Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
You think you're smart, with your geopolitical expertise ? Yes, you are, for sure.
Just an simple example for you :
Pakistan is a 100 % muslim state ; the government, the people, everyody is sunni muslim.
And there are a lot of sunni muslim attacks in this country. Horrible attacks (schools and so on)
So : you can do everything you want to please the muslim terrorists, they will always find a reason to fight you. They don't have the same thinking as us, and western intervention and colonialism has nothing to do with that.
You can claim tomorrow that US is a muslim state now if you want, you'll have muslim terrorists attacks anyway.
Try to think out of your tiny box next time.
Your mistake is thinking that the Sunni world is all the same. Sunni Islam is divided in several branches (so are Sufi and Shia Islam):
This doesn't even include all of them, the ones we should worry about are first and foremost wahhabism and then salafism. You want to know why this ideals are spreading so much? Several citizens of Saudi Arabia, one of USA's most valuable allies, and the Gulf Countries are funding the building of new mosques all over Europe and the World and are putting more radical imams as the head of these newly built mosques
Doesn't matter what created whom. Bin Laden attacked WTC, Iraq got invaded; The US AND France helped kill Gaddafi, then American ambassador died; Assad has been the target of almost pathological hatred from mainstream western politics, left or right, european or american, so much that had Putin not intervened decisively, a "no-fly" zone would have established to protect "moderates" (they can't name) and "civilians" (the same civilians who stormed American Embassy in Libya), yet hundreds of bystanders got slaughtered in one of the greatest western cities by people whose ONLY effective opposition on the ground came from, guess who, Assad. Politics is broken, not just over gun, tax or who should be allowed to marry whom, it's also broken in term of foreign policy, it's total madness at work both at the White House, CIA, State and Defense Departments and ALL the think-tanks, for more than 10 years, failures after failures, trillions spent, tens of thousands of deaths, civilian and military, both Democrats and Republican administrations, and pretty much ALL electable candidates, yet there is still fundamental difficulty at identifying who all the pent-up rage (from where? I dunno, to be honest, what's the deal about attacking status quo that has been FINE for decades) should be directed at: always attack people who never really mess with you and turn blind eyes to people who repeatedly blow up all kinds of bombs on your streets.
That's because Pakistan is fighting against the TTP. So your example actually proves you wrong. The reason European and Western countries are attacked is because they are involved in something called "war". In war, the other side sometimes hits back, the difference is Pakistanis realize they are fighting a war, Europeans don't seem to understand that when you bomb, invade, and kill millions of people in other countries you're going to get retaliation, war isn't a one way street. You don't see Japan, Brazil, Argentina, Botswana, Iceland, Switzerland, or other countries getting attacked, because they are not involved in aggressive military operations in the ME. They are peaceful countries that mind their own business.
France wants to fight ISIS? Well be careful what you ask for.
Japan, Brazil, Argentina, Botswana and Iceland don't have any muslims in their soil (or a very few, to say the least). That's the reason why they don't face muslim terrorist attack : you need some muslims to make muslim terrorism.
By the way, put some muslims in the North Pole, you will see some terrorists attacks after a while.
Of course, you will always find a very clever geopolitical reason to justify that. Maybe it's the white bears' fault ? Who knows ?
Doesn't matter what created whom. Bin Laden attacked WTC, Iraq got invaded; The US AND France helped kill Gaddafi, then American ambassador died; Assad has been the target of almost pathological hatred from mainstream western politics, left or right, european or american, so much that had Putin not intervened decisively, a "no-fly" zone would have established to protect "moderates" (they can't name) and "civilians" (the same civilians who stormed American Embassy in Libya), yet hundreds of bystanders got slaughtered in one of the greatest western cities by people whose ONLY effective opposition on the ground came from, guess who, Assad. Politics is broken, not just over gun, tax or who should be allowed to marry whom, it's also broken in term of foreign policy, it's total madness at work both at the White House, CIA, State and Defense Departments and ALL the think-tanks, for more than 10 years, failures after failures, trillions spent, tens of thousands of deaths, civilian and military, both Democrats and Republican administrations, and pretty much ALL electable candidates, yet there is still fundamental difficulty at identifying who all the pent-up rage (from where? I dunno, to be honest, what's the deal about attacking status quo that has been FINE for decades) should be directed at: always attack people who never really mess with you and turn blind eyes to people who repeatedly blow up all kinds of bombs on your streets.
Yup. Those bleeding hearts driving the western media narratives about freedom rebels against the evil dictator Assad forgot to mention one thing....those freedom fighters may be allies today, but after the dictator is gone, they will become hardcore radical islamists. In fact, many aren't even waiting for the dictator to be deposed...they are turning now!
How stupid that Western and American foreign policy is driven by the western media narratives. Dictators like Assad and even Kaddafi, as much as they are unattractive, held the last gate against islamic fundamentalism. I feel sorry for the victims of the latest attacks in Paris. But I can't but notice the irony of the French who are so against Assad, and are now on the receiving end of IS. Is only grew strong because Assad is under attack.
It's totally ignorant claiming that if Europe or the US would just isolate ourselves ISIS and other terrorists would let us be. No, they won't. ISIS is not Al-Qaeda, IRA, ETA, Khmer Rouge, or Hamas just having some limited goals in terror, influence and revenge. ISIS wants to create a false heretic caliphate from Indonesia to Spain, and destroy everything which existed before that. They want to create a new world order, and everyone resisting are their enemies - secular Muslims too. All Westerners are too, and it doesn't demand more that you have been baptised.
Another stupid idea is that "close the borders and don't let anybody in". Firstly, that is against our fundamental liberal Western ideas, and secondly it means that the terrorists wins. Why? Because the ongoing refugee crisis is due to people who want to escape ISIS, but if we categorically close the borders they have no other option than to resist or serve. Most likely it means serve, and the problem just escalates. If we are already having problems with radicalised and frustrated Muslims here in the West, it will get a lot worse if we start to demonise all Muslims living in the Middle East, not to mention the millions of Muslims already living in the West. Not of course to mention that there are scores of secular Muslims who have been living in Europe for decades, and now they suddenly are some kind of unwanted persons waiting to be evicted.
In addition, if we in the West make rash decisions, like curbing civil liberties, make all kinds of restrictions, create a police state and also the atmosphere that everyone might be a terrorist and we have to fear everything, the terrorists win again. Why? Because we start to change our societies, and that is weakening us. Just like the terrorists want.
Thirdly, an opinion which is very popular here in Scandinavia is that if we put our head in the sand, stay neutral and don't interfere, the terrorists will ignore us and nothing bad will happen to us. This is false hope, and it is not how ISIS or any global terrorism operates. They want to create fear, confusion, disagreement - undermining our societies. They don't look up on wikipedia if Norway was involved in the 2003 Iraq War, and they don't care.
We have to be tough on terrorism, I'm not saying otherwise. ISIS might use the current refugee crisis to plant terrorists, we have to acknowledge that. We also know that radical islamists are recruiting people in Mosques in Europe and the US. We have to combat that, and deport the people involved. We have to step up our intelligence efforts and cooperation, so that we can fight these cells before they can act.
We also have to use military power towards ISIS. Why? Because though we might not feel being in war, ISIS certainly does, and will keep on fighting until every Western society is destroyed. And though violence doesn't stop violence - violence is the only thing that will stop ISIS. They aren't even prepared to negotiate or agreeing on some kind of status quo. What the military action would be is up to debate.
No, it isn't. ISIL was started in Syria, not Iraq. ISIL is from the Arab Spring. The West did nothing in Syria, and ISIL was born.
And how did 9-11 occur, then? There was no U.S. involvement in Afghanistan prior to 9-11.
These people kill because they want to. It has nothing to do with nuances of foreign policy.
There was US involvement and interference in Iraq and the Middle East for decades before 9/11. US supporting oppressive Arab governments and dictators e.g. Hosni Mubarak, Saddam Hussein, Saudi royal family, and others. US Gulf War I, US troops stationed in Saudi Arabia, US military support for Israel against Palestinians, US setting up military bases in ME, all before 9/11.
Besides, ISIS was created by US and NATO foreign policy. US-NATO removal of Saddam enabled for the rise of ISIS. It was the US and European countries that funneled money, weapons, and fighters into Syria to fight against Pres. Assad. Look at what your foreign policy has gotten you. Instability in Europe, a dead Ambassador in Libya, instability and war in Iraq and Syria, mass human migration of refugees and others into Europe, and now 130+ dead and 350+ wounded in France.
What if Christians started massacring Muslims in mosques because they're upset over the Coptic's treatment in Egypt.
"Christians" have been doing that for decades now using bombs, rockets etc., right on the Muslim's land, Iraq was the culprit. In Iraq alone west killed 200,000 civilians!
Well, West needs to realize: you cannot have cheap oil and convert everybody into western way of living without consequences.
Sorry France, but this is just a start... West got what it "paid" for.
Well, West needs to realize: you cannot have cheap oil and convert everybody into western way of living without consequences.
We did it already a long time ago. That's the reason why we are leaving Afghanistan.
Quote:
Originally Posted by civis
Sorry France, but this is just a start... West got what it "paid" for.
Paid for what? As far as I know nobody who died yesterday had done anything.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
blablabla
