[Ter]

It was disclosed last week that there are about 1,500 million people on the planet belonging to the Muslim faith.
That is one quarter of the world population.

Without backing my claim up with references at this point, I say that population growth in Muslim countries is much higher than in non-Muslim countries in general.

Are the Muslims, consciously or unconsciously trying to take over the world ?
Will there be a reaction of the non-Muslim peoples to stop this ?

Most if not all of the Muslim-majority countries are poor or have a poor population due to undemocratic rulers. Their women do not enjoy freedom to go out and work and are oppressed in many other ways. Typical Muslim societies do not accept gender equality, homosexuality or freedom of religion.

How can Muslims integrate with the rest of the world ?

Discuss please.

Ter

[Shadow Dragon]

Are the Muslims, consciously or unconsciously trying to take over the world?

Muslims as a whole? No. In fact, I forget the exact line, but there is a part in the Koran that says you shouldn't force people into Islam. But that doesn't stop certain groups from trying.

Most if not all of the Muslim-majority countries are poor or have a poor population due to undemocratic rulers. Their women do not enjoy freedom to go out and work and are oppressed in many other ways. Typical Muslim societies do not accept gender equality, homosexuality or freedom of religion.

This is because they have authoritarian governments than Islam being their primary religion. To these leaders Islam is simply a tool to keep the masses controlled. Just like how other dictators use nationalism and christianity as tools.

How can Muslims integrate with the rest of the world?

I think they already have considering that they are the second largest religion in the world.

[QatzelOk]

Most if not all of the Muslim-majority countries are poor or have a poor population due to undemocratic rulers.

This is true.

So when the USA got rid of democratically-elected Iranian leader Mohammad Mosaddeq in Iran in 1953 - and replaced him with an undemocratic shah - it was in order to keep Iranians poor.

So to become wealthier, these countries have to destroy the USA. And a lot of them already know this. As long as the USA and its Israel colony exist, a lot of Arab countries will be poor.

[Wolfman]

I HATE MEMES!

[Zyx]

I'm surprised that Ter of all people can not focus on the Jews.

[Plaro]

Most if not all of the Muslim-majority countries are poor or have a poor population due to undemocratic rulers.

This is funny, how does democracy bring wealth?
And what is “poor” by your definition?

Are the Muslims, consciously or unconsciously trying to take over the world

This is a loaded question.

Their women do not enjoy freedom to go out and work and are oppressed in many other ways.

How is it that women are oppressed, if they do not work for wages?

[QatzelOk]

Their women do not enjoy freedom to go out and work

Are you suggesting that work will set them free?

If so, I think I know what school of thought you belong to.

[Muslim]

I say that population growth in Muslim countries is much higher than in non-Muslim countries in general.

I can't really see a correlation between Islam and high birth-rates.
Population Growth: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/c ... _world.PNG
Islam: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/c ... on_Map.png

Will there be a reaction of the non-Muslim peoples to stop this ?

By killing more Muslims?

Actually, at least in Egypt I can tell, we are trying to slow the population growth as it tends to swallow the economic progress.

Most if not all of the Muslim-majority countries are poor or have a poor population

I still can't see a correlation.

Poverty: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/c ... 7-2008.png
Undernourishment: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/c ... ld_map.PNG
Gini Coefficient: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/c ... t_2009.png

How can Muslims integrate with the rest of the world ?

Well, when the rest of the world becomes integrated, let us know to integrate too

[Ter]

I'm surprised that Ter of all people can not focus on the Jews.

Why should we concentrate on Jews ? It's only in your head, Zyx.

Are you suggesting that work will set them free?

Not at all. What I think doesn't matter here.
I notice that Western Governments consider it important that women should go out to work and be free to do as they wish, including stray-fucking and getting alimony and such.
I don't blame the Muslims at all for keeping their womenfolk at home or at least under close supervision.

I can't really see a correlation between Islam and high birth-rates.

Well thanks for posting those graphs. The correlation is not perfect but I believe it is there.

Actually, at least in Egypt I can tell, we are trying to slow the population growth as it tends to swallow the economic progress.

Are they trying hard enough ? It seems to me Egyptians have a lot of babies.

I still can't see a correlation.

Again, I am pretty sure there is. Some of the countries with high poverty rates have big populations (Indonesia, Bangladesh, Pakistan...), so just looking at a world map where only percentages are mentioned is not going to resolve this issue.

Ter

[Muslim]

Are they trying hard enough ? It seems to me Egyptians have a lot of babies.

Again, I am pretty sure there is. Some of the countries with high poverty rates have big populations (Indonesia, Bangladesh, Pakistan...), so just looking at a world map where only percentages are mentioned is not going to resolve this issue.

Well, there is also immigration!

[Nattering Nabob]

The Middle East is moving into the modern age far more rapidly than did European nations...many people have gone from riding camels and herding goats to watching porn on satellite dishes and driving autos to the supermarket in their lifetimes...

Rapid social change can unsettle a population as was seen in the west during the 1960's and social change is occurring far more quickly in the ME...

Top that off with the fact that most in the ME are living under some form of dictatorial/authoritarian rule while many of the people on the satellite dishes they are watching are not and you have a naturally volatile situation...

The fundamentalist backlash that we are currently seeing in many parts of the ME is not unexpected...

[Bumperstickerphilosophy]Change takes time...[/Bumperstickerphilosophy]

I'm surprised that Ter of all people can not focus on the Jews.

I see that you are able to maintain a laser beam focus...

[Muslim]

The Middle East is moving into the modern age far more rapidly than did European nations...many people have gone from riding camels and herding goats to watching porn on satellite dishes and driving autos to the supermarket in their lifetimes...

That it is true concerning Arabia only.

[Kman]

That it is true concerning Arabia only.

And that is because of the oil in their underground, without that most of these so called ''modern arabs'' would still be a poor as dirt and riding around in the desert on camels.

[Muslim]

without that most of these so called ''modern arabs'' would still be a poor as dirt and riding around in the desert on camels.

I can't see how "poor as dirt" can be a sound metaphor. Actually, I don't consider being rich/poor to be the most important metric of a society. Moral values are the true civilization in my opinion. For anything else, people adapt well. Nomads, with their simple life, can be as happy or sad as any other people. I am not promoting poverty, though. I am just making my views clearer.

[QatzelOk]

Rapid social change can unsettle a population as was seen in the west during the 1960's and social change is occurring far more quickly in the ME...

A better example than the pot-smoking 60s is the early 20th Century in Germany.

There, a nation got too modern for its banking elites and other high class interests. They didn't like the fact that the German population - previously a divided group of assorted tribes - came together and surpassed Britain and France in popular education and social progress.

This "too much advancement" is probably why they were bombed to rubble twice. I think the West is trying to repeat those pogroms in the Middle East and for similar reasons: "Those Arabs is gettin' uppity." Just like those Huns.

[Apostrophe]

"Their women do not enjoy freedom to go out and work and are oppressed in many other ways"

Hey, Ter,
I don't know if this part is a "con" in your argument, but from your post in
Adultery is very common in the industrialized countries.

you state:

"I read a study that showed almost 50% of people had a fling in the office.

I am especially concerned that the bitches get impregnated with sperm that is not from their husband.

As controversial as this may sound, it is not such a bad idea to keep an eye on the females, as they do in most of the Third World.

Unless they allow the husband to have a DNA test done to check that the li'l fuckers are yours, I see no other solution.


Ter"


Hmmmmmmmmmmmmm. Would you like to re-evaluate your argument?

[Ter]

Would you like to re-evaluate your argument?

It wasn't an argument, only an observation.

Higher in this thread, I wrote:

QatzelOk wrote:
Are you suggesting that work will set them free?


Not at all. What I think doesn't matter here.
I notice that Western Governments consider it important that women should go out to work and be free to do as they wish, including stray-fucking and getting alimony and such.
I don't blame the Muslims at all for keeping their womenfolk at home or at least under close supervision.

See ? I am consistent.

Ter

[QatzelOk]

I don't blame the Muslims at all for keeping their womenfolk at home or at least under close supervision.

Until low wages made it a necessity for them to work, American women used to stay home and tend to the domestic front as well.

They only work now because the elite has since figured out that women working means that everyone gets lower wages. It is very similar to when blacks were "liberated" into factory slavehood.

This is the only kind of "liberation" that businessmen can tolerate - the work sets you free type. And businessmen - as we all know - run the USA with their own private profits in mind. This is what "liberalism" means.

[jaycola]

If a woman is not free to work and earn money(if she so chooses), she has to depend on a man to provide for her. It's a matter of whether you have control over your own life and choices. A woman who works does not need to marry a man for survival nor does she have to ask for things to be provided to her.

[Shadow Dragon]

Women, as well as men for that matter, should have the option of being a stay at home spouse or working. To force them to do one is an injustice. In this case, they just want women to be weak and completely dependent upon men.