ISIS terror attacks around the world

problem is that the people in those countries are too entrenched in their community/tribal disputes that have lasted centuries... and/or there's too much corruption in their political systems so they have no ability to call for unity.  It's a bit insane.

On one side, they don't want western intervention.  On the other side, they're too dysfunctional to operate and beg for western intervention when everything collapses.

I can guarantee you that the US would love to have nothing to worry about in the middle east. Nobody here wants the US to intervene but they're forced to despite it being a very poor political decision.

It's interesting to me that people acclaimed the US leaving Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, etc so that the people there could figure it out themselves... but now that it's become an absolute disaster, they want the US to intervene. Damned if we do and damned if we don't.

Adit wrote:Hail USA for creating Al Qaeda
Hail USA for turning Iraq into the state
Hail USA for making civil war worse in Syria

USA

Watchful protector, silent guardian.. Dark knight

The problem is, the US has been playing the world's policeman for a while now. They decide who to 'help', and then invade them, kill many and leave them in ruins and total chaos and anarchy. As a result, those people will inevitably hate them and ISIS wouldn't struggle that much to convince them to join their organization.

The US is the fuel that created and keeps ISIS running. And the funny part is, they don't even realize it.

That's BS... guess what would have happened in WW2 without US intervention... or WW1...  heck, even more recently, Kosovo.

The issue is that the UN and all the other so-called alliances are incapable of acting.  So atrocities and international law breaks would go unimpeded unless the US actually stands up.

The crazy thing is that the US people fund most of this while the rest of the world just sit and act as the peanut gallery.  Even the UN needs to be funded 80% by the US for it to survive although the US has only 1 vote and can be vetoed by Russia, China, etc.

Only reason you don't have pervasive anarchy is that the US hasn't allowed it to happen.

If Japan hadn't bombed Pearl Harbor, everyone would probably be speaking German in Europe right now (no offense meant to the current German people and Germany; wonderful country honestly. I'm talking about Nazi rule obviously.) We were perfectly happy to remain isolated until that happened.

Not saying we're perfect... but we do have a moral and ethical compass most times. We could be far far more ruthless than we actually are.

sportsczy wrote:Only reason you don't have pervasive anarchy is that the US hasn't allowed it to happen.

Anarchy? I severly doubt that, because of

sportsczy wrote:If Japan hadn't bombed Pearl Harbor, everyone would probably be speaking German in Europe right now (no offense meant to the current German people and Germany; wonderful country honestly.  I'm talking about Nazi rule obviously.)  We were perfectly happy to remain isolated until that happened.

There would more likely be a brutal dictatorship with insane Nazi cronies at the helm.

Although a very interesting question would be how this would have affected the Middle East as Israel would never have been created, taking out one of the destabilizing factors in the ME.

(Although it is likely that the Nazis might have turned to wiping out Muslims after getting rid of the Jews, just because they would have needed one big external enemy to be able to convince the people inside their regime to rally and not find the space to start thinking).

I didn't mean anarchy in the global context of world order subsequent to Nazi Germany going unchecked... i meant post WW2 with US involvement but no further major involvement in anything else (back to our policy of isolationism).  The USSR would have likely taken over (brutal dictatorship) and/or the Middle East would have become anarchy like most of current Africa where the US remains largely on the sidelines.

Just depends if you prefer the alternative to what the US is looking to offer...

let's just get down to what the real issue is here, it's Religion.

This made up bs from thousands of years ago that millions of people still believe in and follow is the cause of all major conflicts in the world.

there is no heaven there is no hell, there is no afterlife, there is no god.

all just a bunch of crap made up to try to explain the meaning of life thousands of years ago before science had advanced and evolution was discovered, and to set rules for people to live by to remain civil before modern governments were formed so people feared of punishment by a "higher power".

Religion is just a old, shit outdated form of Government.

Religion is a plague and a cancerous ideology now to the world.

thats where you're wrong though. just because we have done good things does not make the USA free from critics. the usa also went into vietnam, iraq, took half of mexico in an unjust war, annexed the phillipines.. etc.

so if im getting you right, we should ignore the bad and praise the good..

No...  i'm saying that the US does more good than bad by a longshot although it does plenty of bad.  The alternative which would be the US doing nothing would be far worse. And i have Iranian blood, a country where US involvement has been detrimental. So it's not like i'm coming from a place where my family has benefited from US foreign policy. In fact, we lost everything.

sportsczy wrote:That's BS... guess what would have happened in WW2 without US intervention... or WW1...  heck, even more recently, Kosovo.

The issue is that the UN and all the other so-called alliances are incapable of acting.  So atrocities and international law breaks would go unimpeded unless the US actually stands up.

The crazy thing is that the US people fund most of this while the rest of the world just sit and act as the peanut gallery.  Even the UN needs to be funded 80% by the US for it to survive although the US has only 1 vote and can be vetoed by Russia, China, etc.

Only reason you don't have pervasive anarchy is that the US hasn't allowed it to happen.

If Japan hadn't bombed Pearl Harbor, everyone would probably be speaking German in Europe right now (no offense meant to the current German people and Germany; wonderful country honestly. I'm talking about Nazi rule obviously.) We were perfectly happy to remain isolated until that happened.

Not saying we're perfect... but we do have a moral and ethical compass most times. We could be far far more ruthless than we actually are.

Question: What moral compass led to the US to invade Iraq on false pretenses (which directly led to the state Iraq is in today)? That invasion led to the death of hundreds of thousands of innocent people and destroyed million of lives. If the US had any moral compass, George Bush would be convicted of war crimes and would be in a jail cell.

What moral compass led them to arm and support rebel groups in Syria (know today as ISIS)?

What moral compass leads the US to support Saudi Arabia even today, when they are well know for funding extremists all over the world and for some of the most blatant human rights abuse in modern history (stoning rape victims, chopping of heads etc). Yet the US continues to provide them with weapons and support ....

If by moral compass, you mean $$$, then sure, what you said makes sense.

B-Mac wrote:let's just get down to what the real issue is here, it's Religion.

This made up bs from thousands of years ago that millions of people still believe in and follow is the cause of all major conflicts in the world.

So you really think that the root cause of all of this is religion? I'm not a religious person, but that is just naive.

People fight for money, and power. In this case, they use religion to justify their actions.

Was WW1 caused by religion? Or WW2? Or any of the other thousands of non-religious wars in human history?

What was common in all those wars, and is true today and will be tomorrow is the (some) people are greedy and when placed in a position of power, are willing to trample others to get what they want.

If you think abolishing religion from the world will rid it of all conflict .... I don't know what to say to that.

I don't think anyone is trying to compare ISIS's moral compass with the that of the US. Apples and Oranges obviously. The US are not fundamentally evil, they just act in their own security and financial interests which all too often seems to come with a great deal of "collateral damage".

The US government is also a slightly more complex machine than ISIS - money can talk and sways policy on some issues - but it would be disingenuous to make a blanket statement that the US government is evil. Might get away with saying it about the republicans.

ISIS have a pretty clear objective and that objective is pure evil, there are no morally sound factions within ISIS that are trying to do good (objectively).. teaching more 10 year old's that the west is the devil and they have a divine obligation to kill does not count.

I just wanted to make the point that given the evidence that it is so much harder for intelligence agencies to detect homegrown terrorists I think its time we readdress what constitutes hate speech... unfortunately our freedom of speech in the west has been to our detriment in this issue by allowing grass-roots Muslim groups to operate in western communities.

Muslim kids are being taught from a young age that their "people" have been oppressed for years by the west and that there were "better" times for Muslims. they are taught that they are not welcome in the west, they are shown propaganda videos of Mujahideen on horseback and show past victories of the Arabs against the west with some sort of pride.

I would add that the wests involvement in the middle-east and also societal treatment of middle-eastern migrants has certainly hasn't made it hard to sell this idea.

These organisations are run by under-educated members and who are likely, unbeknownst to most of them, funded by wider Salafist organisations that operate in the middle-east. I'm pretty convinced that there was and still is a concerted effort to indoctrinate this young generation of Muslims and I saw it going on 10 years ago.

Hizb-Ut-Tahrir is one such organisation who do this - an organisation who are afforded the freedom to run grass-roots programs for kids in muslim communities in the west - an organisation who, although are not a terrorist group per se, appear to share common aspirations as such groups as ISIS in re-establishing the caliphate.

I am against the idea of draconian policy and consider myself pretty left of centre politically but to be honest we are just at a critical point now where the Muslim community have not done enough to silence these idiots so I think government need to tinker with what constitutes "hate speech".

It's such a fine balance between policing what goes on in the communities and creating an even greater sense of "us" and "them"... One does feel like we may be too far gone in dealing with this schism.

Agreed. Such organization should be shut down. But the more important thing to do is too shut down their sources of funding. ISIS and its ilk can have all the evil intentions in the world. But it's not their evil intentions that kill people. Its the tanks and the guns and the ammo.

And as you pointed out, the source of this funding is Salafist organizations in the middle east. One such organization (I would say the biggest one) is the Saudi government. Which continues to receive support from the west.

Without someone to counteract Iran, Hezbollah and Iran would have taken over Iraq... the US felt there was no alternative to support bad regimes with the idea that they would balance each other out and keep them occupied rather than trying to expand. It worked for a while with Iran and Iraq. But it was shortsighted obviously.

Remember that the terrorist culture and roots in the middle east started with Iran supported groups. The Sunnis just copied them. Iran was the example of religious extremists taking over a country successfully. The US didn't want that to repeat itself...

So yeah, the intent was fine. The tactics were wrong. But i would theorize that there would have been a massive war if Iran would been left to its own devices because a conflict with Israel would have occurred and the whole world would have been sucked in.

All the alternatives were bad. We're just experiencing one of the bad alternatives.

Il Diavolo wrote:

B-Mac wrote:let's just get down to what the real issue is here, it's Religion.

This made up bs from thousands of years ago that millions of people still believe in and follow is the cause of all major conflicts in the world.

So you really think that the root cause of all of this is religion? I'm not a religious person, but that is just naive.

People fight for money, and power. In this case, they use religion to justify their actions.

Was WW1 caused by religion? Or WW2? Or any of the other thousands of non-religious wars in human history?

What was common in all those wars, and is true today and will be tomorrow is the (some) people are greedy and when placed in a position of power, are willing to trample others to get what they want.

If you think abolishing religion from the world will rid it of all conflict .... I don't know what to say to that.

WW2 hitler was killing people for being Jews........ not every conflict is, but a vast majority of them are.

still doesn't change the fact religion is still just a bunch of made up crap that the world should just rid themselves of because it really is just a big lie and a fairy tale cult

Not only France, but Beirut, too, was attacked by those insane slaughterers. I just read this and thought it ought to be mentioned:

"Adel Termos: Hero father ‘saved hundreds of lives’ by tackling second suicide bomber in Beirut
The Lebanese father lost his life when he threw himself at the suicide bomber, causing the bomber to detonate early"

Read full story: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/adel-termos-hero-father-saved-hundreds-of-lives-by-tackling-second-suicide-bomber-in-beirut-a6735776.html

This video lol one girl was at the Boston bombing and Paris bombing must be bad luck

The terrorist and their magic passport, despite blowing up, but yet it survived

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OXavIbOQnZw

If people opened their eyes then they'd see the truth instead believing this puppet media show.

Some interesting comments:

"i was watching the trailer for condemned when i noticed the empire state building lit up in the french colors. the trailer was released something like 2 months ago. just thinking weather the film was meant to be set around this time, i dont know. there could be a perfectly good reason for it but check it out for yourself, it's exactly 1 minute into the trailer. (edit) the movie was released on the 13 of november, the day of the attack."

"Charlie Hebdo...9/11...now this....and every time they find the passports of these people...that's just no coincidence"

"The question is who are these people working for?  You not find it a teeny weeny bit strange that just one highlight is these supposed terrorists have left passports at every event recently, namely 911, 7/7, boston, charlie hebdo and now this.  I find it unbeleivable that so many biodrones just accept as the truth what the media and their governments tell them with question, without question.  So sad and gullible and naive.  So many biodrones."

Without someone to counteract Iran, Hezbollah and Iran would have taken over Iraq... the US felt there was no alternative to support bad regimes with the idea that they would balance each other out and keep them occupied rather than trying to expand. It worked for a while with Iran and Iraq. But it was shortsighted obviously.

It's such logic and mentality that ISIS, Al-Qaeda, Taliban etc. found so helpful for their growth.

You do realize that was the plan, right? Iraq was wedged between Syria and Iran... and the idea was to take over Iraq by attacking on two fronts after they had destabilized Lebanon. For a lot of reasons, that was an absolute impossibility for the US and the West. Hence the West made deals with the devil like Saudi Arabia, Iraq, etc.

Once the Iranian revolution occurred and a religious extremist group took over the country AND vowed to get rid of Israel AND burned the US flag as a sign of defiance AND sponsored terrorist groups... well you get my drift. That destabilized the region and set into motion a lot of shortsighted policies.

Jimmy Carter destabilized the entire region by allowing Iran to go down the path of extremism. For centuries, Iran was the by far the most modern, strong and stabilizing force in the region. Once Iran stopped playing those roles, the region fell into mayhem.

You would have thought the lesson taught by Iran's hijacked revolution (it was a student revolution; but once the Shah left, the clergy took over and killed all the students lol) would have stuck. But no... the same mistakes were repeated in Iraq, Syria, etc.

sportsczy wrote:Without someone to counteract Iran, Hezbollah and Iran would have taken over Iraq.

The only person I heard saying this phrase was Bill O'Reilly and even him stopped saying it given how ridiculous and self-righteous it is.

The US don't give a rat's ass about people. They just act for their own political and financial gains. If you believe otherwise, you are sadly mistaken.

Iraq before the US invasion was a very powerful country, like Iran today. Now? Look at it, it's in ruins and total chaos. That's on the US. Let's stop sugarcoating and call it what it is.

They are friends with Saudi Arabia even though the latter is doing despicable things. Once the interest is gone, some guy in a suit will come out on FOX and tell the world how despicable SA is and that we should do something about it. But for now? They keep their mouths shut .

Swanhends wrote:

Unique wrote:tbh mate if the world was not so worried about offending muslims the problem would be much easyer to fix. we have people with a history of being extreamists and without them blowing shit up we let them run free. the police and FBI profile criminals because it works. they look at the crime. see a patten .look at the motive then then look at the people that are most likely to commit that crime. its ok saying this and that is to blame and go into a big political debate about it but the bottom line is we know who the enemy is. we know who they are and where to find them. now all we need is the balls to stop them.

this is quite the dumpster fire of a post

first: profiling is racist and ineffective, not really much else to say there

second: "we know who the enemy is. we know who they are and where to find them" you planning on providing some names and addresses breh? bunch of world governments working around the clock to figure out how this happened but apparently all they needed to do was ask GL

third: "now all we need is the balls to stop them" don't speak in code, say what you mean. Sounds to me like when you write "the balls" what you really mean is "to ignore concepts of human/civil rights, treat muslims as subhuman, & allow governments to kill as many as they deem necessary for an indefinite period of time"

first off profiling does work if you can use it without people crying racist. the people that are doing these things are young muslim men mostly under 40yo. not a bunch of over 50yo jewish women. 2nd we do know where to find them and who they are. the profile gives you the who they are. most of these crack pots are brain washed in mosques so we know where to find them. and on the have the balls to stop them. crazy people like abu Hamza and Anjem choudary stan on the streets and openly tell muslims to kill people and blow people up. some of the people from this attack and in other attacks before were known to the police for being extreamists yet nothing was done. so like I said we know who they are. we know where to find them now instead of worring about upsetting the billions of good muslims who should be doing more to help anyway we hold back and let these people do what they like.

I do agree that civilian 'normal' Muslims
should take an initiative, should make more use of social media, the same platform through which thousands are getting radicalized by ISIS at an alarming rate.
I just don't think we're seeing enough of it rather they are more bothered with doing a root cause analysis and blaming the west.Fix the present.This has gone beyond political motives.
This religious cult has grown too big.Adopt ways to deradicalize the vulnerable youth.It's a contagious disease that's making the ISIS stronger and a cure needs to be found as soon as possible.We need to tackle this right from the grassroots.

S wrote:I do agree that civilian 'normal' Muslims
should take an initiative, should make more use of social media, the same platform through which thousands are getting radicalized by ISIS at an alarming rate.
I just don't think we're seeing enough of it rather they are more bothered with doing a root cause analysis and blaming the west.Fix the present.This has gone beyond political motives.
This religious cult has grown too big.Adopt ways to deradicalize the vulnerable youth.It's a contagious disease that's making the ISIS stronger and a cure needs to be found as soon as possible.We need to tackle this right from the grassroots.

IMO the religious leaders of the "real muslims" [tm] should try to use their power to describe in colourful pictures how these criminals that abuse the Islam will get punished by Allah, burn in some hell etc.

If the Daesh use the religion to brainwash weak persons, then maybe trying to spread the word how angry Allah would be at those who commit such atrocities and that they will not get rewarded, but horribly punished in the afterlife, might make it a bit more difficult for the criminals to recruit their sheep with vain promises.

What religious leaders? There is no pope in islam, only Ulama (scholars) who interpret.

You think the Khateebs (people who lead friday prayer semons) don't condemn this shit? Don't discourage it?

You'r making it seem as if we are okay with what happened.

Using social media to coerce young people's minds

There is a proper forum, every Friday prayer, it is when everyone attends young people, old, middle aged whatever. That is where you see Muslims making strides to abolish radical behaviours and such. Obviously, i can't speak for every Mosque, but of the ones i've seen here, they're doing their parts.

smh, making it seem as if we're the ones not doing enough.

on the other hand if the Europe is not born now, it is not born anymore.
now more than ever , you can feel that sense of community that the EEC / EU  wanted to pursue but European mass has never felt really.
now the European ppl really feels united as a community , here  we are talking about Europe more than Italy,we feel the need of an union against a common enemy, you listen so many times European identity never felt before..
Italians to talk about the " French brothers " , who would have never thought (personally always appreciated the France as country tbf ) . Then maybe it will vanish  .. but the European ppl ' ve   never been so close as now.
I'm just saying , The so-called Euro-skepticism instead of benefit  it could suffer the  opposite effect now .
When there is an imminent danger, you feel a need to compact in more forces, not of disintegration.
then at a pratical plan , the situation is more complex than this of course,  imo atm  the EU is just the umbrella of Nato .

yes Islam is a horizontal  religion ,   and not a hierarchical religion as Christianity and this   is penalizing now  .
infact one of basic Islam elements is the he institutionalization of the umma .
Trivializing, if there was " an Islamic Pope " to threaten
"excommunications" towards who embraces the Isis, etc the situation would be  mostly manageable

because  indeed there were positions of Islam   against Isis, I posted this Gif

Spoiler:

but the lack of and  unifying  authority is very perceptible tbf and infact who reminds about these words or how many ppl ignores it ... .

You can't change a religion structure after centuries, but yes, it is a problem.