Quote:

mozzaok wrote on Jul 17^th, 2008 at 10:46am:

I definitely don't support the Taliban.

The fact remains that it took place in Nuristan, which is not completely a Taliban area, there are other anti occupation guerrillas there. I support removing the West from Afghanistan but I don't support having the Taliban in their place.

I support removing the West from Afghanistan but I don't support having the Taliban in their place.

Do you think the west did the right thing in toppling the Taliban and setting up an alternative government?

mozzaok wrote on Jul 17^th, 2008 at 12:03pm:

We did have a model Islamic society at one stage where the rest of the world came to us, it's when we ruled Islamic Spain, Baghdad and for the majority of the Ottoman empire the Islamic nation was one of learning where Europeans came to learn what knowledge we had.

But sadly in each occasion someone decided to come in and invade the lands, bringing destruction to what we had. In the case of Islamic Spain it was the reconquisition, in the case of Baghdad it was the Mongol hordes and in the case of the Ottoman empire it was the Western invasions of it's lands and sponsoring of religious fanatics like the Wahabi's that caused this problem.

Perhaps if the West stopped supporting Wahabi governments we wouldn't be in the position that we are currently in at the moment.

Also the Taliban never advocated fighting the West, at least not until the West attacked Afghanistan.

In fact the Taliban was in the middle of a huge pipeline deal with the US for many years before 9/11.

I don't support the Taliban and support their removal, but I would not like, in it's place a government that are puppets of the West.

I don't completely dislike the Afghan government, however I dislike their acceptance of US help to remove the Taliban and I dislike the Warlords that the US supports in Afghanistan that terrorize the population. It makes them somewhat obligated to follow US policy in the region, even when the decisions are not in the best interests of Afghanistan. Right now they are under immense pressure to allow the US to use Afghanistan as a base in an attack against Iran. Something which they are resisting.

Afghanistan needs balanced Islam, I personally blame the rise of the Taliban on the Muslim world's neglect for Afghanistan. Had the Muslim world kept to their responsibilty of trying to help those who need it, the Taliban could have been educated correctly on how Islam should be applied and instead of resorting to tribalism and extremism. The problem there is due to the major support for the Taliban coming from Pakistan and Saudi Arabia, in particular religious teachings came from Saudi. So many Afghans learnt the Wahabi type of Islam and mixed it with their own culture to make what Afghanistan was under the Taliban's rule.

There needs to be an Islamic State to come about in the Middle East so that the proper and balanced Islam can be taught to the people and the lands ruled under proper and balanced Shariah law instead of Wahabi laws. Once this occurs then a proper government that will be fair and balanced will come to Afghanistan God willing.

This will be prolonged as long as the US and the rest of the West supports kings and dictators in the Middle East, it will come about eventually in the Middle East, whether the West likes it or not, but it's emergence will either be with the blessings of the West with the intentions of having good relations the Islamic State in mutual cooperation and the wishes to have trade and fair diplomacy or it will come about eventually through war and the Muslims will force the West out of the Middle East. It is inevitable, so the West should save its strength by accepting it now because they can't stop it, God Willing.

freediver wrote on Jul 20^th, 2008 at 10:26am:


How is what I'm saying nonsense?

Oppressive dictators and kings in the Middle East and warlords backed by the West in Afghanistan is what is delaying them. For example in Egypt's past elections, the Muslim Brotherhood won the elections, when the votes came in the Western backed President Hosni Mubarak locked any judge opposed to him in prison and also locked any Muslim Brotherhood members in prison too so he could stay in power, the West supports his actions and that's evident by the fact that Egypt gets the second largest amount of military foreign aid that the US gives out (after Israel) so that he can keep his stanglehold on Egypt. If Egypt ever got in the hands of an Islamic State you'd see it expand so rapidly that nothing could stop it, just the same way it did when Salahudeen Ayoube was around, it arose from Egypt then too and took the whole Middle East.

May God grant the Egyptian people victory in establishing a proper Islamic State with balanced Islam and freedom and freeing their land from tyranny, ameen.

Sprintcyclist wrote on Jul 20^th, 2008 at 10:53pm:

LOL, the Muslim Brotherhood were voted in legitimately by many millions of Egyptians and their agenda is well known to be an eventual Islamic State.

Tyranny is what the US brings.

freediver wrote on Jul 21^st, 2008 at 11:41am:


The West ISN'T setting up democracies in the Middle East, these are similar types of 'democracies' that the US set up in Latin America which are farses. Instead they set up puppet regimes that will do everything the US tells them to.

Right now however, you are starting to see even those governments which the US has set up start to rebel against it.

And you ask why don't they fight? They have fought, in the 60's and 70's they did fight. The US then upped it's military aid to the government and started training it's interrogators how to torture and create fear, much the same as they did with those officers attending The School of the Americas where US backed Latin American dictatorships sent their officers to learn similar things. Soon the Egyptian government started abducting, torturing and murdering anyone who spoke out against them in addition to throwing them in prison without charge. Egypt is a police state and even if you walk down the street and have a big beard or stay at the mosque longer than the prayer time they will lock you up sometimes in fear of you being a member of the Muslim Brotherhood.

The Muslim Brotherhood then started in the political process but was banned as a political party, in recent years this has been lifted slightly and still even when they win the election and are proven so by judges they and the judges get put in prison and are tortured.

This is why it's imperitive that the West ceases supporting such tyrants, dictators and kings so that we can establish a proper Islamic State easier, because if we overthrow those governments while they are still being supported by the West (which is inevitable God willing) then I'm sure you can imagine that it'd be less likely that we'd trust the West in anything in the future and that could damage potential relations.

The West is better off withdrawing support and letting the people decide without fear of being persecuted by dictators, kings and tyrants that wish to keep their positions. If the West does that then once we deal with our own nations and get ourselves in order then we can have fruitful relations with the West based on good will between each other, fair trade and understanding.

You can't export democracy at the barrel of a gun.

The West ISN'T setting up democracies in the Middle East

Yes they are. In Iraq and Afghanistan.

And you ask why don't they fight? They have fought, in the 60's and 70's they did fight. The US then upped it's military aid to the government

So Some money to the Egyptian government explains how they kept the entire middle east oppressed agaisnt the wishes of the locals?

I also find it astounding that you consider the Wests interference in the Middle East as 'low level'.

In a historical context it is. They are not physically occupying it. Fancy being able to oppress an entire region of the globe so easily, despite the fact that the locals are of a different religion and want to use that religion to unite against you (supposedly). It just doesn't make sense.