The Middle-East Needs the Caliphate

It is my observation that the Middle-East is in grave need of a new Caliphate to unite the Islamic countries under one ruler. So long as they are separated, the Western Nations will continue to take land from them and abuse their countries.

Yeah, it's a damn shame Canada is just marching in on their soil. But what can you tell those crazy maple-sucking canucks?Setsa

It is a shame that they are in a country which they do not belong in, but they serve our Queen, and that is an honourable duty.

[QUOTE="Setsa"]Yeah, it's a damn shame Canada is just marching in on their soil. But what can you tell those crazy maple-sucking canucks?TheAbbeFaria

It is a shame that they are in a country which they do not belong in, but they serve our Queen, and that is an honourable duty.

...I have a feeling the last thing the middle east needs is more wars

[QUOTE="TheAbbeFaria"]

[QUOTE="Setsa"]Yeah, it's a damn shame Canada is just marching in on their soil. But what can you tell those crazy maple-sucking canucks?Setsa

It is a shame that they are in a country which they do not belong in, but they serve our Queen, and that is an honourable duty.

You're straw-manning my argument, saying that my support for a Caliphate is simply asking everyone in the Middle-East to hold-hands and unite, which is absolutely ridiculous and an insult to my intelligence. If you wish to have a reasonable argument, then simply be reasonable. ;)

The journey toward a Caliphate is not an easy one, and will indeed result in much blood-shed, whether with involvement with the West or the Western figureheads running many of the MIddle-Eastern countries. However, the end result is stability which has not been seen since the collapse of the Ottoman Empire (caused by Western external and internal involvement).

I think the last thing the middle east needs is a new caliphate. Back in the day, the middle east was one of the most advanced regions in the world in terms of science and technology. Then much of it became too fundamentalist and now lags behind most of the world. They need to drop the hardcore religous ideology and become more tolerant and more open to technology. It's not a good thing to be against the whole modern world.

They would never get along.

I think the last thing the middle east needs is a new caliphate. Back in the day, the middle east was one of the most advanced regions in the world in terms of science and technology. Then much of it became too fundamentalist and now lags behind most of the world. They need to drop the hardcore religous ideology and become more tolerant and more open to technology. It's not a good thing to be against the whole modern world.

sonicare

Back when they were the most advanced civilization in the world, they were ruled under the Caliphate. They had freedom of speech against religion and the government as well.

Yes the Mahdi should come.

Its a pretty terrible idea. Nasser was onto something with his secular Arabic independence movement. Case in point: Turkey, now doing exceedingly well as a secular islamic country, although the EU admittedly had to push a lot of the reforms and put the gov under great pressure to stop the violence against kurds. Hell, even Cyprus is doing pretty well these days.

What The middle east needs is strong secular leadership which focuses on teaching the real Islam, not that radical BS, the economy and welfare/healthcare. Also can't be racist either. And that doesn't look like its going to happen without ouitside interference (by which I do not mean a freakin war.)

Its a pretty terrible idea. Nasser was onto something with his secular Arabic independence movement. Case in point: Turkey, now doing exceedingly well as a secular islamic country, although the EU admittedly had to push a lot of the reforms and put the gov under great pressure to stop the violence against kurds. Hell, even Cyprus is doing pretty well these days.

What The middle east needs is strong secular leadership which focuses on teaching the real Islam, not that radical BS, the economy and welfare/healthcare. Also can't be racist either. And that doesn't look like its going to happen without ouitside interference (by which I do not mean a freakin war.)

lyeti

The Umayyad Caliphate was pretty secular compared to the rest, and it was also during this time that the Islamic Empire became the most powerful.

[QUOTE="lyeti"]

Its a pretty terrible idea. Nasser was onto something with his secular Arabic independence movement. Case in point: Turkey, now doing exceedingly well as a secular islamic country, although the EU admittedly had to push a lot of the reforms and put the gov under great pressure to stop the violence against kurds. Hell, even Cyprus is doing pretty well these days.

What The middle east needs is strong secular leadership which focuses on teaching the real Islam, not that radical BS, the economy and welfare/healthcare. Also can't be racist either. And that doesn't look like its going to happen without ouitside interference (by which I do not mean a freakin war.)

TheAbbeFaria

The Umayyad Caliphate was pretty secular compared to the rest, and it was also during this time that the Islamic Empire became the most powerful.

Yes, I know that the islamic world was at its height under a caliphate, however it is unfeasible in modern times. There is too much ethnic and religious conflict for a caliphate or indeed even a secular union. The best they can do is to become a bunch of secular Arab nations. Its too ucked up over there to hope for anything better. I mean, Al quaeda was trying to establish a caliphate by causing the U.S to become the middle east's common enemy, yet even with the post-9/11 hate/discriminiation of arabs by westerners and the invasion of Iraq, the islamic nations still didn't do nuffingg but go into deeper and deeper internal struggles...

Back in the day, the middle east was one of the most advanced regions in the world in terms of science and technology. Then much of it became too fundamentalist and now lags behind most of the world.

sonicare

One theory holds that Genghis Khan's devastation of the Khwarezmian Empire in 1219 was the reason for the shift from intellectualism to fundamentalism.

Interestingly enough, the Mongols were poised to devastate Europe in much the same way and turned back only on account of the death of Ogedei Khan, Genghis' son and successor.

Ogedei died during a bout of heavy drinking, so it is one of those strange quirks of history that Europe may literally owe its existence to alcohol!

[QUOTE="sonicare"]

Back in the day, the middle east was one of the most advanced regions in the world in terms of science and technology. Then much of it became too fundamentalist and now lags behind most of the world.

Stesilaus

One theory holds that Genghis Khan's devastation of the Khwarezmian Empire in 1219 was the reason for the shift from intellectualism to fundamentalism.

Interestingly enough, the Mongols were poised to devastate Europe in much the same way and turned back only on account of the death of Ogedei Khan, Genghis' son and successor.

Ogedei died during a bout of heavy drinking, so it is one of those strange quirks of history that Europe may literally owe its existence to alcohol!

I wouldn't exactly call europe an intellectual beacon prior to the renaissance.

the largest chunk of conflict would be solved if the united states left

Yeah, it's a damn shame Canada is just marching in on their soil. But what can you tell those crazy maple-sucking canucks?Setsa

When has land been taken from them in the modern era by Western countries?:lol: