Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:
No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.
If you are already a member then feel free to login now.
bound for glory wrote: What response should the western world have to this and all the other horrors done in the name of Allah?
Probably the same one that the rest of the world had to all the horrors committed in the name of Christ. You act as though this is something new, or unique to Islam.
a.k.a. Whataboutism.
We're not living in the Middle Ages anymore. There are no more Crusaders. Mainstream Christianity went through centuries of reform and restraint thanks to secularization. Islam has not, and is largely still the same Medieval religion that was in the Middle Ages (when it was just as brutal as Christianity, mind you).
Do not equate Modern Islam to Medieval Christianity.
Indeed, it's more accurate instead to compare it to modern Christianity, as both religions have a very tiny minority (less than 1%) of its member-base that commits atrocities, while the remaining 99.9% go about their ordinary lives raising families, working jobs and paying taxes.
Errm, nope. Islam is in the dark ages still. Its not a tiny minority committing these atrocities, its a rather sizable minority that at worst has the tacit approval, and at best ambivalence, of the majority.
Self-proclaimed evil Cat-person. Dues Ex Felines
Cato Sicarius, after force feeding Captain Ventris a copy of the Codex Astartes for having the audacity to play Deathwatch, chokes to death on his own D-baggery after finding Calgar assembling his new Eldar army.
Grey Templar wrote: Errm, nope. Islam is in the dark ages still. Its not a tiny minority committing these atrocities, its a rather sizable minority that at worst has the tacit approval, and at best ambivalence, of the majority.
So comparing it to Christianity is valid then, as "rather sizable minority" is a completely arbitrary metric.
Its an ugly, backword religion. Child rape. Murder. Violence to females. Primitive response to crime. And the hate they hold for non believers. Its all there, if you look.
For them it's 1437. If you look at Christianity in 1437, it was pretty much the same. I have a pet theory that Abrahamic faiths follow the same pattern.
You should look again at christianity (or judaism, for that matter) in 1437. Nothing approaches the degree of extremism, callous brutality and disrespect of women seen in modern islam. And since 1437, christianity has become a lot less militant and intolerant. Islam meanwhile, is going into an opposite direction. Modern islam is actually much more militant and intolerant than medieval islam was. I think you should revise your theory.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2016/03/02 01:23:06
Errm, nope. Islam is in the dark ages still. Its not a tiny minority committing these atrocities, its a rather sizable minority that at worst has the tacit approval, and at best ambivalence, of the majority.
That's... fortunately... not true. Only about 20% of the worlds Muslims live in the middle east as a region. How many commit atrocities? A thousand? Ten thousand? A hundred thousand? A million? Ten million? There are 1.6 BILLION Muslims in this world.
Let's say that there are ten million Muslim terrorists out there. (which I think is wildly high, but for the sake of argument...)
That's 0.0006% of the total number of Muslims in the world. That's lower than the number of murderers per capita of the average city.
But like murderers, the exceptions grab headlines. People who speak out against murder generally don't get the sort of screen time that decapitating someone does, whether by a crazed Uzbek nanny or Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi.
Hoping that was specific enough rather than general.
You should look again at christianity (or judaism, for that matter) in 1437. Nothing approaches the degree of extremism, callous brutality and disrespect of women seen in modern islam. .
You're forgetting the Inquisition, which was slowly ramping up at the time, though, I grant, would not really reach full bloom for another 30 years.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2016/03/02 01:49:42
Fate is in heaven, armor is on the chest, accomplishment is in the feet. - Nagao Kagetora
That's... fortunately... not true. Only about 20% of the worlds Muslims live in the middle east as a region. How many commit atrocities? A thousand? Ten thousand? A hundred thousand? A million? Ten million? There are 1.6 BILLION Muslims in this world.
Let's say that there are ten million Muslim terrorists out there. (which I think is wildly high, but for the sake of argument...)
That's 0.0006% of the total number of Muslims in the world. That's lower than the number of murderers per capita of the average city.
But like murderers, the exceptions grab headlines. People who speak out against murder generally don't get the sort of screen time that decapitating someone does, whether by a crazed Uzbek nanny or Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi.
Hoping that was specific enough rather than general.
But its not just actual terrorists that are the problem. Your mistake is thinking in simplistic black and white terms: Violent = bad. Non-violent = good.
