Historical Combat, War, Geopolitics History and Analysis

[Afif]

In light of the war in Middle East, let us once again remind you of our good old neocon and new atheist 'public intellectuals'. @Nilgiri @Ryder @Gary et al.

Tbh, even though these days Sam Harris sounds like a broken record, they had quite a bit of impact on public discourse in 2000s and 2010s regarding the 'War on terror' and US foreign policy. I wonder if any of you guys closely followed their movement at the time, @Nilgiri?

 

[Ryder]

In light of the war in Middle East, let us once again remind you of our good old neocon and new atheist 'public intellectuals'. @Nilgiri @Ryder @Gary et al.

Tbh, even though these days Sam Harris sounds like a broken record, they had quite a bit of impact on public discourse in 2000s and 2010s regarding the 'War on terror' and US foreign policy. I wonder if any of you guys closely followed their movement at the time, @Nilgiri?

Neocon arguments against Islam has largely failed not because Islam is the problem because neocon arguments were always to cover and support US imperialism in the Middle East.

Even if Atheists have their criticism of Islam they are no longer using neo con arguments like they use to in the past.

 

[Nilgiri]

In light of the war in Middle East, let us once again remind you of our good old neocon and new atheist 'public intellectuals'. @Nilgiri @Ryder @Gary et al.

Tbh, even though these days Sam Harris sounds like a broken record, they had quite a bit of impact on public discourse in 2000s and 2010s regarding the 'War on terror' and US foreign policy. I wonder if any of you guys closely followed their movement at the time, @Nilgiri?

I'll watch it later and tell you what I think. Lot of youtube personalities are grifters in end....I always keep it in mind its easy to say things, but harder to practice things.

Also anti-islamist and/or anti-sharia and/or anti-islamic-conservative (whether specifically on this identity or on all world conservative identities generally including own) etc etc are not automatically neo-cons. Neo cons are separate group, but sure there can be cross over in objectives sometimes.....and sometimes these groups are also at odds with each other. Neo cons tend to hate paleo cons and even mainstream conservatives for a reason (ever since Vietnam war didnt go way of Korea and this big axe to grind kept growing and the switch to divert to new biggest enemy in their mind after cold war end and 9/11 happened and now back to old cold war adversary and so on).

The problem to me is what leftism has done in the west, as leftism prefers creating problems for their ideology of "our utopia cure". There are always 100 different ways to prevent problems, and work certain things in alternate more pragmatic way (regarding say global peace, cohesion, structured society reform) without the need to fulfill an ideology first and at any costs.

There is lot of crying over spilled milk by liberals too. Suddenly what they went along with and got coerced into going along with the "every culture is the same kumbaya" (and essentially moved from more principled classical liberal to whatever the modern sel-identifying "feelings" liberal tends to be these days).

 

[Ryder]

I'll watch it later and tell you what I think. Lot of youtube personalities are grifters in end....I always keep it in mind its easy to say things, but harder to practice things.

Also anti-islamist and/or anti-sharia and/or anti-islamic-conservative (whether specifically on this identity or on all world conservative identities generally including own) etc etc are not automatically neo-cons. Neo cons are separate group, but sure there can be cross over in objectives sometimes.....and sometimes these groups are also at odds with each other. Neo cons tend to hate paleo cons and even mainstream conservatives for a reason (ever since Vietnam war didnt go way of Korea and this big axe to grind kept growing and the switch to divert to new biggest enemy in their mind after cold war end and 9/11 happened and now back to old cold war adversary and so on).

The problem to me is what leftism has done in the west, as leftism prefers creating problems for their ideology of "our utopia cure". There are always 100 different ways to prevent problems, and work certain things in alternate more pragmatic way (regarding say global peace, cohesion, structured society reform) without the need to fulfill an ideology first and at any costs.

There is lot of crying over spilled milk by liberals too. Suddenly what they went along with and got coerced into going along with the "every culture is the same kumbaya" (and essentially moved from more principled classical liberal to whatever the modern sel-identifying "feelings" liberal tends to be these days).

I understand Athiests or Agnostics being against Sharia.

What I find so ironic is how Christians and Jews are anti Sharia.

When Islamic Law, Jewish Law and Christian Law are pretty similar to each other. If anybody studied Islam, Judaism and Christianity. You will see lots of similarities but also lots of differences

Its funny seeing Islamic Extremists and Christian extremists all opposing each other.

Its a bit funny how both Muslims and Christians use arguments against each other when it comes to religious law mandated by God.

I dont think freedom or liberty comes from Christianity more so from classical liberalism due to the age of enligtenment and the industrial revolution.

Islam and Christianity basically tells its followers that they have to follow Gods law in their entire lives not just praying or going to the Mosque and Church.

 

[Nilgiri]

I understand Athiests or Agnostics being against Sharia.

What I find so ironic is how Christians and Jews are anti Sharia.

When Islamic Law, Jewish Law and Christian Law are pretty similar to each other. If anybody studied Islam, Judaism and Christianity. You will see lots of similarities but also lots of differences

Its funny seeing Islamic Extremists and Christian extremists all opposing each other.

Its a bit funny how both Muslims and Christians use arguments against each other when it comes to religious law mandated by God.

I dont think freedom or liberty comes from Christianity more so from classical liberalism due to the age of enligtenment and the industrial revolution.

Islam and Christianity basically tells its followers that they have to follow Gods law in their entire lives not just praying or going to the Mosque and Church.

Its mostly due to using the theological framework from Hippo ---> Aquinas to the modern era (just like these 2 were heavily influenced by the Pagan Greek trio philosophers in era before them)....that superseded large parts of "particularities" that the Christian/Western (legal and socioeconomic realm) do not want a return of (especially given the bloodbath of internecine warfare between factions like in the 30 years war).

So this automatically extends to sharia, basically the acorns are similar but the oak trees have notable differences now from the environments they have grown in.

W.r.t jews, its from much smaller population, exiled, dispersed and minority psyche everywhere they were....combined with the complete stasis essentially of much of earlier rabbinic practice/law due to there being the explicit need for the temple in jerusalem (and the ark of covenant etc) for those to be carried out and have relevance. The final destruction of Jewish Jerusalem by the Romans meant a marked change in Rabbinic doctrine....vast portions of the Talmud have since been made irrelevant and large new interpretations have since occured in the 2000 years following (with much influence from the Christian host populations etc).

This is putting aside in the west maybe 10 - 20% of the population are actually practicing Christians....vast majority are non-practicing, secular, non-religious or have moved to agnosticism, atheism and other religions etc.

Hence the great aversion to sharia and any other culture's conservative legal basis (which have not gone through same process the western one did and come to enough similar conclusions).

Its circle peg in square hole stuff...even if both are made of wood essentially.

If say Eastern religions (Buddhism, confucian, shinto, hindu, chinese folk etc etc) also come to same overall de facto conclusions on application in society (essentially carry a framework but put religious particularities behind), the peg will be circle and fit in hole, even if its not wooden so to speak. That's how there is somewhat less clash with these cultures and the west when they immigrate and integrate there etc.

Its why there is a clash between moderate/secularized muslims and more conservative muslims too. i.e what would Ataturk's impression of Sharia have been...given his explicit actions against the religious courts of the time when founding the current modern Republic.

 

[Afif]

I know it's gonna sound little weird, but I needs some help.
So, I have been reading on a special topic for a while now. It is quite sensitive and unpopular.
How to put it? Okay, I read a lot of online materials on 'genetics, race and IQ.' It appears to be a highly politicized subject of disscusion, and I feel like I am back to square one without being able to make any meaningful conclusion.

If you have familiarity with the topic, can any of you guys give me some references and links that maybe more helpful? I would really appreciate that.
@Nilgiri @Ryder @Gary et al.

 

[Ryder]

Its mostly due to using the theological framework from Hippo ---> Aquinas to the modern era (just like these 2 were heavily influenced by the Pagan Greek trio philosophers in era before them)....that superseded large parts of "particularities" that the Christian/Western (legal and socioeconomic realm) do not want a return of (especially given the bloodbath of internecine warfare between factions like in the 30 years war).

So this automatically extends to sharia, basically the acorns are similar but the oak trees have notable differences now from the environments they have grown in.

W.r.t jews, its from much smaller population, exiled, dispersed and minority psyche everywhere they were....combined with the complete stasis essentially of much of earlier rabbinic practice/law due to there being the explicit need for the temple in jerusalem (and the ark of covenant etc) for those to be carried out and have relevance. The final destruction of Jewish Jerusalem by the Romans meant a marked change in Rabbinic doctrine....vast portions of the Talmud have since been made irrelevant and large new interpretations have since occured in the 2000 years following (with much influence from the Christian host populations etc).

This is putting aside in the west maybe 10 - 20% of the population are actually practicing Christians....vast majority are non-practicing, secular, non-religious or have moved to agnosticism, atheism and other religions etc.

