PDA

View Full Version : Islamist burn churches in Nigeria



Peter1469
10-07-2014, 05:31 PM
Islamist burn churches in Nigeria (http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/nigeria-boko-haram-torch-185-churches-captured-towns-borno-adamawa-1468763)

Jihadists are running amok in Nigeria. Burning churches- much of the violence in sub-Sahara Africa is Muslim on Christian action.


A prominent Nigerian reverend has revealed Islamist terror group Boko Haram destroyed over 180 churches in the West African country following its capture of towns and villages in the north-eastern states of Borno and Adamawa.


Reverend Gideon Obasogie, the director of Catholic Social Communication of Maiduguri Diocese in Borno State, said the group's seizure of territory in both states has seen 185 churches torched and over 190,000 people displaced by their insurgency.


In his statement, Obasogie said Boko Haram's "ransacking and torching" of churches had forced priests to leave their homes for two months while displaced civilians were still unable to return to their towns and villages.

Private Pickle
10-07-2014, 05:33 PM
Islamist burn churches in Nigeria (http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/nigeria-boko-haram-torch-185-churches-captured-towns-borno-adamawa-1468763)

Jihadists are running amok in Nigeria. Burning churches- much of the violence in sub-Sahara Africa is Muslim on Christian action.

They would find another reason to slaughter each other if not for religion. Have been for thousands of years.

Mister D
10-07-2014, 05:45 PM
They would find another reason to slaughter each other if not for religion. Have been for thousands of years.

no, they haven't. Certainly not more than anyone else.

Private Pickle
10-07-2014, 08:35 PM
no, they haven't. Certainly not more than anyone else.

Hahaha seriously? They fight over goat grazing...

Mister D
10-07-2014, 08:37 PM
Hahaha seriously? They fight over goat grazing...

Yes, seriously. Europeans fought all the time. African society has been no more violent than any other.

Private Pickle
10-07-2014, 08:43 PM
Yes, seriously. Europeans fought all the time. African society has been no more violent than any other.

What exactly are you basing this on? Given of course the multiple genocides that have occurred there in the last 3 decades.

Mister D
10-07-2014, 08:48 PM
What exactly are you basing this on? Given of course the multiple genocides that have occurred there in the last 3 decades.

The developed world just fought two catastrophic world wars and helped fuel proxy wars all over the world after 1945. What are you basing your assertion on? Is Africa more violent today? Of course. Has that always been the case? Hardly.

Peter1469
10-07-2014, 08:49 PM
What exactly are you basing this on? Given of course the multiple genocides that have occurred there in the last 3 decades.

Europe fought constantly from the fall of Rome until the end of WWII, with very brief rest periods.

Private Pickle
10-07-2014, 09:06 PM
The developed world just fought two catastrophic world wars and helped fuel proxy wars all over the world after 1945. What are you basing your assertion on? Is Africa more violent today? Of course. Has that always been the case? Hardly.

So you jumped into a comparison without acknowledging the question. Do you think they were a peaceable people before the appearance of the white man? Do you think Native Americans were peaceable?

Private Pickle
10-07-2014, 09:07 PM
Europe fought constantly from the fall of Rome until the end of WWII, with very brief rest periods.

Care to not issue a red herring? You can focus on the question. I believe in you.

Peter1469
10-08-2014, 04:27 AM
Care to not issue a red herring? You can focus on the question. I believe in you.

Do you know what a red herring is?

Mister D
10-08-2014, 07:49 AM
So you jumped into a comparison without acknowledging the question. Do you think they were a peaceable people before the appearance of the white man? Do you think Native Americans were peaceable?

No. Neither were the Europeans.

nathanbforrest45
10-08-2014, 08:09 AM
Do you know what a red herring is?


A communist fish?

Captain Obvious
10-08-2014, 08:11 AM
A communist fish?

A hooker after a gangbang actually

Private Pickle
10-08-2014, 08:22 AM
Do you know what a red herring is?

Another one.

Private Pickle
10-08-2014, 08:23 AM
No. Neither were the Europeans.

You keep comparing them to the Euros. While this may make you morally feel good it has nothing to do with my question.

Mister D
10-08-2014, 08:27 AM
You keep comparing them to the Euros. While this may make you morally feel good it has nothing to do with my question.

