• 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!

Islamic State claims responsibility for bombing at Kabul wedding that killed 63

Rogue Valley

Rogue Valley

Lead or get out of the way
DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 18, 2013
Messages
94,329
Reaction score
82,720
Location
Barsoom
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Islamic State claims responsibility for bombing at Kabul wedding that killed 63

e41a5f5f73953ba8293d26ab747dbe95

The shoes of victims.

8/18/19
Kabul, Afghanistan — The death toll from a late-night suicide bombing at a crowded wedding party in the Afghan capital rose to at least 63 on Sunday, including women and children, officials said. The local Islamic State (IS) group's affiliate claimed responsibility for what was the deadliest attack in Kabul this year. Another 182 people were wounded in the Saturday night explosion, government spokesman Feroz Bashari said. Interior Ministry spokesman Nusrat Rahimi confirmed the casualty toll as families began to bury the dead. Some helped to dig graves with their bare hands. Kabul residents were outraged as there appears to be no end to violence even as the U.S. and the Taliban say they are nearing a deal to end their 18-year conflict, America's longest war. The Taliban condemned the attack as "forbidden and unjustifiable" and denied any involvement. Both the Taliban and IS have carried large-scale attacks in the Afghan capital in the past.
Click to expand...

I believe no outside force can fix this. The looming problem is that the Taliban either won't be able to, or refuse to, keep global terrorist groups like ISIS in check.
 
Kiwimac said:
No individual government can keep a global organisation in check. It needs an international agency to do so.
Click to expand...

I disagree. Such organizations are not allowed to metastasize in Western nations. What we have in the West is "lone wolf" operators.
 
Rogue Valley said:
I disagree. Such organizations are not allowed to metastasize in Western nations. What we have in the West is "lone wolf" operators.
Click to expand...

That is true, but whether it be ISIS or a lone wolf, they still read from the same play book - the Qur'an.
 
stevecanuck said:
That is true, but whether it be ISIS or a lone wolf, they still read from the same play book - the Qur'an.
Click to expand...

As far as I am aware, white supremacists don't read the Quran.
 
Kiwimac said:
No individual government can keep a global organisation in check. It needs an international agency to do so.
Click to expand...

Unfortunately, we don't have a real life version of S.H.I.E.L.D.
 
Meanwhile, the negotiations with the Taliban continue as the US determines how much of Afghanistan will be ceded to them. The Afghan government isn't party to this as the country is divvied up. In a like manner, the US was considering tendering an offer for Greenland to the Danes. The semi-autonomous government of Greenland wasn't included.

The present US Administration doesn't think very highly of a people's possible interest in self-determination. One is reminded of the European powers drawing the lines of nations in the Middle East and Africa some while back.
 
Rogue Valley said:
You said "lone wolf" terrorists "still read from the same play book - the Qur'an."

Your assumption is wrong. Most domestic terrorism in the US originates with neo-Nazi / white supremacist groups.

FBI Director Christopher Wray Says A Majority of Domestic Terrorism Cases are Motivated by White Supremacist Violence
Click to expand...

When you're going to change the subject mid-post, perhaps you should say so. You said, "I disagree. Such organizations are not allowed to metastasize in Western nations. What we have in the West is "lone wolf" operators". The organizations in question were Islamic terrorist groups, which means any further discussion is assumed to be about the same subject unless otherwise stated. It's pure linearity. Besides that, there have been Islamic lone-wolf terrorists on this side of the continent, and yes they do read from the same play book.
 
stevecanuck said:
When you're going to change the subject mid-post, perhaps you should say so. You said, "I disagree. Such organizations are not allowed to metastasize in Western nations. What we have in the West is "lone wolf" operators". The organizations in question were Islamic terrorist groups, which means any further discussion is assumed to be about the same subject unless otherwise stated. It's pure linearity. Besides that, there have been Islamic lone-wolf terrorists on this side of the continent, and yes they do read from the same play book.
Click to expand...

The Quran does not encourage anyone to commit suicide bombings. Which is why such acts are roundly condemned by mainstream Muslims whenever they occur. Of course, extremists can find justification for whatever they please. That's why they're called extremists.
 
Irredentist said:
The Quran does not encourage anyone to commit suicide bombings. Which is why such acts are roundly condemned by mainstream Muslims whenever they occur. Of course, extremists can find justification for whatever they please. That's why they're called extremists.
Click to expand...

That's basically correct. All they have to do to justify dying in that way is to simply treat it as another way of dying in battle. Easy peasy.
 
stevecanuck said:
When you're going to change the subject mid-post, perhaps you should say so. You said, "I disagree. Such organizations are not allowed to metastasize in Western nations. What we have in the West is "lone wolf" operators". The organizations in question were Islamic terrorist groups, which means any further discussion is assumed to be about the same subject unless otherwise stated. It's pure linearity. Besides that, there have been Islamic lone-wolf terrorists on this side of the continent, and yes they do read from the same play book.
Click to expand...

No. Not all "lone wolf" terrorists acting on US soil are Muslim as you are implying. That's just Trumpian propaganda.

Trumps own FBI Director Christopher Wray states that most domestic terrorism on US soil stems from white supremacist groups.
 
Rogue Valley said:
No. Not all "lone wolf" terrorists acting on US soil are Muslim as you are implying. That's just Trumpian propaganda.
Click to expand...

You're cute when you're floundering.

I NEVER implied anything of the sort. You commented on Islamic terrorist organisations abroad, then segued into a statement that such organisations don't exist here, rather we have lone wolf activity. I agreed and added that they get their marching orders from the same book. Pretty simple and linear stuff. The topic was clearly Islamic terrorism ONLY within the context of that conversation. Then you changed the subject and tried to insert the square peg of white supremacy into the round hole of Islamic terrorism, which I assume you'll do again. So, go ahead, but I'm done here.





Trumps own FBI Director Christopher Wray states that most domestic terrorism on US soil stems from white supremacist groups.
Click to expand...

That is probably true, what's your point?
 
stevecanuck said:
That's basically correct. All they have to do to justify dying in that way is to simply treat it as another way of dying in battle. Easy peasy.
Click to expand...

Your mistake is to assume that so called "Islamic terrorism" is really about Islam at all. If you look at the goals of organizations like ISIS or Al Qaeda, you'll see that they are not actually religious, but political in nature. Faith is a useful tool to inspire their followers, but what they're really after is power. Not to spread religion.
 
Irredentist said:
Your mistake is to assume that so called "Islamic terrorism" is really about Islam at all. If you look at the goals of organizations like ISIS or Al Qaeda, you'll see that they are not actually religious, but political in nature. Faith is a useful tool to inspire their followers, but what they're really after is power. Not to spread religion.
Click to expand...

How do you know that? If you study the Qur'an, you'll see that fighting "fee sabil allah" is commanded of them by God. Your statement is completely unsupported.
 
stevecanuck said:
How do you know that? If you study the Qur'an, you'll see that fighting "fee sabil allah" is commanded of them by God. Your statement is completely unsupported.
Click to expand...

The Quran may command Muslims to fight for God, but that isn't what ISIS or Al Qaeda are actually doing. Mostly what they do is kill other Muslims, at mosques, in markets, at weddings. I don't think you'll find that commanded anywhere in the Quran. Again, it's not about religion, it's about politics and power.
 
Irredentist said:
The Quran may command Muslims to fight for God, but that isn't what ISIS or Al Qaeda are actually doing. Mostly what they do is kill other Muslims, at mosques, in markets, at weddings. I don't think you'll find that commanded anywhere in the Quran. Again, it's not about religion, it's about politics and power.
Click to expand...

Oh c'mon. You can't be that uninformed. Sunnis consider Shia to be heretics, and therefore on the hit list. Btw, when did you get in their heads and become privy to their 'true' motives? This is a clear Occam's razor scenario.
 
stevecanuck said:
Oh c'mon. You can't be that uninformed. Sunnis consider Shia to be heretics, and therefore on the hit list. Btw, when did you get in their heads and become privy to their 'true' motives? This is a clear Occam's razor scenario.
Click to expand...

Are you aware of what differentiates Shia from Sunnis? Sunnis supported Abu Bakr, the successor to Mohammed and the first Caliph, while Shia believe it should have been Ali ibn Abi Talib. Once again, this is a political difference, rather than a theological one.
 
That Sunni and Shia (respectively) consider the other to be heretic is undisputed, just as much as that IS kills EVERYone not abiding by their ideology, fellow Sunni included.
 
Irredentist said:
Are you aware of what differentiates Shia from Sunnis? Sunnis supported Abu Bakr, the successor to Mohammed and the first Caliph, while Shia believe it should have been Ali ibn Abi Talib. Once again, this is a political difference, rather than a theological one.
Click to expand...

Yes it started that way. Since then Shias have split into several sects, and some of them have introduced religious beliefs and rituals that Sunnis believe to be heretical. In my opinion, Sunnis are more Mohamed-like than the Shia.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom