Is America at war with radical Islam?

[JetsetBkk]

Brilliant! There is little more that I can add, save for a few words on gaslighting.

So successful have US politicians been at selling the ridiculous religion of peace meme that a recent poll in Iowa found 53% of Republicans and 81% of Democrats considered Islam to be an inherently peaceful religion. Now what were you saying a bout cognitive dissonance? It makes me wonder how many more beheadings, bombings , shootings etc will it take for a majority to consider Islam not to be inherently peaceful. It's a sobering thought, but not only would it likely such a majority before any meaningful action would be undertaken by politicians, and that's if the issue was furthermore deemed important enough to voters viz other issues.

Islamophobia - A word made up by fascists, and used by cowards, to manipulate morons. - Christopher Hitchens.

re. Your signature: Hitchens didn't write that. Andrew Cummins did:

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2014/05/12/christopher-hitchens-never-said-that-memorable-line-about-islamophobia/

(It was so good, I had to look it up.)

[Publicus]

Good night John Boy....good night maryellen......good night Momma......

Simplistic stuff, the program was...watched it one time only just to say I'd actually seen at least one episode of it. It was based in the retrogressive American South which means John Boy today would be Captain America in the forefront of making war between all of Christiandom against all Muslims and Islam itself across the globe.

If we're going to try to match people up, then Obi-Wan Kenobi is more along the lines (if I must point it out to some).

It is the dark side I reference that is presented in post after post, as if in a series.

The Dark Side Diaries.

[Fatty123]

I don't get all the yank bashing on here. America isn't perfect by a long way. But ISIS' growth is not the fault of the USA. That is a rather pathetic argument. ISIS' idealogy, is a form of radilcal Islam. It needs to be stopped, and as a Brit, I'm grateful for their presence in the Middle East in order to stop the spread into Europe.

If ISIS were to gain a foothold in one on the 'major' European nations (Germany, France, UK etc) then all bets are off. It will be a huge and savage civil war on the streets. Funnily enough, I would rather that never happens. And no it, hasn't happened already in the UK (a few incidents notwithstanding). That is also another rather silly argument.

[Steely Dan]

Brilliant! There is little more that I can add, save for a few words on gaslighting.

So successful have US politicians been at selling the ridiculous religion of peace meme that a recent poll in Iowa found 53% of Republicans and 81% of Democrats considered Islam to be an inherently peaceful religion. Now what were you saying a bout cognitive dissonance? It makes me wonder how many more beheadings, bombings , shootings etc will it take for a majority to consider Islam not to be inherently peaceful. It's a sobering thought, but not only would it likely such a majority before any meaningful action would be undertaken by politicians, and that's if the issue was furthermore deemed important enough to voters viz other issues.

Islamophobia - A word made up by fascists, and used by cowards, to manipulate morons. - Christopher Hitchens.

re. Your signature: Hitchens didn't write that. Andrew Cummins did:

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2014/05/12/christopher-hitchens-never-said-that-memorable-line-about-islamophobia/

(It was so good, I had to look it up.)

Thanks for pointing that out, I took the quote from a friend who told me it, I guess this is how mis attribution spreads, I shall correct him as well seeing as the originator deserves credit.

[jtTamad]

It would be really stupid to state out loud that we are at war. Obama is playing it right.

[spidermike007]

This is 100% politics. The GOP cannot provide a reasonable solution to the problem. Because there is no solution. The President wants to get a handle on the radical Muslims without antagonizing the other 1 billion moderate Muslims because frankly, we need them. The Republican party is of no help at the moment in trying to solve this problem.

The Republican party is a bankrupt party, without ideas, creativity, solutions, or the ability to even put forth a good candidate. Of course I feel the same way about the democrats. But, the GOP has no ability to criticize any policy, as they have none of their own. The level of talent in Washington these days is shockingly low. Of course we are at war with Radical Islam. Not saying so is only a cowardly act. The moderate Muslims would not find this offensive. They themselves hate radical Islam. There is really no such thing as radical Islam, as the dickheads who call themselves that are not Muslim. They are hateful murderers, who simply want a license to kill, maim, rape, and sell women into slavery. It is more accurate to describe this as a war against gangsters who perpetrate crime in the name of Islam.

[Ulysses G.]

There is really no such thing as radical Islam, as the dickheads who call themselves that are not Muslim.

This is about as accurate as the rest of your post. No one "calls themselves" radical Islam. The Muslims who follow the Qur'an verbatim are what the rest of the world calls "radical Islam". Moderate Muslims are the ones who ignore the crazy stuff.

[spidermike007]

There is really no such thing as radical Islam, as the dickheads who call themselves that are not Muslim.

This is about as accurate as the rest of your post. No one "calls themselves" radical Islam. The Muslims who follow the Qur'an verbatim are what the rest of the world calls "radical Islam". Moderate Muslims are the ones who ignore the crazy stuff.

The Koran advocates defending the faith when it is being attacked. There is nothing in the Koran that advocates mass murder, gang rape, kidnapping girls into sex slavery, ransacking villages, stealing, maiming, nor attacking and killing people for debating during a conference. That is thuggery, not Islam. That is co-opting a faith to justify being a gangster. Plain and simple. These guys are not religious. They spend no time in prayer and contemplation. None. They are pigs, thugs, heathens, freaks, shit heads and snakes. Not practitioners of any faith. It is simply a license to kill and steal and rape.

[Ulysses G.]

The Qur'an calls for nonbelievers to be fought and subdued until they either accept humiliation, convert to Islam, or are killed. That is a lot more than "defending the faith."

[Steely Dan]

I don't get all the yank bashing on here. America isn't perfect by a long way. But ISIS' growth is not the fault of the USA. That is a rather pathetic argument. ISIS' idealogy, is a form of radilcal Islam. It needs to be stopped, and as a Brit, I'm grateful for their presence in the Middle East in order to stop the spread into Europe.

If ISIS were to gain a foothold in one on the 'major' European nations (Germany, France, UK etc) then all bets are off. It will be a huge and savage civil war on the streets. Funnily enough, I would rather that never happens. And no it, hasn't happened already in the UK (a few incidents notwithstanding). That is also another rather silly argument.

ISIS have gained a foothold in France, the estimated 1000 French Muslims fighting in Syria are the tip of the iceberg. Given that there are 750 Zones Urbaines Sensitive in France where 4 million people live you can get a feel for how big the problem may be. A majority of French polled thought France was t war with radical Islam. The civil war is only a matter of time seeing as France is currently transitioning to the second stage of jihad.

[Credo]

I have no idea if America is at war with radical Islam, and I don't know if that war is or will be on US soil, but I am sure that it's best not to mess with someone's parking space, regardless of what religion you are.

I also note that when Muslims are killed they scream 'hate crime' pretty fast and seem to be able to protest in large numbers, including in front of the White House. Much more silent when heads are being cut off.

[BKKBobby]

I have no idea if America is at war with radical Islam, and I don't know if that war is or will be on US soil, but I am sure that it's best not to mess with someone's parking space, regardless of what religion you are.

I also note that when Muslims are killed they scream 'hate crime' pretty fast and seem to be able to protest in large numbers, including in front of the White House. Much more silent when heads are being cut off.

Acts of terrorism can happen anywhere at anytime.

Of course theres not going to be a war on US soil.

Theres a difference between terrorism and war.

"War on terror" is a figure of speech.

You imagine an army of 'radical islamists' in combat with US troops on US soil?

[BKKBobby]

I don't get all the yank bashing on here. America isn't perfect by a long way. But ISIS' growth is not the fault of the USA. That is a rather pathetic argument. ISIS' idealogy, is a form of radilcal Islam. It needs to be stopped, and as a Brit, I'm grateful for their presence in the Middle East in order to stop the spread into Europe.

If ISIS were to gain a foothold in one on the 'major' European nations (Germany, France, UK etc) then all bets are off. It will be a huge and savage civil war on the streets. Funnily enough, I would rather that never happens. And no it, hasn't happened already in the UK (a few incidents notwithstanding). That is also another rather silly argument.

ISIS have gained a foothold in France, the estimated 1000 French Muslims fighting in Syria are the tip of the iceberg. Given that there are 750 Zones Urbaines Sensitive in France where 4 million people live you can get a feel for how big the problem may be. A majority of French polled thought France was t war with radical Islam. The civil war is only a matter of time seeing as France is currently transitioning to the second stage of jihad.

Civil war in France is just a matter of time?

Take a trip to Paris. A holiday might do you good. Or check in to the nearest mental hospital. The end of days are coming! The historical battle between good and evil is reaching its climax!

[boomerangutang]

Brilliant! There is little more that I can add, save for a few words on gaslighting.

So successful have US politicians been at selling the ridiculous religion of peace meme that a recent poll in Iowa found 53% of Republicans and 81% of Democrats considered Islam to be an inherently peaceful religion. Now what were you saying a bout cognitive dissonance? It makes me wonder how many more beheadings, bombings , shootings etc will it take for a majority to consider Islam not to be inherently peaceful. It's a sobering thought, but not only would it likely such a majority before any meaningful action would be undertaken by politicians, and that's if the issue was furthermore deemed important enough to voters viz other issues.

People are people, and they vary greatly in how they manifest. We've got these large brains which complicate things. We are unique as a species for many reasons, not least that people get offended.

Even moderate Muslims can get offended if something is said or done which they perceive as offensive. The perceived offense might appear silly from the perspective of someone from a different and freer background. Radical Muslims can get extremely offended very quickly and take severe measures to 'get back' at the offender. Just being human is enough of a crutch (because of large complicated brains, and the multitude of things which anger/offend/sadden us), yet take the 'human condition' and infuse it with an archaic mean-spirited belief system, then all sorts of harm can ensue.

Of all the types of people, cultural heritages, religions in the world, there are relatively very few who don't get genuinely offended at small things. Buddhists are nearly as thin-skinned as Muslims in the 'quick-to-get-offended-and-angry' syndrome. I've even seen Buddhist head monks get red-faced angry and offended. The message to me, when I see that, is they're no more religious or enlightened than the regular person on the street (maybe less so).

Muslims (and other groups of people, particularly those who adhere to a sect) are sometimes like little bratty children. You remember in grade school, there was always at least one guy who flipped out often/quickly/loudly, and was meaner and angrier than anyone else? Even Muslims adults who appear calm and collected, can flip out in the snap of a finger. They've got their sect beliefs wrapped tightly around them (like a security blanket). Are there any group of people who are more insecure? How insecure do you have to be to go and bomb and kill people, because of a crude little cartoon drawing?

Edited February 15, 2015 by boomerangutang

[JockPieandBeans]

Is America at war with Radical Islam ?

No.

Is Radical Islam at war with the rest of the world ?

Yes.

http://asia.nikkei.com/magazine/20150205-Changes-in-the-air/Politics-Economy/Threat-of-Islamic-State-hits-home-in-Asia

http://asia.nikkei.com/magazine/20150115-Living-with-terror/Politics-Economy/Living-with-terror-China-clamps-down-on-Uighurs-after-Paris-attacks

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/islamic-state-releases-video-purporting-to-show-beheading-of-21-egyptians-in-libya/ar-BBhBTJq?ocid=DELLDHP

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-31477237

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-31480100

It took a whole 2 minutes to come across these articles.

[Mosha]

There is really no such thing as radical Islam, as the dickheads who call themselves that are not Muslim.

This is about as accurate as the rest of your post. No one "calls themselves" radical Islam. The Muslims who follow the Qur'an verbatim are what the rest of the world calls "radical Islam". Moderate Muslims are the ones who ignore the crazy stuff.

Moderates are what the Koran calls hypocrites.

[spidermike007]

This is 100% politics. The GOP cannot provide a reasonable solution to the problem. Because there is no solution. The President wants to get a handle on the radical Muslims without antagonizing the other 1 billion moderate Muslims because frankly, we need them. The Republican party is of no help at the moment in trying to solve this problem.

No such thing as a "moderate muslim". This is your lack of cultural understanding and blinded by western political correct idealism. In Arabic, there is no such word as "moderate". The Quran explains there are only believers and non believers.

And you're worried about upsetting "moderates" muslims? Well, they ain't the true muslims. Only those jihadists who live according to the Quran are true muslims.

So YES it indeed is a War against Islam. Except your CNN, MSNBC, Bloomberg leftist media types will censure the truth.

Pure and utter, hateful BS. Uneducated, mindless, jibberish. Nearly every Muslim i have ever met was moderate. You are using semantics to justify your racist hatred.

[Ulysses G.]

There is really no such thing as radical Islam, as the dickheads who call themselves that are not Muslim.

This is about as accurate as the rest of your post. No one "calls themselves" radical Islam. The Muslims who follow the Qur'an verbatim are what the rest of the world calls "radical Islam". Moderate Muslims are the ones who ignore the crazy stuff.

Moderates are what the Koran calls hypocrites.

Indeed. Moderate Muslims do not take the Qur'ran literally and just practice the parts that fit in with living in the modern world. What is scary is how many Muslims world-wide want Sharia law in their countries and harsh punishments such as stoning to death, beheading and amputation of limbs.

http://wikiislam.net/wiki/Muslim_Statistics_-_Shariah

[boomerangutang]

If moderate Muslims only go with the parts of the Q'ran which suit them, and disregard/disavow the rest, then they've got to acknowledge the Q'ran is flawed. If an airplane mechanic only adhered to parts of his guidebook, but disregarded other parts, then planes might be dropping out of the sky (more than they already are).

Moderate Muslims should speak out and either A. demand that the Q'ran be updated to be reasonable, or else B. quit calling themselves Muslim. Oh, but wait a minute; if they quit being Muslim, they can get killed. What a quagmire.

Moderates can keep bleating about how it's not fair that all Muslims get painted with the same brush of 'extremists' - in the eyes of the rest of the world, but it's going to keep happening unless they do what's suggested in the above sentence.

If the most atrocious crimes were only committed by blue-eyed people, then it would be reasonable to assume that blue-eyed people are capable of atrocities.

Like the poster above, I too have Muslim friends. One of my best buddies is a Burmese Muslim. Some of the others, whenever they see me, they smile and wave as if I was a long-lost family member returning from a journey. So, I admit, it's a dilemma. I know the vast majority of Muslims are decent and fine folks. Yet, they've got that fringe element of radicals which are harming innocents, and therefore besmirching the image/reputation of all Muslims.

Perhaps part of the reason is overpopulation. In other words, when a finite space (planet Earth and, more specifically the dunes of the M.East) get overpopulated and stripped of nature, the people get desperate and some of them do bizarre things - like getting little girls to strap on bomb belts and compelling then to blow up as many people as possible.

Rapanui (Easter Island) is an example of a finite space which lost its resources and was over-run. Cannibalism and other bizarre activities clouded its final days, until Europeans arrived and found a few miserable starved survivors huddled in holes in the ground.

[transam]

I read that this ISIS lot are now removing heads of smokers......... ..........Is that in the book........?

[canuckamuck]

I read that this ISIS lot are now removing heads of smokers......... ..........Is that in the book........?

I'll bet they are having excellent results with getting people to quit though.

[Scott]

But do they let them have a cigarette before they execute them?

Adds new meaning to 'dying for a cigarette.'

[Mosha]

As Mohammed would not have smoked tobacco. Perhaps they consider it unislamic. Which is a dilemma, he didn't have automatic weapons or drive.

[boomerangutang]

As Mohammed would not have smoked tobacco. Perhaps they consider it unislamic. Which is a dilemma, he didn't have automatic weapons or drive.

Here are a list of other things Mohammed didn't have:

refrigeration

phones

anything digital

TV or radio

internal combustion engine

anything more explosive than camel dung

planes

oil, gas, batteries

Perhaps another, even more fundamentalist group will get going in the dunes, and they'll have a war with ISIS to assert which group is closer to Prophet Mo ...and wipe each other out, wish, wish.

[Steely Dan]

As Mohammed would not have smoked tobacco. Perhaps they consider it unislamic. Which is a dilemma, he didn't have automatic weapons or drive.

The technology of the infidel is not haram, as long as adopting it furthers the spread of Islam. Indeed dispensations apply to any forbidden behavior by the same logic. One Imam even issued a fatwa stating buggery was permitted, providing it was practiced in order to expand the anal cavity in order to pack more explosives there. Whether this dispensation applied to the buggerer as well as the buggeree is an interesting question. Perhaps if not he could in turn get buggered and get packing the Semtex.

[thaibeachlovers]

More to the point is the World at war with radical Islam?

If they aren't they should be.

[thaibeachlovers]

As Mohammed would not have smoked tobacco. Perhaps they consider it unislamic. Which is a dilemma, he didn't have automatic weapons or drive.

If it is not forbidden in the Koran, it is permitted. As they did not know about automatic weapons it obviously would not have been forbidden. However, in his day women drove camels ( his wife was a camel train owner, apparently ), which gives the men in the Islamic University of Saudi great difficulty in trying to come up with something to ban women driving.

[thaibeachlovers]

As Mohammed would not have smoked tobacco. Perhaps they consider it unislamic. Which is a dilemma, he didn't have automatic weapons or drive.

Here are a list of other things Mohammed didn't have:

refrigeration

phones

anything digital

TV or radio

internal combustion engine

anything more explosive than camel dung

planes

oil, gas, batteries

Perhaps another, even more fundamentalist group will get going in the dunes, and they'll have a war with ISIS to assert which group is closer to Prophet Mo ...and wipe each other out, wish, wish.

The Saudi religious leaders tried to ban telephones, but allowed them when it was pointed out they could use them to spread the word of Islam.

[spidermike007]

I was starting to question what Ulysses G. had to say about about the majority of Muslims worldwide preferring the implementation of sharia la. Until I read this link. Is it possible this is true? If so, we may all be in trouble and indeed we may be looking at the beginning of a worldwide religious war.

Of the world's 192 countries, 121 are electoral democracies. However, only 11 of the 47 nations (23 percent) with an Islamic majority have democratically elected governments. In the non-Islamic world, which comprises 145 states, 110 are electoral democracies (75 percent). Therefore, a non-Islamic state is over three times more likely to be democratic than an Islamic state. None of the 16 Arab states of the Middle East and North Africa is a democracy.[1]

December 2001

There are 4 places in the world that still have beheading as a method of execution. Every single one is officially Islamic.

Although beheading is legal today only in Saudi Arabia, Iran, Qatar and Yemen, it has been used in many non-Muslim countries throughout the ages.[2]

There are 5 places in the world that still have amputation as a form of legal punishment. Every single one is officially Islamic.

"Amputating hands, flogging, all of these kind of [sentences] that are used in Iranian Islamic laws as punishment, all of these are considered torture, [and] torture has been banned in [international treaties]," Lahidji said. Amputation as legal punishment is still practiced in a number of countries, among them Yemen, Saudi Arabia, Sudan, and Islamic regions of Nigeria. They were also common in Afghanistan under the Taliban. Parts of sub-Saharan West Africa have also recently witnessed amputations as a form of intimidation used by various political factions.[3]

January 2008

In 2012 there were 7 known countries in the world where the state could execute you for being atheist. Every single one was officially Islamic.

Map atheist persecution by islam.jpg

The annual “freedom of thought” report from the International Humanist and Ethical Union, an advocacy umbrella group that represents and seeks to protect non-religious people, details laws and practices around the world that punish or restrict atheism. The group presented the report to the United Nations today.

The report tracks, among other things, which countries have laws explicitly targeting atheists. There are not many, but the states that forbid non-religiousness – typically as part of “anti-blasphemy” legislation – include seven nations where atheism is punishable by death. All seven establish Islam as the state religion. Though that list includes some dictatorships, the country that appears to most frequently condemn atheists to death for their beliefs is actually a democracy, if a frail one: Pakistan. Others include Saudi Arabia, Iran, Afghanistan, Sudan, the West African state of Mauritania, and the Maldives, an island nation in the Indian Ocean. These countries are colored red on the above map.

. . .

Some countries, according to the report, also codify possible prison sentences for atheists (these countries are indicated in orange on the map). These laws, however, can be difficult to distinguish from restrictions against “religious incitement,” which are common in much of the world, including in atheist-friendly Western Europe. But the report indicates that, in countries such as Egypt or Indonesia, the laws appear to be used to specifically target citizens who, for example, publicly profess their own atheism.

Other countries, colored yellow on the map, restrict rights for atheists, for example by limiting marriage rights or public service.[4][5]

December 2012

There are 9 places in the world that still have stoning as a form of legal punishment. Every single one is officially Islamic.

[in addition to Iran] Stoning is also a legal punishment for adultery in Mauritania, a third of Nigeria's 36 states, Pakistan, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Somalia, Sudan, the United Arab Emirates and Yemen.[6]

September 2013

There are now 13 countries in the world where the state can execute you for being atheist. Every single one is officially Islamic.

In 13 countries around the world, all of them Muslim, people who openly espouse atheism or reject the official state religion of Islam face execution under the law, according to a detailed study issued on Tuesday.

. . .

The study, The Freethought Report 2013, was issued by the International Humanist and Ethical Union (IHEU), a global body uniting atheists, agnostics and other religious skeptics, to mark United Nations' Human Rights Day on Tuesday.

. . .

A first survey of 60 countries last year showed just seven where death, often by public beheading, is the punishment for either blasphemy or apostasy - renouncing belief or switching to another religion which is also protected under U.N. accords.

But this year's more comprehensive study showed six more, bringing the full list to Afghanistan, Iran, Malaysia, Maldives, Mauritania, Nigeria, Pakistan, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Somalia, Sudan, United Arab Emirates and Yemen.[7]

December 2013

Muslim World[edit]

Sharia table.jpg

Asked whether Shari'a should be the only source of legislation, one of the sources of legislation, or not be a source of legislation, most Muslims believed it should at least be a source of legislation. Support was particularly strong in Jordan, Palestine, and Egypt, where approximately two-thirds of Muslim respondents stated that the Shari'a must be the only source of legislation; while the remaining third believed that it must be "one of the sources of legislation." By comparison, in Lebanon and Syria, a majority (nearly two thirds in Lebanon and just over half in Syria) favored the view that Shari'a must be one of the sources of legislation.

In contrast, neither education nor age seems to explain attitudes toward the role of the Shari’a in legislation. Pooled data from Jordan, Palestine, Lebanon, and Egypt indicate that 58% of respondents with low education, 59% of those with moderate education, and 56% with higher education believe that Shari'a must be the only source of legislation in their countries. Similarly, the pooled data found that approximately 50% of respondents in all age groups wanted to see the Shari’a become the only source of legislation, another 36-40% across age groups wanted to see it as a source of legislation, and 10-13% preferred that the Shari’a not become a source of legislation.[8]

February 2005

[Publicus]

How many of 'em want to kill everyone to get all of it.