It has nothing to do with morals. Just accuracy and reason.

Private Pickle
10-08-2014, 08:28 AM
It has nothing to do with morals. Just accuracy and reason.

What reason? It's off topic... Aren't we talking Africans here?

Mister D
10-08-2014, 08:31 AM
What reason? It's off topic... Aren't we talking Africans here?

Reason as in rationality. There is no reason to believe African society is inherently more violent. If there is, present your case.

Private Pickle
10-08-2014, 08:35 AM
Reason as in rationality. There is no reason to believe African society is inherently more violent. If there is, present your case.

I've already pointed to multiple genocides in the last few decades and you pointed to the Euros.

Private Pickle
10-08-2014, 08:36 AM
Do you know what a red herring is?

Something meant to be distracting or misleading.... Did you know that?

Mister D
10-08-2014, 08:42 AM
I've already pointed to multiple genocides in the last few decades and you pointed to the Euros.

I pointed to the European genocides of the 1930s and 1940s as well as the plethora of proxy wars fueled by European powers throughout the post war period. Persumably, your contention is that African society is inherently more violent, right? If so, how do you explain the frequent violence in Europe and elsewhere?

Private Pickle
10-08-2014, 08:48 AM
I pointed to the European genocides of the 1930s and 1940s as well as the plethora of proxy wars fueled by European powers throughout the post war period. Persumably, your contention is that African society is inherently more violent, right? If so, how do you explain the frequent violence in Europe and elsewhere?

No D! That was your contention not mine. I just said they have been slaughtering each other for thousands of years. You're the one who said "no more than the Euros".

Now. If you would like to compare Europe with Africa I'm sure that I can accommodate. Would you like to start with big conflicts or simple violence and or crime?

Mister D
10-08-2014, 08:51 AM
No D! That was your contention not mine. I just said they have been slaughtering each other for thousands of years. You're the one who said "no more than the Euros".

Now. If you would like to compare Europe with Africa I'm sure that I can accommodate. Would you like to start with big conflicts or simple violence and or crime?

Lets assume for the sake of argument that they have been "slaughtering each other for thousands of years". OK? Now what makes them different than anyone else? Why point that out?

Private Pickle
10-08-2014, 08:55 AM
Lets assume for the sake of argument that they have been "slaughtering each other for thousands of years". OK? Now what makes them different than anyone else? Why point that out?

Can you please go back an read the thread? I stated that religion is just another excuse to kill each other given they have been killing each other...in droves...for thousands of years.

You then instantly pointed to the holocaust as if that was an applicable response....which it wasn't...

Mister D
10-08-2014, 08:59 AM
Can you please go back an read the thread? I stated that religion is just another excuse to kill each other given they have been killing each other...in droves...for thousands of years.

You then instantly pointed to the holocaust as if that was an applicable response....which it wasn't...

So there really isn't any difference between them and everyone else, right? If not, then we agree.

Private Pickle
10-08-2014, 09:01 AM
So there really isn't any difference between them and everyone else, right? If not, then we agree.

Oh is this a race discussion or a discussion on African history and violence or African vs. European civilization?

I think the differences are pretty obvious D.

Mister D
10-08-2014, 09:03 AM
Oh is this a race discussion or a discussion on African history and violence or African vs. European civilization?

I think the differences are pretty obvious D.

So you do think African society is inherently more violent. OK then. Now how do you explain the frequent violence, genocides, etc. in Europe? In fact, the most recent example was in the 1990s.

Pickle, what exactly is your point?

Private Pickle
10-08-2014, 09:12 AM
So you do think African society is inherently more violent. OK then. Now how do you explain the frequent violence, genocides, etc. in Europe? In fact, the most recent example was in the 1990s.

"Inherently more violent". Your words...not mine...

Did you know there are examples of genocide in Africa today?


Pickle, what exactly is your point?

They have been slaughtering each other for thousands of years...regardless of religion...

Mister D
10-08-2014, 09:16 AM
"Inherently more violent". Your words...not mine...

Did you know there are examples of genocide in Africa today?



They have been slaughtering each other for thousands of years...regardless of religion...

Sigh...

Yes, I know there are examples of genocide in Africa today. I already said that.

OK so they have been have been "slaughtering each other for thousands of years regardless of religion". Now..are ready? I want you to explain exactly what makes their situation different. Please get to the point.

Private Pickle
10-08-2014, 09:47 AM
Sigh...

Yes, I know there are examples of genocide in Africa today. I already said that.

OK so they have been have been "slaughtering each other for thousands of years regardless of religion". Now..are ready? I want you to explain exactly what makes their situation different. Please get to the point.

Different than what? I never made a comparison...you did that... Why don't you explain how they are different given it's your assertion and I will tell you how you're wrong.

Mister D
10-08-2014, 09:58 AM
Different than what? I never made a comparison...you did that... Why don't you explain how they are different given it's your assertion and I will tell you how you're wrong.

So we agree that everyone has been slaughtering each other for thousands of years? Good. We're done here.

Private Pickle
10-08-2014, 10:00 AM
So we agree that everyone has been slaughtering each other for thousands of years? Good. We're done here.

Did you even start here? Yes. All humans are violent however; Africa has constantly warring tribes and factions...Europe doesn't...

:huh:

Mister D
10-08-2014, 10:02 AM
Did you even start here? Yes. All humans are violent however; Africa has constantly warring tribes and factions...Europe doesn't...

:huh:

yes, today. Now if we looked at Africa and Europe say in 1943 what society woudl we say is more violent? Right. We're done here.

Captain Obvious
10-08-2014, 10:03 AM
Did you even start here? Yes. All humans are violent however; Africa has constantly warring tribes and factions...Europe doesn't...

:huh:

You sure about that?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EM4vblG6BVQ

Private Pickle
10-08-2014, 10:04 AM
yes, today. Now if we looked at Africa and Europe say in 1943 what society woudl we say is more violent? Right. We're done here.

Well I think you are off here. Just because Europe and the US have better technology to kill each other with and just because we kill more of each other during specific points in history doesn't mean we are more or less violent than Africans.

Are you sure we're done here? You keep saying that but I don't think it means what you think it means.

Private Pickle
10-08-2014, 10:06 AM
You sure about that?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EM4vblG6BVQ

Yeah man...pretty sure...

You guys may be struck by pockets of European violence because well...you're European and you watch Western media... But that kind of shit happens on a DAILY basis in Africa and it only hits the news when some actor or activist group makes it so...

Mister D
10-08-2014, 10:08 AM
Well I think you are off here. Just because Europe and the US have better technology to kill each other with and just because we kill more of each other during specific points in history doesn't mean we are more or less violent than Africans.

Are you sure we're done here? You keep saying that but I don't think it means what you think it means.

I didn't say we were more or less violent. That seems to be your thing which you run away from...then come back to...then run away from.

yes, we're done. This is getting boring.

Private Pickle
10-08-2014, 10:11 AM
I didn't say we were more or less violent. That seems to be your thing which you run away from...then come back to...then run away from.

yes, we're done. This is getting boring.

You made the initial comparison D. I simply finished off my point and started in on your indefensible tangent that there is no difference in the level of violence between Europeans and Africans.

Cya.

Polecat
10-08-2014, 10:17 AM
Before colonial intrusion into Africa most of the continent was primitive. There was no civilized society to speak of away from the Nile and the Mediterranean. Tribal skirmishes hardly compare to what is happening there now. Ironically it is one introduced religion persecuting another introduces religion.

Private Pickle
10-08-2014, 10:18 AM
Before colonial intrusion into Africa most of the continent was primitive. There was no civilized society to speak of away from the Nile and the Mediterranean. Tribal skirmishes hardly compare to what is happening there now. Ironically it is one introduced religion persecuting another introduces religion.

There have been tribal genocides there since the dawn of man...

Primitive =/= Peaceful

As a matter of fact often times primitive = barbaric.

Common Sense
10-08-2014, 10:23 AM
Throughout the history of man every continent has seen war and genocide. Europe may have had a 60 year relatively quiet spell, but that's a blip in time.

In regards to violence in Africa, some of that is due to cultural or religious clashes and some of it has to do with the residual effect of colonialism. Rwanda was a direct result of colonialism.

But no one has been better at waring than the Europeans. Maybe the Asians.

The only continent that was spared was Antarctica...

Common Sense
10-08-2014, 10:31 AM
Before colonial intrusion into Africa most of the continent was primitive. There was no civilized society to speak of away from the Nile and the Mediterranean. Tribal skirmishes hardly compare to what is happening there now. Ironically it is one introduced religion persecuting another introduces religion.

Well, that's not entirely true. There were plenty of kingdoms, cities etc... From the ancient Ethiopians, Somalian city states, the Kanem empire, Mapungubwe in south Africa to Namibia. There were actually plenty of ancient civilizations throughout Africa. But introduction of western and eastern religion certainly didn't help them. Redrawing their borders was probably worse.

Polecat
10-08-2014, 10:38 AM
There have been tribal genocides there since the dawn of man...

Primitive =/= Peaceful

As a matter of fact often times primitive = barbaric.

I disagree with that. Genocide would not have been possible given the population density. I never claimed that primitive = peaceful. When the need arose I am sure that they took up arms. But it was for practical reasons like defending/acquiring resources. There wasn't any ideological or political motivation to warrant building an empire. That is why there weren't any.

Private Pickle
10-08-2014, 10:38 AM
Throughout the history of man every continent has seen war and genocide. Europe may have had a 60 year relatively quiet spell, but that's a blip in time.

In regards to violence in Africa, some of that is due to cultural or religious clashes and some of it has to do with the residual effect of colonialism. Rwanda was a direct result of colonialism.

But no one has been better at waring than the Europeans. Maybe the Asians.

The only continent that was spared was Antarctica...

Being better at war doesn't necessarily make one more or less violent. I tend to believe the disjointed and fractured nature of African nations combined with rampant corruption and a lack of resources causes the over-abundant and constant violence.

Polecat
10-08-2014, 10:40 AM
Well, that's not entirely true. There were plenty of kingdoms, cities etc... From the ancient Ethiopians, Somalian city states, the Kanem empire, Mapungubwe in south Africa to Namibia. There were actually plenty of ancient civilizations throughout Africa. But introduction of western and eastern religion certainly didn't help them. Redrawing their borders was probably worse.
Coastal areas and along the Nile. There are no ancient ruins in the heart of the continent.

Private Pickle
10-08-2014, 10:42 AM
I disagree with that. Genocide would not have been possible given the population density. I never claimed that primitive = peaceful. When the need arose I am sure that they took up arms. But it was for practical reasons like defending/acquiring resources. There wasn't any ideological or political motivation to warrant building an empire. That is why there weren't any.

That was my original point. That they don't need Religion as an excuse given they have been doing it for thousands of years for more noble causes like food.

Genocide is genocide. When you kill off an entire tribe for their resources it's still genocide and it is still happening there year after year.

Polecat
10-08-2014, 10:50 AM
That was my original point. That they don't need Religion as an excuse given they have been doing it for thousands of years for more noble causes like food.

Genocide is genocide. When you kill off an entire tribe for their resources it's still genocide and it is still happening there year after year.

You are using the word genocide which is why I disagreed in the first place. We obviously interpret the word differently. Tribes were related to each other. The women and children were taken as spoil. They were not trying to cleanse a race (or any other label) off the face of the planet.

Private Pickle
10-08-2014, 10:59 AM
You are using the word genocide which is why I disagreed in the first place. We obviously interpret the word differently. Tribes were related to each other. The women and children were taken as spoil. They were not trying to cleanse a race (or any other label) off the face of the planet.

If a tribe is related then it is part of the overall tribe. Tribes and Ethnic groups in Africa consists of tens of thousands and sometimes millions of people. There are literally thousands of different ethnic groups in Africa and they have fought each other, sometimes to the extincition of a group for thousands of years.

Common Sense
10-08-2014, 11:02 AM
Coastal areas and along the Nile. There are no ancient ruins in the heart of the continent.

That's not true at all. Much of them are probably lost to the jungle, but there are many that have been found.

https://www.google.com/maps/d/viewer?msa=0&mid=zlY48eTMIq2I.kuisANP8A4ok

Common Sense
10-08-2014, 11:06 AM
That was my original point. That they don't need Religion as an excuse given they have been doing it for thousands of years for more noble causes like food.

Genocide is genocide. When you kill off an entire tribe for their resources it's still genocide and it is still happening there year after year.

Certainly there has always been war, but the impact of colonialism has had a huge impact. Almost every major genocide of the 20th century can be partially attributed to European involvement.

