The middle East

[thebish]

^ I'm sure there's some deep point to this, I'm just struggling to grasp what it is...

Either that there are no nice sides in Syria or possibly there are few nice Muslims.

the former would make sense - but is nothing new - the latter isn't proven by quoting the deeds of some really bad people any more than listing the heinous crimes of some of the nastiest people in the civilised west would prove that the whole of the west was filed with bloodthirsty murderers...

[Bruce Rioja]

I really wish that I hadn't read Spotty's post.

[William the White]

Like thebish I'm puzzled why he thinks it appropriate to post details of barbaric acts like these. To what end? Atrocities of despicable vileness take place in wars - perhaps, most of all, in civil wars. There are well over a million people who have fled their country to try and escape the conflict. They are in desperate need. I'd like to see the government, with European partners, addressing that need.

[Lost Leopard Spot]

Only Bruce has understood.
This sort of 'conflict' is becoming more common. Conflict, it's fxcking barbarism, but hey ho, to the likes of William the White the drivers of this sort of conflict are just partaking in 'politics', whereas the opposers of this shit are a police state engaged in murderous actions.

[thebish]

Only Bruce has understood.
This sort of 'conflict' is becoming more common. Conflict, it's fxcking barbarism, but hey ho, to the likes of William the White the drivers of this sort of conflict are just partaking in 'politics', whereas the opposers of this shit are a police state engaged in murderous actions.

it has always been too common, to my mind... but on what scale is it becoming more common? all ages and pretty much all corners of the world have their fair share of utter senseless brutal barbarism... depressingly - I think it has always been a part of human nature... I'm not convinced it's nay more common now than it has ever been...

[William the White]

Only Bruce has understood.
This sort of 'conflict' is becoming more common. Conflict, it's fxcking barbarism, but hey ho, to the likes of William the White the drivers of this sort of conflict are just partaking in 'politics', whereas the opposers of this shit are a police state engaged in murderous actions.

Ah, I see, you are engaged in a polemic with me. It would, of course, be better not to misrepresent my position.

[Lost Leopard Spot]

Only Bruce has understood.
This sort of 'conflict' is becoming more common. Conflict, it's fxcking barbarism, but hey ho, to the likes of William the White the drivers of this sort of conflict are just partaking in 'politics', whereas the opposers of this shit are a police state engaged in murderous actions.

Ah, I see, you are engaged in a polemic with me. It would, of course, be better not to misrepresent my position.

Your position was absolutely clear. Let me restate it and then see where I've gone wrong.
I'm stupid.
The Egyptian state exist just to kill their own citizens.
The Muslim Brotherhood are being unfairly picked on just because of their politics.

[Lost Leopard Spot]

So, I see I haven't after all mis-stated your position!
Well, here's the thing: the only real difference between what is occurring in Syria and Egypt is the fact that the army in Egypt has (so far) managed to stymie the slide to bloodlust fuelled internecine anarchy that appears to be the natural state of humans with guns and an overwhelming belief in God.
It appears to me to be two-faced to condemn the barbarity that is Syria while at the same time complaining about the very actions that are preventing that barbarity from taking hold in Egypt.

[Prufrock]

So, I see I haven't after all mis-stated your position!
Well, here's the thing: the only real difference between what is occurring in Syria and Egypt is the fact that the army in Egypt has (so far) managed to stymie the slide to bloodlust fuelled internecine anarchy that appears to be the natural state of humans with guns and an overwhelming belief in God.
It appears to me to be two-faced to condemn the barbarity that is Syria while at the same time complaining about the very actions that are preventing that barbarity from taking hold in Egypt.

No less two-faced that to concentrate only on the barbarity which occurs in the Muslim world as if it's a problem which only occurs there. Or the wilful refusal to accpet that 'Muslim' does not equal 'murderous religious fanatic'.

[Lost Leopard Spot]

So, I see I haven't after all mis-stated your position!
Well, here's the thing: the only real difference between what is occurring in Syria and Egypt is the fact that the army in Egypt has (so far) managed to stymie the slide to bloodlust fuelled internecine anarchy that appears to be the natural state of humans with guns and an overwhelming belief in God.
It appears to me to be two-faced to condemn the barbarity that is Syria while at the same time complaining about the very actions that are preventing that barbarity from taking hold in Egypt.

