The rising of an Empire and the future invasion of Europe! - Page 58




 
--
 
April 21st, 2006  
bulldogg
 
 
Thanks.
April 21st, 2006  
Mohmar Deathstrike
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by gladius
I saw no world crusade against the US was going to happen during the Iraq invasion. This was only wishful thinking from people like you. If there was any good possibility of this happening then I would have said it. But did I? NO, no way, not even close. And if you did predict somekind of world crusade against the US (you probably did didn't you) that shows you how flawed your assesment of world dynamics and situations are.
You completely failed to understand my point: What I meant was "Just because a lot of people get angry about something and show it in public, it doesn't mean that they organize militarily and attack a country" and I used the US invasion of Iraq as an example. Furthermore, I think 2 months have passed since those cartoon wars reached their maximum intensity, yet Europe still hasn't been. Sure shows how flawless your assesment of world dynamics and situations are. Psych!
Quote:
Originally Posted by gladius
Your comparisons are not even close, its like comparing apples and oranges two different things with different qualities. The reason for this is that you keep assesing this without true knoledge of Muslim psychology. You think, what you think, is what they think. Not even close, not by a long shot.
I never said that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by gladius
You are precieving Mulsim political stances and Muslim core values and one and the same, they are not. So voicing one's outrage in protest along with others showed the core value of what most all Muslim adhere to. As long as they have these core value they are never far from unification. All they lack is a leader. How many separate political factions and groups did Germany have during the 1930's before one charismatic leader was able to harness the situation for his total domination.
Apples and oranges come to mind...

Quote:
Originally Posted by gladius
Israel will never join the Muslim world. This would be agaist everything the Muslims stand for.

It is in Muslim prophecy that they will destroy Israel and kill all the Jews. I how this helps you to see why there is so much irational trouble in the Middle East. And also why there can never be any lasting peace over there.



China and Russia will help the Islamic Empire and arm it, by selling it massive amounts of weapons in order to tip the balance against the West. However they will later realize that the Islamic empire will also be a threat to them.
It's fun to hypothesize about all kinds of possible futures but one should also take a step back and realize that one is not omniscient.
April 21st, 2006  
Mohmar Deathstrike
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by WNxRogue

I think what he meant is that China can win a war with us on their own soil, but can not win on our terms. You have to remeber, China is a large country, and although such a war would be devastating, if they can keep it away from population centers, the damage could be minimized. Its like the US fighting a war with someone in their own country opposed to say Death Valley (if you are confused by this post me back ).
I think I understand. If war is inevitable for China, they would draw an enemy deep into rural areaas.



Quote:
Originally Posted by WNxRogue
Actually Japan has no aircraft carriers currently, atleast none that I am aware of, they used land bases to launch their aircraft.
Yes, I mentioned Aircraft carriers and long range bombers as weapons Japan doesn't have.
Quote:
Originally Posted by WNxRogue
But, As Sandy said, the Japanese have modern weapons, just not very many of them by modern standards. When I said reweaponize, I meant start building the amounts to modern standards, which our treaty at the end of WWII stops them from doing.
I see. Until now I thought that Japan's army was as big as a large European one, like France or Britain.
--
April 21st, 2006  
Mohmar Deathstrike
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by WNxRogue
I made this scenario for 1 reason: Its the only way to procede without US interference. Cambodia, Laos, Thailand, Mongolia, and vietnam are not great allies of ours. And even siberia is so underdeveloped so it probably wont anger us. It takes a lot to drag us into a war, and if it does not directly threaten us, then we will not get involved.

Tell me what you think of this.
China conquering Cambodia, Laos, Thailand, Mongolia and Vietnam I can swallow. Siberia? Never. It still belongs to the country with the most nuclear warheads in the world.
April 22nd, 2006  
deerslayer
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mohmar Deathstrike
You completely failed to understand my point: What I meant was "Just because a lot of people get angry about something and show it in public, it doesn't mean that they organize militarily and attack a country" and I used the US invasion of Iraq as an example. Furthermore, I think 2 months have passed since those cartoon wars reached their maximum intensity, yet Europe still hasn't been. Sure shows how flawless your assesment of world dynamics and situations are. Psych!
I never said that.

Apples and oranges come to mind...

It's fun to hypothesize about all kinds of possible futures but one should also take a step back and realize that one is not omniscient.
Gladius, you're starting to remind me of Ms. Cleo, I mean, this totally certain tone about what's going to happen. You've gone from making inferences on current info to making uncertain assumptions.
April 22nd, 2006  
zander_0633
 
 
Hahqa!
April 22nd, 2006  
bulldogg
 
 
Visionaries seldom speak in uncertain terms.

Rock on Gladius.
April 22nd, 2006  
deerslayer
 
 
Doggone it, bulldogg, you got me there.
April 26th, 2006  
bulldogg
 
 

A nice read for Gladius and others who are interested in this topic.

http://www.rand.org/pubs/testimonies...RAND_CT255.pdf

April 28th, 2006  
gladius
 
That was an itneresting read bulldogg, thanks for posting that.

Here is one of the quotes from that study to show you all that this concept of a united Muslim power is not something new that I am making up, it is an idea that is ingrained in Mulsim belief and prophecy.

"...bin Laden’s intentions were three-fold. First, he sought to co-opt these movements’ mostly local agendas and channel their efforts towards the cause of global jihad. Second, he hoped to create a jihadi “critical mass” from these geographically scattered, disparate movements that would one day coalesce into a single, unstoppable force..."

Quote:
Originally Posted by deerslayer
Essentially, the theoretical coming of the Mahdi may be a double-edged sword. Have you ever seen anything on CNN about people who proselytize about seeing Christ and how they healed their broken down pickup or something? (that particular one I remember).
But did Christ show himself physically to all the people, he didn't. That's one guys experience of what he saw. Its not the same thing as someone everyone can see physically and laying down decrees or whatever.

Quote:
Generally I take that with a grain of salt. From an outsider's view, it would seem that the paranoia caused by the theoretical appearance of the Mahdi would cause either a total upheaval (as gladius suggests) or minor action with a fair share of skeptics.
Yes there will be skeptics even from the Muslims themselves. But if the coming Mahdi where to get past this intial round of skepticism, then the movement will snowball, starting with an upheaval in the Muslim world itself ---either you are with the Mahdi or against him.

Quote:
Ollie Garchy... that's what I've been trying to say. Not every Muslim is going to get up and throw themselves at Europe. There will always be pacificts, skeptics to the Mahdi, etc.
I pointed that out.

But when Hitler was taking over Germany there where pacificts and skeptics also. You don't need all of them to believe in the Mahdi for him to take over the Muslim world and form an empire, all you need is a radical core will to take extreme measure to make it so (similar to Hilter's rise to power). With the Mahdi prophecies you already have this in place


Quote:
My argument stands, therefore, (and Ollie Garchy agrees with this point in his last post) that we will not witness every Muslim in the world population attempt to take on Europe as a united Islamic state.
You don't understand do you. Once the Mahdi shows up, the Muslims believe that if you do not follow the Mahdi you will go to hell. This is part of their beliefs.

Beside you don't need all the Muslims to form a united Islamic state willing to invade. How many Germans were Nazis prior or even during WW2?

As for the Muslims living in Europe themselves how many Muslims Turks did Ollie Garchy say were living in Germany? Around 5 million right. Even if 10% decided to cause havoc to help out the invasion (that's a very conservative number for this scenario). That still will equal to 500,000! Half a million Muslims in country within Germany trying their best to kill ordinary Germans and cause as much havoc as posible. So what if they don't all believe, it doesn't matter.

When in history did you have every single person from a population believe in movement for it to happen? Never. All you need is a core of the of the population to take power and the rest will follow.

Quote:
Hell, the Nazi party was a unifying structure in Germany (funny how we keep coming back to that) but no clear majority of them were members.
Exactly my point. They were not a majority but they still cause a freakin' World War.

You don't need every single Muslim jumping into this, but I think a good majority of them will, those who take their religion seriously.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mohmar Deathstrike
You completely failed to understand my point: What I meant was "Just because a lot of people get angry about something and show it in public, it doesn't mean that they organize militarily and attack a country" and I used the US invasion of Iraq as an example. Furthermore, I think 2 months have passed since those cartoon wars reached their maximum intensity, yet Europe still hasn't been. Sure shows how flawless your assesment of world dynamics and situations are. Psych!
I never said Europe was going to be invaded because of the cartoon, I was merely pointing out core values that can unify the Muslims depite their different factions.

The fact that you think that I even suggest they will invade because of the cartoon is pretty funny. Again show your lack of comprehension of world dynamics. Psych back to you.

Quote:
Apples and oranges come to mind...
Thats because you don't understand human pschology. This has been and always will be the same throughout history. Have you ever heard the quote, "History repeats itself"? It repeats itself, because human psychology has always been the same and will react in a mass scale to similar situations in the same way.

Quote:
It's fun to hypothesize about all kinds of possible futures but one should also take a step back and realize that one is not omniscient.
No one is not, but it helps to know what people believe. Knowing what they believe will help you predict how they will react as situations present themsleves.