Brussels attacked.

[markmifsud]

These atrocities are done in the name of religion, but not for religion. Not an avid believer in anything but I am sure no honest religion has instructions to go out and slaughter the innocent.

 

[Flyinspanner]

Do you seriously think they care about losing our trust and respect?

When I mentioned some people losing the trust and respect of the wider community around them, I meant the Muslim communities losing trust of the Christian/western cultures around them where they have chosen to live/move to (or their forebears did).

If citizens start to feel that one particular (religious or ethnic) group is aiding and concealing these mad murderous lunatics, (because they haven't shopped them) then the wider community of regular law abiding people will come to mistrust and fear, then despise those groups.

It's then a short hop to support swinging to right wing politics..it's all very scary as to where this ends up.

 

[Deleted member 37751]

simple: Religion is conflict is business, period!

ftfy

 

[NDFR]

Stop bombing their countries killing their children and they'll stop killing yours.

It's simple.

Actually theres a bit more to it than that.

What is the 'their country' that you refer to anyway?

 

[KillerHERTZ]

Refrain from discussing religion please, else the thread will close.

 

[markjay]

Stop bombing their countries killing their children and they'll stop killing yours.

It's simple.

That's precisly what Michael Adebolajo said after killing Drommer Lee Rigby:

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/lee-rigby-murder-trial-gruesome-2943281

I can follow the logic of his argument (just about).... but even so I find it very difficult to symphetise or even just be emphatic.

 

[HB]

Actually theres a bit more to it than that.

What is the 'their country' that you refer to anyway?

You just want to start an argument. You know exactly what I mean

Same applies to markjay.

 

[markjay]

When I mentioned some people losing the trust and respect of the wider community around them, I meant the Muslim communities losing trust of the Christian/western cultures around them where they have chosen to live/move to (or their forebears did).

If citizens start to feel that one particular (religious or ethnic) group is aiding and concealing these mad murderous lunatics, (because they haven't shopped them) then the wider community of regular law abiding people will come to mistrust and fear, then despise those groups.

It's then a short hop to support swinging to right wing politics..it's all very scary as to where this ends up.

When you look closely at these processes, a two-tier system emerges.

At the lower level, activists and supporters are being told that their actions will bring freedom to their brothers' 'occupied' countries. They are also being told it is all about religion.

The people who mastermind this ideology however, know very well that these suicide attacks on European or US soil will acheive no such effect.

With the exception of Spain (the Madrid train bombing)... when did it ever work? Did the Americans, British, or French withdrew their forces or reduces their political intervention in the Middle East as result of 9/11, 7/7, or Bataclan?

I beleive that the real purpose behind these attacks is the alienation of the Muslim population in Europe and the US and forcing them to make a choice between their 'persecutors' and their 'kinfolk'.

It is the rise of the white far right that ISIS and Al-Qaida are trying to promote in Western societies. The idea that Muslims and non-Muslims can actually co-exist peacefully in a tolerant society undermines ISIS extreme ideology and weakens its power base.

The reason these attacks take place in mixed cities is not simply because this is where ISIS finds its supporters. It is because this is where the effect will be maximised by turning non-Muslims against Muslims, thus alienating otherwise-peaceful Muslims and forcing them to side with their 'defenders', ISIS, by joining the circle of violence.

My own personal belief is that the worse thing we can do to ISIS and Al-Qaida is contiune and have peaceful and tolerant relationships between our diverse communities and not give-in to scaremongering tactics.

 

[markjay]

You just want to start an argument. You know exactly what I mean

Same applies to markjay.

HB, you made the first comment.... you brought it into the discussion, and now suggest that it should not be discussed or responded to.... ? Of course it is a controversial statement.

This is not me being argumentative BTW, I am happy to keep certain topics off this forum, but let's all stick to the same guidelines.

 

[NDFR]

You just want to start an argument. You know exactly what I mean

Same applies to markjay.

No I don't want to start an argument actually.

I'm interested to understand your point of view.

Europeans have been responsible for some of these bombings, so 'their countries' is something I don't understand.

 

[Deleted member 113659]

Yet another terrible day for so many innocent people, their families & friends. My heart goes out to each and everyone of them. May they rest in peace.

Ant.

 

[Red C220]

I'm not entirely sure this would stop if we "stopped bombing anyone's country" this has gone beyond protest/revenge terrorism and developed in to a form of extreme fanaticism.

There's so much rolled in to what keeps being referred to as "so called IS" (what's the so called bit all about?), stemming back from 9/11 and earlier that it's become a way of life for a hardcore that will never end.

What is the actual goal of IS? In their minds what would they ideally like to see to stop this kind of action? I'm not entirely sure, does anyone else know?

I grew up in London in a time of the IRA problems and you really couldn't defend against that kind of terrorism, the MO of IS doesn't appear to be much different other than they appear to be going for volume soft casualties rather than political (government) targets.

I don't buy the "stop bombing their countries/children" argument, I think this is far more unhinged than that.

 

[markjay]

..what's the so called bit all about?...

The 'so-called' bit relates to the word 'State' in 'Islamic State' - the international community do not accept or recognise that IS (or ISIS, or Daesh as it is called in Arabic) is a State, instead they are seen as an illegal terrorist organisation.

 

[KillerHERTZ]

"so called IS" (what's the so called bit all about?)

If you call them IS your recognising/ acknowledging that they are an actual state. Thus 'so called'. Daesh is their correct name.

 

[grober]

This is one of the latest texts on the subject- makes for uncomfortable reading. A couple of reviews.
The New Threat from Islamic Militancy by Jason Burke review ? important and impressive | Books | The Guardian
The New Threat from Islamic Militancy by Jason Burke, review: 'persuasive'

 

[Red C220]

The 'so-called' bit relates to the word 'State' in 'Islamic State' - the international community do not accept or recognise that IS (or ISIS, or Daesh as it is called in Arabic) is a State, instead they are seen as an illegal terrorist organisation.

If you call them IS your recognising/ acknowledging that they are an actual state. Thus 'so called'. Daesh is their correct name.

Now I've learned something this evening. The "so called" bit was irritating me.

Why aren't they simply referred to as Daesh then?

 

[StuartK]

This is exactly why we need to close our borders. Problem is we already have these nutters here!

 

[whitenemesis]

Now I've learned something this evening. The "so called" bit was irritating me.

Why aren't they simply referred to as Daesh then?

"Daesh, an adapted acronym of their Arabic name - Dawlat al-Islamiyah f'al-Iraq w Belaad al-Sham - is similar to another Arabic word - das - which means 'to trample down' or 'crush', which could therefore be the source of their dislike.

The group hates it so much, in fact, that they have reportedly threatened to cut out the tongues of anyone who uses it in public."

http://indy100.independent.co.uk/ar...it-if-we-start-calling-them-daesh--bkC822p_zl

What does Daesh mean? ISIS 'threatens to cut out the tongues' of anyone using this word - Mirror Online

 

[markjay]

Now I've learned something this evening. The "so called" bit was irritating me.

Why aren't they simply referred to as Daesh then?

Well that's the big I don't get myself... apparently it is OK to call them Daesh, but Daesh simply means the same in Arabic...:

al-Dawla al-Islamiya al-Iraq al-Sham (Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant)

In my view the West should simply refer to them as 'The Group of Nutters in the Middle East', though the obvious risk is that this correctly describes too many groups out there

 

[StuartK]

John Lennon was a visionary....

He knew that without religion there would be no wars. He was right.