No less two-faced that to concentrate only on the barbarity which occurs in the Muslim world as if it's a problem which only occurs there. Or the wilful refusal to accpet that 'Muslim' does not equal 'murderous religious fanatic'.

See the answer that William the White gave to me, I'll stick with that one.

[Lost Leopard Spot]

I am as equally scathing of the barbarity that occurs in Mexico by the drug cartels... For instance. But, however, this thread ain't "Mexico" and more importantly, unless we have some hidden machos amongst us, I don't think there is anybody denying the fact that Mexican drug cartels are fxcking barbaric!
I don't hear William the White complaining about the murderous actions of the Mexican army, whilst merely condemning the politics of the Sinaloa and Zeta cartels, f'rinstance.

So?

[Hoboh]

Only Bruce has understood.
This sort of 'conflict' is becoming more common. Conflict, it's fxcking barbarism, but hey ho, to the likes of William the White the drivers of this sort of conflict are just partaking in 'politics', whereas the opposers of this shit are a police state engaged in murderous actions.

it has always been too common, to my mind... but on what scale is it becoming more common? all ages and pretty much all corners of the world have their fair share of utter senseless brutal barbarism... depressingly - I think it has always been a part of human nature... I'm not convinced it's nay more common now than it has ever been...

This fella kinda puts it all in perspective.

You don’t conquer Asia without cracking a few skulls. In fact, during their horrific invasion of the Khwarezmia Empire, it is rumored that after taking Samarkand, Genghis ordered the civilians, including the children, beheaded and a pyramid of their severed heads erected in honor of his victory.

Of course, Genghis had been incensed by the Persians prior to the invasion. A few years earlier, he had tried to establish trade relations; but rather than being received with open arms, his emissaries were abused. In fact, with one group of three envoys, only two returned alive, along with the severed head of the third. It has been reported that Genghis had as much as 75% of the Iranian population massacred during his conquest, and, for the provincial governor who initially rebuffed his envoys, Genghis had him executed by pouring molten silver into his ears and eyes.

[Lost Leopard Spot]

Only Bruce has understood.
This sort of 'conflict' is becoming more common. Conflict, it's fxcking barbarism, but hey ho, to the likes of William the White the drivers of this sort of conflict are just partaking in 'politics', whereas the opposers of this shit are a police state engaged in murderous actions.

it has always been too common, to my mind... but on what scale is it becoming more common? all ages and pretty much all corners of the world have their fair share of utter senseless brutal barbarism... depressingly - I think it has always been a part of human nature... I'm not convinced it's nay more common now than it has ever been...

This fella kinda puts it all in perspective.

You don’t conquer Asia without cracking a few skulls. In fact, during their horrific invasion of the Khwarezmia Empire, it is rumored that after taking Samarkand, Genghis ordered the civilians, including the children, beheaded and a pyramid of their severed heads erected in honor of his victory.

Of course, Genghis had been incensed by the Persians prior to the invasion. A few years earlier, he had tried to establish trade relations; but rather than being received with open arms, his emissaries were abused. In fact, with one group of three envoys, only two returned alive, along with the severed head of the third. It has been reported that Genghis had as much as 75% of the Iranian population massacred during his conquest, and, for the provincial governor who initially rebuffed his envoys, Genghis had him executed by pouring molten silver into his ears and eyes.

That puts absolutely nothing into perspective whatsoever. To start with, Genghis attacked Khwarezm not Persia. Persia was conquered by a fellow called Hulagu. And as far the mountain of heads even the article you've quoted says "it was rumored" [sic], and it was probably the Daily Mail who was "reporting" that as much as 75% of the Iranian population was massacred.
It was also rumored and reported by the same sources that a Christian Emporer called Prester John ruled in the east. That was bollox too.

[Hoboh]

Only Bruce has understood.
This sort of 'conflict' is becoming more common. Conflict, it's fxcking barbarism, but hey ho, to the likes of William the White the drivers of this sort of conflict are just partaking in 'politics', whereas the opposers of this shit are a police state engaged in murderous actions.

it has always been too common, to my mind... but on what scale is it becoming more common? all ages and pretty much all corners of the world have their fair share of utter senseless brutal barbarism... depressingly - I think it has always been a part of human nature... I'm not convinced it's nay more common now than it has ever been...

This fella kinda puts it all in perspective.

You don’t conquer Asia without cracking a few skulls. In fact, during their horrific invasion of the Khwarezmia Empire, it is rumored that after taking Samarkand, Genghis ordered the civilians, including the children, beheaded and a pyramid of their severed heads erected in honor of his victory.

Of course, Genghis had been incensed by the Persians prior to the invasion. A few years earlier, he had tried to establish trade relations; but rather than being received with open arms, his emissaries were abused. In fact, with one group of three envoys, only two returned alive, along with the severed head of the third. It has been reported that Genghis had as much as 75% of the Iranian population massacred during his conquest, and, for the provincial governor who initially rebuffed his envoys, Genghis had him executed by pouring molten silver into his ears and eyes.

That puts absolutely nothing into perspective whatsoever. To start with, Genghis attacked Khwarezm not Persia. Persia was conquered by a fellow called Hulagu. And as far the mountain of heads even the article you've quoted says "it was rumored" [sic], and it was probably the Daily Mail who was "reporting" that as much as 75% of the Iranian population was massacred.
It was also rumored and reported by the same sources that a Christian Emporer called Prester John ruled in the east. That was bollox too.

So what’s happening now is worse than some fella who for some reason we still remember and talk about 800+ years later ( I wonder why) committed?

Look, I am not any lover or admirer of the current loon's and fruitcakes and if that is the way they live and put up with things, it is their business. We should stop trying to put the world to rights and be modern day missionaries.
Don't get me wrong if they threaten to try and bring their ways over to the West or threaten our way of life in any way, shape, or form then I would not hesitate to turn them all into cinders.
We should keep them at arms length, if folk feel a need to embrace their consciences then we live in a relatively free world so they can do so.
Oh and your the 'great historian' then?

[Lost Leopard Spot]

Only Bruce has understood.
This sort of 'conflict' is becoming more common. Conflict, it's fxcking barbarism, but hey ho, to the likes of William the White the drivers of this sort of conflict are just partaking in 'politics', whereas the opposers of this shit are a police state engaged in murderous actions.

it has always been too common, to my mind... but on what scale is it becoming more common? all ages and pretty much all corners of the world have their fair share of utter senseless brutal barbarism... depressingly - I think it has always been a part of human nature... I'm not convinced it's nay more common now than it has ever been...

This fella kinda puts it all in perspective.

You don’t conquer Asia without cracking a few skulls. In fact, during their horrific invasion of the Khwarezmia Empire, it is rumored that after taking Samarkand, Genghis ordered the civilians, including the children, beheaded and a pyramid of their severed heads erected in honor of his victory.

Of course, Genghis had been incensed by the Persians prior to the invasion. A few years earlier, he had tried to establish trade relations; but rather than being received with open arms, his emissaries were abused. In fact, with one group of three envoys, only two returned alive, along with the severed head of the third. It has been reported that Genghis had as much as 75% of the Iranian population massacred during his conquest, and, for the provincial governor who initially rebuffed his envoys, Genghis had him executed by pouring molten silver into his ears and eyes.

That puts absolutely nothing into perspective whatsoever. To start with, Genghis attacked Khwarezm not Persia. Persia was conquered by a fellow called Hulagu. And as far the mountain of heads even the article you've quoted says "it was rumored" [sic], and it was probably the Daily Mail who was "reporting" that as much as 75% of the Iranian population was massacred.
It was also rumored and reported by the same sources that a Christian Emporer called Prester John ruled in the east. That was bollox too.

So what’s happening now is worse than some fella who for some reason we still remember and talk about 800+ years later ( I wonder why) committed?

Look, I am not any lover or admirer of the current loon's and fruitcakes and if that is the way they live and put up with things, it is their business. We should stop trying to put the world to rights and be modern day missionaries.
Don't get me wrong if they threaten to try and bring their ways over to the West or threaten our way of life in any way, shape, or form then I would not hesitate to turn them all into cinders.
We should keep them at arms length, if folk feel a need to embrace their consciences then we live in a relatively free world so they can do so.
Oh and your the 'great historian' then?

It's a small hobby of mine. The Mongol Empire is an especial favourite - I'm probably one of maybe ten individuals in the world who possess a full five volume set of Howorth's History of the Mongols From the Ninth to the Nineteenth Century. Most University Libraries only have the first three volumes.

[Hoboh]

He was a Tory politician and you believe him

[Lost Leopard Spot]

He was first and foremost a Historian, an expert on Mongolia and the Mongols, and the nation's leading controversialist. That'll do for me.

[Hoboh]

He was first and foremost a Historian, an expert on Mongolia and the Mongols, and the nation's leading controversialist. That'll do for me.

'Fraid not, he was first a barrister then an amateur historian and geologist.

[Lost Leopard Spot]

He was first and foremost a Historian, an expert on Mongolia and the Mongols, and the nation's leading controversialist. That'll do for me.

'Fraid not, he was first a barrister then an amateur historian and geologist.

Ok. He was firstly a barrister, secondly an historian (I reject the amateurishnessness), and thirdly a contraversialist, and only fourthly a conservative politician.
So yeh, he'll do, even though he's a (was a) Tory.
Have you read him by the way?

[Montreal Wanderer]

it has always been too common, to my mind... but on what scale is it becoming more common? all ages and pretty much all corners of the world have their fair share of utter senseless brutal barbarism... depressingly - I think it has always been a part of human nature... I'm not convinced it's nay more common now than it has ever been...

This fella kinda puts it all in perspective.

You don’t conquer Asia without cracking a few skulls. In fact, during their horrific invasion of the Khwarezmia Empire, it is rumored that after taking Samarkand, Genghis ordered the civilians, including the children, beheaded and a pyramid of their severed heads erected in honor of his victory.

Of course, Genghis had been incensed by the Persians prior to the invasion. A few years earlier, he had tried to establish trade relations; but rather than being received with open arms, his emissaries were abused. In fact, with one group of three envoys, only two returned alive, along with the severed head of the third. It has been reported that Genghis had as much as 75% of the Iranian population massacred during his conquest, and, for the provincial governor who initially rebuffed his envoys, Genghis had him executed by pouring molten silver into his ears and eyes.

That puts absolutely nothing into perspective whatsoever. To start with, Genghis attacked Khwarezm not Persia. Persia was conquered by a fellow called Hulagu. And as far the mountain of heads even the article you've quoted says "it was rumored" [sic], and it was probably the Daily Mail who was "reporting" that as much as 75% of the Iranian population was massacred.
It was also rumored and reported by the same sources that a Christian Emporer called Prester John ruled in the east. That was bollox too.

So what’s happening now is worse than some fella who for some reason we still remember and talk about 800+ years later ( I wonder why) committed?

Look, I am not any lover or admirer of the current loon's and fruitcakes and if that is the way they live and put up with things, it is their business. We should stop trying to put the world to rights and be modern day missionaries.
Don't get me wrong if they threaten to try and bring their ways over to the West or threaten our way of life in any way, shape, or form then I would not hesitate to turn them all into cinders.
We should keep them at arms length, if folk feel a need to embrace their consciences then we live in a relatively free world so they can do so.
Oh and your the 'great historian' then?

It's a small hobby of mine. The Mongol Empire is an especial favourite - I'm probably one of maybe ten individuals in the world who possess a full five volume set of Howorth's History of the Mongols From the Ninth to the Nineteenth Century. Most University Libraries only have the first three volumes.

I'm gratified to note that our university library has two copies of the original publication and two of the 1965 reprint (which is still available). It is actually four parts in five physical volumes (pt 2 having two volumes).