ISIS propaganda video celebrating Brussels attacks uses Trump’s voice and photo

NOVA said:
Hate to clue you in, Tonto.....terrorism was created the same time as Mohammad...and terrorism has

been mentioned in the papers a few times, in case you missed it
Click to expand...

Do you really believe there was no such thing as terrorism before Muhammad?
 
Thing1 said:
I love - absolutely love - that the friggin' morons who cheerleaded the catastrophe known as the Iraq War are still here trying to tell us how we need to defend America.

Idiots. Haven't you all done enough damage?
Click to expand...

What or who is to blame for the terrorism before the Iraq war?
 
Who cares what ISIL faggots have to say? The opinions of Muslims in 2016 are as worthless as they were in 632, when they first started attacking the world. There was no Donald Trump or his retarded followers back then, either.
 
Thing1 said:
I meant exacerbate the problem, dummies. Obviously, terrorism has been around forever.
Click to expand...

Do you believe Trump is responsible for Brussels?

I think you are raise a fair point that Trump could exacerbate terrorism, but I am not so sure. The guy lives for making deals, not starting wars. I think he is saying outlandish things to get elected and once elected, he will likely be a moderate.

I don't have faith he will actually do that or be that, but you raise a good point.
 
The Pauper said:
Who cares what ISIL faggots have to say? The opinions of Muslims in 2016 are as worthless as they were in 632, when they first started attacking the world. There was no Donald Trump or his retarded followers back then, either.
Click to expand...
You're just mad they beat you mackerel snappers in the crusades.
 
Mott the Hoople said:
You're just made they beat you mackerel snappers in the crusades.
Click to expand...

Well, we've been beating them since about the 18th Century, so it's all good, now. Well, obviously they haven't adjusted to it all that well. But, they're going to have to get used to it for another millennium, or so...
 
The Pauper said:
Well, we've been beating them since about the 18th Century, so it's all good, now. Well, obviously they haven't adjusted to it all that well. But, they're going to have to get used to it for another millennium, or so...
Click to expand...
actually that's probably at the heart of radical Islam. Their inability to adapt to modernity due to ingrained social conservatism.
 
Rhetoric that targets “the Muslims” and singles out Americans for suspicion based on nothing more than their faith seriously complicates the war against terrorism, for these reasons:

First, anti-Muslim rhetoric strains relations with Sunni Muslim countries, which we are trying to persuade to do more to combat the Islamic State. “The leadership of these countries,” former acting CIA director Mike Morell told me, “understand American politics enough to know that, for now, this is just rhetoric. But their publics do not get that. And it is the perception that acts to limit what these nations can do overtly to support the U.S.”

Second, it amplifies Islamic State propaganda that the West is conducting a religious war against the “caliphate,” which is a source of terrorist morale. “It certainly feeds extremist recruitment,” says Morell, “but it also makes even moderate Muslims wonder if the extremists may be right.”

Third, anti-Muslim rhetoric needlessly disrupts relationships with American Muslim communities that are often the first to recognize and report radicalization in their midst. “From the perspective of American Muslims,” according to former national security adviser Stephen Hadley, “the rhetoric creates a sense of alienation from their fellow citizens and makes them more susceptible to the [Islamic State] argument that they have no real place in American society — and that their true ‘home’ is in the caliphate.”

In a sense, Trump is right. Assimilation is the key. But by what possible theory of assimilation should the United States declare Islam to be inconsistent with its ideals?
Click to expand...
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opin...hpid=hp_no-name_opinion-card-e:homepage/story

I personally don't think Trump's/Cruz language makes all that much difference -but it is corrosive, and can only hurt relations as outlined above
 
anatta said:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opin...hpid=hp_no-name_opinion-card-e:homepage/story

I personally don't think Trump's/Cruz language makes all that much difference -but it is corrosive, and can only hurt relations as outlined above
Click to expand...

My problem with all that is it ignores our own political situation at the expense of our Sunni 'allies'. If they were actual allies they wouldn't need prodded or cow-towed to in order for them to crack down on their extremists. If the shoe was on the other foot, you can bet they wouldn't give a crap about offending us. The same ditto holds for the American Muslim community. If it ever gets to the point where there's systemic Muslim persecution [isolated instances don't count, since even Christians can claim 'persecution' based on that metric] then it's time to talk about restricting political speech.

Another problem is that it's clearly not working. Radical Islamism is clearly ascendant. If it were the opposite then one could claim that going miles out of our way to not utter the words 'radical Islam' is an effective measure.

In fact, I would argue that it just makes us look weak and feckless in the face of it. Which we are.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top