16 out of 18 of the deadliest arm conflicts involve Muslims

[CapnAwesome]

Ask yourself : how many of these wars involve "America" or western powers/Russia as a supporting power to the conflicting sides ?
Count it yourself..

Even if these people are crazy, who sold them guns to do the dirty work ? black markets are not enough to arm armies.

Even the mexican drug war, is well known to include the CIA as a supporting side.

If you count it that way, then thrown in Muslims as supporting a side in the Ukraine too, which is true with the Chechens and the Mexican drug war is the only one without Muslim involvement. The only fucking one.


Obviously that's not what I'm talking about though and bringing in the US is only a distraction for the topic at hand.

[CapnAwesome]

Ask yourself : how many of these wars involve "America" or western powers/Russia as a supporting power to the conflicting sides ?
Count it yourself..

Even if these people are crazy, who sold them guns to do the dirty work ? black markets are not enough to arm armies.

Even the mexican drug war, is well known to include the CIA as a supporting side.

You are welcome to make a thread about that. I think you just don't want to talk about the topic at hand though.

[Minimalist]

I hate to point this out but if you use this standard...



the US is right up there with the carnage in our own streets.

The US has a below average murder rate when compared with the world at large.

And you're proud of that?  Compare us to other industrialized nations.  We do pretty good when the competition is a third world shithole.  Anything more than that.......

[CapnAwesome]

The US has a below average murder rate when compared with the world at large.

And you're proud of that?  Compare us to other industrialized nations.  We do pretty good when the competition is a third world shithole.  Anything more than that.......

No, I'm talking about the whole world.  You realize it's more than just western Europe and the US, right? I'm pretty sure the US compared favorably to industrialized countries. If the world industrialized has any meaning to it at all.

[WinterHold]

If you count it that way, then thrown in Muslims as supporting a side in the Ukraine too, which is true with the Chechens and the Mexican drug war is the only one without Muslim involvement. The only fucking one.


Obviously that's not what I'm talking about though and bringing in the US is only a distraction for the topic at hand.

It can give you a hint that Muslims are in an alliance with America. Ironically most of the Middle East is in some form of alliance with the United States.

Some Muslim militias fought with the government in the Ukraine; weren't these the same Muslim militias that America armed in the past to defeat the soviets ??

It just appears hypocritical, when you cancel the role of the U.S in warmongering; and blame it only on Muslims, you can revise the Iraqi-Irani war, and see how the U.S aided Saddam in massacring the Iranians :

http://foreignpolicy.com/2013/08/26/excl...ssed-iran/

I live in a Middle Eastern country that witnessed the gulf war. It's a known game :
1- America warmongers between two sides
2- Since modern Middle Easterms regimes are uneducated and partially savage; they take the bait
3- Both sides fight each other
4- America sells weapons for both sides, and sells military "expertise" for both sides

They call this "the war economy". You don't imagine to quote about war modern warfare without opening this topic, don't you ?

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

Have you considered that 18 out of 18 of the deadliest conflicts in the world involve non-Muslims?

Boru

[WinterHold]

Ask yourself : how many of these wars involve "America" or western powers/Russia as a supporting power to the conflicting sides ?
Count it yourself..

Even if these people are crazy, who sold them guns to do the dirty work ? black markets are not enough to arm armies.

Even the mexican drug war, is well known to include the CIA as a supporting side.

You are welcome to make a thread about that. I think you just don't want to talk about the topic at hand though.

I will open topics for both points though; for Muslims and for war economy.

[CapnAwesome]

Have you considered that 18 out of 18 of the deadliest conflicts in the world involve non-Muslims?

Boru

I guess involved is sort of an open ended word. The US could send a few CIA members somewhere and technically be involved. I'm talking more about heavy involvement. Like having soldiers on the ground fighting people in a significant way, where at least a large preportion of the troops are Muslim. Being an active combative member in the conflict. When you narrow it down to that, there are more Muslim combatants fighting in the world right now then there are non-muslim combatants.

[CapnAwesome]

If you count it that way, then thrown in Muslims as supporting a side in the Ukraine too, which is true with the Chechens and the Mexican drug war is the only one without Muslim involvement. The only fucking one.


Obviously that's not what I'm talking about though and bringing in the US is only a distraction for the topic at hand.

It can give you a hint that Muslims are in an alliance with America. Ironically most of the Middle East is in some form of alliance with the United States.

Some Muslim militias fought with the government in the Ukraine; weren't these the same Muslim militias that America armed in the past to defeat the soviets ??

It just appears hypocritical, when you cancel the role of the U.S in warmongering; and blame it only on Muslims, you can revise the Iraqi-Irani war, and see how the U.S aided Saddam in massacring the Iranians :

http://foreignpolicy.com/2013/08/26/excl...ssed-iran/

I live in a Middle Eastern country that witnessed the gulf war. It's a known game :
1- America warmongers between two sides
2- Since modern Middle Easterms regimes are uneducated and partially savage; they take the bait
3- Both sides fight each other
4- America sells weapons for both sides, and sells military "expertise" for both sides

They call this "the war economy". You don't imagine to quote about war modern warfare without opening this topic, don't you ?

I in no way canceled the US role. I'm very critical of US foreign policy. I said in the opening post that it's impossible to get into the nitty gritty details of all the wars going on. I think saying 'well the US..........' is a distraction to the issue. Not that it's not important to the conversation at hand, but when it's just used to try to not talk about how the Islamic world is obsessed with war and to try to steer the direction of conversation away from it, that's when it's a distraction.