the Muslim Caliphate

Yurt said:
it is rather interesting that the governments we have toppled, iraq and libya, were basically non muslim and now, with "freedom", they have become, for the most part, islamic governments. libya most likely...
Click to expand...

Iraq uses civil law. Libya already used Sharia, so there's no change.
 
President Mittens said:
I'd really like to see where this is a Caliphate or an anti western government, or any kind of threat to anything.
Click to expand...

The people who are calling this a caliphate do not know what a caliphate is. It is merely a negative word they don't understand (and are, in fact, quite proud of being incapable of understanding) and just ascribe as an attribute of things they don't like. This is a common pattern amongst conservatives, if you've been paying attention.
 
Skidmark said:
Which is kind of funny, because the Ottoman empire was the last caliphate in the Muslim world.
Click to expand...

Technically, Libya could form its own caliphate, but it would be weak and ineffectual. At the heights of the Abbasid, Seljuk, and Ottoman empires, there were numerous smaller caliphates throughout the Muslims world (such as Spain). The Ottomans were very secular rulers, interested in stability and security within the empire. They were very ceremonial, and the founders had been trusted with the "protection of Islam," so they could claim to the world that they were the modern caliphate.
 
Threedee said:
Technically, Libya could form its own caliphate, but it would be weak and ineffectual.
Click to expand...

Technically, I could form my own caliphate as well. Who's on board?

Threedee said:
At the heights of the Abbasid, Seljuk, and Ottoman empires, there were numerous smaller caliphates throughout the Muslims world (such as Spain). The Ottomans were very secular rulers, interested in stability and security within the empire. They were very ceremonial, and the founders had been trusted with the "protection of Islam," so they could claim to the world that they were the modern caliphate.
Click to expand...

Yeah, the Caliphate under the Ottoman's was pretty much symbolic, an artifact of history that mainly still existed to boost their credibility. Initially, it's only purpose was to give them causa bellum against Muslim nations, allowing them to DoW without a stability stab or infamy penalty. Any attempt to re-establish a caliphate would probably be by a fundamentalist government without such moderate leanings. But I've seen "caliphate" thrown around a great deal without any sort of proof that it's actually happening or apparent knowledge by the arguer of what the hell they're talking about. Just some vague conspiracy theory. The newest "evidence" thrown out, that being Libya's conversion from Sharia law to Sharia law, is the most laughable yet.

Interestingly, back in the 70's there was an attempt to unite Libya, Egypt, and Syria (and, at one point, Sudan) into a single state. It actually passed referendums in the countries, but wasn't ever implemented. There might be some pan-arabian spirit left in the air. However, pan-arabism has generally been secular, not something pushed by fundamentalists.
 
bravo said:
http://blog.heritage.org/2011/08/22...on-sharia-is-principal-source-of-legislation/

Libyan Draft Constitution: Sharia is ‘Principal Source of Legislation’

Its just fuckin amazing....the New Muslim Caliphate for world conquest is being born and we are helping it happen.....

We are witnessing it first hand, something to tell you grandchildren and great grandchildren...

Now is the time to clip you newspapers stories for your great grandkids to read about it as is occurs....
Click to expand...

LOL I love how you righties are always pissing your pants over one thing or the other.

It's kinda cute and definitely entertaining.
 
Skidmark said:
Technically, I could form my own caliphate as well. Who's on board?



Yeah, the Caliphate under the Ottoman's was pretty much symbolic, an artifact of history that mainly still existed to boost their credibility. Initially, it's only purpose was to give them causa bellum against Muslim nations, allowing them to DoW without a stability stab or infamy penalty. Any attempt to re-establish a caliphate would probably be by a fundamentalist government without such moderate leanings. But I've seen "caliphate" thrown around a great deal without any sort of proof that it's actually happening or apparent knowledge by the arguer of what the hell they're talking about. Just some vague conspiracy theory. The newest "evidence" thrown out, that being Libya's conversion from Sharia law to Sharia law, is the most laughable yet.

Interestingly, back in the 70's there was an attempt to unite Libya, Egypt, and Syria (and, at one point, Sudan) into a single state. It actually passed referendums in the countries, but wasn't ever implemented. There might be some pan-arabian spirit left in the air. However, pan-arabism has generally been secular, not something pushed by fundamentalists.
Click to expand...

Ill join the Watermark Caliphate. But we'd still take an infamy penalty, just at 25% instead of a full penalty.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top