What should the West do Now about Islamic Terrorism?

[Rick O'Shez]

From where they could obtains ?

There's lots of stuff floating around if you have the money.

 

[Godobeyer]

There's lots of stuff floating around if you have the money.

I don't think so , they already have money .

except if West or Russia sell them some ?

 

[Rick O'Shez]

except if West or Russia sell them some ?

I'm glad you have included Russia at last. How about China too?

Imagine an "axis of evil" involving ISIS and North Korea.

 

[Godobeyer]

I'm glad you have included Russia at last. How about China too?

Why you think that someone could sell them nukes ?

Do you think that West really fighting all terrorists in Syria?
after almost year, why they still exist ,could not be defeated ?!

 

[Rick O'Shez]

after almost year, why they still exist could be defeated ?!

Make your mind up. One minute you're blaming the west for getting involved, the next minute you're criticising them for not being involved enough.

And Russia has been dropping bombs too.

 

[Smart_Guy]

Probably the best thing, at least until ISIS obtains WMDs.

Which is happening in a foreign land the West has no authority over. Not to mention that the West owns WMD's already, and did cause disasters with it before. I think they don't have the right to question who own WMD's if they own it and actually used it before.

 

[Godobeyer]

Make your mind up. One minute you're blaming the west for getting involved, the next minute you're criticising them for not being involved enough.

And Russia has been dropping bombs too.

There is two kind of involvements , good one and evil one .

When it's about fighting ISIS, I consider it as good one and may required.
when it's about supporting the rebels in Syria (terrorists) that evil one and hypocrisy.

 

[Godobeyer]

@Rick O'Shez if West keep supporting what they called rebels(terrorists) in Syria, I prefer they step down , and stop intervention there.

 

[Rick O'Shez]

Which is happening in a foreign land the West has no authority over. Not to mention that the West owns WMD's already, and did cause disasters with it before. I think they don't have the right to question who own WMD's if they own it and actually used it before.

Perhaps not, but it is reasonable to be concerned about rogue states ( nutters ) like ISIS and Korea obtaining WMDs.

 

[Rick O'Shez]

@Rick O'Shez if West keep supporting what they called rebels(terrorists) in Syria, I prefer they step down , and stop intervention there.

Better tell the Russians too, they are bombing another set of "rebels", all very confusing.

 

[Godobeyer]

Better tell the Russians too, they are bombing another set of "rebels", all very confusing.

Russians many just don't want to bomb "ally terrorists of West " on ground . because West want too.


Obama urges Russia to stop bombing "moderate" Syria rebels
http://www.reuters.com/article/mideast-crisis-syria-idUSKCN0VN0M7

 

[Smart_Guy]

Perhaps not, but it is reasonable to be concerned about rogue states ( nutters ) like ISIS and Korea obtaining WMDs.

Generally speaking, I agree. I just wish there is a way to deal with that without making things worse causing something like this:

But in this case, we can replace "democracy" with the generic word "interference".

Does the photo above show correctly?

 

[Jumi]

Yep, and democracy doesn't come through force but the will of the people.

 

[Godobeyer]

I've never once heard a Muslim lay the blame for the likes of Islamic State or Boko Haram at the feet of pissed off Muslims who hate people that believe differently than they do. It's always cop-outs like 'they are not true Muslims' or 'the West supplies them'. In the case of Islamic State I admit the West is indirectly & partially responsible on two accounts:

1. We toppled Saddam's regime and laid the ground work for the resulting chaos that would see Islamic State arise;
2. We fund the Saudis who provided Islamic State with a lot of their hardware.

I don't deny the West is partially to blame for this - but neither do I see Muslims admitting that Islamic fundamentalism is a fundamentally Islamic problem. They brush it off every time.

I do understand that in wars or civil war is sound of hate and radical is more .

You never heard a Muslim blame ISIS ? or Boko Haram !!!

ok listen

Btw I made threads about ISIS and Boko haram condemn them.

 

[Tomorrows_Child]

Where's your proof that there were atheist bombings? I'm still waiting.

Please, if you want to have a discussion, reply to my entire post otherwise there is no point in me writing factual arguments and getting nonsensical replies.

 

[Tomorrows_Child]

And yet ISIS, Boko Ham and Al Qaeda self-identify as Muslims and find justification in the Quran for their "war on the infidels". Maybe you need to talk to THEM about it instead of blaming everyone else.

What does self identification mean? If I self identified as a rabbit you would think I was a mad man and you would be right. If one must identify as something, belong to a club, a profession or a religious identity they must met certain criteria. That is the way of the world. If these people do not meet the criteria of even being muslim in the first place, considering they have to buy books called Islam for Dummies for example, why should I or anyone else with intelligence label the mas Muslims?

And please stop mentioning organisations and blanketing them as Muslims or Islamic. Do some research, find out who created, funded, supported and propagated organisations such as Black September, Al-Qaeda, Taliban and the big bogeymen of the modern world, ISIS.

You can't support governments that play both the arsonist and the fire fighter. Why did we go to war with Iraq and claim they had WMDs, when in reality everyone knew they never and that the chemical weapons they did once have was sold to them by the US to kill Iranians?

 

[Rick O'Shez]

If these people do not meet the criteria of even being muslim in the first place, considering they have to buy books called Islam for Dummies for example, why should I or anyone else with intelligence label the mas Muslims?

There is clearly a strong fundamentalist tendency in Islam, the "radical Islamists" represent the extreme end of it.

 

[Jumi]

Please, if you want to have a discussion, reply to my entire post otherwise there is no point in me writing factual arguments and getting nonsensical replies.

So you just decided to lump in atheists, just to blame them for something but have nothing to offer in which atheists are responsible and what they have done.

 

[FearGod]

Well, I don't know at this writing if this particular Munich case is motivated by Islamist hatred of the west. But there have certainly been enough cases to warrant discussion of this issue.

What do we do about such cases? I think if there are people with enough evil and madness in their hearts they can always find a way to cause the deaths of innocents on the scales we have been seeing.

Should we go for tighter boarders and greater vetting and questioning of entrants? Should people of certain ethnicities (such as those where the people are predominantly Muslim) receive more aggressive vetting?

Should we give police and intelligence agencies more rights to question and investigate people they deem suspicious? This will come at the cost of what some will see as intimidating and scaring some who have no great evil intentions. But I have to believe truly innocent people might get scared and inconvenienced, but I don't believe they will be harmed.

Do we say we are doing the best we can and accept that these type of killing events are just going to happen from time to time and maybe our press should report it but not over-report it? And at the same time our authorities continue searching and investigating at the same level that they have been?

Should we become more isolationist and turn away from involvement with the Islamic world both economically and militarily. If we become more isolationist do we stand by for the killing of innocent villagers in the Islamic world and sit on our military hands? Are we expected to be humanitarian even at the risk of being labeled interventionists?

Or do you take the anti-west (usually anti-American) view that the west has caused the majority of the problems. But even still you have to address the question of the safety of innocent people on western soil.

What do we do NOW about Islamic terrorists in the west? (remember the past can never be changed)

Better to destroy all the companies that produce cigarettes which kills millions, but who cares about us humans.
Believe me no one cares, they only pretending to.

For example while France was in the state of emergency, they allowed people to gather to celebrate an event,
such gathering was a good target to kill many civilians, who cares.

 

[Tomorrows_Child]

So you just decided to lump in atheists, just to blame them for something but have nothing to offer in which atheists are responsible and what they have done.

Once again, reply to what I posted in response. If you are unwilling to do so, just say. Stop posting nonsense and wasting my time.