The rising of an Empire and the future invasion of Europe! - Page 9




 
--
 
September 9th, 2004  
Redleg
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Big_Z
No matter what the muslim countries dont stand a chance in h**l vs Europe
Please be very careful about posting comments like that Big_Z.
September 9th, 2004  
Doppleganger
 
 
In this day and age, I just cannot see the various Muslim sects uniting under one banner. Just ain't gonna happen IMO.

For what you propose to happen, there will probably have to a series of different events that occur together, a set of social and economic conditions if you like. Furthermore, the world is a much smaller place these days and the current generations (for the most part) have exposure and access to far more information than their forebears ever did.

I said it before but I'll restate. Any invasion will be social-economic and cultural. Indeed, it's already began to happen. Look around you. Economic migration is here to stay, despite Western Governments trying to put curbs on it. Examine the birth rates of Christian and Muslim families and you will have an answer of sorts.

Read "The Years of Rice and Salt", by Kim Stanley Robinson and you may get a glimpse into our future..
September 9th, 2004  
Chocobo_Blitzer
 
I found http://www.globalthink.net/global/ds...?ArticleID=145
--
September 9th, 2004  
godofthunder9010
 
 
Chocobo, that article sums up my own opinions perfectly, and shows why a united Islam isn't going to happen anytime soon.

Dopp, the problem with the West being over-run by the higher birth-rate of Muslims in their own countries is this: The first generation to move to ... oh France shall we say, is steeped in tradtions and unlikely to behave differently. Their children, however, adapt to the cultural norms of France, are educated and learn to think for themselves in almost all instances simply by having living in a culture that does not restrict information and opinion.

Islam isn't going to present a decent threat to the moderm world until they bring themselves up to date. In the Arabic and heavily Muslim nations of the world, there is more division than the article suggest, mostly due to tribal rivalries.

Quote:
The Sudanese government is using modern air power to bomb Black villages, and then Arabs on horseback ride in and slaughter all the men and boys and rape all the women and girls. The rest of the Muslim world has not uttered a peep of protest.
This underlines the ridiculous double-standard that the Muslim world uses. Israeli or American pressence in the region offends them beyond all reason, but their fellow Muslims are free to commit genocide and murder. I don't think we're going to see a substantial threat from THIS Islam, but once they are fully awake and caught up, perhaps then is the time to start worrying.
September 10th, 2004  
Doppleganger
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by godofthunder9010
Dopp, the problem with the West being over-run by the higher birth-rate of Muslims in their own countries is this: The first generation to move to ... oh France shall we say, is steeped in tradtions and unlikely to behave differently. Their children, however, adapt to the cultural norms of France, are educated and learn to think for themselves in almost all instances simply by having living in a culture that does not restrict information and opinion.
Unfortunately it doesn't seem to always work like that, at least not in the UK. Some of the most extremist UK Muslims are 2nd or 3rd generation migrants - born and bred in the UK but somehow very anti-west and pro-fundamentalist.

Quote:
The Sudanese government is using modern air power to bomb Black villages, and then Arabs on horseback ride in and slaughter all the men and boys and rape all the women and girls. The rest of the Muslim world has not uttered a peep of protest.
I find this double standard disgusting.
September 10th, 2004  
gladius
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Paddster

My God, you say as though ever muslim is extreme, I'm not trying to offend you, but you've gotta be careful the way you say things.
Maybe you didn't read everything I wrote here but I actually said that most Muslims are decent people. But the potencial for them as a whole to be controlled by extremist is a very real possibility.

Quote:
No, all people are different, and even extremist muslims would have different views on who the real Mahdi is.
Yes they may but these all would seem to include global domination, or did you not notice the event that happened in Russia recently.

But I think they know who the real Mahdi is. Bin Laden claimed he was the Mahdi you didn't see any small portion of them start to flock to him, so I think they know. And when they do see figure out who it is, most of them will have the same Idea.

Quote:
Not only that, you're getting Muslim countries mixed up with Arab countries etc. Pakistan is not arab, and its only beef is with India, and if Pakistan even thought of joining forces India would annialate them.
Arabs countries are still mainly Muslim countries, I wasn't just talking about Arabs countries. I was talking about all Muslim countries, Arab or not, I think you maybe the one confused here.

Besides what is the India/Paskistan all about? What?...
It's Muslim versus Hindu, with Muslim extremist terrorizing India forcing the India to retaliate. So again we are back to Muslim extremist.

Quote:
Would each country's leader just give up office for some guy claiming to be the Mahdi? I doubt it.
I doubt it too, we both agree here. But how long would they be able to hold out with Muslim majority populace clamoring to join with the Mahdi.

Quote:
They wouldn't be a force to be reckoned with, they'd be a force, but they have nothing powerful or the technology. You mention Japan defeating Russia, by ww2 Japan were still using ancient 'honourable' methods.
I don't know what you are trying to say here. I was trying to illustrate a point from an example in history, your connection doesn't make any sense to me.

