Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

A very good point made well there by Iron_Captain.

Humans who become extremists often justify themselves through religion, or another ideology from politics.

 Kilkrazy wrote:
A very good point made well there by Iron_Captain.

Humans who become extremists often justify themselves through religion, or another ideology from politics.

I will try to find it tonight, but there was a good report (I want to say that it was by a British Intelligence agency) that found that religion, including Islam, was actually one of the biggest factors in preventing extremist violence. A thorough understanding of what your religion actually teaches, which doesn't actually include raping non-believers and cutting off their heads, goes a long way towards radicalization.

To quote myself:

The "cause" is the same as it has always been: poverty, violence, disenfranchisement, stigmatization, being 18 and knowing everything, parent issues, dissatisfaction with the current regime, watching your family die from preventable situations and blaming others for them, those are the root causes. Nothing has changed about the cause of extremism in the last 100+ years, nothing will change in the next 100+ years.

Newly found religion is just one of the expressions of that extremism. People like that already are predisposed to extreme actions and want justification for their feelings and they find it in whatever new dogma they can twist into compatibility with their desires. Right now we see a twisted view of Islam as their catalist, but we have also seen the same type of expression in the forms of other religions, forms of nationalism, forms of communism, forms of anarchism, environmentalism, and any other ideology that provided a justification for their already present desires.

Normal people become normal Muslims and do normal Muslim things. They know the teachings and they have lived that live. Then when someone comes along and tells them "hey, I just learned that we should rape the Christian girl next door, behead her dad, and then blow ourselves up in front of city hall, isn't Allah great" they quickly realize that this person is completely nuts and not doing anything Islamic at all.

But when a person grows up in a bombed out village in the desert, sees another country overthrow their "stable" government, sees a dictator imprisoning their family, or watches their family go hungry while nobody cares about them, they get pissed. Now that person decides they want to do something but they don't know how they can stick it to the man, and then someone finds them and tells them "you want to kill westerners, your feelings are okay and righteous and we will help you" they are receptive to that idea. Not because Islam is violence, but because a violent person is open to extremist violent ideals. That's why many extremists are people who are newly converted.

On that thought: http://www.thenation.com/article/what-i-discovered-from-interviewing-isis-prisoners/

 Iron_Captain wrote:

 whembly wrote:
I don't think anyone is saying extremism in Christianity or other religions doesn't exist.

Of course they do and it will ALWAYS be a constant vigilance to thwart them.

However, we're talking about the scale of these extremisms.

And what is the point in that? Christian extremism has been huge in the past, and many massacres have been committed in its name (Charlemagne's conquests, the many different Crusades, the pogroms to name a few examples). In the same way, there have been plenty of periods in history where islamic extremism was as good as non-existant. Extremism is caused by political and economical circumstances, not by something inherent in a religion/ideology/culture.

The point is that while Christian extremism was huge in the past Islamic extremism, especially the Wahabbi/Salafi sect, is a huge motivator of terrorist attacks today. What is the common connection between Al Qaeda, ISIS, ISIL, Al Shabaab, Abu Sayyaf, etc.? Wahabbism. Every religion will create a minority of extremists once it reaches a large enough size but you don't see other religious sects currently waging a war of religious terrorism anywhere near the scope of Wahabbism. You have ISIS forcibly annexing large chunks of other countries into their area of control, Salafi zealots committing acts of terrorism and mass murder on multiple continents, etc.

Salafi extremists already believe that they are the only true Muslims, more devout and adhering more closely and properly to the tenets of Islam than other Muslims. Having "moderate" Muslims condemn them doesn't do much good because Salafis already view all other Muslims as apostates. Osama Bin Laden's primary target for Al Qaeda was the Saudi royal family because he believed that the House of Saud had become too westernized and didn't adhere to Wahabbism like they should. The Salafi movement believes that the one true Muslim way is to recreate an anachronistic oppressive medieval Islamic society and they will forcibly create their caliphate through violence against apostate Muslims and infidels. There are poor people and politically disenfranchised people all over the world but they aren't setting off car bombs in marketplaces or bombing sporting events or shooting up magazine offices or crashing planes into buildings or massacring people in shopping malls and hotels. That's being done by Salafi terrorists because apostate Muslims and infidels don't support their one true version of Islam. There are a host of different religions and sects in the world that poor disenfranchised/disillusioned people can join that don't encourage them to murder other people. Salafi terrorism exists because it's an inherently violent us vs them religion.

Pretty sure Rwanda would count as a rather major piece of awfulness in which the Catholic church was arguably involved.