A huge proportion of those Muslims whom you label "not terrorists" will actually hold a lot of beliefs and values that are downright bigoted, intolerant and cruel; things that have long been ostracized in the West. Many Muslims agree with the traditional Sharia law punishments for things such as homosexuality, adultery and thievery. Anti-Semitism is endemic within Muslim communities and countries. Muslim societies are often what Western Feminists would call misogynist, with women holding second class status.
Yes, only a tiny minority of Muslims actually engage in violence, but the rest of them are far from angels.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2016/03/02 02:51:25
You are looking it from the wrong angle, it has almost nothing to do with religion and more with economy.
Don't compare a jihadist with a modern western, compare a jihadist with a drug cartel sicario, or a christian extremist in central Africa. They are from different religions but they are from a similar economic background (poverty in a corrupt third world country) and they can be incredibly violent.
If you are going to compare a christian westerner, compare with a muslim westerner, which comes from the same economic background.
Islam has the unfortunate honor of being the dominant religion in the hell hole that it is the Middle East.
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2016/03/02 06:18:08
Ahtman wrote: Can't it be both economics and religion?
You could replace Islam in the Middle East with Christianity, it would be the same hell hole. Western values of democracy, equality and all that nice stuff are independent of religion, in fact, Western governments make a point of separating church and state.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2016/03/02 06:45:38
Ahtman wrote: Can't it be both economics and religion?
You could replace Islam in the Middle East with Christianity, it would be the same hell hole.
Which makes it sound like religion is still playing a role and not something completely separate from the economic problems. It might even be that there isn't a single issue causing the problem; working on solving just one issue doesn't solve the overall.
Amidst the mists and coldest frosts he thrusts his fists against the posts and still insists he sees the ghosts.
Ahtman wrote: Can't it be both economics and religion?
You could replace Islam in the Middle East with Christianity, it would be the same hell hole.
Which makes it sound like religion is still playing a role and not something completely separate from the economic problems. It might even be that there isn't a single issue causing the problem; working on solving just one issue doesn't solve the overall.
I agree I was oversimplifying the issue. The problem isn't really religion, but the culture (which is related but separated from religion), economy and politics. The most obvious example would be Saudi Arabia that loves to export their brand of extremism.
The problem is that to "fix" the Middle East it would be needed to incorporate stability, western values and a western economy, and I have no idea how to do that.
Tyran wrote: You are looking it from the wrong angle, it has almost nothing to do with religion and more with economy.
Don't compare a jihadist with a modern western, compare a jihadist with a drug cartel sicario, or a christian extremist in central Africa. They are from different religions but they are from a similar economic background (poverty in a corrupt third world country) and they can be incredibly violent.
If you are going to compare a christian westerner, compare with a muslim westerner, which comes from the same economic background.
Islam has the unfortunate honor of being the dominant religion in the hell hole that it is the Middle East.
Don't be fething ridiculous. There ate plenty of well off educated westerners who leave to join ISIS. Hell, Osama Bin Laden came from a wealthy family.
Are poor disaffected people easier to manipulate? Of course. But its far from the sole cause.
Ahtman wrote: Can't it be both economics and religion?
You could replace Islam in the Middle East with Christianity, it would be the same hell hole. Western values of democracy, equality and all that nice stuff are independent of religion, in fact, Western governments make a point of separating church and state.
Do you really think the Middle East would be as violent as it is if everyone were following Jainism?
Culture and religion are not seperatre. Middle Eastern cultures have decided alongside and in reflection of 1500 years of Islamic values and teachings. Islam is intrinsic within the cultures of countless middle eastern countries, just as Christianity is intrinsic within the native european cultures of European nations and america.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2016/03/02 08:03:41
Shadow Captain Edithae wrote: But its not just actual terrorists that are the problem. Your mistake is thinking in simplistic black and white terms: Violent = bad. Non-violent = good.
A huge proportion of those Muslims whom you label "not terrorists" will actually hold a lot of beliefs and values that are downright bigoted, intolerant and cruel; things that have long been ostracized in the West. Many Muslims agree with the traditional Sharia law punishments for things such as homosexuality, adultery and thievery. Anti-Semitism is endemic within Muslim communities and countries. Muslim societies are often what Western Feminists would call misogynist, with women holding second class status.
Yes, only a tiny minority of Muslims actually engage in violence, but the rest of them are far from angels.
Yes, there are serious and widespread problems within Islam when it comes to antisemitism, homophobia, misogyny and a whole bunch of other issues. But these are problems you'll see pretty much everywhere outside of the developed world. Probably only antisemitism is more severe in Islam than elsewhere.
And the extent of these issues varies greatly from one Islamic country to the next, and sure enough the more moderate the country, the higher the level of income and education. It isn't the whole of the story, but it's the major part, but it gets lost completely as people get so fixated on terrorism.
Shadow Captain Edithae wrote: Don't be fething ridiculous. There ate plenty of well off educated westerners who leave to join ISIS. Hell, Osama Bin Laden came from a wealthy family.
Are poor disaffected people easier to manipulate? Of course. But its far from the sole cause.
The existence of a wealthy murderer doesn't reject the basic fact that the likelihood of murder tracks closely with income.
Meanwhile, what does 'plenty' mean? We'll put ISIS at 50,000 strong, because that's as good a number as any. About 20,000 are foreign fighters, so 40% seems like a lot. But only 5,000 are from Europe or other developed countries, most are from Asia or Africa. So 'plenty' is about 10% are drawn from wealthy, educated countries.
And that 5,000, that's 5,000 people out of a total European Muslim population of about 45 million. So 0.01%. And even that stat is misleading, because a lot of the fighters are people who convert to Islam once they're already on a downward spiral in to violence.
Which is, of course too many, and a problem that needs to be addressed by European governments and Islamic communities. But to say that it's plenty, and a reason to dismiss the role of education and wealth in reducing violence... nah that's nonsense.
This message was edited 7 times. Last update was at 2016/03/02 09:02:50
“We may observe that the government in a civilized country is much more expensive than in a barbarous one; and when we say that one government is more expensive than another, it is the same as if we said that that one country is farther advanced in improvement than another. To say that the government is expensive and the people not oppressed is to say that the people are rich.”
Adam Smith, who must have been some kind of leftie or something.
You should look again at christianity (or judaism, for that matter) in 1437. Nothing approaches the degree of extremism, callous brutality and disrespect of women seen in modern islam. .
You're forgetting the Inquisition, which was slowly ramping up at the time, though, I grant, would not really reach full bloom for another 30 years.
Contrary to popular belief, the Inquisition believed in fair trials and justice for everyone, and was at the time known for being the most humane court in Europe. Secular courts were usually more likely to use torture and death penalties than the Inquisition (fun fact: some people would even blaspheme in court on purpose, so that their case would go to the Inquisition).
The idea of the Inquisition as some kind of murderous organisation that tortured and burned everyone even suspected of heresy is largely a 19th century Protestant myth. The real Inquisition was kinda boring, and while it remains a clear sign of christian intolerance, it was very tame when compared to the likes of ISIS or even the religious courts in places as Saudi Arabia and Iran.
The idea of the Inquisition as some kind of murderous organisation that tortured and burned everyone even suspected of heresy is largely a 19th century Protestant myth. The real Inquisition was kinda boring, and while it remains a clear sign of christian intolerance, it was very tame when compared to the likes of ISIS or even the religious courts in places as Saudi Arabia and Iran.
I can contest that, based on the raw number of executions for witchcraft alone (read Malleus Maleficarum sometime to lose sleep at night), but I think we should save that discussion for another thread.
Fate is in heaven, armor is on the chest, accomplishment is in the feet. - Nagao Kagetora
The idea of the Inquisition as some kind of murderous organisation that tortured and burned everyone even suspected of heresy is largely a 19th century Protestant myth. The real Inquisition was kinda boring, and while it remains a clear sign of christian intolerance, it was very tame when compared to the likes of ISIS or even the religious courts in places as Saudi Arabia and Iran.
I can contest that, based on the raw number of executions for witchcraft alone (read Malleus Maleficarum sometime to lose sleep at night), but I think we should save that discussion for another thread.
I agree it is getting off topic, but I will have to note that the Malleus Maleficarum was banned by the Catholic Church and only used in secular courts, not by the Inquisition.
He might be thinking of the Spanish Inquisition, whose deeds in popular memory are like some kind of medieval horror show, but in reality was way less juicy. The story as we remember it today is pretty much a whole cloth myth produced as English propaganda
It does matter, as he was discussing it's performance, and the crux of the matter was that Russia sells a cheap knockoff that resembles a 'true' Hind D. So, was the helo he was in a actual Hind D, or the knock off?
Russians sell "cheap knock offs" of its own military hardware? Do tell.
Riiiight... so over-stamping and reselling is 'improving' now?
They have the blueprints, thus they make their own. They don't resell "Soviet-made". My remark about improved version was more about their marketing, not that i ever seen the Soviet original and modern Serbian hardware compare d side by side. I would imagine the the Serbian version would be at least slightly better.
The fact that France is a member of the EU, who are still putting the screws to Russia's economy in retaliation for the invasion of the Ukraine, obviously has no bearing on their decision to not sell Russia any baby flat tops.
EU in this case and France in particular follow orders from Washington, who financed ukranian neo-Nazi Junta. Thus they are canceling contracts for which they will not receive any benefits. Also. there were no Russian invasion in so-called ukraine. If it were, "ukraine" would've declared a war against Russia. So far, the only thing that comes from the West is lies and anti-Russian propaganda.
Apparently in fully operational condition, as they offer to demill to local legal requirements for a nominal fee. (Not worried, I have all my papers order to keep them 'live' both here and in the US)
ATM they say they have 'large' lots for sale in Serbia and Czech republic.
If you do buy one, for service and aftermarket upgrade kits, I recommend contacting:
Demilitarized and from the Eastern Europe, just like I thought. You are a liar.
Offering to demill them for an additional fee sort of indicates they're NOT demilled. And, frankly, I never said they were not from Eastern Europe. Only that they were available cheaply.
Fate is in heaven, armor is on the chest, accomplishment is in the feet. - Nagao Kagetora
Oddly enough I was talking about these tonight (was playing a 1990s game involving Russians).
The Soviets didn't sell their puppet states like for like versions of their gear. It was part of the Cold War smokescreen. See, if you give your puppets all your fancy gear, what happens when NATO captures/ trades for it? "Wow, the Soviets are using some real crap. Those sights are terrible, guess we don't need to bother with camo. The gun's crap, let's not upgrade our armour...".
Besides lulling the enemy into a false sense of superiority (there was a whole spy movement dedicated to breaking through the propaganda about Soviet armour and discovering their actual specs), it also mean the puppets were more dependent on the USSR. "Help, we're at war and our tanks suck! Please, take all our money for the working versions, or better yet send troops to occupy us. Here have all our resources at a cut rate"".
A funny anecdote on the subject comes from the Israelis. The Egyptians were literally jumping out of their tanks during battles because the monkey models which they were sent didn't have a radiator shutoff, nor did anyone see that as an issue till it was too late. The radiator was set for Siberian temperatures. ...The first thing the Israelis did with their Dictators (what they called the T-xx series tanks they captured, in reference to the USSR) was strip all the downgraded parts and stick in American derived parts which actually worked.
Spoiler:
Not to go off on a tangent, but the Israelis were intending to use an upgraded Dictator as their Main Battle Tank at one point. It fell through after they failed to secure the rights to use the British Challenger, and wound up building their own tank, the Chariot, themselves. That tank has more than a few nods to the development process of the Dictators. The Israelis were almost as bad as the Ukrainians for having spare Soviet tanks laying about, till they sold them all off to developing countries (who probably loved them over the crap the Soviets were selling them) and moved to the Chariot.
Summary though; odd how a pro-Russian poster doesn't know about monkey models (which is a term coined by Soviet politicians), or are they CIA propaganda as well?
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2016/03/08 23:00:02
I had to google "Ghibellines" but I still have no idea what are you asking.
Iron_Captain is showing off his education by simultaneously drawing a historical comparison while positing that US and Russian hardware have sources other than the US and Russia.
It's one of the reasons that many of us prefer discussing Russian related issues with him over you, as he tends to actually address one's points and provide genuine counterpoints of his own.
All this without insulting his fellow posters AND remaining polite. You should try it sometime!
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2016/03/08 23:24:18
Fate is in heaven, armor is on the chest, accomplishment is in the feet. - Nagao Kagetora
I think you have a problem understanding what the words "cheap" and"knock offs" are. The Russian export versions are not cheap and they are not illegal copies. They are slightly downgraded from the Russian military standards or they have changed/added different features than the Russian hardware. For instance, Russian armour sold to the Guelph States is an exact copy of the domestic version except air conditioner is added and the Russian electronics substituted where it is deemed necessary with the equipment from the other countries.
