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.
Let's face it. The West has been at war with Radical Islam since at least the 70s. Nothing we have done really seems to work. There are too many radicals spread out over too many places to effectively target militarily and pretending that nothing is wrong is only a recipe for disaster.
Not only are the radicals too hard to target, but many are actually eager to die. Killing them is good in the short term, but more radicals are being raised or converted for every extremist that gets clipped.
This is a major problem, but I think I have a solution. We have been going about this all the wrong way. We are dealing with people that value symbolism and magical thinking more than reality or their own lives. Remember, we are talking about people who literally shoved girls back into a burning building because they were trying to escape the flames without their headscarves. These people don't think like us. However, I think we can use that against them.
Here are some suggestions for screwing with the Jihadis in a way that will make them think twice:
1) European nations should refuse to allow the construction of any more mosques in their countries until Saudi Arabia allows the construction of churches and synagogues in Saudi Arabia and the repeal of apostasy being a capital offense.
2) Any mosque that has been proven to have recruited terrorists or incited religious hatred will be confiscated and turned into a gay nightclub.
3) In response to any terrorist attack on the West (mass shooting, bombing, etc.) NATO military planes will drop packages containing pornography, pork rinds, alcohol, and Bibles on Mecca and Medina.
4) A free Camaro for any Muslim male between the ages of 16-35 who publicly renounces his faith.
5) When an Islamic terrorist group holds a hostage and threatens to behead him and then has the gall to suggest that it is our fault because we didn't give into their demands, we threaten to release a video of our own. We make a whole series of gay porno films about Mohammad. Really gross gay porn too. Like have Mohammad enter a Jewish village and have him execute the men because they just didn't fist him hard enough. Well, you get the idea.
When they release their video making demands. We tell them that if they don't release the hostage(s) that we'll release ours and that it will be their fault that the Prophet has been insulted. That the real blasphemer is not *insert Western country here* but *insert terrorist group here*.
6) We use our electronic warfare capability to interrupt the signal of the various firebrand televised clerics in the Middle East and replace the broadcast with reruns of Baywatch.
The problem is not lack physical strength, but rather a lack of will. When you are dealing with people who are more offended by a cartoon (which really wasn't that offensive) than the actually killing of people (theirs or ours) than it goes to show that you can't fight them the same way you could fight the Nazis. You need to get creative. Don't threaten sanctions. Threaten a new uncensored cartoon produced by Matt Stone and Trey Parker. Let's hit them where it hurts.
Hmm. Interesting thoughts indeed! I particularly liked your last paragraph.
It all reminds me of how some British colonel or general handled a situation that had arisen in India, way back when (sorry for the lack in particulars). Anyway, in dealing with some Muslim insurrection or such, the general announced that all bullets had been dipped in pork fat. The author claimed that this scared off the Muslims since they believed that if they were shot with a pork-bullet they would be denied Heaven.
The officer got the idea from one Indian mutiny when the rumor spread among some soldiers that the cartilages they were using contained some type of pork product (back in the days when of muskets you had to 'bite' the end of a little sack containing the gun powder to pour into the musket; it was said that the sack had been soaked in pig fat or such). Caused a lot of rioting.
I once mentioned this here on CD, and proposed that it be used again. Someone pointed out that, no doubt, a Muslim religious leader would state that the involuntary introduction into the body of pork via bullet would not be a 'sin'. I have no doubt that poster would be right. Back in the 1800s things were different, I guess.
Frankly, I believe that a lot of the terrorists have little true religious faith, but they do like holding 'power' over others. The Nazi's were the same way.
Hmm. Interesting thoughts indeed! I particularly liked your last paragraph.
It all reminds me of how some British colonel or general handled a situation that had arisen in India, way back when (sorry for the lack in particulars). Anyway, in dealing with some Muslim insurrection or such, the general announced that all bullets had been dipped in pork fat. The author claimed that this scared off the Muslims since they believed that if they were shot with a pork-bullet they would be denied Heaven.
