• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Muslim 'radicalization' hearing a success, say Rep. Peter King, Republicans

justabubba said:
here is how it can be a bad thing
the muslims - who may now believe they are being unfairly singled out - may be less inclined to expose the prospective terrorists within their group than if we were evenhanded about this matter

the muslims abroad are watching. and if they see that we impose a double standard against the interests of America's muslims then it will confirm what osama bin forgotten has been expressing in his fatwas. such actions will provide him more credibility and less for America
Click to expand...

You honestly think that Muslims need an excuse to kill Westerners? You honestly think there is anything you can do to dissuade them? You honestly think there is anything you can do to persuade them? Guantanamo and Congressional hearings don't make suicide killers, a warped ideology, bribes from Saudis make suicide killers and rape makes suicide killers.

You can love them all you want. They won't love you back.

Rape. Here I'll give you a source you can respect: Forced suicide bombers. This is terrible - Democratic Underground
 
StillBallin75 said:
There are differences obviously, but at the end of the day terrorism is terrorism wherever its found. If you kill innocents you should be condemned, no matter the cause. That's just my two cents.
Click to expand...

I agree, condemnation all around.
 
Deuce said:
... and how's that, exactly?
Click to expand...

Well, the IRA is a paramilitary organization which was primarily localized to the British Isles and wanted self-government and independence from England. This went through a civil war in Ireland. Al Qaeda is a group not fighting for independence of a government, or because they are oppressed - nor is it for religion freedoms and we know that their operations are world wide.

There's way too much to educate you on Deuce, you might try reading a book about both and reassessing. If you think the IRA and Al Qaeda are the same... that's said out of ignorance, so I excuse you for that.
 
Ockham said:
Well, the IRA is a paramilitary organization which was primarily localized to the British Isles and wanted self-government and independence from England. This went through a civil war in Ireland. Al Qaeda is a group not fighting for independence of a government, or because they are oppressed - nor is it for religion freedoms and we know that their operations are world wide.

There's way too much to educate you on Deuce, you might try reading a book about both and reassessing. If you think the IRA and Al Qaeda are the same... that's said out of ignorance, so I excuse you for that.
Click to expand...

Gotta agree with Ockham here. However that doesn't take away from the fact that during the Troubles, the IRA, either deliberately or through negligence, ended up killing civilians in the course of their violence as well.
 
Terrorism and suicide terrorism are the choice and likely only effective strategy to wriggle concessions from the occupying democratic states. Note that until the war on terror almost all suicide bombings were against democratic occupations of the terrorist's native territory. I don't remember who published that... pape I think.
 
SE102 said:
Terrorism and suicide terrorism are the choice and likely only effective strategy to wriggle concessions from the occupying democratic states. Note that until the war on terror almost all suicide bombings were against democratic occupations of the terrorist's native territory. I don't remember who published that... pape I think.
Click to expand...

If I recall correctly, out of all the terrorists that were involved in 9/11, the United States was occupying none of their home countries. Pape is a good academic but if that's his actual thesis it is irrelevant here.
 
Last edited:
StillBallin75 said:
If I recall correctly, out of all the terrorists that were involved in 9/11, the United States was occupying none of their home countries. Pape is a good academic but if that's his actual thesis it is irrelevant here.
Click to expand...

1. It's not irrelevant because the particularity of a terrorist's home state does not discount his reasons for joining al-Qaeda and doing its bidding. Al-Qaeda recruits its members primarily from the standpoint of American presence in the Persian Gulf as a general area.

2. Nevertheless, 15 out of 19 were from Saudi Arabia. The United States had a military presence there until 2003.

BBC NEWS | Middle East | US pulls out of Saudi Arabia

USATODAY.com - Official: 15 of 19 Sept. 11 hijackers were Saudi
 
theplaydrive said:
1. It's not irrelevant because the particularity of a terrorist's home state does not discount his reasons for joining al-Qaeda and doing its bidding. Al-Qaeda recruits its members primarily from the standpoint of American presence in the Persian Gulf as a general area.

2. Nevertheless, 15 out of 19 were from Saudi Arabia. The United States had a military presence there until 2003.

BBC NEWS | Middle East | US pulls out of Saudi Arabia

USATODAY.com - Official: 15 of 19 Sept. 11 hijackers were Saudi
Click to expand...

Ah true my mistake. You're entirely correct playdrive. forgot about that. But there's still an unsubtle difference between having a military presence and occupation/oppression.
 
StillBallin75 said:
Ah true my mistake. You're entirely correct playdrive. forgot about that. But there's still an unsubtle difference between having a military presence and occupation/oppression.
Click to expand...

Terrorists think they've welcomed the devil to their door really. Hence they kill cooperating muslims =\.
 
StillBallin75 said:
Ah true my mistake. You're entirely correct playdrive. forgot about that. But there's still an unsubtle difference between having a military presence and occupation/oppression.
Click to expand...

I agree with you. The problem is al-Qaeda frames military presence as the same thing as occupation and oppression. Even if bin Laden himself does not really care about the difference, many of his recruits do. An rough analogy would be the way some white Americans feel about the growing presence of illegal immigrants/Mexicans in the U.S.. There increase in numbers is obviously not a take over of America and its values. Nevertheless, many people vehemently argue that it is.

The presence of a culture that appears diametrically opposed to their conservative, Islamic values and that also appears to have a good enough relationship with their government to have a lasting impact is a threat to their culture and ideology. The way I see it, even if the difference is palpable, it only matters (in this particular argument) how terrorists/recruits see the military presence.
 
LookingGlass said:
Anyone who doesn't want more clarity and information has an agenda and therefore no objectivity. There is no debate when objectivity is absent.
Click to expand...

ironic coming from someone who makes statements like this.

LookingGlass said:
Any Muslim's opinion of the United States is irrelevant. I am so tired of everyone tiptoeing around these kooks.
Click to expand...

LookingGlass said:
If you are a Muslim and you have an opinion about the U.S., said opinion is irrelevant. Is that clearer?
Click to expand...
 
theplaydrive said:
I agree with you. The problem is al-Qaeda frames military presence as the same thing as occupation and oppression. Even if bin Laden himself does not really care about the difference, many of his recruits do. An rough analogy would be the way some white Americans feel about the growing presence of illegal immigrants/Mexicans in the U.S.. There increase in numbers is obviously not a take over of America and its values. Nevertheless, many people vehemently argue that it is.

The presence of a culture that appears diametrically opposed to their conservative, Islamic values and that also appears to have a good enough relationship with their government to have a lasting impact is a threat to their culture and ideology. The way I see it, even if the difference is palpable, it only matters (in this particular argument) how terrorists/recruits see the military presence.
Click to expand...

I agree. It's part of their propaganda narrative. However in my mind the million dollar question is how these guys are so easily brainwashed into thinking that the West is the root of all their problems.
 
SE102 said:
Terrorists think they've welcomed the devil to their door really. Hence they kill cooperating muslims =\.
Click to expand...


If you think that this sort of simplistic thinking about the reasons behind attacking the western cultures is the only reason, then I have news for you.

Radical Islam is on a mission of caliphate across the world, either by population overtaking, or by death and destruction their goals are the same. rule the world, and make it submit to Islam, or kill those who don't.

Those who blame our presence on SA land during, and after the first Gulf War, should at least be smart enough to see that using this as a reason for attack is an excuse, nothing more.


j-mac
 
j-mac said:
If you think that this sort of simplistic thinking about the reasons behind attacking the western cultures is the only reason, then I have news for you.

Radical Islam is on a mission of caliphate across the world, either by population overtaking, or by death and destruction their goals are the same. rule the world, and make it submit to Islam, or kill those who don't.

Those who blame our presence on SA land during, and after the first Gulf War, should at least be smart enough to see that using this as a reason for attack is an excuse, nothing more.


j-mac
Click to expand...

I think there's a difference between radical Islam's rhetoric regarding establishing a global caliphate, and reality. It's kind of like Hamas's charter in which they say they want to dismantle Israel as a state. They might say they want to destroy Israel but realistically they know they don't have the capability to do so. Likewise, the radical Islamists might pay lip service to such rhetoric regarding a global caliphate, but in reality they might have more realistic objectives (not sure what those are though).
 
StillBallin75 said:
I agree. It's part of their propaganda narrative. However in my mind the million dollar question is how these guys are so easily brainwashed into thinking that the West is the root of all their problems.
Click to expand...

I've thought about that to and it's obviously impossible for either one of to reach know, but I always assume it works by the same mechanism that makes some racists/white supremacists think that blacks and Jews are the root of their economic problems.

If you're living in the Middle East and you grow up with a sense of loyalty to the region, population and Islam then the idea that another foreign power, whose military may have killed your relatives or friends, is still on your land may be enough to tip you over. What I've always found interesting about suicide terrorists (al-Qaeda in particular) is that most/many of them are well-educated, have good income and show no signs of mental disorder. We tend to think of extremists as uneducated and poor, but these guys aren't - I can't wrap my head around that.
 
Radical Islam is on a mission of caliphate across the world, either by population overtaking, or by death and destruction their goals are the same. rule the world, and make it submit to Islam, or kill those who don't.
Click to expand...

All I got is rolly eyes for you, dude. :roll:

:roll: Just rolly eyes. :roll:
 
theplaydrive said:
I've thought about that to and it's obviously impossible for either one of to reach know, but I always assume it works by the same mechanism that makes some racists/white supremacists think that blacks and Jews are the root of their economic problems.

If you're living in the Middle East and you grow up with a sense of loyalty to the region, population and Islam then the idea that another foreign power, whose military may have killed your relatives or friends, is still on your land may be enough to tip you over. What I've always found interesting about suicide terrorists (al-Qaeda in particular) is that most/many of them are well-educated, have good income and show no signs of mental disorder. We tend to think of extremists as uneducated and poor, but these guys aren't - I can't wrap my head around that.
Click to expand...

I totally agree and I've thought the same about this. I've been wrestling with the same questions. Clearly education and intelligence/moral reasoning aren't quite the same thing.
 
j-mac said:
If you think that this sort of simplistic thinking about the reasons behind attacking the western cultures is the only reason, then I have news for you.

