Originally Posted by I3BrigPvSk

The different ideologies have not spread peacefully; further, you cannot compare social ideologies with theological ideologies. Capitalism is not an ideology, it is an economic system and so is Communism, which has never occurred.

Don't blame me, I only answered it.

Originally Posted by Yossarian

And thus the world keeps turning....

Hehe well a year or so ago I decided not to get involved in these pointless cyclic battles, basically if you have to repeat yourself more than twice either you are not getting your point across or the other guy isn't listening (in this case I suspect the latter).

So now my aim is to only respond to "genuine" posts.

Originally Posted by hamidreza

VDKMS didn't really want to have a comparison among different isms or ideologies. he just was looking for an opportunity to say somethings against Islam or shi.

I'm against any theocracy and I find the Islamic theocracy the worst.

Originally Posted by MontyB

So you are going to persist with the idea that ignoring the bits of history that do not fit your argument gives you a balanced understanding of the world?

Unlike Spike I know when an argument isn't worth fighting because your opponent clearly can't see the forest for the trees so please for your own benefit go away re-read those history books but this time try opening both eyes then perhaps we can have intelligent discussion on these issues rather than an ideological one.

In short please accept that I probably won't be responding to any more of your posts on this issue not because I agree or you have defeated me but because I think you are so blinded by your own idealogical issues that it is not worth responding.

Why don't you quote some historical facts to prove I'm wrong.

Some historical facts:

Christianity : beginning: 1st century and spread peacefully throughout Europe.
The Crusaders did not fight to expand Christianity but to protect, defend or recapture the places where christianity started (BTW, the Crusades were a private undertaking). The Spanish expelled the Muslims and Jews from their territory which was once Christian. The Knights Templar attacked Muslim shipping convoys from Cyprus and were driven back by the Turks to Malta where the Muslim navy got slaughtered.

Judaism : beginning : propably 3.000 years ago. Very peacefull. Mostly confined to palestine.

Islam : Beginning : 7th century. Mostly expanded through wars. In 10 years Mohammed launched 80 military campaigns (the battles of Badr, Uhud, Khandaq, Khyber and Hunayn were the most important). Jews were expelled if they did not convert. The Arabian peninsula was conquered. Next came the Byzantine Empire of the Mediterranean and the Sassanid Empire of Persia. Both were defeated by military means. Then came North Africa and Spain but the Muslims were defeated by the Franks in France. Expansion here was halted and later driven back.

----------------

Islam always expanded through military means, even today. Iran wants to be the patron of Islam. A nuclear Iran will give lots of troubles.

I'll give another example of how to use nuclear power without firing one rocket. Remember the Mumbai attacks? They were organized and executed by members of Lashkar-e-Taiba, a Pakistan-based militant organisation. The ISI (Palistani intelligence) have provided financial and material support to the group. India wanted to attack Pakistan for the attack but refrained because it could be the start of a nuclear war.

Suppose the Quds forces launch a similar attack in Paris. What will the French (or nato) do aginst a nuclear armed Iran?

Originally Posted by VDKMS

Why don't you quote some historical facts to prove I'm wrong.

Some historical facts:

Christianity : beginning: 1st century and spread peacefully throughout Europe.

I have to admit you have given me the first 4 week long LOL ever.
I cant believe anyone posted that without a at the end.

Originally Posted by MontyB

I have to admit you have given me the first 4 week long LOL ever.
I cant believe anyone posted that without a at the end.

Christian cruelty started centuries later, not in the beginning.

You need clerics to mess up religion. In the beginning of Christianity there were no clerics only apostles.

Originally Posted by VDKMS

Christian cruelty started centuries later, not in the beginning.

You need clerics to mess up religion. In the beginning of Christianity there were no clerics only apostles.

How true. Most people can easily go on about their lives, worshipping whatever/whomever they want, and not really caring about the beliefs of others...until some wacko claims he heard it directly from God(s) that those OTHER FOLKS need to be forcibly converted or exterminated in His/Her/Their name.

And you wonder why people don't pray or attend church/temple like they once did...

Originally Posted by VDKMS

Some historical facts:

Islam always expanded through military means

Horse Hockey!

Some historical facts:

Indonesia is the country that has the largest number of Muslims in the world, and the majority of people in Malaysia are Muslims. But, no Muslim army ever went to Indonesia or Malaysia. It is an established historical fact that Indonesia entered Islam not due to war, but because of its moral message. Despite the disappearance of Islamic government from many regions once ruled by it, their original inhabitants have remained Muslims.

Muslims ruled India for about a thousand years, and therefore had the power to force each and every non-Muslim of India to convert to Islam, but they did not, and thus more than 80% of the Indian population remains non-Muslim.

Similarly, Islam spread rapidly on the East Coast of Africa. And likewise no Muslim army was ever dispatched to the East Coast of Africa.

If Islam was spread by the sword, it was the sword of intellect and convincing arguments.

How did Christianity spread through Europe? When German tribes were conquered, Constantine required as part of the peace treaty that they convert to Christianity.

Originally Posted by Freyja

Horse Hockey!

Some historical facts:

Indonesia is the country that has the largest number of Muslims in the world, and the majority of people in Malaysia are Muslims. But, no Muslim army ever went to Indonesia or Malaysia. It is an established historical fact that Indonesia entered Islam not due to war, but because of its moral message. Despite the disappearance of Islamic government from many regions once ruled by it, their original inhabitants have remained Muslims.

Correct, Indonesia and Malaysia are the only countries where Islam went peacefully.

Muslims ruled India for about a thousand years, and therefore had the power to force each and every non-Muslim of India to convert to Islam, but they did not, and thus more than 80% of the Indian population remains non-Muslim.

The Muslim rulers were never able to force most of the Hindoes into Muslims, just like they were never able to force most Jews into Muslims. Cruel Muslim leaders offered you to convert, expell or die. Peacefull Muslim leaders offerd you to convert, expell or pay penal taxes. Many battles with Hindoe armies were fought during the muslim occupation.

Similarly, Islam spread rapidly on the East Coast of Africa. And likewise no Muslim army was ever dispatched to the East Coast of Africa.

Islam didn't conquered the African east coast. They only held a few city states based on trade and ruled by Muslim families. Islam didn't spread far outside those cities.

If Islam was spread by the sword, it was the sword of intellect and convincing arguments.

No, it was the sword of their armies. Look up in history how many battles they fought. I must admit that a choice between conversion, expulsion or dead are convincing arguments.

How did Christianity spread through Europe? When German tribes were conquered, Constantine required as part of the peace treaty that they convert to Christianity.

You are talking about a few German tribes. Constantine did not go to war to impose Christianity. In fact, Christians were already spreading their belief peacefully for almost 400 years. Constantine also treated his prisoners much better than other rulers.

It is a common complaint among some non-Muslims that Islam would not have millions of adherents all over the world, if it had not been spread by the use of force.

The best reply to the misconception that Islam was spread by the sword is given by the noted historian De Lacy O’Leary in the book "Islam at the cross road" (Page 8):
"History makes it clear however, that the legend of fanatical Muslims sweeping through the world and forcing Islam at the point of the sword upon conquered races is one of the most fantastically absurd myth that historians have ever repeated."

Muslims ruled Spain for about 800 years. The Muslims in Spain never used the sword to force the people to convert. Later the Christian Crusaders came to Spain and wiped out the Muslims. There was not a single Muslim in Spain who could openly give the adhan, that is the call for prayers.

14 million Arabs are Coptic Christians. Muslims were the lords of Arabia for 1400 years. For a few years the British ruled, and for a few years the French ruled. Overall, the Muslims ruled Arabia for 1400 years. Yet today, there are 14 million Arabs who are Coptic Christians i.e. Christians since generations. If the Muslims had used the sword there would not have been a single Arab who would have remained a Christian.

The Muslims ruled India for about a thousand years. If they wanted, they had the power of converting each and every non-Muslim of India to Islam. Today more than 80% of the population of India are non-Muslims. Similarly, Islam has spread rapidly on the East Coast of Africa.

From 1934 to 1984 Islam increased by 235%, and Christianity had increased by 47%. May one ask, which war took place in this century which converted millions. (Reader’s Digest "Almanac", year book 1986)

Islam is not "the enemy" – irrational hatred is!

Horrendous violence is something that people from all backgrounds are capable of. From Hamas to Alabama’s Klansmen, irrational hatred and the illegitimate arguments that serve as fig leaves for it have been engines for the dehumanisation of other cultures that so often throughout history have led to needless and terrible civilian deaths.

Reminding ourselves the humanity of "the other" is a novel act for many who would rush to a prior assertions that certain groups are incorrigibly nefarious, implicitly morally inferior and need to be aggressively combated. Nonetheless, it is the capacity to do this that stops the worst parts of human nature from infecting our hearts and minds.

This is what must be fought, surely: the temptation to fall prey to simplistic narratives about the world we live in, such as the reductive notion that "a clash of civilisations" between Islam and the west is our future. If we don´t utterly reject such prescriptions with common sense as much as anything else, there remains the chance that we might just end up realising them.