My take on ISIS and why we should STOP PRETENDING

Original post by nexttimeigetvpn

because atheists aren't gathered in mass under one or several excessively unstable political regimes

Do you consider the US to be an "excessively unstable political regime"?
What about the UK, or Belgium, France, India, Bangladesh or Indonesia?

There must be some other factor at play here. Something common to all. Something that is regularly cited by these attackers as being a motive and justification.

I wonder what that could possibly be?

Reply 104

Betelgeuse-

19

Original post by nexttimeigetvpn

because atheists aren't gathered in mass under one or several excessively unstable political regimes

same applies for the other groups

but not sure why I'm even replying to you when clearly all you like to talk about is how anyone who disagrees with you is 15.

BS. You think no Atheists / non muslims are living under unstable political regimes? Only muslims live under these conditions?. lool. Ok how about all these western born muslims...? Living in societies under regimes that are the most stable and successful than has ever existed in Mankind...?

(edited 7 years ago)

Reply 105

Original post by QE2

Are you seriously trying to claim that the radicalisation of Islamis terrorists has nothing to do with religion?
Really?
In your earlier post, you highlighted that some individuals were radicalised by extremist preachers in mosques. Many such attackers use Islamic imagery and quote Islamic scripture. Is this mere coincidence?

Indeed. Those radicalised often tend to be the vulnerable or damaged, and often whilst in prison. But that does not alter the fact that one of the tools used to get such people to carry out thes acts is Islamic ideology.
It is ridiculous to try and claim that it is not.

Also, there are people, some of them well educated, successful and seemingly content, who appear to join groups like ISIS on purely ideological grounds. It is far too simplistic to claim that because they support extremist Islamist ideology, they must be danaged in some way. Some people just believe this ****. After all, 1.6 billion believe something separated only by interpretation of certain verses. Are they all damaged?

Yep, radicalisation occurs due to peoples' lives being turned upside down.

Cherif and Said Kouachi - the mother of these two killed herself and they were placed in a foster home, they were also arrested numerous times and spent time in jail. Clearly these guys had rough childhoods and resorted to crime which led to them being in prison and becoming radicalised.

Amedy Coulibaly - arrested and convicted 5 times by the age of 17 for drug trafficking, robbery and various other offences, he was reportedly radicalised in prison by other inmates, catalysed by the fact that he is a weak individual with nothing to live for an a history of crime and therefore little capacity to get a job/future.

Man Haron Monis - again, he was charged for violent crime and fraud, and even under surveillance for sexual assaults. He also had a history of tax avoidance and involvement with the black market in Iran. Its highly likely that the jail time and threat for further convictions motivated him to become radicalised to concentrate his hatred into a political movement. He also has a history of spouses who left him.

Seifeddine Rezgui - this is the Libyan beach attacker who reportedly liked to binge drink and breakdance. He was radicalised by the Libyan conflict, he clearly became involved in politics as a result of the corrupt regime and political unrest.

And the list goes on... I've already done enough research for you, its time you do some research for me. Find me ONE example of a perpetrator where they act solely on Islam and haven't had some kind of other motivation to suddenly turn violent.

Reply 106

Original post by QE2

Do you consider the US to be an "excessively unstable political regime"?
What about the UK, or Belgium, France, India, Bangladesh or Indonesia?

There must be some other factor at play here. Something common to all. Something that is regularly cited by these attackers as being a motive and justification.

I wonder what that could possibly be?

By excessively unstable, I mean that there is a significant rebel opposition, more-or-less consistent fighting between rebels and the government, widespread discontent for the leader, situations emerging where the leader is suppressing the opposition and actively destroying civilians' lives to retain power.

Nothing like the UK or any of these governments.

Reply 107

Original post by nexttimeigetvpn

Yep, radicalisation occurs due to peoples' lives being turned upside down...
...

So, you maintain that even without any contact with Islam, these people would have still committed such attacks?
We should also expect to see people from other and no religion committing similar acts at a rate proportional to their demographic size.

Spoiler

Face it. Your argument is utterly blown.

Reply 108

Original post by QE2

So, you maintain that even without any contact with Islam, these people would have still committed such attacks?
We should also expect to see people from other and no religion committing similar acts at a rate proportional to their demographic size.

Spoiler

Face it. Your argument is utterly blown.

Islam is a factor, but blaming it is stupid and evidently there's a vast array of other, more important factors.

Remove Islam, and they would've still committed crimes, just under a different motive. Radical Islam just acts as a way of concentrating this hatred, in the same way that many other things do.

If you'd read my post, you would be aware of this.

Now do some research and find a case where someone kills because of a sudden desire to help Islam.

Reply 109

Original post by nexttimeigetvpn

Find me ONE example of a perpetrator where they act solely on Islam and haven't had some kind of other motivation to suddenly turn violent.

I never claimed that Islam was the only influence. (If you are resorting to strawmen to bolster your argument, you know you've lost.)

Now, as you are the one making the exclusive claim, you need to provide me with a case of Islamist terrorism where Islam had nothing to do with the motivation or justification.

Good luck with that.

Reply 110

Original post by nexttimeigetvpn

By excessively unstable, I mean that there is a significant rebel opposition, more-or-less consistent fighting between rebels and the government, widespread discontent for the leader, situations emerging where the leader is suppressing the opposition and actively destroying civilians' lives to retain power.

Nothing like the UK or any of these governments.

But you claimed that radicalisation and attacks occur because of such instability, but as you agree all those countries have stable governments yet they all suffer attacks and produce radicalised terrorists.

You're all over the place now, aren't you?

Reply 111

Original post by QE2

But you claimed that radicalisation and attacks occur because of such instability, but as you agree all those countries have stable governments yet they all suffer attacks and produce radicalised terrorists.

You're all over the place now, aren't you?

Clearly I'm all over the place in the mind of a confused, word-twisting idiot.

Reply 112

Original post by nexttimeigetvpn

Islam is a factor, but blaming it is stupid and evidently there's a vast array of other, more important factors.

Whoah now!
"Islam is partly to blame, but partly blaming it is stupid"?
I'll just let you think about that one.

Remove Islam, and they would've still committed crimes, just under a different motive.

You are going to have quite a job supporting that assertion.
What would help you is if there were statistically proportional attacks of a similar nature by people with no connection with Islam.
So, if we take France, if your argument holds water, in the last year we would expect to see attacks by atheists leading to about 1500 deaths, and attacks by Catholics leading to 2500 deaths (assuming similar levels of personal trauma across the groups).
...

Now do some research and find a case where someone kills because of a sudden desire to help Islam.

The Nice attacker would seem to fit this bill as apparently, his radicalisation was quite sudden.
And why must their desire to act be "sudden". You keep changing your argument and introducing new terms. You're not used to this kind of thing are you? Are you quite young?

Reply 113

Original post by QE2

Whoah now!
"Islam is partly to blame, but partly blaming it is stupid"?
I'll just let you think about that one.

You are going to have quite a job supporting that assertion.
What would help you is if there were statistically proportional attacks of a similar nature by people with no connection with Islam.
So, if we take France, if your argument holds water, in the last year we would expect to see attacks by atheists leading to about 1500 deaths, and attacks by Catholics leading to 2500 deaths (assuming similar levels of personal trauma across the groups).
...

The Nice attacker would seem to fit this bill as apparently, his radicalisation was quite sudden.
And why must their desire to act be "sudden". You keep changing your argument and introducing new terms. You're not used to this kind of thing are you? Are you quite young?

Dinosaurs are partly to blame for skeletons in the ground, but there's no point in attacking them about it.

Same thing applies here, attacking an ancient religion is stupid, given that these attackers make a conscious choice to murder people.

Reply 114

Reformed

14

Original post by nexttimeigetvpn

Islam is a factor, but blaming it is stupid and evidently there's a vast array of other, more important factors.

Remove Islam, and they would've still committed crimes, just under a different motive.

.

without islamist doctrine - what would have been the motive for the group of terrorists that killed the staff of Charlie Ebdo magazine?

Reply 115

Original post by nexttimeigetvpn

Dinosaurs are partly to blame for skeletons in the ground, but there's no point in attacking them about it.

Same thing applies here, attacking an ancient religion is stupid, given that these attackers make a conscious choice to murder people.

I have literally no idea what point you are trying to make here.
And I don't think you do either.

Reply 116