NationStates Jolt Archive

I'm just wondering, when will the actions of the Islamic radicals be too much for everyone? I mean sure we're saying "stop it" or we're condemning it, but they just turn around and laugh at us, and then kill us by blowing themselves up. How far does radical Islam have to do until people actually get off of their collective ass and start doing something about it? Personally I have passed that point a loonnngggg time ago.

I'm just wondering, when will the actions of the Islamic radicals be too much for everyone?

When will the actions of religious people, period?

Also I should point out that the following arguments will not work here.

1. the Christian Crusade
2. The Minority argument
3. USA, Bush, Rumsfeld, or anyone in the Bush Administration = EBVIL.

When will the actions of religious people, period?

Yea, but today, most Christians and Jewish fundies are just annoying, and when they do get power, people usually get sick of their bullshit in 6 years.

Um, what do you actually suggest doing, then?

Also I should point out that the following arguments will not work here.

1. the Christian Crusade
2. The Minority argument
3. USA, Bush, Rumsfeld, or anyone in the Bush Administration = EBVIL.

So, basically you're saying that we should answer a generalising question you asked without generalising ourselves?

So, basically you're saying that we should answer a generalising question you asked without generalising ourselves?

Well the problem with these types of discussing is that people are always making the excuses that I've listed above. No more excuses, no more apologizing, it's time to face the music.

Um, what do you actually suggest doing, then?

Bring the Middle East into the 21st Century for starters.

Well the problem with these types of discussing is that people are always making the excuses that I've listed above. No more excuses, no more apologizing, it's time to face the music.

The problem with these type of discussion is that you call for the world to fight windmills.

Bring the Middle East into the 21st Century for starters.

Thanks for the insight.

How are you going to do that? And what constitutes "the 21st Century"?

I'm a Christian, and this argument hasn't the least bit to do with the fundies argument, but here's what I have learned.

A faithful person is someone that inwardly practices on his/her belief.
A religious person is someone that outwardly practices his/her belief.

I'm not saying that being religious is bad, but fundamental religiousness, IE the kind of religiousness that ignores common practice in a Religion (eg Protestant, Catholic, Orthodox, etc), is bad.

I just wish religions had to pay tax. I mean, I have to pay tax on my entertainment so why should religious people get a write off? Worse yet, it gets put down as charitable giving.

It would end the deficit overnight.

Yea, but today, most Christians and Jewish fundies are just annoying, and when they do get power, people usually get sick of their bullshit in 6 years.

So, basically: "Ignore all those others, focus on the ones I don't like."

Sorry, Don Quijote, not gonna play your game of denial.

The problem with these type of discussion is that you call for the world to fight windmills.

Yea, but the guy fighting the windmill didn't have TNTs.

How are you going to do that? And what constitutes "the 21st Century"?

Flying cars. And robots.

I'm just wondering, when will the actions of the Islamic radicals be too much for everyone? I mean sure we're saying "stop it" or we're condemning it, but they just turn around and laugh at us, and then kill us by blowing themselves up. How far does radical Islam have to do until people actually get off of their collective ass and start doing something about it? Personally I have passed that point a loonnngggg time ago.
Wait? I'm condemming it?

Anyways, I suggest we send them to irony camp. Should straighten things out.

Yea, but the guy fighting the windmill didn't have TNTs.

So you want us to blow up windmills. Big difference, Don Quijote.

Bring the Middle East into the 21st Century for starters.
And how are we supposed to do that? I'm sure the Middle East will appreciate being told it's a backwards region and needs to get with the times.

Thanks for the insight.

How are you going to do that? And what constitutes "the 21st Century"?

Well for starters, make them realize that killing innocent people is not the best way to get the world on their side. Usually it has an opposite effect. Sell Contracts in companies based in the West, China, and India to build stores and factories in the middle east thus improving the economy. Hold an international talk to redraw the countries borders, thus separating the Kurds, Sunnies, and Shiites. They'll all have their own country, and they'll all be happy.

There's a few more things we'd have to do, but after we start them off down the right path, they should be fine, and if they start up again, well they're on their own.

So, basically: "Ignore all those others, focus on the ones I don't like."

Sorry, Don Quijote, not gonna play your game of denial.

Saying that the Christian had the crusade is not a valid argument. Saying that they're just the minority is not a valid argument. Saying that USA or the Bush administration is not a valid argument. Fundies are a real problem that needs to be dealt with.

So you want us to blow up windmills. Big difference, Don Quijote.

Eh last resort.

Well for starters, make them realize that killing innocent people is not the best way to get the world on their side. Usually it has an opposite effect.

Yeah, we seem to be doing a wonderful job with that as it is.

Sell Contracts in companies based in the West, China, and India to build stores and factories in the middle east thus improving the economy.

And how will you get companies to invest in the Middle East? How will you get the governments there to accept them?

Hold an international talk to redraw the countries borders, thus separating the Kurds, Sunnies, and Shiites. They'll all have their own country, and they'll all be happy.

Yeah, because redrawing borders and remaking countries at whim is such an effective way to do things.

It strikes me that you don't really have any real solutions, other than the "do something about it!" that we've heard forever from everyone.

Well for starters, make them realize that killing innocent people is not the best way to get the world on their side. Usually it has an opposite effect.

And.. currently the US is trying to teach them that by killing innocent people and invading inoffensive countries, right?


Sell Contracts in companies based in the West, China, and India to build stores and factories in the middle east thus improving the economy. Hold an international talk to redraw the countries borders, thus separating the Kurds, Sunnies, and Shiites. They'll all have their own country, and they'll all be happy.

Are you seriously that naive?
Economy isn't that big a factor for many Arab nations to begin with. And if it was, how do you think they would feel if the West started to economically collonise them again?
And redrawing borders has this unfortunate tendency to lead to more wars. Just take a brief look at the Balkans in the 1990s.

Well for starters, make them realize that killing innocent people is not the best way to get the world on their side. Usually it has an opposite effect. Sell Contracts in companies based in the West, China, and India to build stores and factories in the middle east thus improving the economy. Hold an international talk to redraw the countries borders, thus separating the Kurds, Sunnies, and Shiites. They'll all have their own country, and they'll all be happy.

There's a few more things we'd have to do, but after we start them off down the right path, they should be fine, and if they start up again, well they're on their own.
Oh, the irony :p

The Middle Eastern economy is pretty good as it is, what with the oil and all. The terrorism doesn't have a lot to do with poverty- look at Bin Laden himself.

Oh, the irony :p

The Middle Eastern economy is pretty good as it is, what with the oil and all. The terrorism doesn't have a lot to do with poverty- look at Bin Laden himself.

Yea, but that oil is going to run out sometimes. Either it get tapped out, or the world get fed up with the ME and just nuke it.

Yea, but that oil is going to run out sometimes. Either it get tapped out, or the US get fed up with the ME and just nuke it.

Edited for accuracy.

Edited for biased.

fixed.

Yea, but that oil is going to run out sometimes. Either it get tapped out, or the world get fed up with the ME and just nuke it.
The oil money's still allowed the ME to develop other industries and infrastructure.

Yea, but that oil is going to run out sometimes. Either it get tapped out, or the world get fed up with the ME and just nuke it.

I think you'll find that most of the Arab oil-producing countries have given that some thought already. They ar einvesting heavily in new technologies, tourism, medical research and other progressive areas.
If their oil runs out tomorrow, they all have a solid base of other industries to fall back on.

The oil money's still allowed the ME to develop other industries and infrastructure.

True, well beside rounding them up and killing them, or force the ME into a physical and economic isolation, I don't have anymore ideas.

True, well beside rounding them up and killing them, or force the ME into a physical and economic isolation, I don't have anymore ideas.

Diplomacy. Takes a long time and lots of patience, but it's proven itself over and over to be the only thing that works against international terrorism.

fixed.

Well, really who else with nukes would?

Russia? They'd be on the ME side just to piss us off.
China? The ME doesn't seem to be the greatest concern to them. Seeing Kimmy Jong is more nuts than ever.
France?
UK? I guess that might be possible.
Everyone else with nukes is from the ME. Surely you don't think they'd nuke themselves.

Well, really who else with nukes would?

Russia? They'd be on the ME side just to piss us off.
China? The ME doesn't seem to be the greatest concern to them. Seeing Kimmy Jong is more nuts than ever.
France?
UK? I guess that might be possible.
Everyone else with nukes is from the ME. Surely you don't think they'd nuke themselves.

Russia wouldn't
China might because they don't want to lose the trade relations with the USA, and to show Kim what's coming if he doesn't straighten up.
France, HA.
UK, maybe.

Diplomacy. Takes a long time and lots of patience, but it's proven itself over and over to be the only thing that works against international terrorism.

Didn't seem to work the first 30 years.

Didn't seem to work the first 30 years.

Worked in Ireland, worked in Germany, worked in Spain, worked in Turkey.

You'll find that the places with the most problems with terrorists are those that try the hrashest approach to dealing with terrorism.

Russia wouldn't
China might because they don't want to lose the trade relations with the USA, and to show Kim what's coming if he doesn't straighten up.
France, HA.
UK, maybe.

China wouldn't nuke Kimmy. too many poor border hoppers for them to deal with.

China wouldn't nuke Kimmy. too many poor border hoppers for them to deal with.

True, but they can still use it to show Kimmy that they mean business. Kind of like when the USA nuked Nagasaki. If I remember my history correctly, there are speculations that the reason we nuked Nagasaki was to show the Soviet what we are capable of.

True, but they can still use it to show Kimmy that they mean business. Kind of like when the USA nuked Nagasaki. If I remember my history correctly, there are speculations that the reason we nuked Nagasaki was to show the Soviet what we are capable of.

You mean in case they didn't notice that you had nuked Hiroshima?

You mean in case they didn't notice that you had nuked Hiroshima?

I thought Hiroshima came first and Nagasaki came second.

True, but they can still use it to show Kimmy that they mean business. Kind of like when the USA nuked Nagasaki. If I remember my history correctly, there are speculations that the reason we nuked Nagasaki was to show the Soviet what we are capable of.
Look how well that turned out.

Look how well that turned out.

Eh actually turned out pretty well for us. For Russia, eh they're getting back up there. For the Eastern Europe, ok not so much.

Man who bright idea was it to dismantle the Ottoman empire?

I thought Hiroshima came first and Nagasaki came second.

My point exactly. I'm pretty sure the Sovjets had noticed what you were capable of when you nuked Hiroshima 3 days before.

My point exactly. I'm pretty sure the Sovjets had noticed what you were capable of when you nuked Hiroshima 3 days before.

Well I'm just saying that nuking a country once would achieved the desired effect. There was no need to nuke Japan again unless you had other reasons.

Man who bright idea was it to dismantle the Ottoman empire?

The allied nations after WW I.

Well I'm just saying that nuking a country once would achieved the desired effect. There was no need to nuke Japan again unless you had other reasons.

Impressing someone by doing the same thing twice?

Eh actually turned out pretty well for us. For Russia, eh they're getting back up there. For the Eastern Europe, ok not so much.

Man who bright idea was it to dismantle the Ottoman empire?
UK, Canada, France, USA?

Impressing someone by doing the same thing twice?

All I'm saying that after Japan have seen the horror of Hiroshima, there was no need to nuke Nagasaki, unless there was other reasons (IE showing the Soviet what we are capable of).

UK, Canada, France, USA?

Ahh, well that was a mistake.

All I'm saying that after Japan have seen the horror of Hiroshima, there was no need to nuke Nagasaki, unless there was other reasons (IE showing the Soviet what we are capable of).

I know that you are saying that.
And I'm saying that the Soviet Union clearly saw what you were capable of with the first bomb, there was no need for the second one just to impress them.

I know that you are saying that.
And I'm saying that the Soviet Union clearly saw what you were capable of with the first bomb, there was no need for the second one just to impress them.

True. Hmm, we need to restart the Ottoman Empire....

Ahh, well that was a mistake.

So was the decision on the Balkans. And ending the protectorate for Palestine. And agreeing on the Versaille treaty.

There were a lot of mistakes made after WW I, but there's no going back.

True. Hmm, we need to restart the Ottoman Empire....

And every ME country thinks they should be at the core.

So was the decision on the Balkans. And ending the protectorate for Palestine. And agreeing on the Versaille treaty.

There were a lot of mistakes made after WW I, but there's no going back.
I thought the mandate was concluded after WWII.

I thought the mandate was concluded after WWII.

oops... http://www.stamcar.com/projekti/microblog/smilies/blush.gif

You're right of course.

I'm just wondering, when will the actions of the Islamic radicals be too much for everyone? I mean sure we're saying "stop it" or we're condemning it, but they just turn around and laugh at us, and then kill us by blowing themselves up. How far does radical Islam have to do until people actually get off of their collective ass and start doing something about it? Personally I have passed that point a loonnngggg time ago.
What can we personally do? This is one of those things that the government has to sort out.

So, basically: "Ignore all those others, focus on the ones I don't like."
So annoying people is as bad as killing people? Logic isn't on your side...

And.. currently the US is trying to teach them that by killing innocent people and invading inoffensive countries, right?

Just because Wilgrove is American, we shouldn't assume he supports the US wars.

True, well beside rounding them up and killing them, or force the ME into a physical and economic isolation, I don't have anymore ideas.
And you have a history degree...?

Didn't seem to work the first 30 years.
Thirty years of what?

Russia wouldn't
More than anyone else Russia would. They don't like many of the Muslim countries, and they wouldn't have moral or PR qualms about using nuclear weapons.

Though I don't think nuclear weapons will ever come into the ME conflicts.

True, but they can still use it to show Kimmy that they mean business. Kind of like when the USA nuked Nagasaki. If I remember my history correctly, there are speculations that the reason we nuked Nagasaki was to show the Soviet what we are capable of.
Of course that was the reason. The common justification that "a million people would have been killed otherwise" was just a hyped up figure. The actual estimate for deaths in a land attack on Japan was about 25,000.

Eh actually turned out pretty well for us. For Russia, eh they're getting back up there. For the Eastern Europe, ok not so much.
How can you be so ignorant and immoral?

Eastern Europe is much better off than Russia.

Man who bright idea was it to dismantle the Ottoman empire?
What did you learn in your history degree?

True. Hmm, we need to restart the Ottoman Empire....
The Ottoman Empire should have been dismantled. It was in a rotten state of stagnation, routinely committed atrocities, and it was an empire.

I'm just wondering, when will the actions of the Islamic radicals be too much for everyone? I mean sure we're saying "stop it" or we're condemning it, but they just turn around and laugh at us, and then kill us by blowing themselves up. How far does radical Islam have to do until people actually get off of their collective ass and start doing something about it? Personally I have passed that point a loonnngggg time ago.

Starting doing what exactly?

How far does radical Islam have to do until people actually get off of their collective ass and start doing something about it? Personally I have passed that point a loonnngggg time ago.

Oh right. So when you passed that point a loonnngggg time ago, what did you start doing? Y'know, after you got off your ass and started doing something about it?

I'm just wondering, when will the actions of the Islamic radicals be too much for everyone? I mean sure we're saying "stop it" or we're condemning it, but they just turn around and laugh at us, and then kill us by blowing themselves up. How far does radical Islam have to do until people actually get off of their collective ass and start doing something about it? Personally I have passed that point a loonnngggg time ago.
Remind me what it is you're doing again?


Edit: Damn, that'll teach me to post without reading the thread . :D

UK, Canada, France, USA?

USA wanted self determination and were not really pushing for it, Canada didn't have that much of a say mostly UK(which I guess included Canada) and France then it was redone later I think *tried to remember*

UK, Canada, France, USA?

Um... what history books were you reading?!? :eek:

UK: Lloyd George
US: Wilson
France: Clemenceau
Italy: Orlando

...what was Canada's role in the "Big Four", holding everyone else's hats??

I made a big list of points and nobody answered, thus, BUMP!

Ah, another sweeping generalization from a Bushevik who thinks all Muslims come from the violent country of DurkaDurkaJihadstan.

:rolleyes:

I made a big list of points and nobody answered, thus, BUMP!

http://www.nearlygood.com/smilies/nopity.gif Poor baby, no one answered your points so you bumped. Poor thing, no one is paying any attention to you. Is it possible no one thought your points needed an answer?:eek:

I'm just wondering, when will the actions of the Islamic radicals be too much for everyone? I mean sure we're saying "stop it" or we're condemning it, but they just turn around and laugh at us, and then kill us by blowing themselves up. How far does radical Islam have to do until people actually get off of their collective ass and start doing something about it? Personally I have passed that point a loonnngggg time ago.

Probably when the US stops supporting terrorism, opposing democracy,
supporting dictatorial regimes, starts taking responsibility for itself,
gets itself out of other people's countries
and becomes responsible for fewer deaths than Islamic terrorists are.

Saying that the Christian had the crusade is not a valid argument. Saying that they're just the minority is not a valid argument. Saying that USA or the Bush administration is not a valid argument. Fundies are a real problem that needs to be dealt with.

How about the abortion clinic bombings, are we allowed to use them as an argument? Please say yes, go on, pleeeease.

How about the abortion clinic bombings, are we allowed to use them as an argument? Please say yes, go on, pleeeease.

Actually it is, why, because it's people who use violence to try to get everyone else to follow their religion and extremist ideology. Such actions results in the maiming and killing of innocent lives.

You get a cookie Forsakia.

I'm just wondering, when will the actions of the Islamic radicals be too much for everyone? I mean sure we're saying "stop it" or we're condemning it, but they just turn around and laugh at us, and then kill us by blowing themselves up. How far does radical Islam have to do until people actually get off of their collective ass and start doing something about it? Personally I have passed that point a loonnngggg time ago.

But there are very very few who back the actions of "Islamic Radicals".

http://www.nearlygood.com/smilies/nopity.gif Poor baby, no one answered your points so you bumped. Poor thing, no one is paying any attention to you. Is it possible no one thought your points needed an answer?:eek:
Sure, I guess it's possible that he pwned the opposition so badly that they hoped the thread would die and no one would notice. So good job in helping everyone see the pwnage. :D

But there are very very few who back the actions of "Islamic Radicals".

Not backing them and actually stopping them are two different things.

True, well beside rounding them up and killing them, or force the ME into a physical and economic isolation, I don't have anymore ideas.


Wow, you're better than the people that get paid for Foreign policy advice. Go for a job. Its two more years of gravy train for that kind of thinking yet.

Not backing them and actually stopping them are two different things.

How does one stop a small secretive group....

Police work.

Actually it is, why, because it's people who use violence to try to get everyone else to follow their religion and extremist ideology. Such actions results in the maiming and killing of innocent lives.

You get a cookie Forsakia.

:)


So extremists in general are arseholes and should be acted against as equally as possible. In other news water flows downhill.

:)


So extremists in general are arseholes and should be acted against as equally as possible. In other news water flows downhill.

Basically yea.

Basically yea.
And...... what exactly are you doing about this again? Don't think you've ever answered that.

And...... what exactly are you doing about this again? Don't think you've ever answered that.

Buy as little gas as possible and I am looking into converting my house to solar power.

When will humanity be too much?

Buy as little gas as possible and I am looking into converting my house to solar power.

Good start. Are you going to start supporting politicians who share your views on environmentalism as well?

Good start. Are you going to start supporting politicians who share your views on environmentalism as well?

Eh I figure that military is not enough, we need to fight them on several fronts, and one of them is where they get their fundings. As for the abortions clinic bombings, I vote for any politicians that comes out against it.

I'm just wondering, when will the actions of the Islamic radicals be too much for everyone? I mean sure we're saying "stop it" or we're condemning it, but they just turn around and laugh at us, and then kill us by blowing themselves up. How far does radical Islam have to do until people actually get off of their collective ass and start doing something about it? Personally I have passed that point a loonnngggg time ago.

Invading afganistan was doing something about it. I'm sorry if your brain only includes the two options of "Fucking kill everyone even associated with the problem" and "Ignore it" but real solutions are more complicated than that.

Invading Iraq was stupid, and incompetently handled. What good is killing terrorists if as a result of your meathods, hundreds more will join the ranks against you? It's like trying to get rid of the rat problem in your house by drowning them in honey; sure it will kill the rats, but it will attract many more. Our attacks agaisnt terrorist targets should be surgical. We should eliminate cells and training camps. It should never be an excuse for invasion.

Then again, perhaps you do have a new plan? What should we get up off of our collective ass and do?

(actually I just read the rest of the thread, but still I have to ask: What is your plan to "modernize" the middle east? How will we teach them that killing is wrong? How will we go about showing them that radical fundamentalism isn't the best way to live?)

Flying cars. And robots.

dont forget flying to jupiter to have a look at a giant black obilisk

When will humanity be too much?

About 150 years ago, I think.

As for the abortions clinic bombings, I vote for any politicians that comes out against it.

Is there any politician in the US that comes out FOR it???

Is there any politician in the US that comes out FOR it???

Fundies?

Buy as little gas as possible and I am looking into converting my house to solar power.

Yeah, I'll bet Osama's shitting himself over that.

how far does state sponsored/directed/enacted/fluffled terrorism have to go before we all speak out against it. i've been angry at it for ages and have been invollved with protesting it as actively as i can for years. islamic terrorism is simply a further symptom of the diabollical attitudes of the christian capitalist majority leadership of the us towards anything 'other' than it.

Fundies?

Have you ever listened to a politician speaking out in FAVOR of abortion clinic bombings? The closest thing I heard was Tom "the judges had it coming" DeLay, and he only favors murder, not terrorist attacks.

Yet.

Yea, but today, most Christians and Jewish fundies are just annoying, and when they do get power, people usually get sick of their bullshit in 6 years.
Your Christian fundy government invaded a country(Iraq) and Fundy Jewish country is occupying and enslaving an mainly muslim populations.....

How will we teach them that killing is wrong? How will we go about showing them that radical fundamentalism isn't the best way to live?)

-Christian countries colonized them, overthrew democratic governments, supported dictators that terrorized them, supported a Jewish takeover, suppression and cleansing of their fellow Muslims in their own land.-Those weren't good examples for Muslims to follow but they learned from them, violence works. -The West taught them that very well so how do go about telling them "Do as we say, not as we do".

You'll find that the places with the most problems with terrorists are those that try the hrashest approach to dealing with terrorism.

See Russia.

I'm just wondering, when will the actions of the Islamic radicals be too much for everyone? I mean sure we're saying "stop it" or we're condemning it, but they just turn around and laugh at us, and then kill us by blowing themselves up. How far does radical Islam have to do until people actually get off of their collective ass and start doing something about it? Personally I have passed that point a loonnngggg time ago.

When I start caring that people I never have, never will, and never would've met are being blown up.