The reason is the lack of grounds and the opprtunistic nature of such partnerships.

For all the Hitler that he was, Saddam still ruled Iraq secularly.

Quote:
If Europe doesn't rise to the challenge, Eurabia will come to pass. Then Europe will cease to be an American ally and instead become a base of operations (as she already is to a small degree) against us.

And I'll have to agree with jkalvin on this.
Increasing muslim population in Europe is not very likely to pose a threat to anybody.
What needs to be ensured however, and European countries are already doing this, is to not let radical thinking drive their thoughts.
Deportation of radicals may seem like a funny idea to the trigger-happy American who believes that war is the solution to every problem, but it can make all the difference.

And please don't bomb every single European country just because you feel that Europe is a base of operations against you.
EtherealDesert
Well. This has got to be the single most interesting topic atm. But I must admit that I find certain aspects quite disturbing. The notion of a "disease" spreading in form of certain ideas, concepts and cultural enclaves might be right on the mark, but still has overtones of the retorical anti-semitism of the NSDAP of Nazi-Germany. In addition to that, the "Deportation" idea itself was the very principle leading nazis used prior to the war. This doesn't has to mean that the concept is evil or anything, but it sure is nice to know where these mechanisms have also been nurtured.
Resident Egoist
Quote:
dont' think about all arabians as terrorists and dont' think that they are all after you becouse they dont.... the terrorists are only very few of them..


So, with over 1.3 billion muslims in the world, how many would you say is "very few"? 2 muslims? 3? 4? 10? 100 million? Pick your percentage.
gonzo
S3nd K3ys wrote:
Heard about this on the news the other nite. Very disturbing.

Basically, what they're talking about is the radical and rapid movement by Islam to take over Europe and use it to promote jihad through-out the world.


What? AGAIN? How many times are they going to ply their world domination plans?

It didn't work the first time.
It didn't work the second time.
It didn't work the third time.
It didn't work the fourth time.
It didn't work the fifth time.

What makes them think Islamofascist conquering is going to work this time? Don't they know we're on to them??

The islamofascist posistion hasn't changed since the first time they went on a mad pillaging, and conquering spree pre-800 AD. It's pretty much the same charming mantra from each of their world domination attemts: convert to islam or die


I have a great Hilaire Belloc article on Islam for you.. remind me to dig it up later.


edit: it's called "The Great and Enduring Heresy of Mohammed"

http://img364.imageshack.us/img364/8478/searchysearchy8tv.png


<censored image>
xalophus
gonzo wrote:
the same charming mantra from each of their world domination attemts: convert to islam or die

Not much different from the old American "my way or the highway" mantra, is it ?

gonzo wrote:
How many times are they going to ply their world domination plans?

What makes them think Islamofascist conquering is going to work this time? Don't they know we're on to them??

Burn down the jungle because the lion you tamed turned out to be a man-eater ?

And talking of world domination plans, ever heard of PNAC ?


I'll suggest,
Why don't you "liberate" the people of Saudi Arabia and Iran next ?
They have the world's largest and fourth largest oil reserves. (Iraq was second and Kuwait was third)
Surely they must be a huge threat to American freedom & the world.
Resident Egoist
gonzo wrote:


Now that's what I'd really call Islamo-Fascism! Or should it be Islamo-Nazism -- considering the common animosity against Jews [among other things] that is inherent in both philosophies?
Resident Egoist
Xalophus wrote:
Not much different from the old American "my way or the highway" mantra, is it ?


So, presupposing that one exists, what kind of solution would you propose -- as there certainly exists a problem?

Here's how I see the situation: for there to be a compromise or diplomatic discussion between two quarreling parties, there must be not only an agreement in basic principle, but also the case must be that mutual exchange of values is possible. For example, it is possible for an employer and an employee to negotiate a work contract as there is potentially mutual interest when an agreement is reached: the employer benefits from the skills of the worker, and this latter gets the agreed-upon salary for work done.

But clearly any such thing as negotiation is impossible when the intererests of the involved parties are diametrical opposites, such as the case of an armed robber and a property owner -- any benefit of the former necessitates a loss for and total surrender of the latter. And if there is one thing that Islamists have demonstrated to be their purpose, it is the total deprivation of the life and liberty of all so-called "infidels." What compromise, discussion or negotiation is possible between you and a man from whom you receive the ultimatum: your liberty or your life!?

Make no mistake: such is exactly what the ultimatum "convert to Islam or die" stands for.

Also remember that the radical Islamists are the aggressors against the West, i.e., the initiators of violence.
GW_Addict
I think that all of the psts so far have relevance. Mainly, that not all Arabs are terrorists. In fact, most are just people wanting to get away from the garbage they have to live with in their home countries. I think this accounts for the majority of the 'growth' in Euopean countries. England, for example, has pretty much opened it's borders all the way for what they consider "pakistani asylum seekers'.

However, this said, having these numbers in place certianly makes it easier for the 'bad seeds' to mingle better, and establish bases of operation. Anybody who does not think that the 'bad' arab's are doing this is living under a rock.

Either way, I don't see what can be done. Do these countries turn away those truly deserving of help to keep one or two who want to hurt others out?
ixat
gonzo wrote:
The islamofascist posistion hasn't changed since the first time they went on a mad pillaging, and conquering spree pre-800 AD. It's pretty much the same charming mantra from each of their world domination attemts: convert to islam or die



Ha! All those Christians and Jews who coexisted with Muslims just fine for centuries until the mad pillaging and conquering Crusader hordes poured in would have a good laugh at that.

The editorial page of the Washington Times is about as neocon as it gets. They've been beating the "Eurabia" drum for years. You might want to diversify your sources.

Tidbit for the end: a year or two ago France incurred the ire of American conservatives by passing a law banning all religious symbols in schools (yeah, that includes muslim headcloth). I don't know if I would call that "coddling."
ixat
Resident Egoist wrote:

Now that's what I'd really call Islamo-Fascism! Or should it be Islamo-Nazism -- considering the common animosity against Jews [among other things] that is inherent in both philosophies?


Go read a history book or two.

"During the Middle Ages, Jews were generally better treated by Islamic rulers than Christian ones. Despite second-class citizenship, Jews played prominent roles in Muslim courts, and experienced a "Golden Age" in the Moorish Spain about 900-1100, though the situation deteriorated after that time. History of Jewish communities indigenous to the Middle East and North Africa is described in the article Mizrahi Jew." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewish_history#Spain.2C_North_Africa.2C_and_the_Middle_East

On the other hand, "Jews were frequently massacred and exiled from various European, countries. The persecution hit its first peak during the Crusades. In the First Crusade (1096) flourishing communities on the Rhine and the Danube were utterly destroyed; see German Crusade, 1096. In the Second Crusade (1147) the Jews in France were subject to frequent massacres. The Jews were also subjected to attacks by the Shepherds' Crusades of 1251 and 1320. The Crusades were followed by explusions, including in, 1290, the banishing of all English Jews; in 1396, 100,000 Jews were expelled from France; and, in 1421 thousands were expelled from Austria. Many of the expelled Jews fled to Poland. ... etc. etc."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewish_history#Spain.2C_North_Africa.2C_and_the_Middle_East
jongoldsz
The United States must stop Europe from being taken over and prevent Asia and Africa from being take over because a World War may start.
littlegiant
Quote:
And talking of world domination plans, ever heard of PNAC ?


Exactly. Talk about the pot calling the kettle black.
Resident Egoist
ixat wrote:
Go read a history book or two.


Ah! Listen to the pompous man pretending that he is a history guru. Of course all his history comes from WikiPedia -- that egalitarian abomination.

But besides that, I don't see the point of your historical reference -- of which I am aware, by the way. It doesn't falsify my claim, i.e., change the fact that both Islamism and Nazism share a deep, common hatred of Jews.

That Jews and Muslims once lived in the same communities, once again, does not alter this fact. Following your logic, one might as well point out that Jews used to live in Nazi Germany, too. Of course, they were second class citizens, but so were they in Muslim societies too.

As to why their status deteriorated in both cases/societies -- that's because the seed of hatred already existed from the begining.

Now, go read a religious book or two.


GW_ADDICT wrote:
Either way, I don't see what can be done [about Islamo-Fascism].


Islamist fanatics, in order to put their plans into practice, need, besides their training, financial, intellectual and political support. They cannot have acces to any of these without the existence of State sponsor of terrorism. As it is impossible to change the way these dogmatists think, the only solution is the total eradication of all state sponsors of terrorism -- i.e., the elimination of the essential, material means by which terrorists put their plans into practice.
GW_Addict
Well said - I would agree that this is the only thing likely to have any major affect at quelling terrorism.

Again - well spoken. I enjoy discussing things like this with people who can think through the argument and offer something other than "Im right -and your wrong"

There are always at least two sides to every coin. :)
gnomme
I wish that the concerned parties, including the Muslim Council of Britain, would concentrate their efforts where they should be concentrated. It's our duty to halt incitement from among our ranks; our duty is to condemn incitement against Arabs and Muslims.

source: Jihad El Khazen Al-Hayat - 07/10/05//
Idea
illini319
xalophus wrote:

I'll suggest,
Why don't you "liberate" the people of Saudi Arabia and Iran next ?
They have the world's largest and fourth largest oil reserves. (Iraq was second and Kuwait was third)
Surely they must be a huge threat to American freedom & the world.


I actually agreed with most of what you said except for this part. Why is it that when it comes to the middle east and CURRENT U.S. policy, do people immediately think it's because of the oil? While we can all sit here and discuss the issue, I double we will ever get to the bottom of this. It's easy to think that it's the oil. It's been the party line for how many decades now. Could there be some truth in this? Well, if you consider that having a more stable Middle East might lead to a more stable oil flow then maybe... Given the shrub's unilateral policies, it seems more likely that he genuinely believes that what he is doing in the middle east is making America safer; and not gas cheaper. IF the U.S. wanted to make gas cheaper... they would either strong-arm OPEC into producing more crude (i.e. increase supply), make more refineries (we haven't made much lately, hence the hurricane aftermaths), or go to war with our latest and greatest oil competitor: China.



As far as thoughts on Eurabia...
This is the most inane chicken little paranoia I've heard in a long time. It is absolutely true that Muslims are everywhere. Name me one continent where there isn't a crucifix. It is not fair to generalize all muslims as radicals. Radicals are more devolutionary than anything else. I don't believe it is in their nature to usurp world governments for their gain.
HAVING SAID THAT, those muslims who have powerful voices in their communities should be compelled to do a little PR. It is their primary responsibility that the non-muslim world not consider them to all be terrorists. They should condemn all terrorism, not by words but by actions.
hofer
Muslins are taking europe just as the barbarians did with Rome.
artur.h
there is nothing bad about islam
i welcome muslims to europe
we canj live in peace with them
i have many muslim friends
Related topics
Where do you live?
"terrorist" my thoughts
A soldier's rant
Mexifornia - The Destruction of America
Rigid School system in Asia
Can you give me your thoughts on Burlesque?
Why doesnt France contain the violence?
African -->AMERICANS<-- are rioting in France???
Powerbook G4 Vs Powermac G5 thoughts
Problem with a ".be" domain.
terrorism
Deism vs Atheism
Christians, Jesus, and Africans born in America from slavery
Americans and Europeans join Al Qaeda
Reply to topic    Frihost Forum Index -> Lifestyle and News -> Discuss World News

FRIHOST HOME | FAQ | TOS | ABOUT US | CONTACT US | SITE MAP
© 2005-2011 Frihost, forums powered by phpBB.