Hence the great aversion to sharia and any other culture's conservative legal basis (which have not gone through same process the western one did and come to enough similar conclusions).

Its circle peg in square hole stuff...even if both are made of wood essentially.

If say Eastern religions (Buddhism, confucian, shinto, hindu, chinese folk etc etc) also come to same overall de facto conclusions on application in society (essentially carry a framework but put religious particularities behind), the peg will be circle and fit in hole, even if its not wooden so to speak. That's how there is somewhat less clash with these cultures and the west when they immigrate and integrate there etc.

Its why there is a clash between moderate/secularized muslims and more conservative muslims too. i.e what would Ataturk's impression of Sharia have been...given his explicit actions against the religious courts of the time when founding the current modern Republic.

Whats interesting too Judaism use to be a religion where they went and convert people.

But now being Jew is more of a race than a religious identity.

Everybody can be a Muslim or a Christian but not everybody can be Jewish.

 

[Ryder]

I know it's gonna sound little weird, but I needs some help.
So, I have been reading on a special topic for a while now. It is quite sensitive and unpopular.
How to put it? Okay, I read a lot of online materials on 'genetics, race and IQ.' It appears to be a highly politicized subject of disscusion, and I feel like I am back to square one without being able to make any meaningful conclusion.

If you have familiarity with the topic, can any of you guys give me some references and links that maybe more helpful? I would really appreciate that.
@Nilgiri @Ryder @Gary et al.

A lot of it is controversial because it dates back to the 1800s.

Peak era of scientific racism where racism was basically justified not because of skin colour but due to the size of skulls.

Also you have the missing link alongside human zoos.

Im really interested in finding proper sources without the racial bullcrap or the superior race bullshit.

 

[Afif]

@Nilgiri @Ryder et al.

 

[Nilgiri]

I know it's gonna sound little weird, but I needs some help.
So, I have been reading on a special topic for a while now. It is quite sensitive and unpopular.
How to put it? Okay, I read a lot of online materials on 'genetics, race and IQ.' It appears to be a highly politicized subject of disscusion, and I feel like I am back to square one without being able to make any meaningful conclusion.

If you have familiarity with the topic, can any of you guys give me some references and links that maybe more helpful? I would really appreciate that.
@Nilgiri @Ryder @Gary et al.

Its best to check so called IQ progress over time within a group....as education and opportunity expands (its not just flynn effect, theres other stuff too). And what the correlation of IQ is with "intelligence" to begin with (its not 1:1).

Theres lot of BS when you dig into initial data some of the extreme arguments use (like in case of India, there was data from a few schools taken in the 1950s when our literacy rate was barely 20% at best), and then it gets turned into clickbait maps.

I prefer to chart hard evidence produced of a populations intelligence....and factors helping to expand and develop it specifically. Nothing is stuck in a stasis.

World came around to using Indian number system for a reason for example. Societies wax and wane for various reasons.

 

[Nilgiri]

Whats interesting too Judaism use to be a religion where they went and convert people.

But now being Jew is more of a race than a religious identity.

Everybody can be a Muslim or a Christian but not everybody can be Jewish.

Everyone can convert to Judaism, its just very difficult to (there are things to be done to show proof by praxis) as its not just a statement of belief like can be done in larger population religions overall.

When I mention the acorn that produces the tree....there is one fundamental difference in the layers of this acorn between Judaism and Christianity/Islam.

Judaism believes largely in praxis to cultivate belief. Whereas the other 2 hold belief as the inner most layer (that cultivates praxis). i.e the priority of the first principle.

Why this difference exists and may have been psychologically done as it was is longer debate to get into....but likely large part of it is again the formative environment the jews were in compared to the start of Christianity and then Islam (and the history/society stages they could analyse and inherit from).

Combined with fact of what can be done earlier starting out with oral transmission only (whereas with Christianity and Islam, writing had been invented quite a long while).

The phenomenon is seen in other systems. Why (various branches of) Taoism and Confucianism differ in this prioritisation as well (given the chronology, and arrival of writing and its peculiar form in China too).

In Hinduism, the earliest vedic religion was much more praxis-first as well like judaism... i.e "do the things" (as heard and transmitted directly from the creator, i,e sruti, and most resources went to preserving this unbroken) and the belief comes next.

Later forms of hinduism (including mainstream now) are more like Christianity and Islam, in that they emphasise belief first and have larger written work (smriti) that was able to influence cultivating belief (bhakti) first.

