-
01-08-07, 05:33 PM #1Registered Senior Member
- Posts
- 44
Racial holy war against blacks
I'm talking ofcourse about the sunni arab genocidal jihad against black christians in Sudan.
http://www.csmonitor.com/2004/0714/p09s02-coop.html
The inimitable War Nerd on the conflict,President Omar Bashir and his fundamentalist Islamic government declared a holy war against African groups in the south - the Dinka, Nuba, and Neur peoples. More than 2 million people have been decimated, millions more have been internally displaced, and hordes have been exiled.
http://www.exile.ru/2004-May-27/war_nerd.html
And with a lot of cash help from those Wahabbi morons in Saudi Arabia, who fund the whole miserable war, they're winning. The Northerners already starved and bombed the Dinka into surrender, and they're using the same tactics on the Fur right now.
-
01-08-07, 06:25 PM #2Registered Senior Member
- Posts
- 23,053
I wonder what we're supposed to say about that? I mean, what are you seeking Sepulchrave? Should I say, "Geez, that's too bad."?
Baron Max
-
01-09-07, 12:03 AM #3Banned
- Posts
- 33
you call islamic jihad "holy"?
-
01-09-07, 12:50 AM #4
The concept of "jihad" is not limited to violent action. Look it up, MySpace.
-
01-09-07, 01:11 AM #5Banned
- Posts
- 33
It sure starts from ideological points no question, but I was referring to the action part, especially in relation to Sudan genocide of millions of victims.
To Stop Sudan's Brutal Jihad, Support Sudan's Opposition, Sudan's radical Islamic regime has created one of the world's worst human rights situations and one of its largest humanitarian crises.
http://www.heritage.org/Research/Africa/BG1449.cfm
-
01-09-07, 01:28 AM #6
http://the-american-interest.com/contd/?p=577
More:The current Darfur conflict was not started by the government in Khartoum; it was started by Darfur rebel groups that were inspired by the SPLA’s achievements in 2005. They represent the same ethnic group—indeed, the same tribe—as the one in power in neighboring Chad, and if African borders were drawn rationally to represent underlying ethnic and tribal realities, Darfur should be part of Chad and not Sudan.
The root of so many of Africa’s contemporary problems is that it has inherited a state structure from European colonialism that makes no sense, leaving states that are either too large and diverse, like Sudan, or ones that are too small to be viable, like those in the Sahel. The norm since independence has been to respect the sanctity of existing borders, supported both by the African elites that inherited those political entities, and by the international community.
Americans and Europeans conveniently forget that their own state-building process was accompanied by a huge amount of violence, involving massive changes of borders: the thirteen colonies didn’t belong in the British empire; Texas and California didn’t belong in Mexico; Europe went from over 300 separate sovereign entities at the end of the Middle Ages to less than 30 by the beginning of the 20th century, accompanied by a huge amount of ethnic cleansing as Germans, Poles, Czechs, Ukrainians, and others were pushed or pulled into more ethnically homogenous states. Europe and America are at the end of a long, painful state-building and state-consolidation process, while Africa is just at the beginning, and yet the West pretends that African states have the same sanctity as their own.
We of course want Africa to avoid the bloodshed that other parts of the world suffered in the state-building process, but we offer them only the freezing of the existing status quo and no route to the creation of more viable states with more rational borders. The ceasefire that Bob Zoellick negotiated last May was yet another example of this: it did not address the larger question of Sudanese sovereignty over Darfur, and was rejected not by the Sudanese government, but by two of the three Darfurian rebel groups. It has broken down not simply because of recalcitrance in Khartoum, but because it did not meet the political demands of the Darfurian rebels.
http://www.sciforums.com/showpost.ph...63&postcount=8
-
01-09-07, 02:15 AM #7
-
01-09-07, 03:36 AM #8Humans are ONE
- Posts
- 3,372
Makes about as much sense as anything else that happens in North Africa.
-
01-09-07, 05:01 AM #9Humans are ONE
- Posts
- 3,372
-
01-09-07, 06:56 AM #10Banned
- Posts
- 6,618
The slaughter of Christians and animists by the Muslim government in southern Sudan has been ongoing for over a decade, shame on the whole world for doing nothing.
It's the "peaceful religion," Islam, which is commanding these people to convert to Islam or die, nice folks.
-
01-09-07, 07:03 AM #11Registered Senior Member
- Posts
- 23,053
-
01-09-07, 07:06 AM #12Humans are ONE
- Posts
- 3,372
A lot of the people getting killed are African Muslims, so I don't think the religion angle counts for much.
However, despite Sam's pic, I've heard that the soldiers use a lot of ethnic, if not racist, slurs. Nazism saw Poles as an inferior race even though they had the same skin colour as Germans, so both sides being 'black' doesn't mean there isn't some tribal hatred between them.
-
01-09-07, 07:07 AM #13
-
01-09-07, 07:27 AM #14Registered Senior Member
- Posts
- 44
-
01-09-07, 07:31 AM #15Humans are ONE
- Posts
- 3,372
And 'black' Muslims.
-
01-09-07, 07:32 AM #16Immortalist
- Posts
- 3,023
I don't think race has much to do with it. I think it's the same war that these arab islamist extremists wage against Europeans, and Americans, and anyone else.
I think in this situation, Somolia is involved in fighting the same enemy everyone else is fighting, islamic terrorists. So lets support the Christians and push the arab extremists out of Africa, before Africa becomes radicalist and extreme too.
-
01-09-07, 07:37 AM #17Immortalist
- Posts
- 3,023
Race is not what it's about, it's about tribe. Like I said all along, race was never about skin color, whites and blacks have different races because white and black are not races.
Arab, is at best a mixed race, because there are dark Arabs and pale Arabs, so according to American skin race standards they are mixed, however as a culure they are distinct. Africa, is mostly muslim, thats just how the place is, but the extremists know this and want to radicalize the African muslims into terrorists. This must be stopped.
It's not in America or Africas best interest to have radical terrorist training camps. If people in Africa want to be muslim, it must be of the moderate kind.
I'm not sure what the war in Somolia is about, but it seems to be a religious war, not a "race" war, because race is a very American black and white idea that the majority of the world does not follow. In Africa there are tribes, races, and they might all look the same to you, but they know the differences.
Just like to a lot of Americans think all Asians look the same, but they know the differences. The situation in Africa is being handled, and as long as American troops are not involved, it's better for America.
-
01-09-07, 07:39 AM #18Banned
- Posts
- 6,618
Why would the Sundanese government kill black Muslims when the black Muslims are on their side?
-
01-09-07, 07:40 AM #19Immortalist
- Posts
- 3,023
Islam is as peaceful as Christianity. It's not important what religion people have, it's most important to know who the extremists are. Most Muslims are not terrorists just like most Christians are not and were not part of the inquisition.
How do you know "black" Muslims are on the Sudans side? How do you come to these conclusion that the sudan would choose either side? What if the Sudan is on the Sudans side?would the Sundanese government kill black Muslims when the black Muslims are on their side?
-
01-09-07, 07:40 AM #20Banned
- Posts
- 6,618
The "moderate kind" of Islam is the kind where the reader of the Koran doesn't follow the plain instructions on how to deal with "infidels."

Reply With Quote

Bookmarks