Private Pickle
10-08-2014, 11:20 AM
Certainly there has always been war, but the impact of colonialism has had a huge impact. Almost every major genocide of the 20th century can be partially attributed to European involvement.

The idea that anyone...from the Africans to the Native Americans...were a peacible people before the appearance of the white man is a joke...

Common Sense
10-08-2014, 11:32 AM
The idea that anyone...from the Africans to the Native Americans...were a peacible people before the appearance of the white man is a joke...

I don't think anyone is saying that.

There were some peaceful societies. But yes, war and violence have been a constant everywhere throughout history. All I am saying is that colonization and particularly post colonization had a violent impact on Africa.

Mac-7
10-08-2014, 11:43 AM
Certainly there has always been war, but the impact of colonialism has had a huge impact. Almost every major genocide of the 20th century can be partially attributed to European involvement.

Africans slaughter other Africans and that is white people's fault?

thats insane logic that barely qualifies as logic.

Polecat
10-08-2014, 11:46 AM
Africans slaughter other Africans and that is white people's fault?

thats insane logic that barely qualifies as logic.

Nobody said that but you.

Common Sense
10-08-2014, 11:48 AM
Africans slaughter other Africans and that is white people's fault?

thats insane logic that barely qualifies as logic.

I don't blame you for jumping to that retarded conclusion. However if you had a grasp of history, particularly the history of colonization, you wouldn't ask that simplistic question.

Do yourself a favor and read up on how the genocide in Rwanda came about.

Mac-7
10-08-2014, 11:51 AM
I don't blame you for jumping to that retarded conclusion. However if you had a grasp of history, particularly the history of colonization, you wouldn't ask that simplistic question.

Do yourself a favor and read up on how the genocide in Rwanda came about.


You are are attempting to shift blame for black African savagery onto the backs of white euros.

Mister D
10-08-2014, 11:53 AM
I don't blame you for jumping to that retarded conclusion. However if you had a grasp of history, particularly the history of colonization, you wouldn't ask that simplistic question.

Do yourself a favor and read up on how the genocide in Rwanda came about.

It came about because the government of Rwanda whipped up hysteria, prepared the population psychologically for genocide, and even went so far as to fly in extra machetes. It was hardly the spontaneous outburst of ethnic hatred the western misperception.

Common Sense
10-08-2014, 11:55 AM
You are are attempting to shift blame for black African savagery onto the backs of white euros.

I'm attempting to reveal the facts.

Stop sounding like someone who is ignorant and do yourself a favor. Take 30 minutes out of your day and get a brief education, through whatever means you have available, on the history of European colonialism in Africa and the repercussions. Again, specifically take a look at Rwanda.

Private Pickle
10-08-2014, 11:55 AM
I don't think anyone is saying that.

There were some peaceful societies. But yes, war and violence have been a constant everywhere throughout history. All I am saying is that colonization and particularly post colonization had a violent impact on Africa.

Humans interacting with humans in anyway inevitably leads to conflict.

Mac-7
10-08-2014, 11:58 AM
I'm attempting to reveal the facts.

Stop sounding like someone who is ignorant and do yourself a favor. Take 30 minutes out of your day and get a brief education, through whatever means you have available, on the history of European colonialism in Africa and the repercussions. Again, specifically take a look at Rwanda.

You are babbling nonsense.

africans are practicing savagery because they are savages not because the Euros once had political control of their territory.

Common Sense
10-08-2014, 11:59 AM
It came about because the government of Rwanda whipped up hysteria, prepared the population psychologically for genocide, and even went so far as to fly in extra machetes. It was hardly the spontaneous outburst of ethnic hatred the western misperception.

There was also a lot of history that led up to that. It's what happens when European colonialists use a local minority to rule a majority.

Common Sense
10-08-2014, 11:59 AM
You are babbling nonsense.

africans are practicing savagery because they are savages not because the Euros once had political control of their territory.

Oh stfu...let the adults talk.

Mac-7
10-08-2014, 12:02 PM
Oh stfu...let the adults talk.

You don't like to be contradicted, do you?

As an adult I know I'm responsible for my own actions.

you and the Africans want to blame the murders they commit on whites who have nothing to do with it.