 

[Nilgiri]

@Nilgiri @Ryder et al.

Diversity just exists in the end. You can just keep splitting populations among whatever lines that exist. Its not a strength or weakness in end to me..... but definitely the more lines exist, the harder work needed to unify on what needs unifying.

In the end higher principles are what matter and there should be unity there. The better a society does that and develops trust based on it, the better it will do.

 

[Ryder]

@Nilgiri

Buddhism comes from India. What were the factors that could not make Buddhism supplant Hinduism.

Its been a curious case for me.

 

[Nilgiri]

@Nilgiri

Buddhism comes from India. What were the factors that could not make Buddhism supplant Hinduism.

Its been a curious case for me.

I'll come to this a bit later. It is an interesting subject too.

 

[Ryder]

Diversity just exists in the end. You can just keep splitting populations among whatever lines that exist. Its not a strength or weakness in end to me..... but definitely the more lines exist, the harder work needed to unify on what needs unifying.

In the end higher principles are what matter and there should be unity there. The better a society does that and develops trust based on it, the better it will do.

Diversity can be a strength but it can also be a weakness.

Ottoman Empire, Habsburgs and other old empires that were diverse actually got their strength by putting people together to work for one state.

At the same time conflicts of interest and humans in general can be tribal which also led to their destruction.

A lot of us Muslims can talk about a united Ummah but even Muslims regardless of ethnic groups even rebelled against their own Muslim Empires.

Same story with Christendom.

Ottoman Empire invaded Yemen guess what the Yemenis also rose up against us.

Yavuz Sultan Selim even once said.

"A carpet can accomodate 2 Sufis while the world is not enough for two kings".

Now you have some people dreaming of an empire from Morocco to Indonesia.

 

[Afif]

@Nilgiri

Buddhism comes from India. What were the factors that could not make Buddhism supplant Hinduism.

Its been a curious case for me.

What? No, that is not fair. @Nilgiri is from far away South India. You should ask me, I am from the region. (my ancestors literally from Murshidabad)

Here is post you that I wrote few months back. You probbaly didn't check it out yet.

The most comprehensive and well presented YouTube video on the History of Bengal. @Nilgiri @Ryder @Gary @TR_123456 @Jackdaws I highly recommend you to watch it. (At least first 25 minutes)

Some key points.

today's geography of Bangladesh.

-World largest river delta. Hence also the world most arable land. (percentage wise) second and third is Denmark and Ukraine respectively.

-World largest mangrove forest, 'Sunder-ban' ( means, beautiful forest)

-Longest natural sea beach. (Cox-bazar)


History of region.

Birthplace of multiple civilisations. Notably-

1. Pala empire. (750-1161 CE, Golden age of Buddhism.) One of the most advanced and rich civilisations. They built some of the World first universities.

Pala Empire - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Notably- Nalanda university, founded in 5th century (location- current day India)

View attachment 60761

And the biggest one. The Somapura university, founded in 8th century (current day Bangladesh)

View attachment 60762


2. Bengal Sultanate.

Notable city- Gaur city, World's 5th largest at the time.

Bengal Sultanate - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Notable architecture- Adina mosque.

View attachment 60764


3. Bengal subah (under Mughal rule) 'Golden age of Bengal' also termed 'paradise of nations' by mughal emperor.

Notable cities- Dhaka and Murshidabad.

'The eastern part of Bengal was globally prominent in industries such as textile manufacturing and shipbuilding, and it was a major exporter of silk and cotton textiles, steel, saltpeter, and agricultural and industrial produce in the world.'

Bengal Subah - Simple English Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

simple.wikipedia.org

Most notable industries-

Muslin and Shipbuilding.

'Under Mughal rule, Bengal was a center of the worldwide muslin, silk and pearl trades. During the Mughal era, the most important center of cotton production was Bengal, particularly around its capital city of Dhaka, leading to muslin being called "daka" in distant markets such as Central Asia. Bengal also exported cotton and silk textiles to markets such as Europe, Indonesia and Japan. Bengal produced more than 50% of textiles of Indian subcontinent and around 40% of silks imported by the Dutch from Asia, for example.'

Muslin trade in Bengal - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Due to the riverine geography of Bangladesh, ships have been playing a major role in the trade affairs of the people of this country since the ancient times. According to the accounts of the 14th century Moroccan traveler Ibn Batuta, there used to be large fleets of warships docked in various ports of the country. A medieval European traveler Caesar Frederick documented that the port city of Chittagong and Sandwip were manufacturing hubs of large ships during the mid 15th century. The volume of shipbuilding swelled extensively during the Mughal period. During the 17th century, the shipyards of Chittagong and Sandwip used to build warships for the Sultan of Turkey.


'During the Mughal Empire, the province of Bengal Subah had a large shipbuilding industry. Economic historian Indrajit Ray estimates shipbuilding output of Bengal during the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries at 223,250 tons annually, compared with 23,061 tons produced in nineteen colonies in North America from 1769 to 1771. He also assesses ship repairing as very advanced in Bengal.

Bengali shipbuilding was advanced compared to European shipbuilding at the time. An important innovation in shipbuilding was the introduction of a flushed deck design in Bengal rice ships, resulting in hulls that were stronger and less prone to leak than the structurally weak hulls of traditional European ships built with a stepped deck design. The British East India Company later duplicated the flushed deck and hull designs of Bengal rice ships in the 1760s, leading to significant improvements in seaworthiness and navigation for European ships during the Industrial Revolution.'

http://www.ucd.ie/t4cms/WP17_11.pdf

Shipbuilding in Bangladesh - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Edit- Nalanda University was actually founded by Gupta empire. While Vikramashila and Somapura was founded during Pala period.

Believe it or not? Monks studied Buddhism in Bangladesh (less then 100km away from my home) and then spread it to Tibbet.

"A number of monasteries grew up during the Pāla period in ancient India in the eastern regions of the Indian subcontinent, comprising Bengal and Magadha. According to Tibetan sources, five great Mahaviharas (universities) stood out: Vikramashila, the premier university of the era; Nalanda, past its prime but still illustrious; Somapura Mahavihara; Odantapurā; and Jaggadala. The mahaviharas formed a network; "all of them were under state supervision" and there existed "a system of co-ordination among them ... it seems from the evidence that the different seats of Buddhist learning that functioned in eastern India under the Pāla were regarded together as forming a network, an interlinked group of institutions," and it was common for great scholars to move easily from position to position among them. Atisa, who resided at the Somapura Mahavihara (the largest university in ancient India at that time), traveled from Bengal to Tibet to preach Buddhism. The earliest form of the Bengali language began to the emerge during the eighth century."

Somapura Mahavihara - Wikipedia https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Somapura_Mahavihara


The cultural richness of our region is no less then yours. But few people knows it.

 

[Afif]

Btw, I am just kidding. I will let @Nilgiri to give you a comprehensive answer.

 

[Ryder]

What? No, that is not fair. @Nilgiri is from far away South India. You should ask me, I am from the region. (my ancestors literally from Murshidabad)

Here is post you that I wrote few months back. You probbaly didn't check it out yet.




Believe it or not? Monks studied Buddhism in Bangladesh (less then 100km away from my home) and then spread it to Tibbet.

"A number of monasteries grew up during the Pāla period in ancient India in the eastern regions of the Indian subcontinent, comprising Bengal and Magadha. According to Tibetan sources, five great Mahaviharas (universities) stood out: Vikramashila, the premier university of the era; Nalanda, past its prime but still illustrious; Somapura Mahavihara; Odantapurā; and Jaggadala. The mahaviharas formed a network; "all of them were under state supervision" and there existed "a system of co-ordination among them ... it seems from the evidence that the different seats of Buddhist learning that functioned in eastern India under the Pāla were regarded together as forming a network, an interlinked group of institutions," and it was common for great scholars to move easily from position to position among them. Atisa, who resided at the Somapura Mahavihara (the largest university in ancient India at that time), traveled from Bengal to Tibet to preach Buddhism. The earliest form of the Bengali language began to the emerge during the eighth century."

View attachment 62334
View attachment 62333


Somapura Mahavihara - Wikipedia https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Somapura_Mahavihara


The cultural richness of our region is no less then yours. But few people knows it.

Nalanda was a university but when the Muslim Turks invaded it was in decline.

I dont think the Turks destroyed it because they hated knowledge more like all nomads they loved raiding and looting.

Mongols and the Huns also practiced this type of warfare.

House of wisdom ended up in the same way because the Mongols loved looting.

 

[Afif]

Nalanda was a university but when the Muslim Turks invaded it was in decline.

All of them were universities.
Nalanda was the oldest one and Somapura, the one in question was younger and the biggest one. (And it wasn't in decline)

 

[Afif]

@Nilgiri @Ryder @Gary @TR_123456
You gotta see this.