And, frankly, I never said they were not from Eastern Europe. Only that they were available cheaply.
Your quote from page 104:
And the Prices here at Crazy Ivan's are so low, we must be INSANE!
In reality though there are still only a few big providers of military hardware, and Russia is the Wal-Mart box store of the international arms market.
ATM they say they have 'large' lots for sale in Serbia and Czech republic.
First you say "Russia is the Walmart", then you point that it's Serbia and Czech republic who sell the actual hardware which are, most likely the locally produced export versions those countries got from USSR. I find it troublesome to believe in anything you say lately.
Summary though; odd how a pro-Russian poster doesn't know about monkey models (which is a term coined by Soviet politicians), or are they CIA propaganda as well?
"...The term monkey model was popularized in the West by Viktor Suvorov, in Inside the Soviet Army."
No wonder I've never heard of this term if it was invented by a dochebag traitor and a liar. Dr. Goebbels would be jealous of his "literature talents" .
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2016/03/08 23:37:36
Besides former Soviet satellite states, Israel (seeing a theme here?) was one of the major exporters of Russian kit till a few years ago. You could tell the Israel stuff though as, whilst they sold a lot of the Monkey Models off, they upgraded a whole load of it as well. Notably though this was mostly to South American states rather than their neighbors, but that's not to say they don't have allies in the region (though they usually take the American kit as a preference).
Not to say Russian isn't the main supplier though. Whilst in contemporary times the former Soviet states are coming out with better modernizations of Soviet era armour than the Russians are, the Russians themselves are your main source for the up to date stuff. Which is to say if you see a Soviet era vehicle in foreign hands, the origin of the vehicle is pretty obvious if you know your variants. You won't see someone claiming a Mirage as being Russian, but if some country suddenly starts rolling about in T-90s there's few sources for them (coincidentally the Russians did just sell a load of those to a few Eastern countries).
Re: Monkey Models - again
The term was used within Soviet government as a joke. The concept however hopefully shouldn't be something unknown to someone who can spout off about Russian logistics. Clearly it is though, to the point that your disputing it existed at all.
Nice to see you're using Reddit as a primary source too.
Sure, carry on spouting off. Go to a legitimate military forum and see what their opinion is of your post. Ah right, atypical Russian propaganda poster who ignores undisputed facts when it comes to their own agenda.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2016/03/08 23:47:55
Besides former Soviet satellite states, Israel (seeing a theme here?) was one of the major exporters of Russian kit till a few years ago. You could tell the Israel stuff though as, whilst they sold a lot of the Monkey Models off, they upgraded a whole load of it as well. Notably though this was mostly to South American states rather than their neighbors, but that's not to say they don't have allies in the region (though they usually take the American kit as a preference).
Not to say Russian isn't the main supplier though. Whilst in contemporary times the former Soviet states are coming out with better modernizations of Soviet era armour than the Russians are, the Russians themselves are your main source for the up to date stuff. Which is to say if you see a Soviet era vehicle in foreign hands, the origin of the vehicle is pretty obvious if you know your variants. You won't see someone claiming a Mirage as being Russian, but if some country suddenly starts rolling about in T-90s there's few sources for them (coincidentally the Russians did just sell a load of those to a few Eastern countries).
So a lot of countries sell Soviet-made export versions of weapons as well their own versions. Great. I don't see how this contradicts my statement that Russia doesn't sell cheap.
Re: Monkey Models - again
The term was used within Soviet government as a joke. The concept however hopefully shouldn't be something unknown to someone who can spout off about Russian logistics. Clearly it is though, to the point that your disputing it existed at all.
I never heard the term "monkey models" until this thread. But then again, I don't read Rezun's garbage.
Nice to see you're using Reddit as a primary source too.
Nice of you to miss the article from the Jerusalem Post.
Sure, carry on spouting off. Go to a legitimate military forum and see what their opinion is of your post. Ah right, atypical Russian propaganda poster who ignores undisputed facts when it comes to their own agenda.
Go ahead, show up at an English-speaking Russian military forum with your fantasies and have a new hole torn in you.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2016/03/09 00:06:01
Mordant 92nd 'Acid Dogs'
The Lost and Damned
Inquisition
