• 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 the Right simply doesn't get about "Islamic Terrorism"

stevecanuck said:
That was quite a leap. At that point I hadn't studied Islam on my own. I only knew what they told me, so I wasn't anti-Islam at that point. So, no.
Click to expand...

If I was a Muslim I know, beyond a doubt, that I'd mess with the "twelve year olds are terrorists" crowded whenever possible, so......
 
Regarding that 10-1 ratio: Wonder how special forces do it with 12 people in a group to cover medical, engineering, communications, and weapons support, with the team capable of independent action and everyone a fighter. Unconventional warfare does not need that 10-1 ratio.

Were there 190 al Qaeda support people around at 9/11 that we haven't found?
 
Tigerace117 said:
If I was a Muslim I know, beyond a doubt, that I'd mess with the "twelve year olds are terrorists" crowded whenever possible, so......
Click to expand...

You may know what you're talking about, but I certainly don't understand what you're getting at.
 
Paleocon said:
What you don't seem to get is that Islam isn't a democracy. Just because most Muslims don't adhere as faithfully to its teachings as ISIS does, doesn't change its teachings.
Click to expand...

And, um, can you show me ANY religion that's a democracy? There are certainly Muslim nations that are democracies, but I don't know of any religion that is one.
 
Glen Contrarian said:
And, um, can you show me ANY religion that's a democracy? There are certainly Muslim nations that are democracies, but I don't know of any religion that is one.
Click to expand...

That's exactly the point.
 
The problem isn't even Islam. It is Terrorism. Remember the IRA.
 
Abbazorkzog said:
The problem isn't even Islam. It is Terrorism. Remember the IRA.
Click to expand...

Terrorism doesn't exist in a vacuum. It's always done as a means of achieving a goal. Islamic terrorism exists for the purpose of furthering the rule of Islam (whodathunkit?). The question then becomes whether or not Islam demands such, and any attempt to discuss it that strays outside the navigational buoys of political correctness elicits a most spectacular amount invective and spittle.
 
stevecanuck said:
Terrorism doesn't exist in a vacuum. It's always done as a means of achieving a goal. Islamic terrorism exists for the purpose of furthering the rule of Islam (whodathunkit?). The question then becomes whether or not Islam demands such, and any attempt to discuss it that strays outside the navigational buoys of political correctness elicits a most spectacular amount invective and spittle.
Click to expand...

The point is that terrorism isn't exclusively Islamic. The enemy is terrorism, not Islam. You really think that by getting rid of Islam, terrorism will just magically disappear?
 
Abbazorkzog said:
The point is that terrorism isn't exclusively Islamic. The enemy is terrorism, not Islam. You really think that by getting rid of Islam, terrorism will just magically disappear?
Click to expand...

No. Only Islamic terrorism. So, about 99% of it. That would leave regional issues, but it would absolutely eliminate terrorism on a global scale. You can counter with the Basques and Shining Path, or the LRA, but they're small potatoes globally.
 
stevecanuck said:
No. Only Islamic terrorism. So, about 99% of it. That would leave regional issues, but it would absolutely eliminate terrorism on a global scale. You can counter with the Basques and Shining Path, or the LRA, but they're small potatoes globally.
Click to expand...

Al-Qaeda, Islamic State, al-Shabaab, Hezbollah, etc... were all 'small potatoes' until the US CIA decided to weaponize al-Qaeda to fight USSR forces in Afghanistan in 1979. Same with al-Qaeda, Saddam Hussein may have been a brutal dictator, but the abomination that is ISIL arose in the region amidst the power-vacuum, and now they continue to re-mobilize due to our government continuing to supply them with weapons in response to their Assad goose-chase. We should really be taking lessons from the UK regarding terrorism, they virtually stamped out the IRA, but to say that the IRA were 'small potatoes', you would have to be misinformed as to the actual length of 'the Troubles', which lasted from 1968 to 1998, 3 decades. Quantitatively speaking, Western Civilization has been at war with non-Islamic terrorists for far far far longer than any other terrorists.

Again, I'm not defending Islamists. I am alerting to the fact that terrorism is here to stay if we fail to defeat the Islamist propaganda campaign attempting to distract from terrorism using moderate Islam as a scapegoat. Divide and conquer is their M.O.
 
Abbazorkzog said:
Al-Qaeda, Islamic State, al-Shabaab, Hezbollah, etc... were all 'small potatoes' until the US CIA decided to weaponize al-Qaeda to fight USSR forces in Afghanistan in 1979. Same with al-Qaeda, Saddam Hussein may have been a brutal dictator, but the abomination that is ISIL arose in the region amidst the power-vacuum, and now they continue to re-mobilize due to our government continuing to supply them with weapons in response to their Assad goose-chase.
Click to expand...

Correct.

We should really be taking lessons from the UK regarding terrorism, they virtually stamped out the IRA, but to say that the IRA were 'small potatoes', you would have to be misinformed as to the actual length of 'the Troubles', which lasted from 1968 to 1998, 3 decades. Quantitatively speaking, Western Civilization has been at war with non-Islamic terrorists for far far far longer than any other terrorists.
Click to expand...

Terrorism in the form of attempted conquests have been a constant in human history. Anyone who ever ventured out of their homeland for the purpose of conquering their neighbor was a terrorist. Muslims (with large gaps because of being defeated) are no different. They created a vast empire within 100 years of Mohamed's death, and they besieged Europe several times, so they have been terrorists since their inception.

Again, I'm not defending Islamists. I am alerting to the fact that terrorism is here to stay if we fail to defeat the Islamist propaganda campaign attempting to distract from terrorism using moderate Islam as a scapegoat. Divide and conquer is their M.O.
Click to expand...

Muslims who don't want to support terrorism are caught in the cross fire, because they have no legitimate way of defending their religion. The example of the first Muslims along with commands in the Qur'an very much work against them when they try to convince us (and probably themselves) that Islam has been "twisted" by the likes of ISIS. ISIS is just 7th century Islam 2.0.
 
stevecanuck said:
Muslims who don't want to support terrorism are caught in the cross fire, because they have no legitimate way of defending their religion. The example of the first Muslims along with commands in the Qur'an very much work against them when they try to convince us (and probably themselves) that Islam has been "twisted" by the likes of ISIS. ISIS is just 7th century Islam 2.0.
Click to expand...

Oh, quit being so biased against Islam. All forms of religious texts can be used as radical propaganda due to their inherently violent nature.

stevecanuck said:
Terrorism in the form of attempted conquests have been a constant in human history. Anyone who ever ventured out of their homeland for the purpose of conquering their neighbor was a terrorist.
Click to expand...

Yep. And most terrorists, historically speaking, were Christian, Jewish, or Roman.

stevecanuck said:
Muslims (with large gaps because of being defeated) are no different. They created a vast empire within 100 years of Mohamed's death, and they besieged Europe several times, so they have been terrorists since their inception.
Click to expand...

Back then, yes. But we don't live in those times. Applying medieval, Dark-Ages logic to the modern era is not only wholly ignorant from a cultural perspective, it is strategically unwieldy and dangerous. If you commit to a militarized campaign to commit genocide against Muslims (thinking that will somehow stop terrorism, despite the plethora of evidence that points toward the fact that terrorism will re-emerge in the form of Christian, ethnic, or nationally-extremist strata), not only are you energizing potential for terrorist organizations to emerge in the future based around other ideologies, you just created the Fourth Reich for Muslim and Arabic peoples.

Congratulations, you have successfully laid out the blueprint to open the door to White Supremacists to launch a second attempt at world domination.
 
stevecanuck said:
Correct.



Terrorism in the form of attempted conquests have been a constant in human history. Anyone who ever ventured out of their homeland for the purpose of conquering their neighbor was a terrorist. Muslims (with large gaps because of being defeated) are no different. They created a vast empire within 100 years of Mohamed's death, and they besieged Europe several times, so they have been terrorists since their inception.



Muslims who don't want to support terrorism are caught in the cross fire, because they have no legitimate way of defending their religion. The example of the first Muslims along with commands in the Qur'an very much work against them when they try to convince us (and probably themselves) that Islam has been "twisted" by the likes of ISIS. ISIS is just 7th century Islam 2.0.
Click to expand...

I don't think you actually understand what terrorism is. Words have actual meanings and definitions and you don't get to just say they mean what ever you feel like that day.
 
Abbazorkzog said:
Oh, quit being so biased against Islam. All forms of religious texts can be used as radical propaganda due to their inherently violent nature.



Yep. And most terrorists, historically speaking, were Christian, Jewish, or Roman.



Back then, yes. But we don't live in those times. Applying medieval, Dark-Ages logic to the modern era is not only wholly ignorant from a cultural perspective, it is strategically unwieldy and dangerous. If you commit to a militarized campaign to commit genocide against Muslims (thinking that will somehow stop terrorism, despite the plethora of evidence that points toward the fact that terrorism will re-emerge in the form of Christian, ethnic, or nationally-extremist strata), not only are you energizing potential for terrorist organizations to emerge in the future based around other ideologies, you just created the Fourth Reich for Muslim and Arabic peoples.

Congratulations, you have successfully laid out the blueprint to open the door to White Supremacists to launch a second attempt at world domination.
Click to expand...

Uhhhhhhhhhh, okbyenow.
 
Glen Contrarian said:
Muslim terrorists have staged major terrorist attacks in the following first-world nations: America, England, France, Russia, a couple small ones in Australia, and now Belgium. They're striking EVERYwhere, huh?

But wait. Are there nations where there's lots of Muslims that there's been no significant terrorist attacks? Let's see here: Germany, Poland, Czech Republic, Solakia, Greece, Italy, Spain, Portugal, Norway, Sweden, Ireland, Switzerland, Austria, Romania, Bulgaria, Denmark, Croatia, Ukraine...the list goes on.

So one must ask ...
Click to expand...
"So one might ask.."

Where the hell did you get that Bogus list?
You Have to have pulled it from your rear end, as anyone with ANY knowledge whatsoever would remember, (for just one) the Huge Terror act that was the Madrid train bombing, killing 191, and injuring 600, in 2004.

https://www.google.com/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=madrid+train+bombing

There have been many other attacks, including in Italy, Canada, Greece, Germany, etc
One would have to be utterly IGNORANT to not know that.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terrorism_in_the_European_Union
and there are attacks worldwide every month.

The OP is so partisan in his premise, the string totally backfires.
 
Last edited:
mbig said:
"So one might ask.."

Where the hell did you get that Bogus list?
You Have to have pulled it from your rear end, as anyone with ANY knowledge whatsoever would remember, (for just one) the Huge Terror act that was the Madrid train bombing, killing 191, and injuring 600, in 2004.
https://www.google.com/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=madrid+train+bombing

There have been many other attacks, including in Italy, Canada, Greece, Germany, etc
One would have to be utterly IGNORANT to not know that.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terrorism_in_the_European_Union

The OP is so partisan in his premise error, they are an embarrassment and total backfire.
Click to expand...

Tell you what, guy - why don't you go add up how many actual honest-to-goodness terrorists have been involved in all those attacks. Compared to the total number of Muslims, it's a very small number indeed.

That's the nature of terrorism - the acts of a relatively very few can have a far-outsized effect. The bombing on that train in Spain - did it require the efforts of a hundred or more terrorists? Or just a handful? Yet you - and everyone who thinks as you do - are SO quick to blame the many for the actions of a relatively very, very few.

Think about it - if you yourself decided to go commit a terrorist act, how many would you be able to kill or maim? Probably quite a few, right? And you're just one guy. These terrorists are doing just that, and they have the funding to support them...and so they're able to have even more of an effect. BUT just as you are only one guy, THEY are only a relatively very few idiots, and are NOT representative of the whole...or do you not realize that those Islamic terrorists kill more Muslims than they do non-Muslims?
 
Glen Contrarian said:
Tell you what, guy - why don't you go add up how many actual honest-to-goodness terrorists have been involved in all those attacks. Compared to the total number of Muslims, it's a very small number indeed.
Click to expand...

You have disingenuously created a false dichotomy with that argument. You're suggesting that those who actually commit acts of terrorism are the only Muslims who support doing so. That's not the case, and you know it. People have posted Pew Research results that prove a sizable minority of Muslims support them. Deal with it.

That's the nature of terrorism - the acts of a relatively very few can have a far-outsized effect. The bombing on that train in Spain - did it require the efforts of a hundred or more terrorists? Or just a handful? Yet you - and everyone who thinks as you do - are SO quick to blame the many for the actions of a relatively very, very few.
Click to expand...

More of the false dichotomy. But, more importantly, there's a difference between blaming Muslims and blaming Islam. You and others on this board pretend that criticism of Islam is broad-brush Muslim bashing.

Think about it - if you yourself decided to go commit a terrorist act, how many would you be able to kill or maim? Probably quite a few, right? And you're just one guy. These terrorists are doing just that, and they have the funding to support them...and so they're able to have even more of an effect. BUT just as you are only one guy, THEY are only a relatively very few idiots, and are NOT representative of the whole...or do you not realize that those Islamic terrorists kill more Muslims than they do non-Muslims?
Click to expand...

False dichotomy part three. And yes, Muslims kill each other. That's because they consider the others to be apostates (for whatever reason), and apostates are worse than infidels.
 
The right gets everything; it only plays dumb vis-a-vis terrorism either out of opportunism or to advance a malignant ideology of second-comings and raptures.
 
Glen Contrarian said:
Tell you what, guy - why don't you go add up how many actual honest-to-goodness terrorists have been involved in all those attacks. Compared to the total number of Muslims, it's a very small number indeed.

That's the nature of terrorism - the acts of a relatively very few can have a far-outsized effect. The bombing on that train in Spain - did it require the efforts of a hundred or more terrorists? Or just a handful? Yet you - and everyone who thinks as you do - are SO quick to blame the many for the actions of a relatively very, very few.

Think about it - if you yourself decided to go commit a terrorist act, how many would you be able to kill or maim? Probably quite a few, right? And you're just one guy. These terrorists are doing just that, and they have the funding to support them...and so they're able to have even more of an effect. BUT just as you are only one guy, THEY are only a relatively very few idiots, and are NOT representative of the whole...or do you not realize that those Islamic terrorists kill more Muslims than they do non-Muslims?
Click to expand...

Nice job though of avoiding the fact that your op just got called out for being the crap that it is. Wonder why you avoided discussing that for the multiple time in your own thread. Not a very honest way to post.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom