Stop All War

The Insane Causes of War

The war we are fighting in Iraq right now is not a war of liberation. It is not a war of freedom, or a war of liberation. It is a cultural war. That last statement will probably cause you to put me in the ranks of those "nuts" who believe it's a war of Christianity against Islam. From a certain (very very limited) point of view, it can be seen as such. But that is not the point, nor is it the main topic, of this little essay.

The war of cultures I am talking about is the war of western (called that by those who live in - and named - the western hemisphere) capitalist consumer culture on cultures who are tired of being exploited, and are rebelling, or are simply misbehaving.

Capitalist Consumers

The "western" capitalist consumer culture is a culture which destroys more than it creates; it is laid out to further enrich the already rich, on the backs of most everybody else. Granted, there are also good sides, such as the fact that if you're is lucky enough (and almost inevitably, this means "born in the western culture"), you can make it big on the backs of others too.

The culture itself, however, is based around the fundamental concepts of capitalism and consumerism - concepts which go hand-in-hand in a vicious circle. The capitalist needs a base of clients or customers to sell to. The customers need to work for the capitalist (or a capitalist) in order for them to have money to buy. Not only that - the capitalist is also looking to make a profit. And that is where war comes in.

The western culture constantly needs an inflow of supply in order to meet demand. This demand is often a "created" need, be it fashion, the newest car, or whatever. If a fad is no longer in, it is dumped. Western countries are the only countries in this world who routinely dump huge amounts of food in order to keep demand (and therefore prices) high.

Where does all of this come from? How do we have the resources to constantly consume? The answer to that one is painfully obvious: the resources come from the "other" cultures out there, who are being systematically exploited in order to feed the needs of the west.

(thank you BdR76 on flickr)
(thank you BdR76 on flickr)

The "Other" Cultures

History is a long story of oppression and exploitation. In recent years, the results of these policies are becoming more and more obvious: mass famines where western powers replaced all local crops with tea or coffee. Instabilities where western powers simply carved up the land on a map, little realizing that a map is not equal to a territory. Striking poverty in nations where the upper class is incredibly wealthy, and sympathetic to the west.

These are countries that are being gouged by the west. They are force-fed the western consumerist culture, breaking them out of their own rural existences. Western corporations then come in, offering a pittance for labor and land, and replacing sustenance crops with cash crops, which are then shipped back to the west. The workers may now have money (but mostly only very very little), but have nothing to buy. Borders in their own countries must be open to allow the influx of western corporations, but their own people, living in extreme poverty and constantly on the bring of starvation, have no-where to go. The western castle doors are closed.

Wealthier nations (those with oil, for example) are also being gouged, but in a different way. They are threatened by the military over-might of the western powers (which include one hyper-power) to continue trading oil at prices and in a manner which is detrimental to their ultimate profits (they still make massive profits, but could be making more). The super-powers make sure that rulers friendly to themselves are in power, regardless if these rulers are homicidal maniacs.

The Process of Capitalism

But not only are these poorer states exploited - western states are too. The common population has to work very hard to make a living. One of the reasons I say "living" and not "fortune" (in a 'developing' nation it would be a fortune) is because the products that are bought in developing nations for a pittance are sold in the west for a much higher sum of money, benefiting the corporations even more.

Robert Newman's History of Oil - A Must-See

War of Cultures

The western world is constantly embroiled in war. The reasons behind such wars should be plain by now: if a 'subject' nation takes it upon itself to demand a little more freedom to determine its own destiny, it is made an example of. If the exploited rise, they are executed. This may destroy the production capacity of one nation, but most certainly serves as an example to other nations.

Geopolitically important targets (such as Iraq, and, to a lesser degree, Afghanistan) are extremely important in this realpolitik. Iraq was, and still is, a major supplier of oil. The western economy, and, mainly, western military might, is extremely dependent on this resource, and are absolutely paranoid about defending it. If the rulers of one of these nations so much as hints that supplies will freeze up, they need to be made an example of.

Oil is a precious natural resource - only few nations possess it. Most of these nations are not friends of the United States. But they supply oil to the hegemon, and Iraq serves as a good example of why they should continue doing so.

It is incredibly depressing to see otherwise sensible people applaud a war which is being fought to retain geopolitical dominance - and nothing else.

Stop the War

It is not enough to simply stop this particular war. There is never an excuse for war, for human lives to end, for masses to die so that others might drive their cars or tanks for one more day or one more month. The problem, however, is not just this war, or any recent war.

The problem is more deeply rooted than that. Quite simply, it is the consumer culture that is the currently dominant paradigm of cultural governance. We in the west grow up thinking that food magically appears in supermarkets. We are taught otherwise, and might even have visited a farm or two, but do not understand what is really behind it. We are born into a culture which teaches us, from day one, to be consumers.

I'm not saying that the elimination of the consumer culture and a move back to the stone age are the answers. What I am saying is that the western culture must evolve. It must grow out of this infantile state, and become much less belligerent.

It's not as if the war enjoyed much support to begin with. Many people demonstrated against it (~7,000,000 in Rome alone). But the governments decided to represent their corporations instead of their citizens. And I strongly feel that this was a mistake.

Terrestrial culture must re-form to become a culture which is all-encompassing and completely participatory. We have enough money in the western world to feed and clothe everybody on the entire earth. We have enough money to ensure that all human beings can live as equals, more-or-less equally wealthy, and that all can truly contribute to society to the fullest of their capacity.

No, I am not a communist. Communism doesn't work, as we've seen, because it is inevitably usurped by corrupted individuals. However, a world in which all nations are more-or-less evenly developed is a world in which mankind can finally be at peace with itself.

And can reach for the stars.

More by this Author


I'd Love Some Feedback. 34 comments

MrMarmalade profile image

MrMarmalade 8 years ago from Sydney

Wealthier nations (those with oil, for example) are also being gouged, but in a different way. They are threatened by the military over-might of the western powers (which include one hyper-power) to continue trading oil at prices and in a manner which is detrimental to their ultimate profits (they still make massive profits, but could be making more). The super-powers make sure that rulers friendly to themselves are in power, regardless if these rulers are homicidal maniacs.

Does it suit your argument, which in the main I agree with. 'Stopped the War.'

It is not good for the west to put the prices up, but good for the oil cOUNTRIES to do so. That is a little one eyed, I think.

Thank you for your hub. Another point of view.


thooghun profile image

thooghun 8 years ago from Rome, Italy

Very nice Hub.

I certainly agree with you conclusion. Although I'm curious as to how you would envision a possible sharing of wealth towards lesser priviledged countries without inciting revolution. I doubt the power structures that hold today would willing accomodate this process, and subsequently it would be our (middle class) job to bear the burden.

Can it be done given that it seems the middle class today is suffering? (well, relatively)

Thoog.


Iðunn 8 years ago

ok, you got me on 'capitalism is The Great Evil' because you're right, it is. Exploitation of labor (that means all of us) is built in.

Iraq is a wrong war. There have been right reasons to fight. This just wasn't one of them. The reason there will always be war is that there will always be people and by their very nature people are flawed and human and often greedy and abusive. Fighting back against that, those are the wars that need to be fought.


Patty Inglish, MS profile image

Patty Inglish, MS 8 years ago from North America

Work, buy, consume, and die. I certainly tired of that in the fast food industry. Glad I keft it young.


Coeus profile image

Coeus 8 years ago from All over the world and then some. Author

MrMarmalade: Each price hike is not only a hike by an oil country, but also that by the corporation. After all, they need to cream a profit of the top as well. If the at-source oil price rises too high, you can be sure that there will be trouble. But the at-station price can pretty much rise all it wants to.

 

Thooghun: Of course the middle-class of today is suffering. They are the principal consumers in any given society, and they are the ones who will be gouged by the corporations in the long run.

Regarding a re-distribution of wealth: there are a million ways to do this. The UN, as well as other international organizations have archives full of plans for this. Perhaps the easiest one - and, mainly, the one least likely to cause too much turmoil - would be to approach their development as developing a new market, much as europe was developed after world war II, instead of development for the sole purpose of exploitation (as is happening today).


Coeus profile image

Coeus 8 years ago from All over the world and then some. Author

Nice one, Patty Inglish! :)


Coeus profile image

Coeus 8 years ago from All over the world and then some. Author

Iðunn : I believe there are other means, which are harmful to far less people, and are much more efficient. I cannot believe that there is ever any justification for war, nor that there is such a thing as a "just war".

I'm sorry to disagree, but thank you for the comment!


Iðunn 8 years ago

I can agree to disagree and I can even tell you I am working very hard to get to that point. I haven't yet though. Your hub made a thoughtful read in the right direction for me. Thank YOU. :)


eugie17 profile image

eugie17 8 years ago from online (everywhere)

Maybe a world ruled by machines will solve the problem, hehe ... Nice work

by the way am from IRAQ ;) and it sucks here all side are guilty and every body is despaired, I hate politics and never watch the news it all sucks


Coeus profile image

Coeus 8 years ago from All over the world and then some. Author

Iðunn: Thank you. That's a great compliment. Thank you. :)

eugie17: Thanks for the comment!


Misha profile image

Misha 8 years ago from DC Area

While I definitely share your attitude against war in general and iraq war in particular, I don't think wars could be avoided. Wars were before the Western civilization, wars will be after it. It may be sad, but this is how World works.

Oh, and if you did not know, communism equals war. This is insider view :)


Sonu m 8 years ago

First of all let me say that I am a liberal and I also oppose the war and Bush in general. With that said I truely feel that your type of thinking is very naive. Sure capitalism and cosumerism has its flaws but name any other system that has allowed for even a poor man to become rich regardless of his class, caste, religion, etc. There are certainly abuses by corporations and certain individuals, but that is true of all systems (as you pointed out in your comments about communism).

Capitalism works, plain and simple. Almost every country that has embraced capitalism has prospered and the people's quality of life has improved drastically. China is one of the worst examples of brutal governments, yet their limited embrace of capitalism is allowing for their poor to start to rise and become more affluent. Yes the poor in China end up working 15 hours a day (or more) and make very little for their effort, yet still they are able to earn enough to support themselves and their families. And with time they will only become more capable and live with a much higher standard of living.

As for your comments about how "there is never an excuse for war," well tell that to the Hindus that were slaughtered by the Muslim Moghuls when they invaded India, tell that to the Jews who were killed for no reason other than the fact that they were born. Mankind has always had evil and twisted elements from the begining, when a certain ideology becomes twisted enough where groups see it as being ok to kill another group for no reason other than to extinguish it, then the only solution is war.

Don't get me wrong, not every war, and particularly the war in Iraq, is justifiable but what I am trying to say is that true threats are always present globally and sometimes the only way to stop violence is through war.

One other thought for you to ponder, a big reason why people and cultures end up hating other people and cultures is because of fear and lack of understanding. Perhaps if we had one global culture, maybe we would not fear or misunderstand our fellow global neighbors and vice versa. Some of the consumerism symbols which you posted (namely the McDonalds trademark) are widely revered and recognized around the world. If you go to Russia, China, Japan and even in the middle east it is instantly recognized and looked up to. Most people in foreign countries do not see that symbol as a mark of our imperialism or arrogance, rather they see it as a place where they can take their families and enjoy themselves... in effect unifying all those who recognize it. Isn't that something to be proud of??


poseidon profile image

poseidon 8 years ago

All about oil.Thanx.


Coeus profile image

Coeus 8 years ago from All over the world and then some. Author

poseidon: Oil is a very important factor, but not the only one. Thanks. :)


Coeus profile image

Coeus 8 years ago from All over the world and then some. Author

Sonu m: First of all, thank you for taking the time to write the comment. I appreciate it, and I'm glad you read the article.

I am in opposition to the wars being fought now, yes. I am also opposed to war in general, and believe, once again, that there are also more effective ways of defending one's country.

Regarding your discussion on capitalism, allow me to answer the points in order:I mentioned in the article that capitalism has its good sides, and that one of those sides is that it allows the poor to "become rich". However, mostly this refers to the poor of western nations. A capitalist nation such as Kenya has very few poor who have become rich. Mostly, the poor are simply exploited.

While it is true that some countries have prospered as a result of introducing capitalism, this rise in relative economic wealth has always come on the shoulders of a huge class of the poor. Citing China as an example is interesting - the people who manage to obtain permission to work in those areas where some capitalism has been allowed to seep in might have a miniscule chance of prospering. An average worker in the west of China does not have this opportunity. They are doomed to work in a factory, for a pittance, for their entire lives.

Regarding war: you have made my point better than I could, and I thank you for it. It is up to us, as rational individuals, to prevent such ideologies from ever taking hold. It is up to us to simply state that we will not fight such wars - after all, governments must take their militaries from the ranks of common, everyday people.

I do believe that there are cultural differences which might start as fear and misunderstanding. However, in this case, culture is not your friend. If your culture (not yours specifically, of course, but as a general statement) advocates fear and a lack of understanding (much like the US is doing right now), that culture must be analyzed and changed from within. It is up to the participants in the culture to advocate change.As to the final point you made: it is the same as mine. Having a global culture is definitely a desirable goal. I disparage consumerist capitalism because it is doomed - it over-exploits all resources for the benefit of few, and the results are felt worldwide. However, a more rational form of capitalism would logically seek to develop all countries as potential markets, rather than as raw natural resources. This would allow corporations to have a much larger customer base, and would allow 'other' nations to develop properly as well.

Once again, thank you for your insight!


Adventure 8 years ago

Good piece. I agree with much of what you say. You are right; you're not a communist. You are a socialist living in a capitalist society. One of the problems with trying to equalize or evenly develop all of our countries, or even all of our own population in this country is that many people are lazy. That is a factor often glided over in this type of topic. What about those who are plenty capable but do not pull their own weight?The other, harder workers must then pull up the slack. Also, those who are very determined will have to have their income redistributed to the poor or lazy. I'll admit: we are a fat, lazy, consumer-oriented nation. But we weren't this bad until well after WWII. Also, I'm no war fan, but don't forget, radical Islamists have throughout history tried to kill people different than they. I mention Islam because that is the war we're in right now. Remember the USS Cole, the first bombing of the World Trade Center, 911, etc. were not a matter of our country having too much. It is because the radical Islamists are out of their minds.


Coeus profile image

Coeus 8 years ago from All over the world and then some. Author

Adventure: I suppose you could call me a socialist if you would like to place me into one of your mental boxes. :) Thanks for the comment.

By saying humans are lazy you are simply dismissing the hundreds of thousands who don't even get chances at jobs, and that's just in the United States. In the 'other' nations, even if you want to work, even if you have the drive, you have absolutely no chance. None. I think calling everybody in those nations 'lazy' is a bit harsh.

I am not talking about a redistribution of wealth in this case - I am simply talking about actually making an effort to develop these 'other' nations as potential markets instead of simply exploiting them.

An interesting aspect of Islam is that the Christian west repeatedly invaded the Arab / Muslim empire for no apparent reason in the crusades. If you do a little research, you'll realize that the Arab/Muslim empire was extremely egalitarian, did not impose religious beliefs on anybody, and offered chances to most everybody to rise to the top of their profession. It was only since the crusades, and the subsequent attacks and colonization by the west that they developed a deep dislike of us (unsurprisingly).

Another aspect you don't take into consideration is the schizophrenic and exploitative western foreign policy in that part of the world starting just prior or during WWI with the explicit goal of securing oil by any means necessary. We've toppled governments, carved out a western state, made hundreds of assassinations, and so forth. A little anger is very understandable in this case.

I don't think the radical islamists are crazier than western policies in that part of the world. I think they're a natural and direct consequence of our actions in that part of the world.

Thanks again. :)


thooghun profile image

thooghun 8 years ago from Rome, Italy

Adventure, it's good to see some debate on here. I think though, that by claiming that:

"Remember the USS Cole, the first bombing of the World Trade Center, 911, etc. were not a matter of our country having too much. It is because the radical Islamists are out of their minds."

You are disregarding much foreign policy that equates with it and worse. The only difference here is the amount of media exposure and wordplay.

I condone neither.

An act of terrorism is an act of terrorism, whether it is orchestrated by a suicide bomber, agency, state or otherwise.


Coeus profile image

Coeus 8 years ago from All over the world and then some. Author

Thooghun - good point. I do not condone terrorism at all, whether state-sponsored or otherwise. I am simply pointing out the most obvious reasons for this terrorism.

Thanks again!


thegecko profile image

thegecko 8 years ago from San Diego, CA

Definitely a big piece in the puzzle. Thanks for posting this :)


Coeus profile image

Coeus 8 years ago from All over the world and then some. Author

thegecko: thanks for the comment! :)


BartholomewKlick profile image

BartholomewKlick 8 years ago

A fascinating article, but I cannot say that I agree with you. The capitalistic free market is no more harmful to people than is a petty dictator. In the capitalistic free market system, it is possible for other people to gain power, and not all power is absolute.


BartholomewKlick profile image

BartholomewKlick 8 years ago

I do, however, agree that war is wrong and fought for innane reasons. :-)


sonum 8 years ago

Hello Coeus,

I appreciate your response and your giving me the chance to respond in turn. I will try and respond to your other comments at a later time but you mentioned in a comment to another post that "the Arab/Muslim empire was extremely egalitarian, did not impose religious beliefs on anybody, and offered chances to most everybody to rise to the top of their profession" this comment simpy is not true.

If you look at the history of India, which is a prime example of the muslim empire conquering a non-muslim people you will see it was anything but egalitarian. Many Hindus, buddhists, and jains were given the choice to either convert or die by the sword. If they were not forcibly converted, non muslims had to pay a special tax so that they could live under Muslim domination and they always lived in constant fear that at any time a true believer (follower of Islam) could come and lay claim to their property. In addition to this, Hindu temples and palaces were often destroyed and defaced and the parts that remained were often used to construct Muslim monuments. Sites that were holy to non muslims were converted to Muslim mausoleums or other monuments. Living under Islamic domination was anything but egalitarian and peaceful.

For you to paint Islam's history as being one that is tolerant and allowing non muslims to rise up is simply a gross misrepresentation of facts and it belittles the millions of people who have been slaughtered throughout history simply because they did not want Islam to be their religion.

But just for the sake of argument, lets forget about the past and simply look at modern islam. Look at all the countries which are predominatley Muslim in the world today and you will see one common thread... intolerance and favortism. In Malaysia Malays are given preference simply because they are Muslims and are given scholarships and government jobs whether they are deserving or not. Non Muslims who live in Malaysia are not given these benefits.

In Saudi Arabia and many other Middle Eastern Countries, foreigners are invited to enter the country to work yet they are not allowed to own property nor are they treated as equals under the law. There is absolutely no way for a non muslim foreigner to become a citizen in Saudi Arabia even if they were born in the country to parents who have worked in the country for many years.

Or how about Pakistan, our supposed ally. Christians living in Pakistan are constantly under fear that their daughters will be kidnapped by "Good" muslims who are doing a service to their religion by kidnapping and marrying these women to convert them. Muslim student unions control most of the major schools and universities and non-muslim faculty and students are continuously harrased. The police and government simply turn the other way and pretend that these things do not occur. Are these rare acts committed by a few zealouts?? Perhaps, but the fact remains that very few of these acts go punished even when they are blatent.

Don't get me wrong, there are many good Muslim people in the world. The problem is that they are not allowed or simply choose not to take a stand against these injustices.


Coeus profile image

Coeus 8 years ago from All over the world and then some. Author

Sonum:

That's a very valid point, and I thank you for it. It is true that modern extremists are committing atrocities, but limiting that to Islam would be mistaken. In the small scale, pro-choice institutes in the US are harassed and even attacked with frightening frequency, simply because they run counter to the predominant Christian faith. People who wish to partake of these services often have to do so in secrecy, so they are not discriminated against by their society.

Favoritism is prevalent in the 'democratic' societies. People who are not of the local flavour, as it were, are discriminated against in many ways, shapes, and forms (see Islamophobia, and the beating of Sikhs in relation to 9-11).

Of course, that is still the small picture. Western governments are more and more overtly Christian. When was the last time the United States had a president who wasn't? The atrocities committed by the western governments, therefore, are done so under the auspices of Christianity, or, at least, are perceived as being as such.

And because the western, Christian nations are superpowers, and include the only hyper-power in the world, it is easy to see where the misconceptions are coming from. A case could be made (and often is) that these are not really misconceptions - that this is actual fact, but I, for one, don't subscribe to it.

And because it is superpowers committing these atrocities, in combination with a mass export of their culture, Muslim nations are forced into a bind. They would like their culture to continue (though the extremists obviously don't want any change whatsoever, and would like a return to the 'good old' values), and feel threatened by western actions. This is a fertile bed for extremism, whether state sponsored or not, because of the background level of fear and paranoia that pervades society.

This image is not to different from where the Western world seems to be headed.

Thank you again for your comments, and for this interesting discussion.


Coeus profile image

Coeus 8 years ago from All over the world and then some. Author

BartholomewKlick: Thank you for your comments! I have already addressed this issue above. Please read the comments, specifically my response to Sonu M's excellent first post. If you would like to add something, or to continue making a point, please feel free to do so. Any feedback is always welcome.


sonum 8 years ago

Hello Coeus,

I do agree that even in our great country discrimination does exist. The difference is that here it is hidden and still considered wrong and is punishable. In Muslim nations discrimination is a way of life, ask any Christian living in Pakistan or Hindu living in Malaysia.

The other difference is that Muslims are allowed to practice their religion freely in the U.S., they are allowed to hold jobs in all industries because quite simply no one is allowed to consider religion as a factor. In countries like Malaysia or Pakistan, religion is the first thing that employers or the government consider. Just google discrimination in Malysia or Pakistan and you will see what I mean.

As for Sikhs living in the U.S. and the treatment they received post 911... first of all Sikhs are not Muslims but they were the unfortunate victims of hatred by ignorant folks who merely saw the turban as beard as a sign of Islam. Sikhs have always enjoyed a great deal of success in the U.S. both prior to and after 9-11. Yes there were acts of discrimination and violence towards them, but the fact remains that these acts were considered crimes. The people who performed these acts were prosecuted and imprisoned. Had any of these acts happend to Sihks or Christians, or Hindus in a Muslim state the perpetrators would serve only token punishment if any at all.

The difference between my point of view and yours is that you see the U.S. as a Christian nation and superpower wheras I see the U.S. as a Superpower that happens to have a Christian majority. All religions (including Islam) are allowed open and free practice and all citizens (regardless of their religion) are allowed to pursue "the American dream." In Islamic nations (even so called progressive and modern nations like Malasyia) minorities are not afforded the same opportunities and benefits as their Muslim brothers.

Another difference in our views is that you seem to think that muslim rage is due to "The atrocities committed by the western governments... " and this somehow serves as a cause of extremism. Unfortunatley you are very incorrect. The U.S. is the one that supported the Taliban and gave funding to their early regime (either directly or through Saudi Arabia). We even invited a group of Taliban leaders to the U.S. prior to 911. Yes it is true that we did so because of our own interest in preventing the Russians from gaining favor with them, or perhaps because of oil interests. But the fact remains we were willing to deal with and support a pure and extreme muslim regime. The simple truth is that the U.S. has always backed and continues to back muslim regimes such as Saudi Arabia, Paksitan, and many more. Yet these countries are the ones that foment the most hate against us.

The hate that they feel is not because of our policies or way of life, it is simply because we are not muslim. Read the Koran and talk in depth to some Muslim friends and you will understand that the sole basis for brotherhood in Islaam is not to love thy neighbor, or to live peacefully with all cultures, instead it is convert and live in a world where Islaam is the only religion.

These are not my words or my thoughts, these are the words of numerous Imaams (even those living in the U.S. and Europe). I have often argued with Muslim friends for not speaking out against these views, in the end to only be rebuffed by the realization that they too would not be unhappy with a world muslim domination.

Anyway all of these comments are just a digression (a very lengthy digression!!). My original intent was to point out how your statement that,

"Arab/Muslim empire was extremely egalitarian, did not impose religious beliefs on anybody, and offered chances to most everybody to rise to the top of their profession" is a gross misrepresentation of history and has absolutely no basis in either modern history or ancient history. Perhaps there are some kindly Muslim scholars that preach this and want the world to believe this but this simply is not true.


thooghun profile image

thooghun 8 years ago from Rome, Italy

Sonum and Coeus, you have a great intelligent discussion going, I commend you both.


thooghun profile image

thooghun 8 years ago from Rome, Italy

Although I find it funny, when you say it is the Muslims who cannot live peacefully side-by-side with their neighbors. Unless am I grossly mistaken, it is us (the west) that has attacked, not one but two countries, and threatens to contninue on this path. Two countries whose governents created by the west. We can retrace as far back as you like.

Sticks and stones.

Threats and attitude count for much, as you say. But bombs and bullets count for more.


Coeus profile image

Coeus 8 years ago from All over the world and then some. Author

Sonum: I already conceded this point to you in the prior post. I think your arguments in the last post betray a rather crass level of bias against Islam, and I will not respond to it other than to say: Islam is as peaceful a religion as Christianity, if not more so. Make of that what you will.


sonum 8 years ago

Hello Coeus,

I do apologize to you if you feel that my arguments are biased and "crass." My initial intention was to point out that war is sometimes an unwanted necessity (as mentioned in my first post) and in my last few posts to simply take issue with your characterization of Muslim history as being peaceful and just. I am not a Christian, nor am I a Muslim but I am someone who has read the great holy books of many religions and I have tried digest and understand all relgions in my own quest for God. Many (if not most) Muslims in this world are peaceful and just individual seeking to live their lives like everyone else but that does not mean that the teachings in the Koran lead to peace or justice or equality for all men of all religions to live peacefully. If you feel that my arguments are crass, unrefined, and even biased then so be it, but that does not make them untrue.


sonum 8 years ago

Hi Thoogun,

I hope you do not think that I am saying Muslims cannot live peacefully with their neighbors because we know that is just not true. Most Muslims do live peacefully with their neighbors and want to just live their life like the rest of us. What my point is that the religion itself condones violence and hatred to non-muslims. The ultimate goal preached at many Masjids is that your brothers can only be Muslims and non Muslims are inferior.

Ever wonder why a Muslim in Indonesia who has absoultely no link or relation to Palestine still hates Israel and Jews in general?

I do agree with you that we (the U.S) have been aggressors for oil and have a leadership that is war mongering and quite simply crazy. The difference is that the people generally do not support the war and hopefully will elect wise people to end it without causing more turmoil.

The reason why Muslim nations have waged war was typically due to religious intolerance in addition to resources and imperialism. Just look at the threats Iran makes to Israel and you will see what I mean.

Although I find it funny, when you say it is the Muslims who cannot live peacefully side-by-side with their neighbors. Unless am I grossly mistaken, it is us (the west) that has attacked, not one but two countries, and threatens to contninue on this path. Two countries whose governents created by the west. We can retrace as far back as you like.

Sticks and stones.

Threats and attitude count for much, as you say. But bombs and bullets count for more.


Coeus profile image

Coeus 8 years ago from All over the world and then some. Author

Sonum: Indeed, this is the case. And you will find that to be the case for most all "holy" books. I believe any religion that does not stem from yourself, but is instead based upon the teachings of others which have been regurgitated time and time again, is a dangerous fallacy.


kaffir 8 years ago

Sometimes you fight a war because it is brought to you. You want to live peacefully, raise your children, and earn a living, yet some group does not allow you to because your beliefs, or religion is different than theirs. Islaam is not a religion of peace... go to youtube and watch the following video:

Dispatches - Undercover Mosque

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=peFQWuk4nuo

These are not the views of all muslims, but these are the views of the muslims that are practicing their faith (wearing the hijab, practicing sharia, etc). Do your own research and make your own conclusions, do not let anyone feed you lines Islaam being a religion of peace and tolerance.

    Sign in or sign up and post using a HubPages Network account.

    0 of 8192 characters used
    Post Comment

    No HTML is allowed in comments, but URLs will be hyperlinked. Comments are not for promoting your articles or other sites.


    Click to Rate This Article
    working