• 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!

Massive Terror Attack in Australia Foiled, Isis to Blame

stevecanuck said:
Then let's not worry about being "over-run". Let's worry about some bastard Islamist militant blowing away as many innocent Westerners as possible, and how we're going to stop them if we have to worry about how to do that without being "racist". Does that sound like a plan?
Click to expand...

I'll tell you what sounds like a plan. We say there's no racism involved and we let our enforcement agencies do their jobs. We trust professionals and slough off the ramblings of knotheads. We focus on the problem so our resources aren't squandered chasing somebody's fear-induced phantasies.
 
truthatallcost said:
Begin with an honest dialogue on the pros and cons of Muslim immigration to Australia. Do the pros outweigh the cons? Do they contribute more to the economy than they take away? Is the number of Muslim police and military service members grater than the number of Muslims incarcerated in Australian prisons? Etc.
Click to expand...

Substitute "Muslim" with "black" or "Jewish" or any other racial or religious or ethnic background and see if your post continues to make sense.
 
Kobie said:
Substitute "Muslim" with "black" or "Jewish" or any other racial or religious or ethnic background and see if your post continues to make sense.
Click to expand...

Not one person on your side of aisle wants to address the pros & cons that I suggested. You're no exception.
 
truthatallcost said:
Not one person on your side of aisle wants to address the pros & cons that I suggested. You're no exception.
Click to expand...

Your take seems to be that all Muslims are equally bad, and therefore a straight litmus test should be applied.

I look at things individually, rather than wanting to blame blanketly. Because I'm not a paranoid child.
 
truthatallcost said:
It only took one massive shooting spree for Australia to ban guns, why are they still taking chances with potential Isis sympathizers?
Click to expand...

Because the government has no plans to introduce a Muslim buy-back, and until it does, I refuse to sell my Muslims like people had to sell their guns.
 
truthatallcost said:
Oh I'm sure al-Bagdadi reads Debate Politics from within the confines of his secret hideout. But what about Bin Laden's motives for terrorism? I don't remember there being a huge segment of Islamophobic sentiment in the US prior to 9/11.
Click to expand...
What escapes you completely, and no surprise there either, is that the primary motive for OBL to attack the US (from the Kenya bombings via the USS Cole, all the way to 9/11) was to instigate precisely that Islamophobic hate on the part of the West.

So as to lure the West into warring upon the Muslim world, thus causing resentment and hate to rise sufficiently on both sides to get him the Holy War (where he was concerned) that he wanted. He may have seen his hopes thwarted when war was not declared upon his native Saudi Arabia, but saw his ruse happily working when the West (with the US understandably leading the fray) invaded Absurdistan.

But that the reaction would then expand to invading Iraq surely exceeded his wildest hopes, what with that move providing a whole new very fertile playing field for AQ, finally to be succeeded by IS happily lapping up the nutrients that had thus been sown.

You don't understand the roots of Islamic terrorism Manc.
Click to expand...
That, coming from somebody as blatantly ignorant of the developments as you, is truly hilarious.
They don't give a damn whether you like them or not.
Click to expand...
Where the terrorist are concerned, one simply has to agree with this assessment.
You've been commenting on this issue for far too long not to know that.
Click to expand...
You've been commenting on this issue for so long, one would have hoped for you to meanwhile have developed some modicum of political analysis.
 
truthatallcost said:
One could derive several points from stories like these. How about you address this point that one can learn from doing a little research; 97% of Australians aren't Muslim, yet most of the terrorist plots there involve Muslims.
Click to expand...
So?

Not all bums are drunks but all drunks are bums.

And what does that tell us in the sense of having something relevant to work with?

You're right, nothing.
 
Grand Mal said:
I'll tell you what sounds like a plan. We say there's no racism involved and we let our enforcement agencies do their jobs. We trust professionals and slough off the ramblings of knotheads. We focus on the problem so our resources aren't squandered chasing somebody's fear-induced phantasies.
Click to expand...
Which, as alone the Australian example here shows, can be made to work.
 
Chagos said:
What escapes you completely, and no surprise there either, is that the primary motive for OBL to attack the US (from the Kenya bombings via the USS Cole, all the way to 9/11) was to instigate precisely that Islamophobic hate on the part of the West.
Click to expand...

No it wasn't. If you can prove it, please do. But you can't.

So as to lure the West into warring upon the Muslim world, thus causing resentment and hate to rise sufficiently on both sides to get him the Holy War (where he was concerned) that he wanted. He may have seen his hopes thwarted when war was not declared upon his native Saudi Arabia, but saw his ruse happily working when the West (with the US understandably leading the fray) invaded Absurdistan.
Click to expand...

The war with Afghanistan was (is in fact) not about any of the grandiose ideals stated by either bin Laden or the USA. It isn't a war on Islam, a war for democracy, or to free an oppressed people. Bin Laden was used as a ruse for beginning this war, but was never the key prize as far as the Pentagon was concerned.

But that the reaction would then expand to invading Iraq surely exceeded his wildest hopes, what with that move providing a whole new very fertile playing field for AQ, finally to be succeeded by IS happily lapping up the nutrients that had thus been sown.
Click to expand...

I don't disagree with this.

That, coming from somebody as blatantly ignorant of the developments as you, is truly hilarious. Where the terrorist are concerned, one simply has to agree with this assessment.You've been commenting on this issue for so long, one would have hoped for you to meanwhile have developed some modicum of political analysis.
Click to expand...

So what was the appropriate course of action, from the standpoint of not rattling Isis' cage? Ignore the story, and the fact that Australia now seems to have more Isis sympathizers than anyone previously thought?

You don't defeat Isis by pretending they don't exist. You also can't defeat them by downplaying their infiltration of Western nations. Your avatar bears witness to the results of a non aggressive stance towards Isis and AQ my friend. You calling anyone 'blatantly ignorant' on the issue would be hilarious if it weren't so sad.
 
Chagos said:
So?

Not all bums are drunks but all drunks are bums.

And what does that tell us in the sense of having something relevant to work with?

You're right, nothing.
Click to expand...

OK, then maybe you can be the first to answer my question that so many have sidestepped;

Considering both the good and bad we inherit from Muslim migration, do the pros outweigh the cons? Please explain your answer.
 
truthatallcost said:
No it wasn't. If you can prove it, please do. But you can't.
Click to expand...
I'm not about to go "proving" what is common knowledge derived from political analysis conducted by those of more political and historical savvy than you possess.
The war with Afghanistan was (is in fact) not about any of the grandiose ideals stated by either bin Laden or the USA. It isn't a war on Islam, a war for democracy, or to free an oppressed people. Bin Laden was used as a ruse for beginning this war, but was never the key prize as far as the Pentagon was concerned.
Click to expand...
It's not about what it was according to you or me (over which we can argue til the cows come home and which I thus won't), it's about how it is perceived by large factions of the Muslim world.
So what was the appropriate course of action, from the standpoint of not rattling Isis' cage? Ignore the story, and the fact that Australia now seems to have more Isis sympathizers than anyone previously thought?
Click to expand...
What's this supposed to be, non-sequitur mixed with straw-manning.

Please be better.

You don't defeat Isis by pretending they don't exist. You also can't defeat them by downplaying their infiltration of Western nations.
Click to expand...
see above
Your avatar bears witness to the results of a non aggressive stance towards Isis and AQ my friend.
Click to expand...
You clearly haven't understood the significance of my avatar to this day where others didn't require any explanation to see the humor.
You calling anyone 'blatantly ignorant' on the issue would be hilarious if it weren't so sad.
Click to expand...
Yes, I forgot to add how sad it also is.
 
truthatallcost said:
OK, then maybe you can be the first to answer my question that so many have sidestepped;

Considering both the good and bad we inherit from Muslim migration, do the pros outweigh the cons? Please explain your answer.
Click to expand...
Why don't you tell me?

You think masking an opinion you clearly hold with a question mark is going to make me bite?

Dream on, buddy.
 
Chagos said:
I'm not about to go "proving" what is common knowledge derived from political analysis conducted by those of more political and historical savvy than you possess.
Click to expand...

He wanted Saudi Arabia to cut ties with the USA, and for American troops to leave SA. He wanted trade with the USA, but no further relationship. He wasn't trying to usher in the Holy War like Isis has been.

It's not about what it was according to you or me (over which we can argue til the cows come home and which I thus won't), it's about how it is perceived by large factions of the Muslim world.
Click to expand...

We're both probably in agreement that it's been a stupid war. A profitable stupid war however.

What's this supposed to be, non-sequitur mixed with straw-manning.

Please be better.

see above You clearly haven't understood the significance of my avatar to this day where others didn't require any explanation to see the humor. Yes, I forgot to add how sad it also is.
Click to expand...

Ah I see.
 
Chagos said:
Which, as alone the Australian example here shows, can be made to work.
Click to expand...

The fact that our security forces have prevented something like 13 major attacks in the last 10 years shows it's clearly not working, and all Muslims needs to be deported. :roll:
 
truthatallcost said:
He wanted Saudi Arabia to cut ties with the USA, and for American troops to leave SA. He wanted trade with the USA, but no further relationship. He wasn't trying to usher in the Holy War like Isis has been.
Click to expand...
He officially declared that Holy War (summoned the believers) as early as middle of 1996. Yet had already engaged in attacks on the US (the 1993 bomb at the WTC just being one example) long before.

What IS subsequently made of all that changes nothing in these simple facts.
We're both probably in agreement that it's been a stupid war. A profitable stupid war however
Click to expand...
haven't seen anyone making a believable balance sheet as yet but I remain suspicious on the profits.
 
spud_meister said:
The fact that our security forces have prevented something like 13 major attacks in the last 10 years shows it's clearly not working, and all Muslims needs to be deported. :roll:
Click to expand...
Naw, shot of course.

One can clearly see how Bin Laden getting creased (not that I disapprove) really turned the tables.

Now just imagine if these perps that are the subject here had all been drowned straight after birth already.

Let's in fact go Herod on all new-borns, that'll forestall a lot of future problems.
 
Carjosse said:
What do you propose do about that, imprison all Muslims?
Click to expand...
Imprison the radicals and any of their friends or relatives who were aware of the plot.
 
Chagos said:
Why don't you tell me?

You think masking an opinion you clearly hold with a question mark is going to make me bite?

Dream on, buddy.
Click to expand...

You're the 5th or 6th poster that refused to bite. :lol:

If I'd asked you to list your pros & cons related to Brexit, you very likely could compose one. Or pros & cons of ANY subject, besides this one.

I've posed this question to hundreds of people, and they never really have much of a reply, besides 'diversity is good for us'. The globalist marketing campaign worked incredibly well on these people.
 
stevecanuck said:
Then let's not worry about being "over-run". Let's worry about some bastard Islamist militant blowing away as many innocent Westerners as possible, and how we're going to stop them if we have to worry about how to do that without being "racist". Does that sound like a plan?
Click to expand...

Strawman. No one said "let's forget about terrorism". Why does arguing against a non-existent opinion and, in the process, stating the obvious appeal to you?

Now, here's the claim I objected to (review my response if you remain obligated to state the obvious as if it's a refutation):

truthatallcost said:
We'll lose our country eventually.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom