Brainwashed fighters across the world wreaking havoc ... how do you think it will end? Surely the end to the conflict won't even be in our lifetime will it? What say you?
Printable View
Brainwashed fighters across the world wreaking havoc ... how do you think it will end? Surely the end to the conflict won't even be in our lifetime will it? What say you?
I am confident there will be extremists in the future. Is harder to say if most of the extremists will be religious or if more will be focused on something else. Historically religion has generated large numbers of people willing to die. Attempts by empires to crush religious movements frequently made them grow.
Watching people have their lives wasted by religious lies is hard to bare, knowing that my own country (Australia) spends money and lives on the issue is upsetting also. After much ponderance i have little doubt their will be much the same seen in the world in the next century ... that is - unless humankind awakens and evolves enough to cast off religious stupidity.
I'm afraid the war on (religious) extremism will turn out just as successful as the war on drugs.
Mens minds do not finish forming until they are about ten thousand days and nights old ... it is sick to see these men being brainwashed and having their lives wasted. I think informing people is the best way to rid the earth of isis ... if they knew the truth about the world surely they would talk their problems through or agree to disagree rather than fight to the death ... or fight by dying - suicide bomber.
I watch the youtube footage of young men firing guns at each other and all i can do is thank fate i live where i live (Australia). I wonder what the fk goes through the heads of a suicide bomber ... it is all so shocking. Children get nightmares from watching the news these days.
Surely Isis can not win. They seem to be just hurting the world on their way out ...
I think the anti religious extremists have eclipsed the religious extremists, in the amount of brainwashing / killing / terrorism etc that they have done. FWIW.
Personally I think you're wrong, at least for the killing/terrorism pert, as for the brainwashing part, well that depends on how you define brainwashing.
For the term "anti-religious extremists" to have any meaning in this context you'd have to limit it to atheists/agnostics killing in order to root out all religion. Not just everybody who's have a beef with 1 religion or other. Because if you don't limit your scope thusly you'd have include the Crusades, The 30-year war, and other such weirdness in the "anti-religious extremist" category.
And when you define 1 group of religious extremists trying to kill another group of religious extremists as anti-religious extremists then the term just ceases to be meaningful.
So thus you can't include for example the Holocaust, as the Nazis weren't specifically atheist, nor against religion(they for example permitted christianity to persist) which I'd suspect was what you were aiming at including.
One thing you can include is perhaps the Communist cleansings in the Soviet Union and China because they actively(at least in the beginning) practised state Atheism and actively persecuted religious elements, at least early on before they settled on for ignoring them as long as they didn't pose a threat to the Communist regime. I still seriously doubt that the Communist persecutions can hold a candle to the persecutions and killings in the name of some god or other throughout written history.
Now as for brainwashing.
http://www.wingia.com/web/files/news/14/file/14.pdf
59% of the Global population defines themselves as religious while only 13% as atheists. So I'd say religion is the better at brainwashing.
But that of course depends on what you want to include in the concept.
Its 5 am here and I've yet to get any sleep so I'll have to post anther post later, but it will perhaps suffice to say, that the atheistic wars / terrorism and brainwashing I had in mind begins no latter than the "30 years war" or at the very least the French Revolution. I'll not go into the "30 years war" just yet, other than to write that, 'when I do I'll grab a quote from Eugene Weber about how it really was a war that was done in the name of religion but was according to him the first series of war that had nothing to do with religion in fact.' "The French Revolution" on the other hand was outright hostile towards religion and out right violated many of its stated goals in the name of liberation of the peasant from religion, despite the fact that the majority of those they were trying to liberate did not share their sentiments nor want their forced "liberation". The leaders of the, I think it was, the third Republic in order to preserve its self (it may have been one of the other republics (the first or second) my memory atm is failing me) forcefully ejected religious leaders from the education system and force educated the French population in order to preserve itself.
Anyway I hope that suffices for now but I plan to gather references for you to see and to further my arguments as well. Your post was good as usual.
I would agree that the 30 year war was largely a political war. The reformation having become a threat to the always political catholic church/papal states needed to be put down and a wholly protestant Germany would have been a massive setback and threat to the catholic church, thus saw catholic Kingdom of France(Because they didn't get along with the Spaniards or the Holy Roman Empire) allied with the protestant league and protestant Denmark allied with the catholic league(because hey we get to kill Swedes! and we love fighting the Swedes above all else). So yes the 30-year war was anything but cut cleanly down religious divides, and thus more political than religious.
As for the French Revolution, The catholic church was a big part of the official establishment under the Ancien Régime, every Bishop was a nobleman and the catholic church was the largest landowner and collected massive tithes. Thus as the church was essentially part of the state so to overthrow the state the church needed to be overthrown as well. Thus perhaps the Revolution in practice violated it's ideals in order to achieve their goals. Without overthrowing the government including the first(the clergy) and second estates(the nobility) there could be no universal freedom, and without overthrowing the church there could be no true freedom of religion(because historically the catholic church really doesn't like any form of competition).
The First Republic lasted from the French Revolution in 1792 until Napoleon overthrew the Republic and crowned himself Emperor of France in 1804.
The Second Republic lasted from the 1848 Revolution until Napoleon III decided that President of the republic wasn't enough and crowned himself Emperor.
The Third Republic lasted from 1870 when Napoleon II was dethroned and lasted until the French defeat at WWII.
So my guess would be that the acts you're talking about happened during the first republic(because both the first and second republic fell suddenly, and the third republic were reasonably stable until Hitler waltzed through Paris) in the aftermath of the French revolution where the new republic sentenced a lot of priests to death for refusing to swear fealty to the new republic amongst other things, and forcefully marrying them off, since catholic priests could not have spouses thus they ceased to be priests. Dirty? yes, but overthrowing a system that has been around for 300 years is rarely if ever a pretty thing to witness. So I would say it was less about staying in power and more about establishing power.
Recommended book for anyone who's interested in this topic from a liberally democratic point of view - 'Radical' by Maajid Nawaz. He's Muslim. Do yourself a favour! :)
Why is everyone so opposed to ISIS? Aren't they the good guys in this scenario? It's the drone-wielding terrorists from the west that should yield. Supporting the US here is like supporting the British during the revolutionary war.
For their savagery and opposition towards modern civilisation maybe. Heroes they may claim to be, yet so many had died pointlessly under their reign, and oh not to forget for the sake of america-s national security.
This is what happens when you engage in regime change in countries you don't belong in. How can you attack a region then get upset when the losing party retaliates? They've been nothing but righteous in their dealings in spite of their strange religious fervor.
Maybe it's time to recognize them as a legitimate state (which was so arrogantly taken away from them under Saddam) and provide financing/reparations to rebuild. I'm sure they would also appreciate an apology and admission of guilt from the US and their allies.
There is no security without peace.
Lands are originally within iraq and syrias borders, both nations the us helped destablized. If any, ISIS shd be thanking us intervention for their founding rather than retaliate for their eventual demise. Pointless loss of lives in any scenario if anyone cares. And isis is also a good example of radical extremist islam, not people you want to be neighbours with. Ask assad if you would, afaik he wants them gone too.
That's what's interesting about my US: we want to ousts a guy that's allegedly saying everything I hear common citizens say in idle conversation.
Octo basically is ditto my thinking. Then we get upset about Russia while we destabilize regions all over their borders.
I don't have time to draw chronological circles. Not many good guys involved, but good could've come from the actions of a few.
Which borders would that be? Russia doesn't share a border with Syria, nor Afghanistan or Iraq, nor any other country the US has invaded in recent history.
Russia is quite capable of destabilizing their own borders with, Ukraine, Georgia & Estonia.
Now if by destabilize you mean NATO "encroaching" on their border, I'd argue that it does the exact opposite, it stabilizes the border because it's become readily apparent in Ukraine how "stable" borders with Russia are and what happens when a weaker nation doesn't follow the orders from Moscow.
No, Russia is the destabilizing factor on Russia's borders.
Isis is a completely brutal organization that goes out of their way to kill and torture civilians. They kill children and put their heads on spikes or hang them from trees. There is nothing good about that organization and make the Nazis look like saints with there actions.
What business does the military have policing social norms in foreign nations? Is it acceptable for me to come into your house and kill you because I don't like the way you discipline your children?
Doesn't look like ISIS has signed yet! Can you even engage in such treaties before you're recognized as a nation-state?
You could certainly abide by it. Attempting to act like a sovereign nation would most certainly going a long way in getting globally recognized as such.
But more to your point, you're right. They aren't a nation. They're a terrorist group that has declared war on the United States (among others). We aren't going in and policing the social norms of another nation. We're exterminating a terrorist group that has declared war on us and just about every other non Muslim nation on the globe.
Really it comes down to treating others the way you'd like to be treated. They attack us, so we attack them. It just so happens that they are a flimsy terrorist organisation that decided to attack the largest military on the planet and it's really not going the way they thought it would.
I'll also make note of the fact that the US is pretty good friends with Saudi Arabia, whose social norms are far from what would be considered acceptable in the US. So the general idea that we're policing the world based on values different than ours is just a flawed premise from the get go
Did you say Saudi Arabia?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=odCZpBPfFQk
Interesting question: Does religion *generate* people willing to die for a cause? Or does it merely attract unstable people who are looking to die for a cause? (Or, more likely, some combination of the two?)
Consider the 'lone wolf' attacks we've seen in Canada and the US by ISIL sympathizers. To the best of my knowledge, none of these attacks actually had any meaningful contact with ISIL itself - ISIL isn't actively involved in staging attacks in North America, but is actually putting more effort into *recruiting* people from North America to travel *to* the middle east. The folks who have launched attacks in ISIL's name are usually home grown, frequently Muslim converts (i.e. raised with little or no connection to the Muslim faith), and often have a criminal record and/or history of mental health issues. There are even cases where Muslim communities (mosques or other organizations) have kicked these converts out because of their extremist views.
These people aren't being indoctrinated. These are people just looking for a justification to commit suicide by cop.
Similarly, extremism even within the middle east is often at *least* as political as it is religious. Religion is used as the catalyst, the justification, for abhorrent acts of violence, but the goals are often political in nature. When a guy straps a bomb to himself and blows himself up to oppose American interests or a west-supported government, could it have something to do with the probability that a family member of his has been killed by an American drone strike? Palestinian Muslims join Hamas to fight against Israel...really think it's religious indoctrination? Or could it be a fight against Israeli occupation of their homes?
Religion isn't largely the reason for these conflicts. Religion is a tool that political actors use to help motivate and justify their side's militant acts.
Octo, while I recognize your point about the US interfering with the internal matters of other groups (and often quite violently), and I would absolutely agree that killing Saddam was a huge mistake, ISIL is a pretty brutal group in its local dealings, too. Most of us know ISIL because, as middle east terror groups go, they have a pretty good social media presence - no, I'm not kidding, they're playing western media like a finely tuned fiddle, feeding news outlets with great 'shock value' footage and headlines. ISIL declaring war on America? Come on, seriously? ISIL is a local group of guerrilla fighters, which gets attention because of its brutal tactics and shocking actions, but it has fewer fighters and *significantly* less money and hardware than the *Canadian* military, and we're widely known for our military being a joke. ISIL doesn't have the resources or even much desire to wage a fight against the United States. They'd rather secure themselves into power in their own geographical area.
But does that mean that we should recognize them as a state? Or not fight them? Considering their actions and rhetoric, we're perfectly justified in condemning and fighting them, though there's a legitimate question as to what we would hope to accomplish - noting that the last time we (as in, the west) tried to change a regime in Iraq, it took over a trillion dollars, a decade, thousands of lost troops, and merely resulted in the rise of something worse than the regime we sought to change. But they're barely more than a band of marauders right now. Palem's right - if they start acting like a government, instead of a paramilitary organization, then that could raise additional questions: If they start actually *governing* the people within their territorial control, and manage to retain that control with a degree of stability for a period of time, then maybe we start asking questions about whether or not statehood is appropriate. (Of course, there are other political concerns, too. That region gets really complicated. They want parts of different countries, and different proposed countries. It's going to be a real mess for a long time, and ISIL is just complicating it more.)
They've been doing a lot of governing! Collecting taxes, providing schooling, and brutally enforcing the (sharia) law. They've even assembled a military to protect their growing interests. It really resembles a younger US (from their revolutionary days).
A good size chunk of their people/leadership is from Saddam's original regime. If they're acting any worse than they have previously it's probably because they're stuck engaging in asymmetric warfare against the western powers that removed them from play for absolutely no reason whatsoever. The British very much viewed the US revolutionary groups as terrorists as well because they weren't lining up and exchanging gunfire in open fields as was the norm. They hid in the bushes like guerrilla fighters and brutally assassinated honorable soldiers.
...
What is "Islamic extremism" anyway? Someone who follows Islam without exceptions?
All extremism is the same. Anybody who follows propaganda w/o using logic. Like the followers of Trump who parrot Fox Noise.
Squawk, Poly wants a tax break for Billionaires.
Abortion is evil but state supported murder of inmates on Death row is great
Obamacare is evil but our members of Congress deserve my tax supported Health care.
Bush 43 invaded Iraq w/o any exit strategy and caused the downfall of 5-6 middle east govs. We are surprised by the extremism in Europe that followed. Hell just kill all Muslims is the only answer.
This country is a big joke to the rest of Earth.
WordNet (r) 3.0 (2006) (wn)
extremism
n 1: any political theory favoring immoderate uncompromising
policies
I'll try and look it up in a decent oxford dictionary... I did online search on a oxford dictionary but I suspect there is better oxford dictionaries than what I received for results.
Point I am trying to make is, one could be rightly called an extremist for good things or bad things...
What a shame that only the dictionary-makers get a say on what our words mean :(
Can't I have a say too!?
Islamic extremists carries out jihad as instructed in the Koran. When I was in the military we where educated on our enemy which is these extremist. Problem is any Muslim can wake up one day and become a Islamic extremist. Koran is very specific on how to treat non believers. The extremist just follows the Holy Koran to the letter. Many people have tried to answer the why peaceful Muslims become radical islamic extremist. Generally most research I have seen done, points to life changing events, enivorment or just seeking a higher level of religious State. Hope that helps answer your question.
That's some might fine fear mongering you've got going there.
Yea, just look at this stuff...Quote:
Koran is very specific on how to treat non believers. The extremist just follows the Holy Koran to the letter.
Quote:
If there be found among you, within any of thy gates which the LORD thy God giveth thee, man or woman, that hath wrought wickedness in the sight of the LORD thy God, in transgressing his covenant; 17:3 And hath gone and served other gods, and worshipped them, either the sun, or moon, or any of the host of heaven, which I have not commanded; 17:4 And it be told thee, and thou hast heard of it, and enquired diligently, and, behold, it be true, and the thing certain, that such abomination is wrought in Israel; 17:5 Then shalt thou bring forth that man or that woman, which have committed that wicked thing, unto thy gates, even that man or that woman, and shalt stone them with stones, till they die.
****, wait, that's the bible ¯\_(ツ)_/ ¯Quote:
6 If your very own brother, or your son or daughter, or the wife you love, or your closest friend secretly entices you, saying, “Let us go and worship other gods” (gods that neither you nor your ancestors have known, 7 gods of the peoples around you, whether near or far, from one end of the land to the other), 8 do not yield to them or listen to them. Show them no pity. Do not spare them or shield them. 9 You must certainly put them to death. Your hand must be the first in putting them to death, and then the hands of all the people. 10 Stone them to death, because they tried to turn you away from the Lord your God, who brought you out of Egypt, out of the land of slavery. 11 Then all Israel will hear and be afraid, and no one among you will do such an evil thing again.
12 If you hear it said about one of the towns the Lord your God is giving you to live in 13 that troublemakers have arisen among you and have led the people of their town astray, saying, “Let us go and worship other gods” (gods you have not known), 14 then you must inquire, probe and investigate it thoroughly. And if it is true and it has been proved that this detestable thing has been done among you, 15 you must certainly put to the sword all who live in that town. You must destroy it completely, both its people and its livestock. 16 You are to gather all the plunder of the town into the middle of the public square and completely burn the town and all its plunder as a whole burnt offering to the Lord your God. That town is to remain a ruin forever, never to be rebuilt.
Brainwashing via propaganda (or in some cases, anti-muslim reality). Its not all that complicatedQuote:
Many people have tried to answer the why peaceful Muslims become radical islamic extremist.
That's eggsactly what I've been saying about Rupert Murdock and Fox. Why does the US allow a foreign national to spew his fascist extreme right lies?
I am 100% sure HoT is a nice guy, I also believe nothing he chats. I do read it.
I have never read the Koran, don't plan to, but I've always heard it says nothing about Jihad on nations.
I am mystified by the 3 main religions praying to the God, the ONLY God of Abraham, killing each other every day for eons. Since time began.
Am I my Brothers keeper?
What hypocrites we are. Jews killing Jew, Christians killing Christians, Muslims killing Muslims, and every amalgam of those 3. Man, Woman, Child all in the name of God...
I thank God every day I am an Atheist.
@ khrono : sure shinto, budist, hindu, pagan, etc too; but when an atheist kills its not hypocrisy its only against the law of man and morally wrong.
I was chatting more about war; gang violins; or old terror vendettas, I am old enough to remember the terror attacks of the IRA vs England for example. I did not mean murder such as for stealing, or crimes of passion.
Plenty of killing in the name of "law", of "truth", of "science" going on all over... plenty of atheists doing killing in whatever name motivates them.
Pretty much people will kill whoever they want to kill in the name of whatever will motivate other peoples to help them and or what helps them hide from the fact they are not good people.
Few things, one you quoted the old testament which if fine. But once Jesus Christ died on the cross for our sins the old law where no More. Why Christians believe to this day to turn the other cheek. But I am not going to argue religion as it's a never ending argument. Simple difference that you missed is zero Christian nations are doing terrorism, genocide or chemical weapon attacks. Now plenty of places in history Christians did terrible things in the name of God. But where they really Christians? You can debate that in circles, for instance I don't view Cathics as Christians. But others would view them as such. I am not fear mongering, I am putting out facts. I could careless if you agree with them or Not.;)
I guess it all depends on what version your reading. Did Palem quote the Christian or the Jewish old testament and does Palem even know there is a difference.
Lol wut? Russia? Rwanda? Ringing any bells? China is a bit of a stretch, but most definitely not a Muslim nation. They might not be executing the acts, but there lots of Christians who openly celebrate the deaths of "sinners" right here in the US.
Also, new testimate is much tamer, but there's still some violence.
Luke 19:27
But those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me.
Mathew 10:34
Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword.
I don't consider myself any kind of a religious expert and don't have much of a personal background in religion, but in my travels I do know that there isn't any significant differences between the torah and the old testimate.
For what it's worth I do believe both are from the old testimate, although I admittedly don't know and don't care to look it up lol
*it's at this point that I'll harbor no ill will towards anyone for practicing the religion of their choice. I am not an "all religions are a cancer!" atheist lol*
http://cdn.playbuzz.com/cdn/36f90b87...10eaf26a0b.gif