☪ Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaand, it's a Muslim. Again. ☪

christiefan915 said:
They aren't WASPs. Are you really going to blame color and religion as the reasons for these conflicts? And ignoring the obvious, money and power?
Click to expand...
Religion, yes. I will put part of the blame on that. I will also blame shitty societal norms, racism, shit political systems, and culture on it. The US and Canada have fought relatively few wars over their history and don't tolerate dictatorships. Compare that to the Americas that originated as Spanish and Portuguese colonies. They're rife with wars and dictatorships. Culture and societal norms account for a huge chunk of that. The Catholic Church accounts for much of the early part of that.
 
christiefan915 said:
  1. Ideological Motivation: Many Islamist terror groups are motivated by a radical interpretation of Islam that promotes jihad against perceived enemies of Islam. These interpretations often include a desire to establish a Caliphate governed by Sharia law.
  2. Political Grievances:
    • Occupation and Foreign Intervention: The presence of foreign military forces in Muslim countries can be seen as an occupation or interference, fueling resentment and resistance.
    • Support for Oppressive Regimes: Western support for regimes viewed as corrupt or oppressive in the Muslim world can radicalize individuals.
  3. Socio-Economic Factors:
    • Poverty and Lack of Opportunities: Economic deprivation can make extremist ideologies more appealing, especially when coupled with promises of better life conditions or martyrdom.
    • Education and Propaganda: In some regions, radical ideologies are spread through educational systems or local religious teachings, often manipulated by extremist groups.
  4. Revenge and Retaliation: Attacks can be retaliatory, responding to perceived injustices or military actions against Muslim populations, like drone strikes or military campaigns in conflict zones.
  5. Identity and Alienation:
    • Cultural Clash: Feelings of cultural alienation, particularly among diaspora communities, can lead to radicalization as individuals seek identity and belonging.
    • Discrimination and Islamophobia: Experiences of discrimination or perceived hostility towards Muslims can radicalize individuals.
  6. Organizational Dynamics:
    • Recruitment and Indoctrination: Terror groups often have sophisticated recruitment strategies that exploit personal vulnerabilities or grievances.
    • Leadership and Structure: The organizational structure of these groups sometimes promotes or directs acts of terror as a strategy to maintain control, gain visibility, or intimidate.
  7. Globalization and Media: The spread of ideas through the internet and social media has allowed terrorist ideologies to reach a global audience, radicalizing individuals far from conflict zones.

It's important to understand that these reasons do not justify acts of terrorism but rather provide context for why individuals or groups might engage in such activities. Each incident can have its unique blend of these factors, and understanding the specifics often requires looking at the local, regional, and international dynamics at play.

Grok
Click to expand...
I'll offer this bet to anyone and will be more than happy to put money into escrow to back it up....

I'll bet $100 that every car driven into a crowd or intentionally detonated is a Muslim and "you" take the side that it's not.

Deal?
 
T. A. Gardner said:
Religion, yes. I will put part of the blame on that. I will also blame shitty societal norms, racism, shit political systems, and culture on it. The US and Canada have fought relatively few wars over their history and don't tolerate dictatorships. Compare that to the Americas that originated as Spanish and Portuguese colonies. They're rife with wars and dictatorships. Culture and societal norms account for a huge chunk of that. The Catholic Church accounts for much of the early part of that.
Click to expand...
The Crusades were about the Catholic Church wanted to land grab in the guise of converting infidels. The same drive to grab land that the Spanish and Portuguese colonies did, or that England did in her years of empire-building.

If people weren't trying to grab land and other assets they'd be sending missionaries, not warring.
 
ZenMode said:
I'll offer this bet to anyone and will be more than happy to put money into escrow to back it up....

I'll bet $100 that every car driven into a crowd or intentionally detonated is a Muslim and "you" take the side that it's not.

Deal?
Click to expand...
You lose, but keep your money. I don't need it.

"The Charlottesville car attack was a white supremacist terrorist attack perpetrated on August 12, 2017, when James Alex Fields Jr. deliberately drove his car into a crowd of people peacefully protesting the Unite the Right rally in Charlottesville, Virginia, killing one person and injuring 35. Fields, 20, had previously espoused neo-Nazi and white supremacist beliefs and drove from Ohio to attend the rally."
 
christiefan915 said:
You lose, but keep your money. I don't need it.

"The Charlottesville car attack was a white supremacist terrorist attack perpetrated on August 12, 2017, when James Alex Fields Jr. deliberately drove his car into a crowd of people peacefully protesting the Unite the Right rally in Charlottesville, Virginia, killing one person and injuring 35. Fields, 20, had previously espoused neo-Nazi and white supremacist beliefs and drove from Ohio to attend the rally."
Click to expand...
Right.... so you'd win that one. We'll do this for the next 5 years. Do you think you'd come out ahead?
 
Diogenes said:
The CIA factbook will prove that you didn't make a racist assumption about skin color?

You may proceed.

BTW, what happened to you shift @work?

Did DOGE cut someone's funding?
Click to expand...
The CIA Factbook will prove that the majority of people in those countries are non-whites, therefore it's not racist to state a fact.

I said back in 2020 that I started WFH due to the pandemic, and that didn't change when the pandemic ended. It ended up being successful cost cutting.
 
christiefan915 said:
The Crusades were about the Catholic Church wanted to land grab in the guise of converting infidels. The same drive to grab land that the Spanish and Portuguese colonies did, or that England did in her years of empire-building.
Click to expand...

No. They were far more a reaction to the attempted Muslim invasions of Europe. Religion was more a cover for reverse pillaging and looting than anything else.

The period of colonial expansion was more about grabbing wealth that was being expended in Europe on perpetual wars and having a pressure relief for population growth than anything else.
christiefan915 said:
If people weren't trying to grab land and other assets they'd be sending missionaries, not warring.
Click to expand...

The Catholic Church did send missionaries. Of course, the second the locals resisted, in swooped the military and made them see the error of their ways by conquest. The English and French weren't nearly so virulent about converting the natives. Instead, they used them far more as convenient pawns in fighting their wars. Like the Spanish, who did likewise, they recognized the indigenous tribes were not united in their politics. They all used that wedge to get some tribes to fight with them against the tribes that were their enemies and, in the process, also fight opposed European powers. Spain was more monolithic in its empire in the Americas and willingly gave up N. America to avoid war with England while gaining a free hand in Central and S. America.
 
christiefan915 said:
The CIA Factbook will prove that the majority of people in those countries are non-whites, therefore it's not racist to state a fact.
Click to expand...


Is that so?

This was your racist assumption:

christiefan915 said:
Those areas are populated by black and brown people.
Click to expand...


Now, you backpedal and try to pretend you didn't make a racist assumption?


bike-cat.gif
 
ZenMode said:
Right.... so you'd win that one. We'll do this for the next 5 years. Do you think you'd come out ahead?
Click to expand...
You moved the goalpost after making an incorrect statement. You said EVERY CAR, not some cars. Anyway, here's one for the road.

"On September 20, 2019, at around 2:30 pm CDT, a man drove a black first generation (2001–2008) Chevrolet TrailBlazer LT through an entrance door of Sears and began driving through the store and into the main concourse of the mall, crashing into kiosks, Clarks, International Diamond Company, and multiple other stores, seemingly targeting Forever 21 and other adjacent stores The driver was taken into custody by responding police near the center of the mall's first level without further incident. The identity of the suspect was not immediately released. No injuries were reported, but the mall was temporarily on lockdown due to the incident as well as concurrent, but unfounded, reports of an active shooter. The mall was evacuated about one hour after the incident.

The man, later identified as [Not a Muslim] Javier Garcia of Palatine, Illinois, was charged with terrorism as a result of the incident; he appeared in court on September 29, 2019, and was denied bond."

Prosecutors claimed Garcia searched the internet 124 times for Woodfield-related topics within 24 hours of the incident. Despite the state terrorism charges, investigators never found any evidence that Garcia was involved in extremist ideologies or acted with terrorist intentions.
 
T. A. Gardner said:
No. They were far more a reaction to the attempted Muslim invasions of Europe. Religion was more a cover for reverse pillaging and looting than anything else.

The period of colonial expansion was more about grabbing wealth that was being expended in Europe on perpetual wars and having a pressure relief for population growth than anything else.


