Jump to content
Islamic Forum
Sign in to follow this  
freedslave

Our Muslim Credibility Problem: It's A Conspiracy

Recommended Posts

I have. You haven't.

 

You don't know me and I will not discuss my scientific background with you. I really hate to debate with layman on scientific issues such as nuclear fusion, nuclear fission, radioactivity, radioactive decay , short term and long term effects of nuclear radiation on living things etc.

 

Your statements above reflect your ignorance. You ignore the effects and consequences of a nuclear war and nuclear fallout on living things and non-living things because they do not support your opinion.

 

Yes, they do. But the extent of the deleterious effects depends entirely on the amount of radioactive matter released. As I said (and you have not disputed) the number of bombs involved in a nuclear exchange between israel, Pakistan and India is likely to be small. Further, those bombs would not be anything like as powerful as the bombs held by the US, China and Russia. Thus not much radioactive matter would be released. Thus they would be unlikely to cause widespread health problems beyond the countries involved and they could not possibly cause a nuclear winter (or summer).

 

Once again you have proven that you are an ignorant person and you don't even know what you are talking about.

 

Please read this statement made by Institute for Energy and Environmental Research :

 

About Eighty Thousand Cancers in the United States, More Than 15,000 of Them Fatal, Attributable to Fallout from Worldwide Atmospheric Nuclear Testing

 

Takoma Park MD, February 28, 2002: An estimated 80,000 people who lived in or were born in the United States between the years 1951 and 2000 will contract cancer as a result of the fallout caused by atmospheric nuclear weapons testing, according to an analysis of government studies by the Institute for Energy and Environmental Research. Well over 15,000 of these cases would be fatal. The most recent government study, a fact sheet, and official fallout maps are posted on the IEER web site. The report and maps are also scheduled to be posted at the Centers for Disease Control web site, you are not allowed to post links yetcdc.gov. The maps show cumulative fallout and county-by-county radiation dose and fallout patterns. These are proxies for geographic patterns of excess cancers that would be attributable to radiation.

 

The government report, prepared by the National Cancer Institute and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, estimates radiation doses from testing at the Nevada Test Site as well as from testing outside of the continental United States. The latter category includes U.S. tests in the Marshall Islands and Johnston Atoll in the Pacific region, Soviet tests in Semipalatinsk (now in Kazakhstan) and Novaya Zemlya (Russia), and British tests on Christmas Island. Source: (you are not allowed to post links yet)"you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_you are not allowed to post links yetieer(contact admin if its a beneficial link)/comments/fallout/pr0202.html"]you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_you are not allowed to post links yetieer(contact admin if its a beneficial link)/comments/fallout/pr0202.html[/url]

 

Now we know that worldwide atmospheric nuclear testing affect living things worldwide but you are so ignorant that you even deny the scientific findings and the consequences and the effect of nuclear testing, nuclear war, nuclear fallout on human beings, animals etc.

 

A nuclear war involving a large number of very powerful bombs (such as a war between China and the US in which hundreds of cities would be vaporised) could do catastrophic harm to the planet. A nuclear war involving a small number of not so powerful bombs (such as a war between Pakistan and israel in which four or five cities would be vaporised) could not do catastrophic harm to the planet.

They should. So should the regimes in Pakistan, China, France, Russia and India.

 

Let me tell you that the consequences and effects of a nuclear war on living things and non-living things are beyond your imagination, your small brain and your ignorance.

 

In the U.S. in September 1961 the Federal Government started the Community Fallout Shelter Program. That means the US regime really believes that nuclear fallout may reach USA.

 

"The United States has a compensation program for Nevada Test Site neighbors who are geographical downwinders. But this is clearly not enough," explained Ms. Ledwidge. "There are hot spots thousands of miles from tests sites and the new definition of 'downwinder' should include all of them."

 

"The new fallout maps and radiation dose estimates show that nuclear weapons states not only harmed their own people but also people in other countries," said Dr. Makhijani. "U.S., Soviet, and other testing likely created hot spots in Canada and Scandinavia, for instance. There may have been hot spots in many other countries all over the world. Source: Institute for Energy and Environmental Research (you are not allowed to post links yet)"you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_you are not allowed to post links yetieer(contact admin if its a beneficial link)/comments/fallout/pr0202.html"]you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_you are not allowed to post links yetieer(contact admin if its a beneficial link)/comments/fallout/pr0202.html[/url]

 

Atmospheric winds etc are able to bring nuclear fallout worldwide. Can you control atmospheric winds etc? You can't. Can you control or prevent the spread of nuclear fallout? You cannot control nor prevent nuclear fallout from spreading destruction etc in your country. Therefore, you cannot guarantee that nuclear fallout would not reach USA etc. Can you detect a slight smell of nuclear fallout in your home, farm, village, town, cities etc? You can't ! You can't even detect the presence of nuclear fallout or gamma rays from the nuclear fallout! It is beyond your ability!!! When you detect the presence of nuclear fallout, it means you and other people in your village, town, city, or country are already exposed to nuclear fallout etc.

 

A nuclear war may cause nuclear holocaust that is the possibility of nearly complete annihilation of human civilization by nuclear warfare and all or most of the Earth is made uninhabitable by nuclear weapons in future world wars. Two opposing sides would use nuclear weapons that effectively result in the destruction of both the attacker and the defender. Only foolish and savage regimes like the US regime, the UK regime, the israeli regime of terror etc produce so many nuclear weapons to destroy the world and all mankind.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
PropellerAds
You don't know me and I will not discuss my scientific background with you. I really hate to debate with layman...

 

 

 

Your 'scientific background' ? Don't make me laugh !! All you do is c/p. And didn't you, when you called yourself 'Truth4u' claim to have had five majors in college and to have been an Army officer trained in counterinsurgency ?

Why aren't you still posting that tidbit in your profile now ? I know why. Because it's false, isn't it ? 'Layman...'

HAHAHAHA !!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You don't know me and I will not discuss my scientific background with you. I really hate to debate with layman on scientific issues such as nuclear fusion, nuclear fission, radioactivity, radioactive decay , short term and long term effects of nuclear radiation on living things etc.

 

I understand the effects of radiation and I also understand the crucial (yet very, very basic) point that you don't seem to understand - the size of the effects depends on the amount of radiation. If (as you seem to be saying) ANY amount of radiation is equally deleterious, you really should start a campaign to get rid of the X-ray machines and luminous paint in your country.

 

Now we know that worldwide atmospheric nuclear testing affect living things worldwide but you are so ignorant that you even deny the scientific findings and the consequences and the effect of nuclear testing, nuclear war, nuclear fallout on human beings, animals etc.[/b]

Let me tell you that the consequences and effects of a nuclear war on living things and non-living things are beyond your imagination, your small brain and your ignorance.

 

Yep, they affect it worldwide because it was carried out worldwide. I haven't noticed Doomsday, though. However a small (for the reasons I have already given several times) nuclear exchange involving India, israel and Pakistan would not have disastrous consequences worldwide.

 

In the U.S. in September 1961 the Federal Government started the Community Fallout Shelter Program. That means the US regime really believes that nuclear fallout may reach USA.

 

LOL! No, they thought that if Russia dropped several hundred huge nuclear bombs on the US there would be a lot of nuclear fallout in the US!

 

Atmospheric winds etc are able to bring nuclear fallout worldwide. Can you control atmospheric winds etc? You can't. Can you control or prevent the spread of nuclear fallout? You cannot control nor prevent nuclear fallout from spreading destruction etc in your country. Therefore, you cannot guarantee that nuclear fallout would not reach USA etc. Can you detect a slight smell of nulcear fallout in your home, farm, village, town, cities etc? You can't ! You can't even detect the presence of nuclear fallout or gamma rays from the nuclear fallout! It is beyond your ability!!! When you detect the presence of nuclear fallout, it means you and other people in your village, town, city, or country are already expose to nuclear fallout etc.

 

You seem to have entirely forgotten what this discussion is about. It was claimed that a nuclear exchange involving israel, Pakistan and India would cause Doomsday. Yes, it might be possible that fallout from the exchange would be detected in distant countries - no, it would not have disastrous effects.

 

A nuclear war may cause nuclear holocaust that is the possibility of nearly complete annhilation of human civilization by nuclear warfare and all or most of the Earth is made uninhabitable by nuclear weapons in future world wars. Two opposing sides would use nuclear weapons that effectively result in the destruction of both the attacker and the defender. Only foolish and savage regimes like the US regime, the UK regime, the israeli regime of terror etc produce so many nuclear weapons to destroy the world and all mankind.

 

Yes. But not any nuclear war. The extent of the damage depends entirely on the number and size of bombs involved. israel, Pakistan and India simply do not have enough bombs to destroy the world.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yes. But not any nuclear war. The extent of the damage depends entirely on the number and size of bombs involved. israel, Pakistan and India simply do not have enough bombs to destroy the world.

 

why only israel, pakistan and india wanna toss nuclear bombs? what if 15 others wanna nuke as well? no way the world gonna survive. it's surely gonna be end of civilization followed by doomsday and inevitably judgement day (for those who believe in it). regardless of doomsday, sooner or later it's gonna be from dust to dust. right?

 

what we gotta do now is to correct what is not right - one of which is to come up with viable 2 state solution to end israeli palestinian conflict.

 

the donkey marching of israeli fanatics in majority arab town of Umm al-Fahm not gonna help towards this end right? neither is the donkey expansion of illegal jewish settlements in west bank and illegal annexation of east jerusalem. :sl:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Indeed, but Britain was the ruling country. If you think that conquest confers legitimac (I don't), then you have to agree that not only was the formation of israel legitimate (as it was given the land by the ruler of the land), but the current borders of israel are legitimate because they were won in war.

 

you're mistaken. britian is NOT the ruling country following ottoman downfall, it's british AND arabs coz they'd fought side by side to topple ottoman. read bbc article again in post number 86.

 

besides britain PROMISED arabs nationalism (in 1916) if they helped to topple ottoman. it promised a state to foreign jews a year later in 1917. as you can see britian's fork tongue promises has led to land dispute between arabs/palestinians and foreign jews. read bbc article in post number 86.

 

indeed britian n arabs' conquest over ottoman is legitimate. the reborn of israel via un partition of palestine is recoqnized by majority of un members. BUTTT un partition is never being implemented. that's why un didnt recognize israeli conquest over arabs in the 2 wars coz it didnt allow israelis to build settlements in occupied territories. “The Occupying Power shall not deport or transfer parts of its own civilian population into the territory it occupies.” - Article 49 of the Fourth Geneva Convention of 1949.

 

So? You were (and apparentl still are) arguing that conquest confers legitimacy. By that reasoning Britain was the legitimate ruler of the Ottoman territory known as Palestine, and they gave it to israel. They could have given it to the Armenians or the Irish or the Maltese and it would have been equally legitimate if you consider that conquest confers legitimacy. israel has since, also by conquest, expanded its borders. If you are saying that Jews lost their right to israel when they were defeated by the Romans you also have to say the same for the Palestinians.

 

who is britain to give mideast to ###### tom harry? britain is for british, palestine for palestinians. right? israel is for israelis/jews butt it's lost to the romans as you've pointed out. palestinians/arabs lost to foreign jews/isralies ONLY AFTER un gave a part of palestine to foreign jews on a golden platter. that's un partition, remember? your reasoning is #### eye dude :sl:

Edited by tom

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
why only israel, pakistan and india wanna toss nuclear bombs? what if 15 others wanna nuke as well? no way the world gonna survive. it's surely gonna be end of civilization followed by doomsday and inevitably judgement day (for those who believe in it). regardless of doomsday, sooner or later it's gonna be from dust to dust. right?

 

Let me recap.

 

1. At post #94 you said that if a billion Muslims started a war against everyone else it would result in Doomsday.

 

2. I pointed out that Pakistan is the only Muslim nation with nuclear weapons, and it doesn't have long-range delivery systems. Thus its only target(unless it wants to nuke south-western China or a Muslim country) is India. A nuclear exchange between Pakistan and India (both of which have small numbers of small bombs and short-range delivery systems) would not come remotely close to causing Doomsday.

