The Islam Thread

[The Batlord]

Originally Posted by Aux-In

@ The_Batlord.

Tough words from someone who litters this board with anti-Christian rants.

The definition of ad hominem.

I'm not interested in false rhetoric and hyperboly. The shooter was born in the U.S. and from what I've read he wasn't particularly religious. This is a blend of good old-fashioned hate mixed with pseudo-religious and ideological components. If you can prove that he had legit ties to ISIS (international), then it is in fact domestic terrorism. Terrorism all the same, though. If you shoot up a joint because you're mad that the sky is blue, it's still terrorism.

I haven't read **** about this person. The news I've read about him amounted to nothing about him personally. Which is why in another thread I questioned why he was being linked to ISIS. SINCE HE HAD NO LINK TO ISIS THAT I COULD SEE.

Originally Posted by pansy gayboy 69

well OF COURSE it is. any type of violence on civilians whether politically or religiously motivated is terrorism. MY problem is with people only calling muslim terrorists terrorists. there are MANY non muslim terrorists. but it seems to me that word is only used for muslims now.

also... even if he did it out of pure hatred for gays it would be terrorism. because he still has an agenda... he hates gays and wants them to die. he wants this acceptance of gays in the west to stop. there.

The pure definition of terrorism is inclusive to the point of being useless, and not even clear. The kind of organized terrorism perpetuated by groups like ISIS and Al Qaeda is very rare. The only non-muslim group I can think of like them is the IRA, and they're disbanded. You can define terrorism however you want, but Islamic terrorism is an entirely different breed from how many people would define terrorism.

Whether Israel practices the same kinds of actions I can't say, as our country is in bed with Israel to the point that it's considered anti-semitic to even criticise them. Sorry, but that's just the way it is. But this American certainly does not support Israelis making settlements in Palestinian lands, and then having their government support them.

And calling the Iraq War terrorism is dumb. It may have been an unjust war, but it's still war. To redefine war as terrorism would be to make both words pointless. That's not to elevate what happened above a terrorist action, but to literally equate the two makes no sense.

[Chula Vista]

Originally Posted by 1blankmind

I never said I agree with the war. I've said the opposite in fact. I just think it's overkill to call it terrorism.

Then you are naive and/or using double standards.

Again, just because Bush Sr. didn't take out Saddam in the 80s was no reason for Bush Jr. to decide to mop up the job. Well, Haliburton made it justifiable.

100% Terrorism. Give me a concrete reason why it doesn't fit the description.

[The Batlord]

Originally Posted by Chula Vista

Then you are naive and/or using double standards.

Again, just because Bush Sr. didn't take out Saddam in the 80s was no reason for Bush Jr. to decide to mop up the job. Well, Haliburton made it justifiable.

100% Terrorism. Give me a concrete reason why it doesn't fit the description.

Because it was an operation with a specific military goal beyond "creating terror". 9/11 wasn't meant to secure the Twin Towers. The Second Gulf War was meant to secure Iraq. It's purpose was also not to scare the beejebus out of the Iraqis, but, again, to secure the country. Whatever you think of our motives, our goals had nothing in common.

Again, that's not to elevate the Iraq War, as I see it as a political action to gain a strategic foothold in the middle east and secure the Iraqi oil fields, but just cause it's "Bad, mmkay" does not make it terrorism.

[Chula Vista]

Originally Posted by The Batlord

And calling the Iraq War terrorism is dumb. It may have been an unjust war, but it's still war. To redefine war as terrorism would be to make both words pointless. That's not to elevate what happened above a terrorist action, but to literally equate the two makes no sense.

Get rid of the label "IRAQ WAR" and focus on what was done. It was not a war. The US labeled it that for convenience sake. If you accept their reasoning then stop reading right now.

It was a terrorist act on a grand scale, plain and simple.

Al Queda declared war on the west. Does that negate all of their actions as terrorism?

[kibbeh]

would you describe this as terrorism?



this is the one video i will never be able to get out of my head. even though this happened 10 years ago it still makes me sick. i wonder if she's still alive today.

[Blank.]

Originally Posted by Chula Vista

Get rid of the label "IRAQ WAR" and focus on what was done. It was not a war. The US labeled it that for convenience sake. If you accept their reasoning then stop reading right now.

It was a terrorist act on a grand scale, plain and simple.

Al Queda declared war on the west. Does that negate all of their actions as terrorism?

But then your denying the fact that it was never purely designed to create terror. That was the side effect. Terrorism is be definition creating terror for the means. The concept wasn't to create it. You don't like the war so you're unwilling to face facts.

[The Batlord]

Originally Posted by Chula Vista

Get rid of the label "IRAQ WAR" and focus on what was done. It was not a war. The US labeled it that for convenience sake. If you accept their reasoning then stop reading right now.

It was a terrorist act on a grand scale, plain and simple.

Al Queda declared war on the west. Does that negate all of their actions as terrorism?

We invaded a country. That is done in war. We engaged enemy combatants. That is done in war. We captured cities. That is done in war.

The "insurgents" (or whatever you want to call them) engaged enemy combatants. That is done in war. They took cities. That is done in war. Whether they were terrorists in their "off days", they were soldiers when they were at war with us.

We both did some bad ****. That is done in war. That's not a good thing, but it's been a part of war for as long as war has been a thing.

[The Batlord]

Originally Posted by pansy gayboy 69

would you describe this as terrorism?



this is the one video i will never be able to get out of my head. even though this happened 10 years ago it still makes me sick. i wonder if she's still alive today.

I don't know what that is. For all I know those people were summoning demons to invade an alien stronghold on Mars. All I know is that they're dead. I can say absolutely nothing intelligent about it.

[kibbeh]

Originally Posted by The Batlord

I don't know what that is. For all I know those people were summoning demons to invade an alien stronghold on Mars. All I know is that they're dead. I can say absolutely nothing intelligent about it.

its very clear what that is. you're just playing dumb. i'm not sure why. probably because your government has brainwashed you into believing that israel can do nothing bad.

[kibbeh]

Originally Posted by The Batlord

We invaded a country. That is done in war. We engaged enemy combatants. That is done in war. We captured cities. That is done in war.

The "insurgents" (or whatever you want to call them) engaged enemy combatants. That is done in war. They took cities. That is done in war. Whether they were terrorists in their "off days", they were soldiers when they were at war with us.

We both did some bad ****. That is done in war. That's not a good thing, but it's been a part of war for as long as war has been a thing.

and killed waaaaay more civilians than 'enemies' actually.