Erdogan's purge in Turkey

[Darth Rotor]

That's not entirely correct. Zbig admitted to have lured the Soviets into invading with his support of the crazies starting half a year earlier, and was mighty proud about it in 1998. Don't you know the famous interview?

Your appeal to the third grader "he made me to it" earns you zero points. The Sovs had a variety of reasons to do or not to do something in the Near Abroad and Afghanistan. The policy makers in Moscow Made A Choice. Nobody made them do anything.

 

[Childlike Empress]

Your appeal to the third grader "he made me to it" earns you zero points. The Sovs had a variety of reasons to do or not to do something in the Near Abroad and Afghanistan. The policy makers in Moscow Made A Choice. Nobody made them do anything.

Read carefully and don't put words into my mouth. I said they lured the Soviets into invading, not that they made them do it. In Zbig's words in the interview: We didn’t push the Russians to intervene, but we knowingly increased the probability that they would.

 

[Childlike Empress]

The point is of course that the often stated, even by well-informed people like CapelDodger, "wisdom" that the rise of "Sunni extremism" started after the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan with help of "the West" is inaccurate. First comes support of "Sunni extremism", second comes Soviet invasion of Afghanistan.

 

[Darth Rotor]

Read carefully and don't put words into my mouth. I said they lured the Soviets into invading, not that they made them do it. In Zbig's words in the interview: We didn’t push the Russians to intervene, but we knowingly increased the probability that they would.

Zbig gives himself more credit than some cynics (like me) do. Your second point I won't argue with, as it squares with what I saw.

 

[McHrozni]

Only if you don't know anything about how ISIS' interpretation compares with other interpretations, both classical and modern.

I didn't compare the interpretations of ISIS to interpretations of other groups, but rather the interpretations of ISIS to what the texts actually say.

The interpretation ISIS offers fairly straightforward "Let's do as Mohammed did, let's do as Mohammed said we should do", without looking for special meanings in, say, his command that slaughtering a woman who talked bad about him wasn't a murder that required any recompense.

You can, of course, interpret the texts differently. It's just that if Mohammed and Allah wanted Muslims to act differently, there's a fairly simple way they could've done it: make the most straightforward interpretation a lot more benign.

Why is that so hard to grasp?

Because of the way hadith collections arose, their use as legal proof-texts by the various madahib, and the way 'ilm al-hadith developed to sort through the traditions recorded in all of these. The first collections, called musannaf (such as the Muwatta' of Malik ibn Anas), were basically transcripts of legal discourse, containing Prophetic ahadith, the reports of the Companions, the rulings of jurists, and the interpretations of scholars, all organized by specific legal topic or issue. Because of their nature as reference handbooks, these books were not concerned with proving the authenticity of the reports contained within, but merely documented the development of Islamic law as it was practiced in the early period of Islam.

(...)

This all resulted in the situation, which persists today, that there a multiple of hadith books out there, each of which declares, on the authority of various and assorted scholars, that some ahadith are reliable and some are weak and some are outright forgeries. And they unfortunately don't all agree with each other as to which are which. As with most things in Islam, it all depends on which particular scholar you want to believe.

I can summarize this very easily: because Muslims are more concerned about how Mohamed lived, and not very concerned about what the results of his teachings would be.

Great job. Did I mention a sufficient number of times this is exactly what's fueling pretty much every ******** organization in the area, from AKP to ISIS, or do I need to repeat myself further?

McHrozni

 

[McHrozni]

Yes. Islam encompasses many different interpretations, even among two people who successively held the same position.

I did say earlier that a series of chaotic, conflicting commands should be expected to produce chaotic, conflicting results at least some of the time, did I not?

McHrozni

 

[FenerFan]

Here is text message I just got on my phone. Presumably, it was sent to everyone using TurkCell. (It's a fairly good translation, but I'm not perfect with text translations)

My dear nation,
Don't give up your heroic support of the the nation, the homeland and the flag. We will continue to teach a lesson to the terrorist traitors (FETO)* and to defend democracy. Tanks are not the rulers of our public squares.
R.T. Erdoğan

* This refers to the supposed "Fetullah Gülen Terrorist Org."

Whew! I sure feel better now since democracy will be preserved.

 

[McHrozni]

Read carefully and don't put words into my mouth. I said they lured the Soviets into invading, not that they made them do it. In Zbig's words in the interview: We didn’t push the Russians to intervene, but we knowingly increased the probability that they would.

Actually the original sin in Afghanistan had absolutely nothing to do with the West and absolutely everything to do with the KGB.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saur_Revolution

McHrozni

 

[TubbaBlubba]

Tanks are not the rulers of our streets.
R.T. Erdoğan

Oh, the irony.

 

[Planigale]

Seems a little late to declare a state of emergency after the coup has been defeated. Unless of course you have rounded up lots of people including many judges and don't have the judges to judge them any longer. This will provoke internal terrorism as people begin to feel that there is no option for peaceful opposition.

 

[Craig B]

I didn't say that, but it's clear the growth of Islamic extremism has little to do with their actions (or lack thereof).

McHrozni

That is not at all "clear". Your reasoning is wrong. You are saying that extremists will remain extremists no matter what; therefore nobody else's actions matter. My point is that extremists may gain influence among people less likely to be extremist, if events unfold in certain ways.

Western tolerance of the expulsions and annexations performed by Israel, for example, has been a fruitful source of influence to some very extreme movements in the Muslim world. It hasn't made he extremists more extreme. It has made them more influential.

 

[McHrozni]

That is not at all "clear". Your reasoning is wrong. You are saying that extremists will remain extremists no matter what; therefore nobody else's actions matter. My point is that extremists may gain influence among people less likely to be extremist, if events unfold in certain ways.

Maybe, but Western interference is one thing that has approximately zero correlation with Islamic extremism. Correlation does not equal causation, but a lack of correlation usually rules out causation, at least any causation strong enough to mention.

Western tolerance of the expulsions and annexations performed by Israel, for example, has been a fruitful source of influence to some very extreme movements in the Muslim world. It hasn't made he extremists more extreme. It has made them more influential.

For some unfathomable reason that's only a problem is Israel does it. Islamic world has absolutely no problems with far worse crimes against the Kurds, or indeed against Muslim Arabs (or anyone else), as long as it's someone other than Israel doing it.

This leads me to believe it's not Western tolerance of the expulsions and annexations performed of Israel, or even the acts themselves, but it's all about the very existence of Israel, irrespective of what Israel or indeed any other country does or doesn't do.

I can find you a few Islamic scriptures that might help explain that hatred if you really want. Surely Islamic scriptures ordering the rabid hatred of Jews could help explain the rabid hatred of Jews in the Islamic world, no?

McHrozni

 

[Craig B]

No, it's actually highly relevant. Turkish Islamist president has enacted actions that strictly go against democracy, rule of law and basically everything Turkey stood for since the country was formed in the collapse of the Ottoman empire.

Uncovering what motivated this destructive actions is highly relevant, especially since it might offer clues as to what comes next. My guess is he will continue by curtailing religious freedoms across the country, as mandated by the religion he follows.

McHrozni

This looks like an archaism rather than a feature specific to "the religion he follows". Fusion of religion and the state, and the concomitant persecution of "heretics" and minorities, was an almost universal feature of the state in Europe before the nineteenth century. In fact, tolerance, though not equality, was a feature of official religious practice in the Ottoman Empire, more than elsewhere in Europe.

It is the atrocious intolerance practiced by ISIS and other bigots that is aberrant in the history of state Islam.

None of this is intended to suggest that I have any time or admiration for Erdogan's reversion to fundamentalist religion as a tool of state policy.

 

[McHrozni]

This looks like an archaism rather than a feature specific to "the religion he follows". Fusion of religion and the state, and the concomitant persecution of "heretics" and minorities, was an almost universal feature of the state in Europe before the nineteenth century.

That's enormously far from truth. Christian Church and state were two separate institutions from the onset. The Church did try to take over state functions from time to time, but if that's "fusion" you'd also have to call 17th century Europe "unified" - a ludicrous proposition.

That said, with the exception of Vatican (a state formed solely for the purpose of having the Pope of Rome subject of no man) today is secular. Every single Muslim state is either Islamic, or on a path towards becoming one.

In fact, tolerance, though not equality, was a feature of official religious practice in the Ottoman Empire, more than elsewhere in Europe.

What you describe as "tolerance" is more accurately described as "subjugated second class citizen".

It is the atrocious intolerance practiced by ISIS and other bigots that is aberrant in the history of state Islam.

Is it? Orthodox Greeks were the majority population of the entire Asia Minor, until the highly tolerant Seljuk Turks arrived and cleansed them from their homes. Constantinople was the largest and most important city of the orthodox Greeks, until it was conquered and ethnically cleansed by the highly tolerant Ottomans. The lands between Sinai peninsula and the Atlantic ocean were predominantly Christian, until the highly tolerant Arabs conquered the lands and made them into second class citizens in their own lands. The highly tolerant Sultans of Andalusia in Cordoba placed Jews into high positions, until they highly tolerantly massacred them so they wouldn't amass too much power. Malta was depopulated and remained almost unsettled for two centuries when the highly tolerant Muslim invaders took the island in 870.

History of Islam is riddled with these and other 'highly tolerant' actions. Admittedly not all of their history is like this, but ISIS is certainly no historic aberration. It's just another example of how bad Islam can become. The only defense of that that I've seen - if you can call that a defense at all - is that ideologies other than Islam can produce similar results as well. This is true of course, but this 'defense' somehow never pops up when radical nationalism, racism, communism or indeed any other ideology with similar content, ideas and problems is debated.

None of this is intended to suggest that I have any time or admiration for Erdogan's reversion to fundamentalist religion as a tool of state policy.

It's interesting how Muslims represent only 21% of world population but account for about 100% of cases where fundamentalist religion is used as a tool of state policy. Furthermore nearly 100% of states with a Muslim majority suffer from that problem (to varying extent), so it's not a statistical anomaly of some sort. Do you have an explanation for that? I do, but you apparently disagree with it.

McHrozni

 

[Tolls]

It's interesting how Muslims represent only 21% of world population but account for about 100% of cases where fundamentalist religion is used as a tool of state policy. Furthermore nearly 100% of states with a Muslim majority suffer from that problem (to varying extent), so it's not a statistical anomaly of some sort. Do you have an explanation for that? I do, but you apparently disagree with it.

McHrozni

You'll have to post some actual workings on this, including definitions.
If the discussion a couple of months ago re: Russian military accomplishments is anything to go by I fear you have a habit of seeing things you want to see.

 

[McHrozni]

You'll have to post some actual workings on this, including definitions.

Which definitions do you want to see?

If the discussion a couple of months ago re: Russian military accomplishments is anything to go by I fear you have a habit of seeing things you want to see.

We all do, but some of you are more prominent in it. In that particular thread it took four or five explanations for you guys to stop saying I was merely saying what pussies Russians are as opposed to how backwards and underdeveloped Russia has been throughout history, if I recall correctly. It's interesting how you failed to grasp that then, or mention it now.

McHrozni

 

[Tolls]

Which definitions do you want to see?

The workings and definitions for that paragraph I quoted of yours.
What counts as a "tool of state policy". How do we identify it being used as such.
Where did you pluck your %ages from?
"(V)arying extent"? That's awfully vague.
And so on.

We all do, but some of you are more prominent in it. In that particular thread it took four or five explanations for you guys to stop saying I was merely saying what pussies Russians are as opposed to how backwards and underdeveloped Russia has been throughout history, if I recall correctly. It's interesting how you failed to grasp that then, or mention it now.

McHrozni

No, my argument in that thread was entirely down to Russian military accomplishments after you had suggested they didn't have any.

From this post.

With actual Swedes, Poles, Germans and French they were either defeated, or were a part of a much larger coalition that often did a lion's share of work, as in the case of WW2.

Which I pointed out (and others afterwards) was nonsense, especially with a lack of any definitions.

Hence my request here, as it is the same sort of blanket statement you seem to love.

 

[McHrozni]

The workings and definitions for that paragraph I quoted of yours.
What counts as a "tool of state policy". How do we identify it being used as such.

A tool of state policy is using Islamic fundamentalist rules to help run the state. King of Morocco for example claims he's descendant from Mohamed the prophet, and claims legitimacy to rule for that ancestry. It's a clear tool of state policy, stemming from Islamic fundamentalism.

Where did you pluck your %ages from?

It's an estimate.

"(V)arying extent"? That's awfully vague.

Morocco is one of the states where the presence of Islam is very moderate when not compared to non-Islamic states. Saudi Arabia is not. Both use Islam as means to rule their populace. How would you describe the difference if not through use "varying extent" or a phrase with similar meaning?

No, my argument in that thread was entirely down to Russian military accomplishments after you had suggested they didn't have any.

And you quoted my post which specifically noted how Russian military accomplishments existed, but were nowhere near the mythical powers usually ascribed to them. Curious.

Here's another definition for you:

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=pot calling the kettle black

McHrozni

 

[tinribmancer]

I can't quite see that this is good news for future students in Turkey, or university students now in Turkey.There seems to be a lack of freedom of expression and an independent judiciary and a free press and media. Turkish Intelligence with all their bugging has immunity from criticism.

I still think it was a mistake for Erdogan to support Isis, which is Al Qaeda and extreme Islam, and is at war with the West, though supported by Israel and Saudi Arabia and Blairite liberals, just because Erdogan wants a war of aggression against Syria, and also the mad mullahs in Iran and the Kurds.

It's a clash of cultures. When in Rome do as the Romans do.

Henri, you've been linking Israel to ISIS and the terrorist attacks that have already happened from months on the CT section.

You have zero proof about this.

 

[Tolls]

A tool of state policy is using Islamic fundamentalist rules to help run the state. King of Morocco for example claims he's descendant from Mohamed the prophet, and claims legitimacy to rule for that ancestry. It's a clear tool of state policy, stemming from Islamic fundamentalism.

That's not a definition.
Did you know that the Queen of the UK is head of the CofE?

Note that there are lots and lots of issues with Morocco, but simply having their monarch claim descent from some historic religious figure is not unusual. It's how lots of monarchies work, and have worked throughout history.

It's an estimate.

So a figure pulled out of your arse.

Morocco is one of the states where the presence of Islam is very moderate when not compared to non-Islamic states. Saudi Arabia is not. Both use Islam as means to rule their populace. How would you describe the difference if not through use "varying extent" or a phrase with similar meaning?

It's a wishy washy phrase that can be used to hide a wishy washy argument behind.

And you quoted my post which specifically noted how Russian military accomplishments existed, but were nowhere near the mythical powers usually ascribed to them. Curious.

McHrozni

And as I said, my argument was entirely about that sentence I quoted. It was bollocks.