Radical Islam is on a mission of caliphate across the world, either by population overtaking, or by death and destruction their goals are the same. rule the world, and make it submit to Islam, or kill those who don't.

Those who blame our presence on SA land during, and after the first Gulf War, should at least be smart enough to see that using this as a reason for attack is an excuse, nothing more.


j-mac
Click to expand...

I agree with StillBallin on this one. They claim this in many of their videos and perhaps in their ideal world everyone would be a Muslim like many Christians' ideal world would be all Christians. It's similar to how the Aryan Brotherhood claims to operate on a basis of white superiority and working against all other races. However, the Aryan Brotherhood has worked with Mexican gangs in the drug trade and other aspects. At the end of the day, in spite of their words, the bottom line for them is money. Similarly, a lot of evidence based on thorough studies of al-Qaeda shows that their bottom line is getting the U.S. off of their land.
 
LookingGlass said:
They would if Christians had flown planes into buildings in NYC.
Click to expand...
No, they wouldn't. But apparently Deuce's comment flew completely over your head. Also, the people who flew jets in the WTC are DEAD!!!
 
StillBallin75 said:
I think there's a difference between radical Islam's rhetoric regarding establishing a global caliphate, and reality. It's kind of like Hamas's charter in which they say they want to dismantle Israel as a state. They might say they want to destroy Israel but realistically they know they don't have the capability to do so. Likewise, the radical Islamists might pay lip service to such rhetoric regarding a global caliphate, but in reality they might have more realistic objectives (not sure what those are though).
Click to expand...


We are dealing with people here that still subscribe to 7th century remedies for their condition. Ever heard of "Twelvers" Ahmadinjihad is one. And if Islam is a billion and a half, then just 10% (conservative estimate) are radicalized, that's 1 1/2 million jihadists all believing the worst parts of the Hadith, and Koran as literal in terms of killing non believers. These radicals have the rest of the religion hostage, through intimidation.

They may not have the means, but they don't care, to die trying is their greatest calling.


j-mac
 
theplaydrive said:
I've thought about that to and it's obviously impossible for either one of to reach know, but I always assume it works by the same mechanism that makes some racists/white supremacists think that blacks and Jews are the root of their economic problems.

If you're living in the Middle East and you grow up with a sense of loyalty to the region, population and Islam then the idea that another foreign power, whose military may have killed your relatives or friends, is still on your land may be enough to tip you over. What I've always found interesting about suicide terrorists (al-Qaeda in particular) is that most/many of them are well-educated, have good income and show no signs of mental disorder. We tend to think of extremists as uneducated and poor, but these guys aren't - I can't wrap my head around that.
Click to expand...
Robert Pape wrote an excellent book called 'Dying to Win' where he documents actual cases of suicide bombers. he talks about the fact that they often experienced a traumatic event in their lives, be it a family member who was killed, etc. most cases involve them living under foreign military occupation, and them eventually doing it for political reasons - not religious.

it's a good read regardless if you agree with the conclusion or not. you can at least take the presented facts and make up your own conclusions.
 
theplaydrive said:
I agree with StillBallin on this one. They claim this in many of their videos and perhaps in their ideal world everyone would be a Muslim like many Christians' ideal world would be all Christians. It's similar to how the Aryan Brotherhood claims to operate on a basis of white superiority and working against all other races. However, the Aryan Brotherhood has worked with Mexican gangs in the drug trade and other aspects. At the end of the day, in spite of their words, the bottom line for them is money. Similarly, a lot of evidence based on thorough studies of al-Qaeda shows that their bottom line is getting the U.S. off of their land.
Click to expand...

I don't have a definitive answer, but do you think that AQ would stop their attacks if the US withdrew its military forces completely from all Muslim countries? This was a poll awhile back, I think.
 
j-mac said:
We are dealing with people here that still subscribe to 7th century remedies for their condition. Ever heard of "Twelvers" Ahmadinjihad is one. And if Islam is a billion and a half, then just 10% (conservative estimate) are radicalized, that's 1 1/2 million jihadists all believing the worst parts of the Hadith, and Koran as literal in terms of killing non believers. These radicals have the rest of the religion hostage, through intimidation.

They may not have the means, but they don't care, to die trying is their greatest calling.


j-mac
Click to expand...

10% would be 150,000,000 Muslims, not 1,500,000. Your estimate is not even supported by anything.
 
Serenity said:
Robert Pape wrote an excellent book called 'Dying to Win' where he documents actual cases of suicide bombers. he talks about the fact that they often experienced a traumatic event in their lives, be it a family member who was killed, etc. most cases involve them living under foreign military occupation, and them eventually doing it for political reasons - not religious.

it's a good read regardless if you agree with the conclusion or not. you can at least take the presented facts and make up your own conclusions.
Click to expand...


Facts are always the way to go, however you can also present facts in a skewed manner. For instance, when you speak of Pape speaking on terrorists as "...most cases involve them living under foreign military occupation, and them eventually doing it for political reasons - not religious."

This can be spun. I haven't read his book, but hope that he doesn't do that.

j-mac
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom