Improvised bomb on the Tube in London...

[Tigerace117]

Persecution =/= terrorism, the terrorism is being perpetrated by the Muslim insurgents:

The Rohingya insurgency in Western Myanmar is an ongoing insurgency in northern Rakhine State, Myanmar (formerly known as Arakan, Burma), waged by insurgents belonging to the Rohingya ethnic minority. Most clashes have occurred in the Maungdaw District, which borders Bangladesh.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rohingya_insurgency_in_Western_Myanmar

Only problem buddy is that not only is A) the insurgency the direct result of the thuggish "Myanmar" regime brutally oppressing its own people, but B) the "Myanmar" regime isn't fighting the insurgents. That might be dangerous. No, what the thugs are doing is running around hacking up all the non combatants they can catch.

 

[Tigerace117]

Terrorism resulting in civilian deaths is almost an exclusively Muslim perpetrated phenomenon not only in the UK but in every country on the planet.

Completely and utterly false. Coldjoint, is that you?

 

[Tigerace117]

PraiseKek:

Vietnam War: over 640,000 North Vietnamese civilian deaths from 1960-1975. Operation Rolling Thunder between 52,000 and 182,000 North Vietnamese civilian deaths between 1965 and 1968 inclusive.

Cambodia: 100,000-150,000 Cambodian deaths.

Laos: 20,000 Laotian deaths and 270 million cluster bomb submunitions dropped.

Arab Israeli Wars and Israeli Occupation: no clear data here for civilian deaths.

Soviet Invasion of Afghanistan: 600,000-1.8 million deaths, mostly civilian.

Gulf War 1990-1991: 60,000-170,000 civilian deaths.

Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iraq and Syria: see:

http://www.psr.org/assets/pdfs/body-count.pdf

Your definition of state terrorism is wrong. See:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_terrorism

Wars start when one nation attacks another. Israeli military forces invaded Egypt in 1956 and 1967.

I have have read plenty of books and have witnessed this slaughter either indirectly via media or directly in person.

Welcome to Debate Politics Forum.

Cheers.
Evilroddy.

Counting the Soviet War in Afghanistan as part of the "West"'s Wars is incorrect.

 

[PraiseKek]

Completely and utterly false. Coldjoint, is that you?

No it's 100% accurate EG more than 90% of civilian casualties from terrorism in the US between 1985 and 2005 were from attacks committed by Muslims.

 

[Tigerace117]

No it's 100% accurate EG more than 90% of civilian casualties from terrorism in the US between 1985 and 2005 were from attacks committed by Muslims.

I see you fled from my educating you on the situation in "Burma"/ Myanmar. Typical.

Your opinion does not magically make terrorism a "almostly exclusively Muslim phenomenon worldwide".

 

[PraiseKek]

Only problem buddy is that not only is A) the insurgency the direct result of the thuggish "Myanmar" regime brutally oppressing its own people,

Repression is not terrorism, that repression is a direct result of the Muslims attempting to create a Muslim state through a terrorist insurgency.

but B) the "Myanmar" regime isn't fighting the insurgents. That might be dangerous. No, what the thugs are doing is running around hacking up all the non combatants they can catch.

It's the Muslim insurgency hacking up the Buddhists bud.

 

[Evilroddy]

As I said civilian deaths occur in war the difference is we do not target civilians and the majority of civilian casualties in Iraq were committed by the insurgency not the Coalition forces.



Your source conflates state terror with state sponsorship of terrorist groups.



After hundreds of Egyptian directed Fedayeen attacks against Israel, furthermore, blockades are an act of war.

PraiseKek:

OK, you can continue to live on planet "Blind-Patriotism", where facts are an alien concept, but those of us here on Earth know better.

To All:

I'm not going to continue to hijack this thread anymore than I already have. My apologies to the DP community for doing so in the first place. What I thought would be a simple side comment mushroomed into an acrimonious tangent. Sorry for that.

Cheers.
Evilroddy.

 

[PraiseKek]

Your opinion does not magically make terrorism a "almostly exclusively Muslim phenomenon worldwide".

It's not an opinion, it's an incontrovertible fact:


http://www.businessinsider.com/global-terrorist-attacks-past-20-years-in-maps-2017-5

 

[PraiseKek]

PraiseKek:

OK, you can continue to live on planet "Blind-Patriotism", where facts are an alien concept, but those of us here on Earth know better.

The US military has rules of engagement, we do not target civilians and when our soldiers do we punish them.

 

[Tigerace117]

Repression is not terrorism, that repression is a direct result of the Muslims attempting to create a Muslim state through a terrorist insurgency.



It's the Muslim insurgency hacking up the Buddhists bud.

Vicious repression involving paramilitaries and organized forces conducting terrorist attacks is, in fact, terrorism. Hate to burst your little Muslim hate bubble.

Nope, the "insurgency" is a direct result of the thugs running "Myanmar" launching yet another campaign of terror against minorities in their country.

 

[Tigerace117]

It's not an opinion, it's an incontrovertible fact:


Every terrorist attack worldwide for the last 20 years in maps - Business Insider

It's no such thing. Would you like a refresher on the basics of terrorism?

 

[Evilroddy]

Counting the Soviet War in Afghanistan as part of the "West"'s Wars is incorrect.

Tigerace117:

If you refer to my post #60 you will see that I said "great powers" and not the West. That having been said I view the West as Europe and nations whose cultures were predominantly affected by European settlement. Much like the old word Occident. Russia, being a European state (at least vis-Ural Russia where all the major military decisions are made) is thus part of the West. The political-economic definition laminates non-communist on top of the older definition but that connotation is now anachronistic as the Cold War is over and Russia is no longer a communist state.

Good points on Myanmar. Keep putting some stick about when our new and zealous member gets overly excited about his unique interpretation of world affairs.

Cheers.
Evilroddy.

 

[Gill]

Wars start when one nation attacks another. Israeli military forces invaded Egypt in 1956 and 1967.

Israel attacked Egypt because they tried to block their only access to the Red Sea and the Suez Canal. Without that access, they could not import any oil. Egypt declared an economic war on Israel.

 

[Fearandloathing]

I'm guessing not in any capacity as a sub-editor. :mrgreen:

I have never heard of a position of "sub-editor"

And I don't care to share the details with hostile Americans


Come to think about it, there is nothing in that post to warrant that level of personal insult. However being a moderator I can't put you on ignore.

So I guess I have to live with your cheap insults

 

[Gill]

Please read the Pentagon Papers and look up the roll of Harry Truman and what went on with the French-Viet peace accord.

Well aware of all that, but does not change my post.

 

[Fearandloathing]

Well aware of all that, but does not change my post.

OK, now I know not to blieve anything you say. To maintain a position against concrete evidence to the contrary does not result in stable people.

 

[Fearandloathing]

Tigerace117:

If you refer to my post #60 you will see that I said "great powers" and not the West. That having been said I view the West as Europe and nations whose cultures were predominantly affected by European settlement. Much like the old word Occident. Russia, being a European state (at least vis-Ural Russia where all the major military decisions are made) is thus part of the West. The political-economic definition laminates non-communist on top of the older definition but that connotation is now anachronistic as the Cold War is over and Russia is no longer a communist state.

Good points on Myanmar. Keep putting some stick about when our new and zealous member gets overly excited about his unique interpretation of world affairs.

Cheers.
Evilroddy.

"The Great Mystery" was lone of the names for Russia at one point. It does not consider itself part of the "west" you describe, and even though a majority of their land mass is in Asia, they don't consider themselves Asian either.

However, for practical purposes we should include Russia in the west, just don't think that as a result they will think like the west.

Tsar Nicholas (?) was not successful in bringing Russia into the European mainstream despite such measures as making men shave off their beards, his "incogito" visit to Paris and Netherlands

 

[Evilroddy]

Israel attacked Egypt because they tried to block their only access to the Red Sea and the Suez Canal. Without that access, they could not import any oil. Egypt declared an economic war on Israel.

Gill:

There were pipelines bringing 800,000 barrels of oil per day from Iraq and Iran to the Mediterranian Sea just north of Israel in the late 1940's and early 1950's and the Israeli port of Elat could receive small tankers if necessary, so Israel would not have been starved of oil. Oil would have been more expensive, but it would have still been available. What really upset Israel was that Egypt was searching Israeli and third-party ships using the canal and seizing weapons shipments and sundry, related resources bound for Israel, especially arms from France and the far flung French colonies. France bribed Israel right after independence to cooperate with France's neo-colonial agenda by providing more arms and by promising in 1949 to train Israelis in atomic science while also promising to provide the necessary materials to build the first research reactor in Israel. That is one of the main reasons that Israel was keen to invade Egypt (UAR), that and the realization that fedayeen raids ordered by Nasser and Israeli counter-raids were getting nowhere.

Israel was acting in accordance with France and Britain to seize the canal and topple Nasser because Nasser had refused to renew the 1936 Anglo-Egyptian treaty which granted Britain a lease on the canal for 20 years. That lease was up in late 1956 and Nasser wouldn't budge. Egypt had agreed to allow Britain to use the canal with special privileges until 1968 but that wasn't good enough for the ex-colonial powers. Israel saw this as a golden opportunity to knock off Nasser and return Egypt to more friendly colonial rule or proxy-colonial rule. They took that opportunity and along with France and Britain failed in the face of international pressure led by the UN, the USA and the USSR.

As to the right of passage through the Suez Canal (mentioned by another poster above) the 1888 treaty which guaranteed such international access to the canal was serially violated by Brritain in the late 19th Century (sporadically), and in the Russo-Japanese War, during World War I, in the interwar years and during World War II (routinely). Nasser's position was that just as Britain had routinely denied use of the canal to hostile powers and their allies from 1904 onwards, so would Egypt. Israel was Egypt's enemy and thus would be denied as Britain had done to Russian, German, Turkish, Soviet, Italian and other nations' ships at her discretion. Britain, France and Israel did not like that. The Suez Crisis was the result and what a debacle it was.

Cheers.
Evilroddy.

 

[Gill]

OK, now I know not to blieve anything you say. To maintain a position against concrete evidence to the contrary does not result in stable people.

Since you have all this "concrete evidence", I'm sure it will be simple for you to prove Eisenhower sent armed combat troops to Vietnam.

I'll wait, probably for a long time.

 

[Evilroddy]

"The Great Mystery" was lone of the names for Russia at one point. It does not consider itself part of the "west" you describe, and even though a majority of their land mass is in Asia, they don't consider themselves Asian either.

However, for practical purposes we should include Russia in the west, just don't think that as a result they will think like the west.

Tsar Nicholas (?) was not successful in bringing Russia into the European mainstream despite such measures as making men shave off their beards, his "incogito" visit to Paris and Netherlands

Fearandloathing:

I hear you man. But being a bit snobbish I will add that Russian elites of the 17th and 18th centuries were Europhiles and fancied all things European with gusto. At times France was in vogue, or Germany was "gut" or England the cup of tea. Even wee Scotland was all the rage for a brief time, especially in St. Petersburg where the Scottish influenced Royal Academy of Sciences was located. About the only Europeans who were not popular were the Poles, Lithuanians and the Swedes who kept invading Russia at this time! Jumping ahead to the 19th Century America and Britain were the darlings of Russian foreign admiration. Many forget that Leon Trotsky spent many happy years in New York City and relished American culture, if not its capitalism. The last of the Romanov's were Grecophiles and Anglophiles, until the bullets flew in Yekaterinburg!

But you're right about the bearded Boyars, they were hirsute thugs and boorish brigands. The rest of the Russian population could not have cared less for the most part.

Cheers.
Evilroddy.

PS: I've forgotten the first name of the Scottish director of the St. Petersburg Royal Academy of Sciences so I've got to go and look it up before I go around the twist. His surname was Bruce. Talk about being an obsessive nerd! I need help!

 

[Evilroddy]

Fearandloathing:

James (Yakov) Bruce! Now I can rest! It's really quite pathetic.

Cheers.
Evilroddy.

 

[Andalublue]

I have never heard of a position of "sub-editor".

I believe you might refer to them as copy editors.

And I don't care to share the details with hostile Americans

Nor would I. Very sensible. I'm Anglo-Spanish btw.

Come to think about it, there is nothing in that post to warrant that level of personal insult.

There's no personal insult in there, just a gentle ribbing about the several grammatical and orthographic errors in your post.

However being a moderator I can't put you on ignore.

Very true.

So I guess I have to live with your cheap insults

Also true, so if I ever get around to insulting you I'll be sure to let you know.

 

[volsrock]

all this was predicted by most on the right years ago


let Muslims in you country this is what will happen

 

[Manc Skipper]

all this was predicted by most on the right years ago


let Muslims in you country this is what will happen

Keeping the fear alive since last century!

 

[Manc Skipper]

4 or more people counts as "mass shootings"? That's a Saturday night in the projects in Chicago. That definition serves the narrative.

It's the FBI's definition, I believe. Has been the standard for years now. Do try again, this is fun.