• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Islam: Responsible for more deaths than Mao and Stalin combined

jin1776

Banned
Joined
Sep 15, 2008
Messages
441
Reaction score
56
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
That is correct, the largest genocide in human history was perpetrated by the Muslim imperialists in the Indian subcontinent, estimates assert that the Indian population declined by 80 million people under Islamic rule.

80 million Hindus massacred by Muslims. The West is next.

These were not all the result of disease like in the Americas this was the result of a systematic genocide in which all non-Muslims were either killed, converted, or subjugated as dhimmi third class citizens under the 20 humiliations. One example is the murder of 100 thousand prisoners by the Shah Timur as recorded by Timur himself:

Timur himself recorded the invasions in his memoirs, collectively known as Tuzk-i-Timuri.[21] In them, he vividly described the massacre at Delhi:

In a short space of time all the people in the [Delhi] fort were put to the sword, and in the course of one hour the heads of 10,000 infidels were cut off. The sword of Islam was washed in the blood of the infidels, and all the goods and effects, the treasure and the grain which for many a long year had been stored in the fort became the spoil of my soldiers. They set fire to the houses and reduced them to ashes, and they razed the buildings and the fort to the ground....All these infidel Hindus were slain, their women and children, and their property and goods became the spoil of the victors. I proclaimed throughout the camp that every man who had infidel prisoners should put them to death, and whoever neglected to do so should himself be executed and his property given to the informer. When this order became known to the ghazis of Islam, they drew their swords and put their prisoners to death.

One hundred thousand infidels, impious idolators, were on that day slain. Maulana Nasiruddin Umar, a counselor and man of learning, who, in all his life, had never killed a sparrow, now, in execution of my order, slew with his sword fifteen idolatrous Hindus, who were his captives....on the great day of battle these 100,000 prisoners could not be left with the baggage, and that it would be entirely opposed to the rules of war to set these idolaters and enemies of Islam at liberty...no other course remained but that of making them all food for the sword.[22]

According to Malfuzat-i-Timuri,[23] Timur targeted Hindus. In his own words, "Excepting the quarter of the saiyids, the 'ulama and the other Musalmans [sic], the whole city was sacked". In his descriptions of the Loni massacre he wrote, "..Next day I gave orders that the Musalman prisoners should be separated and saved."

Persecution of Hindus - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

In fact the Hindus got off lucky that they could become dhimmis under the Hanafi school of Islamic jurisprudence, because under all other schools of Sharia dhimmi status is reserved only for Christians and Jews.

Furthermore; this occupation and oppression continues to this very day, half of India has been permanently colonized by dar al-Islam IE Pakistan which even in the continues the genocide of Hindus that the Sultans started eg between 300 hundred thousand and 3 million Hindus were killed in 1971 during operation searchlight in Bangladesh.

1971 Bangladesh atrocities - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

With the recent terrorist attacks in India allthough tragic it is important to remeber that it is only part of a larger picture and a drop in the bucket compared with the ongoing Islamist genocide and occupation of the Indian subcontinent. And this is only a single region in the global jihadists grand strategy of bringing the entire world into the fold of dar al-Islam through offensive Jihad eg Umayyad Conquest of North Africa which started in around 600 A.D. the conquest of Hispania which occurred in the 700's, and the invasions of Southern Italy which occurred in the 800's, the crusades didn't start until 1000 AD.

The Rashidun dynasty first engaged in the unprovoked war of aggression against the Zoroastrian Sassanid Empire of Persia they conquered Persia and Mesopotamia between 633 and 656, they then conquered Syria in 637, then they conquered Armenia in 639, then they conquered Egypt in 639, then they conquered North Africa in 652.

Under the Umayyads they finished their conquest of North Africa in 665, then between 662 and 709 they conquered Afghanistan, Uzbekistan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, and southwest Kazakhstan, then between 664 and 712 they conquered the Indian sub-continent, then between 711 and 718 they conquered the Iberian Peninsula of Hispania, they then laid siege to Constantinople between 717 and 718, then between 711 and 750 they conquered the Caucasus, they then conquered Tbilisi in 736, and they then conquered southern Italy in 827.
 