 Iron_Captain wrote:
In the same way, there have been plenty of periods in history where islamic extremism was as good as non-existant.

You mean the period where Genghis Khan and his sons conquered the middle east? Or the period where the Ottoman Empire conquered the middle east?

Is conquest extremism?

Jon... stahp it... the Crusades maaaan.

This needs to be a SNL or politicball skit:

ISIL: We did this because our holy texts exhort us to do it.

Libs: No... you didn't.

ISIL: Wait, what? Yes we did...

Libs: No, this has nothing to do with religion. You guys are just using religion as a front for social and geopolitical reasons.

ISIL: WHAT?! Did you even read our official statement? We give explicit Quranic justification. This is jihad, a holy crusade againsts pagans, blasphermers, and disbelievers.

Libs: No, this is definitely not a Muslim thing. You guys are not true Muslims, and you defame a great religion by saying so.

ISIL: Huh?! Who are you to tell us we're not true Muslims? Islam is literally at the core of everything we do, and we have implemented the truest most literal and honest interpretation of its founding texts. It is our very reason for being.

Libs: Nope. We created you. We installed a social and economic system, not to mention our anthromorphic global warming impact, that alienates and disenfranchise you, and that's why you did this. We're sorry.

ISIL: WHAT?! Why are you apologizing? We just slaughtered you mercilessly in the streets. We targeted unwitting civilians - disenfranchisement doesn't even enter it.

Libs: Listen, it's our fault. We don't blame you for feeling unwelcome and lashing out.

ISIL: Seriously, stop taking credit for this! We worked really hard to pull this off, and we're not going to let you take it away from us.

Libs: No, we nourished your extremism. We accept full blame.

ISIL: OMG, how many people do we have to kill around her to finally get our message across?

Have I missed anything?



Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Kilkrazy wrote:
Is conquest extremism?

O.o

Um... maybe??? Depending on the context...

 Kilkrazy wrote:
Is conquest extremism?

Maybe you could ask the Yazidi's.

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:
Pretty sure Rwanda would count as a rather major piece of awfulness in which the Catholic church was arguably involved.

The local churches and clergy certainly didn't do enough to stop it and the worst clergy condoned the violence but there's a difference between believe that God wants you to murder people and believing that God won't punish you for murdering certain people. The Catholic church didn't great the tribal/ethnic conflict between Hutus and Tutsis, the church chose to put political gain and expediency above moral standards. It's not as if the Catholic church was actively declaring that one side were true Christians and all other Christians and nonbelievers should be killed or enslaved. Churches and clergy also played a large rule in establishing a peaceful reconciliation.

Maybe you could give your opinion of why the Yazidis are extremists by being conquerors.

 Kilkrazy wrote:
Maybe you could give your opinion of why the Yazidis are extremists by being conquerors.

Are you being deliberately obtuse? Do you know who the Yazidis are, what has been done to them and by whom?

 Kilkrazy wrote:
Maybe you could give your opinion of why the Yazidis are extremists by being conquerors.

The Yazidis are a religious minority found in Iraq, Syria, Iran and Turkey. Since they aren't Muslims they have been declared "devil worshippers" by ISIS and ISIL and subjected to widespread persecution, displacement and murder since the rise of ISIS in the region. The Yazidis probably consider being murdered and displaced by ISIS' conquest of the region to be rather extreme or at least unwarranted and wrong.

 whembly wrote:

Have I missed anything?

Hmmm, I think the right leg looks a little off, you should probably stick some more straw in there.

 Pendix wrote:

 whembly wrote:

Have I missed anything?

Hmmm, I think the right leg looks a little off, you should probably stick some more straw in there.

If we're honest... that's what religion discussions usually devolves into...

Also... I'm confused about the Yazidis conquistadors... o.O

Prestor Jon wrote:

sirlynchmob wrote:

 djones520 wrote:

 Kilkrazy wrote:
Why judge people by some arguable idea of what their religion supposedly tells them to do when you can judge them by their actions?

Because unfortunately the world isn't simple like that. Religion does have a play in it. Whether or not the actual core teachings of the religion are "peaceful" or not, in many many places in the world, the religion that is being taught is NOT peaceful.

https://www.facebook.com/frontline/videos/10153169295601641/?fref=nf

Everyone needs to watch that video. EVERYONE.

Can we apply this logic to christians as well? Obviously due to the every growing number of christians killing their kids, committing mass shootings, and blowing up buildings, it must be because the religion that is being taught is NOT peaceful. Right?