Anyways, I know they don't have technology, but didn't I describe the ways they could aquire it.

Quote:
Look at the situation now, would the USA ALLOW this coalation to form or develop modern technology? I doubt that.
To the Muslims this would be a major religious event, the US will not likely interfer in a religious event. Look how much we are tip-toeing now with the religious site in Iraq instead of pulverizing them.
Besides when this first forms I don't think most people will see it as danger at all, and its part of what makes this so dangerous.

Quote:
A good read and well put up points Gladius but I just cannot see it happening soon or in the near future, and even if it did the world would crush them, countries act very different when a threat of war looms.

I believe that in conventional war, UK, Germany, France, Italy, Spain any of the developed European countries would crush the middle east coalition on its own.
Yes I believe Europe could actualy crush them, but at what cost and would they be willing to pay it unless they were invaded first.

Hitler had the same confidence that he could easily crush the Russians. This confindence was not in anyway misplaced.

Because you know what... they did crush Russians, again and again. Several times through out the war they crushed several Russian Armies, taking prisoners of as much as half a million to a million men each time. But the Russians belief in thier motherland kept them coming back again and again. Yes the Germans crushed several Russian Armies, but it only took the Russians crushing one, only one German Army to turn the tide of the war.

If this were to happen and the EU crushes several army-groups of Islamics, they will have to crush several more and then some to defeat them completely. All the Islamics would have to do is crush one, just one European army-group to turn the tide of the war and put the Europeans on the defensive.
September 10th, 2004  
Doppleganger
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by gladius
Quote:
A good read and well put up points Gladius but I just cannot see it happening soon or in the near future, and even if it did the world would crush them, countries act very different when a threat of war looms.

I believe that in conventional war, UK, Germany, France, Italy, Spain any of the developed European countries would crush the middle east coalition on its own.
Yes I believe Europe could actualy crush them, but at what cost and would they be willing to pay it unless they were invaded first.

Hitler had the same confidence that he could easily crush the Russians. This confindence was not in anyway misplaced.

Because you know what... they did crush Russians, again and again. Several times through out the war they crushed several Russian Armies, taking prisoners of as much as half a million to a million men each time. But the Russians belief in thier motherland kept them coming back again and again. Yes the Germans crushed several Russian Armies, but it only took the Russians crushing one, only one German Army to turn the tide of the war.

If this were to happen and the EU crushes several army-groups of Islamics, they will have to crush several more and then some to defeat them completely. All the Islamics would have to do is crush one, just one European army-group to turn the tide of the war and put the Europeans on the defensive.
Gladius, your appraisal of why Germany failed in WW2 is grossly flawed. I wouldn't use it to support your argument regarding any future war between the EU and an Islamic superstate. In any case, how could events of Operation Babarossa where one Christian nation invaded another Christian nation have any relevance to a future Christian - Islamic war in Europe?
September 10th, 2004  
gladius
 
What do you mean flawed, didn't the Russians turned the tide of the war when they destroyed 6th Army at Stalingrad. They didn't win it at that point but it certainly shifted the momentum on their side.

And what does one Christian country invading another as you say it have to do with this? I was mearly giving an example of war as whole. Anyhow I would hardly call Hiltler Christian, since most of his beliefs had to do with astrology and mysticsm and so did most of his deptuties, and Stalin was a Communist Atheist for crying out loud, so I think its your views that may be grossly flawed.

Anyways I have read "Panzer Leader" by Heinz Guderian " and "Lost Victories" by Erich von Manstien so I think I have a pretty good grasp of the history of the Russian Front during WWII, I wouldn't classify myself completely ignorant on this subject as you would like to put it.
September 10th, 2004  
godofthunder9010
 
 
Gladius, the technological gap between EU and your proposed Islam Superstate is much greater than the technological gap of Germany vs Russia in WW2. Russia had the same level of technological development as Germany in almost every category, and a very potent Industry. These are the things that the nations of the Muslim world have fallen way behind in. So the comparison doesn't fit very well at the moment. Also, Islam is still not caught up to the Roman Catholic Church in overall numbers.

I really enjoyed "Panzer Leader" myself.
September 10th, 2004  
gladius
 
Yes I know there is a large technological gap. But this state hasn't formed yet and I gave example how they would acquire technology, and also how to make up for what they don't have. A supreme leader could force them to modernize, just like the example I gave with Japan.

I don't think they are going to be dumb enough to attack with what they got now, if they do, well then thats good.

I also not proposing that they are going to flat out win, what I'm saying is that they aren't going to be so dumb that the Europeans walk all over them. I believe the Europeans will still win but the price will be catastrophically high.

Yet I also know that Russia had a potent industry, and good rugged weapons too, however their way of conducting warfare was primitive in comparison, for example they didn't have radios in their tank and planes, they had to use hand signals.

As far as Catholics go, the Pope doesn't have an agenda for world domination, not like the Mahdi who has, and will try perpare his empire for war.