Jihadi Motivation (Disturbing Essay Episode 3) Come On In, It's Short.

Originally posted by lonewolf19792000
reply to post by charles1952

 

If the West would stop, then violent Jihad would stop.

What a lark, he must have never read Quran or Sharia Law.

Sharia law is arabic or rather saudi law, nothing to do with real islam. In Quran muslims are allowed to fight only in selfdefence. One thing is clear, you are brainwashed by zionist propaganda.

Originally posted by NavyDoc

Originally posted by Tw0Sides

Originally posted by charles1952

Jihadists dont want you the American citizen dead.

Boston Marathon? British Train Bombing? Beltway Sniper? Need I give more examples?

Your a Cheeky Monkey Chuck.
Afgan
Iraq
Yemen
Syria?
Iran ?
This is the real kicker, read the next sentence twice, it defines the word...Hypocrisy.

Aren't you one of the GOP Faithful, constantly Blasting Obama for Drone Strikes?

Chuck...just who's heads are those Drones landing on?

We invaded Yemen and Syria and Iran?

There is a lot of muslim on muslim violence going on in teh Middle East right now. I'm certain you will say that it is the fault of the US. Iran and Iraq fought each other to a standstill with tens of thousands dead on both sides. Iraq Invaded Kuwait and raped and tortured Kuwaitis. Internal revolutions in Syria and Egypt.

It seems that the ME is not the peace loving, happy, kumbaya group of people you all make it to be.

USA is providing weapons and financial assistance to the muslim brotherhood for their revolutions against their government. It does not have to be a direct invasion by ground forces or aerial bombardment from planes to mean we are interfering on foreign land.

But we did invade afghanistan directly and iraq twice. The second time was pointless and mean.

You probably don't even know who did 9-11-2001 and killed 3000 americans on their own soil. Hint it was NOT alqueda and I have done plenty of research to be sure. Why don't you look into it as well?

reply to post by mideast


Yeah let's talk about blind and ignorance like how money flowing in to the ME is also from itself, Like Saudi, Pakistan,Iran as well as Eastern countries like Russia, China.


Also financed, by human trafficking,illegal drugs, and OPEC oil.

Bunch of saints in the ME eh?

Originally posted by charles1952
reply to post by SuicideBankers

 

Dear SuicideBankers,

The reason I thought the discussion was important was the prospect for peace in the future. Soon, the US will have only a relatively small presence in the Middle-East. If the terrorist attacks are due to our invasion, that justification should end fairly quickly and peace can arise.

If Muslims just have a hatred for the West and want to destroy it, peace will sadly be a long time away.

The article also suggests a way of thinking about the question "Are Muslim terrorists (e.g. Taliban) a tiny fringe element outside of Islam?"

I would like to think I hold no weapons to lay down. Would you be kind enough to explain?

With respect,
Charles1952

We have a right to defend ourselves from all enemies foreign and domestic. I would be more worried about the deomestic terrorists in washington. If muslims go on a rampage in the USA then they will either be killed or imprisoned on usa soil, not on foreign soil.

reply to post by EarthCitizen07


They attacked most Europoean countries, also Africa, there aren't any African troops in Iraq or Afghanistan.

Furthermore they killed many other Muslims, various sects as well as the main tribal warfare.

Originally posted by theabsolutetruth
reply to post by EarthCitizen07

 

They attacked most Europoean countries, also Africa, there aren't any African troops in Iraq or Afghanistan.

The ottomans did a few centuries ago, not recently. The ottomans were turks, not exactly all muslims of the world or even of the middle east. You are stretching "the truth" quite a bit and it will break "my friend".

Furthermore they killed many other Muslims, various sects as well as the main tribal warfare.

edit on 30-5-2013 by theabsolutetruth because: (no reason given)

And fanatic christians have killed many native americans in north america, south america, and central america.

We also have fanatic christians plotting bombs in the usa such as oklahoma city and waco texas.

Originally posted by EarthCitizen07
reply to post by charles1952

 

If that is the case then why isn't islam attacking any other european country?

It certainly seems, if not entirely obvious by now, that islamic fanatics are focusing on countries that have bases in the middle east and needless to say INTERFERE with their culture and politics. "We" are creating the problems one by one and then wonder like idiots why they dislike us.

If europeans were to attack america then I am certain americans would feel animosity towards europeans. As they say it is NOT rocket science.

The military industrial complex of NATO is creating the problems. They need war to profit!

Considering that there have been Islamic terrorist attacks all over the world, including India, Argentena, Indonesia, Malaysia, Africa, Egypt, Turkey , Pakistan, Canada, Former Soviet Republics, China, Australia etc., I think it rather simplistic to think that Islamic terrorism is only a response to the actions of America and NATO and it would go away if we only played nice with them. I think that to these radicals, everything is an excuse and everyone not them is to blame for whatever affront they believe they have faced. Honestly, these people simply hate the world at large.

Originally posted by EarthCitizen07

Originally posted by theabsolutetruth
reply to post by EarthCitizen07

 

They attacked most Europoean countries, also Africa, there aren't any African troops in Iraq or Afghanistan.

The ottomans did a few centuries ago, not recently. The ottomans were turks, not exactly all muslims of the world or even of the middle east. You are stretching "the truth" quite a bit and it will break "my friend".

Furthermore they killed many other Muslims, various sects as well as the main tribal warfare.

edit on 30-5-2013 by theabsolutetruth because: (no reason given)

And fanatic christians have killed many native americans in north america, south america, and central america.

We also have fanatic christians plotting bombs in the usa such as oklahoma city and waco texas.

OK city was a political, not a religious act. McVey was striking out against the government.
The only demolition that was done in Waco was done BY the government.

I don't think these two examples count as Christian Terrorism.

Originally posted by EarthCitizen07

Originally posted by NavyDoc

Originally posted by Tw0Sides

Originally posted by charles1952

Jihadists dont want you the American citizen dead.

Boston Marathon? British Train Bombing? Beltway Sniper? Need I give more examples?

Your a Cheeky Monkey Chuck.
Afgan
Iraq
Yemen
Syria?
Iran ?
This is the real kicker, read the next sentence twice, it defines the word...Hypocrisy.

Aren't you one of the GOP Faithful, constantly Blasting Obama for Drone Strikes?

Chuck...just who's heads are those Drones landing on?

We invaded Yemen and Syria and Iran?

There is a lot of muslim on muslim violence going on in teh Middle East right now. I'm certain you will say that it is the fault of the US. Iran and Iraq fought each other to a standstill with tens of thousands dead on both sides. Iraq Invaded Kuwait and raped and tortured Kuwaitis. Internal revolutions in Syria and Egypt.

It seems that the ME is not the peace loving, happy, kumbaya group of people you all make it to be.

USA is providing weapons and financial assistance to the muslim brotherhood for their revolutions against their government. It does not have to be a direct invasion by ground forces or aerial bombardment from planes to mean we are interfering on foreign land.

But we did invade afghanistan directly and iraq twice. The second time was pointless and mean.

You probably don't even know who did 9-11-2001 and killed 3000 americans on their own soil. Hint it was NOT alqueda and I have done plenty of research to be sure. Why don't you look into it as well?

I know who orchestrated 9/11, and it was not the US government. I've looked into it deeply, and the conspiracy theorists don;t have any real proof, but lots of speculation.

You are right, we should not be involved in Syria at all, but that involvement is helping a group of muslims overthrow a dictator, so one cannot call it "anti-Islamic." OTOH, the mulsim brotherhood would be just as bad or worse than the regime they are going to overthrow, so we are again backing the wrong team.

The second invasion of Iraq was neither pointless nor "mean." Sadaam signed a ceasefire agreement after the first invasion and he failed to comply with said agreement. We invaded the first time to free Muslims in Kuwait (how soon they forget) and went in again because we stupidly did not finish the job in the first place. The second invasion was actually more justified than the first (RE the violation of the ceasefire) as we did not have any real national interest in freeing the Kuwaitis.

Originally posted by charles1952
If that is indeed the case, that hatred of the West is the motivator, then pulling out of Afghanistan, the entire Middle-East, or even the world, will not stop Islamic Jihadi attacks. Perhaps the only solution is crushing force, but I'm wide open for another, realistic solution.

With respect,
Charles1952

Genocide is your solution?

Genocide.

Killing every man woman and child within a culture until the culture ceases to exist.

How many are you personally willing to kill?

reply to post by NavyDoc

Dear NavyDoc,

Your post makes a lot of sense to me and I thank you for contributing it.

I started this thread with the idea that we might get different perspectives, different ways of seeing, that would broaden our understanding. I didn't present Mr. Prager's essay as the truth, but as a "Disturbing Essay" that would stretch our thinking.

The first post or two from someone with Muslim sympathies encouraged my belief that we would have a solid discussion. It quickly degenerated, however, into a torrent of name-calling, finger-pointing, moral-equivalence, and a general avoidance of the question.

If the posters on ATS are representative of the Muslim world, I can understand why some (many?) people would get frustrated and say "Blast them all, a new parking lot is the only possible solution." Certainly Muslims condemn this view, what surprises me is that they don't see that they are the ones contributing to it.

With respect,
Charles1952

Originally posted by NavyDoc

Originally posted by EarthCitizen07
reply to post by charles1952

 

If that is the case then why isn't islam attacking any other european country?

It certainly seems, if not entirely obvious by now, that islamic fanatics are focusing on countries that have bases in the middle east and needless to say INTERFERE with their culture and politics. "We" are creating the problems one by one and then wonder like idiots why they dislike us.

If europeans were to attack america then I am certain americans would feel animosity towards europeans. As they say it is NOT rocket science.

The military industrial complex of NATO is creating the problems. They need war to profit!

Considering that there have been Islamic terrorist attacks all over the world, including India, Argentena, Indonesia, Malaysia, Africa, Egypt, Turkey , Pakistan, Canada, Former Soviet Republics, China, Australia etc., I think it rather simplistic to think that Islamic terrorism is only a response to the actions of America and NATO and it would go away if we only played nice with them. I think that to these radicals, everything is an excuse and everyone not them is to blame for whatever affront they believe they have faced. Honestly, these people simply hate the world at large.

First of all I do not recall terrorist strikes in all of the countries you listed, and secondly the countries afflicted by terror do not use that as an EXCUSE to invade or otherwise interfere in other peoples business. I never implied arabs were saints or progressive in nature. They do have their shortcommings.

Originally posted by charles1952
He begins by wondering if there is any truth to the idea that recent Islamic attacks in England and elsewhere, are caused by Westerners who are killing Muslims.

That's a nice theory if you are a Jihadist that doesn't hold up when you consider that Jihadists are constantly making war against Islamic gov'ts that are very likely put in place by the same God they claim to serve.

When really by fighting a religious war without fighting for a sovereign Islamic nation wearing a military uniform they are fighting for the enemy of the God they claim to serve.

For example Jihadists were trying to overthrow the legal gov't in Afghanistan in the late 70's and 80's, and Russian soldiers were invited to fight against them at the side of Islamic Afghanistan soldiers.

''Jihad'' Islamic terrorist attacks on other religions prior to Iraq / Afghanistan wars.

voiceofdharma.org...

www.facebook.com... o

Partition of India and Pakistan in 1946-1948. This page is a tiny attempt to compile and share the atrocities committed by muslims to kick out Hindus/Sikhs from Pakistan and make it a dar-ul-islam.

Comment from a Muslim on a Sikh facebook page

Hindus and Sikhs cant be compared to we Muslims in a least bit, We muslims are the best of people, u hindus and sikhs are black dogs, dirty people, raping u own people, but we muslims follow the teaching of Prophet Muhammad pbuh, and we have got guidance of Allah (means god in arabic), So hindus and sikhs cant not compared to people who have surrendered their will to One God or simply Muslims in Arabic

islammonitor.org...:islams-indian-slave-trade-part-i-in-islams-genocidal-slavery-

India has a deep, long cultural history. Hinduism began there around 1,500 BC and Buddhism around the 6th century BC. This culture had evolved impressive intellectual, religious and artistic pursuits. Pre and post the early days of Islam, Indian scholars took their works in science, maths (zero, algebra, geometry, the decimal system, so-called ‘Arabic’ numbers are actually Hindu ones!), medicine, philosophy etc to the courts of others (including Muslims eg Baghdad).

Others came to study in India’s established universities. Indian children (boys and girls) were educated in the relatively widespread education system in a wide variety of subjects eg science, medicine and philosophy. India’s art and architecture was magnificent. They were a prosperous people. Then came Islam - slaughter, slavery, rape, violence, pillage; destruction of religious sites, art and architecture; poverty, exploitation, humiliation, famine, forced conversion, decline in intellectual pursuits, social destruction and a worsening of social ills. To Islam, anything that is not Islamic is from a time of ignorance –Jahiliyya- and must be destroyed (or appropriated and called Islam’s!). The onslaught created the Roma (gypsies), destroyed ‘Hindu’ Afghanistan and formed Pakistan (Kashmir) and Bangladesh .

The cost of the Muslim invasions is massive in lives, wealth and culture. Estimates suggest that 60-80 MILLION died at the hands of Muslim invaders and rulers between 1000 and 1525 alone (ie over 500 years-the population FELL). (Lal cited in Khan p 216) Impossible you think? In the war of Independence of Bangladesh, 1971, the Muslim Pakistani army killed 1.5-3 million people (mainly Muslims ...) in just 9 MONTHS

A list of Islamic atrocities in lots of places from 1979 to 2013

1970-1979
"Munich Massacre" in Germany by Islamic "Black September" militants, 1972.
Grand Mosque Seizure in Saudi Arabia, 1979. Approx. 250 Dead, 600 wounded.

21 February 2013. Hyderabad, Andhra Pradesh. A series of two bomb blasts in a crowded place killed 16 people and 119 were injured. There were two blasts on Thursday at 6.58 p.m. and 7.01 p.m. The bicycle had a bag hung to its carrier, which the police believe had an Improvised Explosive Device (IED).
15 April 2013. Boston Marathon bombings. Two brothers, Tamerlan and Dzhokhar Tsarnev, planted two bombs near the finish line of the Boston Marathon. The blast killed 3 and injured 183 others. [56]
7 May 2013. Hangu, Pakistan. In a wave of pre-election sectarian violence a suicide attack, at a rally for a candidate of the Jamiat Ulema-e-Islam, a pro-taliban religious party, killed at least 15 people and injured more than 40 including an election candidate.[57][58][59]
22 May 2013 Two men with cleavers hack a British soldier's head off in London.[60][61]
25 May 2013 – Makhachkala, Dagestan. A female suicide bomber blew herself up in southern Russia's restive Dagestan, wounding 12 people.[62]
25 May 2013 – Samarra, Iraq. A car bomb exploded near a bus killing six Iranians and one Iraqi. 14 others were wounded

Originally posted by NavyDoc

I know who orchestrated 9/11, and it was not the US government. I've looked into it deeply, and the conspiracy theorists don;t have any real proof, but lots of speculation.

Two remote controlled cargo/military planes hit the twin towers. There is a youtube video from fox news interviewing the downtown locals saying "those planes were not commerical passenger planes because they had no windows and a strange blue logo." Then someone managed to take a picture of the plane's fuselage and it depicts something protruding from the belly next to the wings.

A missile hit the pentagon probably from a drone. To this day there is no credible video of any commercial plane approaching and impacting the pentagon. I have searched and searched and only stumbled upon a hazey as hell 5sec clip of *something exploding*.

You are right, we should not be involved in Syria at all, but that involvement is helping a group of muslims overthrow a dictator, so one cannot call it "anti-Islamic." OTOH, the mulsim brotherhood would be just as bad or worse than the regime they are going to overthrow, so we are again backing the wrong team.

DOD contractors want to make a few bucks. Poor fellows

The second invasion of Iraq was neither pointless nor "mean." Sadaam signed a ceasefire agreement after the first invasion and he failed to comply with said agreement. We invaded the first time to free Muslims in Kuwait (how soon they forget) and went in again because we stupidly did not finish the job in the first place. The second invasion was actually more justified than the first (RE the violation of the ceasefire) as we did not have any real national interest in freeing the Kuwaitis.

You making stuff up now? There was no ceasefire violation at all! Saddams army was neutered like a dog from a pet store. The man was crumbling from within and it was only a matter of time. Making a few isolated threats is not the same as invading or getting ready to invade.

We went in SUPPOSEDLY because nato had suspicions that saddam was trying to aquire weapons of mass destruction that was NEVER PROVEN by anyone. If they had any evidence they certainly failed to provide any. For the most part it was a unilateral and pre-emptive strike that was wholly unneeded and mean.

reply to post by EarthCitizen07

Two remote controlled cargo/military planes hit the twin towers. There is a youtube video from fox news interviewing the downtown locals saying "those planes were not commerical passenger planes because they had no windows and a strange blue logo." Then someone managed to take a picture of the plane's fuselage and it depicts something protruding from the belly next to the wings.

Who comes up with this stuff?

So, we should just assume that commercial airliners with passengers just mysteriously disappeared and never returned to their families that day and there's no way to check that out for sure?

reply to post by MichaelPMaccabee

Dear MichaelPMaccabee,

Thank you, that's a really solid question, and helps make a good conversation. I appreciate it. Let me try to explain, and I'll try not to be too repetitive.

If we are in a situation where the Islamic world hates the existence of the West, in the same way as they hate the existence of Israel, we are in a dangerous situation. It may be because we allow drinking, smoking, and rock music, or it may be the provocative attire of our women, who knows?

In that case, it seems that they would be dedicated to the destruction of the West, with no other goal than total conquest. There would be nothing we could do (in the diplomatic sense) to stop their attacks.

In a situation like that I can't see another solution besides massive force. It doesn't have to be genocide, but it would have to be damaging enough to ensure that it would be generations before they ever thought of attempting to destroy the West again. But remember, I said:

Perhaps the only solution is crushing force, but I'm wide open for another, realistic solution.

How many would I be willing to kill? In a military battle to the death between the West and Islam, I'd be willing to kill the same number as the number of bullets I'd been issued.

With respect,
Charles1952

I posted this in another thread, but it has impact here as well... so I shall quote myself:

While I was in Saudi Arabia after Desert Storm, I got to see exactly how the Muslims see us. Of course, when I got in country, the first briefings that we were given were on how to not upset the locals, and to respect them and their religion.

The Saudis were always very cordial hosts, but you could see a genuine mistrust that they have for Westerners.

Part of my job in the USAF was to have one last look at the aircraft and arm its weapons at the End Of Runway area. The Saudis have a small air-con building at the EOR at Khobar, which we were told we could use. The first day that we used this building, the Saudis were nice enough to leave us reading material... in Arabic of course. I saved one of these rags, only to have it lost in a PCS move... bummer. I cannot read Arabic, but the symbolism used was very clear. Images of splintered crosses, a Star of David with a nuclear mushroom cloud at its center...

Islam wants the world. Period. Christians and Jews are evil heretics in their eyes, and must be destroyed. The Islamists have made it abundantly clear that they have ZERO regard for innocent lives; who they kill is of no concern to them, it is the why they kill that is important to them.

You think the Inquisition was bad? Keep placating the Muslims...

Originally posted by charles1952
reply to post by MichaelPMaccabee

 

Dear MichaelPMaccabee,

Thank you, that's a really solid question, and helps make a good conversation. I appreciate it. Let me try to explain, and I'll try not to be too repetitive.

If we are in a situation where the Islamic world hates the existence of the West, in the same way as they hate the existence of Israel, we are in a dangerous situation. It may be because we allow drinking, smoking, and rock music, or it may be the provocative attire of our women, who knows?

In that case, it seems that they would be dedicated to the destruction of the West, with no other goal than total conquest. There would be nothing we could do (in the diplomatic sense) to stop their attacks.

In a situation like that I can't see another solution besides massive force. It doesn't have to be genocide, but it would have to be damaging enough to ensure that it would be generations before they ever thought of attempting to destroy the West again. But remember, I said:

Perhaps the only solution is crushing force, but I'm wide open for another, realistic solution.

How many would I be willing to kill? In a military battle to the death between the West and Islam, I'd be willing to kill the same number as the number of bullets I'd been issued.

With respect,
Charles1952

Perhaps the only solution is crushing force, but I'm wide open for another, realistic solution.

What you are advocating is genocide. The mere idea that you would be comfortable with killing children, to even entertain the notion, removes any compassion for humanity that you might claim.

Originally posted by InverseLookingGlass
Understand the meme and you will understand the human behavior. Islam is the current alpha-meme of planet Earth. No other meme will cause people to snuff out their own genetic line to service the orthodoxy. Literally, a zealot would load the whole family in the car to get a suicide bomb through a checkpoint. There's nothing like it on Earth.

It will grow to destroy all other religions or it will be "reformed". There is no in between. Reformation must happen from within the meme as it did for the Catholics. The Catholics were vicious killers before the reformation. It wasn't that long ago.

The Catholics and the Protestants were even more vicious killers---especially of each other---after the Reformation as well.

However, the Reformation did (inadvertently) open the cultural door to secular humanism and the philosophy of the Enlightenment---and this, not Protestantism or the Reformation itself---was the golden prize, the only fundamental philosophical or moral improvement of human organization in ten thousand years of civilization.

The thing is, Salafism and fundamentalism is the Muslim analogy of the Reformation, in the sense of "getting back to basics, rigor and piety" of the religion, and less respect to existing secular and religious power structures.

Osama bin Laden might be Islam's Martin Luther.

Arab world could use Ataturks, not Luthers.