btw just to make it clear before someone answers me: TL;DR.

You said something similar about american christians.

Americans, statistically, are a more murderous folk, and there's probably one faith that murders more on average than others, but I haven't said anything about that, what I did say was that some Christians do kill folk for the sake of their faith just as Muslims do.

Most/all are conflicts motivated by Islam, so your point of

they obey their book, and in their book, there shall be no compulsion in faith, and as a result, most Islamic countries have a low murder rate

Doesn't really hold any water in that case.

It's motivated by anti-Americanism, from the many wars there are. Out of all the Islamic extremist conflicts, there are few brought about without American or Israeli waging war on the land, first.

Violent Islamic extremism where America warred/war:
*Afghanistan
*Iraq
*Libya
*Pakistan
*Somalia
*Syria
*West Site
*Yemen

Violent Islamic extremism where it hasn't warred:
*Sinai (Israel)

And the Reading does permit violence in self-defence, and eye-for-an-eye warfare.

There are numerous denominations within islam, and many wouldn't consider followers of other denominations to be "devout". So what?

I think we can agree that if all the theologians of a faith except a certain small minority say that this minority is not part of the faith, then it's not. In Catholicism, the Roman Father can just say "Ha ha, you're not Catholic anymore, now." and be done with it.

Americans, statistically, are a more murderous folk, and there's probably one faith that murders more on average than others, but I haven't said anything about that, what I did say was that some Christians do kill folk for the sake of their faith just as Muslims do.

America is not more murderous, rather around average and slightly better than average. That is, american has a lower murder rate than 57% of the world.

And it's not just that america commits a few less murders than the nations on the top of the list. Compared to the nation with the most murders, america has around 30 times less murders than honduras. and compared to some of the islamic nations I mentioned, america commits 2-4 times less murders.

It's motivated by anti-Americanism, from the many wars there are. Out of all the Islamic extremist conflicts, there are few brought about without American or Israeli waging war on the land, first.

Violent Islamic extremism where America warred/war:
*Afghanistan
*Iraq
*Libya
*Pakistan
*Somalia
*Syria
*West Site
*Yemen

The taliban was causing mischief in afghanistan long before america invaded, and they had set up a theocratic state there in fact, which is at least partly why the invasion happened.

While it's true that islamic extremism has only been prevalent in iraq since the 2003 invasion, Ba'athist iraq wasn't a terribly nice place either.

Pakistan has been rife with extremist muslims ever since it's founding, when the muslim indians in the british raj refused to live with the hindus; Which is what created "Pakistan" in the first place.

The US has never heavily intervened in somalia.

It's hard to argue that the US is responsible for the war in syria. while we have been supplying rebels with supplies and such, the civil war was caused by the oppressive assad regime.

Everyone supporting either side in the yemeni civil war are other muslim nations and extremist groups. All the US is doing is airstriking al-queda.

The situation in palestine is caused specifically by muslim palestinians having problems with jewish folks migrating there. It's hard to imagine that they would have any sort of problem with say jordanian muslims migrating.

^ Make America WACOWAPOKAZOOO again!

muslims do more terrorism

therefore we gotta FOCUS more on them

it common logic

Honduras is a particularly bad example since they had a coup backed by the US that has made things awful.

America is not more murderous, rather around average and slightly better than average. That is, american has a lower murder rate than 57% of the world.

Murderous for its development, meant to say, but you should weigh this by population. Who cares if Montenegro has a high murder rate, noone lives there, and it would be misleading to count it as 3% the world when it has 0% the folk.

Without going into detail, a quick check. China+India+America+Indonesia+Brazil+Bangladesh+Russia = ~50% world population. Keep in mind America is the best developed of those countries.

The weighted average between those countries (pretending they hold 100% world population) is about 3.7.

And it's not just that america commits a few less murders than the nations on the top of the list. Compared to the nation with the most murders, america has around 30 times less murders than honduras. and compared to some of the islamic nations I mentioned, america commits 2-4 times less murders.

America doesn't have a war on its land, nor economic collapse, and great drug problems (not as great as Russia, anyway). Out of all countries at the same living tier as America, only Bahamas has a greater murder rate; Germany, France, Hanguk, they all've lower.

The taliban was causing mischief in afghanistan long before america invaded, and they had set up a theocratic state there in fact, which is at least partly why the invasion happened.

Yes, Russia invaded Afghanistan first, but America lengthened the war, which is why they're still here today, and Afghanistan hasn't had a day of peace since 1978.

Also, theocracy has 0 things to do with why America did invade countries, rid your corrupting patriotism here. America doesn't do what's right, America does what America wants, doing in selfish ways like all governments do. Also, America helped these same Students in the Soviet-Afghan war, with supplies (they were still part of the Holy Warriors, then).

While it's true that islamic extremism has only been prevalent in iraq since the 2003 invasion, Ba'athist iraq wasn't a terribly nice place either.

It was far better. There was much less violence, mainly in Kurdistan by Kurd nationalists, women could vote and serve in the military forces, Sunni, Shia, and Christians all worked in government, but once the government was undone, the Shia theocrats, Sunni Islamists, and Kurd nationalists let loose.

It did not have national democracy, but that is a rare thing to be found, in which few countries (like America) can boast of.

Pakistan has been rife with extremist muslims ever since it's founding, when the muslim indians in the british raj refused to live with the hindus; Which is what created "Pakistan" in the first place.

This is very one-sided. The bloody and pointless border wars were brought about by angry Hindus and Muslims, and wasn't really fought about faith, but more anger to their nations. Then there was the Balochistan wars. Then, lastly, in 2004, the Base invaded Pakistan, and then, only in 2004, violent Islamic extremism began in Pakistan. Very soon after the Base came to Pakistan, America found an excuse to bomb Pakistan, and now Pakistan is getting ruined, too.

The US has never heavily intervened in somalia.

There were different phases in the war, now it is intervening quite a bit, and it definitely did in 2006, which began the violent extremism in Somalia.

It's hard to argue that the US is responsible for the war in syria. while we have been supplying rebels with supplies and such, the civil war was caused by the oppressive assad regime.

The revolution was not caused by the Syrian Arab Republic, but well, revolters, and likely foreign agents. Then America invaded Iraq, The Base and later Mashriq got in Iraq, and then they invaded to the already in-war SAR. Anyhow, America is disponsible for lenghtening this war, at any rate.

Everyone supporting either side in the yemeni civil war are other muslim nations and extremist groups. All the US is doing is airstriking al-queda.

America is doing more than that, and has been doing more than that for a while. I think the count was, in 2014, mind you, about 2,100 folk died in Yemen, almost all civilians, from American airstrikes? That's unforgivable.

The situation in palestine is caused specifically by muslim palestinians having problems with jewish folks migrating there. It's hard to imagine that they would have any sort of problem with say jordanian muslims migrating.

Didn't talk about Palestine, but anyhow, the Israeli government started that, not America. Systemic deportation of Palestinians was the least of it, everyone realised, when Israel began to bomb Palestine.

Murderous for its development, meant to say, but you should weigh this by population. Who cares if Montenegro has a high murder rate, noone lives there, and it would be misleading to count it as 3% the world when it has 0% the folk.

I'm not really sure what you're getting at, nobody is claiming that montenegro makes up any significant part of the world population.

America doesn't have a war on its land, nor economic collapse, and great drug problems (not as great as Russia, anyway). Out of all countries at the same living tier as America, only Bahamas has a greater murder rate; Germany, France, Hanguk, they all've lower.

While it is true that the US has a higher murder rate than most other developed nations, the numbers are so small that it hardly matters. Can it really be said that a country is worse because out of 100K people 3 get murdered rather than 1 or 2?

