Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
x Turn on thread page Beta

New terror attack france many dead watch

Announcements
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by champagnepapii)
    More muslims are dying by the hands of non muslims and ISIS together yet no one seems to care about them....why?
    The vast majority of Muslims who die violently are killed by other Muslims, in Muslim countries.

    Just idiots firing the "religion of peace" statement even though it is the muslims who suffer more and are constantly being oppressed by non muslims
    Care to name a country where Muslims are constantly oppressed by non-Muslims?
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by QE2)
    The vast majority of Muslims who die violently are killed by other Muslims, in Muslim countries.

    Care to name a country where Muslims are constantly oppressed by non-Muslims?
    China, Burma
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    At least 84 dead and the count hasn't stopped rising. Why do they do this? Really have they not the guts or honour to fight a real war, they murder civilians not people who are fairly armed and know they are there. It is disgusting to me that they can just decide to murder hundreds of innocent people who have done nothing to them and have nothing against them. I think this really shows that so called 'Islamic state' are spineless, honour-less and stupid, but what they are doing is very close to working, they're effectively building the islamophobia in the populations of un-islamic countries. This needs to stop.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    So saddened by this. It's really troubling how France has become a common target for terrorist attacks. Me and my sisters study in Paris and my family are becoming increasingly worried, advising us to avoid large gatherings etc.. Came across pictures on twitter and it was just heartbreaking
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Fullofsurprises)

    Or we can just descend into our own modern version of the medieval holy wars, is that what you would prefer?
    That is already happening, whether you and I like it or not.

    French intelligence are saying that Europe and the Middle East are now essentially one theatre of war. That trucks driving into crowds mowing down pedestrians are an established tactic in the Middle East and we can expect car bombs in our cities attacking civilians soon too.

    No-one is prepared to admit this, publicly, but the post war mass immigration of Muslims into Europe has been a disaster.

    The Middle East is already a basket case. Soon we will be too. Marvellous.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by oShahpo)
    Isn't time Muslims realise the bad influence their religion can have? Regardless of its goodness or badness, I think it's time for Muslims in the West to start a new sect or whatever that has non-Violence as its main creed, maybe then we'll be able to better filter the retarded murderers.
    (Original post by QE2)
    The only way to achieve this is to remove from the Quran all passages that can be interpreted as encouraging violence against those who refuse to submit to Islam. And accept that Muhammad was not the perfect role model and that he said and did some unacceptable things.However, no Muslim is going to agree to this, so the "misinterpretations" will continue.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Trapz99)
    It shows that his religion was the reason why he carried out the attack.
    I don't think it does. Muslims mention the name of Allah when they do pretty much anything, be it when they're about to die, or simply taking an exam or eating a plate of food. It's just a common phrase they say all the time.

    Even if the attack was religiously motivated, mentioning the name of Allah would be unsurprising.

    If someone shouted "Praise Jesus" I, even as a Christian, would admit that he was a Christian terrorist. But that doesn't really happen...
    I wouldn't say that makes the person a Christian terrorist, even if he was feeling particularly religious at the time, or even if his religion was the reason why he carried out the attack.


    A terrorist is someone who's using threats of violence to coerce the public or the government into complying with some sociopolitical objective.

    (For example, the murder of Lee Rigby, the killing of white police officers in Dallas etc. are acts of terrorism, because they attempt to force the establishment into pulling out of wars, or into sorting out police brutality against black people etc.)

    What was this truck driver trying to coerce the government/the public into doing? What did he think he was punishing them for? Do we even know?
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Reformed)
    the playing dumb tactic doesnt the achieve the apologist agenda you seek.
    The "tactic" of asking such questions is purely to see if you actually have a well thought out answer behind them.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TheAdviser)
    China, Burma
    Hardly. There is some discimination in some areas, and China is certainly guilty of refusing to allow special privilege, but it cannot realistically be described as "constant oppression".

    And you said "The Muslims suffer constant constant oppression", not "A tiny minority of Muslims suffer constant oppression".

    And non-Muslims suffer worse oppression in Muslim countries, but you don't see them committing a steady stream of atrocities against Muslims.
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by tazarooni89)
    I don't think it does. Muslims mention the name of Allah when they do pretty much anything, be it when they're about to die, or simply taking an exam or eating a plate of food. It's just a common phrase they say all the time.

    Even if the attack was religiously motivated, mentioning the name of Allah would be unsurprising.



    I wouldn't say that makes the person a Christian terrorist, even if he was feeling particularly religious at the time, or even if his religion was the reason why he carried out the attack.


    A terrorist is someone who's using threats of violence to coerce the public or the government into complying with some sociopolitical objective.

    (For example, the murder of Lee Rigby, the killing of white police officers in Dallas etc. are acts of terrorism, because they attempt to force the establishment into pulling out of wars, or into sorting out police brutality against black people etc.)

    What was this truck driver trying to coerce the government/the public into doing? What did he think he was punishing them for? Do we even know?
    Are you still in denial? This was a terrorist attack. Not a single person is denying it. You can keep making excuses but this literally happens so many times- a Muslim terrorist says "Allahu Akbar" and then blows up/starts shooting/crashes something. We can be sure that this was a terror attack. Of course you can keep denying it but you're looking like you don't want to admit the truth for doing so with all the clues we have at the moment.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by generallee)
    Don't be disingenuous.

    You are not only denying the Islamic terrorist roots to this atrocity on this thread, you are in denial about it to yourself also.

    The question is why?
    I note that you didn't reply to my question. Are you a Muslim or not?
    As I said, I am not denying anything, I'm just asking you to justify it. I will be happy to accept that it is a terrorist attack as soon as someone explains what sociopolitical agenda he thought he was fighting for.

    So far we've established that he's a Muslim, fine. The next thing is to establish that he's a terrorist. It should be a simple matter, shouldn't it?


    Unfortunately I see the accusations of "denying that it is terrorism based on my own personal biases" simply as a way to get out of answering the question, since I have not at any point denied that it may be terrorism.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Trapz99)
    Are you still in denial? This was a terrorist attack. Not a single person is denying it. You can keep making excuses but this literally happens so many times- a Muslim terrorist says "Allahu Akbar" and then blows up/starts shooting/crashes something. We can be sure that this was a terror attack. Of course you can keep denying it but you're looking like you don't want to admit the truth for doing so with all the clues we have at the moment.
    I am not denying that it could be a terrorist attack. I am simply awaiting justification for it. So far, you've proved very conclusively that the person was Muslim, that's fine.

    All that's left is to identify what sociopolitical agenda he was trying to coerce the public/the government into fulfilling, and then I'll say "Yes okay, it was a terrorist attack".

    Was he protesting against wars in Syria? Was he acting on behalf of ISIS? Was he simply killing people for not being Muslim? Which is it? All you need to do is explain the background behind the attack, that's all, and then I'll agree with you 100%. It's a really simple thing I'm asking here.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by BobSausage)
    It is disgusting to me that they can just decide to murder hundreds of innocent people who have done nothing to them and have nothing against them.
    According to some interpretations of the Quran and sunnah, simply refusing to submit to Islam and opposing its spread is enough to warrant death.

    The punishment for waging war against Allah and his messenger, and spreading corruption, is death... - Quran 5:33

    Fight the disbelievers until all religion is for Allah and there is no more idolatry - Quran 8:39

    Muhammad said: I have been ordered to fight against the people until they testify that there is no god but Allah and I am his messenger, and if they do this then they save their lives and property from me
    - Sahih Bukhari
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by tazarooni89)
    I don't think it does. Muslims mention the name of Allah when they do pretty much anything, be it when they're about to die, or simply taking an exam or eating a plate of food. It's just a common phrase they say all the time.

    Even if the attack was religiously motivated, mentioning the name of Allah would be unsurprising.



    I wouldn't say that makes the person a Christian terrorist, even if he was feeling particularly religious at the time, or even if his religion was the reason why he carried out the attack.


    A terrorist is someone who's using threats of violence to coerce the public or the government into complying with some sociopolitical objective.

    (For example, the murder of Lee Rigby, the killing of white police officers in Dallas etc. are acts of terrorism, because they attempt to force the establishment into pulling out of wars, or into sorting out police brutality against black people etc.)

    What was this truck driver trying to coerce the government/the public into doing? What did he think he was punishing them for? Do we even know?
    you sounded as confused as you used to in the past - you are forgettig that aaprt from sociopoilitcal motivations some terrorist ( ie islamic, sikh, evangelical chritians etc,) may have some doctrinal influences that dictate their politics . i n the case of islamists these can be numerous in example, ie hatred of jewish state of israel, hatred of non muslim nation states, hatred of 'muslims' they dont regards as islamic, hatred of homosexuals etc etc. And islamist propoganda is one of the most propagated and widely disseminated. so commit an act of violence with these influences in mind will make it an islamist terrorist attack. hope that explains what is a rather simple concept for you
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Reformed)
    you sounded as confused as you used to in the past - you are forgettig that aaprt from sociopoilitcal motivations some terrorist ( ie islamic, sikh, evangelical chritians etc,) may have some doctrinal influences that dictate their politics . i n the case of islamists these can be numerous in example, ie hatred of jewish state of israel, hatred of non muslim nation states, hatred of 'muslims' they dont regards as islamic, hatred of homosexuals etc etc. And islamist propoganda is one of the most propagated and widely disseminated. so commit an act of violence with these influences in mind will make it an islamist terrorist attack. hope that explains what is a rather simple concept for you
    So which of these was it in this case then? (See bold)
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by tazarooni89)
    So which of these was it in this case then? (See bold)
    could be combination of 2nd and 3rd. perhaps add other islamic edicts - angry at mixing of sexes, at women being uncovered. at alcohol being taken. Take your pick.

    possibly though , upset that his precious Islamic Caliphate in iraq lost a major islamic leader and jsut wanted to kill some 'kuffar' today. the mindset of an islamist doesnt have to be more complex than that does it?
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by tazarooni89)
    All that's left is to identify what sociopolitical agenda he was trying to coerce the public/the government into fulfilling, and then I'll say "Yes okay, it was a terrorist attack".
    Terrorism doesn't have to be designed to coerce the government into fulfilling any kind of agenda. It can simply be designed to foment fear and distrust, thus inceasing the likelihood of civil unrest, which in turn can further the agenda of others outside the government.

    And as we can all agree that this action has clearly heightened the climate of fear and distrust in France, you can no longer have any reservations in calling it "terrorism".
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by QE2)
    Terrorism is illegal violence carried out to promote a particular agenda or ideology.
    *
    Is a violent attack carried out by a Muslim under the impression (no matter how misguided) that they are somehow furthering a particular interpretation of Islam, "terrorism"?
    Going by the definition you've provided, yes, it is (assuming it is illegal violence rather than ordinary warfare).

    So what I'm asking here is, what agenda or ideology or interpretation of Islam was this attack intended to promote?*
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Reformed)
    could be combination of 2nd and 3rd. perhaps add other islamic edicts - angry at mixing of sexes, at women being uncovered. at alcohol being taken. Take your pick.

    possibly though , upset that his precious Islamic Caliphate in iraq lost a major islamic leader and jsut wanted to kill some 'kuffar' today. the mindset of an islamist doesnt have to be more complex than that does it?
    And how do we know which of these motivations it was (if any)? Are we just speculating, or do we actually know?
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by QE2)
    Terrorism doesn't have to be designed to coerce the government into fulfilling any kind of agenda. It can simply be designed to foment fear and distrust, thus inceasing the likelihood of civil unrest, which in turn can further the agenda of others outside the government.

    And as we can all agree that this action has clearly heightened the climate of fear and distrust in France, you can no longer have any reservations in calling it "terrorism".
    I said that based on the following definition:

    The U.S. Code of Federal Regulations defines terrorism as "the unlawful use of force and violence against persons or property to intimidate or coerce a government, the civilian population, or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives"
 
 
 
Poll
Do you agree with the proposed ban on plastic straws and cotton buds?
Useful resources

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.