Last edited:

gree0232

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 14, 2008
Messages
1,341
Reaction score
428
Location
All over
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
An interesting topic header that is widely misleading even in its concept. For starters, Islam has been around for roughly 1400 years. Stalin and Moa, giving them the maximum amount of time to spread their atrocities over (they didn't kill anyone as infants), were in power for 30-40 years. I wonder, if they were given that same amount of time coupled with their murderous intents, just how many would have perished?

The issue is not religion, or even any particular religion. The issue is ideology. There is nothing in communist ideology that would appear to sanction mass murder and purges, yet this is exactly what happened when unscrupulous, self serving leaders corrupted the revolutionary zeal surrounding communism’s birth.

Similarly, there are those who would deliberately misquote and falsify the teaching of the Koran into justifications for mass murder. The reality is that there is no such component to Islam that would justify this behavior. Yet there are those seeking power, to impose their views on others, and who will use any tool in their arsenal to see those views imposed.

These methods include arming often thuggish agents to enforce the group’s views and punish those who might openly disagree. How lively a debate do you think exists in Taliban or Al Qaeda controlled territory about doing what is best for the people? Imagine for a second what it would be like to be threatened by armed men every time you even mildly disagreed. Imagine if the intimidation extended to beating and the disappearance of family members? Imagine a scene of overt torture, rape, and simple murder for no other reason than to demonstrate power, and you will know why the Iraqi people rebelled against Al Qaeda in Iraq. The real question being asked is: would you have had the courage to stand against this behavior as it slowly rose within your neighborhoods? Or would you acquiesce, so long as the terror was no directed at you?

Ultimately, that is the question that every tyrant wants an answer to, regardless of his ideological stripe.

It is no accident that Hitler and Stalin employed similar tactics in their 'rise to power' and it is no accident that at some point these actions reap their own reward, be it a cowards death in a bunker or setting the stage for the eventual implosion of your nation.

Using the Koran as justification is no different than using Communist ideology, or Nazi ideology, or ethno-purity ideology and working them into a frenzy from which morality is expelled. Those that participated in the Balkan cleansing operations surely understood that the murder and rape of innocents was wrong, yet their actions were excused on behalf of greater-Serbia or ethnic purity. Similarly, Bin Laden's may cloak murder under a perversion of Islam, but the reality of the actions is no different than the Balkans.

In each case there are leaders deliberately stoking the animosity. In each case, there is at the end a desire for political power. In Milosevic’s case it was a greater, more pure Serbia (with himself at the helm). In Bin Laden's case it a Grand Caliphate (presumably with himself or one of his likeminded chums at the helm).

Yet what would that Grand Caliphate look like? A deliberate disregard for modern technology? A corrupt state spending resources on enforcing its will on its own people, where inevitably those who control the punishments find ways to be persuaded? An area of concentrated bureaucratic and political power in the open rather than in the ethernet or hidden in caves where it is vulnerable to Western military might (whose technology they have rejected and become even more vulnerable too.)?

Bin Laden and his group are no threat. Neither do they represent Islam, only a tiny fringe of the radicalized and disillusioned. They are little more than a mafia seeking political power, to go with their arms and opium fueled fortunes. In failure, they remain dangerous criminals; in success they open themselves to total destruction.

800 years ago, was it Muslims who killed Hindu's? Or was it the fodder of kings seeking glory who were slaughtered under the banners of righteousness their King's wove for them? Was it a Crusader who killed a Saracen and was in turn killed by a Saracen who spoke in the name of religion, or was it the nobility seeking power and land who spoke and spilled blood in Jerusalem?

Was it atheism expressed through communism that spoke in Stalin's purges, or was it simply the expression of a murdering tyrant bent on protecting his seat of power at all costs?

