Closed Thread
Outside of maybe ten posts on the first two pages, i don't remember the "atrocity" being mentioned at all. The last 7 pages have been about whether Islam is inherently evil or not.
Paris Attack 11/13/2015
If the point is that religious fanatics live by the literal word of their religious texts, then I'd say "duh". Of course they do. All religious fanatics do. Other religious people have to fanny about, duck and dive to explain why something written thousands of years ago meant to say something different or means something different now. They can find passages that offer up a different interpretation because these texts are usually a minefield of contradictions.
These Muslims (the terrorists) have different values to us and they want to kill us and they think they're right, just as anyone with God on their side does. That's all you have to understand.
These Muslims (the terrorists) have different values to us and they want to kill us and they think they're right, just as anyone with God on their side does. That's all you have to understand.
__________________
5-time MoFo Award winner.
5-time MoFo Award winner.
X
Favorite Movies
X
User Lists
I don't see why it's so difficult to believe that a) a religion's followers are not responsible for one another's actions but b) that the types of people a religion produces are still, in aggregate, a reflection on it.
People are broken, so every worldview leaves itself open to some abuse or misapplication. The question is whether this particular religion/worldview is especially likely to be misapplied in a way that leads to particularly terrible things, like bombing innocent people. I'm not sure I see anyone really addressing this; just dismissing the entire examination based on a).
People are broken, so every worldview leaves itself open to some abuse or misapplication. The question is whether this particular religion/worldview is especially likely to be misapplied in a way that leads to particularly terrible things, like bombing innocent people. I'm not sure I see anyone really addressing this; just dismissing the entire examination based on a).
X
Favorite Movies
X
User Lists
Slight change of subject - I'm re-posting this just because it's some of the latest news about the event, and I wonder what others think.
As an add on, reports are coming in that these targets were provided to France by the U.S. So I have to ask - if we have confirmed stronghold coordinates, then why didn't we attack them already? Are we saving targets (and tacitly allowing ISIS to carry on) so we'll have something to hit and show as "feel good" propaganda after the next terror attack?
As an add on, reports are coming in that these targets were provided to France by the U.S. So I have to ask - if we have confirmed stronghold coordinates, then why didn't we attack them already? Are we saving targets (and tacitly allowing ISIS to carry on) so we'll have something to hit and show as "feel good" propaganda after the next terror attack?
Now - the next issue - the news is now saying that France is conducting massive airstrikes against ISIS in Syria.
My first reaction is "great!" But this begs a serious question...
The ISIS situation has been going on for nearly 2 years. Are we to believe that suddenly, after Friday night's attack in Paris, that France (part of the mysterious "60 plus country" coalition) and France alone has received brand new intelligence telling them exactly where ISIS' strongholds are in Syria?
If anyone knew where these strongholds were, why weren't they destroyed before? Why only AFTER a terror attack in Paris?
It seems a little coincidental (or maybe contrived?) that all these various locations only became known and have been confirmed by intelligence on the ground as being ISIS occupied and vacant of civilians since Friday night.
And I'm sure, just like Jordan was going to wipe out ISIS with massive airstrikes after the terrorists brutally burned a Jordanian pilot alive, this current campaign will be short lived.
What I'm suggesting is it may merely be a show of force meant to give some temporary sense of solace to the populace that's just suffered a terror attack.
And since France is bombing locations that are said to be ISIS "strongholds" that ONLY became known AFTER the Paris attack, could this mean that they might be dropping bombs on indiscriminate targets and perhaps unintentionally killing untold numbers of civilians?
Just asking.
My first reaction is "great!" But this begs a serious question...
The ISIS situation has been going on for nearly 2 years. Are we to believe that suddenly, after Friday night's attack in Paris, that France (part of the mysterious "60 plus country" coalition) and France alone has received brand new intelligence telling them exactly where ISIS' strongholds are in Syria?
If anyone knew where these strongholds were, why weren't they destroyed before? Why only AFTER a terror attack in Paris?
It seems a little coincidental (or maybe contrived?) that all these various locations only became known and have been confirmed by intelligence on the ground as being ISIS occupied and vacant of civilians since Friday night.
And I'm sure, just like Jordan was going to wipe out ISIS with massive airstrikes after the terrorists brutally burned a Jordanian pilot alive, this current campaign will be short lived.
What I'm suggesting is it may merely be a show of force meant to give some temporary sense of solace to the populace that's just suffered a terror attack.
And since France is bombing locations that are said to be ISIS "strongholds" that ONLY became known AFTER the Paris attack, could this mean that they might be dropping bombs on indiscriminate targets and perhaps unintentionally killing untold numbers of civilians?
Just asking.
Last edited by Captain Steel; 11-16-15 at 01:59 PM.
X
Favorite Movies
I don't see why it's so difficult to believe that a) a religion's followers are not responsible for one another's actions but b) that the types of people a religion produces are still, in aggregate, a reflection on it.
People are broken, so every worldview leaves itself open to some abuse or misapplication. The question is whether this particular religion/worldview is especially likely to be misapplied in a way that leads to particularly terrible things, like bombing innocent people. I'm not sure I see anyone really addressing this; just dismissing the entire examination based on a).
People are broken, so every worldview leaves itself open to some abuse or misapplication. The question is whether this particular religion/worldview is especially likely to be misapplied in a way that leads to particularly terrible things, like bombing innocent people. I'm not sure I see anyone really addressing this; just dismissing the entire examination based on a).
The whole point of this is to get to a place of actually understanding what we are dealing with - and getting an anti-Islamic site to explain the Koran then posting over and over about what it apparently teaches is not that place.
If I want to understand the bible should I talk to a biblical scholar or a satanist?
It is also incredibly unhelpful to keep pushing "truths" about Islam in an attempt to divide our society. It is beyond bizarre to me that people continually do exactly what ISIS want. If we want to find a solution surely the first step is to not do exactly what the crazy people shooting innocent people want us to do?
They want to kill us all. Right? And to do that they need more supporters - they get more supporters by having Muslims around the world left with nowhere else to go. That is exactly what happens now with young Muslims who think they have nowhere else to turn.
They want all of those refugees that are trying to escape them to be turned back so they are forced to stay in their "paradise" and they can add to their numbers.
Ever time we do exactly what ISIS want we are one step closer to WWIII and ever time threads like this or news stories become simply attacks on Islam we are helping to increase their support.
Everyone needs to watch this and get some understanding of what is going on - https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=XXUZjyZVj6s - Australian Muslim writer and tv presenter Waleed Aly.
If we want to stop iSIS then we diminish its power in every way - not do things that increase it,
As to why Islam has this problem to start with? I'm not completely sure of all of the history but it seemed to have started about the time of the Islamic Revolution and probably in the way that ISIS has grown it used incorrect versions of the Koran to convert susceptible people. Then when we go to war in the Middle East it creates an environment perfect for extremism - regardless of whether the war was "right" or not. The power of ISIS seemed to grow during the Iraq war.
There is obviously far more to it though and I certainly don't have the answers.
X
Favorite Movies
X
User Lists
I don't think knowing where these camps/HQ's/whatever is that new. It rarely is, but it's the quality of the information which has to be confirmed. After that, you've got legal requirements and public opinion to think about and, it wouldn't surprise me at all to find out that this (and things like this) are done as a response to show that they're doing something. Sadly, it's probably not the right thing or time to do it, but it's a token to make people feel better. It's human nature to want to hit back and leaders don't like to look impotent.
X
Favorite Movies
X
User Lists
Saying that anyone is dismissing the entire examination is simply not correct. What posts are you basing this on?
The rest of your reply seems to be aimed at someone other than me, or else predicated on the idea that my response can be extrapolated into a total defense of what some others in the thread have said.
X
Favorite Movies
X
User Lists
The responses that contain essentially no argument other than pointing out that many Muslims are peaceful and/or making an analogy to Christians and not expecting them to account for the misdeeds of other Christians.
The rest of your reply seems to be aimed at someone other than me, or else predicated on the idea that my response can be extrapolated into a total defense of what some others in the thread have said.
X
Favorite Movies
X
User Lists
....They [ISIS] want all of those refugees that are trying to escape them to be turned back so they are forced to stay in their "paradise" and they can add to their numbers.
Ever time we do exactly what ISIS want we are one step closer to WWIII and ever time threads like this or news stories become simply attacks on Islam we are helping to increase their support...
Ever time we do exactly what ISIS want we are one step closer to WWIII and ever time threads like this or news stories become simply attacks on Islam we are helping to increase their support...
You say we are doing what ISIS wants....how do you know that? You say ISIS wants us to turn back the Syrian refugees, how do you know that?
X
Favorite Movies
X
User Lists
Sane, no offense, but you kept asking for passages from the Koran that support things I postulated.
Since I don't have the book committed to memory, I Googled "violent passages in the Koran," then posted a link to the first site that came up.
I've read the book. I've looked at study guides. I've listened to Imam's, practicing Muslims, fundamentalist Muslims and former Muslims (some more moderate, some less, that both criticize and defend the text) and been to many sites on the net that discuss it over the last 15 years.
These varied sources plus my own look at the book have helped form my opinion - not from looking at anti-Islam websites. (I haven't saved any of the many online sources I've looked at as favorites that I could refer back to.) And as with all other scriptures I've read, I've committed none to memory and cannot quote chapter & verse. So when people request passages, I have to do a search for them just like most everyone else.
There are tons of online sources - many that back up what I've said and many that present counter opinions. Some are objective, some are subjective. In light of global Islamic Terrorism, it is probably difficult to find completely objective web sites that don't either whitewash the scriptures to some extent to defend Islam or view them in a more negative context to try to show what may be influencing such extensive levels of terrorism.
Now, what do you think of the French airstrikes in Syria?
A strategic, well-planned part of the "60 plus country" coalition to hit designated targets with minimal "collateral damage" to degrade and destroy ISIS? Or a contrived show of force in reaction to the Paris attack, the real purpose of which is just to give the populace a feeling that something is being done in response?
Since I don't have the book committed to memory, I Googled "violent passages in the Koran," then posted a link to the first site that came up.
I've read the book. I've looked at study guides. I've listened to Imam's, practicing Muslims, fundamentalist Muslims and former Muslims (some more moderate, some less, that both criticize and defend the text) and been to many sites on the net that discuss it over the last 15 years.
These varied sources plus my own look at the book have helped form my opinion - not from looking at anti-Islam websites. (I haven't saved any of the many online sources I've looked at as favorites that I could refer back to.) And as with all other scriptures I've read, I've committed none to memory and cannot quote chapter & verse. So when people request passages, I have to do a search for them just like most everyone else.
There are tons of online sources - many that back up what I've said and many that present counter opinions. Some are objective, some are subjective. In light of global Islamic Terrorism, it is probably difficult to find completely objective web sites that don't either whitewash the scriptures to some extent to defend Islam or view them in a more negative context to try to show what may be influencing such extensive levels of terrorism.
Now, what do you think of the French airstrikes in Syria?
A strategic, well-planned part of the "60 plus country" coalition to hit designated targets with minimal "collateral damage" to degrade and destroy ISIS? Or a contrived show of force in reaction to the Paris attack, the real purpose of which is just to give the populace a feeling that something is being done in response?
X
Favorite Movies
None of which dismiss the entire examination.
X
Favorite Movies
X
User Lists
Sure it does: the fact that the replies consistent only of the observation that many of the religion's adherents are peaceful suggests that they think this fact, alone, serves as a rebuttal. If they didn't, they'd say more.
X
Favorite Movies
X
User Lists
Sane I've found you to be an intelligent, thoughtful person so don't take anything I'm saying here other than spirited debate.
You say we are doing what ISIS wants....how do you know that? You say ISIS wants us to turn back the Syrian refugees, how do you know that?
You say we are doing what ISIS wants....how do you know that? You say ISIS wants us to turn back the Syrian refugees, how do you know that?
X
Favorite Movies
X
User Lists
Now, what do you think of the French airstrikes in Syria?
A strategic, well-planned part of the "60 plus country" coalition to hit designated targets with minimal "collateral damage" to degrade and destroy ISIS? Or a contrived show of force in reaction to the Paris attack, the real purpose of which is just to give the populace a feeling that something is being done in response?
The more important question is whether the ideology can be defeated and we, as in "the west" or "Christian countries", can't do that - only the Islamic world with our help can do that.
X
Favorite Movies
X
User Lists
Who in this thread hasn't said "more"?
http://www.movieforums.com/community...71#post1411971
http://www.movieforums.com/community...14#post1412014
Please note that "more" in this context is not a catch-all for "anything else." It refers to more on the specific question of whether or not the behavior of a religion's adherents reflects on it. As far as I can see, that idea has been dismissed with pretty much nothing other than pointing out that the extremists in question are in the minority.
X
Favorite Movies
X
User Lists
Now, what do you think of the French airstrikes in Syria?
A strategic, well-planned part of the "60 plus country" coalition to hit designated targets with minimal "collateral damage" to degrade and destroy ISIS? Or a contrived show of force in reaction to the Paris attack, the real purpose of which is just to give the populace a feeling that something is being done in response?
A strategic, well-planned part of the "60 plus country" coalition to hit designated targets with minimal "collateral damage" to degrade and destroy ISIS? Or a contrived show of force in reaction to the Paris attack, the real purpose of which is just to give the populace a feeling that something is being done in response?
But I agree that they can't be totally defeated by airstrikes, their military progress can only be stopped (as it is) but in order to eliminate them you need ground troops and Syria is sadly not united and is short in numbers as people are running from being drafted and recruited in military.
So I don't see ISIS going away in military sense for a while and they will be here for a long time in terrorist matters.
Here is the map:
Pink - Iraq
Light Red - Syria
Orange - Lebanese
Grey - ISIS
Dark Yellow - Iraqi Kurdistan
Yellow - Syrian Kurdistan
Light Green - Syrian Rebels
White - al-Nusra (Terrorists)
Blue - Hezbollah (Iran)
Quick note big parts of ISIS and Iraq territory are just deserts, main city's are closer to sea.
__________________
“By definition, you have to live until you die. Better to make that life as complete and enjoyable an experience as possible, in case death is shite, which I suspect it will be.”
“By definition, you have to live until you die. Better to make that life as complete and enjoyable an experience as possible, in case death is shite, which I suspect it will be.”
Last edited by -KhaN-; 11-20-15 at 02:18 PM.
X
Favorite Movies
X
User Lists
It is also incredibly unhelpful to keep pushing "truths" about Islam in an attempt to divide our society. It is beyond bizarre to me that people continually do exactly what ISIS want. If we want to find a solution surely the first step is to not do exactly what the crazy people shooting innocent people want us to do?
They want to kill us all. Right? And to do that they need more supporters - they get more supporters by having Muslims around the world left with nowhere else to go. That is exactly what happens now with young Muslims who think they have nowhere else to turn.
They want all of those refugees that are trying to escape them to be turned back so they are forced to stay in their "paradise" and they can add to their numbers.
They want to kill us all. Right? And to do that they need more supporters - they get more supporters by having Muslims around the world left with nowhere else to go. That is exactly what happens now with young Muslims who think they have nowhere else to turn.
They want all of those refugees that are trying to escape them to be turned back so they are forced to stay in their "paradise" and they can add to their numbers.
X
User Lists
I already said before that if peaceful muslims condemn extremism and let us know for sure that they won't go suicide bombing, then they would have somewhere to go. Many people on here though are saying how they don't need to explain themselves so... we're still left not knowing whether or not many muslims in western countries are extremists or not. Which means that there's a massive chance that more bombings are gonna happen.
X
Favorite Movies
X
User Lists
Here are a couple of examples:
http://www.movieforums.com/community...71#post1411971
http://www.movieforums.com/community...14#post1412014
Please note that "more" in this context is not a catch-all for "anything else." It refers to more on the specific question of whether or not the behavior of a religion's adherents reflects on it. As far as I can see, that idea has been dismissed with pretty much nothing other than pointing out that the extremists in question are in the minority.
http://www.movieforums.com/community...71#post1411971
http://www.movieforums.com/community...14#post1412014
Please note that "more" in this context is not a catch-all for "anything else." It refers to more on the specific question of whether or not the behavior of a religion's adherents reflects on it. As far as I can see, that idea has been dismissed with pretty much nothing other than pointing out that the extremists in question are in the minority.
X
Favorite Movies
X
User Lists
Sane I've found you to be an intelligent, thoughtful person so don't take anything I'm saying here other than spirited debate.
You say we are doing what ISIS wants....how do you know that? You say ISIS wants us to turn back the Syrian refugees, how do you know that?
You say we are doing what ISIS wants....how do you know that? You say ISIS wants us to turn back the Syrian refugees, how do you know that?
Everytime we bomb IS we are giving them more reason for their cause in their eyes - its the West killing Muslims. Every time we argue about giving help to refugees we give them reason to use social media to exhort susceptable people to join their cause - it's The West turning away our brothers and sisters. This is despite the fact that Syrians and Iraqis are fleeing from IS violence in their own countries.
and here's another news item for carlspackler
http://www.theguardian.com/world/201...-hall-memorial
X
Favorite Movies
X