The officer got the idea from one Indian mutiny when the rumor spread among some soldiers that the cartilages they were using contained some type of pork product (back in the days when of muskets you had to 'bite' the end of a little sack containing the gun powder to pour into the musket; it was said that the sack had been soaked in pig fat or such). Caused a lot of rioting.
I once mentioned this here on CD, and proposed that it be used again. Someone pointed out that, no doubt, a Muslim religious leader would state that the involuntary introduction into the body of pork via bullet would not be a 'sin'. I have no doubt that poster would be right. Back in the 1800s things were different, I guess.
Frankly, I believe that a lot of the terrorists have little true religious faith, but they do like holding 'power' over others. The Nazi's were the same way.
That seems to be a mix between an urban legend regarding General Pershing in the Philippine Wars and the Sepoy Rebellion of 1857 in British India.
Legend has it that General John Pershing would bury the bodies of Muslim insurgents with pieces of salt pork or fatback as deterrent to the Muslim Moro guerrillas. Other versions have the blood of a freshly slaughtered pig poured on the bodies or something of that nature. However, there aren't any records of him doing it and it became a popular legend following 9/11.
The Sepoy Rebellion involved a conflict between the British government and Muslim and Hindi soldiers serving in the colonial army in India. The soldiers were equipped with early versions of the rifle where the power and bullet came in a paper package. The way you would load your rifle was to bite off the end of the paper and pour the power and bullet down the barrel. Well, a new version of the cartridge was greased with animal fat (both lard and tallow), but it was only issued to a few units consisting of British soldiers. Word got out among the Sepoys (Indian soldiers serving in the British military) that the cartridges they had to bite down on had either beef or pork fat on it. There were already a number of issues between the Sepoys and the British colonial government, but many Muslims and Hindus felt that the coating of cartridges with pork or beef fat was deliberate attack on their religions and not merely a mistake (especially since the British were sponsoring Christian missionary work in both Muslim and Hindu areas). So the Brits and the Indians got into one of the many little tiffs they would engage in for almost a hundred more years.
1) European nations should refuse to allow the construction of any more mosques in their countries until Saudi Arabia allows the construction of churches and synagogues in Saudi Arabia and the repeal of apostasy being a capital offense.
I think that's not a terrible idea to help move freedom of religion into view (not just Christianity and Judaism though). People shouldn't be supporting countries that take basic human rights away from their people.
2) Any mosque that has been proven to have recruited terrorists or incited religious hatred will be confiscated and turned into a gay nightclub.
The people who did so should be removed from the leadership and arrested where appropriate. Forcing businesses to move into a specific place is not really appropriate.
3) In response to any terrorist attack on the West (mass shooting, bombing, etc.) NATO military planes will drop packages containing pornography, pork rinds, alcohol, and Bibles on Mecca and Medina.
I thought this was to radicals? Being offensive to all Muslims will just **** people off and make angry people more likely to radicalize and hate the west. It also punishes everyone of the same religion for the actions of one. Should someone take a dump on your religions sacred places because one person did something horrible?
It also violates a nations sovereignty, of an allied nation, which is likely to start a war when they shoot the planes down for violating their airspace. It's not stopping a few radicals to start a war with another nation. It will just escalate the violence.
4) A free Camaro for any Muslim male between the ages of 16-35 who publicly renounces his faith.
Again, you are looking to stop the faith and not the radicals. Any zealous nut is not going to renounce their faith. They are going to say they did and get the free car. I probably would as well if I can just say I renounce it.
5) When an Islamic terrorist group holds a hostage and threatens to behead him and then has the gall to suggest that it is our fault because we didn't give into their demands, we threaten to release a video of our own. We make a whole series of gay porno films about Mohammad. Really gross gay porn too. Like have Mohammad enter a Jewish village and have him execute the men because they just didn't fist him hard enough. Well, you get the idea.
When they release their video making demands. We tell them that if they don't release the hostage(s) that we'll release ours and that it will be their fault that the Prophet has been insulted. That the real blasphemer is not *insert Western country here* but *insert terrorist group here*.
Yet again, being an ******* to all Muslims for what a few do. More likely to radicalize those on the fence, or at least make them apathetic to what the radicals do. You do know that all Muslims are not terrorists...and that everyone of a single faith is not personally responsible for the actions of one?
6) We use our electronic warfare capability to interrupt the signal of the various firebrand televised clerics in the Middle East and replace the broadcast with reruns of Baywatch.
The station should keep them off the air. Violating another nations sovereignty will likely start a war and **** even more people off.
Your ideas seem to be being a dick to every Muslim every time someone does something horrible. This is likely to make even more radicals, start a war, and blame everyone of a religion for the actions of one. Especially since violence in places in the middle east targets people of every faith (Muslims included, and likely more are killed). Any more than it would be appropriate to do similar things to do so if a person of your faith committed atrocities or violence.
No, there doesn't need to be any stopping of Mosques being built.
Freedom of religion is a founding principle of our nation. We shouldn't be expecting any other nation to go against something we decided was evil and wrong.
98% of Muslims world wide are peaceful, and never give anyone any problems.
You know what people say about Ferguson MO? "Those protesters aren't even from there, they are from other parts of the country just to stir up trouble"
Guess what? ISIS, most of their troops, they aren't from this area of the world. The flocked there from Egypt and all other kinds of nations. If they win, they'll use religion as a means of control instead of a means of liberation. Thats why we hold freedom of religion as such an important foundation for basic human rights.
So no. How should we combat evil men using religion as a way to control people? We should educate the people. We need to be working with Muslim nations from around the world, even Iran, to denounce this violence and these actions.
Thats starting to happen, and thats what we should be doing
I think that's not a terrible idea to help move freedom of religion into view (not just Christianity and Judaism though). People shouldn't be supporting countries that take basic human rights away from their people.
The people who did so should be removed from the leadership and arrested where appropriate. Forcing businesses to move into a specific place is not really appropriate.
I thought this was to radicals? Being offensive to all Muslims will just **** people off and make angry people more likely to radicalize and hate the west. It also punishes everyone of the same religion for the actions of one. Should someone take a dump on your religions sacred places because one person did something horrible?
It also violates a nations sovereignty, of an allied nation, which is likely to start a war when they shoot the planes down for violating their airspace. It's not stopping a few radicals to start a war with another nation. It will just escalate the violence.
Again, you are looking to stop the faith and not the radicals. Any zealous nut is not going to renounce their faith. They are going to say they did and get the free car. I probably would as well if I can just say I renounce it.
Yet again, being an ******* to all Muslims for what a few do. More likely to radicalize those on the fence, or at least make them apathetic to what the radicals do. You do know that all Muslims are not terrorists...and that everyone of a single faith is not personally responsible for the actions of one?
The station should keep them off the air. Violating another nations sovereignty will likely start a war and **** even more people off.
Your ideas seem to be being a dick to every Muslim every time someone does something horrible. This is likely to make even more radicals, start a war, and blame everyone of a religion for the actions of one. Especially since violence in places in the middle east targets people of every faith (Muslims included, and likely more are killed). Any more than it would be appropriate to do similar things to do so if a person of your faith committed atrocities or violence.
What I said was meant to be tongue-in-cheek and not to be taken 100% literally.
The only policies that I would seriously consider would be the countries in Europe should consider restricting mosques until Saudi Arabia allows freedom of religion. The Saudis are quite fond of accusing European countries of violating the religious freedom of Muslims, but you would be sentenced to death if you tried to open a church and Saudi Arabia bars Jews from entering the country.
The other policy I would consider would be closing down mosques that are tied to terrorist groups. Because those mosques are less places of worship and more recruitment centers for extremist organizations. The gay nightclub thing is just hyperbole. It should also be noted that Islamic conquerors have a long history converting churches, synagogues, and temples into mosques. The second most famous mosque (second only to the Dome of the Rock), the Hagia Sophia in Istanbul was originally a church.
And the part about the free car was obviously a joke, but the point would to publicly renounce their faith in other words becoming an apostate.
And as far as a blasphemy radicalizing moderates. I would say that if someone is willing to join ISIS or the Muslim Brotherhood over a cartoon or book or movie, I wouldn't say they are very moderate.
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.