The Catholic Church did send missionaries. Of course, the second the locals resisted, in swooped the military and made them see the error of their ways by conquest. The English and French weren't nearly so virulent about converting the natives. Instead, they used them far more as convenient pawns in fighting their wars. Like the Spanish, who did likewise, they recognized the indigenous tribes were not united in their politics. They all used that wedge to get some tribes to fight with them against the tribes that were their enemies and, in the process, also fight opposed European powers. Spain was more monolithic in its empire in the Americas and willingly gave up N. America to avoid war with England while gaining a free hand in Central and S. America.
Click to expand...
Thanks for making my point. Reverse pillaging, looting, grabbing wealth and taking over land is exactly why I argued that these conflicts had very little to do with spreading religion.
 
The Crusades were a series of religious and political conflicts initiated by the Latin Church in the medieval period, primarily aimed at recovering Jerusalem and the Holy Land from Muslim rule. Here are the main reasons behind the Crusades:
  1. Religious Zeal and the Call for Holy War:
  2. Political and Economic Motivations:
    • Byzantine Empire's Plea for Help: The Byzantine Emperor Alexios I Komnenos sought assistance from Western Europe to fend off the encroaching Seljuk Turks, who had significantly weakened the Eastern Roman Empire.
    • European Nobility: Many nobles saw the Crusades as an opportunity to gain land, wealth, and prestige. With Europe experiencing overpopulation and younger sons of nobility lacking inheritance, the promise of land in the East was appealing.
  3. Economic Factors:
    • The Crusades opened new trade routes to the East, boosting commerce but also creating economic incentives for continued involvement in the Middle East.
  4. Social and Cultural Dynamics:
    • There was a sense of adventure and a desire for martial glory among knights and warriors. The concept of chivalry also played a role, where knights could prove their valor in a holy cause.
  5. Clashes of Civilizations:
    • The Crusades reflected the broader tensions between Christianity and Islam, with both sides seeing the other as a religious and cultural threat.
  6. Papal Authority and Church Reform:
    • The Crusades helped consolidate the Papacy's authority in Europe, serving as a means to unite Christendom under the Pope's leadership during a time of church reform and centralization.
These motivations were not mutually exclusive; they often intertwined, with religious fervor driving action while political and economic interests shaped the execution and outcomes of the Crusades. Over time, the nature of the Crusades evolved, including campaigns against heretics within Europe and other non-Christian groups, reflecting a broader ideological struggle rather than solely a conflict over land in the Holy Land.

Grok
 
christiefan915 said:
The Crusades were a series of religious and political conflicts initiated by the Latin Church in the medieval period, primarily aimed at recovering Jerusalem and the Holy Land from Muslim rule. Here are the main reasons behind the Crusades:
  1. Religious Zeal and the Call for Holy War:
  2. Political and Economic Motivations:
    • Byzantine Empire's Plea for Help: The Byzantine Emperor Alexios I Komnenos sought assistance from Western Europe to fend off the encroaching Seljuk Turks, who had significantly weakened the Eastern Roman Empire.
    • European Nobility: Many nobles saw the Crusades as an opportunity to gain land, wealth, and prestige. With Europe experiencing overpopulation and younger sons of nobility lacking inheritance, the promise of land in the East was appealing.
  3. Economic Factors:
    • The Crusades opened new trade routes to the East, boosting commerce but also creating economic incentives for continued involvement in the Middle East.
  4. Social and Cultural Dynamics:
    • There was a sense of adventure and a desire for martial glory among knights and warriors. The concept of chivalry also played a role, where knights could prove their valor in a holy cause.
  5. Clashes of Civilizations:
    • The Crusades reflected the broader tensions between Christianity and Islam, with both sides seeing the other as a religious and cultural threat.
  6. Papal Authority and Church Reform:
    • The Crusades helped consolidate the Papacy's authority in Europe, serving as a means to unite Christendom under the Pope's leadership during a time of church reform and centralization.
These motivations were not mutually exclusive; they often intertwined, with religious fervor driving action while political and economic interests shaped the execution and outcomes of the Crusades. Over time, the nature of the Crusades evolved, including campaigns against heretics within Europe and other non-Christian groups, reflecting a broader ideological struggle rather than solely a conflict over land in the Holy Land.

Grok
Click to expand...


So @Grok didn't support your silly assertion. :nodyes:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top