The all purpose global 'Terror' attack topic.

[Amsterhammer]

Sadly, we are now experiencing these outrages so regularly, that a separate topic is warranted in addition to the politics topics, which get sidetracked by these criminal/terrorist atrocities.

Nice latest - 84 dead, 50 injured, of whom 15 still critical. The perp was a 31 year old with dual French/Tunisian citizenship. He rented the truck some days ago, and also had at least one gun and some explosives in the truck.

 

[RedheadDane]

 

[Amsterhammer]

One handgun, "several fake rifles and a fake grenade". No word yet on explosives. Perp was a local resident, described as a "loner" by neighbors.

The Tour goes on, of course.

 

[ToreBear]

This reminds me of the day after 22/7-2011. It was a tempo as well, and the commentators were struggling to talk because they were crying so much.

Today they had a minute of silence on air and talked about Nice with the tears kept from breaking out.

 

[burning]

As a guy born in a country where the population is mostly muslims, I can easily say that Islam is a global problem and needs to dealt with. I am really sad for what is going on in last few months.

 

[StryderHells]

Re:

As a guy born in a country where the population is mostly muslims, I can easily say that Islam is a global problem and needs to dealt with. I am really sad for what is going on in last few months.

Islam is not the problem, it's the extremists that are the problem. You can't paint all islamic people with the same brush

 

[burning]

Re: Re:

As a guy born in a country where the population is mostly muslims, I can easily say that Islam is a global problem and needs to dealt with. I am really sad for what is going on in last few months.

Islam is not the problem, it's the extremists that are the problem. You can't paint all islamic people with the same brush

Actually you can, 40% of people in Turkey have sympathy to ISIS. Many people in Turkey are really happy about the Nice bombing as the people who died are not muslim. I know from first hand that, if you don't fight with Islam properly, this stuff will go on forever.

 

[The Hitch]

Re: Re:

As a guy born in a country where the population is mostly muslims, I can easily say that Islam is a global problem and needs to dealt with. I am really sad for what is going on in last few months.

Islam is not the problem, it's the extremists that are the problem. You can't paint all islamic people with the same brush

He didn't.

At no point did he do anything of the sort. He said Islam was the problem.

 

[lenric]

Re: Re:

As a guy born in a country where the population is mostly muslims, I can easily say that Islam is a global problem and needs to dealt with. I am really sad for what is going on in last few months.

Islam is not the problem, it's the extremists that are the problem. You can't paint all islamic people with the same brush

Those extremists are created because of the stupid intervention of several states (such as USA, UK, etc) in poor countries where their only interest is economical. Resentment is created. Factions are created. Groups are born.

No wonder the most unstable zone of the world is a small one, yet extremely rich. No wonder ISIS was created by USA.

Extremism is a byproduct of authoritarianism, particularly the foreign one.

 

[Merckx index]

American intervention in other countries, e.g., in Central and South America, has resulted in radicalization of young men, but the difference is that radicals in those countries understand that the problem is economic. Radical Islamists think the problem is religious. That’s the rationalization for killing men, women and children in other countries, and particularly at events that Islamists regard as anti-religious. Radical Islamists are not interested in pulling people in their societies out of poverty, their aim is simply to convert everyone on earth to their vision of Islam. They have no economic plan at all, and use foreign intervention as a recruitment tool. If there were no intervention, their aims would be the same, it would just be more difficult to recruit.

Nobody wants to admit this, but even the so-called moderate Islamists are a major problem. The religion, in any of its practiced forms, is centuries out of step with modern society. The same is true to some extent of fundamentalist Christianity, but at least those Christians are so immersed in modern, secular societies that they have to go along with it to some extent. Thus an ignorant idiot like Mike Pence switches his positions on issues like needle exchanges and the rights of gays to be served by marriage-related businesses, not because he understands or agrees with those positions, but because he really has no choice.

