Sharia

Had to dig pretty deep for that one. Is it all that surprising that equally nutjob groups rise up in the wake of over a decade of extremist Muslim groups? When they start blowing up bombs and shooting peaceful crowds in Europe and the US I will see them as a threat.

 

Would you say it was 'not surprising' that Muslim who grew up in Iraq and saw his relatives abused and killed would 'rise up'?

 

Belasar...if you lived in the Middle East you would seen over a decade of Christian countries bombing and invading...even blowing up (albeit accidentally) crowds of civilians or 'peaceful' people...it gets maximum press when a Muslim does it in a western or 'Christian' country and almost nothing if it happens in a city in the Middle East.
Why wouldn't the people in the Middle East see us as violent nutjobs?

 

But please
Of course those Western leaders who attacked other countries, driven by their criminally insane liberal ideologies or by their own internal politics are criminals and murderers.

But it can't be denied the attacked countries were/are fake countries. Because really, if someone destroys Washington, the Americans will not start fighting each other, they will unite against the enemy.

Those countries: Iraq, Libya and the others didn't - proving they were fake countries united only by the brutality of their leaders and nothing else.
Most of the killings are not done by Christians, but by their own citizens in civil or religious wars. The wars were always there - latent, waiting for an opportunity to erupt. They were inevitable because the countries were fake.

And actually the liberals, the progressives want Europe and the US to be like the those fake countries, without any common bond, a bunch of religious, national and political groups united by nothing.

 

It is just another civil war in a fake country, a shithole nobody ever heard of.

 

Oh...So, they are "fake" countries.

The the terrorists are "fake" terrorists, after all those countries do not exist - so why should the terrorists exist.

Since, the terrorists are "fake" terrorists, then they do not exist, but are made-up creations of those criminally insane liberal Western Leaders.

 

CAC, not stating that we have never harmed non combatants, sadly we have, but we never reveled in it as Islamic religious extremists have and it was in the attempt to come to grips with actual bad guys with guns. You know as well as I that had the 'West' wanted to kill indiscriminately we could do so in a way that would have made Syria's Assad feel like a rank amateur, but that is not our way. Further our collective military action came only after acts they committed.

What m kenny conveniently overlooks is that Islamic Fundamentalism terrorizes indiscriminately. If a convenient Christian or Jew is unavailable, they oppress their own who do not live up to their 13th century view of what a 'good Muslim' should be. Did we bomb central Africa and create Boko Haram? Did we create the Taliban by air strikes? Did we bomb Holy sites in Saudi Arabia and create Al Qaeda?

Bringing this back to the point of this thread, These groups use the precepts of Sharia Law to justify their heinous acts, both against westerner's and against their own people. We really do try to fight 'clean' wars against these extremists and yes, sometimes we fail, but they never try. Ever.

 

We have the luxury of having the ability to be able to fight "clean" wars. The fringe extremist elements do not have said luxury, unless you are willing to give them aircraft carriers, long-range bombers and cruise missiles, as well as friendly bases to operate them from.

Further, these extremists are not the complete dolts that some take them for. These extremists know that they cannot and will not win a "clean" war, thus they must use other tactics and strategies if they are to be successful.

 

Soooooo, when the Taliban destroys a girl's school and kills their teacher's, or Boko Haram kidnaps prepubescent girls and turns them into sex slaves and ISIS fighters video mass executions of Muslim's its all about out maneuvering our military?


What devious genius's they are!

 

The countries are fake, i.e. were built on sand, but the people living there are real and their conflicts are real.
Their conflicts are structural and nothing can't be done about them.

 

Look at the cost of the 'War On Terror'.
Look at the draconian & repressive Laws that have been sneaked in on the back of it.
Look at the total hoovering up of the on-line traffic of the entire world.
Look at how it now dominates a certain countries every act.

In the UK the IRA Campaign in 1960-90s was far more lethal and far more destructive but in that 'war' we did not destroy the fabric of society to try and win it.


I would say that is the 'success' they were looking for.

 

Remind me of the wars in Libya, Iraq, Syria & Afghanistan before The West/Russia got involved.
How big a problem were these countries then compared to now.
The Refugee Crisis that is destabilising Europe is a direct result of Western meddling.

 

It's a direct result, but in time a different event would create a similar direct result. Like for example death of their leader.
Even today there are 140 tribes and clans in Libya, the possibilities for conflict are endless there.

Libya, Iraq, Syria didn't even exist before the ww2, so there wasn't any before there.
In Afghanistan wars were fought constantly, those people haven't become fierce warriors by playing Buzkashi.

 

So when was the first time 'Afghans turned up (say) on the streets of London armed to the teeth
Was it in the 1700s?

 

I don't think the eighteenth-century British elite invited the Afganas at any time, and were giving them free living, free health-care, money, and free stuff like today - so there were none.

 

Maybe they should have...It might have prevented British embarrassment during the First Anglo-Afghan War.

 

But, they are not just fighting our army, are they?

The Viet Cong & Khmer Rouge did much the same...Killing teachers & mass executions of their own people. Mao and the Cultural Revolution would be another. The Bolshevik Revolution.

There are plenty of instances of using fear to control a population...Just as there are plenty of cases showing the opposite.

 

The concept of "holy war" doesn't make much (if any) allowance for non combatants, and all judaic christians religions have that, the Bible has more accounts of battles than anything else and it includes plenty of episodes that look very much borderline between ethnic cleansing and outright genocide. So the Moslems didn't come up with anything new there though they possibly took it a bit further (haven't read their "book" so can't make a real comparison).

The western world basically countered that by pushing a separation of state and church, if you let people that think in terms of absolute good and evil get power you are in trouble as they simply cannot see that they should have any restraint.
But religion gives a ruling group the sort of unifying belief that is essential for nation building, so it's not surprising "new" states are resorting to it, and the more ruthless the better, it's very hard to create a workable state based on turn the other cheek.

But then some misguided idiots came up with the concept of total war, and "the absolute" came back without any need for religion ..... people of good will have been attempting to put the genie back in the bottle ever since, and failing, so even "non believers" are now unlikely to show the kind of consistent self restraint that may trigger a similar behavior from the other side.

Then we have insurgents, rebels and "rabid dogs" groups, that have a lot less to lose than established governments from social breakdown, you need some sort of stability to collect taxes and tax money is what modern era governments are all about, social breakdown will enable insurgents to fight on an equal footing with the usually militarily stronger government so they usually benefit from it.

And last but not least modern technology has given both governments and individuals a capacity for destruction that was unthinkable just 100 years ago, and oceans are no longer effective borders.

mala tempora currunt

 

Well, the events in the Bible were 2000 years ago, but Sharia, corporal punishment, beheadings, Muslim subjugation of women, Muslim holy wars we have today.
Actually there is no holy war in the Bible, although they have there a single event that can be called a holy war, limited for a specific place, time.
The Bible doesn't support the concept, and basically forbids it (for hall who take the sword will perish by the sword).

The Bible was written by farmers, the Quran by warriors - because of that the Bible is useful today, and the Quran isn't.

And Europe and the US weren't built by some anonymous Western World, but actually by people of the Bible: Catholics, and Protestants. People who like Muslims were guided and informed by their religion.
Even the fathers of the European Union were mostly Catholic and Protestants, not Socialists or Communists.

 

That's the New Testament my friend...

Read the Old Testament.