OT: Terrorist attacks in Paris

[musiqsoulchild]

At some point, the way out of this maybe to allow for the creation of a Caliphate that is more 21st century than 12th. After all, Israel's beauty is that they are not wedded to the Old Testament. They have always challenged their own thinkers and moved forward on cultural evolution.

Right now too many in the region are wedded to ancient extremist doctrine though. So I don't see how you would ever bring about the creation of this idea. When the people in the region couldn't agree on it themselves. Thus sectarian fighting for control of the territory would continue, even if the rest of the world said, "Lets tear up all borders in the M.E. make up one giant nation-sate and share all the oil." No one is going for that especially those who hold power in the region. Saudi royals aren't giving up power. Ayatollahs aren't giving up power/land. Jordan wouldn't want to throw in with much more troubled areas like Libya and Syria.

Sadly, you are spot on.

I was naive to even think it.

[TimRobbins]

Uh pissing off Turkey?

And why should we care about that? What is Turkey going to do? Turkey is NOT our ally. Not with Erdogan.

[TimRobbins]

I have an honest question for folks here - as you are all very knowledgeable.

We all accept and fully supported the advent of a Jewish state ( Israel). What would be the problem in having a similarly themed home /country for Muslims? Or, in other words, the Caliphate?

Lets be VERY CLEAR here ---- I am NOT advocating for Daesh and their pogrom. I am asking more as a theoretical question - whats wrong with having a Caliphate in the 21 st century?

First, Israel is NOT a Jewish state. It's the homeland of the Jewish people. Big difference there. Israel is not a theocracy. It's a secular country, and It has complete and absolute freedom of religion. The laws there are man made, not biblical.

Nevertheless, I don't think we have any right to tell others they cannot live under s theocracy. I think the idea of an Islamic State is fine and there's clearly demand for it among the Sunni Arabs. Iran is a theocratic state and we accept it, so is Saudi Arabia. As I've been arguing throughout this thread, we're not the world's policeman and we should not be forcing out values on others. As long as ISIS is willing to stay contained to the ME, I don't think we have any cause for intervention.

[TimRobbins]

he has certainly stopped doing things when they weren't working. he has also made minor adjustments to stated policy. but please name one impactful change in obama's middle east policy that was unwarranted

the situation in the middle east is volatile and fluid. any involved leader should be constantly shifting their country's middle east strategy in small tactical ways

you've simultaneously said that obama is "do nothing" and "aggressively pursuing reunification." you've suggested that america be less involved in the middle east while at the same time actively fixing what is wrong there. it's like you're picking random talking points from conflicting anti-obama blogs. it's incoherent

I think we're just about done here. You're obviously worried about defending Obama, and as usual, when you get defensive, you resort to clinging to semantics and ad-hominem attacks.

I really don't care about Obama. I'm indifferent towards him and this thread really isn't about Obama. This is about our future policy in the ME.

[DarthDiggler69]

Surprized no one mentioned it yet, new attack in San Bernadino: gun control, terror or workplace violence?

To me its definitely terror: two devout muslims with bullet proof vests, IED and AR-15's without any hints of attack, storm into his company christmas party and start shooting everyone. Now they are searching for a motive, many motives are in their Qur'an and Hadiths, this guy was a devout muslim so he likely follows offensive Jihad doctrine of the books. Government better get this right and don't politically coat the topic and mislead the public again.

[bentheredengthat]

Surprized no one mentioned it yet, new attack in San Bernadino: gun control, terror or workplace violence?

To me its definitely terror: two devout muslims with bullet proof vests, IED and AR-15's without any hints of attack, storm into his company christmas party and start shooting everyone. Now they are searching for a motive, many motives are in their Qur'an and Hadiths, this guy was a devout muslim so he likely follows offensive Jihad doctrine of the books. Government better get this right and don't politically coat the topic and mislead the public again.

After reading the more about this event this morning I came here to say exactly what you said.

It's terrorism.

Mail order terrorist bride? Ready and willing to have a baby to play the part? These people aren't f*cking around.

Enough with the politically correct language. Just call it what it is.

[DarthDiggler69]

His dad calling him a 'Devout muslim' should have triggered some alarms. The more a follower reads into the books the more dangerous they can become.

But I was thinking they weren't part of ISIS, I was thinking they were doing it on their own. It being ISIS just tells me that Caliphate needs to be destroyed as soon as possible because many are seeing it as legitimate as time goes on. Once its destroyed we will see a large spike it terror attacks before it dies. This is gonna take decades to control, but I don't think it truly can be eliminated because its written to do stuff like this in their books.

[TheSuzerain]

Seems like a radical Islam/Workplace violence hybrid.

[bentheredengthat]

Seems like a radical Islam/Workplace violence hybrid.

Yeah or just an undisciplined terrorist. Big plans, little patience. Someone pissed in their cheerios and they just couldn't hold off anymore. Or they just never could figure out the pipe bomb diagram they found online.

I think we are trying to overthink these guys. They are just easily assimilated easily manipulated hateful people.

[musiqsoulchild]

Could be a sleeper cell.
Could be a hybrid act.

Either way there is the whole unholy nexus of radicaliation in Saudi / a bride who ALREADY knew how to use tactical weapons and build bombs / Pakistan based friends who are on the radicals being watched by FBI.

I cant ignore this anymore - its militant Islam. Its become a part of Islam now - this is precisely my point when I started this thread. The problem is IN Islam. The solution should ALSO come from WITHIN Islam.

[Rerisen]

Could be a sleeper cell.
Could be a hybrid act.

Either way there is the whole unholy nexus of radicaliation in Saudi / a bride who ALREADY knew how to use tactical weapons and build bombs / Pakistan based friends who are on the radicals being watched by FBI.

I cant ignore this anymore - its militant Islam. Its become a part of Islam now - this is precisely my point when I started this thread. The problem is IN Islam. The solution should ALSO come from WITHIN Islam.

Like many who have done these heinous acts, Syed Farook also wasn't some poverty stricken youth from a battered country. He had a comfortable government job and was said to be, "living the American dream" by some of his colleagues.

We hit on this earlier in the thread, the grand grievances ideas, like this is all about inequality or whatever inward looking blame we try to band-aid it with, just doesn't ring true.

Born in the US he also would have little reason to care who is 'controlling the oil' in the ME. It's a poisonous strain of ideology problem as you said. We aren't at war with Islam, Islam is at war with itself, or needs to become so to defeat this thinking.

[DarthDiggler69]

the main war going on seems to be a Sunni vs Shia proxy war with outside powers taking sides. Dont forget the Yemen war is loosely tied to the Syrian War because it has Saudi Rebels vs Iranian rebels vs Al-Queda. I'm a believer that Saudi Arabia is indirectly behind ISIS and are perhaps friends with Al-Queda, yes there have been ISIS attacks in Saudi Arabia but they were against Shia Mosques which Im sure Saudi doesnt care about

Anyway that Farook guy was actually born in Chicago

[bentheredengthat]

Maybe OT ..but since DarthD brought up Saudi Arabia... and that we talk about only being in the ME because of oil...

Everyone says the Saudi's are pumping their oil to drive more expensive hydrocarbon sources out of business. One of my hobbies is following alternative energy sources, even the ones that are not within the bounds of mainstream science ( as many of the greatest discoveries are before they become mainstream).

I'm wondering if the Saudi's don't see something like that coming down the road and are just pumping to sell as much as they can before oil is no longer a preferred energy source. I mean maybe that would happen in 20-30 years but that's a relatively short time period to sell as much of your huge source of oil as possible before it's worth pennies on the dollar.

[musiqsoulchild]

the main war going on seems to be a Sunni vs Shia proxy war with outside powers taking sides. Dont forget the Yemen war is loosely tied to the Syrian War because it has Saudi Rebels vs Iranian rebels vs Al-Queda. I'm a believer that Saudi Arabia is indirectly behind ISIS and are perhaps friends with Al-Queda, yes there have been ISIS attacks in Saudi Arabia but they were against Shia Mosques which Im sure Saudi doesnt care about

Anyway that Farook guy was actually born in Chicago

David Headley was also connected with Chicago....another well-to-do, well educated Muslim.

Also, radicalized.

[art_barbie]

i agree with you analagy...but what exactly is the disease in your opinion?

The disease is the wars/instability in the region (Middle East). The vast majority of this instability is created and maintained by the West and its insistence on forcing the colonial borders/nations on people who clearly reject them.

sorry im late but yes...yes...agree here too...which begs the next question: why did we set up the borders and why do we (help) enforce them mostly via nato approved ops? What exactly are we (helping) to protecting/enforce? and why? What is nato? What is the U.N? Why do they exist? Who are they protecting? And who pays is for the "renting" out of our military to enforce this stuff? You do realize that we are compensated for our middle east involvement missions? Who compensates us? And where do they get $20-30-40-50 billion to compensate us?

[TimRobbins]

i agree with you analagy...but what exactly is the disease in your opinion?

The disease is the wars/instability in the region (Middle East). The vast majority of this instability is created and maintained by the West and its insistence on forcing the colonial borders/nations on people who clearly reject them.

sorry im late but yes...yes...agree here too...which begs the next question: why did we set up the borders and why do we (help) enforce them mostly via nato approved ops? What exactly are we (helping) to protecting/enforce? and why? What is nato? What is the U.N? Why do they exist? Who are they protecting? And who pays is for the "renting" out of our military to enforce this stuff? You do realize that we are compensated for our middle east involvement missions? Who compensates us? And where do they get $20-30-40-50 billion to compensate us?

We are clearly NOT getting compensated - just look at how our national debt ballooned since we started our military involvement in 2001. What are we protecting? The world oil supply. However, given the oil glut, I don't think that's necessary anymore, so I can't see why we shouldn't just back out and let Russia/France/UK carry the load for a change while we free-ride they they've been doing for the past century.

[art_barbie]

The disease is the wars/instability in the region (Middle East). The vast majority of this instability is created and maintained by the West and its insistence on forcing the colonial borders/nations on people who clearly reject them.

sorry im late but yes...yes...agree here too...which begs the next question: why did we set up the borders and why do we (help) enforce them mostly via nato approved ops? What exactly are we (helping) to protecting/enforce? and why? What is nato? What is the U.N? Why do they exist? Who are they protecting? And who pays is for the "renting" out of our military to enforce this stuff? You do realize that we are compensated for our middle east involvement missions? Who compensates us? And where do they get $20-30-40-50 billion to compensate us?

We are clearly NOT getting compensated - just look at how our national debt ballooned since we started our military involvement in 2001. What are we protecting? The world oil supply. However, given the oil glut, I don't think that's necessary anymore, so I can't see why we shouldn't just back out and let Russia/France/UK carry the load for a change while we free-ride they they've been doing for the past century.

not getting compensated? hmmm...you sure about that? You do realize we were compensated for gulf war 1? Fully. We've been compensated one way or another for just about every single other conflict we've been involved in...and we will never know the ways in which central banks like out federal reserve fully compensate the US governement...its purposely locked away...you will never know unless it gets leaked. ONly decades from now will we know...by the way...guess which countries were the latest to develop a rothschild/rockefellor/mellon/morgan controlled central bank?

here's the most recent 3. Libya, IRaq, Syria. Guess how many countries are left? 2 or 3 by my count. Guess which countries!!???

You will never guess...but North Korea and Cuba.

Hmmm...recent wars and conflicts or over throwing of regimes in all 3...after years of building up the animosity...now Libya, iraq, and syria have Central banks. With Korea and Cuba up next.

Cuba fought a 'econonic sanctions war for 50 years...they gave up...there will be a rothschild/rockefellor/morgan/schiff/brown(lehman ousted) controlled central bank there shortly...i give it 6 months. Which leaves North Korea....hmm...any guess on when that war starts? well the economic sanctions started years ago...but I give it 2-3 years maximum before nato forces invade...as they have their hands full in the middle east.

By the way do you know who owns the federal reserve? Who owns all the central banks around the world? Figured it out yet? I hinted at it above but they all fall under the control of Bank of England, Citi, Chase, wells, BoA.

anyway...

[TimRobbins]

Again with the banking nonsense? You won't find takers for that kind of discussion here. Try Storm-front or somewhere similar.

[DarthDiggler69]

sorry im late but yes...yes...agree here too...which begs the next question: why did we set up the borders and why do we (help) enforce them mostly via nato approved ops? What exactly are we (helping) to protecting/enforce? and why? What is nato? What is the U.N? Why do they exist? Who are they protecting? And who pays is for the "renting" out of our military to enforce this stuff? You do realize that we are compensated for our middle east involvement missions? Who compensates us? And where do they get $20-30-40-50 billion to compensate us?

NATO and UN were formed to prevent major catastrophes like World War I and World War II. If you understand the war history and intricate alliances dating back to the Napoleonic Wars to WWII and how turbulent it was it makes very good sense. So far so good, in that there have been no major wars that can even sniff the scale of WWII and European countries are all friends(if you thought the ME was bad check Europe in the 1800's). Every war since WWII has been a very limited war from the Korean War to even these wars, which are very tiny in comparison.

UN and and NATO have proven necessary, some people protest it but thats because they have undeclared enemies (Russia for NATO)

Be warned Im a huge fan of history when it comes to wars, if you know the history you understand why things are like this today

[bentheredengthat]

NATO and UN were formed to prevent major catastrophes like World War I and World War II. If you understand the war history and intricate alliances dating back to the Napoleonic Wars to WWII and how turbulent it was it makes very good sense. So far so good, in that there have been no major wars that can even sniff the scale of WWII and European countries are all friends(if you thought the ME was bad check Europe in the 1800's). Every war since WWII has been a very limited war from the Korean War to even these wars, which are very tiny in comparison.

UN and and NATO have proven necessary, some people protest it but thats because they have undeclared enemies (Russia for NATO)

Be warned Im a huge fan of history when it comes to wars, if you know the history you understand why things are like this today

Do tell! and can you recommend a good book that would kind of summarize what you are talking about, or recommend an author.

When I was young I didn't really appreciate history, but now I really enjoy reading and educating myself.