But no such restraints exist on Muslims living in Islamic states, who are expected not only to believe but to practice their biased, irrational, discriminatory, anti-scientific worldview. Muslims who immigrate to the west, no matter how moderate they may claim to be, share many of these beliefs. They may renounce terror and live tolerant of people who don’t share their beliefs, but those beliefs are still irrational and really don’t belong in moderns society. By claiming to follow the Koran, they provide support to the radicals, even if the latter interpret its passages differently. If so-called moderate Muslims were to renounce their religion, seeing it for the ignorant, immature worldview that it represents, the radicals would have a far more difficult time surviving. When everyone believes the emperor has clothes, people who have a radical authoritarian view of who the emperor is and what he has a right to do will naturally be in a far stronger position than if most people see in fact that the emperor is naked.

 

[Starstruck]

American intervention in other countries, e.g., in Central and South America, has resulted in radicalization of young men, but the difference is that radicals in those countries understand that the problem is economic. Radical Islamists think the problem is religious. That’s the rationalization for killing men, women and children in other countries, and particularly at events that Islamists regard as anti-religious. Radical Islamists are not interested in pulling people in their societies out of poverty, their aim is simply to convert everyone on earth to their vision of Islam. They have no economic plan at all, and use foreign intervention as a recruitment tool. If there were no intervention, their aims would be the same, it would just be more difficult to recruit.

Nobody wants to admit this, but even the so-called moderate Islamists are a major problem. The religion, in any of its practiced forms, is centuries out of step with modern society. The same is true to some extent of fundamentalist Christianity, but at least those Christians are so immersed in modern, secular societies that they have to go along with it to some extent. Thus an ignorant idiot like Mike Pence switches his positions on issues like needle exchanges and the rights of gays to be served by marriage-related businesses, not because he understands or agrees with those positions, but because he really has no choice.

But no such restraints exist on Muslims living in Islamic states, who are expected not only to believe but to practice their biased, irrational, discriminatory, anti-scientific worldview. Muslims who immigrate to the west, no matter how moderate they may claim to be, share many of these beliefs. They may renounce terror and live tolerant of people who don’t share their beliefs, but those beliefs are still irrational and really don’t belong in moderns society. By claiming to follow the Koran, they provide support to the radicals, even if the latter interpret its passages differently. If so-called moderate Muslims were to renounce their religion, seeing it for the ignorant, immature worldview that it represents, the radicals would have a far more difficult time surviving. When everyone believes the emperor has clothes, people who have a radical authoritarian view of who the emperor is and what he has a right to do will naturally be in a far stronger position than if most people see in fact that the emperor is naked.

Is this supposed to be an accurate, rational, unbiased, comprehensive analysis of the circumstance?

No wonder the Wahhabi message resonates and they do what they do.

You could have just said "we are civilized, they are barbarians" in ancient Greek. Besides, "terrorism" has always been a product of empire since the beginning.

 

[aphronesis]

The paleo age of western liberalism chimes in. I'm not one to back Star these days, but the world didn't stop moving when you did Merckx. There's a bit more nuance to it.

Shh: there's a global economics. These things don't happen in a vacuum.

The elevated western stance is cute though.

 

[lenric]

American intervention in other countries, e.g., in Central and South America, has resulted in radicalization of young men, but the difference is that radicals in those countries understand that the problem is economic. Radical Islamists think the problem is religious. That’s the rationalization for killing men, women and children in other countries, and particularly at events that Islamists regard as anti-religious. Radical Islamists are not interested in pulling people in their societies out of poverty, their aim is simply to convert everyone on earth to their vision of Islam. They have no economic plan at all, and use foreign intervention as a recruitment tool. If there were no intervention, their aims would be the same, it would just be more difficult to recruit.

Nobody wants to admit this, but even the so-called moderate Islamists are a major problem. The religion, in any of its practiced forms, is centuries out of step with modern society. The same is true to some extent of fundamentalist Christianity, but at least those Christians are so immersed in modern, secular societies that they have to go along with it to some extent. Thus an ignorant idiot like Mike Pence switches his positions on issues like needle exchanges and the rights of gays to be served by marriage-related businesses, not because he understands or agrees with those positions, but because he really has no choice.

But no such restraints exist on Muslims living in Islamic states, who are expected not only to believe but to practice their biased, irrational, discriminatory, anti-scientific worldview. Muslims who immigrate to the west, no matter how moderate they may claim to be, share many of these beliefs. They may renounce terror and live tolerant of people who don’t share their beliefs, but those beliefs are still irrational and really don’t belong in moderns society. By claiming to follow the Koran, they provide support to the radicals, even if the latter interpret its passages differently. If so-called moderate Muslims were to renounce their religion, seeing it for the ignorant, immature worldview that it represents, the radicals would have a far more difficult time surviving. When everyone believes the emperor has clothes, people who have a radical authoritarian view of who the emperor is and what he has a right to do will naturally be in a far stronger position than if most people see in fact that the emperor is naked.

South americans are mostly christians. So, the conditions to create hate towards USA can't be based on religion, which is the most important subject to control people (since most of the world is religious).

About South America, most of their nations are authoritarian. When dictators are in power, people will is suppressed. Or they're against their own politicians, not against other countries, mainly because they don't have access to other countries information.

The Islam costumes may appear retrograde for us, but in fact all religion is retrograde. Whether Christianity, Hindu, Islam, whatever. They hinder scientific progress.
The problem with Islam isn't the religion, but the governments over there. They take advantage of their natural resources to build political connections with the wealthiest countries of the world, who help them maintain status quo, hindering the education of their citizens and, most importantly, social progress. They are stagnated and because of that, people mindsets doesn't change, thus their delay in almost everything.

When Christian countries intervene over there, some guys use that excuse to foment a religious war. A jihad. And since they're on the edge of poverty, they start believing in anything they can because of despair. This resentment was slowly build over the centuries and coupled with very little scientific and social progress (in the best interest of the occident), we have this crap.

This attacks won't stop, especially if we keep attacking them. And the actual immigration policy from Europe is horrible. Not because I'm against the free circulation of people (for instance, I'd like free circulation all over the world, were it from people, from resources, from capital, whatever), but only because there should be equal treatment both for national citizens and immigrants, which there isn't. And not only that, but also police should be properly trained and armed. Instead, there are several european countries where they aren't armed at all.

Religion in itself isn't dangerous. What people can do using/because of it is.

 

[Starstruck]

Re:

The paleo age of western liberalism chimes in. I'm not one to back Star these days, but the world didn't stop moving when you did Merckx. There's a bit more nuance to it.

Shh: there's a global economics. These things don't happen in a vacuum.

The elevated western stance is cute though.

Leave me alone. I've taken up playing Pokemon Go.

 

[Starstruck]

American intervention in other countries, e.g., in Central and South America, has resulted in radicalization of young men, but the difference is that radicals in those countries understand that the problem is economic. Radical Islamists think the problem is religious. That’s the rationalization for killing men, women and children in other countries, and particularly at events that Islamists regard as anti-religious. Radical Islamists are not interested in pulling people in their societies out of poverty, their aim is simply to convert everyone on earth to their vision of Islam. They have no economic plan at all, and use foreign intervention as a recruitment tool. If there were no intervention, their aims would be the same, it would just be more difficult to recruit.

Nobody wants to admit this, but even the so-called moderate Islamists are a major problem. The religion, in any of its practiced forms, is centuries out of step with modern society. The same is true to some extent of fundamentalist Christianity, but at least those Christians are so immersed in modern, secular societies that they have to go along with it to some extent. Thus an ignorant idiot like Mike Pence switches his positions on issues like needle exchanges and the rights of gays to be served by marriage-related businesses, not because he understands or agrees with those positions, but because he really has no choice.

But no such restraints exist on Muslims living in Islamic states, who are expected not only to believe but to practice their biased, irrational, discriminatory, anti-scientific worldview. Muslims who immigrate to the west, no matter how moderate they may claim to be, share many of these beliefs. They may renounce terror and live tolerant of people who don’t share their beliefs, but those beliefs are still irrational and really don’t belong in moderns society. By claiming to follow the Koran, they provide support to the radicals, even if the latter interpret its passages differently. If so-called moderate Muslims were to renounce their religion, seeing it for the ignorant, immature worldview that it represents, the radicals would have a far more difficult time surviving. When everyone believes the emperor has clothes, people who have a radical authoritarian view of who the emperor is and what he has a right to do will naturally be in a far stronger position than if most people see in fact that the emperor is naked.

South americans are mostly christians. So, the conditions to create hate towards USA can't be based on religion, which is the most important subject to control people (since most of the world is religious).

About South America, most of their nations are authoritarian. When dictators are in power, people will is suppressed. Or they're against their own politicians, not against other countries, mainly because they don't have access to other countries information.

The Islam costumes may appear retrograde for us, but in fact all religion is retrograde. Whether Christianity, Hindu, Islam, whatever. They hinder scientific progress.
The problem with Islam isn't the religion, but the governments over there. They take advantage of their natural resources to build political connections with the wealthiest countries of the world, who help them maintain status quo, hindering the education of their citizens and, most importantly, social progress. They are stagnated and because of that, people mindsets doesn't change, thus their delay in almost everything.

When Christian countries intervene over there, some guys use that excuse to foment a religious war. A jihad. And since they're on the edge of poverty, they start believing in anything they can because of despair. This resentment was slowly build over the centuries and coupled with very little scientific and social progress (in the best interest of the occident), we have this crap.

This attacks won't stop, especially if we keep attacking them. And the actual immigration policy from Europe is horrible. Not because I'm against the free circulation of people (for instance, I'd like free circulation all over the world, were it from people, from resources, from capital, whatever), but only because there should be equal treatment both for national citizens and immigrants, which there isn't. And not only that, but also police should be properly trained and armed. Instead, there are several european countries where they aren't armed at all.

Religion in itself isn't dangerous. What people can do using/because of it is.

Basically "ugh, we civilized, they barbaric" again. No context, no history, no subtlety, no nuance, no understanding.

The bold bit made sense though.

When the deaths of people from our terrorizing (murder) have equal weight with the deaths from their terrorizing then maybe this will stop. I'm not holding my breath. No justice, no peace. #Utopia.

My truck is thirsty.

 

[The Hitch]

American intervention in other countries, e.g., in Central and South America, has resulted in radicalization of young men, but the difference is that radicals in those countries understand that the problem is economic. Radical Islamists think the problem is religious. That’s the rationalization for killing men, women and children in other countries, and particularly at events that Islamists regard as anti-religious. Radical Islamists are not interested in pulling people in their societies out of poverty, their aim is simply to convert everyone on earth to their vision of Islam. They have no economic plan at all, and use foreign intervention as a recruitment tool. If there were no intervention, their aims would be the same, it would just be more difficult to recruit.

Nobody wants to admit this, but even the so-called moderate Islamists are a major problem. The religion, in any of its practiced forms, is centuries out of step with modern society. The same is true to some extent of fundamentalist Christianity, but at least those Christians are so immersed in modern, secular societies that they have to go along with it to some extent. Thus an ignorant idiot like Mike Pence switches his positions on issues like needle exchanges and the rights of gays to be served by marriage-related businesses, not because he understands or agrees with those positions, but because he really has no choice.

But no such restraints exist on Muslims living in Islamic states, who are expected not only to believe but to practice their biased, irrational, discriminatory, anti-scientific worldview. Muslims who immigrate to the west, no matter how moderate they may claim to be, share many of these beliefs. They may renounce terror and live tolerant of people who don’t share their beliefs, but those beliefs are still irrational and really don’t belong in moderns society. By claiming to follow the Koran, they provide support to the radicals, even if the latter interpret its passages differently. If so-called moderate Muslims were to renounce their religion, seeing it for the ignorant, immature worldview that it represents, the radicals would have a far more difficult time surviving. When everyone believes the emperor has clothes, people who have a radical authoritarian view of who the emperor is and what he has a right to do will naturally be in a far stronger position than if most people see in fact that the emperor is naked.

Is this supposed to be an accurate, rational, unbiased, comprehensive analysis of the circumstance?

.

That's precisely what his post was. You have any counterargument?

