The New terroists That The World have To Confront What is the Answer ?

by smiddy 50 Replies latest social current

• 

  Simon

  Trump got in primarily because he called out Islam, IMO. Far to many politicians are spineless hacks who refuse to stand up and say it. It's a problem, it's messy and it requires urgent action.

  I agree. It's one of the biggest issues of our time and Obama + Clinton were abject failures when it came to tackling it - they made everything much, much worse.

  The world is on the verge of a revolution, it's either that or risk being plunged back into the dark ages for centuries to come. Islam is a good start, but if you are eating bread and wine and believe it to be the body and blood of a dead man from 2000 years ago.... please, lets relentlessly mock this shit for what it is. Get rid of it all.

  Catholicism, for all it's idiocy, isn't an immediate danger in the same way that Islam is. It does harm by denying birth-control but everyone has a choice whether they want to follow it or not.

  Trump seems to have picked a side that Obama never would openly, but Trump has picked the correct one - the only functioning democracy in the region.

  Bravo Mr President.
• 

  Simon

  Obviously you are not well informed. But anywhooo .............what is your excuse for the likes of Timothy McViegh and Anders Brievik? Where do they fit in this neat littte let's just ban muslims solution??

  Oh lord, really? This gem? To name but the only cases you could come up with spanning a 20+ year period compared to the 30,000+ Islamic attacks in the last years alone.

  Next you'll insist that we only count US terrorism in the very specific 15 year period starting the day after 9/11 and ending before recent mass attacks.

  Why are you so determined to try and excuse and distract from Muslim terrorism?
• 

  Simon

  You know the big difference when it comes to Timothy McViegh and Anders Brievik compared to Islam?

  First, they are anomalies. Real standout cases.

  Also, everyone condemns their actions. No one has a problem condemning what they did or that other people get to condemn it.

  But condemn Islam after yet another slaughter of innocents and some asshole will inevitably popup and start arguing that everything is equal and there was this white guy 25 years ago who killed people so Muslims are no worse.

  It's simply not true.
• 

  hothabanero

  Lol, the way some people are talking about Breivik makes it sound like his terror attack was the miracle of the risen Christ: a white terrorist who hated Muslims, oh joy, and in Scandinavia of all places.

  Breivik was bonkers, period. If liberals spend 1/100 of the energy they spend on Breivik on every subsequent terror attack we would literally not hear about Breivik because they would literally never have time to talk about him.
• 

  hothabanero

  Anyone who commits terrorism - bulldoze the mosque they worshipped at.
  Stop passively trying to monitor people - if someone is an extremist, execute them.
  Find their family and if they are fanatics, execute them.
  This is a winnable war, but we're going to lose if we refuse to start fighting it.

  Lol, there would be no mosques left!

  In all honesty... I don't know what to do about this crap but I agree with the last sentence: we are in a war if we like it or not. There are millions (literally) on one side and they have made landfall. You can either surrender or accept the last time you got hundreds of thousands of hostiles on continental Europe it didn't play out by UN/geneva rules....
• 

  freddo

  I wish the non bombing Muslim community would stand up loud and long and condemn the terrorist and bombing Muslim extremists. And remove their own hate preachers from their mosques.

  Some of course silently sympathise but maybe the majority are too frightened of being on the receiving end themselves.
• 

  smiddy

  The west is sadly becoming desensitised to such acts of bastardry...Simply pretending a difficult problem doesnt exist doesnt make that problem go away.The british media were urging Britains to carry on as if nothing had happened { .How insane is that ?} How about Britain responds by targeting those responsible as well as the ideology behind the attacks ?

  Its time to tackle this problem head-on and that starts with an honest discussion about the terroism threat without fear of offending those seeking to wrap themselves in the cloak of victim hood,

  Yet many of our leaders opt for the head in the sand approach preferring to avoid uncomfortable truths

  I have used excerpts of an an article by an Aussie journalist Rita Panahi a herald sun Columnist who was brought up I believe as a Muslim.

  I think she makes a lot of sense in her articles on Islam and what the Muslim community should do to dissassociate itself from terroism and also to abolish sharia law. { These are my thoughts }
• 

  shepherdless

  On page one of this thread:

  Stan livedeath: bearing in mind most islamist terrorists in the UK are " home grown", can anyone tell me what they are trying to achieve ?

  It doesn't seem anyone answered Stan's question. This is also what I struggle to understand.

  Some terror campaigns are successful in persuading an occupier of a region to leave, or a minority in a region to leave where that minority has somewhere else to go. There is no hope of this terror campaign achieving anything like that. It can only harden resolve against the terrorists.

  If there is any logic to why they do it (beyond the logic of the individual who believes he is going to get rewards in heaven), I think it is more a political statement to the world, that they exist and that they are powerful and frightening.

  As for the answer? I don't have a simple one at the moment. A lot of terrorist movements in the past have eventually just petered out. For example, in the 1970's there were a few Marxist terror groups around, all of who have disappeared, and some Arab nationalist terror groups that disappeared. (The only ones that lasted were ones that were also acting like mafia, using their network make financial gain.) So maybe continued thorough law enforcement will wear it down; I don't know.

  The other thing I notice is that virtually all recent Islamist terror seems to be from one sect of one branch of Islam. The second biggest branch of Islam (Shia) is every bit as anti-ISIS as the west is. Same could be said for other groups (Ibadi, Kurdish, etc). It is worth bearing that in mind.
• 

  Thisismein1972

  Yemen, being bombed on a daily basis by Saudi Arabia by the bombs Britain and the US have provided.

  Syria Being bombed on a daily basis using American and British bombs.

  Need I remind those who are spitting vile hatred of the totally illegal war in Iraq under the pretence of Weapons of Mass Destruction?

  Just because a few crazy people are killing innocent people in the name of Islam does not mean the whole of Islam is preaching hatred. And before we start pointing fingers, let's hope our countries are free from blame. Let's hope our countries are not involved in killing innocent children on a daily basis, let's hope the bombs that are dropped daily do not hit hospitals. Although unfortunately, this is not true.

  We go mad because of attacks in our country, yet we do not care about the people in the above countries. Isn't this something to be addressed?
• 

  Landy

  Just because a few crazy people are killing innocent people in the name of Islam does not mean the whole of Islam is preaching hatred

  You wouldn't think it from some of the comments on here.

  We go mad because of attacks in our country, yet we do not care about the people in the above countries. Isn't this something to be addressed?

  68 children killed when a bus was bombed last month.

  https://www.theguardian.com/world/video/2017/apr/16/aftermath-of-syrian-bus-bombing-which-killed-126-people-video

  The current situation is more a result of 15 years of western foreign policy than it is about religion.