Introduction of Islam to Europe and America

Dial it down to 9000 piggy!

Originally posted by FinalAnswer
Yeah, it's almost like the Middle East is a very unstable region, and has been so for hundreds of years, mostly due to outside powers interfering and causing chaos. Who would ever think it would cause the very religious population of said region to become very violent and angry.

This kind of answer shows your complete ignorance to the problems of a unstable middle east and a middle east where they are allowed to harbor terrorists and train.

I guess you don't remember Osama Bin Laden.

Are you unaware that even when we leave them alone, they try and kill us?

Can I just establish there what your reasoning behind 'leave them alone' is? There's been no leaving alone in, say, your lifetime.

We had never been in Afghanistan till early 2000's..we left them alone, do you know how many time Osama and his crew attacked us?

But Osama is from Saudi Arabia, not Afghanistan, and his primary point of contention was US interference in Saudi affairs, particularly their military presence near Muslim holy sites.

The US has not stopped interfering with Muslim nations ever since Roosevelt first made his arrangement with the House of Saud for oil.

And the Saudis kicked him out and he went to Afghanistan. The Saudi's want us involved, are you being serious?

They wont fight their own battles. They want US to do it.

None of what you just said is in any way relevant. You said the US was leaving them alone. That is demonstrably false- the US was interfering in a way that caused extreme aggravation.

Your not winning the argument we all know the facts and we all know what happened, so I don't understand your point.

The Saudi's kicked him out and he was able to practice terror unposed in Afghanistan till we invaded.

Saying 'your [sic] not winning the argument' is, as you know, meaningless. Again, what does what you just said have to do with anything? Once more, your contention is that the US left them alone. You did not leave them alone- you interfered very strongly. The US military presence in Saudi Arabia was a direct causal factor in fundamental Islam targeting the US.

Originally posted by Ushgarak
Saying 'your [sic] not winning the argument' is, as you know, meaningless. Again, what does what you just said have to do with anything? Once more, your contention is that the US left them alone. You did not leave them alone- you interfered very strongly. The US military presence in Saudi Arabia was a direct causal factor in fundamental Islam targeting the US.

The Saudi's wanted US there so?

Oh and by the way, you know we are talking about Afghanistan, stop changing the goal posts.

The House of Saud wanting the US there is irrelevant. The fact that Osama was hiding in Afghanistan is irrelevant. Again, contend with my points, do not evade. You said the US was not interfering. The US was interfering, very strongly, by having a military presence near Muslim holy sites. That is a direct link to Muslim fundamentalist anger towards the US. These are the facts. Your contention that the US was leaving them alone is demonstrably false.

We are done, you moved the goal posts. You are doing the same thing you always do, wont work with me, sorry.

I am not moving the goal posts, that is a false statement you are making to try and avoid the fact that you were mistaken. I don;t need to do anything other than show you were wrong- which I have, and which you have made no attempt to refute.

So again- your contention that the US left them alone is demonstrably false. Regardless of the moral position of fundamentalists, they only acted after the US interfered.

Im telling you are wrong and you misrepresented my argument. You always find a line and run with it.

'Telling' is a nothing- you need to show. Just saying 'you are wrong' in the face of me actually having simply and totally discredited your argument is of no value.

Again- your contention that the US left them alone is demonstrably false. Regardless of the moral position of fundamentalists, they only acted after the US interfered.

You got the last word.

Originally posted by long pig
You sound like an idiotic feminist blaming everything on the " white male patriarchal society".....and since that's bullshit, you just call people racist.

Sorry, little lady but liberal shaming doesn't work anymore.

That literally has nothing to do with anything that I said.

Nice non-sequitur, lay off the pot.

Originally posted by FinalAnswer
That literally has nothing to do with anything that I said.

Nice non-sequitur, lay off the pot.

After a moderator corrects someone, that means its the end of the discussion, or didn't you know that, troll.

Look, I'll relinquish the ground I occupied with my opion and just state facts.
ca
Thomas Sowell [Thomas Sowell, Race and Culture, BasicBooks, 1994, p. 188] estimates that 11 million slaves were shipped across the Atlantic and 14 million were sent to the Islamic nations of North Africa and the Middle East. For every slave captured many others died. Estimates of this collateral damage vary. The renowned missionary David Livingstone estimated that for every slave who reached a plantation, five others were killed in the initial raid or died of illness and privation on the forced march.[Woman’s Presbyterian Board of Missions, David Livingstone, p. 62, 1888] Those who were left behind were the very young, the weak, the sick and the old. These soon died since the main providers had been killed or enslaved. So, for 25 million slaves delivered to the market, we have an estimated death of about 120 million people. Islam ran the wholesale slave trade in Africa.
120 million Africans

Christians
The number of Christians martyred by Islam is 9 million [David B. Barrett, Todd M. Johnson, World Christian Trends AD 30-AD 2200, William Carey Library, 2001, p. 230, table 4-10] . A rough estimate by Raphael Moore in History of Asia Minor is that another 50 million died in wars by jihad. So counting the million African Christians killed in the 20th century we have:
60 million Christians

Hindus
Koenard Elst in Negationism in India gives an estimate of 80 million Hindus killed in the total jihad against India. [Koenard Elst, Negationism in India, Voice of India, New Delhi, 2002, pg. 34.] The country of India today is only half the size of ancient India, due to jihad. The mountains near India are called the Hindu Kush, meaning the “funeral pyre of the Hindus.”
80 million Hindus

Buddhists
Buddhists do not keep up with the history of war. Keep in mind that in jihad only Christians and Jews were allowed to survive as dhimmis (servants to Islam) everyone else had to convert or die. Jihad killed the Buddhists in Turkey, Afghanistan, along the Silk Route, and in India. The total is roughly 10 million. [David B. Barrett, Todd M. Johnson, World Christian Trends AD 30-AD 2200, William Carey Library, 2001, p. 230, table 4-1.] 10 million Buddhists

Jews
Oddly enough there were not enough Jews killed in jihad to significantly affect the totals of the Great Annihilation. The jihad in Arabia was 100 percent effective, but the numbers were in the thousands, not millions. After that, the Jews submitted and became the dhimmis (servants and second class citizens) of Islam and did not have geographic political power.

This gives a rough estimate of 270 million killed by jihad.