off topic The politics of terrorism

[shrader]

Stupid anonymous is going to do nothing but freak out even more people by posting this crap.

[pastajoe]

Changed the thread title as we discuss terrorism more in general terms than just Paris. Anonymous claims to have uncovered ISIS plans to attack worldwide on Sunday including an attack on WWE's PPV Survivor Series.

 

http://trib.al/WIl7Rm5

The return of The Iron Shiek?

[Stoner]

Stupid anonymous is going to do nothing but freak out even more people by posting this crap.

You wonder what side some of these people like Ted Cruz are on. A religious test to enter the country? Yuck.

 

 

"In addition to hunting down terrorists, in addition to effective intelligence, and in addition to missile strikes, and in addition to cutting off financing and all the other things that we're doing, the most powerful tool we have to fight ISIL is to say that we’re not afraid; to not elevate them; to somehow buy into their fantasy that they’re doing something important," Obama said.

Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2015/11/obama-isil-terrorism-fear-216130#ixzz3sEnv6AJ0

[pastajoe]

The rhetoric harkens back to the Japanese internment camps and denying Jewish refugees safe haven during WWII.

[WildCard]

So the missing Paris terrorist may have had some issues he needed to work out

 

The missing Paris jihadist had a taste for gay sex, drugs and PlayStation.

As the international manhunt for 26-year-old Belgian Salah Abdeslam continued, patrons of a gay bar in Brussels told The Sunday Times of London that he was a regular there — known for boozing, smoking hash and flirting with other men.

http://nypost.com/2015/11/22/missing-paris-attacker-loved-gay-bars-and-playstation/

[Stoner]

So the missing Paris terrorist may have had some issues he needed to work out

 

http://nypost.com/2015/11/22/missing-paris-attacker-loved-gay-bars-and-playstation/

What issues?

[nfreeman]

You wonder what side some of these people like Ted Cruz are on. A religious test to enter the country? Yuck.

 

One might also wonder about the "side" taken by a poster who doesn't bother to criticize, in a thread about an act of mass murder, the murderers themselves, and instead chooses to criticize corporations, climate change, the Christian right, Republicans, etc.

[SwampD]

One might also wonder about the "side" taken by a poster who doesn't bother to criticize, in a thread about an act of mass murder, the murderers themselves, and instead chooses to criticize corporations, climate change, the Christian right, Republicans, etc.

Nonsense.

[darksabre]

One might also wonder about the "side" taken by a poster who doesn't bother to criticize, in a thread about an act of mass murder, the murderers themselves, and instead chooses to criticize corporations, climate change, the Christian right, Republicans, etc.

Are you ever going to add anything of value, or just troll?

[nfreeman]

My intention was not to troll.  It was simply to point out that questioning loyalties isn't really a logical or productive approach here, especially when the questioner doesn't seem to appreciate who the real bad guys are.

 

I have argued, pretty consistently in this thread and in the politics thread, that we are in a war that has been declared on us by a deadly and savage enemy that is not interested in peace and prosperity -- and that in order to win this war, we first need to stop kidding ourselves, recognize that we are in a war and who the enemy is. 

 

There are plenty of people in this country who think the way PAFan apparently does -- i.e. we're just as bad as they are, it's just a few bad apples on both sides causing these problems, we need to reform ourselves before we can tell others how to act, it isn't really a war, climate change is the real threat, there are nefarious war profiteers pushing our side for a military engagement, etc.

 

I think that school of thought is self-delusional (albeit understandable as it likely emanates from the desire to avoid the terrible price  of war) and, more importantly, dangerous, because the longer we wait to do what needs to be done, the more costly it will be.

 

I've made all of these points before and likely will do so again when my resolve to stay out of this thread weakens again.

[LastPommerFan]

My intention was not to troll.  It was simply to point out that questioning loyalties isn't really a logical or productive approach here, especially when the questioner doesn't seem to appreciate who the real bad guys are.

 

I have argued, pretty consistently in this thread and in the politics thread, that we are in a war that has been declared on us by a deadly and savage enemy that is not interested in peace and prosperity -- and that in order to win this war, we first need to stop kidding ourselves, recognize that we are in a war and who the enemy is. 

 

There are plenty of people in this country who think the way PAFan apparently does -- i.e. we're just as bad as they are, it's just a few bad apples on both sides causing these problems, we need to reform ourselves before we can tell others how to act, it isn't really a war, climate change is the real threat, there are nefarious war profiteers pushing our side for a military engagement, etc.

 

I think that school of thought is self-delusional (albeit understandable as it likely emanates from the desire to avoid the terrible price  of war) and, more importantly, dangerous, because the longer we wait to do what needs to be done, the more costly it will be.

 

I've made all of these points before and likely will do so again when my resolve to stay out of this thread weakens again.

 

If I can paraphrase this, we need to accept the idea that we are under attack and we need to be brought to understand that pacifism will expose the country to additional danger.

 

Is that what you're saying?

[Stoner]

It's OK. I don't believe that nfreeman believes that I am not critical of what the terrorists did. He's just trying to score a weak point in an argument instead of addressing the real issue I brought up.

 

I don't believe Ted Cruz is coordinating his actions with ISIS, or knowingly working on their behalf. Hence the "You have to wonder" wording. But what would the end result be if what the right is calling for actually got enacted? nfreeman should address this question: would the United States be a weaker or stronger country, if, in response to a terrorist attack in France, we turn away from our tradition of welcoming immigrants and violate a strict separation between church and state?

[X. Benedict]

One might also wonder about the "side" taken by a poster who doesn't bother to criticize, in a thread about an act of mass murder, the murderers themselves, and instead chooses to criticize corporations, climate change, the Christian right, Republicans, etc.

So, do you favor a religious test to enter the country? 

[Stoner]

My intention was not to troll.  It was simply to point out that questioning loyalties isn't really a logical or productive approach here, especially when the questioner doesn't seem to appreciate who the real bad guys are.

I think I actually agree with this. The far right of the Republican party presents a much, much graver risk to the United States than foreign terrorists.

Edited November 23, 2015 by pASabreFan

[nfreeman]

If I can paraphrase this, we need to accept the idea that we are under attack and we need to be brought to understand that pacifism will expose the country to additional danger.

 

Is that what you're saying?

 

Correct.

 

It's OK. I don't believe that nfreeman believes that I am not critical of what the terrorists did. He's just trying to score a weak point in an argument instead of addressing the real issue I brought up.

 

I don't believe Ted Cruz is coordinating his actions with ISIS, or knowingly working on their behalf. Hence the "You have to wonder" wording. But what would the end result be if what the right is calling for actually got enacted? nfreeman should address this question: would the United States be a weaker or stronger country, if, in response to a terrorist attack in France, we turn away from our tradition of welcoming immigrants and violate a strict separation between church and state?

 

What, exactly is "the right" calling for?  I'm not aware of an agreed-upon platform for fighting militant Islam -- just a bunch of splashy and distorted headlines from a liberally biased media engaged in pre-election scare tactics.

 

FWIW, I really don't like Ted Cruz.  He strikes me as a slick, opportunistic demagogue.

 

So, do you favor a religious test to enter the country? 

 

Of course not.

I think I actually agree with this. The far right of the Republican party presents a much, much graver risk to the United States than foreign terrorists.

 

How so?  Please be specific.

[X. Benedict]

 

 

 

Of course not.

 

Thanks. I was puzzling over your response. From what I can gather Jeb Bush and Cruz seem to favor a religious test, while Christie says that he'll just ban immigration from Syria. Trump says he'll even send the ones already here back:

 

http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/gop-primaries/255564-trump-if-i-win-ill-send-syrian-refugees-back

 

Not sure where Rubio stands. 

[Sabres Fan in NS]

Why does it seem that many of us don't remember, or don't want to admit to themselves who got these thugs started.

 

Who keeps them supplied with weapons and how they keep the coffers full, so that they can keep fighting.

 

That's OK. I won't remind you. Some can't handle the truth.

[SwampD]

Why does it seem that many of us don't remember, or don't want to admit to themselves who got these thugs started.

 

Who keeps them supplied with weapons and how they keep the coffers full, so that they can keep fighting.

 

That's OK. I won't remind you. Some can't handle the truth.

Unfortunately, as long as there is oil there, we are going to have to pick a side,… and then change that side,… and then change sides again and again and again…

[Sabres Fan in NS]

Unfortunately, as long as there is oil there, we are going to have to pick a side,… and then change that side,… and then change sides again and again and again…

All those bombs and not one dropped on the ISIS oil lines.

 

The US, I mean NATO, allowing a member state to buy that oil.

 

Shameful.

[WildCard]

What issues?

I'm pretty sure ISIS frowns at all of those things. I'm not condemning them

[WildCard]

5 teenage girls suicide bomb Cameroon, killing 12.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/nov/23/five-teenage-suicide-bombers-nigeria-cameroon-girls-islamist-boko-haram

[Huckleberry]

Why does it seem that many of us don't remember, or don't want to admit to themselves who got these thugs started.

 

Who keeps them supplied with weapons and how they keep the coffers full, so that they can keep fighting.

 

That's OK. I won't remind you. Some can't handle the truth.

 

They are bombing the tankers , but you really don't want to bomb the oil pits or pipe lines if you want to rebuild a country fast.    

Also the main contributor to IS is Doha (Qatar).   Can't really say we aren't guilty, Turkey is buying all of the cotton coming from Syria at bargain prices from IS.

Pretty sure the west is getting the oil at bargain prices from IS.   Lets not kid ourselves in this.

[Weave]

They are bombing the tankers , but you really don't want to bomb the oil pits or pipe lines if you want to rebuild a country fast.    

Also the main contributor to IS is Doha (Qatar).   Can't really say we aren't guilty, Turkey is buying all of the cotton coming from Syria at bargain prices from IS.

Pretty sure the west is getting the oil at bargain prices from IS.   Lets not kid ourselves in this.

 

Links for these?  I've been wondering who is buying that oil.  And I never considered that there might be other materials being exported by ISIS.

[Sabres Fan in NS]

I'm pretty sure ISIS frowns at all of those things. I'm not condemning them

Not really.

 

They promise all kinds of things to their recruits.

 

All of which are strictly prohibited in the Qur'an.

[WildCard]

Not really.

 

They promise all kinds of things to their recruits.

 

All of which are strictly prohibited in the Qur'an.

Now I'm confused. I thought they were conducting terror attacks because of our ideologies (Western ideologies that is), yet they promise their recruits drugs, booze, and the freedom of sex?