When was the last incident of infanticide, mass murder or bombing that was done by Christian fundamentalists yelling Deus Vult! and proclaiming that their Christian beliefs required them to commit murder? I can't recall hearing of one and that seems like it would be the kind of thing that made the news.

They made the news, you just didn't notice.
infanticide, just last month:


Dylan roof in june and lets not forget August 5, 2012 the Wisconsin Sikh temple shooting. And just in the last couple days: http://www.sfgate.com/news/texas/article/US-Muslims-face-backlash-after-Paris-attacks-6640009.php

September 4, 2015 A Planned Parenthood clinic in Pullman, Washington was intentionally set on fire. No injuries were reported due to the time of day, but the FBI was involved because of a history of domestic terrorism against the clinic
and
http://www.wesh.com/news/suspicious-package-closes-streets-near-osceola-regional-medical-center/25302194

So remember: "Religion does have a play in it. Whether or not the actual core teachings of the religion are "peaceful" or not, in many many places in the world, the religion that is being taught is NOT peaceful."

News Flash: People will justify abhorrent acts against their fellow humans using religion, politics, or just about any dang thing they can do to prove that the victim is the "other" and they are "justified". It is called psychology.

Now, can we get back to talking about what ISIS is up to today and what we are going to do (or not do) about it?

 Easy E wrote:
News Flash: People will justify abhorrent acts against their fellow humans using religion, politics, or just about any dang thing they can do to prove that the victim is the "other" and they are "justified". It is called psychology.

Now, can we get back to talking about what ISIS is up to today and what we are going to do (or not do) about it?

WWJD:
Luke 6:27-36 - But I say unto you which hear, Love your enemies, do good to them which hate you, (Read More...)

Romans 12:14 - Bless them which persecute you: bless, and curse not.

Proverbs 24:17 - Rejoice not when thine enemy falleth, and let not thine heart be glad when he stumbleth:

Luke 23:34 - Then said Jesus, Father, forgive them; for they know not what they do. And they parted his raiment, and cast lots.

You can't defeat an ideology, and the only true way to defeat an enemy is to make him a friend.

sirlynchmob wrote:

 Easy E wrote:

You can't defeat an ideology, and the only true way to defeat an enemy is to make him a friend.

Not if they want to kill you.

That's the piece you're missing.

 whembly wrote:

sirlynchmob wrote:

 Easy E wrote:

You can't defeat an ideology, and the only true way to defeat an enemy is to make him a friend.

Not if they want to kill you.

That's the piece you're missing.

Step 1) Find out why they want to kill you. (Hint: It's not because they are Muslim and you aren't)
Step 2) Address that issue.
Step 3) Enjoy your life without being on the kill list.

If I recall correctly, though we did make Germany and Japan our friends, it took a lot of killing to get them to the point we could do so.

 d-usa wrote:

 whembly wrote:

sirlynchmob wrote:

 Easy E wrote:

You can't defeat an ideology, and the only true way to defeat an enemy is to make him a friend.

Not if they want to kill you.

That's the piece you're missing.

Step 1) Find out why they want to kill you. (Hint: It's not because they are Muslim and you aren't)
Step 2) Address that issue.
Step 3) Enjoy your life without being on the kill list.

Errm, I'm pretty sure the answer to step 1 is indeed because we aren't Muslim. Course they also kill people who aren't the "right kind" of Muslim too, but thats beside the point.

 CptJake wrote:
If I recall correctly, though we did make Germany and Japan our friends, it took a lot of killing to get them to the point we could do so.

A big part of that was also the actions of the US after the killing. The US went to Europe, they bombed the hell out of everything, they destroyed the infrastructure needed to wage war, they killed whoever needed some killing (and also a lot of civilians along the way, but that's what Total War gets you), and then they stayed and helped. After spending a ton of money destroying Germany and occupied Europe the United States stayed and they poured billions of dollars back into everything that they destroyed and helped them rebuild the infrastructure needed to become self-sufficient. They realized that being German doesn't make you a mindless Nazi hell-bend on taking over all of Europe (anymore than being a Muslim makes you a mindless terrorist hell-bend on taking over all of the world) and that the best way to prevent radicalization is to remove the factors that turn people radical in the first place.

Now we have lots of people willing to give these guys the Nazi Germany treatment, but how many of the same fiscal conservatives are also willing to commit hundreds of billions of dollars to rebuild Syria, Iraq, whatever other country we need to level to defeat them? You can bomb them all you want, and once you leave the unstable country without an infrastructure behind the cycle just repeats itself. The "Nazi Germany treatment" involved a lot more than bombing and killing, it also involved rebuilding and helping.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Grey Templar wrote:

 d-usa wrote:

 whembly wrote:

sirlynchmob wrote:

 Easy E wrote:

You can't defeat an ideology, and the only true way to defeat an enemy is to make him a friend.

Not if they want to kill you.

That's the piece you're missing.

Step 1) Find out why they want to kill you. (Hint: It's not because they are Muslim and you aren't)
Step 2) Address that issue.
Step 3) Enjoy your life without being on the kill list.

Errm, I'm pretty sure the answer to step 1 is indeed because we aren't Muslim. Course they also kill people who aren't the "right kind" of Muslim too, but thats beside the point.

Muslim leaders are telling us that Islam is not the reason.
Intelligence agencies are telling us that Islam is not the reason.
The actual people doing the killing are telling us that Islam is not the reason.

But hey, I'm glad that you got it figured out.

 whembly wrote:

sirlynchmob wrote:

 Easy E wrote:

You can't defeat an ideology, and the only true way to defeat an enemy is to make him a friend.

Not if they want to kill you.

That's the piece you're missing.

And you want to kill them, If I had a nickle for every christian that uses the word genocide, I'd be the richest man alive.

It's a cycle of violence, they kill a handfull of you, you kill tens of thousands of them. violence begets violence and you have two violent ideologies killing each other for the sake of killing. It's a shame neither one wants to break the cycle.

sirlynchmob wrote:

 whembly wrote:

sirlynchmob wrote:

 Easy E wrote:

You can't defeat an ideology, and the only true way to defeat an enemy is to make him a friend.

Not if they want to kill you.

That's the piece you're missing.

And you want to kill them, If I had a nickle for every christian that uses the word genocide, I'd be the richest man alive.

It's a cycle of violence, they kill a handfull of you, you kill tens of thousands of them. violence begets violence and you have two violent ideologies killing each other for the sake of killing. It's a shame neither one wants to break the cycle.

You break the cycle when the attacker says "no mas" or is buried 6-ft under.

 d-usa wrote:

 CptJake wrote:
If I recall correctly, though we did make Germany and Japan our friends, it took a lot of killing to get them to the point we could do so.

A big part of that was also the actions of the US after the killing. The US went to Europe, they bombed the hell out of everything, they destroyed the infrastructure needed to wage war, they killed whoever needed some killing (and also a lot of civilians along the way, but that's what Total War gets you), and then they stayed and helped. After spending a ton of money destroying Germany and occupied Europe the United States stayed and they poured billions of dollars back into everything that they destroyed and helped them rebuild the infrastructure needed to become self-sufficient. They realized that being German doesn't make you a mindless Nazi hell-bend on taking over all of Europe (anymore than being a Muslim makes you a mindless terrorist hell-bend on taking over all of the world) and that the best way to prevent radicalization is to remove the factors that turn people radical in the first place.

Now we have lots of people willing to give these guys the Nazi Germany treatment, but how many of the same fiscal conservatives are also willing to commit hundreds of billions of dollars to rebuild Syria, Iraq, whatever other country we need to level to defeat them? You can bomb them all you want, and once you leave the unstable country without an infrastructure behind the cycle just repeats itself. The "Nazi Germany treatment" involved a lot more than bombing and killing, it also involved rebuilding and helping.

I was replying to:

sirlynchmob wrote:

You can't defeat an ideology, and the only true way to defeat an enemy is to make him a friend.

And nothing you said takes away from my reply. Sirlynchmob is wrong.

And I think you need to also look at difference in Japan and Germany compared to say Afghanistan, Iraq and now Syria. Germany and Japan both had industry that could be rebuilt and relatively modern infrastructures that though we blew them up all kinds of ways, the people knew how to redo modern infrastructures and keep them going, and in neither place did we face they types of systemic corruption we see in Iraq and Afghanistan.

We spent a ton on infrastructure in Iraq and still are in Afghanistan. In the case of Afghanistan it does not replace what we destroyed in most cases but is instead new. In both we have found they either could not or would not maintain what was given them (for many different reasons, corruption being one). Also, in both places we began the rebuilding before the 'enemy' had been defeated to the level the Germans and Japanese were. In fact, the rebuilding/building went on as the fighting continued (and in many cases actually increased). There is no reason to think Syria or DaIsh would be any different.

We either decide to actually defeat them to the level it would take (and I don't think a modern western nation can/will do so) or accept this is going to continue to be a conflict with various levels of violence for the foreseeable future.

 d-usa wrote:

 CptJake wrote:
If I recall correctly, though we did make Germany and Japan our friends, it took a lot of killing to get them to the point we could do so.