 

3. I further pointed out that even if israel became involved (unlikely as Pakistani nukes couldn't reach israel), the number of bombs exploded in israel's response would still be far too small to cause Doomsday.

 

4. ###### chimed in with his claim that because nuclear radiation can be deadly, ANY nuclear radiation - no matter how little - is deadly. I know that this isn't really worth responding to (I wonder if ###### has ever had an X-ray?) but hunting him down on his untruths is something I do.

 

I entirely agree that the number of nuclear weapons in the world is appalling and must be reduced. I entirely agree that if a very large number of the big bombs exploded, the planet would be in trouble. But I can't see a scenario where that might happen.

 

(Hey, I can edit now. Edited typo)

Edited by melliodora

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
besides britain PROMISED arabs nationalism (in 1916) if they helped to topple ottoman. it promised a state to foreign jews a year later in 1917. as you can see britian's fork tongue promises has led to land dispute between arabs/palestinians and foreign jews. read bbc article in post number 86.

 

So? You claim that conquest confers legitimacy, that might is right. The Ottoman Empire was conquered.

 

indeed britian n arabs' conquest over ottoman is legitimate. the reborn of israel via un partition of palestine is recoqnized by majority of un members. BUTTT un partition is never being implemented. that's why un didnt recognize israeli conquest over arabs in the 2 wars coz it didnt allow israelis to build settlements in occupied territories. “The Occupying Power shall not deport or transfer parts of its own civilian population into the territory it occupies.†- Article 49 of the Fourth Geneva Convention of 1949.

 

So now you are saying that conquest DOESN'T confer legitimacy. Make up your mind.

 

who is britain to give mideast to ###### tom harry? britain is for british, palestine for palestinians. right? israel is for israelis/jews butt it's lost to the romans as you've pointed out. palestinians/arabs lost to foreign jews/isralies ONLY AFTER un gave a part of palestine to foreign jews on a golden platter. that's un partition, remember? your reasoning is #### eye dude :sl:

 

It's simple. If you are saying that the Jews lost their right to israel because they were conquered by the Romans, you have to also agree that the Palestinians lost their right to Palestine when they were conquered by the Jews.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I entirely agree that the number of nuclear weapons in the world is appalling and must be reduced. I entirely agree that if a very large number of the big bombs exploded, the planet would be in trouble. But I can't see a scenario where that might happen.

 

let's talk donkey again. we dunno what the future holds for our generations. let's say there's gonna be one billion muslims uprising. muslims like christians, buddhists, hindus etc are scattered throughout the world. there are 18 (?) countries which have nuclear bombs - muslim, christian, buddhist (?), hindu, taoism (?) countries. these countries may support the muslims n some support the non muslims depending on the rationale for the uprising. inotherwords the whole world gonna be involved - for and against. hence there's the POSSIBILITY of the us and russia tossing nuke at each other or perhaps iran (?) and israel or perhaps north korea (?) and whoever. mother earth gonna be in trouble right? and it's gonna be aggravated by poorest, poorer, poor countries. right? doomsday definitely gonna be real IF and WHEN all wmd countries start shooting stars. :sl:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
let's talk donkey again. we dunno what the future holds for our generations. let's say there's gonna be one billion muslims uprising. muslims like christians, buddhists, hindus etc are scattered throughout the world. there are 18 (?) countries which have nuclear bombs - muslim, christian, buddhist (?), hindu, taoism (?) countries. these countries may support the muslims n some support the non muslims depending on the rationale for the uprising. inotherwords the whole world gonna be involved - for and against. hence there's the POSSIBILITY of the us and russia tossing nuke at each other or perhaps iran (?) and israel or perhaps north korea (?) and whoever. mother earth gonna be in trouble right? and it's gonna be aggravated by poorest, poorer, poor countries. right? doomsday definitely gonna be real IF and WHEN all wmd countries start shooting stars. :sl:

 

AFAIK there are only 8 countries with nuclear weapons:

 

USA

Russia

China

France

UK

Pakistan

India

israel

 

Of these, only China, Russia and the US have the means to deliver nukes worldwide (ballistic missiles, long-range heavy bombers). The UK's Polaris submarines could get most places, but the UK cannot use its nukes without US permission. And of these only the US, Russia and China have big enough arsenals of big enough bombs to do catastrophic damage to the planet.

