Islamic Terrorism is Overrated

Post Reply New Topic

This.

Yes- thats why they call it "terrorism". It spreads terror. The hysteria and terror advance the cause of the terrorists. But more important that same hysteria in the population can be exploited by the state to crush liberty.

The whole point of terrorism is to cause fear and panic. It is even more effective now because not only does everybody freak out, but the media reports the hell out of it. That's why so many are happening nowaways, because the terrorists know that when they do this, they will spread an incredible amount of fear. Isis is such a non threat it is ridiculous. They have no money, they have nothing besides ak-47s and captives. The US could wipe isis and their country out like it is nothing. It just seems like everybody is scared because they want to be scared. We are all fine, WW3 most likely isn't happening for a long while.

The war on terror is a load of crap because it's not a war we're prepared to win or even are honest with ourselves about who the enemy actually is. I am not a Bush supporter, the invasion of Iraq was a mistake, we shouldn't be overthrowing governments and not expect blowback. More than anybody, the Sunni Arab Gulf is responsible for the current state of the Muslim world, the Saudis are the head of the snake and I would sooner ally with Iran than I would them. It's turned into a real threat, this terrorist ideology has metastasized all across the Muslim world and with the immigrants/refugees from these counties being their prime recruits.

Either we do what it necessary to win and solve the problem or we disengage and isolate that region from the rest of the world until it solves itself. The Islamic State caliphate is a rallying cry to Islamists all around the world, it has to be destroyed because this ideology much like Soviet Communism poses an existential threat not just to the west but primarily the Middle East. What we do does feed the ideology which is why no half way solution will work, more needs to be done to combat this ideology and it's sympathizers not just militants in Syria.

He's made great contributions to linguistics and from time to time he still pops out important questions. I have to agree with Christopher Hitchens criticisms of him though - ie. that his favorite go-to for evil in the world turned into a rut that he got stuck in and any other pieces or parts of the problem always fell off the table with him in the overall analysis when compared to the causative power of the evils of western imperialism.

I think it's important to remember that people even three generations ago were socially nothing like us. Even recently I remember watching military shows on the History Channel about WW2 and part of how Japan beat the heck out of us at Pearl Harbor and then with plenty of notice to MacArthur give equally successful attacks in the Philippines. Our leadership was too stunned to believe that anyone other than a white European nation had the genetic capacity of intellect to launch such an attack, not just as a race pride sort of shot or joke - I mean profound lemming-like penetration of that belief. While most people might have been relatively decent on a personal level and figured 'God made the beasts and the children' thus attempting to act accordingly a lot of the imperialism of the European empires was carried out by people who weren't just racist, they were closer to believing that those they were subjugating were closer to higher primates than humans.

That's part of why we're stuck in a quandary where, when the culture is so different now but at the same time we're trying to stop Islamism from destroying both the Middle East and Europe, while we have to pay reflection to WWI and the attempts made to carve up the Middle East into western power-defined segments its also true that our ability to identify with the motives and the outlook on race at the time alienates us from some of the originating attitudes of such motions. Similarly though I don't think we can hide that this has flowed both ways for over 1,000 years and that not only has oil money been a huge agitator for the export of Salafism but that the Sunni vs. Shiite wars have gone one just as long and attempts at caliphate conquest in Europe are also not something that started with western imperialism or even the crusades - it's part of a regional attitude that's inherent to the religious beliefs. That's part of why I have to go more with Sam Harris, Richard Dawkins, etc.. on this particular issue than I would Chomsky.

You are correct. The worst thing we should do is what America has done, react exactly how they wanted us to react. Leaders should not react emphatically but logically. The leader must look at at as purely numbers meaning he or she should delebritly let innocence die to protect more innocent lives even if those innocent lives are school children bieng held hostage in thier American school. They say we never negotiate with terrorsts but we always do one way or another. Even Israel negotiates the release of hundreds of terrorists for one soildier. We should make it a crime for anybody even a family member to negotiate with a terrorist holding a family member. We should lesson government survalience knowing at least for a time it will result in more and larger terrorism because "The Price of Freedom" should be more than a self satisfying empty slogan. And for goodness sake stop most of the shelter in place and frozen zone stuff. Americans have been trying to make life risk free for decades now but life is like not that. And stop with overdoing this memorial stuff, they are unintentionally enemy victory commarations.