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.
It seems to me about 50:1 posters here who are NOT AT ALL CLEAR "on the use that the issue is RADICAL Muslims" I'm reading a whole lot of "wipe 'em out" sentiments...
But THAT is the issue, of course: how does one (or a government) determine WHO is radical and who is not? And what can be done with suspiciousness alone? Do we trample our freedoms out of fear of a statistically few radicals?
In my opinion, these are difficult questions.
Unfortunately, since we are fighting a radical ideology rather than a specific nation or state, like the War on Terror has been since 9/11, it is difficult to just wipe out the radicals. Innocent people will be collateral damage. If we could drop a bomb on the ME and just kill all of ISIS and al-Qaeda and whoever else is this bad, it would be perfect. That's ideal. But we can't... but how else do we fight them? It's difficult.
I think when most people say "wipe 'em out," "just nuke 'em," etc., they don't want EVERYONE to die, just the radicals... except the issue is, it won't just be the radicals. So what do we do?
Even if we WERE fighting a state with a radical government (like Nazi Germany or Japan during WWII), there would STILL be collateral damage and innocents killed. Such is war. Killing innocent people sucks, so does repeatedly getting killed and attacked by a bunch of radical crazies trying to take over parts of the world with their ideology. So what do we do??
I don't know what Teilhard's issue has been with this whole discussion (also similar posts on the refugees in Europe thread, ironically which began just before news of the Paris attacks broke, when certain people were insisting we were crazy bigots for insinuating some refugees may be terrorists in hiding), but he is dead set on insisting anyone who calls out the RADICAL Islam ideology of terrorists is some uninformed, culturally insensitive bigot. God forbid you say these people are Muslims, when they define themselves as Muslims and say what they're doing is in the name of their interpretation of Islam, or that there is a percentage of radical Muslims in the world who support this desire for a caliphate, kill all infidels ideology, and that, no it doesn't mean ALL Muslims (including Teilhard's Minnesotan friends) are terrorists, it means there is a minority that is and do very dangerous things. You're just wrong if you say these things, because all Muslims are good and there is nothing wrong with the radical wing, apparently. It's all sunshine and daisies in the world.
It's a lost cause at this point.
(The late) Tim McVeigh thought he was a true blue loyal American, too …
Yes, there is a minority of ANY group of people that do dangerous things and try to use *something* GOOD as a justification for their evil deeds ...
But in this recent case, there is indeed (in this very discussion thread) a horrible anti-Muslim bigotry asserting that "Radical Islam" is indeed TRUE Islam …
Unless you live in the worst of the worst crime riddled ghetto, and even then for only a short time when the temporary, (young "disenfranchised" Muslim males will more than make up for it quickly) reduction in gang crime is replaced by sharia law that then constrains your ability to live a free, secular life without immediate condemnation, does more Muslims equal a positive thing.
In all cases, the "moderate" (i.e., casual, non pious followers of the religion) will always be accompanied with those true believers, who, following the very core tenets of it, will be hell bent on at the very least to command submission of us (the very definition of Islam) to it, and if not, hell-bent on destroying the infidels and non-believers amongst them.
The band was not a threat either. The draw was the name "The Eagles of Death Metal" to a bunch of people that hate us.. okay? ( My opinion, of-course) Maybe as in- draw two lines in the sand and see who is the real Eagle is--when it was all about who it was that was suppose to separate in the SKY? Maybe for virgins is the code? There is certainly one pattern I've noticed with the two and both are EAGLES/PLANES/FLYING and yeah, I had a friend that died in the Oklahoma City Bombing and we are simply not a free country anymore. Get it... and that radical was a white guy
Anything else?.
Oh I get it.....one crazed white guy or a population of millions. And I thought you said we are a free country? HUH???
Unfortunately, since we are fighting a radical ideology rather than a specific nation or state, like the War on Terror has been since 9/11, it is difficult to just wipe out the radicals. Innocent people will be collateral damage. If we could drop a bomb on the ME and just kill all of ISIS and al-Qaeda and whoever else is this bad, it would be perfect. That's ideal. But we can't... but how else do we fight them? It's difficult.
I think when most people say "wipe 'em out," "just nuke 'em," etc., they don't want EVERYONE to die, just the radicals... except the issue is, it won't just be the radicals. So what do we do?
We cannot fight this like surgeons. We have to fight to win. The "innocents" will tire of being pounded or invaded and will rise to assist us. for an analysis see below.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JerseyGirl415
Even if we WERE fighting a state with a radical government (like Nazi Germany or Japan during WWII), there would STILL be collateral damage and innocents killed. Such is war. Killing innocent people sucks, so does repeatedly getting killed and attacked by a bunch of radical crazies trying to take over parts of the world with their ideology. So what do we do??
Simple and stark answer is that wars must be fought to the finish and with civilian losses.
The civilized world has always tried to limit the bloodshed of war initially. Both the Civil War and WW II ended when the victors became serious about fighting. General Sherman's "March to the Sea", which devastated large swaths of Georgia, convinced the remaining Confederates that their cause was hopeless. The Dresden, Hiroshima and Nagasaki attacks, in my view, for the first time convinced the German and Japanese people, respectively, that their "leadership" was taking them one place; to the grave.
For war to end, the ultimate victors must prosecute it to the maximum extent possible. I am not advocating attacking supermarkets and skyscrapers deliberately. However, we cannot let the presence of civilian facilities stop a war effort. If people are inconvenienced they will find a way to get their governments to stop the madness.
See my thread (link) on this subject. And to reiterate, we must win, to preserve civilization. We cannot proceed daintily and surgically.
Unfortunately, since we are fighting a radical ideology rather than a specific nation or state, like the War on Terror has been since 9/11, it is difficult to just wipe out the radicals. Innocent people will be collateral damage. If we could drop a bomb on the ME and just kill all of ISIS and al-Qaeda and whoever else is this bad, it would be perfect. That's ideal. But we can't... but how else do we fight them? It's difficult.
I think when most people say "wipe 'em out," "just nuke 'em," etc., they don't want EVERYONE to die, just the radicals... except the issue is, it won't just be the radicals. So what do we do?
Even if we WERE fighting a state with a radical government (like Nazi Germany or Japan during WWII), there would STILL be collateral damage and innocents killed. Such is war. Killing innocent people sucks, so does repeatedly getting killed and attacked by a bunch of radical crazies trying to take over parts of the world with their ideology. So what do we do??
One thing we must do is stop being impatient with history, which always takes time whether we like it or not …
Another thing we must do is to stop imagining that everybody else is just like us or should be just like us and/or eventually WILL be just like us if only if only we can keep on keeping on exporting Western culture …
Another thing we must do is pay attention to the PAST in order to understand the PRESENT … The current situation did not just spring into being over night or only after the ouster of Saddam or the reestablishment of The State of Israel …
Another thing we must do is get used to the current situation as the new normal … and then deal with it ...
Unfortunately, since we are fighting a radical ideology rather than a specific nation or state, like the War on Terror has been since 9/11, it is difficult to just wipe out the radicals. Innocent people will be collateral damage. If we could drop a bomb on the ME and just kill all of ISIS and al-Qaeda and whoever else is this bad, it would be perfect. That's ideal. But we can't... but how else do we fight them? It's difficult.
I think when most people say "wipe 'em out," "just nuke 'em," etc., they don't want EVERYONE to die, just the radicals... except the issue is, it won't just be the radicals. So what do we do?
Even if we WERE fighting a state with a radical government (like Nazi Germany or Japan during WWII), there would STILL be collateral damage and innocents killed. Such is war. Killing innocent people sucks, so does repeatedly getting killed and attacked by a bunch of radical crazies trying to take over parts of the world with their ideology. So what do we do??
I don't have the answers, but I recognize that the questions are complex.
I know living in fear is not the answer.
I know abandoning deeply-held convictions about our country, and humanity, is not the answer.
I know, too, naivety and turning a blind eye is not that answer.
If we act from a place of fear, the terrorists have already won.
(The late) Tim McVeigh thought he was a true blue loyal American, too …
Yes, there is a minority of ANY group of people that do dangerous things and try to use *something* GOOD as a justification for their evil deeds ...
But in this recent case, there is indeed (in this very discussion thread) a horrible anti-Muslim bigotry asserting that "Radical Islam" is indeed TRUE Islam …
But Kathryn, for example, has not said such a thing. She actually said she knows it's just the radicals that are the issue, so why your response to her ("*sigh*") when she noted the obvious connection between certain terror groups and Islam?
I have also acknowledged that not every Muslim is radical and radicals are not the norm, but they are certainly a major problem, and you dismiss me similarly. Why? Are we wrong? What do YOU think the issue is? Why are you reluctant to connect Islam to these people, when THEY make the connection themselves, and THEY want to form a nation in the name of their interpretation of Islam? We're not making this stuff up. This is what THEY want to do. It's crazy and not the norm, yes, but it's what they want and they are trying and succeeding pretty well so far.
I don't call the Duggars true Christians because of how extreme they are, but THEY call themselves Christians. Who am I to tell them they're actually not? I don't think they are, based on my definition of my religion, but they read the Bible. They go to church. They have religious leaders, pastors and mentors. They just interpret the religion differently than I do. They take the written verses to the extreme. This is what radical Muslims do, too. And radical Jews (I would call Hasidics pretty radical, not in a violent way, but in the sense that they take the religion very serious: the women wear dark clothes that cover their bodies, they don't use electricity on Saturdays, some don't believe in birth control, etc). Moderate or other casual Jews aren't like this, but a certain sect is. There are radical sects in all religions. Not all of them are violent, but for whatever reason, at this point in time, many Muslim ones are very violent. This is a fact. I don't know how you can deny this and call everyone a bigot or whatever in response. If we're all bigots for saying this, what do YOU think the problem is?
(The late) Tim McVeigh thought he was a true blue loyal American, too …
Yes, there is a minority of ANY group of people that do dangerous things and try to use *something* GOOD as a justification for their evil deeds ...
But in this recent case, there is indeed (in this very discussion thread) a horrible anti-Muslim bigotry asserting that "Radical Islam" is indeed TRUE Islam …
Mainstream Islam as practiced by normal common folk IS extreme even without the violence.
As but one example, there is universal agreement among all five branches of Islam that apostacy warrants death. Ok, well, extreme as that is, it is not news to anyone but the ignorant. What is news is that apostacy warrants death is a view held by the a MAJORITY of Moslems in Egypt and Pakistan.
Quick question. Have you read the Koran, or are you just relaying what you've been told by good people that you know? Be honest, please.
Oh my...you must be joking!!!! I just hope you are one of the virgins the bombers are waiting for. Got lube???
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.
Civilian Casualties Cannot be Spared or Prevented
