The Real Cause of Islamic Terrorism

Military History \| How To Make War \| Wars Around the World	Rules of Use	How to Behave on an Internet Forum
Murphy's Law in Action Discussion Board
Return to Topic Page

Subject: The Real Cause of Islamic Terrorism
SYSOP 4/24/2012 5:40:26 AM

Quote Reply

Show Only Poster Name and Title Newest to Oldest

Pages: 1 2

JFKY How many Lutherans 4/24/2012 9:39:35 AM

Are screaming "Allahu Akhbar" and shooting their fellow citizens, IraqiAmerican? Gedahn, he's an Episcopalian, right? And Qtub, he was a Methodist, correct? Bin Laden, no doubt was a devout Buddhist, as was his fellow traveler Mullah Omar.

One may or may not be able to talk about "Islam" or "Christianity" being this or that, but it is difficult to ignore the fact that, in the West and Middle East, most violence is perpetrated in the name of Allah. Now Allah may or may not approve, but many of his followers ACT AS IF he approves. And failing to realize that simple, but unpleasant fact, is hiding from the truth.

Quote Reply

IraqiAmerican 4/24/2012 10:14:24 AM

Those who shout "Allahu Akbar" and shoot their fellow Muslims do NOT represent the Islamic faith at all. There are extremists in every religion of the world, and these have nothing to do with the pristine tenets of their faith. True followers of Christianity, Judaism, Hinduism... or any other religion do NOT shoot their coreligionists or followers of other creeds because such acts have absolutely nothing to do with religion. Who do you think is behind "Islamic radicalism and extremism?" These are rulers of the closest allies of the United States: Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Bahrain, the U.A.E. and others, yet the U.S. has no courage to tell these rulers to their face that they are financing and promoting terrorism, thus encouraging them indirectly to continue their mischief. Some people simply refuse to open their eyes and face the truth, so they will remain blind till they fall in the deepest pit. They will then, and only then, blame none but themselves.

Quote Reply

JFKY Nice Try 4/24/2012 11:08:28 AM

That's the "No True Scotsman" Argument. No TRUE Scotsman would ever do "X" or "Y"...if they do, the aren't TRUE Scotsman.

Look saying Christianity or Islam is or is not "violent" is almost impossible...but it is very obvious that folks such as Qtub, or Nidal Hassan or Bin Laden or Mullah Omar consider(ed) themselves Muslims...and acted in its name. They thought were Muslims, and a large number of Muslims agree, so I argue they ARE Muslims. Sorry if that rankles....

The fact that millions follow Qtub doesn't mean Allah agrees, or that YOU agree, but it is foolish to deny that there is a strain of Islamic thought that is violent, xenophobic, and dangerous.

Quote Reply

HeavyD 4/24/2012 12:18:25 PM

Well, on the same note the real cause for American terrorism is Lobbyists: kinder and gentler bribery.

Terrorism you say? What terrorism? Iraq for starters. We destroyed and entire frikkin country, and are directly responsible for 100k+ deaths. Extreme political pressure was brought to bear to get everyone on board with the mission, both within the country and in assembling the 'coalition of the bribed, er, willing'. Other than the UK it was patently embarrassing how blatantly we bribed our 'allies' to put even trivial resources on the ground.

So to pretend that we are any different is rather hypocritical, eh?

Quote Reply

Some Guy Terrorism? 4/24/2012 12:51:28 PM

HeavyD,

You peddle utter and complete crap.

The Iraqis should be thanking America and its coalition allies for liberating them from one of the most brutal dictatorships in the world. The coalition did it with remarkably little loss of life. Almost all of the lost lives were the result of Baathist terrorists or Shia terrorists attacking their own people to reimpose a dictatorial government.

Much of the world that opposed the liberation of Iraq did so because they had cozy deals with Saddam Hussein and his sociopathic family. Their moral preening is sickening and hypocrtical.

Now the Iraqis have a chance at a decent government, democracy and human rights. They might screw it up but now it will be their screwup.

Quote Reply

arodrig6 4/24/2012 12:53:12 PM

By this logic, the Crusades of the Middle ages had nothing to do with Christianity, because they advocated violence and therefore were not Christian.

We call various radical terrorist groups "Islamic" because they themselves claim that they are fighting for Islam. By most standards, it is a twisted version of Islam, but that is still how they self-identify.

JFKY is right, this is a classic example of the "True Scotsman" fallacy.

Quote Reply

JFKY HeavyD, 4/24/2012 8:24:49 PM

Heavy on the Moral Equivalence. You want to try a bit further, FDR=Hitler, Eisenhower=Van Manstein?

Iraq better off today, than under the Tikriti clan?

Quote Reply

Nicolei 4/24/2012 8:53:09 PM

By the fruit you will know the tree. Mohammed is regarded by Muslims as the perfect example of the perfect Muslim and his lifestyle and perspective is to be emulated by Muslims for all times and peoples/culture. Mohammed's first 13 years of peaceful preaching in Mecca resulted in some 150 followers. Moderate peaceful Muslims would quote Koran verses from this period to support their belief that Islam is really a peaceful religion.

Following the peaceful period, Mohammed's spent the next 10 years in Medina being active in preaching, politics and WARFARE. At the end of that 10 years warfare, The whole of Arabia was under him and Islam. His successors emulated him and they went on to defeat the Persian and the Byzantines in Middle East, North Africa, Asia Minor and parts of Europe. The Muslim terrorists would quote Koran verses from Mohammed's last 10 years to justify their violence and also the verses in the Koran that abrogates the earlier peaceful revelations to refute the peaceful moderate Muslims.

Observation: 13 years of peaceful Islam produced 150 followers; 10 years of politics and violence the whole of Arabia came under Islam. Conclusion: Preaching, politics and particularly VIOLENCE is the success formula to spread Islam.

Since Mohammed was a religious, political, military etc leader, and he never separated one from any other, in reality there is no separation of state from religion no matter what peaceful moderate Muslims wish to believe. To believe that there is such a separation is to deny Mohammed's example which they are suppose to emulate.

Quote Reply

HeavyD Yes, terrorism 4/24/2012 11:31:13 PM

Someguy: "Much of the world that opposed the liberation of Iraq did so because they had cozy deals with Saddam Hussein and his sociopathic family. Their moral preening is sickening and hypocrtical." Only 4 little problems with this statement: 1. The 'Liberation' of Iraq was not the reason given to the UN or the American people before we invaded, now was it? IT was supposedly because a) Saddam had WMDs b) He had strong links with Al Queda and c) there was an imminent threat. High levels knew all along that b) and c) were speculative at best, outright fabrications at worst, so when a) turned up empty the war profiteers trotted out the hollow 'Bad Man' argument. 2. The US enjoyed cozy dealings with Saddam in the '80s when it suited us, now didn't we. He was a bad man back then too. So who's moral preening is hypocritical? 3. The US has a looooooong history of supporting dictators, monarchs and when it suits our purposes. Why does Iran hate us? The Shah. Think the Egyptians in Tahrir Square were happy we propped up Mubarak for so long? Unlikely. 4. We turn a blind eye to many brutal dictators when the overall importance to us is not high enough. So any moral preening that we are the 'good guys' and 'liberators' is truly sickening: only when it serves our interests. I'm not bagging on the US - every state acts in it's own interests. I just object to any pretense that we don't have bribery going on here, or that some of our actions are not validly seen as terrorism or repressive to some. After all, one man's freedom fighter is another man's terrorist, eh?

Quote Reply

myhandlewontfi hmmm 4/25/2012 5:33:20 AM

and here i thought the iranians hated us, because a minority believed the clerics death to america, and the rest just went along.

as for the article there are plenty of places in africa and maybe even asia just as corrupt, but they dont make international terrorism. hmmm, maybe they just havnt thought of it yet.

is islam a violent religion? You better not think that or you risk your face getting smashed by an extremist. :P

joke aside i dont think it is, but maybe it is more violent than : Turn the other cheek. And sometimes religion has very little to do with what is beeing done in its name.

Quote Reply

1 2