 

[The Hitch]

American intervention in other countries, e.g., in Central and South America, has resulted in radicalization of young men, but the difference is that radicals in those countries understand that the problem is economic. Radical Islamists think the problem is religious. That’s the rationalization for killing men, women and children in other countries, and particularly at events that Islamists regard as anti-religious. Radical Islamists are not interested in pulling people in their societies out of poverty, their aim is simply to convert everyone on earth to their vision of Islam. They have no economic plan at all, and use foreign intervention as a recruitment tool. If there were no intervention, their aims would be the same, it would just be more difficult to recruit.

Nobody wants to admit this, but even the so-called moderate Islamists are a major problem. The religion, in any of its practiced forms, is centuries out of step with modern society. The same is true to some extent of fundamentalist Christianity, but at least those Christians are so immersed in modern, secular societies that they have to go along with it to some extent. Thus an ignorant idiot like Mike Pence switches his positions on issues like needle exchanges and the rights of gays to be served by marriage-related businesses, not because he understands or agrees with those positions, but because he really has no choice.

But no such restraints exist on Muslims living in Islamic states, who are expected not only to believe but to practice their biased, irrational, discriminatory, anti-scientific worldview. Muslims who immigrate to the west, no matter how moderate they may claim to be, share many of these beliefs. They may renounce terror and live tolerant of people who don’t share their beliefs, but those beliefs are still irrational and really don’t belong in moderns society. By claiming to follow the Koran, they provide support to the radicals, even if the latter interpret its passages differently. If so-called moderate Muslims were to renounce their religion, seeing it for the ignorant, immature worldview that it represents, the radicals would have a far more difficult time surviving. When everyone believes the emperor has clothes, people who have a radical authoritarian view of who the emperor is and what he has a right to do will naturally be in a far stronger position than if most people see in fact that the emperor is naked.

South americans are mostly christians. So, the conditions to create hate towards USA can't be based on religion, which is the most important subject to control people (since most of the world is religious).

About South America, most of their nations are authoritarian. When dictators are in power, people will is suppressed. Or they're against their own politicians, not against other countries, mainly because they don't have access to other countries information.

The Islam costumes may appear retrograde for us, but in fact all religion is retrograde. Whether Christianity, Hindu, Islam, whatever. They hinder scientific progress.
The problem with Islam isn't the religion, but the governments over there. They take advantage of their natural resources to build political connections with the wealthiest countries of the world, who help them maintain status quo, hindering the education of their citizens and, most importantly, social progress. They are stagnated and because of that, people mindsets doesn't change, thus their delay in almost everything.

When Christian countries intervene over there, some guys use that excuse to foment a religious war. A jihad. And since they're on the edge of poverty, they start believing in anything they can because of despair. This resentment was slowly build over the centuries and coupled with very little scientific and social progress (in the best interest of the occident), we have this crap.

This attacks won't stop, especially if we keep attacking them. And the actual immigration policy from Europe is horrible. Not because I'm against the free circulation of people (for instance, I'd like free circulation all over the world, were it from people, from resources, from capital, whatever), but only because there should be equal treatment both for national citizens and immigrants, which there isn't. And not only that, but also police should be properly trained and armed. Instead, there are several european countries where they aren't armed at all.

Religion in itself isn't dangerous. What people can do using/because of it is.

Basically "ugh, we civilized, they barbaric" again. No context, no history, no subtlety, no nuance, no understanding.

The bold bit made sense though.

When the deaths of people from our terrorizing (murder) have equal weight with the deaths from their terrorizing then maybe this will stop. I'm not holding my breath. No justice, no peace. #Utopia.

My truck is thirsty.

I'm sorry to have to break this to you, but the vast majority of victims of terrorism continue to be poor muslims in the middle east. The extremists treat their own mothers and sisters as slaves and kill and attack them for the most trivial things. They kill children for going to school, gay people for being gay, women for being looked at, authors for writing books. They prey on religious and ethnic minorities, they massacre men women and children in their hundreds for belonging to what they consider the wrong strand of Islam.

I know this is painful reading for the michael moore wing of the internet, who desperately want to paint people like bin laden as men of the people and great anti imperialists, but it's just not fair on the millions of victims to rewrite history that way.

I mean ffs wake up, this is one of the few cases where one can actually compare people to Hitler on a moral ground, in fact they share with him the wish to exterminate the worlds Jewish population

I suspect if a white Christian sect in the us was killing men women and children in high numbers in an attempt to create their idea of a perfect world, you wouldn't have a fraction of the sympathy

 

[BullsFan22]

I don't usually post on world politics issues, but I agree with several posters here who say this is mostly due to US, UK, French....western intervention in the middle east that has brought this problem. I mean, the French have had north African immigration for decades, and not until fervent intervention in the middle east and north Africa have the terrorist attacks been multiplying.

Of course, extremists with radical religious beliefs (if you can call them 'religious') get provoked and more intervention and antagonistic behavior just confirms to their followers that the cause for terrorist attacks in justified and then, more can join them.

This all then spirals on Europe, primarily. Not only are there more possibilities for terrorist attacks, but it helps create fear and hate for the muslim communities in Europe, it brings fear for the muslims that they will get mocked and ridiculed, the politicians will see it as another lightning rod to 'increase' military use in North Africa and Middle East and, as we've seen over the past few years, the far right parties across Europe will gain more and more sympathy and support. It's a combustible mix. If people don't wake up to this fact real soon, there could be many more problems like this occurring and worse, there could be real social problems in the continent. The refugee crisis has brought problems to Europe but unfortunately nobody asks themselves why this came to being. It's not like hundreds of thousands/millions of people just decided to move to Europe and other places for the fun of it.

Washington and its war/fear mongering needs to stop. On one hand, they preach for unity and respect for muslims, but on the other hand they drop bombs on them on a daily basis without compunction. I am afraid that with the upcoming US election, nothing will change. You have two candidates who will no doubt be pro-war.

 

[rhubroma]

Now we really should tell the young that the creation of the "Islamic State" is, among other things, one of the consequences of a situation created in the Middle East after the invasion of Iraq conducted by the US armed forces under George Bush in 2003. At the same time, when a terrorist says he's doing this in the name of Allah, while brandishing the Koran, who are we to negate his relationship with Islam?

 

[jmdirt]

Finger pointing aside, my fear with this most recent attack is the number of wackos who will copy it. People who might be hesitant to use explosives and/or guns, might be able to drive a vehicle into a crowded area to fulfill their 'destiny'.

 

[Starstruck]

@ the hitch

I'm sorry to have to break this to you, but the vast majority of victims of terrorism continue to be poor muslims in the middle east. The extremists treat their own mothers and sisters as slaves and kill and attack them for the most trivial things. They kill children for going to school, gay people for being gay, women for being looked at, authors for writing books. They prey on religious and ethnic minorities, they massacre men women and children in their hundreds for belonging to what they consider the wrong strand of Islam.

I know this is painful reading for the michael moore wing of the internet, who desperately want to paint people like bin laden as men of the people and great anti imperialists, but it's just not fair on the millions of victims to rewrite history that way.

I mean ffs wake up, this is one of the few cases where one can actually compare people to Hitler on a moral ground, in fact they share with him the wish to exterminate the worlds Jewish population

I suspect if a white Christian sect in the us was killing men women and children in high numbers in an attempt to create their idea of a perfect world, you wouldn't have a fraction of the sympathy

I guess it was a mistake for "the capitalist west" to ally with the Saudis, Qataris, Emirates, etc. and have them promote Wahhabism throughout the Muslim world for the last 40 years. Follow the money and bombs away.

The only thing you broke was your massive bias, ignorance, irrationality and ability to regurgitate propaganda.

 

[Merckx index]

I guess it was a mistake for "the capitalist west" to ally with the Saudis, Qataris, Emirates, etc. and have them promote Wahhabism throughout the Muslim world for the last 40 years. Follow the money and bombs away.

The only thing you broke was your massive bias, ignorance, irrationality and ability to regurgitate propaganda.

You’re still missing the point. Of course there are multiple complex factors, no one is denying that. What I’m saying is that the standard “this is all the consequence of Western imperialism” ignores the fact that other countries respond very differently to Western imperialism. Revolutionaries have a plan, whether you agree with it or not; they have a map of the future, and a way to reach it. Their central aim is to create an economically just society, not to punish wantonly anyone who doesn't agree with them.

It’s like a neighborhood bully getting punched back vs. having his home burned down, along with those of his neighbors. In either case, you can “blame” his treatment on the fact that he was a bully—yes, nothing would have happened to him if he hadn’t been a bully, and too bad about the neighbors--but very few people are going to rationalize the arson by saying that burning down houses is actually going to solve the problem.

By the way, if you were the leader of the U.S., or France, what exactly would you do to address this problem? Since you and aphro are the ones claiming to be more nuanced, be sure to consider all the possible consequences of any action you might take.

 

[Starstruck]

I guess it was a mistake for "the capitalist west" to ally with the Saudis, Qataris, Emirates, etc. and have them promote Wahhabism throughout the Muslim world for the last 40 years. Follow the money and bombs away.

The only thing you broke was your massive bias, ignorance, irrationality and ability to regurgitate propaganda.

You’re still missing the point. Of course there are multiple complex factors, no one is denying that. What I’m saying is that the standard “this is all the consequence of Western imperialism” ignores the fact that other countries respond very differently to Western imperialism. Revolutionaries have a plan, whether you agree with it or not; they have a map of the future, and a way to reach it. Their central aim is to create an economically just society, not to punish wantonly anyone who doesn't agree with them.

It’s like a neighborhood bully getting punched back vs. having his home burned down, along with those of his neighbors. In either case, you can “blame” his treatment on the fact that he was a bully—yes, nothing would have happened to him if he hadn’t been a bully, and too bad about the neighbors--but very few people are going to rationalize the arson by saying that burning down houses is actually going to solve the problem.

By the way, if you were the leader of the U.S., or France, what exactly would you do to address this problem? Since you and aphro are the ones claiming to be more nuanced, be sure to consider all the possible consequences of any action you might take.

To suggest that the imperial project in the M.E. is comparable to S. Am. is false equivocating. Oil, the Zionist project, the Petro. dollar, the Sunni/Shia split, tribal alliances, the Sykes Picot lines in the sand and the divide and conquer built in, the remnants of Soviet alliances versus Capitalist alliances, decades of war and arms sales, arming and promoting the most radical sects of Islam...etc.

Where to begin?

Reacting with "it's the irrational religion" is beyond childish and going nowhere except more of the same. If people can't even begin to address the problems honestly then there aren't any solutions.

 

[rhubroma]

@Merckx Index. I don't think we should consider South America and the Middle East in the same vein. For one thing, the present Middle East (as a post-colonial construct) has resulted from the effects of mostly British orientalism, however the term might be unsatisfactory, a failed Zionism and reckless US militarism. By contrast, South America resulted from the same European colonialism that begot the US, but composed of peasants that latched onto Marxism in various degrees during the Cold War. In any case the South Americans participated in the same ideologies that drove the West in the 20th century.

What the West is confronting in the Middle East, however, is the very negation of "progressivism," as such, because the Muslim states have had no (or very contained) process of secularization. The goal is theocracy tout court. For this reason, Erdogan has been challenged by that military that fears a loss of standing, should Turkey be transformed into a Caliphate.

At this point religiousity is the key.

 

[Starstruck]

Re:

@Merckx Index. I don't think we should consider South America and the Middle East in the same vein. For one thing, the present Middle East (as a post-colonial construct) has resulted from the effects of mostly British orientalism, however the term might be unsatisfactory, a failed Zionism and reckless US militarism. By contrast, South America resulted from the same European colonialism that begot the US, but composed of peasants that latched onto Marxism in various degrees during the Cold War. In any case the South Americans participated in the same ideologies that drove the West in the 20th century.

What the West is confronting in the Middle East, however, is the very negation of "progressivism," as such, because the Muslim states have had no (or very contained) process of secularization. The goal is theocracy tout court. For this reason, Erdogan has been challenged by that military that fears a loss of standing, should Turkey be transformed into a Caliphate.

At this point religiousity is the key.

...because Lebanon is the same as Saudi Arabia is the same as Iran is the same as Turkey.

I can't share your faith in reason.