T Nation

Radical Islam

This is in response to many people on those board who attempt to group all islamic extremism together as if it is some type of regime or movement, it is not.

It’s a symptom of geo-sociopolitical struggles throughout the Middle East, each group has different goals and are a result of political and social conditions.

Not every Islamic extremist group is a threat to the US in most cases they could care less about the US, they are fighting in response to a local political issue.

There is no Global Jihad against the west and by lumping every terrorist group into “islamo-fascists” and deciding they are all after us, we will fail to fight the people who are really after us and create more enemies than we originally had.

this aint a place for sensible posts like this.

Why not try again with something like:

“Muslims genetically closer to crabs than humans”, and see how you get on.

Please list at least four Islamic extremist groups that have no anti-west or U.S. slant and how you know that.

also, please name the groups that do not hate jews/israel (and ostensibly the U.S.)

also, if you know of any muslims for israel groups tell me about those too. you know. like jews for jesus 'cept with plastic explosives and bombs strapped to infants. stuff like that.

[quote]sactown1 wrote:
This is in response to many people on those board who attempt to group all islamic extremism together as if it is some type of regime or movement, it is not.

It’s a symptom of geo-sociopolitical struggles throughout the Middle East, each group has different goals and are a result of political and social conditions.

Not every Islamic extremist group is a threat to the US in most cases they could care less about the US, they are fighting in response to a local political issue.

There is no Global Jihad against the west and by lumping every terrorist group into “islamo-fascists” and deciding they are all after us, we will fail to fight the people who are really after us and create more enemies than we originally had.[/quote]

Absolutely, except the media only gives attention to some group who want to attack the US or something.

Look at the actions of the Taliban against the Buddhist statues a fair few years back. Not really some attack on the West, but they were seen as pretty much generalized fundamentalist / extremist. When the Soviets occupied Afghanistan, I’ ll promise, there was not much interest in even thinking about the US, let alone planning terrorist plots with Bin Laden’s gang.

[quote]sactown1 wrote:
This is in response to many people on those board who attempt to group all islamic extremism together as if it is some type of regime or movement, it is not.

It’s a symptom of geo-sociopolitical struggles throughout the Middle East, each group has different goals and are a result of political and social conditions.

Not every Islamic extremist group is a threat to the US in most cases they could care less about the US, they are fighting in response to a local political issue.

There is no Global Jihad against the west and by lumping every terrorist group into “islamo-fascists” and deciding they are all after us, we will fail to fight the people who are really after us and create more enemies than we originally had.[/quote]

Your attempts to inspire critical thinking will not be tolerated. Now let me get back to staying the course of my xenophobic, isolationist belief system.

The idea that Islamic extremist groups want to commit jihad against the west because they are jealous of us and because they dont like us because we are free is a very ignorant idea, and that is what i was trying to point out.

These Islamic extremist groups exist for other reasons, Osama Bin Laden personally said that US military presence in Saudi Arabia was an occupying force of holy lands, these and other political issues is what really creates terrorists.

In order to effectively fight an enemy you must understand the enemy, you must understand why ordinary people are turing to these terrorist organizations and eliminate that cause, so that you can stop the viscous cycle.

Once we win over the minds of the ordinary muslim people around the world they will see these extremists for what they are and they will take care of these evil terrorists. If The general public does not support these groups then they will be much less of a threat.

Is this a revelation to you? This is pretty obvious stuff.

Radical Islam will only attack the US and the West as long as we oppose the spread of radical Islam worldwide.

Radical Islam is the Borg. We can fight or be assimilated. There are no other choices.

Fortunately for us these radical Islamic kooks are not united.

[quote]jjblaze wrote:
sactown1 wrote:
This is in response to many people on those board who attempt to group all islamic extremism together as if it is some type of regime or movement, it is not.

It’s a symptom of geo-sociopolitical struggles throughout the Middle East, each group has different goals and are a result of political and social conditions.

Not every Islamic extremist group is a threat to the US in most cases they could care less about the US, they are fighting in response to a local political issue.

There is no Global Jihad against the west and by lumping every terrorist group into “islamo-fascists” and deciding they are all after us, we will fail to fight the people who are really after us and create more enemies than we originally had.

Your attempts to inspire critical thinking will not be tolerated. Now let me get back to staying the course of my xenophobic, isolationist belief system.[/quote]

This is not critical thinking. It is merely stating the blindingly obvious.

There is no unity in the Muslim world. The fact that there is no Globally unified Jihad against the West does not mean that there are not many, many factions of Islam that indeed have Jihad against the West.

You guys have to think a much deeper thoughts than this if you hope to understand the situation.

Unfortunately many of the anti-war types stop thinking at this point and figure if we just give them what they want they will leave us alone.

[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
jjblaze wrote:
sactown1 wrote:
This is in response to many people on those board who attempt to group all islamic extremism together as if it is some type of regime or movement, it is not.

It’s a symptom of geo-sociopolitical struggles throughout the Middle East, each group has different goals and are a result of political and social conditions.

Not every Islamic extremist group is a threat to the US in most cases they could care less about the US, they are fighting in response to a local political issue.

There is no Global Jihad against the west and by lumping every terrorist group into “islamo-fascists” and deciding they are all after us, we will fail to fight the people who are really after us and create more enemies than we originally had.

Your attempts to inspire critical thinking will not be tolerated. Now let me get back to staying the course of my xenophobic, isolationist belief system.

This is not critical thinking. It is merely stating the blindingly obvious.

There is no unity in the Muslim world. The fact that there is no Globally unified Jihad against the West does not mean that there are not many, many factions of Islam that indeed have Jihad against the West.

You guys have to think a much deeper thoughts than this if you hope to understand the situation.

Unfortunately many of the anti-war types stop thinking at this point and figure if we just give them what they want they will leave us alone.
[/quote]

Sometimes the most obvious things are the hardest to see. I never stated this was critical thinking. I referred to this post as an attempt to inspire critical thinking. I was being completely, absolutely, one hundred percent sarcastic. I couldn’t have laid it on any thicker. Alas, this did not come across well in my post. If these thoughts are so obvious, then why are we becoming more isolationist? Why do most people in this country think this situation is black & white, muslim vs. non muslim, pro-freedom vs. anti-war? For the record, I’m far from anti-war and far from liberal, but this “war” is impossible to win, and I’ll give you one guess who the Borg really is. Ask someone who resides outside of these borders, or look at our history from, say, Teddy Roosevelt to present day. I’m resigned to this fact, and I’m not going to deny it, nor am I going to accuse others of it.

[quote]jjblaze wrote:
sactown1 wrote:
This is in response to many people on those board who attempt to group all islamic extremism together as if it is some type of regime or movement, it is not.

It’s a symptom of geo-sociopolitical struggles throughout the Middle East, each group has different goals and are a result of political and social conditions.

Not every Islamic extremist group is a threat to the US in most cases they could care less about the US, they are fighting in response to a local political issue.

There is no Global Jihad against the west and by lumping every terrorist group into “islamo-fascists” and deciding they are all after us, we will fail to fight the people who are really after us and create more enemies than we originally had.

Your attempts to inspire critical thinking will not be tolerated. Now let me get back to staying the course of my xenophobic, isolationist belief system.[/quote]

lmao

[quote]sactown1 wrote:
The idea that Islamic extremist groups want to commit jihad against the west because they are jealous of us and because they dont like us because we are free is a very ignorant idea, and that is what i was trying to point out.

These Islamic extremist groups exist for other reasons, Osama Bin Laden personally said that US military presence in Saudi Arabia was an occupying force of holy lands, these and other political issues is what really creates terrorists.

In order to effectively fight an enemy you must understand the enemy, you must understand why ordinary people are turing to these terrorist organizations and eliminate that cause, so that you can stop the viscous cycle.

Once we win over the minds of the ordinary muslim people around the world they will see these extremists for what they are and they will take care of these evil terrorists. If The general public does not support these groups then they will be much less of a threat.[/quote]

Why the hell should they care if we have a base in their country? What’s so bad about it?

[quote]sactown1 wrote:
This is in response to many people on those board who attempt to group all islamic extremism together as if it is some type of regime or movement, it is not.

It’s a symptom of geo-sociopolitical struggles throughout the Middle East, each group has different goals and are a result of political and social conditions.

Not every Islamic extremist group is a threat to the US in most cases they could care less about the US, they are fighting in response to a local political issue.

There is no Global Jihad against the west and by lumping every terrorist group into “islamo-fascists” and deciding they are all after us, we will fail to fight the people who are really after us and create more enemies than we originally had.[/quote]

Still waiting on that list

Yesterday, C-SPAN aired a lecture given by James Dobbins, Director of the International Security and Defense Policy Center at RAND, and Daniel Levy.

Here is the link: http://www.c-span.org/Search/advanced.asp?AdvancedQueryText=DOBBINS&StartDateMonth=&StartDateYear=&EndDateMonth=&EndDateYear=&Series=&ProgramIssue=&QueryType=&QueryTextOptions=&ResultCount=10&SortBy=bestmatch) The lecture is the fourth video down, titled “New America Foundation on ‘Moral Clarity & the Middle East’.”

