The United States of Islam

[Hex0maniac]

How many years of PMT would we all have to endure in phase 1?

eternity maybe.

 

[cloud4000]

How would this be grouping be any better than OIC? It also looks like a slap to Arab members. Is this a run around them? If it is, it won't do well. It will lead to more factionalism: non-Arab Sunni bloc, Arab Sunni bloc, Shia bloc, African Sunni bloc, etc.

It would be better to reform OIC than to create another grouping.

 

[Ultima Thule]

1)How would the block be any different from the current OIC. All the Islamic countries are already united under it's banner.

2)Wouldn't revising or reframing current rules and policies of OIC be more achievable than starting from scratch.

3) All the founding members you've mentioned have diverse national interests, specifically geopolitical ones, how do you propose to bridge differences other than uniting under a common religion. This gets more complicated as more members join the union, how do you juggle state priorities, given the geographical and geopolitical divide.

4) For a stable union to exist, there have to be extensive sets of common values that unite all, asides from religion how do you propose to unite three very different cultures and population sets.

OIC IS USELESS THEY ARE NOT WORKING FOR THE CAUSE OF MUSLIM COUNTRIES I SHOULD QUOTES THE MAULANA NUORANI MARHOOM
OH I SEE @Krptonite

 

[Krptonite]

OIC IS USELESS THEY ARE NOT WORKING FOR THE CAUSE OF MUSLIM COUNTRIES I SHOULD QUOTES THE MAULANA NUORANI MARHOOM
OH I SEE @Krptonite

Your dissatisfaction with OIC not withstanding, I'd like to hear your opinions on the points I've raised.

 

[Sine Nomine]

It would be better to reform OIC than to create another grouping.

OIC is 0+0+0+0+0+0+0

 

[SkyWolf]

This is not justified.

This is not the time of 7th century when even enemies had some respect for our lives.

i am all for their rights.

But they are NOT equal to Muslims, their rights are NOT equal to Muslims either. They have all their right to practice their faith though. Also, we should make it clear that the above extends to the People of the Book only.


Syria is a non Muslim state. It is more anti Islamic than even India or Israel.


The monarchies must be destroyed first. The borders will automatically dissolve.

You are missing the forrest from the trees. This union would not impose on each other. It would be a loose confederation. There would be rent and there would be benefits. If salafist impose their version of islam on malaysia - the union would collapse. Therefore everyone manages their own state but there are a few benefits for all.

Giving minorities equal rights is a decent thing to do and makes countries more prosperous. Discrimination is outdated and immoral.

 

[SkyWolf]

I m pretty sure when that happens there'll be no Uighur issues.

Lets hope so. The uighurs are lucky to be part of china. China is lucky to have them. Freedom of religion in a moderate level is not opium at all. Best of luck.

How would this be grouping be any better than OIC? It also looks like a slap to Arab members. Is this a run around them? If it is, it won't do well. It will lead to more factionalism: non-Arab Sunni bloc, Arab Sunni bloc, Shia bloc, African Sunni bloc, etc.

It would be better to reform OIC than to create another grouping.

Currently there is no rent or benefit mechanism. Too many vested self interest for group theory to work. We need to start small.

Good point. But arent omani arabs? They are in phase 2. They were selected for their softer and moderate temperment.

How would you combine countries and jn which order? Would love to hear other ideas.

It is mixed.

al Qaida was considered a Good Islamic Organisation as long as they were helping the US kick the USSR asses.

When they blew up the towers (allegedly), they became a Bad Islamic Organisation.

I believe, they had good motives but had gone astray. I had never met a Taliban in person, so wont form a strong opinion (either positive or negative) about them.

But I have met Hindus, interacted with them and know first hand how genocidal they are towards us.


Come out of your Socialist Utopia and go through our scripture. I am talking about Allah's Deen, not Gaddaffi's Islam. Thank you.

Extremism is the biggest threat to a union.

The idea is good. Bhutto tried it in the 1970's if I am not wrong.

Basic Issue is that: All ethnicity in Muslims don't consider other Muslims as equal.
for e.g.
Will Saudi allow the marriage of a Saudi Girl with Nigerian/Pakistani Muslims?
or Pakistani Jatts would be fine marrying their daughter to African Muslims man?
Think about it.

This would not be about marriages dummy. Each state would be independent except in a few things of mutual benefit identified above.

Tell me something? Have you indians fully accepted marriage across caste?

1)How would the block be any different from the current OIC. All the Islamic countries are already united under it's banner.

2)Wouldn't revising or reframing current rules and policies of OIC be more achievable than starting from scratch.

3) All the founding members you've mentioned have diverse national interests, specifically geopolitical ones, how do you propose to bridge differences other than uniting under a common religion. This gets more complicated as more members join the union, how do you juggle state priorities, given the geographical and geopolitical divide.

4) For a stable union to exist, there have to be extensive sets of common values that unite all, asides from religion how do you propose to unite three very different cultures and population sets.

Help me with your excellent questions on 3 and 4.

 

[M.Bison]

@SkyWolf

1. Where is Syria in your list ??

2. Central Asian states are more in alignment with Russia than with West-aligned states like Saudia.

3. Palestine is not a "Muslim issue". It is more a humanitarian issue. Non-Muslim revolutionaries like Carlos fought for the rights of Palestinians.

4. Creating a bloc based on religion is not the future thing to do.

The world is already made into blocs based on religion. Obviously, you are too stupid to realize that. Every single Muslim country has been attacked by Christian zionist based on the fact that they are Muslim. Now Indians want their turn with Pakistan using the hoax of "Islamist" terrorism. But as always rapistan have arrived late to the party and only to fail miserably like everything else they try.

 

[!eon]

OIC is 0+0+0+0+0+0+0

45 x 0

 

[SkyWolf]

eternity maybe.

3 years. It would be incumbent upon these three to really have something to show. Real, tangible benefits of the association. In order to draft the next batch.

 

[Haris Ali2140]

3 years. It would be incumbent upon these three to really have something to show. Real, tangible benefits of the association. In order to draft the next batch.

First step should be to bring youth together everything else will automatically fall in line.

 

[Pakhtoon yum]

I m pretty sure when that happens there'll be no Uighur issues.

Please stop, that's not how you convey your point. You just make yourself stand out. You agree with the statement and say something encouraging and against the global rule. Thats how you make friends and covey your message.

 

[beijingwalker]

Please stop, that's not how you convey your point. You just make yourself stand out. You agree with the statement and say something encouraging and against the global rule. Thats how you make friends and covey your message.

Yes, and we have many friends around the world, simply because we never interfere in their internal affairs.

 

[AZADPAKISTAN2009]

I trust only

• China
• Turkey

• Iran (always in hot waters) - Saudi (Dependable friend )- Malaysia (Great relations)

If Arab nations will buy JF17 Thunder from Pakistan and Al Khalid tank then we will talk


I prefer a bilateral 1: 1 engagement with all nations, and neutral stance like Sweden or Norway

 

[SkyWolf]

I trust only

• China
• Turkey

• Iran - Saudi (Dependable friend )- Malaysia (Great relations)

If Arab nations will buy JF17 Thunder from Pakistan and Al Khalid tank then we will talk


I prefer a bilateral 1: 1 engagement with all nations, and neutral stance like Sweden

Are you a child?