Investigators Seek Motive Behind Tennessee Shooting Rampage

[Pannonian]

So? Russia subjugated and oppressed all Muslim states in central Asia, and they keep cultural and political links and the mixed population lives generally in peace.

It doesn't really make sense to hold a grudge indefinitely or we'd never get anything done.

How long did the old CIS last?

Well, "workable" isn't really easily definable, but the proper democracies built on western models today are those countries that were pretty much empty when British appeared, like Australia, Canada or USA.

In all other places, where there's been a big population, British track record isn't that great. Even in India there are massive human right abuses, from child labour to mutilation, religious violence and so. Burma isn't any better. Do I need to mention Pakistan or Afghanistan? In Singapore they chop your head of if you have a joint. Sub Saharan Africa is filled with dictatorships... British loved to rekindle old rivalries and encouraged conflict between natives when it suited their interest.

So, no, regardless of what Brits like to think, Britain hasn't been a more just overlord than France or Netherlands.

And how does Britain compare with the Ottomans?

Hungary, Serbia, Bosnia, Croatia, Montenegro, Albania, Romania, Bulgaria, Macedonia, Greece, Turkey, Georgia, Armenia, Israel, Jordan...

So how does that lot compare with the US, India, the former dominions, etc.? Where do the former Ottoman territories rank in the lists of open government and low government corruption? Hang on, while I scroll down the list until I get to the last page. Israel is pretty much the only high ranking country in those lists, and I doubt even the most fanatical Ottomanophile (barring the odd Serb) would give the Ottomans any credit for that one. Especially when the argument of building from nothing has already been put to avoid giving Britain any credit for Canada, Australia and so on.

[Sarmatian]

How long did the old CIS last?

CIS is still alive and well. It may or may not be replaced with EEC later.

And how does Britain compare with the Ottomans?

I don't give Ottomans credit for any of those countries, especially as most of those countries liberated themselves between a century or more ago. I just used your measuring stick.

But, if you want to push it, all countries subjugated by the Ottomans, kept their local customs, language, religion. They had access to education and more or less important government positions. Their rights and businesses were protected. They weren't taxed excessively and the central government made sure that all regions can develop.
Most of that started crumbling when the empire started crumbling, though.

Which is all generally in stark contrast with British administration of India or American colonies, for example.

So how does that lot compare with the US, India, the former dominions, etc.? Where do the former Ottoman territories rank in the lists of open government and low government corruption? Hang on, while I scroll down the list until I get to the last page. Israel is pretty much the only high ranking country in those lists, and I doubt even the most fanatical Ottomanophile (barring the odd Serb) would give the Ottomans any credit for that one. Especially when the argument of building from nothing has already been put to avoid giving Britain any credit for Canada, Australia and so on.

Building from nothing covers USA also, not just Australia and Canada. Open government and government corruption aren't the only important things. One can look at countries where most forced child labour is...

Attachment 15761

and say that a huge chunk of those countries with the worst record have been former British colonies.

Also, where is Uganda and other former British African colonies on that list?

[Pannonian]

If you reckon Russia and the Ottoman empire compare favourably with western Europe and western Europeanised countries, then I'm thankful that I live in western Europe and you can be thankful that you live in the former Ottoman empire. If I ever move anywhere, I hope I'll be moving elsewhere in western Europe or somewhere else high up in the list of countries with open government and low corruption, and preferably not anywhere that has ever been part of the Ottoman empire.

[Sarmatian]

If you reckon Russia and the Ottoman empire compare favourably with western Europe and western Europeanised countries, then I'm thankful that I live in western Europe and you can be thankful that you live in the former Ottoman empire. If I ever move anywhere, I hope I'll be moving elsewhere in western Europe or somewhere else high up in the list of countries with open government and low corruption, and preferably not anywhere that has ever been part of the Ottoman empire.

What, if I say anything negative about UK you're gonna get insulted?

I'm a history geek, I like to talk about history. I don't think any of those things matter today (in most cases), I just posted various examples that prove you're wrong. No, Britain wasn't a "nice colonial power", it was just a colonial power, period. There's really no such thing as good or nice imperialism/colonialism.

That doesn't mean I'd rather live in Lebanon than Canada.

[Gilrandir]

Hardly. Even though Russian nationalists like to think that, Imperial Russia was just as oppressive as USSR later was.

Comparing the scale of victims, I would say that the Empire falls utterly short of the USSR.

Well, if Kazakhstan is the worst central Asian republic in that regard, it illustrates my point even better.

As you may have noticed, I didn't dispute your point, which is basically correct. I exposed inadequacy of the evidence/proof you chose to exemplify it with.

If I ever move anywhere, I hope I'll be moving elsewhere in western Europe or somewhere else high up in the list of countries with open government and low corruption, and preferably not anywhere that has ever been part of the Ottoman empire.

On the low corruption in the UK:
http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2...-russian-buyer
And on the UK as a perennial stalwart bulwark of democracy and freedom:
http://edition.cnn.com/2015/07/18/eu...alute-footage/
Brenus will find a proper name for the adult teaching infants to do such things.

[Greyblades]

http://edition.cnn.com/2015/07/18/eu...alute-footage/
Brenus will find a proper name for the adult teaching infants to do such things.

Wow, a child imitating a nazi salute in the years before their atrocities became public knowledge, how democracy destroying.

[Gilrandir]

Wow, a child imitating a nazi salute in the years before their atrocities became public knowledge, how democracy destroying.

It is not the child who is to blame, but those who teach her. And the way Hiltler was moving to power and slogans he proclaimed were well known even then.

[Greyblades]

At the time the association between the gesture and the nazis was not set; American students were doing the same salute when doing the morning pledge of allegiance. That the queen was filmed doing the same when a child says absolutely nothing either about her, her parents or her country that comes even close to the point you are failing to make.

[Pannonian]

On the low corruption in the UK:
http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2...-russian-buyer
And on the UK as a perennial stalwart bulwark of democracy and freedom:
http://edition.cnn.com/2015/07/18/eu...alute-footage/
Brenus will find a proper name for the adult teaching infants to do such things.

I suppose Ukraine is the place to turn to if you want an example of a bulwark against Nazism, or an example of a wholly incorruptible government. How many Ukrainians served in the SS? Tens of thousands, wasn't it, with some of the worst units being Ukrainian? How many British served in the SS? Less than 50, wasn't it? And most of those cried off when it came to actually doing anything.

Government corruption perception results for 2014. Britain is 14th in the world with a score of 78, firmly in the first world category and ahead of some other indisputably first world countries, including France and the US. Ukraine is 142nd in the world with a score of 26, lowest ranking of all the major former Soviet states. If put into sub-Saharan Africa, which has the lowest general scores in the regions listed, Ukraine would be classed in the lowest third.

https://www.transparency.org/cpi2014/results

Methinks I prefer living in western Europe.

[Fragony]

Had to google 'Barbados', that's an oddball in the top 20

[Sarmatian]

The problem with this is that it a perception. It gives a good overview but shouldn't be taken as gospel.

[Brenus]

"But, if you want to push it, all countries subjugated by the Ottomans, kept their local customs, language, religion." First, that is pushing a lot. Second, that is true for all Colonial powers. And they have to provide Slaves every year, and pay the price to stay alive...
Once again, we can't compare a colonial expansion with Djihads or Crusades, even if both were as well for political and territorial gains.
All Empires did oppressed their possessions from Slavery to "ethnocid" close to genocide as in Belgium Congo or America (South, Central and North).
To be fair, some treatment was given to their own populations... Ireland was starved to death as India was, or the Boers, so Muslims were no more a target to abject treatment than others. Same can be said for Muslim population under Muslim rulers.
As Russia is concerned, Nicolas II ordering to shoot at angry crowds wanting bread show how much "religious" Russia under a good Autocrat was benevolent. Not speaking of few Czars as Ivan The Terrible...
And France had good Religious wars as well: around 2,000,000 victims (lowest estimate), which is the same amount than the Napoleonic wars...

[Sarmatian]

To be fair, some treatment was given to their own populations... Ireland was starved to death as India was, or the Boers, so Muslims were no more a target to abject treatment than others. Same can be said for Muslim population under Muslim rulers.
As Russia is concerned, Nicolas II ordering to shoot at angry crowds wanting bread show how much "religious" Russia under a good Autocrat was benevolent. Not speaking of few Czars as Ivan The Terrible...

I don't really agree with the first part of your post but we've already strayed too far from the original topic so I won't comment on that.

The bottom line - westerners (or Christians if you wish) committed much more violence all over the world and caused much more deaths than Muslims.

That is an answer to the mantra Frags here (and many other elsewhere) repeat constantly that Islam is an inherently violent religion.

[Pannonian]

I don't really agree with the first part of your post but we've already strayed too far from the original topic so I won't comment on that.

The bottom line - westerners (or Christians if you wish) committed much more violence all over the world and caused much more deaths than Muslims.

That is an answer to the mantra Frags here (and many other elsewhere) repeat constantly that Islam is an inherently violent religion.

Right now, at this moment, western Europeanised descendants of the Christian kingdoms produce far more desirable places to live in than the Muslim descendants of the Ottoman empire. To the point where the founder of the direct successor to the Ottoman empire declared that the European civilisation was the only civilisation in the world. Whatever the inherence of the respective religions, I'd far rather live in western Europe than in the former Ottoman empire, and I'd like the former and the latter to have as little to do with each other as possible. I don't care about the moral height or depth of each; I just want to live in my world, while they can go and live in theirs.

[Sarmatian]

Right now, at this moment, western Europeanised descendants of the Christian kingdoms produce far more desirable places to live in than the Muslim descendants of the Ottoman empire. To the point where the founder of the direct successor to the Ottoman empire declared that the European civilisation was the only civilisation in the world. Whatever the inherence of the respective religions, I'd far rather live in western Europe than in the former Ottoman empire, and I'd like the former and the latter to have as little to do with each other as possible. I don't care about the moral height or depth of each; I just want to live in my world, while they can go and live in theirs.

Ottoman Empire from the start was influenced a lot by Greco-Roman legacy so it's not wonder he said that, especially as the new Turkish state was confined to just Anatolia and relieved of the burden of trying to govern Arabic, Persian, Egyptian and Berber areas...

In the end, that's a fair point you're making, but I believe we can agree that we (western governments to be precise) are not really leaving them alone to live in their world.

[Fragony]

I don't really agree with the first part of your post but we've already strayed too far from the original topic so I won't comment on that.

The bottom line - westerners (or Christians if you wish) committed much more violence all over the world and caused much more deaths than Muslims.

That is an answer to the mantra Frags here (and many other elsewhere) repeat constantly that Islam is an inherently violent religion.

Why do you keep bringing in the age of expansion it has no business here. I could bring in the Arabian slave-trade, or be even cheaper, but that also doesn't belong here so I won't. Yes Islam is an inheritanly violent relgion, and no, not all muslims are violent

capice

[Sarmatian]

Yes Islam is an inheritanly violent relgion,

How can you consider Islam an inherently violent religion when it is a really a mishmash of Judaism and Christianity, sprinkled with some Arab paganism?

A monotheistic religion with a holy book, a God who is demanding your unquestionable obedience, merciful God if you're proper, vengeful if you're not, piety rewarded after death, wickedness punished after death, worldly possessions unimportant, urge to convert the heathens, same commandments, same prophets, same standards of "pious life", same sins, rejection of idols yada yada yada...

I mean, there's even the second coming of Jesus in Islam, who will come back to fight the Anti Christ. In the very early stages of Islam, Muslim were doing their prayers in Christian churches.

[Fragony]

How can you consider Islam an inherently violent religion when it is a really a mishmash of Judaism and Christianity, sprinkled with some Arab paganism?

Daily news should do

[Kadagar_AV]

How can you consider Islam an inherently violent religion when it is a really a mishmash of Judaism and Christianity, sprinkled with some Arab paganism?

A monotheistic religion with a holy book, a God who is demanding your unquestionable obedience, merciful God if you're proper, vengeful if you're not, piety rewarded after death, wickedness punished after death, worldly possessions unimportant, urge to convert the heathens, same commandments, same prophets, same standards of "pious life", same sins, rejection of idols yada yada yada...

I mean, there's even the second coming of Jesus in Islam, who will come back to fight the Anti Christ. In the very early stages of Islam, Muslim were doing their prayers in Christian churches.

Christianity has gone through a LOT of reforms, the French revolution that saw democracy take root, later influences that pushed a more humane agenda, yadda yadda yadda...


Islam has not. Islam is the same ****ed up desert living tribal religion it was more than a thousand years ago.


Also, contrary to christianity, islam is a political ideology as well as a religious belief. Where Jesus said "Give to the government what the government expects" (my definition but also the upheld one), Islam has no such ideas about separation between state and religion.

In Islam, the religion IS the state.



That's why it is more than fair to accuse Islam of being inherently evil. The fact that it was created by a warmongering pedophile REALLY, like, REALLY doesn't help the muslims adapt to western civilized society much either.