ISIS & Terrorism - World War III

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 27
  1. #1
    Rogu3 Wreckless is offline
    SubscriberRank
    May 2012 Join Date
    The WastelandLocation
    1,369Posts

    ISIS & Terrorism - World War III


    RaGEZONE Recommends

    RaGEZONE Recommends

    The Western World greatly fears the impending threats of ISIS and terrorism splurging into Europe and the United States. It's why some sit idly by as an elitist bigot attempts to gain Presidential Office in the US or why some even choose to support him.

    What are the real world solutions though?
    I watched a clip from Fox News (the most racist news network of all) the other day, and they had the alleged Navy SEAL who shot Osama Bin Laden. Personally, I don't think it's the actual person who shot him, I think it's the guy they put on the news to avoid any unwanted parts of the actual story being leaked. But anyway, this guy claims that the only way to stop ISIS is to put troops on the ground in the Middle East and just start killing them. Well, genius, if it were that easy, why wouldn't we just go ahead and do that?

    My biggest question is, how come nobody ever asked, "Why are these terrorists so mad?". It's more than a religious thing, it's more than a territory thing, it's more than America being a bully, but what exactly is it?

    Nobody ever asks this question on the news, and nobody ever tries to get to the bottom of it. We're all just expected to think, "Oh, it's because they're Muslim and they're crazy, Muslims blow things up."

    I can tell you why it's never discussed properly on the media. It starts with an I, and ends with an SRAEL. ISIS hates us because Israel is our alleged "ally", despite them getting all the benefits with very little in return. Israel is killing millions of people and causing many problems in the Middle East, but because they're our ally, we're expected to look the other way as Americans. I'm not saying your average Israeli person is just some ruthless bastard murdering people, but the Israeli government is just as bad, as a matter of fact worse than ISIS. ISIS doesn't have the military technology that Israel has.

    All in all, what do you think?
    Not all fuckboys are heartless, some are just heartbroken.


  2. #2
    That one pokemon thing Luxray is offline
    Alpha MaleRank
    Apr 2010 Join Date
    2,083Posts

    Re: ISIS & Terrorism - World War III

    I've been to Israel some time and I can tell you that the average Israeli is just as dissapointed in its goverment as everyone else (as a matter of fact, just 1 or 2 weeks ago some guy was arrested for a tax fraud and imprisoned). I understand that ISIS'd be mad at Europe, as the jews were basically just sent to Palestina without any consent of the people. A truce was supposed to be formed and the citizens were supposed to be able to go along after a few years, but this never happened.
    As far as I know, the United States have nothing to do in this affair, even though it feels like it has. Europe made a mistake now it has to suffer the drawbacks, which is apparently terrorism. Just a heads up, but ISIS is just as easily removed from the planet as Al Qaida, even though I do not approve of the method. It's a temporary danger and waves the flag of the islam (even though it's already broken more things in the Quran than they'll be ever able to fix.)


  3. #3
    Rogu3 Wreckless is offline
    SubscriberRank
    May 2012 Join Date
    The WastelandLocation
    1,369Posts

    Re: ISIS & Terrorism - World War III

    Quote Originally Posted by Luxray View Post
    I've been to Israel some time and I can tell you that the average Israeli is just as dissapointed in its goverment as everyone else (as a matter of fact, just 1 or 2 weeks ago some guy was arrested for a tax fraud and imprisoned). I understand that ISIS'd be mad at Europe, as the jews were basically just sent to Palestina without any consent of the people. A truce was supposed to be formed and the citizens were supposed to be able to go along after a few years, but this never happened.
    As far as I know, the United States have nothing to do in this affair, even though it feels like it has. Europe made a mistake now it has to suffer the drawbacks, which is apparently terrorism. Just a heads up, but ISIS is just as easily removed from the planet as Al Qaida, even though I do not approve of the method. It's a temporary danger and waves the flag of the islam (even though it's already broken more things in the Quran than they'll be ever able to fix.)
    Well, the reason ISIS is mad at the United States is our continued support and alliance with Israel despite our indefinite knowledge of their crimes against the Middle East and humanity in general. We continue to provide weapons and munitions, and we also send our troops in to do their dirty work. No country in the Middle East stands a chance against Israel, yet Israel continues to bomb and siege their cities and villages. I don't condone ISIS' idea of revenge or justice, and their idea of Islam is very convoluted or a better term would be misinterpreted. It's just like radical Christians who mistake the symbolism in the Bible for literal law (i.e. if your hand causes you to sin, cut it off). It means cut off the paths to sin in your life, it doesn't literally mean cut off the appendage that is directly involved with your sin).

    ISIS seems to misinterpret that they have no right to judge others for their sins and they are not allowed to go beheading people for their sins. You must also remember that there are many supporters of ISIS in the US, Europe, and other regions that were not born into Islam. Their initial teachings of Islam are most likely incorrect or invalid or at least purposely taught incorrectly. Members and supporters of ISIS do not think that what they are doing is wrong. The same goes for members of ISIS in the Middle East, who from a young age are taught to carry out the "will" of Allah.

    ISIS, the Taliban and Al Qaeda aren't as easily removed from the planet as you'd assume. This isn't a form of government though they claim to be. These terrorist groups are most easily compared to the drug cartels of South America. You can't just kill a few leaders and expect it to stop. Their roots go deep into the Middle East and their influence is so widespread, if only they were teaching something peaceful. Anyway, this isn't like a snake where you can cut off the head and it's dead. When you take out the leaders, someone else either moves up or the whole group splits causing more chaos and war amongst the Middle East.

    There has to be a peaceful solution, we just choose not to look for it.
    Not all fuckboys are heartless, some are just heartbroken.

  4. #4

    Re: ISIS & Terrorism - World War III

    Quote Originally Posted by Luxray View Post
    I've been to Israel some time and I can tell you that the average Israeli is just as dissapointed in its goverment as everyone else (as a matter of fact, just 1 or 2 weeks ago some guy was arrested for a tax fraud and imprisoned). I understand that ISIS'd be mad at Europe, as the jews were basically just sent to Palestina without any consent of the people. A truce was supposed to be formed and the citizens were supposed to be able to go along after a few years, but this never happened.
    As far as I know, the United States have nothing to do in this affair, even though it feels like it has. Europe made a mistake now it has to suffer the drawbacks, which is apparently terrorism. Just a heads up, but ISIS is just as easily removed from the planet as Al Qaida, even though I do not approve of the method. It's a temporary danger and waves the flag of the islam (even though it's already broken more things in the Quran than they'll be ever able to fix.)
    As far as i believe from my perspect of view, ISIS has for sure to do with US, they pay them for what they do and them 'So called Muslims'' would do anything for money, plus they are being extremists who claim and believe that what they are doing is right within their Life purpose.
    ISIS its not easily removed from the planet, because to eliminate them there has to be eliminated more than a million innocent people aswell
    which is not really a solution in my opinion.

    Quote Originally Posted by Wreckless View Post
    ISIS seems to misinterpret that they have no right to judge others for their sins and they are not allowed to go beheading people for their sins. You must also remember that there are many supporters of ISIS in the US, Europe, and other regions that were not born into Islam. Their initial teachings of Islam are most likely incorrect or invalid or at least purposely taught incorrectly. Members and supporters of ISIS do not think that what they are doing is wrong. The same goes for members of ISIS in the Middle East, who from a young age are taught to carry out the "will" of Allah.

    ISIS, the Taliban and Al Qaeda aren't as easily removed from the planet as you'd assume. This isn't a form of government though they claim to be. These terrorist groups are most easily compared to the drug cartels of South America. You can't just kill a few leaders and expect it to stop. Their roots go deep into the Middle East and their influence is so widespread, if only they were teaching something peaceful. Anyway, this isn't like a snake where you can cut off the head and it's dead. When you take out the leaders, someone else either moves up or the whole group splits causing more chaos and war amongst the Middle East.

    There has to be a peaceful solution, we just choose not to look for it.
    Very well explained.

  5. #5
    Ask me about Daoism FullmetalPride is offline
    Alpha MaleRank
    Nov 2010 Join Date
    2,182Posts

    Re: ISIS & Terrorism - World War III

    Blaming Israel alone is a narrow line that I wouldn't walk down. It's a Trump-like way of condensing an issue as complex as the dynamic and ambiguous sociopolitical field that is the Middle East. That's not to say Israel isn't just as much a part of the ever-changing power conflicts in the region as anyone else. This is especially true when you consider the fact that the mandatory conscription mandates in Israel are perhaps the best explanation for the IDF's constant controversy.

    It would take pages for me to even touch on how complex the region is; it's not worth it, either, because my high school history classes, while incredibly in-depth for non-college courses, are still only a simplification. So I'll summarize.

    It was Margret Thatcher that said, "Europe was created by history. America was created by philosophy." I cannot agree more. If this is so, then the Middle East is built not on religion, but on history as well. However, it was ruined by war. Before the Middle Ages, when most of the world was in a dark age, the Middle East was thriving in technological, structural, and economic prosperity. The Umayyads were conquered Spain in the 8th century, and their emirates lasted until Ferdinand and Isabella conquered Granada in 1492. One has to acknowledge that, before the Ottoman Empire (and possibly before), the strict laws of Islam weren't easy to come across.

    Enter the Ottoman Empire. I cannot speak on the Islamic policies they had at all, we never ventured their reign. But we did venture their experience in WWI, when they allied with the Germans. The Ottoman Empire had a firm grasp on the northern regions of the Middle East, failing to reach the more easterly sections like Saudi Arabia, Iran, and Iraq. However, the structure of the Middle East was much more unified; would have been hard to start a revolution in what is now Israel.

    Enter America, France, and Britain. These guys decisively dissolved the Triple Alliance, and the Ottoman Empire fell with it, despite having a rich Caliphate economically and politically that some scholars argue ended prematurely. However, the reasons for its demise are unclear. All I know is, the result was a bunch of mandates from the League of Nations that created nations like Palestine, Lebanon, and ascribed others to colonial domination by members of either side of WWI.

    Colonization is such a complex issue that I won't even get into it, as I think you can probably guess why it was a bad idea. Forcing your identity on a nation of peoples not familiar and alien to your culture and government is spelling out demise without peaceful separations.

    Ok, let's skip a few years to WWII. The UN, a new organization filling the huge gap that the League of Nations was always incapable of filling, recommended that the British repurpose Palestine as a Jewish state, given the holocaust etc. Not a bad idea, really, except in the way it was handled. It ignored a huge population that was surrounded by nations similar to them in culture, history, and thought: the Palestinians. Why? I don't know. All I know is, the nations mistook the Middle East to be like Europe, where dividing up boarders is official and regular business because they're all white and they're all basically Christian. As for political thought no one gave any shits in Europe until mass-murder happened.

    The Middle Eastern nations used their imperial rulers as puppets to play off of each other and reap the rewards. But, now that they were given more autonomy, there was nothing really to fill that gap. Egypt was once a thriving microcosm of European and Eastern cultures, but after Nasser took over in a feat of Arab Nationalism, he enforced a strictly eastern identity by expelling the European aristocrats and non-Muslims. Predictably, people weren't happy but the military regime continued until very recently during the Arab Spring.

    <going to post some more later>

  6. #6
    Rogu3 Wreckless is offline
    SubscriberRank
    May 2012 Join Date
    The WastelandLocation
    1,369Posts

    Re: ISIS & Terrorism - World War III

    Quote Originally Posted by FullmetalPride View Post
    Blaming Israel alone is a narrow line that I wouldn't walk down. It's a Trump-like way of condensing an issue as complex as the dynamic and ambiguous sociopolitical field that is the Middle East. That's not to say Israel isn't just as much a part of the ever-changing power conflicts in the region as anyone else. This is especially true when you consider the fact that the mandatory conscription mandates in Israel are perhaps the best explanation for the IDF's constant controversy.

    It would take pages for me to even touch on how complex the region is; it's not worth it, either, because my high school history classes, while incredibly in-depth for non-college courses, are still only a simplification. So I'll summarize.

    It was Margret Thatcher that said, "Europe was created by history. America was created by philosophy." I cannot agree more. If this is so, then the Middle East is built not on religion, but on history as well. However, it was ruined by war. Before the Middle Ages, when most of the world was in a dark age, the Middle East was thriving in technological, structural, and economic prosperity. The Umayyads were conquered Spain in the 8th century, and their emirates lasted until Ferdinand and Isabella conquered Granada in 1492. One has to acknowledge that, before the Ottoman Empire (and possibly before), the strict laws of Islam weren't easy to come across.

    Enter the Ottoman Empire. I cannot speak on the Islamic policies they had at all, we never ventured their reign. But we did venture their experience in WWI, when they allied with the Germans. The Ottoman Empire had a firm grasp on the northern regions of the Middle East, failing to reach the more easterly sections like Saudi Arabia, Iran, and Iraq. However, the structure of the Middle East was much more unified; would have been hard to start a revolution in what is now Israel.

    Enter America, France, and Britain. These guys decisively dissolved the Triple Alliance, and the Ottoman Empire fell with it, despite having a rich Caliphate economically and politically that some scholars argue ended prematurely. However, the reasons for its demise are unclear. All I know is, the result was a bunch of mandates from the League of Nations that created nations like Palestine, Lebanon, and ascribed others to colonial domination by members of either side of WWI.

    Colonization is such a complex issue that I won't even get into it, as I think you can probably guess why it was a bad idea. Forcing your identity on a nation of peoples not familiar and alien to your culture and government is spelling out demise without peaceful separations.

    Ok, let's skip a few years to WWII. The UN, a new organization filling the huge gap that the League of Nations was always incapable of filling, recommended that the British repurpose Palestine as a Jewish state, given the holocaust etc. Not a bad idea, really, except in the way it was handled. It ignored a huge population that was surrounded by nations similar to them in culture, history, and thought: the Palestinians. Why? I don't know. All I know is, the nations mistook the Middle East to be like Europe, where dividing up boarders is official and regular business because they're all white and they're all basically Christian. As for political thought no one gave any shits in Europe until mass-murder happened.

    The Middle Eastern nations used their imperial rulers as puppets to play off of each other and reap the rewards. But, now that they were given more autonomy, there was nothing really to fill that gap. Egypt was once a thriving microcosm of European and Eastern cultures, but after Nasser took over in a feat of Arab Nationalism, he enforced a strictly eastern identity by expelling the European aristocrats and non-Muslims. Predictably, people weren't happy but the military regime continued until very recently during the Arab Spring.

    <going to post some more later>
    I was going to not read all that, but then I realized how often I write that much, so I felt I owe you the respect lol.

    I don't mean to blame Israel for everything. Israel as it stands today is a home-grown monster of the West and the UN. In no way, does it justify the actions of ISIS, Taliban, Al Qaeda or anyone who uses a peaceful religion as a pedestal for terrorism. I'm merely trying to get to the bottom of the origins of these terrorist groups.

    You see, we have a sticky situation. We know where the terrorists come from, we know how they keep their hold on the Middle East and continue to grow in numbers and it's because it acts like an organism that heals itself. No matter how hard you hit them, the young people living there don't understand why and see the terrorists as martyrs against countries and unions like the US, Europe, Israel, etc.

    So, what we don't know is why these terrorists are really doing this in the first place? And I don't think most people committing these violent acts even truly know why. Perhaps, if we know why, we can stop it. Obviously, part of it is the misinterpretation of a religion, but we can't be so naive to assume that the founders of these terrorist groups really believed that sending people on kamikaze missions was the will of God. Especially because the leaders of these groups never actually go out on these kamikaze missions.

    Right away, we've jumped to the radicalization that we can send troops in and fix the problem, but that has proven to be ineffective numerous times. (Korea, Vietnam, Iraq, etc.) In fact, ISIS is the bi-product of sending in troops and leaving when we realized, "Oh shit, we actually can't win this. Well, we can just train some dudes and they'll hold down the fort... right?". Many of these terrorist groups are bi-products of failed "peace" missions. It's time for a new strategy, we have to stop trying to fight our way into the Middle East because it is not Europe and we have yet to learn this since the conflict in Korea and the Vietnam War. Someone needs to tell these defense officials, "You're not in Europe anymore". Because these countries are not civilized or developed like the countries we used to go to war with, (i.e. European Countries). The closest thing to the Middle East and places like Korea or Vietnam that the US has ever taken on was Mexico. And that was about 100+ years ago when part of the US was as bad as the Middle East.

    The Middle East has seen war, and they are seeing war still. We need a new solution.
    Not all fuckboys are heartless, some are just heartbroken.

  7. #7
    Ask me about Daoism FullmetalPride is offline
    Alpha MaleRank
    Nov 2010 Join Date
    2,182Posts

    Re: ISIS & Terrorism - World War III

    <continuing post from earlier as I just got back>

    ENTER OLIVER NORTH!

    Well, enter anyone doing ANYTHING in the Middle East between the 50s and 90s. If you're a nation like the United States, you have interests. During the Cold War, we were afraid of socialism and nationalism in general, but our answer wasn't to dismantle them directly. No, that would be tantamount to what the Soviets were doing, and we were afraid of getting back into a Vietnam-like situation, wherein the aid begins to flow to a tyrannical/anti-democratic/authoritarian regime, and our aid ends after we've sent troops there directly. This was called "Vietnam syndrome," and it's fitting that this public opinion arrived from public perception of the war and the post-traumatic stress thereof, because a more personal and very serious condition was inherited by our fighters (PTSD).

    The reason it was so stressful was because the war was the first time we were fighting off of our home turf, so to speak. You may argue that we've fought plenty of wars offshore, and you'd be right. But wars that were against an armed peasant population and in a very foreign terrain had to be fought guerrilla-like. And that's where the Vietnam syndrome came from: fear that if we're directly fighting a populus who knows the terrain better than we do, it amounts to an unwinnable, and thus expensive and unpopular, war. You'll notice that these wars and the efforts therein typically don't go well, just ask the dry husk that America came from (Britain). So instead, we choose to just arm them. Remember Al-Qaeda? They came from "freedom fighters," called the Mujahideen, in Afghanistan. They were fighting against the Soviet Occupation, another reason we couldn't fight directly. But what did we fuck up there? They won, didn't they?

    Yeah, they did, but we didn't. You see, the vacuum created by an absence of government created a struggle for power. This is out of humans' natural desire to have a central power structure. We like authority to tell us the boundaries of life. You may think "Enter the Taliban!" but you'd be gravely mistaken. The Taliban actually came from the refugee camps created by the Afghanistan war. The small children, with the fresh memory of an unpopular government and the present sight of a civil war, were living in these camps and being educated by our good, decent friends named the Saudis. The Saudis, you might think, are the good guys. We're allies with them, we suck their dicks for oil. We're basically fuckbuddies; we coexist without the need for any "alliance" or formal/international commitment to each other, but still pleasure each other with oil. Fuckbuddies.

    Our support for the Saudis, though, is a real head-scratching paradox. We complain of ISIS doing atrocious things and meanwhile, the Saudis publicly behead criminals in accordance with the Wahhabi school of Islam. The only difference is that ISIS has attacked another friend of ours, the Iraqis. What's the deal? The deal is oil, and it always will be.

    I've not talked much about oil, which might be surprising, because I'm really operating under the assumption that you KNOW our support/fighting comes out of oil greed. The evidence is pretty solid and pretty vast, so I won't bother trying to prove it. Go ahead and follow the money.

    Back to the Saudis. Their school of thought, Wahhabism, is a fundamentalist interpretation of Islam, and if you have an entire generation of children who's homes were destroyed, families killed, and livelihoods burned by war, then introduced to a life-engulfing, radical mode of thought, you've got a huge problem. And this is essentially the problem in any involvement we've had with the Middle East. Vacuums are filled by darkness where no light is to be found.

    The Taliban, then, took up the leftover arms in the Afghanistan countryside and found their way into reign. Such is the way of post-Vietnam, clandestine support.


    My answer to the general question is, then, this: if they're fighting for true justice, support them. The reason Syria is going to be another Afghanistan isn't because we didn't support the right group, it's because we're not doing it the right way. You need to support the general population, educate them, and, bluntly, indoctrinate them into Western thought and reason. May sound ominous but it's true. Syria has nothing left, really. It's divided by a radical front, a moderate front, and a government fighting all of them while gassing the citizens. Obama is rightly fearful: what if we extend arms support and end up with a radical government or splinter cell that uses those same arms? After all, Iraq JUST faced this problem.

    But if you don't allow the radicals to grab hold of a vulnerable, misunderstood population, then you can turn them into the next generation of thinkers. This is exactly what we did in Afghanistan, and it seems to have worked. A government is in power. We built roads and schools, and the life expectancy increased by (don't quote me on this) decades. Our counter-insurgent operatives fighting the Taliban would go into communities, talk to them, develop REAL relationships to gain their trust, and in return for helping us gather information about the Taliban, we'd protect them from retaliation. Suddenly, we're in a position where we might actually be able to pull out of a now-autonomous nation with little to no incident. The Taliban finally agreed to peaceful negotiations in 2015. It may end like a situation similar to the FSLN in Nicaragua. Once a group of violent guerrillas pursuing the dissolution of the government, now an official political party after negotiations and reform.

    Afghanistan is not a glittering nation bereft of corruption or death, or a fantastic economy, but it's improving slowly. And that, considering all of the other FUCK UPS that the west has had when investing time and money into foreign events, is a pretty solid accomplishment.

  8. #8
    Rogu3 Wreckless is offline
    SubscriberRank
    May 2012 Join Date
    The WastelandLocation
    1,369Posts

    Re: ISIS & Terrorism - World War III

    Quote Originally Posted by FullmetalPride View Post
    <continuing post from earlier as I just got back>

    ENTER OLIVER NORTH!

    Well, enter anyone doing ANYTHING in the Middle East between the 50s and 90s. If you're a nation like the United States, you have interests. During the Cold War, we were afraid of socialism and nationalism in general, but our answer wasn't to dismantle them directly. No, that would be tantamount to what the Soviets were doing, and we were afraid of getting back into a Vietnam-like situation, wherein the aid begins to flow to a tyrannical/anti-democratic/authoritarian regime, and our aid ends after we've sent troops there directly. This was called "Vietnam syndrome," and it's fitting that this public opinion arrived from public perception of the war and the post-traumatic stress thereof, because a more personal and very serious condition was inherited by our fighters (PTSD).

    The reason it was so stressful was because the war was the first time we were fighting off of our home turf, so to speak. You may argue that we've fought plenty of wars offshore, and you'd be right. But wars that were against an armed peasant population and in a very foreign terrain had to be fought guerrilla-like. And that's where the Vietnam syndrome came from: fear that if we're directly fighting a populus who knows the terrain better than we do, it amounts to an unwinnable, and thus expensive and unpopular, war. You'll notice that these wars and the efforts therein typically don't go well, just ask the dry husk that America came from (Britain). So instead, we choose to just arm them. Remember Al-Qaeda? They came from "freedom fighters," called the Mujahideen, in Afghanistan. They were fighting against the Soviet Occupation, another reason we couldn't fight directly. But what did we fuck up there? They won, didn't they?

    Yeah, they did, but we didn't. You see, the vacuum created by an absence of government created a struggle for power. This is out of humans' natural desire to have a central power structure. We like authority to tell us the boundaries of life. You may think "Enter the Taliban!" but you'd be gravely mistaken. The Taliban actually came from the refugee camps created by the Afghanistan war. The small children, with the fresh memory of an unpopular government and the present sight of a civil war, were living in these camps and being educated by our good, decent friends named the Saudis. The Saudis, you might think, are the good guys. We're allies with them, we suck their dicks for oil. We're basically fuckbuddies; we coexist without the need for any "alliance" or formal/international commitment to each other, but still pleasure each other with oil. Fuckbuddies.

    Our support for the Saudis, though, is a real head-scratching paradox. We complain of ISIS doing atrocious things and meanwhile, the Saudis publicly behead criminals in accordance with the Wahhabi school of Islam. The only difference is that ISIS has attacked another friend of ours, the Iraqis. What's the deal? The deal is oil, and it always will be.

    I've not talked much about oil, which might be surprising, because I'm really operating under the assumption that you KNOW our support/fighting comes out of oil greed. The evidence is pretty solid and pretty vast, so I won't bother trying to prove it. Go ahead and follow the money.

    Back to the Saudis. Their school of thought, Wahhabism, is a fundamentalist interpretation of Islam, and if you have an entire generation of children who's homes were destroyed, families killed, and livelihoods burned by war, then introduced to a life-engulfing, radical mode of thought, you've got a huge problem. And this is essentially the problem in any involvement we've had with the Middle East. Vacuums are filled by darkness where no light is to be found.

    The Taliban, then, took up the leftover arms in the Afghanistan countryside and found their way into reign. Such is the way of post-Vietnam, clandestine support.


    My answer to the general question is, then, this: if they're fighting for true justice, support them. The reason Syria is going to be another Afghanistan isn't because we didn't support the right group, it's because we're not doing it the right way. You need to support the general population, educate them, and, bluntly, indoctrinate them into Western thought and reason. May sound ominous but it's true. Syria has nothing left, really. It's divided by a radical front, a moderate front, and a government fighting all of them while gassing the citizens. Obama is rightly fearful: what if we extend arms support and end up with a radical government or splinter cell that uses those same arms? After all, Iraq JUST faced this problem.

    But if you don't allow the radicals to grab hold of a vulnerable, misunderstood population, then you can turn them into the next generation of thinkers. This is exactly what we did in Afghanistan, and it seems to have worked. A government is in power. We built roads and schools, and the life expectancy increased by (don't quote me on this) decades. Our counter-insurgent operatives fighting the Taliban would go into communities, talk to them, develop REAL relationships to gain their trust, and in return for helping us gather information about the Taliban, we'd protect them from retaliation. Suddenly, we're in a position where we might actually be able to pull out of a now-autonomous nation with little to no incident. The Taliban finally agreed to peaceful negotiations in 2015. It may end like a situation similar to the FSLN in Nicaragua. Once a group of violent guerrillas pursuing the dissolution of the government, now an official political party after negotiations and reform.

    Afghanistan is not a glittering nation bereft of corruption or death, or a fantastic economy, but it's improving slowly. And that, considering all of the other FUCK UPS that the west has had when investing time and money into foreign events, is a pretty solid accomplishment.
    Was the Afghanistan mission truly a success? Progress was made, but can it really be considered an accomplishment?

    I do like the idea of not going in guns blazing and attempting to just take over. However, is it even possible to accomplish this in every community there? You must remember, most of these terrorists are indistinguishable from ordinary citizens. What I mean is, watch "Good Morning, Vietnam!" with Robin Williams or any movie about the relations in U.S.-Occupied Vietnam (South Vietnam). There's no way to distinguish between terrorist or ordinary person, and you said it yourself, fighting that form or guerrilla warfare is practically impossible. Although, we offer the peaceful solution of building relationships with the populace, that is not always a guarantee. Hence why I've referenced the movie, in the film Williams' character befriends a young vietnamese teenager and his sister and they get really close to each other. Williams later finds out that the boy was a radical militant and had been bombing many buildings in Saigon and the general area. You can build these personal relationships and even teach them a lesson or two, but that is no guarantee to change the way they think. This is war and politics, it's nothing personal.

    All I'm saying is, just because Afghanistan looks like there's progress does not necessarily mean we've made any or that any progress made can't be turned around. The Middle East, in general, is a volatile region, forever changing and erupting with issues we have not seen in the Western world for years. I have hope for it, but it is a long time before peace is a natural status there. There are probably hundreds of reasons why these groups are angry, and most have probably little to do with anything we assume. It's just maybe if instead of trying to indoctrinate them and brain wash them into Western thought, we help mold their own thinking into something peaceful. Why not ask for help from the Islamic communities that do support the U.S. and peace in the Middle East? Surely, there must be some sense that can be talked into Muslim extremists using their own teachings.
    Not all fuckboys are heartless, some are just heartbroken.

  9. #9
    Alpha Member 917893678251 is offline
    Alpha MaleRank
    Jul 2008 Join Date
    In a boxLocation
    1,547Posts

    Re: ISIS & Terrorism - World War III

    You know what I think? I don't think Isis is as mad at Israel as they are mad at America and EUrope. America and EUrope fund Israel and provide all the military supplies to them. America is the model israel follows. THey go bombing other countries just for supposed self defense and national security reasons. Israel follows that model because well I don't know why they follow that model but I think they follow it because their special interests in the region force them to.
    The real reason ISIS is growing and expanding is because of growing antiamericanism. America made post saddam Iraq into a hellhole for sunnis and made shiites take over the government and banned the sunnis from participating in politics. That vacuum created by the United States and filled by the shiites led the sunnis to feel marginalized and then, radical sunnis, tired of not having their say form isis and force their way into politics through war.

  10. #10
    Hardcore Member xAkira is offline
    MemberRank
    Feb 2013 Join Date
    DreamSKYLocation
    143Posts

    Re: ISIS & Terrorism - World War III

    “The greatest enemy is one that has nothing to lose.”


    Islam is often said to be uncultured, close-minded, and oppressing religion. This is quite the truth in the middle east. However, the question is why does Islam stayed this way? Why wont Muslims (in the middle east) have more tolerance to other religions as Christians nowadays? And why does they stay uncivilized and barbaric? Easy, because they were pushed too far, they had been robbed of everything they have and all they can think of now is revenge. Do this to any other country, any other religion or race. And they will act the same way as the terrorist are acting right now.



    //Just google middle east before and after, you'll see..

    Their history however, DOES NOT JUSTIFY their terrorism act. However, it is actually simply human nature to retaliate. Imagine you and your family got kidnapped, everyone killed but you. Definitely you'd be raged and would want to revenge.

    Take a look at Malaysia. That country is by far, the best, multi-religious country. Islam is the official and main religion, however all other religion are freely practicable. (Funny thing is, the muslims and non-muslims there are together hating their governments.) There has been no major conflicts between religions there. And they are doing their best to stop ISIS from spreading there. Indonesia is also another good example of a peaceful Islam major country.

    So my point here is, before religion, humans have the same nature. Push someone too far, and they will definitely retaliate. And once they have nothing to lose, they will have nothing to fear. How to stop terrorism? Let them have live a proper life. Let them have kids, have family. And they would have no reason to kill.

    Extra: Why does the japs only surrenders after 2 of their cities got nuked? Because they realized they have a country that they really love and doesnt want to lose them. But what if US nuked and sink the whole japan? The survivors will definitely keep on fighting to their death and wont stop till they have their revenge.
    Last edited by xAkira; 19-04-16 at 05:09 AM.

  11. #11
    Account Upgraded | Title Enabled! itaialroy is offline
    True MemberRank
    Sep 2010 Join Date
    223Posts

    Re: ISIS & Terrorism - World War III

    This is coming from a people-loving Israeli.

    Well Wreckless, no offence but you're talking bullshit.
    My English might not be as good as yours, but I just need to make a point.
    You have one crucial mistake. Israel is not causing problems in the Middle East, but has to deal with them.
    You might want to read a little bit about the history of Israel and actually the whole Middle East.
    The plan of partition that was accepted by the United Nations was greatly accepted by The Jewish Agency, which was the recognized representative of the Jewish community. The Arab League and Arab Higher Committee of Palestine rejected it, and indicated that they would reject any other plan of partition.
    Therefore, the Arab countries in the Middle East (Jordan, Egypt, Syria, Lebanon, Saudi Arabia, Iraq and the Arab Liberation Army) decided to attack Israel, kill the Israeli people and take Israel's lands - 1948 War.
    Unfortunately for them, they failed.
    Israel, which at first happily agreed to the plan of partition, won the war that the Palestines started.
    Since then, the Palestins continue to be angry about Israel, claim that Israel "took their lands", and so on.
    Nobody promised them that they will win the war. It was their desicion, and they should face the consequences.

    History brief is over, Wikipedia will provide much more info than I will. Anyways, Israel had given the Palestines several opportunities to leave peacefully with Israel - such as Gazza. Israel handed Gazza to the Palestines so they could peacefully leave together, raise their families and thrive as a country. Instead, the Palestines filled Gazza up with weapons and explosives, which they shoot from schools and kindergardens in order to kill innocent Israelis, so they can take Israel's lands for themselves.

    With that said, ask yourself the following questions. 22 Muslim countries exist in the world, and 1 small Jewish country, which they got after being brutally murdered by the Nazis. Why do you think that all these 22 countries adamantly refuse to let the Palestines live besides them? Is it because the Palestines are peaceful and loving?
    Last edited by itaialroy; 03-05-16 at 09:05 AM.

  12. #12
    Newbe likertuban is offline
    ModeratorRank
    Apr 2012 Join Date
    2,169Posts

    Re: ISIS & Terrorism - World War III

    Quote Originally Posted by Wreckless View Post
    "Oh, it's because they're Muslim and they're crazy, Muslims blow things up."
    that one hurt bro, i'm a muslim, but that doesnt mean every muslim agree to violence, our religion do teaching peace, but remember that even a religion is a perfect, people is not a perfect being, and not everyone willing to learn deep to their own religion, that is the end of religion part,

    now come to ISIS, i always asked, i always wondered, and i have some conclusion myself,
    i always asked :
    why isis do this?
    what is it trying to achieve?
    where did he got the weapon?
    where did they got money?

    as to why isis do this and what they after, i'm aren't so sure, even muslim start to hate them since they use "islam" to do horrible thing, some people even writing article about "there's no islam in ISIS".

    the way i look, isis doesn't really done their stuff for muslim, it's more for personal gain or certain mission, if they were really muslim, they should have help in palestine to begin with,
    i always thinking, that in the war, the one gain most profit is the one who sell gun,
    with peace, gun factory won't last long.


    additional info for those who blame islam/muslim :
    Spoiler:

    there's some case in my country that some student of university are missing and probably join the isis (before missing, they always talked about "jihad and war, etc"), and i can't believe that the one who missing is someone who is people called them "smart" and an obedient believer, how come i can't believe it? because in this religion so called "islam" there's always another way of jihad, such as working hard for your family, "jihad" doesn't mean "war", but this so called smart student fail to understand those simple thing


    another additional opinion about peace :
    Spoiler:

    the only way to lead to peace is "trust" but not everyone can be trusted, and not everyone want to be trusted either, hence everytime there's a different opinion, they start fight,


    for those who say islam/muslim do everything for money :
    Spoiler:

    that is not islam fault, it's the believer fault, in islam there's already teaching that when this world end, there's another world waiting, and when you die, you won't bring your money, and your money can't save you, as such, muslim who do everything for money is just simply people's fault, not religion's fault, please consider this one, i do defend on my religion, because people without knowledge always blamed "islam" for this matter.


    for those who say islam barbaric or close minded something like that :
    Spoiler:

    as for me, it's not correct way saying pushed too far and become close minded,
    i'm sure every religion have it's own teaching, and sure believe it's god's teaching,
    the same way goes to muslim, we do believe it's our God teaching, if God say what you called "white" as "black", then as believer who have faith, we should call that thing "black"
    because He is God, He knows everything, He make everything, He has the right to do everything even called white as black, that is what the meaning of faith,
    just like a couple, when you say your friend say your girlfriend cheating you, would you believe it? of course not, the same goes for faith, and we shouldn't argue about faith more than this,

    muslim doesn't teached for being close minded, we could adapt thing, but with limitation, such as LGBT legalization, that can't be happening, because in our religion has forbid them, but we could adapt to technology, because religion doesn't forbid it, our prophet saying that human more knowledgeable on human matter and religion just limit some thing so that people won't cross beyond the line, that mean we have our own option, and some people have their own choice whether to become close minded or not.
    Orang kok kayak kentut, datang2 bau abis itu ilang

  13. #13
    Member keskia is offline
    MemberRank
    Jan 2006 Join Date
    80Posts

    Re: ISIS & Terrorism - World War III

    ... many things to talk about ...

    * about ISIS/al-Qaeda - al-Nusra/Jaish-al-Islam/Harar-al-Sham/etc ... *

    - who are they ? sunni muslims

    - sunni muslims from ? most of them came from other countries than Syria & Iraq, in fact they came from almost all over the world.
    There are arabs & non-arabs.
    Amongst arabs there are a lot of Saudis/Emiraties/Qataris/Koweitis/Jordanians/Egyptians/Lybians/Tunisians/Algerians/Morrocans.
    Amongst non-arabs there are a lot of Russians from caucasus republics like Daghestan/Tchetchenia/etc, people from central asia as Kazakhstan/Ouzbekistan/Turkmenistan/etc, people from south-east asia & people from Europe mainly France/Belgium/Albania/Bosnia but also UK/Germany/Netherlands/etc. Most of non-arabs are from muslim culture, even those coming from France because most of them are from arab origin (childrens and grand-childrens of North-african migrants who begin to came in Europe after WW2) and in fact are ethnically arabs.

    - what are they doing ? they kill/rape/destroy/massacre everything, especially if you are not a sunni.

    - so they are against non-sunni ? not only ! & that's the point !
    They are also killing Kurds whenever they can. Kurds are also sunni muslims but they are not arabs.

    - so what's the purpose of all this ? ethnic-religious changement/removal against shia muslims/Kurds/remaining christians.

    - what for ? $$$. It's called geo-strategy & it's all about $$$ which is also about power/influence.

    - what cash & for who ? Iranian gaz & Qataris gaz to provide europe via pipelines/gazoducs. Assad is alaouit (kind of shia) & is a friend of Iranians who are shia. The problem for Qatar is that there is Syria between them & Europe. For the Saudis it is hard to think of an Iran able to sell gaz directly to the europeans, enabling Iran to have more $$$ & continue developping. Israël also don't like that idea.

    So, to resume, all those terrorists snackbars camping in sexforts are just proxys, and even brainwatched puppets. Just look at their weapons & equipments (liveleak - very easy to find), all the stuff they got are new ! 4 years ago u saw them like tramps, now they are full equiped with modern helmets/bullet-proof vests/rangers just as it was unboxed 1 hour earlier. Now I can hardly distinguish terrorists from a regular army soldiers of any modern nations... except for the beard. I'm not talking about made in USA TOW's/F-150/GMC/Toyota Hilux.

    * about countries involved in this conflict *

    Can write an encyclopedia about it but I won't. It's all about $$$/power, but let's say there are 2 sides :
    - Russian side with Syria/Iran/China : they really fight against terrorists, China supports diplomatocally (and economically) Russia.
    - US side with Gulf monarchy countries, European countires, Israël & Turkey. All of them give support to terrorists in cash/equipments/logistics/weapons/main stream media propaganda/information & intelligence/etc.

    * How will it end ? *

    WW3 ??? maybe.
    But don't think WW3 will necesairly be an atomic armageddon. It can be a new era where several small- to medium-scale wars/conflicts will occure for very long time in the same period and in different parts of the world. It may become a Global Permanent Chaos-like era.
    Last edited by keskia; 07-05-16 at 11:43 PM.

  14. #14
    Rogu3 Wreckless is offline
    SubscriberRank
    May 2012 Join Date
    The WastelandLocation
    1,369Posts

    Re: ISIS &amp; Terrorism - World War III

    Quote Originally Posted by itaialroy View Post
    This is coming from a people-loving Israeli.

    Well Wreckless, no offence but you're talking bullshit.
    My English might not be as good as yours, but I just need to make a point.
    You have one crucial mistake. Israel is not causing problems in the Middle East, but has to deal with them.
    You might want to read a little bit about the history of Israel and actually the whole Middle East.
    The plan of partition that was accepted by the United Nations was greatly accepted by The Jewish Agency, which was the recognized representative of the Jewish community. The Arab League and Arab Higher Committee of Palestine rejected it, and indicated that they would reject any other plan of partition.
    Therefore, the Arab countries in the Middle East (Jordan, Egypt, Syria, Lebanon, Saudi Arabia, Iraq and the Arab Liberation Army) decided to attack Israel, kill the Israeli people and take Israel's lands - 1948 War.
    Unfortunately for them, they failed.
    Israel, which at first happily agreed to the plan of partition, won the war that the Palestines started.
    Since then, the Palestins continue to be angry about Israel, claim that Israel "took their lands", and so on.
    Nobody promised them that they will win the war. It was their desicion, and they should face the consequences.

    History brief is over, Wikipedia will provide much more info than I will. Anyways, Israel had given the Palestines several opportunities to leave peacefully with Israel - such as Gazza. Israel handed Gazza to the Palestines so they could peacefully leave together, raise their families and thrive as a country. Instead, the Palestines filled Gazza up with weapons and explosives, which they shoot from schools and kindergardens in order to kill innocent Israelis, so they can take Israel's lands for themselves.

    With that said, ask yourself the following questions. 22 Muslim countries exist in the world, and 1 small Jewish country, which they got after being brutally murdered by the Nazis. Why do you think that all these 22 countries adamantly refuse to let the Palestines live besides them? Is it because the Palestines are peaceful and loving?
    I'm not saying every Israeli is bad, but the establishment itself is bad. I've studied the region greatly and beyond Wikipedia. Ask yourself, if I came up to you and offered you a piece of land, but I didn't own it, would you take it? Ethically, you should not, but you might take it anyway. Now, turn the tables. What if I took a small piece of your land, and gave it to someone else without even really consulting you. Trust me, it would piss you off even if you don't think so. And then I say, well we're gonna keep it, but let's just be friends. You would tell me to go fuck myself.

    Now, I think the argument is bigger than land. It's bigger than religion. It's bigger than us. In fact, I don't think there's any one reason for the controversy. It is just a cluster fuck of who's who and what belongs to who. This is bigger than the Middle East, to be honest. Ask yourself, why didn't the United Nations offer the Jewish Agency another place of refuge? Why not the US or Europe? Instead they placed them in the place that they wanted to dip their fingers into.

    I am against almost all foreign policies made by my country, but Israel has benefitted greatly and the Palestinians have every right to be mad. Does it constitute the bloodshed going on? No, however there is no one party to blame.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by likertuban View Post
    that one hurt bro, i'm a muslim, but that doesnt mean every muslim agree to violence, our religion do teaching peace, but remember that even a religion is a perfect, people is not a perfect being, and not everyone willing to learn deep to their own religion, that is the end of religion part,

    now come to ISIS, i always asked, i always wondered, and i have some conclusion myself,
    i always asked :
    why isis do this?
    what is it trying to achieve?
    where did he got the weapon?
    where did they got money?

    as to why isis do this and what they after, i'm aren't so sure, even muslim start to hate them since they use "islam" to do horrible thing, some people even writing article about "there's no islam in ISIS".

    the way i look, isis doesn't really done their stuff for muslim, it's more for personal gain or certain mission, if they were really muslim, they should have help in palestine to begin with,
    i always thinking, that in the war, the one gain most profit is the one who sell gun,
    with peace, gun factory won't last long.


    additional info for those who blame islam/muslim :
    Spoiler:

    there's some case in my country that some student of university are missing and probably join the isis (before missing, they always talked about "jihad and war, etc"), and i can't believe that the one who missing is someone who is people called them "smart" and an obedient believer, how come i can't believe it? because in this religion so called "islam" there's always another way of jihad, such as working hard for your family, "jihad" doesn't mean "war", but this so called smart student fail to understand those simple thing


    another additional opinion about peace :
    Spoiler:

    the only way to lead to peace is "trust" but not everyone can be trusted, and not everyone want to be trusted either, hence everytime there's a different opinion, they start fight,


    for those who say islam/muslim do everything for money :
    Spoiler:

    that is not islam fault, it's the believer fault, in islam there's already teaching that when this world end, there's another world waiting, and when you die, you won't bring your money, and your money can't save you, as such, muslim who do everything for money is just simply people's fault, not religion's fault, please consider this one, i do defend on my religion, because people without knowledge always blamed "islam" for this matter.


    for those who say islam barbaric or close minded something like that :
    Spoiler:

    as for me, it's not correct way saying pushed too far and become close minded,
    i'm sure every religion have it's own teaching, and sure believe it's god's teaching,
    the same way goes to muslim, we do believe it's our God teaching, if God say what you called "white" as "black", then as believer who have faith, we should call that thing "black"
    because He is God, He knows everything, He make everything, He has the right to do everything even called white as black, that is what the meaning of faith,
    just like a couple, when you say your friend say your girlfriend cheating you, would you believe it? of course not, the same goes for faith, and we shouldn't argue about faith more than this,

    muslim doesn't teached for being close minded, we could adapt thing, but with limitation, such as LGBT legalization, that can't be happening, because in our religion has forbid them, but we could adapt to technology, because religion doesn't forbid it, our prophet saying that human more knowledgeable on human matter and religion just limit some thing so that people won't cross beyond the line, that mean we have our own option, and some people have their own choice whether to become close minded or not.
    I wasn't saying Muslims are violent, I said we are expected to think they are violent. I've studied all 7 major religions and have come to believe it is all just one religion from different perspectives. A true Muslim believes in Christianity and a true Christian believes in Judaism.
    Not all fuckboys are heartless, some are just heartbroken.

  15. #15
    Newbe likertuban is offline
    ModeratorRank
    Apr 2012 Join Date
    2,169Posts

    Re: ISIS &amp; Terrorism - World War III

    Quote Originally Posted by Wreckless View Post
    I wasn't saying Muslims are violent, I said we are expected to think they are violent. I've studied all 7 major religions and have come to believe it is all just one religion from different perspectives. A true Muslim believes in Christianity and a true Christian believes in Judaism.
    most of spoiler aren't directed to you
    beside, the point of the discussion is about ISIS, not muslim,
    theey just radical people after all,..
    Orang kok kayak kentut, datang2 bau abis itu ilang




Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Advertisement