What if harping on "radical Islam" plays right into the radical Islam agenda?

tsuke said:
honestly if we believed those numbers there would be none left. We say 20k russia said 60k i believe? Yet they are still there.

The only way this ends is if the moderates turn on the extremists. They tried the carrot saying the moderates had nothing to do with it and they didnt turn them in (like in brussels for example). The stick is the muslim ban and other things of that nature. doesnt even have to be implemented. They just have to KNOW that it is being discussed.
Click to expand...

You have no idea what we're doing against ISIS. Why don't you believe those #'s? Because Trump says otherwise?

I still don't understand your "stick." Can you flesh that out a bit? Just threaten to ban all Muslims - that will make everyone come around? And how would this have stopped what happened in Orlando? How would ANY of what you guys are talking about have stopped Orlando?

Did anyone besides this guy's wife know what he was going to do? Do you buy Trump's BS propaganda that "most" of the Muslim community knew about it, and did nothing? You buy that BS, but not that we've killed significant #'s of ISIS, and reduced their territory by half?

Really? And you think you're not an idiot somehow?
\
 
Seahawk said:
What if harping on "radical Christianity" plays right into the radical Christian agenda?
Click to expand...

Is anyone making a big issue out of not saying "radical Christianity?" Are the circumstances similar to those of the OP, where a small group bent on holy war can benefit from the U.S. using rhetoric that would help establish that?

Please give me some details here. I need to understand how this relates to the OP and the argument against using "radical Islam." Can you give me some better correlation on that?
 
Thing1 said:
Is anyone making a big issue out of not saying "radical Christianity?" Are the circumstances similar to those of the OP, where a small group bent on holy war can benefit from the U.S. using rhetoric that would help establish that?

Please give me some details here. I need to understand how this relates to the OP and the argument against using "radical Islam." Can you give me some better correlation on that?
Click to expand...

No one is making an issue out of not saying radical Christianity. That is the point. Why should people not say radical Islam, but it is okay to say radical Christianity? Does this mean you guys actually fear Muslims more than Christians?
 
Thing1 said:
You have no idea what we're doing against ISIS. Why don't you believe those #'s? Because Trump says otherwise?

I still don't understand your "stick." Can you flesh that out a bit? Just threaten to ban all Muslims - that will make everyone come around? And how would this have stopped what happened in Orlando? How would ANY of what you guys are talking about have stopped Orlando?

Did anyone besides this guy's wife know what he was going to do? Do you buy Trump's BS propaganda that "most" of the Muslim community knew about it, and did nothing? You buy that BS, but not that we've killed significant #'s of ISIS, and reduced their territory by half?

Really? And you think you're not an idiot somehow?
\
Click to expand...

because it being discussed shows the moderates that the world is not ok with what is happening anymore. That they will face things like this if they keep letting it happen.

If we really killed that much then the movement would have collapsed already.

this is your thing. You are calling me an idiot because I propose an alternative solution.

WE have tried your military solution for what 15 years? The US won ww2 in 5. At some point it is time to apply the words of einstein "The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result"
 
Do people really think ISIS and al Qaeda sit around and try to think of ways to get us to say 'radical Islam'? It's like, 'oh, if we can just get them to say it....praise Allah! Trump said radical Islam!'

It's friggin bone-headed.
 
What if harping on "radical Islam" plays right into the radical Islam agenda?

Thing1 said:
I agree that ISIS is a threat we need to deal with, but I think we're dealing with it. Do you buy the Trump propaganda that we've done nothing? They're territory has been significantly reduced; they're running out of places to hide. And we've killed thousands of them.

You combat them with great intel (which involves cooperation w/ our Muslim allies in the region) & force when necessary. If you think the way to defeat ISIS is to make sure we call it "Islamic extremism," I don't know what to tell you. Something like that sounds completely braindead to me.
Click to expand...

OK so you want us to attack countries where ISIS is? Ground forces? Just drones?

I have a very simple common sense plan to dealing with ISIS

1) Halt all immigration to this country for the next five years. We have enough people and have no obligation legally or morally to allow anyone from anywhere to come here
2) pull all of our troops out of every foreign land call Afghanistan, Libya, Iraq and Syria a tie. Just pull the fuck out. Let them kill themselves.
3) Tell Europe it is time to pull up their big girl panties and start defending themselves. Their gravy train is over

Pretty simple

Now what is interesting to me is that when people talk about keeping muslimes out of here people like you scream about violating their Constitutional rights as if there can be ZERO limits on the 1st amendment yet you have ZERO problem with wanting to restrict the 2nd amendment to deal with terrorists.

Do you see the contradiction?
 
Thing1 said:
Is anyone making a big issue out of not saying "radical Christianity?" Are the circumstances similar to those of the OP, where a small group bent on holy war can benefit from the U.S. using rhetoric that would help establish that?

Please give me some details here. I need to understand how this relates to the OP and the argument against using "radical Islam." Can you give me some better correlation on that?
Click to expand...

We had exactly this same debate in the UK years ago, now even the ever so PC BBC uses the term!!

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-19277692
 
Seahawk said:
No one is making an issue out of not saying radical Christianity. That is the point. Why should people not say radical Islam, but it is okay to say radical Christianity? Does this mean you guys actually fear Muslims more than Christians?
Click to expand...

Well, that last part is certainly a strawman. I think it's more accurate to say I fear ISIS more than the KKK (though that might be different 50 years ago).

In your attempt to create some kind of equivalency and do your usual "gotcha" thing, you're ignoring the very valid point of the OP, which is not my idea, btw. I've read a lot of discussion on it, among both conservatives and liberals. It's not some lefty "let's make sure we don't incriminate Muslims!" thing.

You're not capable of much nuanced thought, but try to actually think about the question of the OP as it relates to a group like ISIS. What do they want? Again - most want a holy war. But they have limited resources. Their best bet might actually be if we start treating it as an "us against Islam" situation, and really draw those lines. At the very minimum, it helps their propaganda on it...would you deny that?

I don't know what the answer to the OP's question is, really. I think there is some merit to the idea that it might play into their hands if we start going out of our way to keep calling it "Islamic extremism." This thread was meant to open up some intelligent discussion on that idea, but I understand that on this board, there will be the kind of thoughtless, knee-jerk responses such as the one you put forth.
 
Teflon Don said:
OK so you want us to attack countries where ISIS is? Ground forces? Just drones?

I have a very simple common sense plan to dealing with ISIS

1) Halt all immigration to this country for the next five years. We have enough people and have no obligation legally or morally to allow anyone from anywhere to come here
2) pull all of our troops out of every foreign land call Afghanistan, Libya, Iraq and Syria a tie. Just pull the fuck out. Let them kill themselves.
3) Tell Europe it is time to pull up their big girl panties and start defending themselves. Their gravy train is over

Pretty simple

Now what is interesting to me is that when people talk about keeping muslimes out of here people like you scream about violating their Constitutional rights as if there can be ZERO limits on the 1st amendment yet you have ZERO problem with wanting to restrict the 2nd amendment to deal with terrorists.

Do you see the contradiction?
Click to expand...

It's simply not American to discriminate based on religion. Sorry 'bout that. I don't want to redefine America just to protect it.

And who is to say that's protecting it? What you're talking about in terms of restricting Muslims specifically would have done nothing for Orlando.
 
Thing1 said:
Well, that last part is certainly a strawman. I think it's more accurate to say I fear ISIS more than the KKK (though that might be different 50 years ago).

In your attempt to create some kind of equivalency and do your usual "gotcha" thing, you're ignoring the very valid point of the OP, which is not my idea, btw. I've read a lot of discussion on it, among both conservatives and liberals. It's not some lefty "let's make sure we don't incriminate Muslims!" thing.

You're not capable of much nuanced thought, but try to actually think about the question of the OP as it relates to a group like ISIS. What do they want? Again - most want a holy war. But they have limited resources. Their best bet might actually be if we start treating it as an "us against Islam" situation, and really draw those lines. At the very minimum, it helps their propaganda on it...would you deny that?

I don't know what the answer to the OP's question is, really. I think there is some merit to the idea that it might play into their hands if we start going out of our way to keep calling it "Islamic extremism." This thread was meant to open up some intelligent discussion on that idea, but I understand that on this board, there will be the kind of thoughtless, knee-jerk responses such as the one you put forth.
Click to expand...

but see we have already tried for more than a decade to avoid tying the two together and recruits still flock to them. Maybe that strategy is not working?
 
UOTE=Thing1;1636729]Well, that last part is certainly a strawman. I think it's more accurate to say I fear ISIS more than the KKK (though that might be different 50 years ago).
Click to expand...

It is not a strawman you idiot. It is a logical question based on the fact you seem to fear saying radical Islam and have no problem with saying radical Christianity. Thus, I asked if you do in fact fear them more. Real simple question, but too complex for you.

In your attempt to create some kind of equivalency and do your usual "gotcha" thing, you're ignoring the very valid point of the OP, which is not my idea, btw. I've read a lot of discussion on it, among both conservatives and liberals. It's not some lefty "let's make sure we don't incriminate Muslims!" thing.

You're not capable of much nuanced thought, but try to actually think about the question of the OP as it relates to a group like ISIS. What do they want? Again - most want a holy war. But they have limited resources. Their best bet might actually be if we start treating it as an "us against Islam" situation, and really draw those lines. At the very minimum, it helps their propaganda on it...would you deny that?

I don't know what the answer to the OP's question is, really. I think there is some merit to the idea that it might play into their hands if we start going out of our way to keep calling it "Islamic extremism." This thread was meant to open up some intelligent discussion on that idea, but I understand that on this board, there will be the kind of thoughtless, knee-jerk responses such as the one you put forth.
Click to expand...

You really think not saying radical Islam will just make them go away? I'm really seriously asking.

My point goes directly to the core of your OP and others saying we shouldn't say radical Islam. Those same people will turn around and say radical Christiaity.

That doesn't make any sense so I'm trying to understand your logic. Why is it okay to say radical Christianity, but not radical Islam?
 
Milagro said:
We had exactly this same debate in the UK years ago, now even the ever so PC BBC uses the term!!

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-19277692
Click to expand...

I made a similar point on another thread. It's not like 'radical Islam' is some obscure term only used by skin heads in some dark corner of the Internet. It's the generally accepted term for...radical Islam lol!

Not only that, radical Islam is a perverse yet coherent ideology. And it should be required learning for all FBI and DHS personnel.
 
Seahawk said:
It is not a strawman you idiot. It is a logical question based on the fact you seem to fear saying radical Islam and have no problem with saying radical Christianity. Thus, I asked if you do in fact fear them more. Real simple question, but too complex for you.

You really think not saying radical Islam will just make them go away? I'm really seriously asking.

My point goes directly to the core of your OP and others saying we shouldn't say radical Islam. Those same people will turn around and say radical Christiaity.

That doesn't make any sense so I'm trying to understand your logic. Why is it okay to say radical Christianity, but not radical Islam?
Click to expand...

For starters, definitely a strawman.

And your thinking is impossibly linear. We're talking about 2 different groups. Personally, I'm fine w/ calling either "radical (insert religion)." But does it play into the hands of a group like ISIS? Their goal is holy war. Would you say that Christian extremists have the same goal?

I wouldn't. I don't see that same stated goal from Christian extremist groups, at least not put that way. ISIS wants a war w/ the West. I just don't see that out of so-called Christian extremist groups.

Do you? Please detail.
 
What if harping on "radical Islam" plays right into the radical Islam agenda?

Thing1 said:
It's simply not American to discriminate based on religion. Sorry 'bout that. I don't want to redefine America just to protect it.

And who is to say that's protecting it? What you're talking about in terms of restricting Muslims specifically would have done nothing for Orlando.
Click to expand...

Actually we have discriminated based on religion all the time. Stop kidding yourself

None of the gun control measures you want would have prevented Orlando

The bottom line is these immigrants are not assimilating the way prior immigrants did and that is a problem
 
Darth Hussein Omar said:
I made a similar point on another thread. It's not like 'radical Islam' is some obscure term only used by skin heads in some dark corner of the Internet. It's the generally accepted term for...radical Islam lol!

Not only that, radical Islam is a perverse yet coherent ideology. And it should be required learning for all FBI and DHS personnel.
Click to expand...

not saying radical islam sanitizes it by making it seem like islam had nothing to do with it where in reality it should be stated clearly so we show it has islamic ties to make people see it ruins the image of islam.
 
Thing1 said:
For starters, definitely a strawman.

And your thinking is impossibly linear. We're talking about 2 different groups. Personally, I'm fine w/ calling either "radical (insert religion)." But does it play into the hands of a group like ISIS? Their goal is holy war. Would you say that Christian extremists have the same goal?

I wouldn't. I don't see that same stated goal from Christian extremist groups, at least not put that way. ISIS wants a war w/ the West. I just don't see that out of so-called Christian extremist groups.

Do you? Please detail.
Click to expand...

given that that strategy you subscibe too has led us into a stalemate for 15 years and that it looks like there is no end in sight at what point will you try something new? 30 years? 40?
 
Teflon Don said:
Actually we have discriminated based on religion all the time. Stop kidding yourself

None of the gun control measures you want would have prevented Orlando

The bottom line is these immigrants are not assimilating the way prior immigrants did and that is a problem
Click to expand...

The bolded isn't correct. Background checks for terror watch lists? Banning assault weapons?

Much more effective than banning Muslims from entering the country.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top