 

I really cannot imagine a scenario where the US, Russia and China would start nuking each other because of a Muslim uprising. All three coutries are currently fighting Muslim uprisings!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So? You claim that conquest confers legitimacy, that might is right. The Ottoman Empire was conquered.

 

So now you are saying that conquest (israel vs occupied territories) DOESN'T confer legitimacy. Make up your mind.

 

It's simple. If you are saying that the Jews lost their right to israel because they were conquered by the Romans, you have to also agree that the Palestinians lost their right to Palestine when they were conquered by the Jews.

 

let me rewind in simpler words for you to comprehend more easily. british and arabs won the war against ottoman hence palestine belongs to the arabs since they are the legitimate conqueror. palestine does not belong to britain although it took part in the war against ottoman. you know why? coz palestine is for palestinians be they arabs (muslims and christians), local jews (not foreign jews) etc while britain is for british. britian's presence then in mideast was as a colonialist.

 

now let's focus on foreign jews - they're given a part of palestine (via un partition) to be called israel. half of palestine is called israel and the half remains as palestine. take note that britain and arabs are not given a part of ottoman empire to be called arab countries or palestine UNLIKE foreign jews. hence the war between ottoman and britain/arabs are legitimate while the wars between arabs and israel over that part of palestine that remains under palestinians (ie occupied territories) are NOT legitimate. that's why un comes with this warning - “The Occupying Power shall not deport or transfer parts of its own civilian population into the territory it occupies.†- Article 49 of the Fourth Geneva Convention of 1949..

 

as you can see foreign jews' conquest over occupied territories is NOT legitimate under geneva convention 1949. still refuse to comprehend? :sl:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
That's a really crummy argument. The Ottoman Empire lost Palestine to the British. If you think that conquest confers legitimacy, then israel is legitimate.

 

ottoman empire lost palestine to british AND arabs. why are you fearful of this HARDfact? and indeed this conquest by british AND arabs is legitimate coz they're not given a part of ottoman empire before the war began unlike foreign jews.

 

israeli conquest in occupied territories is NOT legitimate coz foreign jews never fought with the british and arabs to get palestine per se. un gave a part of palestine to be called israel and it's not for israelis to lust for the remaining part of palestine. take note of - The Occupying Power shall not deport or transfer parts of its own civilian population into the territory it occupies.†- Article 49 of the Fourth Geneva Convention of 1949..

 

still refuse to understand? why? :sl:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I agree (and it seems that Obama is already delivering), except that I doubt that the extremist settlers will ever want to withdraw, nor that the extremist Islamists will want israel to exist. Somehow the majority of israelis will have to vote for a government which will force the extremists to withdraw, and somehow the majority of Palestinians (and - just as important - their militant backers) have to agree to allow a negotiated settlement. The former will be very difficult - the latter seems impossible.

 

A settlement agreed to by all parties.

 

what's your idea of a negotiated settlement or a settlement agreed to by both israelis and palestinians? :sl:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
what's your idea of a negotiated settlement or a settlement agreed to by both israelis and palestinians? :sl:

 

I personally can't think of one. Neither side seems particularly sane.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
AFAIK there are only 8 countries with nuclear weapons:

 

USA

Russia

China

France

UK

Pakistan

India

israel

 

Of these, only China, Russia and the US have the means to deliver nukes worldwide (ballistic missiles, long-range heavy bombers). The UK's Polaris submarines could get most places, but the UK cannot use its nukes without US permission. And of these only the US, Russia and China have big enough arsenals of big enough bombs to do catastrophic damage to the planet.

 

I really cannot imagine a scenario where the US, Russia and China would start nuking each other because of a Muslim uprising. All three coutries are currently fighting Muslim uprisings!

 

where are these muslim uprisings currently fought by the us, russia and china?

 

take note i'm talking donkey about one billion muslim uprising all over the world. and i'm talking donkey about 16 not oops 18 countries that have nuclear weapons.

 

from wikipedia - five nuclear weapons states from the NPT - the us, russia, uk, france, china.

other known nuclear powers - india, pakistan, north korea.

undeclared nuclear weapons state - israel.

states alleged to have nuclear weapons programs - iran and syria

Nuclear weapons sharing - belgium, germany, italy, netherlands, turkey.

 

IF and WHEN all these countries are involved in nuclear war between muslims and non muslims, there's gonna be doomsday. you refused to digest this possibility? so be it. :sl:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I personally can't think of one. Neither side seems particularly sane.

 

well, israel is more insane than palestinians coz it bulldozes through like crazy its illegal jewish settlements, illegal outposts, illegal idf posts, illegal demolition of palestinian homes and orchards in occupied terrirories, illegal annexation of east jerusalem, fanatic marching in arab majority town in israel, insane shooting of innocent palestinians in the recent gaza war etc. and you expect palestinians to bow wow reverently to their israeli terrorists and not to (hamas) fire rockets into israel or become suicide bombers etc. rats. :sl:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
where are these muslim uprisings currently fought by the us, russia and china?

 

Iraq, Afghanistan, Chechnya (sp?), China. I'm not saying anyting about the rights and wrongs of these situations, I'm pointing out that it is highly unlikely that in the event of a worldwide Muslim uprising, China, Russia and USA would find themselves on opposite sides.

 

from wikipedia - five nuclear weapons states from the NPT - the us, russia, uk, france, china.

other known nuclear powers - india, pakistan, north korea.

undeclared nuclear weapons state - israel.

states alleged to have nuclear weapons programs - iran and syria

Nuclear weapons sharing - belgium, germany, italy, netherlands, turkey.

 

North Korea claims to have nuclear weapons but it is uncertain. 'Nuclear weapons sharing' does not mean control of nuclear weapons. Belgium cannot decide to nuke London, for example. Having a 'nuclear weapons programme' does not mean that they have nuclear weapons - in this context it means the opposite.

 

IF and WHEN all these countries are involved in nuclear war between muslims and non muslims, there's gonna be doomsday. you refused to digest this possibility? so be it. :sl:

 

Again, why would it be Doomsday? Under what scenario would fighting Muslims mean Russia, China and the USA using nukes against each other? They are currently all fighting (or oppressing if you like) Muslims.

 

I repeat for at least the third time - the only Muslim country with nukes is Pakistan, and Pakistan only has the ability to attack India, China, Afghanistan or Iran. It only has a small number of small bombs. If it was stupid enough to drop a bomb on south-western China (where there would be a lot of Muslim casualties, by the way), China might obliterate Islamabad/Rawalpindi and Karachi. End of story. If Iran or Syria got nukes(which israel is unlikely to permit) and obliterated Tel Aviv, a nuke on Damascus or Teheran would be the end of it. None of these events are remotely enough for Doomsday.

 

Even if there was a worldwide Muslim uprising (and I really cannot believe that it could happen) it would be a disaster for Muslims (the Ummah would shrink dramatically - maybe by 50% - and Mecca would probably be destroyed) and a smaller disaster for everyone else, but the chance of it causing large-scale nuclear exchanges even more unlikely. What it would be good for is capitalist economies.

 

I agree that there are too many nuclear weapons and that they present a danger to the planet

Edited by melliodora

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
well, israel is more insane than palestinians coz it bulldozes through like crazy its illegal jewish settlements, illegal outposts, illegal idf posts, illegal demolition of palestinian homes and orchards in occupied terrirories, illegal annexation of east jerusalem, fanatic marching in arab majority town in israel, insane shooting of innocent palestinians in the recent gaza war etc. and you expect palestinians to bow wow reverently to their israeli terrorists and not to (hamas) fire rockets into israel or become suicide bombers etc. rats. :sl:

 

Given that firing rockets and using suicide bombers against civilians is not "fighting back" (it achieves nothing except retaliation) but crude revenge, I think each side is equally insane. However, no matter which side is saner, I don't think there's much hope of a negotiated settlement.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

Sign in to follow this  

×