Obama's Mistaken and Incromprehensible ISIS Strategy (1 Viewer)

[Vassago]

Sure I care about them,,,they are human beings..... etc. I am sorry you doubt that!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

At some point in this post you make reference to 'Europo'. Are they not Liberal...Hell everything over there is liberal,,,, that is why people are getting killed.... 'They have to do the RIGHT thing and let people (Unknown people ) in so they can feeeeeeeel goooood about themselves.

we have mentality over here and it is getting stronger every day. I see now where they are teaching Islam in some TN schools. The only problem, the books tell nothing but lies (how peaceful it is) about the Islam religion. Hmmmmmmmmmmm!

Blade

This is based on what? The Paris attacks were done by EU natives. The passport that was found was fake, likely planted by the terrorists to make the world have a knee-jerk reaction of not allowing refugees.

And our governors fall right in place for ISIL. Good job guys!

 

[Frothingslosh]

I am NOT calling you a Nazi. I'm calling you a person whose open-mindedness appears to be commensurate with WWII Nazis. There is a difference.

To be fair, Doc, there was a little more malice than that in my use of that analogy. Specifically, I am directly comparing Blade's beliefs about Muslims and repeated calls for their 'destruction' against the Reich's attitudes regarding the 'Jewish Question'.

He may not have explicitly called for their extermination, but his every post on the topic winks and nudges at it.

 

[Frothingslosh]

Referring to an earlier post, Muslim and Islamist are EXACTLY the same thing since by definition, a Muslim is someone who submits to Islamic beliefs. There is no some of this are this and all of this are this. They are one and the same, just different words for the same definition.

Actually, Vassago, that is incorrect. Islamism is a political ideology which strives to derive legitimacy from Islam. (Note that the key word there is 'strives'.)

There is an excellent discussion on the topic HERE by the extremely well-written Soner Cagaptay.

Some highlights:

So if Islam is a faith, then what is Islamism? It can be best described as an "anti-" ideology, in the sense that it defines itself only in opposition to things. That is, Islamism stands not for but against.

For starters, Islamism is anti-Semitic in promoting the view that Jews are evil. Because Jews live in Israel, it is also anti-Israeli, and it is also anti-American due to its distorted view of Jews' role in the United States. "Jews are evil, they run America, therefore America is evil" -- this is the mantra of Islamist thinking.

Islamism is also anti-Christian, having a perverted view of the religion as well. And since Jews and Christians live in the West, many Islamists are anti-Western. They likewise oppose liberal democracy and secularism, as these institutions originated in the West.

What is more, Islamists tend to be anti-capitalist because -- now you follow the logic -- capitalism originates from the West. Many also believe that "Jews invented capitalism" and therefore see capitalism as doubly evil. When they make money, however, Islamists often soften their negative attitude toward capitalism, anti-capitalism being ever the corruptible link in the Islamists' "anti-" ideology.

Islamism is therefore not about the Islamic faith. Rather, it is a dystopian ideology that distorts religion and reality to fit its "anti-" platform.

Honestly, I see in Islamism the Muslim version of the nominally-Christian 'Dominionist' and 'Christian Reconstructionist' movements. Each strives to implement a theocracy based on warped, extreme, ultra-conservative and violently exclusionist versions of the religions they claim to represent.

 

[Rabbie]

If Germany(pop 80 million) can take approx 1 million refugees and Sweden(pop 9 million) can take 100,000 refugees why can't the USA(pop 200+ million) take its fair share. After all some of the instability in the Middle East came from US military intervention. In the interests of fairness the UK(pop 60 million) should also take more

 

[Rabbie]

Face it, ALC, Bladerunner longs for the good old days of a police state. Perhaps Stalinist USSR would have been more his taste, but based on his behavior, I think he'd fit right in among the Third Reich. Gays, liberals, and intellectuals were all handled just how he has has repeatedly said he'd like to see happen, and no one dared contradict the ultra-conservative national government.

No Blade doesn't want a police state. He wants a a state run by people with the same religious beliefs that he has. Iran under the Ayatollah seems like the sort of regime he wants but with his particular right-wing christian bias.

 

[Frothingslosh]

Rabbie - Iran is most certainly considered a police state. Dissenting views are violently suppressed, and the Ayatollah's rules are strictly and enthusiastically enforced. Protesting any government decree is punishable by up to at least twenty years in prison (or, surprisingly commonly, death), and even providing legal council to defendants charged with protesting can land you in prison.

Sure, they don't force women to wear a burqa at all times, but God help any woman caught in public exposing anything other than hands and face, such as her hair. The punishment for such a crime is STILL 80 lashes.

The media also functions merely as a government mouthpiece and nothing more.

Sure, it's better than Taliban-era Afghanistan, North Korea, the Soviet Union, or even pre-Arab Spring Egypt and Libya, but that's not really saying much. Iraq just happens to be a theocracy backing a police state.

But you're right in that from what he's said, a far-right-extremist Christian version of Iran would be right down his alley.

 

[Frothingslosh]

Also, I stumbled across this today and the Watercooler came immediately to mind.

 

[Bladerunner]

Thanks for the responses, I feel I should clarify a few points, lest I bet taken for a fervent anti-Muslim (when it's religion in general I have a problem with).

1. I KNOW not all Muslims are violent or terrorists or hate non-Muslims.
2. I was asking if Muslims were allowed to do things expressly forbidden by their religion, in the name of fighting their enemies. The logic behind my questions was:
If I know group A cannot, for example, call Allah bad names
And I know this is adhered to WHATEVER the situation
And I know all people in terrorist group B are a subset of group A
Then if I see someone call Allah bad names I know they're not in group B.

That's all.

If someone in group B IS allowed to call Allah terrible things as long as it's during the fight against their enemies, then the rest is irrelevant.

You may LIE (does that remind of anyone---OBAMA maybe hmmmmmmm),,, in fact it says you can just about do anything as long it is getting to the enemy...You and me....

Blade

 

[Bladerunner]

Referring to an earlier post, Muslim and Islamist are EXACTLY the same thing since by definition, a Muslim is someone who submits to Islamic beliefs. There is no some of this are this and all of this are this. They are one and the same, just different words for the same definition.

Vassago,,I beg to differ with you! All Islamist are Muslims. It is a requirement of the religion side of Islam. You even must take on a Muslim Name.

On the other hand, while most people were born a Muslim and born in the Islamic faith, Many of them have rejected the Islamic regime and have turned to Christianity. In fact, IRAN has about a 18% increase in Christianity and growing. This is despite, the death penalty for converting out of Islam.

Blade

 

[Bladerunner]

This is based on what? The Paris attacks were done by EU natives. The passport that was found was fake, likely planted by the terrorists to make the world have a knee-jerk reaction of not allowing refugees.

And our governors fall right in place for ISIL. Good job guys!

you go ahead and keep believing that.

Blade

 

[Frothingslosh]

you go ahead and keep believing that.

Blade

Seeing as the passport was OBVIOUSLY fake, I'm sure he will continue believing in reality.

 

[Steve R.]

The Paris attacks were done by EU natives

Technically correct. But the next question has to be asked. What was their background; as in ethnic/religious descent?

Being born in France, Belgium, or Germany may make you a legal "native", but it may not make you a "native" in terms of your viewpoint. You may still consider yourself to "belong" to the "old country" whatever it may be. Consequently, even though you may be a native citizen of the EU by birth, you may still take-up the (fanatical) cause of your religious and/or ethnic background.

A quick cursory internet search did not adequately disclose what the ethnic/religious background of the terrorists was, beyond the fact that they were legally "native" to the EU.

Paris terror attack: Everything we know on Friday afternoon

Who were the terrorists? Everything we know about the Isil attackers so far

Omar Ismail Mostefai

The Frenchman born to Algerian parents was a known radical and is believed to have trained with Isil inside Syria last year.

Hasna Aiboulahcen

...according to French reports, as it emerged that she often visited her Moroccan father in eastern France.

 

[Bladerunner]

. Either that you genuinely know nothing at all about life outside the US. Europol (not Europo) is a law enforcement agency https://www.europol.europa.eu/ covering Europe. The police! If you're seriously suggesting that any police force anywhere tends to be more left than right wing, I can only imagine you've never had any dealings with them.

Yes, I was wrong here. It was the Metro Article on one of his links. I saw or thought I saw it as Politico(Europo) (which the former are libs)... Yes, I know what Interpol is while I have never heard of Europol. About the same on difference is territory, I 'd guess at.

Again my apologies.

Blade

 

[Frothingslosh]

Technically correct. But the next question has to be asked. What was their background; as in ethnic/religious descent?

Being born in France, Belgium, or Germany may make you a legal "native", but it may not make you a "native" in terms of your viewpoint. You may still consider yourself to "belong" to the "old country" whatever it may be. Consequently, even though you may be a native citizen of the EU by birth, you may still take-up the (fanatical) cause of your religious and/or ethnic background.

So, because French and Belgian natives launched the terror attacks in Paris, you want to force Syrian refugees to stay in the areas where they're being slaughtered. Brilliant.

I'm gaining weight, so you need to stop smoking.

See how dumb your logic is?

 

[AnthonyGerrard]

I think its fair to say that some of the terrorists appear to have entered Europe as part of the mass refugee flow, they have the fingerprints as taken in Greece.
What we do with that info I'm not quite sure. Whether they be non eu , or eu nationals smuggling themselves in masquerading as refugees we don't yet know.

 

[Alc]

You may LIE (does that remind of anyone---OBAMA maybe hmmmmmmm)

As pointed out many, many MANY times, Obama isn't a muslim.
This is another one of your "Dogs have four legs. My cat has four legs. Therefore my cat is a dog" pieces of reasoning.

 

[Steve R.]

So, because French and Belgian natives launched the terror attacks in Paris, you want to force Syrian refugees to stay in the areas where they're being slaughtered. Brilliant.

I'm gaining weight, so you need to stop smoking.

See how dumb your logic is?

You have mischaracterized what I stated. Being born in France or Belgium does make you a "native" of that country in simplistic terms. However, it does not necessarily follow that:

• you have been assimilated into the local culture
• you owe loyalty to the country of which you are now a citizen
• you give-up on supporting the mother country from which you and/or your parents emigrated from.

Ask a Basque separatist (living in Spain) if they consider themselves Spanish.

Consequently, even though you may be a native citizen of the EU by birth, you may still take-up the (fanatical) cause of your religious and/or ethnic background.

 

[Frothingslosh]

I think its fair to say that some of the terrorists appear to have entered Europe as part of the mass refugee flow, they have the fingerprints as taken in Greece.
What we do with that info I'm not quite sure. Whether they be non eu , or eu nationals smuggling themselves in masquerading as refugees we don't yet know.

It's not 'some', it's 'one', and he did that because he was almost certainly on some 'detain on sight' list. He entered the EU through Greece, whose approach to border security is pretty much "fingerprint here, sign here, have fun!", and then traveled primarily through nations known to be less than thorough in vetting travel documents.

For a refugee to get into the US, on the other hand, is far, far more difficult. There is fingerprinting, interviews, full background checks, checks against every law-enforcement and anti-terrorist database available to the US. This takes months to a year or two, during which they stay in refugee housing and are watched like hawks.

There's a reason terrorists entering the US have always gone for legitimate visas (usually student, sometimes H-1B or other work visas) rather than the refugee route: they're far less likely to get caught that way.

 

[Frothingslosh]

You have mischaracterized what I stated. Being born in France or Belgium does make you a "native" of that country in simplistic terms. However, it does not necessarily follow that:

• you have been assimilated into the local culture
• you owe loyalty to the country of which you are now a citizen
• you give-up on supporting the mother country from which you and/or your parents emigrated from.

Ask a Basque separatist (living in Spain) if they consider themselves Spanish.

Ah, so instead you're just falling into full-blown islamophobia, scapegoating all Muslims for the actions of a few. They were neither Syrians nor refugees.

Funny how when, say, four white Christians in Virginia are arrested for preparing to implement a terrorism campaign against black churches, I don't see you here saying that white people, Christians, Virginians, or Americans are all murderers who can't be trusted and must be turned into second-class citizens. When some white guy (and seriously, why does it virtually always seem to be a white male?) takes his legally owned guns and shoots a bunch of people in a school, I don't see you calling for all gun owners to be placed under mandatory observation , or that all white people get shipped back to where they came from.

But lo, 7 Muslim natives of France and Belgium shoot up Paris and suddenly you're calling for consequences against a group of people who weren't even INVOLVED. Your fear of brown people is all that's going on here, and you're still pulling the logical equivalent of demanding someone else stop smoking because you're losing weight. The calls by you and your ilk to punish the innocent for the actions of a completely different group of people are illogical, racist, and quite frankly, idiotic.

 

[Steve R.]

Ah, so instead you're just falling into full-blown islamophobia, scapegoating all Muslims for the actions of a few. They were neither Syrians nor refugees.

Funny how when, say, four white Christians in Virginia are arrested for preparing to implement a terrorism campaign against black churches, I don't see you here saying that white people, Christians, Virginians, or Americans are all murderers who can't be trusted and must be turned into second-class citizens. When some white guy (and seriously, why does it virtually always seem to be a white male?) takes his legally owned guns and shoots a bunch of people in a school, I don't see you calling for all gun owners to be placed under mandatory observation , or that all white people get shipped back to where they came from.

But lo, 7 Muslim natives of France and Belgium shoot up Paris and suddenly you're calling for consequences against a group of people who weren't even INVOLVED. Your fear of brown people is all that's going on here, and you're still pulling the logical equivalent of demanding someone else stop smoking because you're losing weight. The calls by you and your ilk to punish the innocent for the actions of a completely different group of people are illogical, racist, and quite frankly, idiotic.

You are making unjustified inflammatory statements that are not worthy of a response since they do not contribute to the dialogue. I do hope that you had a good snowy weekend. That's it for now.