Paris Attacks

[Milsap]

The latter is not true.

That's what I've been telling them.

Great response well done lads

Expect a revenge attack soon.

[Kpyna]

ps: @echo: fwiw, on behalf of the thread im sorry ur topic turned into a big high moral ground scrabble, no-one read the literal first line of ur post/took the hint

yeah but i only wrote that first line because i was expecting it. i especially didn't really want anyone arguing in the first 24 hours or so because there's a lot of people who aren't thinking rationally about this kind of stuff, i didn't want it to get super dark, have a whole lot of insults thrown around, etc. i'd say we're like 50% there anyways though haha. not to mention since the french are a stone's throw from england i figured the chances of someone having family/friends that are directly effected by this attack are pretty high and i didn't want blame to get thrown around and actually potentially really hurt someone's feelings.

muhed and i have a pretty similar view on all of this tbh. and i'm not sure if it's entirely accurate or if i'm being too critical of my own country, but sorry for what America essentially started and then roped all of your leaders into being just as dumb about all of this :| definitely part of the minority here in the US that thinks the middle east needs our aid more than missile strikes. situations like this that continuously escalate are what begin wars and ultimately will result in the unnecessary deaths of innocent people. it's my belief that ISIL despite its name is only religiously motivated because its an easy way to separate our cultures. they're just terrible people scrambling for power and will use anything to excuse their violence and get more people on their side who have been harmed by the actions of the west. the content of the book they read is clearly irrelevant here. if these terrorist groups were christian or even totally atheistic, they'd just be finding other excuses for their violence.

and yeah my facebook feed is crawling with americans celebrating the missile strikes. like hey that would be so great if it actually effectively did anything besides poking a sleeping bear. because if you think that's gonna scare them into stopping you have no idea how terrorist organizations work somehow despite the fact that if you're my age you've been hearing about them all your life

[Lord Raven]

You guys should watch Gundam 00 (the first season at least) because I thought it did an excellent job of portraying exactly how terrorism works from all angles.

I don't think ISIS are inherently religiously motivated but it's definitely an easy tool to use especially since we've given them fodder to work with now that there have been missile strikes.

[Turner]

What does it mean "you can't prove a negative"?

It pretty much means exactly that. To prove existence of something is to confirm its truth, you can't prove a negative - you can't 'prove' that something 'Doesn't not exist', on a semantic level that's just not how proof works.

You're getting the compatibility of science and faith confused with their ability to coexist.  You can't apply scientific principles to faith and vice-versa.

First of all, Religion and faith are two very different things. Islam is an organized religion just like Christianity and Scientology. Faith indeed doesn't need factual basis and in fact the very basis of fact contradicts the nature of faith. Kierkegaard has touched on this many times in his writings.

Science and religion can't sensibly coexist because both act as explanations for the world around us. The difference is that Science is culturally neutral and based upon proven fact and logic; it's unbiased to country, culture or creed and it's something that everyone on the most basic human level can follow and understand. It is open to be challenged by anybody and changes to suit new, scientifically proven discoveries. Even animals understand and utilize basic scientific principles even if they don't specifically know it as "science".

The problem isn't with a few people having a 'faith'. It's with millions of people following a set pattern of beliefs and expecting the world to be changed to suit those beliefs, which aside from those beliefs not being not factual in the slightest, are also largely down to arbitrary interpretations of text in a language nobody speaks from a culture greatly different from today's. Religion is not culturally neutral and it is incompatible with anything that challenges it, be it science or another religion. Historically, these disputes are often resolved with the bloodshed of innocents, non-believers or any other minority group unfortunate enough to have their existence considered a crime punishable by death only.

You can believe in (a) god, many gods or even aliens and that's fine - it's faith and there's nothing harmful about that. Faith is personal and has a tendency for change as the person's beliefs naturally change. Having millions of people sit there and believe in the same writings from the same book preaching the same thing is not a huge coincidence of shared faith - that is religion.

When faith becomes organized religion, it becomes problematic because it's no longer about the beliefs of the individual, it's about extracting beliefs from a book or a text and it quickly becomes black and white on which way is the 'right' way to live and which isn't.

The problem with all this ISIS terrorism is radicalization, radicalization is why so-called 'good muslims' are turning into savages and gunning down other Muslim children senselessly. Radicalization is just another form of interpretation of religious text. If you remove religion, you quickly remove radicalization. The root of the problem isn't the Qur'an, it's the mentality that the Qur'an holds all the answers and must be followed religiously. Anyone with a fragile enough mind to be convinced that a holy book is the only way to live your life and that everything else is wrong, is vulnerable to radicalization and that applies to every and all religion out there - Christianity being a prime example which after thousands of years of gradual quoshing is still successfully ruining the lives of millions and still successfully justifying discrimination against women, homosexuals, bisexuals, transsexuals, people of <insert race here>, poor people...just about everyone. Do we really want a repeat of that?

Is banning religion the sensible thing to do? Obviously not, but we're not getting anywhere by making the obvious elephant in the room taboo to talk about. I have Muslim friends, I don't think they're ever going to become radicalized, but I don't know the future and I don't know what their minds are capable of making them believe. Equally, they don't know if I'm going to wake up as a massive racist and go full colonial on them and their family one day. But it's a trade-off and we know it's human instinct to be cautious and we're not offended by it even if we'd hate to be lumped in with either of those negative generalizations. If we walked on eggshells being careful not to say the 'wrong thing' constantly then we'd only create distance between ourselves and we'd lose control over the situation.

In any case, getting back to current events - I think this is only going to end one of two ways, either complete military force against ISIS or withdrawal from Syria. Given that Saudi Arabia supplies us with huge amounts of oil, I'd say its unlikely that we'll be withdrawing anytime soon. If this is going to become a full-fledged war then I can only hope it's finished swiftly, unfortunately destroying an ideology is going to be tougher than destroying a set military target. Maybe if all ISIS strongholds are hit it will slow or cease the spread of their ideology. I think the refugees would be happier to return home if the ISIS threat was removed too.

[Lord Raven]

I'm not going to touch on your religion stuff because that's going to be cyclic.  We're going to go around in circles, but I'm wondering if you've taken a math course because there are a ton of proofs that exist to disprove a concept.  You can indeed "prove a negative" in the way that you are implying.  I took issue with your statement of it being a delusion, rather than any sort of acceptance, but it seems like you accept it and fully want to criticize it.  You're missing the part where I specifically stated that I have no issue with criticism so much as outright declaration of delusion when people express faith in different ways from the religion.  Furthermore, Islamophobia refers to the phobia of the culture and the people hailing from the culture and not necessarily of the religion, given that I've faced Islamophobia despite being an out and out agnostic.

In any case, getting back to current events - I think this is only going to end one of two ways, either complete military force against ISIS or withdrawal from Syria. Given that Saudi Arabia supplies us with huge amounts of oil, I'd say its unlikely that we'll be withdrawing anytime soon. If this is going to become a full-fledged war then I can only hope it's finished swiftly, unfortunately destroying an ideology is going to be tougher than destroying a set military target. Maybe if all ISIS strongholds are hit it will slow or cease the spread of their ideology. I think the refugees would be happier to return home if the ISIS threat was removed too.

Sounds about right.  My only point was that we shouldn't give them fodder to round up supporters.  I think just about everyone has failed spectacularly at trying to get rid of ISIS anyway; the US has dumped too much money into a training program that came out with 5 prepared soldiers, and they do not want to support the Kurds against ISIS on the grounds that Turkey is a part of NATO so they don't wanna trample all over that.

[Pam-the-Lamb]

 Since you turned down my offer to discuss this privately, I'll post on here 

I'm not really looking for an argument nor did I say you called me a tumblr pleb.  I was clarifying my stance on things and clarifying how your post actually sounded close-minded and how presumptuous you were before I made a post.  You already accused me of supporting the Muslims in the terrorist attacks, then you feared that I would make a post that resembles an "SJW" on tumblr.  Yeah, okay.
Don't tell me how to conduct myself, especially since you pretty much did insult me.
This is about the Paris attacks, not Elliot Rodgers or that crap.  But I mean, Rodgers was very very misogynistic, so I think you may have been reading it the wrong way.

When did I accuse you? Did I actually accuse you or did you see what you wanted to see? I never feared that you would post a "SJW" post on here either. You say that I "pretty much did" insult you when you're putting words in my mouth in order to spark an argument. You also proceed to make accusations that I misread... what exactly?

You're missing the point.  Read my post again.  There is coverage that specifically paints Islam in a negative light and you have no problem with this?  I've brought up examples of this too.

Ever seen a white terrorist in the media?  No, you probably haven't seen those words combined.  Because nobody ever calls them white!  It's because they're always mentally ill or something.  They try to garner up sympathy for white people, then they proceed to call an African America/European a thug or a Muslim person a terrorist.  There is a lot wrong with this and this is actually what happens in this world.  Open your eyes.

-anecdotal-

  I understand that this paints Islam in a negative light and that Asian communities will suffer as a whole due to the general ignorance expressed towards Asian culture and religion. I've also had to study the ways in which the media portrays individuals belonging to minority ethnic groups so, obviously, I know how black communities are portrayed as thugs and how Asian communities are generalised as Muslims, especially in a negative light.

Again, this is not victim blaming, these are facts I've heard from actual people living there.  This, in no way, is the fault of those at the concerts and soccer games and all of that.  This is the fault of the way the government has handled past things and how the media has attempted to portray people who aren't the majority.  This is the fault of all of these perpetuating this ass-backwards culture that we should not even see in the modern west!  Yet we still see it, and those who do not wish to acknowledge it try to attack people who do acknowledge it by throwing labels like SJW at them and try to play the pity card where they're like "wow this just happened why are you arguing?"  But I'm not the one using this as a vehicle in the media to advocate war or worse.  I'm not the one exploiting these people for attention and ratings.  Ultimately I am unable to do anything but talk about this and analyze what the hell went on, because I'm just talking about this on a small forum.

Whoa, personal attack - didn't you accuse me of the same thing (nice)? What is your argument here? I know that this is happening. I'll admit that I use the label "SJW" in order to imply extreme ignorance and general stupidity. I've seen countless "Social Justice Warriors" use the label in an attempt to push skewed statistics for their own agenda and as an individual who has previously studied sociology, I'm aware the extreme lack of representability, reliability, and generalisability, that is rife amongst those articles. I also simply tried to diffuse the argument for the sake of the topic not being closed, I wasn't asking for sympathy, stop making assumptions.

I'm not sure who you're addressing with your little quip about exploiting the people?

I don't understand what integrity is in this instance.  Are you saying integrity is continuing to grieve what happened?  Because over here, we're discussing the issues.  Your entire point seems hinged by the fact that I seem to be coming onto here to look for an argument.  If you honestly think that, then you're being extremely presumptuous which is what led me to post those things to begin with.  You said that I seemed happy or whatever that all those people died, then you were almost expecting me to be an SJW.

Is that paragraph one large assumption or what? It was fairly obvious that I wasn't entirely serious by the fact that I addressed the French as "Frenchfams". You really jumped the gun there. Almost expecting you to be a SJW? Almost? Once again, it's fairly obvious that I was joking and you jumped the gun.

-back story-

It's fairly obvious that the West wants another excuse to further destabilise the Middle East. It's fairly obvious that ISIS is using any excuse to attack the West. If you owned a tinfoil hat, then we could argue about why this is happening since that's more interesting than wherever this is going.

I'm actually really pissed that you're assuming I'm using this tragedy as an excuse to argue.  No, I am not, and I posted a few rants because quite frankly this whole thing is ludicrous.  It is awful that this tragedy has occurred and it is also awful how the media is dealing with it.  It is also awful how there's gonna be more death and dying because there is some propaganda out there for the need for retribution.  I've seen some absolutely disgusting views - only from white people, in fact - suggesting we go in and eradicate them.  Basically advocating genocide.  You honestly think I have zero integrity here?  I'm just looking at the facts and how all of this started and trying to assess how the situation got so messed up that so many people have died.

You're pissed that I made an assumption even though you proceed to make a bunch of assumptions yourself? If a country is attacked by terrorists they're going to fight back. If a large terrorist organisation sends a pack of terrorists into Paris to kill unarmed civilians, they're going to go and retaliate. Are you suggesting that Paris apologises for being attacked and offers to make peace with terrorists? ISIS would just keep attacking until they slowly take land, just like they've done in the Middle East.

You know that ISIS are slaughtering Muslims for being the "wrong kind", they're not just a threat to the West. Would it be best to allow all the Syrians to flee and allow ISIS to take more territory and power? ISIS is a genuine threat, they're not the girl scouts. The West is attacking them (partly) because the West doesn't want to take in refugees which is plain to see by all the propaganda.

At least take some responsibility for your words and pretend like you've read our points.  You nitpicked one minor point that was a late edit and then you took some shots at me.  Come on.  If you don't wanna take a crap then get off the pot, otherwise you're wasting everyone's time and energy.

Of course I read your points and I knew that you wanted to argue. To be honest, the amount of assumptions you made pissed me off which is why I didn't want to respond.

You don't want me to to insult your character or insinuate anything. I'm happy to argue with you. Call me a racist. I mean, you don't know my personal opinions on the refugees and Islam and you don't know who I voted for so there's nothing to say that I'm not racist and you sure like making assumptions.

[Lord Raven]

When did I accuse you? Did I actually accuse you or did you see what you wanted to see? I never feared that you would post a "SJW" post on here either. You say that I "pretty much did" insult you when you're putting words in my mouth in order to spark an argument. You also proceed to make accusations that I misread... what exactly?

Please don't say the Frenchfams were asking to be massacred and executed via explosives whilst trying to enjoy a friendly football game.

You insinuated something there.  In other words, had preconceptions.

Man, I'm just glad that you're not one of those Tumblr plebs who spout "SCREW WHITEY" at any chance they get. Yeah, I get you. Islamaphobia has been pushed through our media for years.

I was seriously hoping you weren't going to copy and paste some article from Tumblr lol.

You had some preconception of what I would post.  You're acting like I wanted to start an argument.  I didn't.  I responded to your preconceptions which you clearly had going into this, otherwise you wouldn't be relieved that I didn't post something from tumblr.  The "lol" gave me the impression you weren't gonna take what I was saying seriously.  I've been around the internet a good while and I've heard a lot of similar responses to anyone who argues in favor of social justice stuff.

Whoa, personal attack - didn't you accuse me of the same thing (nice)? What is your argument here? I know that this is happening. I'll admit that I use the label "SJW" in order to imply extreme ignorance and general stupidity. I've seen countless "Social Justice Warriors" use the label in an attempt to push skewed statistics for their own agenda and as an individual who has previously studied sociology, I'm aware the extreme lack of representability, reliability, and generalisability, that is rife amongst those articles. I also simply tried to diffuse the argument for the sake of the topic not being closed, I wasn't asking for sympathy, stop making assumptions.

I'm not sure of where the personal attack is.  But don't infer things or go into things with preconceptions.

I'm not sure who you're addressing with your little quip about exploiting the people?

The media?

Is that paragraph one large assumption or what? It was fairly obvious that I wasn't entirely serious by the fact that I addressed the French as "Frenchfams". You really jumped the gun there. Almost expecting you to be a SJW? Almost? Once again, it's fairly obvious that I was joking and you jumped the gun.

It wasn't.  I really don't know you.  I don't browse the status threads.

You're pissed that I made an assumption even though you proceed to make a bunch of assumptions yourself? If a country is attacked by terrorists they're going to fight back. If a large terrorist organisation sends a pack of terrorists into Paris to kill unarmed civilians, they're going to go and retaliate. Are you suggesting that Paris apologises for being attacked and offers to make peace with terrorists? ISIS would just keep attacking until they slowly take land, just like they've done in the Middle East.

No, I'm not.

You know that ISIS are slaughtering Muslims for being the "wrong kind", they're not just a threat to the West. Would it be best to allow all the Syrians to flee and allow ISIS to take more territory and power? ISIS is a genuine threat, they're not the girl scouts. The West is attacking them (partly) because the West doesn't want to take in refugees which is plain to see by all the propaganda.

I never suggested anything of the sort, but there's a strawman.

Of course I read your points and I knew that you wanted to argue. To be honest, the amount of assumptions you made pissed me off which is why I didn't want to respond.

If I wanted to argue, I'd put more detail in my first post, because I really didn't want to talk about it.  If you really want proof of this then ask Kpyna because we talked as soon as I made my first post in this thread and I outright stated I wanted to avoid talking more about this, because I've talked about this in great detail elsewhere.

At any rate, I felt provoked so I went ahead and turned it into one.  I'm not the sole person to blame here and neither are you.  Not a hard concept.

[Milsap]

and yeah my facebook feed is crawling with americans celebrating the missile strikes.

There's Brits at it too. Some of them being as dumb to say "We shud drop bacon sandwiches on em 2!!!!!1111 LOLOLOLOLOLOLOL"

Bacon doesn't make them vapourise like the Wicked Witch of the West you idiots!

it's my belief that ISIL despite its name is only religiously motivated because its an easy way to separate our cultures. they're just terrible people scrambling for power and will use anything to excuse their violence and get more people on their side who have been harmed by the actions of the west.

These people are not Islamic. At least, not Islamic in the 'proper' sense. By that I mean if Islam truly bred terror, I would have been killed a long time ago as my town has a large Muslim community. They use their religion as an excuse and as justification because they have nothing else to go on. But it is separating cultures. British Muslims are being spat on in the street and it's absolutely disgusting.

[Kpyna]

My friend shared this 4 minute video and I think it's really on point regarding ISIL

Also a bit annoyed my governor isn't letting refugees take shelter in my state. I live in New Hampshire. There's way more deer than people and we're about to get hit by an El Nino and get covered in like 10 feet of snow so I doubt we're gonna be in danger when nobody can even really drive for like 3 months of the year

[Milsap]

A YouTube personality called BlueDrake (streams military based first person shooter games) was on about this the other day, saying that this whole 'us' and 'them' thing needs to stop. He has a lot of subscribers from the Middle East and he helped this guy out who loves watching the streams but can't play the games because of his eyesight so Drake set it up for him to be an unarmed VIP that his squad protects while crossing the map. Then he dropped the ball.

This guy wasn't American. He was Iranian, and lives as close to the fighting against ISIS as Portland, OR is to Los Angeles. He was saying that this whole letting the refugees stay thing isn't about religion or politics or anything like that- It was just about being a human being. Because we are all so connected these days the world is a smaller place. For every one Jihadist that slips through that net there are going to be 10,000 or so men women and children that genuinely need somewhere to go. We are not just Britain or Canada or New Zealand anymore. We are one world. If this attack on Paris isn't enough of a reason for us all to get ourselves together then I don't know what is.

[lets all go out for some frosty chocolate milkshakes]

you know i do wonder about the westboro baptist church and how much they must all be fuming cos they're tryina be religious extremists but are considered sorta passé loonies while isis is whooaaa the big scary thing wawaooaoow and hooverin up all the attention

additionally while we're on the subject of ~~~~~~muslim terror strikes~~~~~~ does anyone remember when 191 people died in madrid in 11-M? spain never gets a look in in the international "neva 4get" scene anymore......pobre españa..............

muhed and i have a pretty similar view on all of this tbh. and i'm not sure if it's entirely accurate or if i'm being too critical of my own country, but sorry for what America essentially started and then roped all of your leaders into being just as dumb about all of this :|

i mean at this stage with the inordinate amounts of money going to defense and defense accessories (the US has piled so much money into the f-35 but its SUCH a bad plane oh my god) at the moment the conflict is just a giant money laundering mess and Arms Companies rippin off the govt more than anything else. 

this thing has been going on for aaaages and people act as if Oh No The Sudden Muslim Menace but its nothing new. half the reason Christains are so big is cos they were v v v aggressive religiously in the past, ironically, and most people kinda conveniently forgot that. (crusades, missionaries, the weird birth of spain, even the witch hunts) and it can be argued that christianity is just whitewashed islam anyway

like the only reason you don't have fanatical pagans .v. the christians (christainity for the most part stole a LOT of pagan stuff like oestre, yule, etc. etc. and then did weird "don't associate with gross pagans they're the enemy") stuff is cos the pagan religion is p oriented in 'ignore them and do more nature stuff, it'll only come back to haunt u otherwise' thru the threefold rule more or less lmao. i mean pagan/wiccan extremists probably exist but i dunno if you're ever gonna see a bunch of fat goths on the telly going 'imma HEX this guy real good if you dont give in to our demands'

all we've done is be born at a time when one particular country was callin the shots and we also have sensationalist and prevalent media empires to give the more vocal and extremist end of things opponentwise a lot of attention. like honestly as a p cogent example of how incredibly screwed up this all is, remember the british media capitalising on the dead syrian kid on the beach and screeching CAMERON HOW COULD YOU after publishing years of literally 'we hate the moslem'.

but cos people think history is boorrriiingggg they dont look it up and they dont find out stuff like "at one point the western world supported Iran" "we were friends with saddam hussein at one point" and "maybe the middle east is a bit annoyed that the USA and the USSR made it their personal carving ground in the latter end of the last century"

its just so annoying when its swallowed hook line and sinker "cos the man on the telly said so!" w/o going 'maybe i ought to check this out myself' and gettin involved in the local muslim community or w/e (see also: lgbtq issues, feminism issues, mental health issues etc etc) cos thaattss too haaaarrrdddd x factor is gonna be on any minute nooowwwww why should i bother im a white guy with a nice hoooouuuuuse. or the other emerging end of things mostly on the internet, the "im obnoxiously vocal and argumentative but dont/wont actually do a lot of action on it cos of (various bad excuses)" aka The Tumblr/Twitter Brigade which i have been falling into in the past and have been trying to fall back out of. cos goddamn ive spent 2 years grumbling on tumblr about The State Of Things and not actually doing a lot of anything myself lol

also on the subject of fanatical conservative sentiment, they've recently got some emerging theory to believe that the conservative .v. liberal thing may be a neurobiological factor along with the overtrained fear response in the right wing brain so who even knows haha


edit for clarity: since this topic kicked off with insinuations im talkin mostly bout the public when im going on bout "people who...." cos the public comandeer a lot more political force than they realise but its squandered by subtle disruption tactics and infighting. aka the sensationalist right wing press and the screechy counterarguments by radical left wing people like the well meaning but ultimately drama-filled occupy movement. its a shame



honestly i do wonder what the world will look like in a good 100 years when another couple of bigname nations step up to strut their stuff around the world. maybe it'll be China v russia? i mean for some weird reason the uk is already cosying up to china so

edit: sorry for typing a lot. tl;dr: beth shrugs and just sorta burbles on about "history doth repeat itself" for several words

[Milsap]

does anyone remember when 191 people died in madrid

And the bigots forget that it was Basque separatists that carried out that attack and not Muslims.

[lets all go out for some frosty chocolate milkshakes]

And the bigots forget that it was Basque separatists that carried out that attack and not Muslims.

if im reading you right you're saying it was ETA who did the bombings?

the verdict is actually out on whether it was ETA or not. ETA themselves denied it. the current best theory is that it was a (possibly moroccan) terrorist splinter cell (there were sketchy links to al qaeda at best but anyone can just up and call themselves a jihadist group these days)

the bombing didn't fit ETA style attacks in the least and an attack by basque sepratists woulda just got Aznar even more elected. "hey this is our last gasp,  please be real hard on us when u get elected mr right wing conservative party leader!!!!". also consider that like the IRA, the ETA usually give warning before an attack which they didn't give at all in this case, and even for ETA this was a bit violent. it doesn't fit ETA modus operandi at all.

the current PM at the time, Aznar, of the Popular Party (spanish tories, basically) sent troops to iraq which on the whole the country didn't support like at all. (spain isn't really one for fighting or involving itself in wars much, see Franco and WW2) and th eway the election was going (attacks were ~3 days before elections) it looked like the conservative party were going to get in again and keep spain in iraq cos they were polling ahead

the bombing had the effect of sending a crapton of votes to zapateros socialist party over aznar's party and when zapatero got elected he pulled spain right out of iraq a month earlier than he said. you can see why its Complicated cos if you cut it down to simple factors it appears to have been a protest bombing to sway the opinion of the nation quickly and immediately from getting involved in the middle east. usually you'd expect a load of "no lets bomb them all to bits!!!" from spain but as i mentioned before spain didn't really want to fight in the middle east at all (remember its history, its basically an awkward mishmash of muslim and christian history)

the evidence is sketchy for it being straight up al qaeda and no-one conclusively proved it (intentionally or not) but just sayin it was straight up ETA doesn't take into account the minutae of the situation at the time


i mean i could be wrong but i was living in spain at the time and its how they saw it tbh

[SirBlaziken]

Allow me to deliver this news to those of you who don't know yet (everyone probably knows already, but regardless). The mastermind behind the attacks was killed in a police raid.