A big part of that was also the actions of the US after the killing. The US went to Europe, they bombed the hell out of everything, they destroyed the infrastructure needed to wage war, they killed whoever needed some killing (and also a lot of civilians along the way, but that's what Total War gets you), and then they stayed and helped. After spending a ton of money destroying Germany and occupied Europe the United States stayed and they poured billions of dollars back into everything that they destroyed and helped them rebuild the infrastructure needed to become self-sufficient. They realized that being German doesn't make you a mindless Nazi hell-bend on taking over all of Europe (anymore than being a Muslim makes you a mindless terrorist hell-bend on taking over all of the world) and that the best way to prevent radicalization is to remove the factors that turn people radical in the first place.

Now we have lots of people willing to give these guys the Nazi Germany treatment, but how many of the same fiscal conservatives are also willing to commit hundreds of billions of dollars to rebuild Syria, Iraq, whatever other country we need to level to defeat them? You can bomb them all you want, and once you leave the unstable country without an infrastructure behind the cycle just repeats itself. The "Nazi Germany treatment" involved a lot more than bombing and killing, it also involved rebuilding and helping.

Pretty sure other folks claiming that doesn't work.

We need to give those folks more jobs... or stop flying a lear jets... or maybe give 'em more hugs.

 whembly wrote:

sirlynchmob wrote:

 whembly wrote:

sirlynchmob wrote:

 Easy E wrote:

You can't defeat an ideology, and the only true way to defeat an enemy is to make him a friend.

Not if they want to kill you.

That's the piece you're missing.

And you want to kill them, If I had a nickle for every christian that uses the word genocide, I'd be the richest man alive.

It's a cycle of violence, they kill a handfull of you, you kill tens of thousands of them. violence begets violence and you have two violent ideologies killing each other for the sake of killing. It's a shame neither one wants to break the cycle.

You break the cycle when the attacker says "no mas" or is buried 6-ft under.

Well you're one of the attackers, say "No mas" already. Be the bigger man for once, er country for once.

sirlynchmob wrote:

 whembly wrote:

sirlynchmob wrote:

 whembly wrote:

sirlynchmob wrote:

 Easy E wrote:

You can't defeat an ideology, and the only true way to defeat an enemy is to make him a friend.

Not if they want to kill you.

That's the piece you're missing.

And you want to kill them, If I had a nickle for every christian that uses the word genocide, I'd be the richest man alive.

It's a cycle of violence, they kill a handfull of you, you kill tens of thousands of them. violence begets violence and you have two violent ideologies killing each other for the sake of killing. It's a shame neither one wants to break the cycle.

You break the cycle when the attacker says "no mas" or is buried 6-ft under.

Well you're one of the attackers, say "No mas" already. Be the bigger man for once, er country for once.

I am?

How so?

I'm not the one going to a sporting event to set off bombs...

I'm not the one going into a Rock Concert and AK'ing folks from the balcony...


Nor, in the same concert slitting victims stomachs...

I realize you want to paint the West as somehow deserving of this by rationalizing these attacks...

I'm telling you... you can't rationalize this.

 whembly wrote:

sirlynchmob wrote:

 whembly wrote:

sirlynchmob wrote:

 whembly wrote:

sirlynchmob wrote:

 Easy E wrote:

You can't defeat an ideology, and the only true way to defeat an enemy is to make him a friend.

Not if they want to kill you.

That's the piece you're missing.

And you want to kill them, If I had a nickle for every christian that uses the word genocide, I'd be the richest man alive.

It's a cycle of violence, they kill a handfull of you, you kill tens of thousands of them. violence begets violence and you have two violent ideologies killing each other for the sake of killing. It's a shame neither one wants to break the cycle.

You break the cycle when the attacker says "no mas" or is buried 6-ft under.

Well you're one of the attackers, say "No mas" already. Be the bigger man for once, er country for once.

I am?

How so?

I'm not the one going to a sporting event to set off bombs...

I'm not the one going into a Rock Concert and AK'ing folks from the balcony...

Spoiler:

Nor, in the same concert slitting victims stomachs...

I realize you want to paint the West as somehow deserving of this by rationalizing these attacks...

I'm telling you... you can't rationalize this.

I never said or implied anything like that, no one deserves that. I'm saying one side or the other has to want peace, you'd think it would be the "enlightened" west, but they seem to be enjoying playing war.

It's a cycle, they attack france, america & friends drop more bombs and kill 100x the innocent civilians and wait for the next retaliatory attack.