Welcome to the WWII Forums! Log in or Sign up to interact with the community.

Incident At UK Parliament

Discussion in 'The Stump' started by GRW, Mar 22, 2017.

  1. m kenny

    m kenny Member

    Joined:
    May 26, 2003
    Messages:
    1,645
    Likes Received:
    225
    I am in no way obligated to explain away claims I never made. My point is simply Christianity was made the official religion of Rome.
     
  2. lwd

    lwd Ace

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2007
    Messages:
    12,312
    Likes Received:
    1,238
    Location:
    Michigan
    Then you made a rather misleading comparison when you stated:
    There's a considerable difference between Conquest intended to spread a religion and a government changing the official religion. Both may be reprehensible especially if the change is forced onto the population but they are distinctly different processes.

    Looking back a bit I found this rather questionable statement which may be the insecure foundation upon which your opinions are based.
    I doubt there is a religion that is 100% wrong or right. Nor do all religions involve "sky fairies" although a fair number do. People who are convinced they have a lock on the ultimate truth are extremist and a big part of the problem. Being convinced you are 100% right and the other 100% wrong is a pretty clear indication of an extremist. Your position puts you awfully close to that by the way.
     
    GRW likes this.
  3. A-58

    A-58 Cool Dude

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2008
    Messages:
    8,844
    Likes Received:
    1,682
    Location:
    Baton Rouge, Louisiana
    Maybe I should rephrase my statement by changing it to "the Muslims have been at it since not long after they came into being". Happy now?
     
  4. O.M.A.

    O.M.A. Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2013
    Messages:
    473
    Likes Received:
    80
    Location:
    Illinois
  5. TiredOldSoldier

    TiredOldSoldier Ace

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2008
    Messages:
    3,223
    Likes Received:
    452
    From my perspective the London attacker is in the same bracket as those that assault abortionist clinics, or any other unstable person going of on a killing spree. Organized and state sponsored terrorism are different beasts, though they share the horrible results, and require different responses.

    We are really facing 3 kinds of threats

    - Individuals going insane are not a huge treat to society, and being crazy hopefully most will self destruct without doing much damage to others, I have doubts that weapon control can help here as there is plenty of "dual use" stuff that is pretty deadly (not just motor vehicles). Not sure toning down the "hate speech" the rabble rousers are using will help with this sort of individuals, but sor sure it wouldn't hurt.

    - True "extremists" like the Italian red brigades, German RAF, the IRA or isolated Islamist groups that are basically the highly violent "tip of the iceberg" of a much larger group that shares some of their beliefs are a different animal. There are basically two ways of defeating them, either you isolate them from the larger group so that they can be destroyed or you go for "ethnic cleansing". The first option requires some high charisma leaders from the "silent majority"of the group (or even from the more extremist fringe if you can convince one) to cooperate in detaching the bulk of the group from the "extremists" and it also requires a lot of restraint,. Unfortunately restraint comes at a high political cost as many voters will mistake moderation for weakness. If you go for the second option you better hope the "ethnically cleansed" never acquire WMDs.

    - The third group is externally sponsored terrorism, that's mostly a war of intelligence, there is close to no political cost for cracking down on a foreign led terrorist operation, as long as you can clearly show it is such, the problem is detecting them. Diplomacy and even "gunboat diplomacy", like in the post Lockerbie raids against Libia, is also pretty useful here, but for diplomacy to happen there most be some sort of recognition, if your declared aim is the complete destruction of the other side there can be no diplomacy so you have basically locked yourself into a life or death struggle.
     
  6. lwd

    lwd Ace

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2007
    Messages:
    12,312
    Likes Received:
    1,238
    Location:
    Michigan
    I agree that restraint is required but I'm not sure the "high charisma leaders" are. Indeed some of the more extreme terrorist groups have proven themselves very capable of detaching themselves from the larger group. Sometimes all you need to do is give them the opportunity to do so.

    Stepping back to look at the bigger picture the three "different beasts" are in many cases not all that distinct. Individuals are often influenced by the extremist groups and external sponsors often sponsor the extremist groups as well. Furthermore the extremist groups sometimes (some would say often) morph into groups that are more accurately described as criminal organizations that may (usually) continue to pay lip service to what ever cause they originally espoused but now concentrate of gaining wealth. In any case the threat of any and all is often blown out of proportion when one looks at the even bigger picture.
     
  7. TiredOldSoldier

    TiredOldSoldier Ace

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2008
    Messages:
    3,223
    Likes Received:
    452
    The categories are indeed not always clear cut, but I stand by them as a useful tool of analysis, and even if it grates against my equalitarian instincts the "high charisma leaders" are nearly always necessary to convince the uncertain to accept an imperfect world rather than radicalize. That's the main reason I consider the assassination by drone tactics as criminally stupid,the inevitable "targeting errors" justify the "criminal", and you are actually killing the people that are essential to a long term solution in order to get a short term advantage of disorganizing the enemy, and that's idiocy, there is pretty close to no chance you will be able to disorganize them enough that they will dissolve without boots on the ground.

    I'm quite familiar with the degeneration of "bandits", or "freedom fighters" to criminal organisations, the archetype for that in the western world is probably the Sicilian Mafia, but those organisations operate in a power void where the central state is weak, and actually attempt to control a territory rather than simply deny it to the central government. To achieve anything against that you need lots of "boots on the ground" that have the guts to stay away from firepower intensive tactics but still do aggressive patrolling so we are closer to "counter insurgency" than to "counter terrorism" from a military standpoint. .
    As I mentioned the Mafia, and this is a WW2 forum, the allied support of that organisation in 1943-1944 allowed it to re-establish itself after Mussolini had cracked down on it, so in that case we have an already heavily degenerated "insurgent" group getting foreign aid.

    BTW I agree with you that terrorism is overblown as a threat when you look at what damage it' did up to now, a fraction of the money spent on the various wars on terror in safer transportation instead would probably have saved a lot more lives, less publicity would also reduce the "copycats" threat and "terrorism" is way too often used as an excuse to increase government control and meddling, but then I think of the possibility of a mad dog with a WMD and I get doubts.
     
  8. Sheldrake

    Sheldrake Member

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2013
    Messages:
    1,751
    Likes Received:
    542
    Location:
    London UK
    The current issue of History Today has an article about the Islamic conversion of the Sassanid Persian Empire. Arab Conquests and Sasanian Iran | History Today The Persian and Byzantine empires had been "at it" for some time before Islam appeared. Many of the locals did not see much difference between Islam of their arab conquerors and the extant Jewish and christian sects that were the faiths of much of the middle east. It also drw on Abraham Issac and even Jesus.
     
  9. OpanaPointer

    OpanaPointer I Point at Opana Staff Member Patron   WW2|ORG Editor

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2008
    Messages:
    15,281
    Likes Received:
    4,716
    And now, Stockholm:

    The driver of a small truck steered his vehicle toward a crowd of people and then rammed it into a department store in the heart of Stockholm on Friday afternoon, killing at least two people, the police and local news outlets reported, in what was believed to be a terrorist attack.

    One person was being questioned after the attack, The Associated Press reported, citing the Swedish prime minister, Stefan Lofven. The assault comes after several other episodes in Europe in the past year in which a vehicle was used as a weapon.

    “Sweden’s been attacked,” Mr. Lofven said. “Everything points to an act of terror.”

    Train service in and out of the city was halted, the police were urging people to stay at home and avoid the city center after blocking off the affected area, and the Swedish intelligence agency said “a large number” of people had been wounded.

    https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/07/world/europe/stockholm-attack.html
     
  10. A-58

    A-58 Cool Dude

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2008
    Messages:
    8,844
    Likes Received:
    1,682
    Location:
    Baton Rouge, Louisiana

    That's wonderful, but the Persians and the Byzantines are gone now. Put out of business by who? The Muslim that's who. Yes I do understand that different peoples, countries, civilizations, religions, areas, regions, creeds, colors, ideologies, social groups, colors and what else have been in conflict with each other for eons, and will be until the end of time. But the point I am making, and the point that you people are covering up or avoiding is that the Muslims are always in constant conflict and will always be at it with everyone that they come in contact that is different in any minute way with them since the day after they started operating.
     
  11. Sheldrake

    Sheldrake Member

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2013
    Messages:
    1,751
    Likes Received:
    542
    Location:
    London UK
    Sorry, but it is simply untrue - and not a little inflammatory to claim that Muslims are always in conflict with everyone that they come in contact that is different in any minute way with them" any more than any other religion, nation tribe etc.

    I don't know about your experiences, but at a personal level my experience with individual Muslims, as co-workers and neighbours has not been characterized by constant conflict. Historically, Muslims Christians and Jews have co-existed in many parts of the world for many centuries. Think for a minute about ethnic cleansing in post WW1 Turkey and 1990s Balkans. Had there been constant religious conflict, there would have been no mixed societies to be ethnically cleansed.

    Muslim states have not been in a continuous state of war with their Christian or Hindu neighbors. Here is a list of European Wars List of conflicts in Europe - Wikipedia These are the Christian states bordering the Islamic world. Which conflicts have been omitted?

    One of the explanations for the initial success of Islam is that the continuous conflict between the Byzantines and Persians had weakened both states and Islam offered a better alternative. - Read the History Today article I linked.

    Your post leaves me feeling uncomfortable because it would look very bad if you replaced the words "Muslims" with "Jews."
     
  12. A-58

    A-58 Cool Dude

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2008
    Messages:
    8,844
    Likes Received:
    1,682
    Location:
    Baton Rouge, Louisiana
    As long as you're happy, that's all that counts my friend. Invite all of them to live in merry ole England with you, have them bring their camels and sharia too. Then you'll see, and then it'll be too late.
     
    efestos likes this.
  13. efestos

    efestos Member

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2010
    Messages:
    495
    Likes Received:
    26
    Our shores (I live in the MED) had been under constant attack of the Muslims pirates since the "reconquista" in 1229 AD to the XIX century , The first military action of the USA ... was the bombardement of TRIPOLI... in 1801 ... You tried the diplomacy and answer was some thing like "The bodies and te goods of the infidels are the booty of the beliervers.." And that's all.

    There are a lot of good people that's muslim probably the vast majority of them.... but the fact is the sharia is incompatible with western civilization.

    NOW in the USA : (link) I can't believe it, but it seems to be truth:
    Detroit Doctor Charged With Performing Female Genital Mutilation Surgery on Girls
     
    Last edited: Apr 16, 2017
  14. toki2

    toki2 Active Member

    Joined:
    May 26, 2013
    Messages:
    620
    Likes Received:
    164
    FGM is more an ethnic practice than a religious one and is undertaken by some Christians, Jews and Muslims. It is an ancient form of circumcision used by a patriarchal society to suppress female sexual desire.
     
  15. Takao

    Takao Ace

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2010
    Messages:
    9,743
    Likes Received:
    2,369
    Location:
    Reading, PA
    Ummm...
    [​IMG]
    You were saying something about constant conflict...
     
  16. belasar

    belasar Court Jester

    Joined:
    May 9, 2010
    Messages:
    8,515
    Likes Received:
    1,176
    I suspect the UK has us beat on that stat.
     
    A-58 likes this.
  17. Takao

    Takao Ace

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2010
    Messages:
    9,743
    Likes Received:
    2,369
    Location:
    Reading, PA
    Fairly certain you would be correct on that. Also in quantity too, I seem to remember it being said that Britain fought some 230 wars during Queen Victoria's 64 year reign.
     
  18. Otto

    Otto Spambot Nemesis Staff Member WW2|ORG Editor

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2000
    Messages:
    9,624
    Likes Received:
    1,723
    Location:
    DFW, Texas
    Not jumping in on either side here, but I've often heard the "USA years at war" to counter claims of Islamist aggression. Seems relevant to mention that this comparison pits Islam vs the USA.

    Is the USA a religion then? I'm not sure we are comparing like with like here.
     
  19. Takao

    Takao Ace

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2010
    Messages:
    9,743
    Likes Received:
    2,369
    Location:
    Reading, PA
    There are over 3 million Muslims living in the US right now...Where is the war? Where are the casualties? Where is the Sharia Law? Where is the incompatibility?
    Obviously, this is not completely about religion...For, if it was, we in the USA, with our 3 million + Muslims, should be knee deep in blood here. Yet, we are not.

    Further, a great many, especially those on the right, say that we are a Christian nation, despite what it says in the Constitution.
     
  20. Otto

    Otto Spambot Nemesis Staff Member WW2|ORG Editor

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2000
    Messages:
    9,624
    Likes Received:
    1,723
    Location:
    DFW, Texas
    I never made any of those claims.

    I'm just saying comparing US aggression as a response to so called Islamic aggression does NOT seem comparable.

    **Edit, I forgot an all important "not" in that previous statement.
     
    Last edited: Apr 16, 2017

Share This Page