Islamofaschists vs Zionists?

doesn't your Koran preach to kill nonbelievers?

 

I know I do!

 

does it ?

 

No, it doesn't. No more then the bible tells extreme evangelicals to blow up abortion clinics. Don't base the beliefs of a small retarded segment of a religion of 1.3 billion people(or in Christianity's case near 2 billion) people. These people would be just as insane no matter what. Like bigcityhillbillie, even if the Jews didn't exist he'd still be just as ridiculous and paranoid about something else.

 

any tips on where to find the right numbers? this nearly 2bill christians and 1.whatever muslims i been readin/hearin forever

 

There is no specific number, there's no global census taken on who's what religion, even in mot countries the question isn't asked, it's just a rounded number/

http://www.adherents.com/Religions_By_Adherents.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_religious_populations#Four_largest_religions

 

the famous euro- and us-centristic world fiew.
the problem of islamic fundamentalists (what you now call extremists) goes back - in my fiew - to european imperialism of the 18th, 19th and 20th century. The important islamic countries were rather modern and science orientated up to a point - many of the western basics in medizine, mathematics, construction and so on are based on achievements made by those countries.

however, 2 important things happened: first of all, europe pretty much managed to control most of the world - with the result of a very arrogant and euro-centristic fiew of the world in general - the european culture was seen as superior, every other culture measured by european standards, other cultures were surpressed, their ppl tried to be tought western standards and so on.

secondly, after WW1 the major islamic power in the world - the ottoman empire - was defeated and its former posessions were divided and shared by the victors.
- now, why is this important? first of all, the islam has no concept of "country" in the western sense. they have the community of believers (sorry, my english sucks today), reigned by aristocrats and tribal leaders, but to real "countries". the ottoman empire fit into the fiew of the world of the islamic ppl perfectly - one big islamic empire.
now, after the defeat of the ottoman empire, entirely alien concepts were introduced: national-states and democracy, both of them having no whatsover base history or tradition in those countries. (oh, and not to forget that the arabic tribes that rose against the ottoman empire under "lawrence of arabia" and who were - in return for their service - promised an autonomous country never saw any of it...).

now, all of this has direct influence of the political situation of today.
1. the western world (especially the US) are unable to understand that their ways are not the ways of those people and try to install insitutions that are not carried by the general populance.
2. there is a strong and basic panislamic movement among the successor countries of the ottoman empire, leading to conflicts among the islamic countries who struggle to become the dominant power in the region (especially Iran, Iraq, Egypt).
3. younger history has made all arabic countries very distrustful of the western world (just think of the Iran-Iraq war!!)
4. the arabic tribes that wanted a country for themselves were outplayed by the zionists (israel).
5. this new country (israel) now is some kind of rally point for the arabic world (as much as they struggle against each other, they all dont want israel).

there are many more aspect to the matter, but that is about the basic summary of problems beneath the ovious and well known.

no it doesnt. it does say that to fight an kill is acceptable in situations of self defence, and those attacking are per definition "non-believers".

and to go back to that quote:
muslims dont "force" their women to wear that - its in most cases a cultural aspect of some very specific islamic regions (the famous "burka" as example is known in afghanistan...). and the "hating the modern" - well, that has something to do with the fact that many have had their first contact with the "modern" in form of a cruise missile.

 

Actually, that's only partially correct. The greatest advances in the Middle East were done by Pagans from Mesopotamia, Phonecia, and ancient Egypt. By the time Islam was introduced to the Middle East and the Islamic Golden Age began, it was a result of Baghdad becoming an intellectual meeting point for civilizations abroad.

Now a lot of Muslims will tell you their people were largely responsible for the jump in discovery and technology at Baghdad. This is not true, Islam made its contribution, but you had people from Italy, Byzantium, China, even Vikings that came to add a piece of their culture and technology.

The Islamic world may have served as a type of meeting point for practitioners of science all around, but it did NOT lead the way on its own.

And on a side note, it was the Mongol Empire, a force from the EAST, not west, that sacked Baghdad and burned its libraries of precious information. They hurt your world a lot more than the west ever did.