The idea of Islam has never killed a single man. Those who would deface it, or any other ideology, for personal, political gain have killed millions. So long as there exists men who wish to rule at any cost, there will be ideologies that exist for opportunism.

The real question is whether we can establish systems that would thwart such men. Given the relatively quick rejection of McCarthyism and, more recent, Bush's disastrous doctrine of pre-emption, I would say that America has gone a long way toward that end.

But we still need to make sure our system addresses the real issue, rather than blocking a potential voice of dissent at a time when it may be needed most.
 

mbig

onomatopoeic
DP Veteran
Joined
May 14, 2009
Messages
10,350
Reaction score
4,989
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
....

The issue is not religion, or even any particular religion. The issue is ideology. There is nothing in communist ideology that would appear to sanction mass murder and purges, yet this is exactly what happened when unscrupulous, self serving leaders corrupted the revolutionary zeal surrounding communism’s birth.
Islam isn't just a religion, it IS an ideology.

Similarly, there are those who would deliberately misquote and falsify the teaching of the Koran into justifications for mass murder. The reality is that there is no such component to Islam that would justify this behavior. Yet there are those seeking power, to impose their views on others, and who will use any tool in their arsenal to see those views imposed.
Actually there is. It's you who seeks to rewrite the Koran for empty PC purpose.
People are fee to exercise their religion as they please. Passively for practicality.. or not.
But it's false to say there's no justification for violence, bigotry, or Jihad in the Koran.
 
Last edited:

Baltim

Active member
Joined
Mar 12, 2011
Messages
428
Reaction score
130
Location
UK
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Socialist
Mao is estimated to have caused the death of 70 million people and Stalin is thought to have killed around 20 million people so the original post is incorrect.
 

StillBallin75

Salty Specialist
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 16, 2011
Messages
23,727
Reaction score
16,745
Location
Fort Drum, New York
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Socialist
Mao is estimated to have caused the death of 70 million people and Stalin is thought to have killed around 20 million people so the original post is incorrect.

We're comparing a religion that has a 1500 year history to two despots that killed millions of people within a few decades...anyone else see the apple and oranges comparison here?
 

TheDemSocialist

Gradualist
DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 13, 2011
Messages
34,951
Reaction score
16,311
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Socialist
Seriously?
More Islamphobia.......
 

Muddy Creek

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 9, 2006
Messages
3,103
Reaction score
699
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Islam isn't just a religion, it IS an ideology.


Actually there is. It's you who seeks to rewrite the Koran for empty PC purpose.
People are fee to exercise their religion as they please. Passively for practicality.. or not.
But it's false to say there's no justification for violence, bigotry, or Jihad in the Koran.

The first seven chapters of Leviticus have extensive rules regarding animal and food sacrifices. These offerings are supposed to be burnt so that God can smell them. If you read through these it seems clear to me that the priests were getting their followers to make a big feast for them every week. The priests were very particular about what kind of food to bring and how to prepare it.



Even more peculiar is God's obsession with first-born sons. In Exodus 13:2 the Lord said "Consecrate to me every first-born that opens the womb among Israelites, both man and beast, for it belongs to me." Later it says that you can redeem (replace) an ass with a sheep and that you must redeem a child for an unspecified price. It is clear from the context that "consecrate" means a burning sacrifice. These priests are guilty of theft and kidnapping. Since any sins in the Old Testament were punishable by death, these priests used the threat of death to extort food and money from their followers. What do we call a scum-bag that threatens to kill your kids unless you pay a ransom? A kidnapper! If these priests were alive today they would be in prison with Abraham.



However, in Leviticus 27:28-29, the Lord allows for no redemptions. "Note also that any one of his possessions which a man vows as doomed to the Lord, whether it is a human being or an animal, or a hereditary field, shall be neither sold nor ransomed; everything that is thus doomed becomes most sacred to the Lord. All human beings that are doomed lose the right to be redeemed; they must be put to death." I must admit that I am a bit confused by this contradiction, but it might only apply to slaves in your possession. Not that it makes any difference. A human sacrifice is a human sacrifice, and it is just sick.

I'd say your god is their god.
 

shablon

Banned
Joined
Apr 20, 2011
Messages
130
Reaction score
7
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
That is correct, the largest genocide in human history was perpetrated by the Muslim imperialists in the Indian subcontinent, estimates assert that the Indian population declined by 80 million people under Islamic rule.

80 million Hindus massacred by Muslims. The West is next.

These were not all the result of disease like in the Americas this was the result of a systematic genocide in which all non-Muslims were either killed, converted, or subjugated as dhimmi third class citizens under the 20 humiliations. One example is the murder of 100 thousand prisoners by the Shah Timur as recorded by Timur himself:



In fact the Hindus got off lucky that they could become dhimmis under the Hanafi school of Islamic jurisprudence, because under all other schools of Sharia dhimmi status is reserved only for Christians and Jews.

Furthermore; this occupation and oppression continues to this very day, half of India has been permanently colonized by dar al-Islam IE Pakistan which even in the continues the genocide of Hindus that the Sultans started eg between 300 hundred thousand and 3 million Hindus were killed in 1971 during operation searchlight in Bangladesh.

1971 Bangladesh atrocities - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

With the recent terrorist attacks in India allthough tragic it is important to remeber that it is only part of a larger picture and a drop in the bucket compared with the ongoing Islamist genocide and occupation of the Indian subcontinent. And this is only a single region in the global jihadists grand strategy of bringing the entire world into the fold of dar al-Islam through offensive Jihad eg Umayyad Conquest of North Africa which started in around 600 A.D. the conquest of Hispania which occurred in the 700's, and the invasions of Southern Italy which occurred in the 800's, the crusades didn't start until 1000 AD.

The Rashidun dynasty first engaged in the unprovoked war of aggression against the Zoroastrian Sassanid Empire of Persia they conquered Persia and Mesopotamia between 633 and 656, they then conquered Syria in 637, then they conquered Armenia in 639, then they conquered Egypt in 639, then they conquered North Africa in 652.

Under the Umayyads they finished their conquest of North Africa in 665, then between 662 and 709 they conquered Afghanistan, Uzbekistan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, and southwest Kazakhstan, then between 664 and 712 they conquered the Indian sub-continent, then between 711 and 718 they conquered the Iberian Peninsula of Hispania, they then laid siege to Constantinople between 717 and 718, then between 711 and 750 they conquered the Caucasus, they then conquered Tbilisi in 736, and they then conquered southern Italy in 827.

You forgot to add Korea, Afghanistan, Iraq, Panama, and Philippine massacres in 1898! Yours is the Most ridiculous piece of nonsense I have ever read!
 

AndrewC23

Banned
Joined
Apr 11, 2011
Messages
1,086
Reaction score
65
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
That is completely ignorant do you realize how many people stalin and mao killed...try 80,000,000
 

shablon

Banned
Joined
Apr 20, 2011
Messages
130
Reaction score
7
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
That is completely ignorant do you realize how many people stalin and mao killed...try 80,000,000

You are partly right. Stalin was at the top when Jewish Commissars slaughtered 40 members of my own family
 

NGNM85

DP Veteran
Joined
May 3, 2011
Messages
1,571
Reaction score
700
Location
Boston, MA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Socialist
The issue is not religion, or even any particular religion. The issue is ideology. There is nothing in communist ideology that would appear to sanction mass murder and purges, yet this is exactly what happened when unscrupulous, self serving leaders corrupted the revolutionary zeal surrounding communism’s birth. ...
Similarly, there are those who would deliberately misquote and falsify the teaching of the Koran into justifications for mass murder. The reality is that there is no such component to Islam that would justify this behavior. Yet there are those seeking power, to impose their views on others, and who will use any tool in their arsenal to see those views imposed. ...
Using the Koran as justification is no different than using Communist ideology, or Nazi ideology, or ethno-purity ideology and working them into a frenzy from which morality is expelled. Those that participated in the Balkan cleansing operations surely understood that the murder and rape of innocents was wrong, yet their actions were excused on behalf of greater-Serbia or ethnic purity. Similarly, Bin Laden's may cloak murder under a perversion of Islam, but the reality of the actions is no different than the Balkans.

I will preface my observations by saying, that while I disagree on a few key points, you have presented a number of compelling arguments with clarity and concision.

That being said, I take issue with your central thesis, here, namely, that the death cult of Jihad represents such a substantial distortion of Islam. First of all, one must clarify what is meant by 'Islam.' If one is referring to the global community of X Billion Muslims, today, thankfully not. This sub-group represents a much smaller, but extremely vocal, and highly agitated minority. If by Islam, we mean the belief in, and observance of, the Koran and the Hadith, then things get murkier. One of the singular features of religious extremists is their literalism. I garuntee any Jihadist, or any abortion-clinic bomber, for that matter, can quote you scripture and verse. I'm sure Bin Laden read the Koran many times, he probably read little else. If we examine the central texts of the Abrahamic faiths, there are an overwhelming number of inflammatory passages. One can almost open to any page at random, and within a short time you'll find impetus for some kind of atrocity or another. Violence cuts a broad swath across nationalities, ethnic backgrounds, age, etc., however, I think your comparison is overreaching. Communism might not necessarily automatically lead to violence, again, this is somewhat depending on the circumstances, and which particular branch or idealogue one follows, National Socialism, however, virtually inevitably leads to violence. If one accepts it's tenets as true, it's almost guarunteed. We see behavioral differences that correlate to belief systems. For instance, the absence of Hindu Steakhouses, Jewish hog farms, or the underrepresentation of mass murderers in Jainism. Given the content of their respective creeds, there's really no reason why these things should surprise us. Therefore, given the perponderance of antisocial nonsense in these books, we can't rightly cry foul when it manifests itself in blood and smoke. Let's just pull out an example;

“Slay them wherever you find them. Drive them out of the places from which they drove you. Idolatry is worse than carnage. . . . f they attack you put them to the sword. Thus shall the unbelievers be rewarded: but if they desist, God is forgiving and merciful. Fight against them until idolatry is no more and God’s religion reigns supreme."

Now, we can argue over the intention of the author of this passage. However, it's rather interesting that there doesn't seem to be any problem with taking the rest of these texts pretty much at face value, up until one gets to a passage about slaughtering heathens, then you suddenly need a theology degree, because it's supposedly too complex. This passage, and the many, many others like it at least have the appearance of being very straightforward about what they mean, and what they ask of us. I have no doubt how bin Laden and his contemporaries interpret this passage, and others like it, the same way as many have before them. I can easily argue that Osama bin Laden was a terrible person, however, it's more difficult to say he was a bad Muslim. I want to be perfectly clear, however, that I am not giving Christianity a free pass. In fact, my first thought upon reading the OP's statement was to wonder; 'How much blood has been spilled (and continues to be) in the name of Christ?'

I think this brings us to the central point; the combination of preindustrial dogma and 21st century technology is a particularly volatile mix. (No pun intended.) It's long past time that we recognize that (for the most part) these creeds represent the thoughts and wisdom of a preindustrial world, where technology had not advanced much beyond fire, written language, and the wheel, where slavery was thriving, women were property, and most humans spent their short, generally unhappy, lives acquiring food and slaughtering (or, conversely, being slaughtered) by neighboring tribes. They are quite literally, the opposite of civilization. We should study them as works of literature, as pieces of our history, but we should cease organizing our lives around them, and recognize the idea that they might contain some deeper wisdom that transcends the capabilities of modern philosophers or scientists for the insanity it is.


It is no accident that Hitler and Stalin employed similar tactics in their 'rise to power' and it is no accident that at some point these actions reap their own reward, be it a cowards death in a bunker or setting the stage for the eventual implosion of your nation.

Unfortunately, this does not appear to be an immutable law, it seems many people have a very high tolerance for such things, and can exist in a climate of systematic violence and oppression for extended periods of time.

Yet what would that Grand Caliphate look like? A deliberate disregard for modern technology?

Unfortunately, (and this is most vexing) Jihadist ideology seems to be totally compatible with sophisticated technology. In fact, many high-profile cultists have been educated in the hard sciences, even well-educated. For example, Ayman al-Zawahiri, bin Laden's second in command (Now, presumably, the head of al Qaeda.) is, by all reports, a competent physician with medical certificates from reputable institutions.

Bin Laden and his group are no threat.

Bin Laden is no longer a threat. However, I think his contemporaries have been quite adept at demonstrating they have the will and the capabilities to make good on their rhetoric.

Was it atheism expressed through communism that spoke in Stalin's purges, or was it simply the expression of a murdering tyrant bent on protecting his seat of power at all costs?

I know this is rhetorical, but this is just a pet peeve of mine, as an Atheist. It's just a total non-sequitor. Atheism doesn't really have any tenets (Perhaps, just one.) it is not an ethos. There is no proven correlation between atheism and violence. There is, however, a long bloody history of religiouis fanaticism resulting in violence.

The idea of Islam has never killed a single man. Those who would deface it, or any other ideology, for personal, political gain have killed millions. So long as there exists men who wish to rule at any cost, there will be ideologies that exist for opportunism.

No, Islam, in this sense, is a set of ideas. However, people's beliefs tend to inform their actions. Like I said, it's really no surprise that the Third Reich turned out the way it did.
 
G

Gargantuan

Mao did not commit genocide first of all. His policies failed and led to famine.

People were all savages back then though. Look at the first crusade. Once the Christians got into Jerusalem, they murdered every single Muslim and Jew in the city. Same type of violence and murder on both sides back then. Comparing it to now is absolutely ridiculous.
 

ElCid

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 12, 2009
Messages
1,784
Reaction score
233
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
As Winston Churchill said, "There is no more of a retrograde force in the world today than Islam."
 

ecofarm

global liberation
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 4, 2010
Messages
131,808
Reaction score
41,982
Location
Miami
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Mao did not commit genocide first of all. His policies failed and led to famine.
First he killed millions. It wasn't to wipe out an ethnic group, though. Then came the famine.

People were all savages back then though... Comparing it to now is absolutely ridiculous.
I agree.
 
Last edited:

StillBallin75

Salty Specialist
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 16, 2011
Messages
23,727
Reaction score
16,745
Location
Fort Drum, New York
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Socialist
Islam's also been around a hell of a lot longer than Mao and Stalin combined. Just sayin'.
 
Joined
Nov 8, 2006
Messages
13,159
Reaction score
7,849
Location
Milwaukee, WI
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
First he killed millions.

Who did he kill? I mean I'm sure he might have killed some people in his guerrilla days but other than that I don't think he killed anyone.
 

The Baron

Knight in Shining Armor
DP Veteran
Joined
May 24, 2007
Messages
5,612
Reaction score
1,459
Location
Somewhere in Dixie
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
I read through some of these posts and have to wonder to myself...

...what makes some people such @*ssies that they can't even admit who our enemies are?
 

StillBallin75

Salty Specialist
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 16, 2011
Messages
23,727
Reaction score
16,745
Location
Fort Drum, New York
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Socialist
I read through some of these posts and have to wonder to myself...

...what makes some people such @*ssies that they can't even admit who our enemies are?

Baron, I hope you're not one of those people who thinks "Islam is the enemy." Because not only is that overly simplistic, it doesn't really fit in with reality. If so, it's not a matter of being ******s. It's a matter of accurately describing reality.
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom