The Arab Spring and "the War on Terror"

[tonyh29]

34 minutes ago, bickster said:

@tonyh29stop pretending to be 21 again

You misread the article , it said “banker” not w….

[Stevo985]

1 hour ago, a m ole said:

in the replies - if you’re of nervous disposition don’t watch:

 

Jesus they actually took off with people clinging to the plane? That's madness

[DCJonah]

1 hour ago, Davkaus said:

I am genuinely stunned that the planes took off with people clinging to them. 

Imagine that feeling of desperation and despair that the almost guaranteed certainty of dying by clinging to a jet about to take off is better than the alternative. 

Genuinely heart breaking. 

[It's Your Round]

I don’t know what the answer to this is, it’s been a problem in the making for decades, with a whole new level of destruction coming. Western occupation forever isn’t realistic, and the billions or trillions already spent on Afghan defences, weapons and trying to instil a capable government have failed miserably. I feel for the ordinary citizens that just want to live their lives without oppression. Desperate times 

[PussEKatt]

Makes you wonder why even the Taliban want to live the way they do.FFS

[regular_john]

2 minutes ago, PussEKatt said:

Makes you wonder why even the Taliban want to live the way they do.FFS

They've got this book that tells them that's how they should be living. Just imagine how bad it would be if their religion wasn't the religion of peace!

[PussEKatt]

Yeah,your right there.Forgot about the religion of peace bit.We should think ourselves lucky that it is a religion of peace and tranquility and not a religion of war and other horrible stuff like that.

[NurembergVillan]

8 minutes ago, regular_john said:

They've got this book that tells them that's how they should be living. Just imagine how bad it would be if their religion wasn't the religion of peace!

Is that not the same book read by those whose lives they seek to destroy?

What you've written is akin to believing that the troubles in Ireland are all down to what it says in the Bible.

[regular_john]

22 minutes ago, NurembergVillan said:

Is that not the same book read by those whose lives they seek to destroy?

What you've written is akin to believing that the troubles in Ireland are all down to what it says in the Bible.

Not the same at all. The Troubles were primarily a nationalistic conflict regarding the reunification or separation of Ireland/N. Ireland. Yes, there was a religious component to it but it would be completely incorrect to say that it was a primarily religious conflict.

 

Islamic extremists, and their various conflicts, are very different. The groups in question are primarily driven by a desire to impose their particular interpretation of Islam and establish caliphates etc.

 

The Taliban, Al Qaeda, Boko Haram, Al Shibab, ISIS etc are not nationalist or political groups; they are driven almost solely by religious ideology. Unfortunately, that ideology is that The Qur'an is the literal word of God and that Jihad is a justifiable measure to conquer the infidels.

Edited August 16, 2021 by regular_john

[HanoiVillan]

23 minutes ago, regular_john said:

Not the same at all. The Troubles were primarily a nationalistic conflict regarding the reunification or separation of Ireland/N. Ireland. Yes, there was a religious component to it but it would be completely incorrect to say that it was a primarily religious conflict.

I guess it's way off topic but you should maybe go back a little in history and consider why 'northern Ireland' is a political construct that came into existence for the first time in history at the moment it did, and why a difference between 'Northern Ireland' and 'Ireland' both emerged and then proved so important.

[Chindie]

Also most Islamic extremists are also political entities, due to the requirement of extreme interpretations of Islam extending so much into all aspects of life that they inherently become political entities through a desire to rip up the status quo and reform it in their particular vision of Islam. The whole movement is called Islamism as a result.

[Awol]

1 minute ago, regular_john said:

Not the same at all. The Troubles were primarily a nationalistic conflict regarding the reunification or separation of Ireland/N. Ireland. Yes, there was a religious component to it but it would be completely incorrect to say that it was a primarily religious conflict.

 

Islamic extremism, and the related conflicts, are very different. The groups in question are primarily driven by a desire to impose their particular interpretation of Islam and establish caliphates etc.

 

The Taliban, Al Qaeda, Boko Haram, Al Shibab, ISIS etc are not nationalist or political groups; they are driven almost solely by religious ideology. Unfortunately, that ideology is that The Qur'an is the literal word of God and that Jihad is a justifiable measure to conquer the infidels.

While that is true, those are all non-state armed groups in the conventional sense - The Taliban has never (until now) controlled all of Afghanistan, while ISIS only briefly achieved a proto-state.

States that identify themselves most strongly with different denominations of the Islamic faith (primarily Pakistan, Saudi and Iran) pursue much more conventional state goals relating to relative power, influence and position in the international system.

Militancy and militant groups are used by these states, both to achieve foreign policy goals and divert domestic anger and unrest externally, away from the state. 

Iran for example was simultaneously supporting the Houthis rebels in Yemen, and their ideological nemesis AQAP - also based in Yemen. It’s not that the religious aspect doesn’t matter to them (it does, intensely) but reasons of state take precedence. That leaves acres of room for blatant hypocrisy and the pursuit of entirely contradictory policies by different arms of the state.

Pakistan created and nurtured LeT as a militant force to use against India. That the LeT is so fervent in its ideological motivation it sometimes commits terror attacks on Pakistani soil, is just the price of doing business and accepted by the state. 

Similarly Pakistan’s intimate relationship with the Afghan Taliban inadvertently led to the creation of the Tehrik-i-Taliban (TTP), dedicated to overthrowing the Pakistani state, mirroring ideologically the project in Afghanistan. Again, an acceptable cost for achieving higher political objectives.

Serious terrorism is almost always state backed. The good book (whichever one) simply provides the ideological motivation to militants, and a fig-leaf of justification to the states behind them. 

 

[chrisp65]

38 minutes ago, regular_john said:

Not the same at all. The Troubles were primarily a nationalistic conflict regarding the reunification or separation of Ireland/N. Ireland. Yes, there was a religious component to it but it would be completely incorrect to say that it was a primarily religious conflict.

 

Islamic extremists, and their various conflicts, are very different. The groups in question are primarily driven by a desire to impose their particular interpretation of Islam and establish caliphates etc.

 

The Taliban, Al Qaeda, Boko Haram, Al Shibab, ISIS etc are not nationalist or political groups; they are driven almost solely by religious ideology. Unfortunately, that ideology is that The Qur'an is the literal word of God and that Jihad is a justifiable measure to conquer the infidels.

Oliver Cromwell says hi.

 

[Rugeley Villa]

2 hours ago, Davkaus said:

I'm not feeling great about our country right now.

No idea what the answer is...stay there forever? It was an impossible problem, but not content with wading in and causing the deaths of hundreds of thousands, only to abandon people to the Taliban when they were finally living better lives...It feels like this blood is on our hands, again. 

It’s a shitty situation. Lose/Lose whatever we do, but it’s definitely victory for The Taliban. Embarrassing really, but what else can we do? Stay there forever which isn’t right , or cut our losses and stay out of it. Modern day Vietnam I’ve heard said a few times. We’ll no doubt end up back there within the next 10-20 years. 

[desensitized43]

1 hour ago, regular_john said:

Not the same at all. The Troubles were primarily a nationalistic conflict regarding the reunification or separation of Ireland/N. Ireland. Yes, there was a religious component to it but it would be completely incorrect to say that it was a primarily religious conflict.

 

Islamic extremists, and their various conflicts, are very different. The groups in question are primarily driven by a desire to impose their particular interpretation of Islam and establish caliphates etc.

 

The Taliban, Al Qaeda, Boko Haram, Al Shibab, ISIS etc are not nationalist or political groups; they are driven almost solely by religious ideology. Unfortunately, that ideology is that The Qur'an is the literal word of God and that Jihad is a justifiable measure to conquer the infidels.

The Quran isn't one homogeneous document any more than the Bible is. It's wholely contradictory in many regards and these Islamist (notice I say Islamist, not Islamic - ones an ideology and ones a religion) extremists have chosen to follow all the nasty bits and disregard the moderate stuff. That says more about them as people than it does about the religion itself.

Personally I'd regard these people as fascists first, and Muslims second. They've co-opted elements of the Quran as a means of justification and a recruitment tool, nothing more. If they didn't have that they'd still be fascists, they'd just find another reason.

[Rugeley Villa]

1 hour ago, PussEKatt said:

Makes you wonder why even the Taliban want to live the way they do.FFS

Brings them closer to god and all that. Their brains are just programmed a different way, they may as well be a different species . Life is jihad(struggle) and they will be repaid in paradise once they die or become martyrs . 

[Rugeley Villa]

1 hour ago, It's Your Round said:

I don’t know what the answer to this is, it’s been a problem in the making for decades, with a whole new level of destruction coming. Western occupation forever isn’t realistic, and the billions or trillions already spent on Afghan defences, weapons and trying to instil a capable government have failed miserably. I feel for the ordinary citizens that just want to live their lives without oppression. Desperate times 

Look how easy it was for The Taliban to regain control and then some. 20 years worth of what for?  The Taliban are hardened fighters in it for the long run . We could go over there again and kick them out for a bit but how many lives and how much money will be sacrificed?

Even getting them to the table you’d be turning a blind eye to their barbaric way of life which would still continue even if you could get talks going . 

[bannedfromHandV]

It’s not difficult to work out why backward thinking men might want to live under Sharia law.

It essentially relegates women to be subordinate slaves, unable to think or do for themselves and constantly at the beck and call of those men.

I’d suggest that this is the primary reason that the Taliban has swept to victory so easily, heck, there are folks in this country (non islamist) would no doubt get behind it if offered the chance, you need look no further than the Plymouth gunman and his apparent ‘Incel’ disposition.

I may be simplifying the issue too much but I can’t help but feel that this is a central theme to Sharia law and Islamic states.

[Rugeley Villa]

Banning music in some uk households wouldn’t be a bad thing , so I’m kind of partial to some sharia za lia, if it suits .

[foreveryoung]

It's rife in the UK (barr the killing) and no one wants to get involved in halting it here, so I'm not sure why it was ever thought we could control it in another country.