Originally Posted by CarlosTheGaucho

I am strongly the meaning that we have no business in any land under Islamic rule apart from trade (and this trade should be consumer oriented, not selling own strategical assets or guns - wishful thinking I know).

However, if you were to judge an ideology based on its doctrine (and not based on the followers who often in fact don't follow its doctrine at all, especially in the West) I'd even go as far as to state that Islam equally has no place in lands that are not ruled by it.

There is one principal reason, this ideology has a very strong political part, a total solution not only for its followers, but for the whole world. More than half of its doctrine is not about how to be a follower of Islam, but about how to plot against those that don't follow it, and how to spread Islam in power and numbers, until its reign is absolute.

Based on the history and its doctrine, the nature of Islam is not to come and co-exist. The purpose of Islamic migration (hijra - migration in the name of Allah) which has a massive importance in Islam (after all the Islamic calendar doesn't start with the birth of Muhammad or with his first revelation - 622 AD is the year of Hijra, after he migrated to Medina and started the process of taking over) is different. The purpose is to eventually take over, no matter if by force or by entering the political process. And it doesn't matter how long it takes, in some countries, such as Anatollya (today's Turkey that used to be exclusively Christian) it took centuries to get to the point where Turkey is today 99.7 pct. Islamic. Such is the strength of the doctrine.

There is no land in history that Islam ever entered that would become post-Islamic, unless using brute force (reconquista in Spain, to some extent also parts of Eastern Europe eventually liberating itself from the rule of Ottoman Empire). Up until the 1950's or so, it has been common sense that Islam is pretty much incompatible with any secular, democratic, in fact any non-Islamic society. What has changed ever since? Certainly not Islam.

Today - the official policy on the West is appeasement, certain "sensitive" type of crime is not reported about, Islam can't be critically discussed in public, stating any facts that are negative towards Islam can as much as land you in jail in some western countries (more than 200 years after we get rid of blasphemy laws related to our own Church), make you lose a job or business. This is a true recipe for disaster, and if there ever is a backlash (and there will be eventually if nothing changes) it may as well be much more due to these policies of appeasement, censorship and "religious" and political prosecution then due to any "-phobia".

One can note that one of the major principles of Sha'ria after Islam enters a Kaffir (non-Islamic) civilization is to establish the command over the Kuffir and make them submit to Islamic requests. So far, many governments, businesses and organizations in the West certainly are very good at that.

The principal issue, there is an ideology that wants to spread their influence and eventually win, but we just want to tie - get along.



Certainly know a few people of Turkish or Middle Eastern descent who may technically qualify as Muslim, but show absolutely no signs of being a follower of Islam. The only thing they want is to get on with their lives, they may be as "western" as you and me.

For sure this is a very pitiful and unwanted thing if people fear or avoid them. But what is also important to understand - these so called moderates and secular guys who simply want to get on with their lives, maybe have affection for their secular country and neighbors, would likely also be the first victims if Islam ever gains enough power.

Islam is an authoritative system, there is only one choice - to submit, there's no space for personal choice, under Islamic rule, these so called moderates can be very easily pronounced Takfir (Muslims that don't follow the doctrine and can be treated as Kaffir) and treated as such.



The principal issue is that the Jihadis not only "think" they are supremacist, the ideology that is supposed to control their lives, and that is supposed to be "the word of god" and a "perfect, final and universal" ideology for the whole world, dictates it. That is the core, systemic issue.

Islam + natural primitiveness it encourages or the opposite, Islam + smarts and being able to use it to control masses (such as its "prophet" did), leads to horrendous results as we can see throughout the history, all across the Islamic lands and today even across the Islamic communities in the west.

I believe that the only thing that can end this is not appeasement, but a thorough education about what Islam is and confronting it ideologically. Not only among those outside of it, but also those "moderates" who often also know very little about it. If there ever will be one thing that will defeat Islam, it will be critical thought. One should also know which principles he wants to live by and where are the borders of what such principles allow and what not.

By the way, and this illustrates it well - one of the Shar'ia principles is that "no criticism of Islam is ever allowed" - if there is one thing that threatens the existence of Islam - it is criticism and critical thought. It's not a coincidence that so called "hate speech laws" were first brought up in UN by the Soviet Union in 1948 and then by OIC (Organization of Islamic Cooperation) in 1999 - totality always has to censor speech and prosecute those that criticize it in order to stay in power.