English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

Not to say it is workable, but thinking on the lines of Gandhi, here goes:

Everyone who is sick and tired of the bloodshed should go to the Middle East and congregrate around Israel's border. No one can be armed and everyone must swear an oath to remain non-violent regardless of what happens. Israel, Hezbullah, Hamas, etc, would have to stop the violence. We stay there long enough, acompanied by batallions of newspeople with their cameras rolling to let tempers simmer down, and by our sheer numbers, demand that they meet at a bargaining table and not leave (not even contact their families) until agreements have been signed and witnessed - and fully disclosed to the world. If anyone breaks the agreements, they would have to pay in cash in the millions to a fund set up for war victims world wide.

Once that is complete, we can all make a right turn and head to Iraq.

2006-07-21 11:09:48 · 7 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government Politics

7 answers

What would be the chances of getting enough people to do this, to make any real difference?

2006-07-21 11:18:10 · answer #1 · answered by oceansoflight777 5 · 1 0

Sounds so good but. You are dealing with Islam Gandhi got a bullet in the gut when he tried too.

One of Mohammed's daughters, Umm Kalthoum, testified that she had never heard the Apostle of God condone lying, except in these three situations:

For reconciliation among people.
In war.
Amongst spouses, to keep peace in the family.
One passage from the Hadith quotes Mohammed as saying: "The sons of Adam are accountable for all lies except those uttered to help bring reconciliation between Muslims."

In the sphere of international politics, the question is: Can Muslim countries be trusted to keep their end of the agreements that they sign with non-Muslim nations? It is a known Islamic practice, that when Muslims are weak they can agree with most anything. Once they become strong, then they negate what they formerly vowed.

The principle of sanctioning lying for the cause of Islam bears grave implications in matters relating to the spread of the religion of Islam in the West. Muslim activists employ deceptive tactics in their attempts to polish Islam's image and make it more attractive to prospective converts. They carefully try to avoid, obscure, and omit mentioning any of the negative Islamic texts and teachings.

An example of Islamic deception is that Muslim activists always quote the passages of the Quran from the early part of Mohammed's ministry while living in Mecca. These texts are peaceful and exemplify tolerance towards those that are not followers of Islam. All the while, they are fully aware that most of these passages were abrogated (cancelled and replaced) by passages that came after he migrated to Medina. The replacement verses reflect prejudice, intolerance, and endorse violence upon unbelievers

In conclusion, it is imperative to understand, that Muslim leaders can use this loop-hole in their religion, to absolve them from any permanent commitment. It is also important to know that what Muslim activists say to spread Islam may not always be the whole truth. When dealing with Muslims, what they say is not the issue. The real issue is, what they actually mean in their hearts.

2006-07-21 18:26:54 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

I think if you had enough people, this would work. However, most people outside the action are too fat, happy, and racist to care. Ghandi worked with people inside India who were actually being oppressed.

This kind of human wall tactic has been tried in Palestine. But they didn't have enough people, apparenlty. Rachel Corrie, a 23-year-old American peace activist and "human shield" was crushed and killed by an Israeli army-driven Caterpillar bulldozer in Gaza in 2003.

2006-07-21 18:50:21 · answer #3 · answered by Alan L 2 · 0 0

I don't remember the result, but that had been tried before the Iraqi war had gotten full blown.
There had been some sort of scandal about the group though.

2006-07-21 18:16:13 · answer #4 · answered by lrad1952 5 · 0 0

And here's the thing. Who's asking for a ceasefire right now?

Not hezbolla.

Why would the terrorists want a ceasefire? They 'welcome WW3' in their own words, and if they start to lose, they'll hide in some other country, namely syria or Iran. You can't win, you can't ceasefire, there is no peace, and they must be destroyed. period.

2006-07-21 18:14:34 · answer #5 · answered by pinkgoatwithmentalissues 2 · 0 0

your right it wont work....just because of the simple fact that the extremist islamic Hezbollah would have a field day killin all the infidels sittin around.

2006-07-21 18:17:23 · answer #6 · answered by rsist34 5 · 0 0

The first answer you got is the best you will see. " They have to be destroyed period."

2006-07-21 18:25:31 · answer #7 · answered by ? 4 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers