Here’s What a Man Who Studied Every Suicide Attack in the World Says About ISIS’ Motives

I would be glad to hear that the daesh are getting renounced of being muslims. That would throw a big stone in their way. But they are not. They take areas and set down sharia rules, according to their interpretation of the koran.
They have female religious 'police' to check that all the ladies wear ninja tents and gloves.

I truly believe that a large number in the daesh are not muslims at all. They are known for drinking, raping and other non muslim activities. Those are the nutters, who are attracted to the violence. Often they don't even know about the koran.

I get that.

There are also those that actually believe in the daesh bringing back a 'decent' way of muslim life. They condone the killings because it is a means to an end they truly hold dear. Their motives are deranged but religious.

And then there must be those that are only in it because they would be killed otherwise.

Now, is anyone disputing the above?

There isn't just 'one kind' of terrorist, there are many, for various reasons. Saying that nobody in daesh is a muslim and they are all mentally disturbed, is somewhat just as ignorant as saying all msulims are terrorists.

As soon as another murder is committed by these idiots, the excuses are coming out.

- They are not muslims

- They are all crazy

- They are angry because of...[insert whatever]

If they are not muslims, then why are not all the muslims in the world [read influential ones like imams and famous muslims] denouncing them of the title? Why not cal a fatwa on the daesh, because they are the ones betraying the religion. Officially denounce them as muslims.

They are all crazy is cute when it happens once or twice. After the 4768 murder by a crazy who is shouting something islamic, I personally am starting to think there may be a trend.

They are angry because the west murdered them first. Strange how the majority of real muslims can see beyond that and have a normal life in the west. So that argument is rubbish. There are other ways of getting your point across without digging yourself deeper into a hole.

The short of it is that as long as the terrorists say that they are muslims and as long as they are accepted as muslims by muslims, they are islamic terrorists. It is not in my hands as an atheist that just wants peace to doubt them.

What good do the excuses do? So what if they are all nutters or none of them.
They use islam as a platform for their atrocities and they are introducing islamic rules in the areas they have conquered. Not to link the two is a bit desperate.

a reply to: Swills

Terrorism is the tool of the leadership in order to bring about thier own political ends. Others die so they can maintain control.
Currently Islam is the tool for the recruitment of those whom the leaders are willing to sacrigfice for their cause.

In days past, as may be in the future, nationalism and race were the main tools for recruilting people to fight their wars.


The only way the "war on terror" can be won, or better stopped, is to find out how high up the chain of command we can go in order to find those who are really directing these acts of terror.

a reply to: symphonyofblase

I believe there is an absolute distinction between the individuals who acted at Columbine, Sandy Hook and the Paris attacks and other attacks like it. I don't think anyone shouted "Allahu Akbar" before opening fire at Columbine or S.S. It takes a special brand of nutbag to open fire on a large group, or to blow them selves up with a suicide vest but I think that is the only commom link.

a reply to: Swills

Any religion can justify it...

Stuff like this insults our intelligence. 911? Paris? Charlie Hebedo? All these terrible attacks, where people literally scream "This is for Allah" and "Allah Akbar," and somehow we're to believe they aren't about religion. Guess what, the distinction between religion and politics is meaningless when we're talking about Islam. Don't know why? I won't waste my breath explaining why, because you clearly know how to google.

originally posted by: mOjOm

originally posted by: Vroomfondel
Not sure, but I think Granny was the aggressor in that event...

Oh I get it. So now you want to attack Grandmaism huh?!?!? That's even worse than being Anti-Clausism by all measure.

I guess we'll just have to torture a confession out of you now until you realize the truth of your demon possession. Denying that you're under the control of Evil Spirits will only prolong your torture and eventually you'll admit to it anyway. At which point we'll have to torture and kill you obviously because you just admitted that you're possessed.

But remember, this is for your own good and it's not me doing it. You caused all this torture you're about to experience yourself because of your wicked ways. I just want to make that clear because that's how I justify doing it without feeling any shame for it.

Amazing how easy and frequently such rhetoric is used upon people with their full support. We all see the humor in what I just wrote but it's not all that different from the ideas which have brutalized so many innocent people through history.

What if you do all that torture to a person, and they like it? Is it still torture? I don't think TPTB have been appeased yet... nanner nanner nanner... ( I am pretty sure I wouldn't like it, but that has to apply to somebody )

originally posted by: Swills
a reply to: vjr1113

How about you listen to what experts who have actually studied terrorism since the 80s have to say? What's so hard about that?

Your responses baffle me. this is a discussion site. If you don't want discussion, making a thread is kind of a bad idea.
Sure these guys studied all this. And they could be right. But why in the hell are you making a thread, then getting angry when people post in it?

counterproductive much?

originally posted by: meemaw
a reply to: symphonyofblase

I believe there is an absolute distinction between the individuals who acted at Columbine, Sandy Hook and the Paris attacks and other attacks like it. I don't think anyone shouted "Allahu Akbar" before opening fire at Columbine or S.S. It takes a special brand of nutbag to open fire on a large group, or to blow them selves up with a suicide vest but I think that is the only commom link.

Excellent point.

The kids who arm themselves, then shoot up the school they went to, are doing so out of anger (however misplaced) coupled with severe mental health issues. (IE, they are crazy) And had suicide as a primary motive for entering such a situation.

The religious attacks where (insert deity name here) are done by crazy people as well, but for different reasons. They (in their mind) believe to be accomplishing some goal for the greater good. Suicide wasn't as much of a factor, as they needed religious reasoning to persuade them to take their own lives.

So brainwashing.

Not much of a revelation.

originally posted by: network dude

originally posted by: meemaw
a reply to: symphonyofblase

I believe there is an absolute distinction between the individuals who acted at Columbine, Sandy Hook and the Paris attacks and other attacks like it. I don't think anyone shouted "Allahu Akbar" before opening fire at Columbine or S.S. It takes a special brand of nutbag to open fire on a large group, or to blow them selves up with a suicide vest but I think that is the only commom link.

Excellent point.

The kids who arm themselves, then shoot up the school they went to, are doing so out of anger (however misplaced) coupled with severe mental health issues. (IE, they are crazy) And had suicide as a primary motive for entering such a situation.

The religious attacks where (insert deity name here) are done by crazy people as well, but for different reasons. They (in their mind) believe to be accomplishing some goal for the greater good. Suicide wasn't as much of a factor, as they needed religious reasoning to persuade them to take their own lives.

I think you'll find that both athiests who murder-suicide for no good reason, and religious types who commit murder-suicide in the name of their god, are actually nothing more than angry people with severe mental health issues.

Eric harris and dylan klebold were ****ed in the head and extremely angry at the world. I don't think any sane person would deny that.
But are you trying to say that when a person shouts "(insert god of choice here)", murders a bunch of people and then kills themselves, that this is somehow different to terrorist events like the columbine massacre?
Are you trying to say that a suicide killer who believes that by murdering a bunch of people, they will gain the favour of an invisible imaginary "god entity", is not mentally ill also?

edit: These religious terrorists also have a large amount of anger driving them to commit murder. Only their anger isn't misplaced, they are angry at the western countries who invade their homeland for no good reason and kill their families with drones.

a reply to: symphonyofblase

Good lord no, they are all bat # crazy. But the justification seems as if it's completely different.
in the end, only crazy people kill others who have done nothing to harm them. (world leaders not exempt)


ETA: trying to understand the killer mentality in hopes of stopping the next one should be high on the list of priorities. (IMHO)

a reply to: Swills

Bin Laden did 9/11 hoping that it would suck a large American ground army into Afghanistan, which would help recruit a large number of suicide attackers to punish America for intervening. We didn’t do that – we used very limited military force in Afghanistan. But what Bin Laden didn’t count on was that we would send a large ground army into Iraq to knock Saddam out. And that turned out to be the most potent recruiting ground for anti-American terrorists that ever was, more so than Bin Laden had ever hoped for in his wildest dreams.

Whenever an "expert" says 911 was orchestrated by OBL, my eyes gloss over and I close the book. They lose all credibility with me. Any true "expert" who has spent any amount of time researching 911 would never come to the conclusion it wasn't an inside job. If they can overlook such an obvious scam, then what else do they fail to see?

Just my 2 cents

a reply to: Swills

Yet from the OP

He says that religious fervor is not a motive unto itself. Rather, it serves as a tool for recruitment and a potent means of getting people to overcome their fear of death and natural aversion to killing innocents. “Very often, suicide attackers realize they have instincts for self-preservation that they have to overcome,” and religious beliefs are often part of that process

So radical Islam sends them down a path where they lose their minds to the point they will kill all kinds of people and themselves.

So radical Islam is where it starts, and political ideology is where it finishes.
Wouldn't we have a more peaceful world if they don't even start down that road ?
Because the outcome is a roll of the dice.

What 95 percent of all suicide attacks have in common, since 1980, is not religion, but a specific strategic motivation to respond

So COMPLETELY IGNORE the FACT that Islam is a religion, and political belief system all rolled in to one that's a marriage made in hell if death,destruction,murder, and mayhem.

Where there is absolutely no separation of church, and state.

Just ignore it people.

IMO not much of an 'expert'.

originally posted by: Swills
Turns out, terrorism isn't based off of religion but political motives. Religion is a great tool to used for recruitment and quelling the minds of suicide bombers to kill themselves but military occupation is usually the driving force behind these attacks.

But the political motives can be centrally organized around religion. And historically, religion and politics were heavily mixed since the conversion of Constantine until the French Revolution. It's only the period from Napoleon to 1979 (Iranian Revolution), when religion and politics were the most separated; that's the unusual part.

In the enormously devastating Thirty Years War in Europe, the political motives was whether some group of princes were going to rule or some other. And one happened to be Catholic and the other Protestant. Were there political motives? Yes. Would there have been a horrible war without the zealotry and lack of compromise from religion? No.

Osama bin Laden had political motives---he wanted USA troops out of Arabia (stationed there after 1991 Gulf War). Why? Because he thought it was immoral to have foreign troops in the Land of the Shrines---primarily religious origin.

Another issue: religion, like other seductive and culturally resonating ideologies, can attract many people to organize in a single cause. That is far more powerful than a lone nut.

The Unabomber isn't going to recruit an army. Mao, and Osama, did.

originally posted by: Blue_Jay33
So radical Islam sends them down a path where they lose their minds to the point they will kill all kinds of people and themselves.

Religious zealotry is the crystal meth for the soul.

Not even once.

originally posted by: symphonyofblase
edit: These religious terrorists also have a large amount of anger driving them to commit murder. Only their anger isn't misplaced, they are angry at the western countries who invade their homeland for no good reason and kill their families with drones.

No good reason?

Why is nobody getting droned in Oman?

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: Willtell

Two important points. One is both are guilty of atrocities in the past. The second is that one moved on, one did not. Why is that?

It was not Martin Luther. It was Voltaire.

The development of aggressively secular, Enlightenment philosophy, and its birth in blood in the American and French Revolutions.



In a nutshell, the Ottomans were defeated by external powers, not an internal secular revolution. There was one later, in Turkey, and that's backsliding very rapidly.

If attacks because of islam are not related, then wouldn't we be seeing suicide bombings from other religions as well?

Pcg

originally posted by: pcgamer11
If attacks because of islam are not related, then wouldn't we be seeing suicide bombings from other religions as well?

Pcg

Christians don't believe in suicide so goes catholicism.