Also, theocracy has 0 things to do with why America did invade countries, rid your corrupting patriotism here. America doesn't do what's right, America does what America wants, doing in selfish ways like all governments do. Also, America helped these same Students in the Soviet-Afghan war, with supplies (they were still part of the Holy Warriors, then).

I'm not being patriotic. It's a logical deduction that the taliban was suspected to be hiding al-queda due to how crazy islamic extremist they were.

It was far better. There was much less violence, mainly in Kurdistan by Kurd nationalists, women could vote and serve in the military forces, Sunni, Shia, and Christians all worked in government, but once the government was undone, the Shia theocrats, Sunni Islamists, and Kurd nationalists let loose.

It did not have national democracy, but that is a rare thing to be found, in which few countries (like America) can boast of.

The factions you mentioned weren't magically created through a US invasion of iraq. They already existed, granted held together by a nutcase dictator. When you have different groups all held together by a crazy dictator, chaos will erupt, the US invasion just sort of set the stage for it to do so.

This is very one-sided. The bloody and pointless border wars were brought about by angry Hindus and Muslims, and wasn't really fought about faith, but more anger to their nations.

I'm not sure what exactly you think those nations are based off of, but they were based off of hindu and muslim religious grouping. This is why Bangladesh was included as "east pakistan" despite being pretty different from actual pakistan. The only similarity it shared was that it was majority muslim.

There were different phases in the war, now it is intervening quite a bit, and it definitely did in 2006, which began the violent extremism in Somalia.

This is the only intervention I could find, and it was a UN one, not specifically a US one:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Operation_in_Somalia_II

America is doing more than that, and has been doing more than that for a while. I think the count was, in 2014, mind you, about 2,100 folk died in Yemen, almost all civilians, from American airstrikes? That's unforgivable.

Couldn't find any sources on those numbers, but from what I can find around 3100 civillians have been killed in the war so far, and I highly doubt that 2/3rds of them are from american airstrikes.

I'm not really sure what you're getting at, nobody is claiming that montenegro makes up any significant part of the world population.

You're overcounting Montenegro and undercounting China by putting the same weight to them.

While it is true that the US has a higher murder rate than most other developed nations, the numbers are so small that it hardly matters. Can it really be said that a country is worse because out of 100K people 3 get murdered rather than 1 or 2?

Yes, you're right, but that wasn't my root point, here.

I'm not being patriotic. It's a logical deduction that the taliban was suspected to be hiding al-queda due to how crazy islamic extremist they were.

Ok, misunderstood you.

The factions you mentioned weren't magically created through a US invasion of iraq. They already existed, granted held together by a nutcase dictator. When you have different groups all held together by a crazy dictator, chaos will erupt, the US invasion just sort of set the stage for it to do so.

There are violent groups in America that would probably become violent if the law enforcement knack suddenly dropped. But anyhow, America brought about, or opened, if you will, the problem.

I'm not sure what exactly you think those nations are based off of, but they were based off of hindu and muslim religious grouping. This is why Bangladesh was included as "east pakistan" despite being pretty different from actual pakistan. The only similarity it shared was that it was majority muslim.

Faith is a part of culture, but not all of culture. The root divisions of India and Pakistan was Islam and Hinduism. But in Pakistan, they were Punjab and Pashtun, while the Indians were Hindi and Bengali.

Islam was not promoted in this war, nor was Hinduism, and the folk fought for their country, not for their faiths (for the most part, I know there's probably exceptions).

This is the only intervention I could find, and it was a UN one, not specifically a US one:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Operation_in_Somalia_II

America spearheaded all the invasions it was involved in, anyhow, that was the second intervention, although I was wrong, Americans were not directly involved in the 2006 to 2009 war.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unified_Task_Force

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Operation_in_Somalia_II

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gabre_Heard

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/African_Union_Mission_to_Somalia

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Combined_Joint_Task_Force_%E2%80%93_Horn_of_Africa

http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2016/may/02/first-british-troops-arrive-in-somalia-as-part-of-un-mission

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-20996963

Couldn't find any sources on those numbers, but from what I can find around 3100 civillians have been killed in the war so far, and I highly doubt that 2/3rds of them are from american airstrikes.

I wasn't talking about the war, that began in 2014, also, I misrecalled, it was 800 civilians for Yemen since 2002, and 2014 killed globally in 2014.

https://www.thebureauinvestigates.com/2015/02/02/almost-2500-killed-covert-us-drone-strikes-obama-inauguration/

Before the war even began.

No one is being paid to shill for Hillary. It's a Republican-funded lie and a pathetic attempt at smearing her campaign!

You're overcounting Montenegro and undercounting China by putting the same weight to them.

I'm not really sure where I said anything about montenegro...

There are violent groups in America that would probably become violent if the law enforcement knack suddenly dropped. But anyhow, America brought about, or opened, if you will, the problem.

Iraq is currently on their seventh government since the fall of the ottoman empire in the early 1900's. Sure there may be violent extremists in america, but nowhere near the level in iraq; After all, america is pretty much still on our first government, over 200 years later.

Competing factions all held together by some nutjob dictator don't make for a very stable place, and indeed Iraq has never been the most stable of places. Something would have likely happened eventually.

Faith is a part of culture, but not all of culture. The root divisions of India and Pakistan was Islam and Hinduism. But in Pakistan, they were Punjab and Pashtun, while the Indians were Hindi and Bengali.

Islam was not promoted in this war, nor was Hinduism, and the folk fought for their country, not for their faiths (for the most part, I know there's probably exceptions).

Most hindus were in favor of keeping a united india. If both sides were in agreement that there should be separate islamic and hindu states it's likely that there would have been much less mess than there was, as well as much less animosity in the region today.

Make Trump rich again!

I'm not really sure where I said anything about montenegro...

This is why I don't like to argue with you, seem like the points keep missing the dot. You haven't said anything about Montenegro, but with an unweighted average, you count it the same as China.

Iraq is currently on their seventh government since the fall of the ottoman empire in the early 1900's. Sure there may be violent extremists in america, but nowhere near the level in iraq; After all, america is pretty much still on our first government, over 200 years later.

Well, it was still a British settlement until 1932, but anyhow, it never had Islamic extremism as a big problem until the 1980s, when America started encouraging such things. Also, America is on its second government, the first one was ended.

Competing factions all held together by some nutjob dictator don't make for a very stable place, and indeed Iraq has never been the most stable of places. Something would have likely happened eventually.

There are competing factions in all countries, some more than other. And just about every country is held together by a dictator. China, India, America. But a good dictator makes patriots, which America is known for. Every page will have an end, but I assure you, the freer countries will be ended faster.

Most hindus were in favor of keeping a united india.

Source? M. Gandhi was, but he was in great opposition to this - by Muslims and Hindu.

If both sides were in agreement that there should be separate islamic and hindu states it's likely that there would have been much less mess than there was, as well as much less animosity in the region today.

I don't disagree.

This is why I don't like to argue with you, seem like the points keep missing the dot. You haven't said anything about Montenegro, but with an unweighted average, you count it the same as China.

I suppose I'm just not getting it. Why should there even be any sort of weight? Measuring murder rates in terms of intentional homicides per 100K people is totally fine IMO.

Source? M. Gandhi was, but he was in great opposition to this - by Muslims and Hindu.

This is just how most descriptions of the partition describe it; The Indian national congress wanted a united, independent india, and the muslims refused to live in a coutnry with the hindus.

http://asianhistory.about.com/od/india/f/partitionofindiafaq.htm

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Partition_of_India#Two_nation_theory

http://www2.needham.k12.ma.us/nhs/cur/Baker_00/baker_modern/baker_mj_ep_p4/indian_pakistani_conflict.htm