Mister D
10-08-2014, 12:02 PM
There was also a lot of history that led up to that. It's what happens when European colonialists use a local minority to rule a majority.

I don't deny that but to suggest that it was the inevitable consequence of that colonialism is bologna. It was the conciously chosen path of a cabal in power.

Common Sense
10-08-2014, 12:14 PM
You don't like to be contradicted, do you?

As an adult I know I'm responsible for my own actions.

you and the Africans want to blame the murders they commit on whites who have nothing to do with it.

I don't mind being contradicted. I do mind ignorant babbling.

Like I said, gain some knowledge so you sound like you know what you're talking about. Then we can have a discussion.

Common Sense
10-08-2014, 12:15 PM
I don't deny that but to suggest that it was the inevitable consequence of that colonialism is bologna. It was the conciously chosen path of a cabal in power.

Actions have consequences. Some of the actions of colonialist set up a powder keg. The keg went off. The blame lays in the hands of those who committed atrocities. But the situation was created by imperialism.

Mac-7
10-08-2014, 12:18 PM
I don't mind being contradicted. I do mind ignorant babbling.

Like I said, gain some knowledge so you sound like you know what you're talking about. Then we can have a discussion.

You mean absorb some bleeding heart lib brainwashing.

Africans are ignorant, backward people who still suffer from tribalism that existed before the colonial period.

indeed it may be that colonialism is the only time that the tribes were not at war with each other in the whole history of Africa.

Polecat
10-08-2014, 12:20 PM
It came about because the government of Rwanda whipped up hysteria, prepared the population psychologically for genocide, and even went so far as to fly in extra machetes. It was hardly the spontaneous outburst of ethnic hatred the western misperception.

Was that a colony of Belgium? Didn't they divide the people into groups based on the slope of their forehead?

Common Sense
10-08-2014, 12:21 PM
You mean absorb some bleeding heart lib brainwashing.

Africans are ignorant, backward people who still suffer from tribalism that existed before the colonial period.

indeed it may be that colonialism is the only time that the tribes were not at war with each other in the whole history of Africa.

I don't know what to tell you. Your ignorance seems to be a terminal case.

Mac-7
10-08-2014, 12:34 PM
I don't know what to tell you. You're ignorance seems to be a terminal case.

Its not ignorance to hold people accountable for their own crimes rather than shift the blame to others.

Cigar
10-08-2014, 12:37 PM
http://editorialcartoonists.com/cartoons/LopezA/2014/LopezA20141008_low.jpg

Common Sense
10-08-2014, 12:38 PM
Its not ignorance to hold people accountable for their own crimes rather than shift the blame to others.

No, but is ignorance to speak about something that you clearly have very little understanding of. It is also ignorance to make broad generalizations about the people of an entire continent.

Mister D
10-08-2014, 12:46 PM
Was that a colony of Belgium? Didn't they divide the people into groups based on the slope of their forehead?

It was German.

Mac-7
10-08-2014, 12:47 PM
No, but is ignorance to speak about something that you clearly have very little understanding of. It is also ignorance to make broad generalizations about the people of an entire continent.

I seem to understand it better than you do since I'm putting the blame where it belongs rather than making limp excuses for people just because they are black.

Common Sense
10-08-2014, 12:49 PM
It was German.

Then it was Belgian.

Mister D
10-08-2014, 12:49 PM
Actions have consequences. Some of the actions of colonialist set up a powder keg. The keg went off. The blame lays in the hands of those who committed atrocities. But the situation was created by imperialism.

That is where we'll have to disagree. You act as if, like I said, genocide was inevitable. It wasn't. It was a policy chosen by a few powerful men. It makes as much sense as blaming the Jewish Holocaust on the Versailles Treaty.

Common Sense
10-08-2014, 12:50 PM
I seem to understand it better than you do since I'm putting the blame where it belongs rather than making limp excuses for people just because they are black.

Their race has nothing really to do with it. Why do you want to ignore an entire facet of history and the repercussions of it?

Mac-7
10-08-2014, 12:52 PM
Their race has nothing really to do with it. Why do you want to ignore an entire facet of history and the repercussions of it?

You made it a racial issue by blaming black crimes on white colonialism.

Common Sense
10-08-2014, 12:53 PM
That is where we'll have to disagree. You act as if, like I said, genocide was inevitable. It wasn't. It was a policy chosen by a few powerful men. It makes as much sense as blaming the Jewish Holocaust on the Versailles Treaty.

Blaming isn't the term I would use but yes, actions often have unintended consequences. Your example is a great one. If the Treaty of Versailles had not set up the situation that helped Hitler gain power, then yes, maybe the holocaust would not have happened. It's not about blame, it's about acknowledging history and being aware that life does not happen in a vacuum.

Mac-7
10-08-2014, 12:53 PM
Then it was Belgian.

Did someone tell you that Belgians are German?

Common Sense
10-08-2014, 12:54 PM
You made it a racial issue by blaming black crimes on white colonialism.

Your oversimplification is noted and to be expected.

Mac-7
10-08-2014, 12:56 PM
Blaming isn't the term I would use but yes, actions often have unintended consequences.

Unintended but far from inevitable.

Africans are killing each other because they choose to not because the euros made them do it.

Common Sense
10-08-2014, 12:57 PM
Did someone tell you that Belgians are German?

Again, why do you feel the need to talk about things that you are ignorant of?

During WW1 the Belgians took control of Rwanda from Germany.

Mac-7
10-08-2014, 12:57 PM
Your oversimplification is noted and to be expected.

You are the one who thinks the tribes were not killing each other before colonialism came along.

Polecat
10-08-2014, 12:58 PM
You made it a racial issue by blaming black crimes on white colonialism.

Funny you should mention that. An English colony went rogue once and attempted genocide on the indigenous peoples.

Common Sense
10-08-2014, 12:59 PM
You are the one who thinks the tribes were not killing each other before colonialism came along.

So you choose to not even read my posts? Did I ever say that?

If you're not going to at least read what I wrote, what's the point?




I suspect fetal alcohol syndrome...but I could be wrong.

Mac-7
10-08-2014, 01:01 PM
Funny you should mention that. An English colony went rogue once and attempted genocide on the indigenous peoples.

You inbred hatred of America is showing.

The euros did the same thing to each other during those times.

Dont judge 18th century people by 21st century standards.

Common Sense
10-08-2014, 01:03 PM
You inbred hatred of America is showing.

The euros did the same thing to each other during those times.

Dont judge 18th century people by 21st century standards.

But you can judge third world people by first world standards?

Mac-7
10-08-2014, 01:03 PM
So you choose to not even read my posts? Did I ever say that?

If you're not going to at least read what I wrote, what's the point?




I suspect fetal alcohol syndrome...but I could be wrong.

Its so typical of bleeding heart libs to bear no hate for blacks practicing genocide but really pour it on observers who criticize the blacks for what they do.

Polecat
10-08-2014, 01:03 PM
You inbred hatred of America is showing.

The euros did the same thing to each other during those times.

Dont judge 18th century people by 21st century standards.

Your lack of communicating skills is showing not to mention your sheet and hood.

Mac-7
10-08-2014, 01:05 PM
But you can judge third world people by first world standards?

I think you have to.

or are you saying that blacks are exempt because they are black and are incapable of measuring up to our standards?

Common Sense
10-08-2014, 01:07 PM
I think you have to.

or are you saying that blacks sure exempt because they are black and are incapable of measuring up to our standards?

I didn't say blacks. You sure are obsessed with race. I said first world and third world. Or developed world and developing world.

You haven't answered any of my questions, btw...

Mac-7
10-08-2014, 01:07 PM
Your lack of communicating skills is showing not to mention your sheet and hood.

Sheet and hood?

I'm not hacking black people in Africa to pieces with machetes.

You dislike the critics of barbarianism more than the barbarians themselves.

Mac-7
10-08-2014, 01:10 PM
I didn't say blacks. You sure are obsessed with race. I said first world and third world. Or developed world and developing world.

You haven't answered any of my questions, btw...

You began by blaming white euros for crimes being committed by people of color in Africa.

Common Sense
10-08-2014, 01:18 PM
You began by blaming white euros for crimes being committed by people of color in Africa.

I did no such thing.

I said..."In regards to violence in Africa, some of that is due to cultural or religious clashes and some of it has to do with the residual effect of colonialism. Rwanda was a direct result of colonialism."

I'm beginning to understand why you have a hard time understanding basic history. You don't actually read. You just see what you want to see.

Mac-7
10-08-2014, 01:23 PM
I did no such thing.

I said..."In regards to violence in Africa, some of that is due to cultural or religious clashes and some of it has to do with the residual effect of colonialism. Rwanda was a direct result of colonialism."

I'm beginning to understand why you have a hard time understanding basic history. You don't actually read. You just see what you want to see.

Ha!

Some of it is due to culture and religion?

No, all of it is.

the Africans were killing each other before the euros arrived and are still doing it after the euros are gone.

Common Sense
10-08-2014, 01:28 PM
Ha!

Some of it is due to culture and religion?

No, all of it is.

the Africans were killing each other before the euros arrived and are still doing it after the euros are gone.

Like I said, some is and some isn't. Look, I really don't care if you want to remain ignorant on the subject. Be my guest. It sort of suits you.

If you want to ignore the effects of colonization, that's fine. It wont change the reality.

Mister D
10-08-2014, 01:47 PM
Blaming isn't the term I would use but yes, actions often have unintended consequences. Your example is a great one. If the Treaty of Versailles had not set up the situation that helped Hitler gain power, then yes, maybe the holocaust would not have happened. It's not about blame, it's about acknowledging history and being aware that life does not happen in a vacuum.

Virtually any action a government, an entity, or an individual takes can and often does have consequences foreseen or not. That kind of waters down this indictment of European colonialism, no? The situation in Rwanda was reported poorly and the popular misconception is that colonialism is to blame. No, the perpetrators are to blame.

Captain Obvious
10-08-2014, 01:49 PM
You inbred hatred of America is showing.

You said that with a tardese accent

Common Sense
10-08-2014, 02:02 PM
Virtually any action a government, an entity, or an individual takes can and often does have consequences foreseen or not. That kind of waters down this indictment of European colonialism, no? The situation in Rwanda was reported poorly and the popular misconception is that colonialism is to blame. No, the perpetrators are to blame.

No, the history and facts of the situation show that colonialism set up the situation. Created the conflict. Yes, the people themselves in the end are guilty, but a scenario was set up by outside forces.

Mac-7
10-08-2014, 02:27 PM
You said that with a tardese accent

i don't know what a tardese accent is.

but I know what the quote means.

you can't defend the crimes of the Africans and have to attack me instead.

Mac-7
10-08-2014, 02:41 PM
No, the history and facts of the situation show that colonialism set up the situation. Created the conflict. Yes, the people themselves in the end are guilty, but a scenario was set up by outside forces.

There you go again pretending that Africans were pacifists till the euros corrupted them.

Common Sense
10-08-2014, 02:49 PM
There you go again pretending that Africans were pacifists till the euros corrupted them.

How do you figure? Of course they weren't. No group of people is.

You seem to see things that aren't there.

Did you ever do any research into the Rwandan genocide? Did you figure out the German Belgian issue?

Mister D
10-08-2014, 02:52 PM
No, the history and facts of the situation show that colonialism set up the situation. Created the conflict. Yes, the people themselves in the end are guilty, but a scenario was set up by outside forces.

Yet when they create documentaries about the Holocaust the focus is not on the Versailles Treaty, the French, the British, or WW1. It's on the Nazis and their policies. Right?

Mac-7
10-08-2014, 02:55 PM
How do you figure? Of course they weren't. No group of people is.



I figure you are tap dancing every time you mildly blame the Africans but then quickly include your Euro colonialism qualifier.

Just admit they are backward and uncivilized.

because confronting the truth is the first step toward real progress.

Mac-7
10-08-2014, 02:56 PM
Yet when they create documentaries about the Holocaust the focus is not on the Versailles Treaty, the French, the British, or WW1. It's on the Nazis and their policies. Right?

Good point.

but the Germans are white and libs have greater expectations for them.

Common Sense
10-08-2014, 03:00 PM
Yet when they create documentaries about the Holocaust the focus is not on the Versailles Treaty, the French, the British, or WW1. It's on the Nazis and their policies. Right?

It's discussed as a contributing factor. I guess the main difference is the treaty was in place because of German aggression in the first place (some may disagree). Colonization of Rwanda was in place to capitalize on the resources of the country. Purposefully pitting one group against another and then leaving is much different than the treaty.