• 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!

What ISIS Really Wants.

ReverendHellh0und

ReverendHellh0und

I don't respect you.
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 13, 2007
Messages
79,903
Reaction score
20,983
Location
I love your hate.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
[h=1]What ISIS Really Wants[/h]


What ISIS Really Wants - The Atlantic



The Islamic State is no mere collection of psychopaths. It is a religious group with carefully considered beliefs, among them that it is a key agent of the coming apocalypse. Here’s what that means for its strategy—and for how to stop it.
Click to expand...




I remember many years ago posting an article "What Al Qaeda really wants".
The Future of Terrorism: What al-Qaida Really Wants - SPIEGEL ONLINE


Which was largely ignored, though note if you read it, all those years ago, yet if you read it today it reads like a history article not a prediction one. Currently we are between the 5th and 6th stage this article predicted.


Now another very insightful article comes out on ISIS, explaining who they are, what they want, and how we are not confronting the problem correctly.


This too, I fear will be ignored.
 
ReverendHellh0und said:
I remember many years ago posting an article "What Al Qaeda really wants".
The Future of Terrorism: What al-Qaida Really Wants - SPIEGEL ONLINE


Which was largely ignored, though note if you read it, all those years ago, yet if you read it today it reads like a history article not a prediction one. Currently we are between the 5th and 6th stage this article predicted.


Now another very insightful article comes out on ISIS, explaining who they are, what they want, and how we are not confronting the problem correctly.


This too, I fear will be ignored.
Click to expand...

We have an administration incapable of saying ISIS is islamic or admiting they just beheaded 21 Christians. ISIS has two to three years of free reign pending the 2016 election outcome.
 
Obama will wake up once American ISIS members come back home and create havoc.
 
ReverendHellh0und said:
I remember many years ago posting an article "What Al Qaeda really wants".
The Future of Terrorism: What al-Qaida Really Wants - SPIEGEL ONLINE


Which was largely ignored, though note if you read it, all those years ago, yet if you read it today it reads like a history article not a prediction one. Currently we are between the 5th and 6th stage this article predicted.


Now another very insightful article comes out on ISIS, explaining who they are, what they want, and how we are not confronting the problem correctly.


This too, I fear will be ignored.
Click to expand...

They were talking about this on Morning Joe, and pointing out again how everyone except Obama is calling ISIS what they are. Thanks for posting the link and also the Spiegel link. Interesting stuff!
 
RDS said:
Obama will wake up once American ISIS members come back home and create havoc.
Click to expand...

Heya RDS. :2wave: Cmon now, they can explain away work place violence easily nowadays.
 
Hopefully, the middle eastern countries will, with our help, do what needs to be done. What needs to be done is the wholesale slaughter of ISIS. We Americans don't have the stomach for that.
 
tres borrachos said:
They were talking about this on Morning Joe, and pointing out again how everyone except Obama is calling ISIS what they are. Thanks for posting the link and also the Spiegel link. Interesting stuff!
Click to expand...



I was screaming the der spiegel link the day it came out, lol no one still considers it.
 
Maybe we're going about this all the wrong way with the islamic extremists factions.

Perhaps we should be air dropping booze, playboy and cigarettes.
 
There is nothing in this article that I skimmed that dispels the most common understanding:
  • Take and hold territory
    • Expand their territory, their Caliphate, across the world (so take over the world, and kill all non-Muslims)
  • Expel any non-Muslims from their territory
  • Destroy the state of Israel
  • Enforce Sharia law in their territory

So isn't the question now whether the world will defend itself against this onslaught? Or lay down as sheep, 'take it' and be subjugated by ISIS?
Do YOU want to live under Sharia law?
Do YOU want to live under ISIS, which has the stated goal of executing all non-Muslims?
(At least on Arabian peninsula, but potentially in all ISIS held territory)
 
fmw said:
Hopefully, the middle eastern countries will, with our help, do what needs to be done. What needs to be done is the wholesale slaughter of ISIS. We Americans don't have the stomach for that.
Click to expand...


I GUARANTEE you that the average anti-Islam responder to this thread and anywhere else they discuss this article will misunderstand what is being said in the article, because they want to.


the wholesale slaughter of ISIS
Click to expand...

The article DOES NOT call for the wholesale slaughter of ISIS , at least not by the US or western military. The article SPECIFICALLY states that ISIS would like nothing more than a US ground force opposing them in Syria/Iraq, and that the best course, instead, is the present course of bombing and containment.

The article, which the war mongers will otherwise say supports their opinion of Islam (which it does not to a large extent) , SPECIFICALLY says the current US course is the best available option.

I wonder how many of the neocons that will otherwise praise this article understand that ?
 
Ockham said:
Maybe we're going about this all the wrong way with the islamic extremists factions.

Perhaps we should be air dropping booze, playboy and cigarettes.
Click to expand...

I did notice we haven't heard anything from those in Morocco.....maybe dropping a bunch of the hashish on them. Will work.....get them laid back and hungry for some munchies.
 
Longshot Lou said:
I GUARANTEE you that the average anti-Islam responder to this thread and anywhere else they discuss this article will misunderstand what is being said in the article, because they want to.




The article DOES NOT call for the wholesale slaughter of ISIS , at least not by the US or western military. The article SPECIFICALLY states that ISIS would like nothing more than a US ground force opposing them in Syria/Iraq, and that the best course, instead, is the present course of bombing and containment.

The article, which the war mongers will otherwise say supports their opinion of Islam (which it does not to a large extent) , SPECIFICALLY says the current US course is the best available option.

I wonder how many of the neocons that will otherwise praise this article understand that ?
Click to expand...

Star Trek is filled with life lessons and parables we can use in our lives. I remember one plot line where Data was tasked with convincing a whole people to relocate from their planet . . . or be destroyed by the Kardashians. (Ha! Sounds like a Star Trek name, doesn't it?) Of course, he was barely able to convince them. They were ready to fight to the death. His most convincing plea came at the end, of course. Paraphrased, badly: "You are ready to die. You stand with weapons in hand prepared to fight to the death to defend your home. You won't need those weapons. The Kardashians will destroy you, your homes, your lifestock, your land . . . from their starship. One starship. You will die never seeing the face of your enemy."

Perhaps you're right.
 
ISIS wants an apocalyptic conflagration on their "holy land" , just as extremist Christians anticipate and await an apocalyptic conflagration in Israel (only have not yet been able to persuade US administrations to make it happen). The answer to ISIS is not to give them what they want, - doing so would prove to other Muslims that the ISIS vision was correct.
 
Longshot Lou said:
ISIS wants an apocalyptic conflagration on their "holy land" , just as extremist Christians anticipate and await an apocalyptic conflagration in Israel (only have not yet been able to persuade US administrations to make it happen). The answer to ISIS is not to give them what they want, - doing so would prove to other Muslims that the ISIS vision was correct.
Click to expand...




And here we go with the excuse making by suggesting christian extremism is as prevalent and on par with islamic extremism. *sigh*
 
Longshot Lou said:
I GUARANTEE you that the average anti-Islam responder to this thread and anywhere else they discuss this article will misunderstand what is being said in the article, because they want to.

The article DOES NOT call for the wholesale slaughter of ISIS , at least not by the US or western military. The article SPECIFICALLY states that ISIS would like nothing more than a US ground force opposing them in Syria/Iraq, and that the best course, instead, is the present course of bombing and containment.

The article, which the war mongers will otherwise say supports their opinion of Islam (which it does not to a large extent) , SPECIFICALLY says the current US course is the best available option.

I wonder how many of the neocons that will otherwise praise this article understand that ?
Click to expand...

But I don't agree with the article at all. The motivation is pretty obvious. They intend to convert the world to their way of thinking and doing things by force. They will continue to do that until they are killed. Personally, I favor getting the U.S. completely out of the middle east. But it is important to understand that they will come and we will fight them. Doing so now would be a mistake because we don't have a leader as president. What we are doing now won't change anything.
 
And here we go with the excuse making by suggesting christian extremism is as prevalent and on par with islamic extremism. *sigh*
Click to expand...

It would be helpful if you would understand the Atlantic article ( which is so long most people that discuss it won't even have read it), but I am not holding out much hope. There is an endless crowd of people on discussion forums who have not read the material they purport to be discussing.
 
Longshot Lou said:
It would be helpful if you would understand the Atlantic article ( which is so long most people that discuss it won't even have read it), but I am not holding out much hope. There is an endless crowd of people on discussion forums who have not read the material they purport to be discussing.
Click to expand...



lol.... nice try bro.
 
But it is important to understand that they will come and we will fight them. Doing so now would be a mistake because we don't have a leader as president. What we are doing now won't change anything.
Click to expand...

MANY people will come on an article like this and repeat things they have already said, as if the expertise of the author did not exist. The author says, quite specifically, that ISIS, in it's present state, is not much of a threat to the US. It may never be, because it's interests, for theological reasons, are in the territory it is presently trying to conquer. The apocalyptic battle will take place in a Syrian city near Turkey.

People can have whatever opinion they want of ISIS, but if you want to give it on a thread discussing an extremely long article about them in a major magazine, people should at least display some understanding of the author's perspective.
 
Longshot Lou said:
I GUARANTEE you that the average anti-Islam responder to this thread and anywhere else they discuss this article will misunderstand what is being said in the article, because they want to.




The article DOES NOT call for the wholesale slaughter of ISIS , at least not by the US or western military. The article SPECIFICALLY states that ISIS would like nothing more than a US ground force opposing them in Syria/Iraq, and that the best course, instead, is the present course of bombing and containment.

The article, which the war mongers will otherwise say supports their opinion of Islam (which it does not to a large extent) , SPECIFICALLY says the current US course is the best available option.

I wonder how many of the neocons that will otherwise praise this article understand that ?
Click to expand...
Click to expand...



People understand what they want to understand.

They see what they want to see and they hear what they want to hear.

This is sometimes known as selective amnesia. ::roll:
 
Longshot Lou said:
MANY people will come on an article like this and repeat things they have already said, as if the expertise of the author did not exist. The author says, quite specifically, that ISIS, in it's present state, is not much of a threat to the US. It may never be, because it's interests, for theological reasons, are in the territory it is presently trying to conquer. The apocalyptic battle will take place in a Syrian city near Turkey.

People can have whatever opinion they want of ISIS, but if you want to give it on a thread discussing an extremely long article about them in a major magazine, people should at least display some understanding of the author's perspective.
Click to expand...




lol, where did I suggest ISIS was a threat to the US in it's present form? Please explain how I don't understand the article based on what I have posted thus far.
 
fmw said:
Hopefully, the middle eastern countries will, with our help, do what needs to be done. What needs to be done is the wholesale slaughter of ISIS.
We Americans don't have the stomach for that.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...



Read the complete history of WWII. :roll:
 
ReverendHellh0und said:
I remember many years ago posting an article "What Al Qaeda really wants".
The Future of Terrorism: What al-Qaida Really Wants - SPIEGEL ONLINE


Which was largely ignored, though note if you read it, all those years ago, yet if you read it today it reads like a history article not a prediction one. Currently we are between the 5th and 6th stage this article predicted.


Now another very insightful article comes out on ISIS, explaining who they are,
what they want,
Click to expand...
 and how we are not confronting the problem correctly.


This too, I fear will be ignored.
Click to expand...



What ISIS wants and what ISIS will get are two totally different things. :roll:
 
We hear ISIS is growing in numbers and in sophistication using the internet to publish their executions. When will they be able to shut down computer systems, attack grids, etc.?
What types of recruits do they seek by showing their mass executions? Now we are being made aware of their ultimate goal the second holocaust in Israel. We appear to know all of this and yet we have a part Muslim president that refuses to so much as say one bad thing about them other than to appease some members of the media. I am curious how large the ISIS issue will be in the coming presidential elections. Who will dare say if we must war them with troops (boots on the ground) then that is what we will do. "No cost will be too great to destroy ISIS". Does anyone believe one candidate will say that or will they ALL slither like the slimy politicians that they all are and dodge the issue as much as possible.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom