• 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!

Is it important that terrorists be identified as either Muslim or Islamic?

Is it important that terrorists be identified as either Muslim or Islamic?

  • Total voters
    33
They're Terrorists, period. Insert whatever you want in front of the word Terrorist, it doesns't make them any more/less evil in my eyes.

Terrorists aim to create fear for a religious, political, or ideological goal, and they deliberately target or disregard the safety of non-combatants. Deliberately targeting, killing and injuring civilians is wrong. No excuses, no matter who they are or what beliefs they hold or excuses they attempt to use to justify the unjustifiable. I don't consider one group of terrorists more evil than the other. Probably because i view all civilian lives as equal and worth grieving over.
 
X Factor said:
Terrorists.
Click to expand...

Al Qaeda = Freedom Fighters. Backed by maybe as much as one billion dollars by the US, trained in part by the US and favored by the US when Afghanistan was at war with the Russians they were our new bestest friends.

Al Qaeda = Terrorists. Russians defeated, Al Qaeda turned its wealth, experience and organization on Muslim nations and then the west.

Your turn;

ISIS = Freedom Fighters

ISIS = Worthless terrorist ****ing douchebags?
Click to expand...

I would agree. Scum of the earth. Because they are Muslim? No.
 
Serenity said:
They're Terrorists, period. Insert whatever you want in front of the word Terrorist, it doesns't make them any more/less evil in my eyes.

Terrorists aim to create fear for a religious, political, or ideological goal, and they deliberately target or disregard the safety of non-combatants. Deliberately targeting, killing and injuring civilians is wrong. No excuses, no matter who they are or what beliefs they hold or excuses they attempt to use to justify the unjustifiable. I don't consider one group of terrorists more evil than the other. Probably because i view all civilian lives as equal and worth grieving over.
Click to expand...

I totally agree with you.

But in order to address the larger problem -- and if that's just identifying and prosecuting the respective terrorist group --, you need to know what kind of terrorism that is. I don't see that specifying the kind of terrorism somehow suggests it's more or less evil than another terrorist act, or that it's more or less justified. It only helps, and is a requirement, to understand the problem better.
 
azgreg said:
Was Timothy McVeigh Muslim or Islamic?
Click to expand...

No, so in that case it would be inaccurate. I assume everyone here is sharp enough to figure out that it should only be applied where it's accurate.
 
Hamster Buddha said:
And that is a point that many on this forum have been missing in concerns to individuals who happened to be Christian committing atrocities in the last few hundred years. Well said.
Click to expand...

It just gets tricky in some cases. Say, you have a terror group somewhere in the Muslim World that fights for national independence, but also supports Muslim views. Is this secessionist or islamist terrorism then? You really have to know a lot about the exact motivation and demands of that group then, to answer that question. Even a terror group that's Muslim doesn't necessarily need to be islamist.

And yes, I noticed that some militant opponents of religion sometimes blame entire religions for the actions committed by members of that religion, regardless which role religion really played in their motivation.
 
Risky Thicket said:
Al Qaeda = Freedom Fighters. Backed by maybe as much as one billion dollars by the US, trained in part by the US and favored by the US when Afghanistan was at war with the Russians they were our new bestest friends.

Al Qaeda = Terrorists. Russians defeated, Al Qaeda turned its wealth, experience and organization on Muslim nations and then the west.
Click to expand...

Well, no conflict in my mind. I can't speak for how you or anyone else might see them.

I would agree. Scum of the earth. Because they are Muslim? No.
Click to expand...

Ah, so even you and I can agree on whose a terrorist, I guess. Incidentally, did I ever, in any way, suggest that it was simply because they're Muslim?
 
German guy said:
I totally agree with you.

But in order to address the larger problem -- and if that's just identifying and prosecuting the respective terrorist group --, you need to know what kind of terrorism that is. I don't see that specifying the kind of terrorism somehow suggests it's more or less evil than another terrorist act, or that it's more or less justified. It only helps, and is a requirement, to understand the problem better.
Click to expand...

I get where you are coming from and i know a lot of people feel like you but for me there is no in between. The only thing to understand is that they are maniacs who choose to target civilians GG. To even attempt to understand any deeper than that is somewhat understanding/justifying their actions and there is never any justifiction for targeting non combatants.
 
Serenity said:
They're Terrorists, period. Insert whatever you want in front of the word Terrorist, it doesns't make them any more/less evil in my eyes.

Terrorists aim to create fear for a religious, political, or ideological goal, and they deliberately target or disregard the safety of non-combatants. Deliberately targeting, killing and injuring civilians is wrong. No excuses, no matter who they are or what beliefs they hold or excuses they attempt to use to justify the unjustifiable. I don't consider one group of terrorists more evil than the other. Probably because i view all civilian lives as equal and worth grieving over.
Click to expand...

I completely understand and I probably agree, but under your definition my country has committed acts of terrorism.
 
Serenity said:
I get where you are coming from and i know a lot of people feel like you but for me there is no in between. The only thing to understand is that they are maniacs who choose to target civilians GG. To even attempt to understand any deeper than that is somewhat understanding/justifying their actions and there is never any justifiction for targeting non combatants.
Click to expand...

I can't quite follow you here. Since when does understanding result in justifying? On the contrary, you *need* to understand before you can *fight* it.

I mean, you have to know if a certain islamist attack was islamist, or else you'll end up raiding Timothy McVeigh's garage and look in the wrong place for the perpetrators.
 
Manc Skipper said:
If the vast majority of Muslims are not terrorists, then Islam can't be the driver for terrorism. By the way, what's the difference between a Muslim terrorist and an Islamic terrorist? The options in the poll are somewhat limited.
Click to expand...

Your assessment is wrong. Islam is a driver for terrorism because it creates a permissive environment for extreme ideology to flourish which leads the insane, mentally weak, or hopelessly socially inept to then become terrorists.

It's a religion where it's perfectly fine to stone a woman for adultery, talking bad about the prophet is punishable by death (not just for believers, but ANYONE), and where anyone or place that isn't muslim is an enemy. Islam is the enemy, and the natural enemy of western liberal democracy and personal freedom. We import muslims and islam with our lax immigration policies to our own peril.

This doesn't mean that most muslim people are 'evil' or 'violent', it means that the religion is a malicious cancer to freedom and that makes muslims dangerous.
 
azgreg said:
Was Timothy McVeigh Muslim or Islamic?
Click to expand...

straw_men.jpg
 
German guy said:
I voted "yes", but that was assuming that their terrorist acts are connected to their religion. As it perhaps is, in most cases. When someone commits an act of terrorism in the name of an islamist organization, of course his religion matters.

But assuming there is a case a person who happens to be Muslim participates in a terrorist act with an entirely unrelated agenda -- say, for animal protection, or for communism --, then I don't think his religion matters. It would only result in false conclusions if his religion was emphasized, in that case.
Click to expand...



Very precisely stated and 100% correct.
 
If we have evidence that the attackers are motivated to attack in the name of Islam, then it is patently foolish not to name that motivtion.

Also information wants to be free.
 
Last edited:
German guy said:
I can't quite follow you here. Since when does understanding result in justifying? On the contrary, you *need* to understand before you can *fight* it.

I mean, you have to know if a certain islamist attack was islamist, or else you'll end up raiding Timothy McVeigh's garage and look in the wrong place for the perpetrators.
Click to expand...

Or your nation is attacked by 19 guys (15 were Saudi Arabians) who were Muslim, funded by Saudi Arabia, which is a Muslim nation and your nation retaliates by attacking Iraq, a Muslim nation that is not Saudi Arabia. :unsure13:
 
cAPSLOCK said:
If we have evidence that the attackers are motivated to attack in the name of Islam, then it is patently foolish not to name that motivtion.

Also information wants to be free.
Click to expand...

So Christianity is responsible for Fred Phelps?
 
Risky Thicket said:
Or your nation is attacked by 19 guys (15 were Saudi Arabians) who were Muslim, funded by Saudi Arabia, which is a Muslim nation and your nation retaliates by attacking Iraq, a Muslim nation that is not Saudi Arabia. :unsure13:
Click to expand...

I agree, that doesn't make sense.

Just like it is a very fallacious conclusion to assume just because many terrorists are motivated by Islam, that all Muslims are the problem or are even terrorists.

Yes, this should be obvious, but unfortunately, it isn't for too many people.
 
German guy said:
I can't quite follow you here. Since when does understanding result in justifying? On the contrary, you *need* to understand before you can *fight* it.

I mean, you have to know if a certain islamist attack was islamist, or else you'll end up raiding Timothy McVeigh's garage and look in the wrong place for the perpetrators.
Click to expand...

It’s ultimately a question of ethics GG. To what extent are we obliged to try to understand the feelings and motivations of those who wish us and others harm? The terrorists responsible want us to understand the reasons for their insane actions. Their excuses are crazy. You can't understand crazy people. Targeting civilians is just wrong no matter what excuses someone may use to attempt to justify their actions.
 
X Factor said:
Well, no conflict in my mind. I can't speak for how you or anyone else might see them.e]

Ah, so even you and I can agree on whose a terrorist, I guess.
Click to expand...

Probably, but our government at one time considered Al Qaeda to be the good guys and treated them that way.

Incidentally, did I ever, in any way, suggest that it was simply because they're Muslim?
Click to expand...

No, but you were thinking it. :mrgreen:
 
German guy said:
I agree, that doesn't make sense.

Just like it is a very fallacious conclusion to assume just because many terrorists are motivated by Islam, that all Muslims are the problem or are even terrorists.

Yes, this should be obvious, but unfortunately, it isn't for too many people.
Click to expand...

One more time, because I think our European buddies just don't quite get the big picture here:

"Your assessment is wrong. Islam is a driver for terrorism because it creates a permissive environment for extreme ideology to flourish which leads the insane, mentally weak, or hopelessly socially inept to then become terrorists.

It's a religion where it's perfectly fine to stone a woman for adultery, talking bad about the prophet is punishable by death (not just for believers, but ANYONE), and where anyone or place that isn't muslim is an enemy. Islam is the enemy, and the natural enemy of western liberal democracy and personal freedom. We import muslims and islam with our lax immigration policies to our own peril.

This doesn't mean that most muslim people are 'evil' or 'violent', it means that the religion is a malicious cancer to freedom and that makes muslims dangerous."
 
Risky Thicket said:
So Christianity is responsible for Fred Phelps?
Click to expand...


Assuming there is such a thing as Christianity in general, I'd say yes. Simply because he acted in the name of Christianity and because non-Christians cannot support him and remain logically coherent.

Just like no non-Muslim will ever deliberately fight for an islamist cause. That simply doesn't make sense.

But just like in case of Islam, I'd say in the case of Phelps and Christianity too, choosing the religion in general as a broad identifyer, without differentiating any further, is not helpful at understanding and explaining the problem. You cannot fully understand Phelps' ideology just by reading the Bible. Just like you'd miss important elements of islamist ideology if you just read Quran.
 
Last edited:
SBu said:
Your assessment is wrong. Islam is a driver for terrorism because it creates a permissive environment for extreme ideology to flourish which leads the insane, mentally weak, or hopelessly socially inept to then become terrorists.

It's a religion where it's perfectly fine to stone a woman for adultery, talking bad about the prophet is punishable by death (not just for believers, but ANYONE), and where anyone or place that isn't muslim is an enemy. Islam is the enemy, and the natural enemy of western liberal democracy and personal freedom. We import muslims and islam with our lax immigration policies to our own peril.

This doesn't mean that most muslim people are 'evil' or 'violent', it means that the religion is a malicious cancer to freedom and that makes muslims dangerous.
Click to expand...

Much of the unspeakable violence Islamic jihadists engage in is directly approved by the most orthodox texts in Islam--the Koran itself, and the haddith, the sayings of Mohammed which interpret and fledge it out. The 14th-century Reliance of the Traveller is the authoritative, officially approved statement of what shari'ah calls for in all aspects of life, and it specifically prescribes, for example, stoning to death for homosexuals and most adulterers. It also calls for Muslims to wage jihad against Christians and Jews.

Many leftists in the U.S. and elsewhere loathe America and Western Civilization about as much as the Muslim jihadists do. So it's not surprising to see some of them constantly carrying water for the jihadists, invariably disguising their efforts as nothing more than protecting innocent Muslims from all those slack-jawed American "Islamophobes" who are out there in flyover country, clinging to their guns and Bibles. These leftists are the jihadists' natural fifth column in the West, just as the communists who were their philosophical forbears were a willing fifth column for international communism in the early years of the Cold War. These disloyal people were more than happy to take up space in America while working against it for Stalin's USSR. Nothing new under the sun.
 
Serenity said:
It’s ultimately a question of ethics GG. To what extent are we obliged to try to understand the feelings and motivations of those who wish us and others harm? The terrorists responsible want us to understand the reasons for their insane actions. Their excuses are crazy. You can't understand crazy people. Targeting civilians is just wrong no matter what excuses someone may use to attempt to justify their actions.
Click to expand...

I'm afraid we're going in a circle here ... not sure where the problem is. I totally agree with you their actions are unjustifyable and crazy. And I don't care about their feelings either.

All I want to know is if I have to shoot a rocket into an islamist camp or into a KKK office to get those who did it. And in order to do so, I have to understand what kind of terrorism that was. ;)
 
Risky Thicket said:
Probably, but our government at one time considered Al Qaeda to be the good guys and treated them that way.



No, but you were thinking it. :mrgreen:
Click to expand...

No I wasn't and I resent the accusation.
 
SBu said:
One more time, because I think our European buddies just don't quite get the big picture here:

"Your assessment is wrong. Islam is a driver for terrorism because it creates a permissive environment for extreme ideology to flourish which leads the insane, mentally weak, or hopelessly socially inept to then become terrorists.

It's a religion where it's perfectly fine to stone a woman for adultery, talking bad about the prophet is punishable by death (not just for believers, but ANYONE), and where anyone or place that isn't muslim is an enemy. Islam is the enemy, and the natural enemy of western liberal democracy and personal freedom. We import muslims and islam with our lax immigration policies to our own peril.

This doesn't mean that most muslim people are 'evil' or 'violent', it means that the religion is a malicious cancer to freedom and that makes muslims dangerous."
Click to expand...

This is a pretty uninformed and generalizing attempt. But don't worry, many Americans are not good at differentiating. ;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom