The war against Islamic extremism

[Earthshine]

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?

[pathetic sheep]

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.

[Earthshine]

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.

[Landro]

I'm afraid the war on (religious) extremism will turn out just as successful as the war on drugs.

[Palem]

that is - unless humankind awakens and evolves enough to cast off religious stupidity.

Lol good one

[The Moon]

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 ...

[khronosschoty]

I think the anti religious extremists have eclipsed the religious extremists, in the amount of brainwashing / killing / terrorism etc that they have done. FWIW.

[Elldallan]

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.

[khronosschoty]

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.

[Elldallan]

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.

[JohnnyReid]

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! :)

[octobrev]

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.

[Nanka]

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.

[octobrev]

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.

[Nanka]

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.