Paris Attacks

[Willihammer]

 

I'm trying to understand your argument about this....are you saying understanding the motivation of ISIS is not worth it, or that understanding that there are other views beside these isn't worth it, or what are you saying when you say it is moot?

I'm just annoyed that religion continues to dominate what I think should be a secular discussion. It is a red herring that hard liners on all sides want us to fixate on, we know that, and yet we continue to fixate on it.

 

Are we ever going to have an adult discussion about the deteriorating US-Russian relations and the power play being staged in Syria? The possibility CIA-led espionage was the cause of the chaos in that country?

 

You only have to look at the neighborhood - Iraq, Iran, Israel, to see how sideways things can go when we install illegitimate regimes in that region. Are we going down this road yet again with Syria? That is the discussion we should be having IMO.

[twinsnorth49]

 

You linked an article "The Phone Islam of ISIS" which attempts to claim that the religion is not all dependent on the interpretation but instead that there are "real" and "phony" interpretations. Again, I don't know why we even need to go down that road since a. none of us is qualified and b. it is 90% moot.

I don't think it's 90% moot and I linked an article because I believe opinions from actual scholars on Islam have merit, that's the point of including the link.

 

I've posted many times in other forums about US and Russian relations and the power play in Syria and how it's led to much of the problem, you should have taken part in it.  I also posted much earlier in this thread that the West's arrival in Afghanistan and Iraq were major mistakes that were very much what Osama Bin Laden was hoping for, it was the main catalyst for much of the chaos we see today. And yes, we are going down that road again in Syria and ISIS is striving to maintain the chaos.

 

This thread has discussed many of the issues involved in the overall problem, because there are many issues. If you want to discuss the one you feel is most relevant, just do that. If you feel it simply boils down to one particular aspect, you're going to find some disagreement, sorry that frustrates you.

 

I don't think back handed swipes at people not having adult conversations is all that productive either. 

[TheLeviathan]

 

ISIS ia a theocracy, or at least it's what it hopes to be.

 

Theocracies work better through ignorance than education.

 

Right, they use education to promote devotion over knowledge.  In other words, just faith and ignorance.

[TheLeviathan]

 

I'm just annoyed that religion continues to dominate what I think should be a secular discussion. 

 

And that, I think, is a profoundly incorrect take.  There is nothing "secular" about ISIS.  They are religious zealots at heart, whatever mitigating factors economic or political that may have given them their opening aren't all that important to who they are and what they want to accomplish.

 

Their version of Islam and what it means to them is at the core of this.

[TheLeviathan]

 

No, I disagree with that, the point is, just because ISIS is  pulling beliefs and practices right out of the Qur'an,  does not make them "fundamentally Islamic". That's the myth, and it's the one they perpetrate because they know that the vast majority of the people they recruit are completely ignorant to scripture and what it actually means.

 

There is such a thing as right and wrong interpretation, they rely on people not knowing the difference.

 

I think that term "fundamentally Islamic" is the tripping point.  I understand how you read that, I guess I don't take it that literally.  I guess my sense was the author was saying these beliefs come straight from the religion - there is nothing made up or mis-quoted or pulled from somewhere else.  This is not a deception, it's straight from the Quran.

 

What they perpetuate is that they have the "correct" interpretation and I think with religion the idea of a "correct interpretation" is very dubious.  (Both the claim ISIS is making and some of the retorts against them make that mistake I'd say)  Even in your article they don't deny the lines or texts or prophecies exist as stated....the retort is that the larger context down-plays them.  Well, if you ignore the other context it doesn't look that way.  It's akin to someone in Christianity emphasizing the crazy Leviticus stuff and ignoring anything Jesus does or says.  It's still straight from Christianity, it's just an intentionally narrow reading.

 

And to me that isn't interpretation, it's more like what I said before: exclusion.  They are picking and choosing what they want and hoping that their emotion and passion lead others to buy into their more exclusive reading of the text.  But it is, still, Islamic.  And that's ok to acknowledge.  Most Muslims can still reply that they enjoy the greater context of their religion that teaches something different than what ISIS preaches, but again, make no mistake that what ISIS preaches is straight from Islam.

 

It's a tense line to draw in the sand, but it's important.

[Willihammer]

https://www.rt.com/news/322482-lavrov-us-isis-assad/

 

 

The Russian FM called Washington’s actions in Syria a “dangerous game,” making it hard to determine America’s true aims in Syria.

 

“Apparently, it’s a kind of a ‘honey is sweet, but the bee stings’ situation: they want IS to weaken Assad as soon as possible to make him leave somehow, but at the same time they don’t want to overly strengthen IS, which may then seize power,” he explained.

 

[Willihammer]

Israel: chaos in Syria 'allows for different' thinking regarding Golan Heights annexation

 

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/netanyahu-suggests-chaos-in-syria-allows-for-different-thinking-regarding-golan-heights-annexation-a6738041.html

[Mike Sixel]

Wait, Russia is saying bad things about Washington? I am shocked. Truly.

[Willihammer]

 

Wait, Russia is saying bad things about Washington? I am shocked. Truly.

Would you admit its possible that we too are capable of emphasizing the "terrorist" label when its convenient, and ignoring it when it suits our purposes?

 

Everyone in the damn region is using ISIS as justification for intervening.

[Willihammer]

Honestly this is a powder keg of a situation. Russian, NATO, Turkish, Iranian, Israeli, Saudi forces all convening in the name of anti-terror. ISIS and their stupid theology should be the least of our concerns right now.

[Mike Sixel]

 

Would you admit its possible that we too are capable of emphasizing the "terrorist" label when its convenient, and ignoring it when it suits our purposes?

 

Everyone in the damn region is using ISIS as justification for intervening.

 

I would admit the US government is capable of many really stupid things.......but I would probably not use Russian government spokesmen to make a point about the US government

[Mike Sixel]

 

Honestly this is a powder keg of a situation. Russian, NATO, Turkish, Iranian, Israeli, Saudi forces all convening in the name of anti-terror. ISIS and their stupid theology should be the least of our concerns right now.

 

Nostradamus predicted this all....

[twinsnorth49]

I would admit the US government is capable of many really stupid things.......but I would probably not use Russian government spokesmen to make a point about the US government

And vice versa.

[twinsnorth49]

Honestly this is a powder keg of a situation. Russian, NATO, Turkish, Iranian, Israeli, Saudi forces all convening in the name of anti-terror. ISIS and their stupid theology should be the least of our concerns right now.

But they're not convening in the name of anti terror, remember? That's the smoke screen.

 

ISIS and the pathetic amount of territory they occupy and the imminent threat they pose to the US should be the least of our worries right now. That and immediate retribution.

 

Let the Peshmergas handle IS right now and focus on coming to an agreement on what to do with Assad.

[ashbury]

Let the Peshmergas handle IS right now

Yes, because if there's one group in the region that is universally admired and respected, and is viewed as being impartial with no agenda of their own to put forward nor grudges to nurse, it's the Kurds. NATO ally Turkey in particular surely is having no heartburn about nearby Kurds flexing some military muscle.

[twinsnorth49]

Yes, because if there's one group in the region that is universally admired and respected, and is viewed as being impartial with no agenda of their own to put forward nor grudges to nurse, it's the Kurds. NATO ally Turkey in particular surely is having no heartburn about nearby Kurds flexing some military muscle.

Yeah, those uppity Kurds, what do they have to complain about anyway?

 

Might be a case of better to dance with the Devil you know however.

[Willihammer]

 

But they're not convening in the name of anti terror, remember? That's the smoke screen.

ISIS and the pathetic amount of territory they occupy and the imminent threat they pose to the US should be the least of our worries right now. That and immediate retribution.

Yes, that is exactly my point. Was that not clear? That is why I'm so disappointed that ISIS and radical Islam dominate the conversation (not just here, but nationally). I called it a red herring earlier.

 

If you look past the smokescreen even a little its clear that Syria is a giant knot of competing interests which could pit former allies against each other (the US and Israel, Iran and Russia, Turkey and the US) depending on how the dust settles.

[Craig Arko]

[Brock Beauchamp]

image.jpeg

It took me a few seconds to get the real joke. Well done.

[ashbury]

It took me a few seconds to get the real joke. Well done.

Yeah, what threw me off was that the cartoonist was sloppy and made the two symbols look the same.

[twinsnorth49]

 

Yes, that is exactly my point. Was that not clear? That is why I'm so disappointed that ISIS and radical Islam dominate the conversation (not just here, but nationally). I called it a red herring earlier.

 

If you look past the smokescreen even a little its clear that Syria is a giant knot of competing interests which could pit former allies against each other (the US and Israel, Iran and Russia, Turkey and the US) depending on how the dust settles.

I think it's about both, always have. The conversation has just dealt with various aspects of it imo.