While I don’t agree with everything said, it is, in my opinion, an incredibly sober, insightful look at the current “War on Terrorism.” It’s a long video clip but it’s well worth it–there is far too much info for me to do it justice, so I urge everyone to watch it…

[quote]storey420 wrote:
Please list at least four Islamic extremist groups that have no anti-west or U.S. slant and how you know that.[/quote]

I am not particularly knowledgable about Middle Eastern terrorist organizations, but I can think of one example: Hezbollah- they only attack Israel, generally amidst a flurry of retallations from both sides in which any militant organization would respond. If they have an anti-West or US slant (assuming Israel isn’t part of the ‘West’), then they have done an incredible job at concealing it.

[quote]semper_fi wrote:
sactown1 wrote:
The idea that Islamic extremist groups want to commit jihad against the west because they are jealous of us and because they dont like us because we are free is a very ignorant idea, and that is what i was trying to point out.

These Islamic extremist groups exist for other reasons, Osama Bin Laden personally said that US military presence in Saudi Arabia was an occupying force of holy lands, these and other political issues is what really creates terrorists.

In order to effectively fight an enemy you must understand the enemy, you must understand why ordinary people are turing to these terrorist organizations and eliminate that cause, so that you can stop the viscous cycle.

Once we win over the minds of the ordinary muslim people around the world they will see these extremists for what they are and they will take care of these evil terrorists. If The general public does not support these groups then they will be much less of a threat.

Why the hell should they care if we have a base in their country? What’s so bad about it?[/quote]

There is no practical reason for people despising a foreign military force occupying their home-country. How would you like having a Chinese military base in your hometown? I for one would feel somewhat threatened and bullied by the occupying country. One could say that there is no reason to feel threatened if you are doing nothing wrong, but having a foreign military watchdog in your country when you have none in theirs implies superiority on the part of the occupying force. This pisses people off. Also keep in mind that Saudi Arabia of all countries has the holy city of Mecca, the fundamental importance of which can hardly be understood by a non-Muslim. Basically, whats the point of having one in their country? It is not the kind of thing you do just cause you can without having a serious backlash.

Most mainstream Muslims do not support the Islamic extremists; it is a minority. The majority think they give Islam a bad reputation and the views of the extremists, by defintion, are not reflective of those of the majority.

Guess what Saudi playboy wasn’t too fond of the US after we helped Israel level Beirut in 1982 and take out many civilians in the process? Osama bin Laden. After seeing so many women and children mangled by Western bombs, he decided he would let their voices be heard. He compared it to an alligator attacking a child in one of his speeches, (which are never published word-for-word in the US media), in the sense that trying to reason with an alligator was senseless; violence must be used if its actions are to be changed.

Hence, the worlds greatest terrorist mastermind was created out of a conflict that is largely forgotten in the West, its legacy living on through a very popular drinking game called Beirut named after the conflict. My intention with this rant was in no way to condone the mass murders that Osama is responsible for, but simply to point out that terrorist attacks in the US are part of a vicious cycle and that our large-scale actions in the Middle East are not without large-scale reactions.

[quote]KombatAthlete wrote:
storey420 wrote:
Please list at least four Islamic extremist groups that have no anti-west or U.S. slant and how you know that.

I am not particularly knowledgable about Middle Eastern terrorist organizations, but I can think of one example: Hezbollah- they only attack Israel, generally amidst a flurry of retallations from both sides in which any militant organization would respond. If they have an anti-West or US slant (assuming Israel isn’t part of the ‘West’), then they have done an incredible job at concealing it.

[/quote]

Hezbollah murdered more than 200 Marines in the US embassy back in the early 80’s.

The Marines were over there as part of a peacekeeping force to try to quell the violence of the Lebanese civil war.

The Marines were not allowed to load their weapons.

Hezbollah admits to having terrorist cells in most Western countries.

Hezbollah is violently anti-West, anti-demcoracy, anti-religous freedom etc.

[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
KombatAthlete wrote:
storey420 wrote:
Please list at least four Islamic extremist groups that have no anti-west or U.S. slant and how you know that.

I am not particularly knowledgable about Middle Eastern terrorist organizations, but I can think of one example: Hezbollah- they only attack Israel, generally amidst a flurry of retallations from both sides in which any militant organization would respond. If they have an anti-West or US slant (assuming Israel isn’t part of the ‘West’), then they have done an incredible job at concealing it.

Hezbollah murdered more than 200 Marines in the US embassy back in the early 80’s.

The Marines were over there as part of a peacekeeping force to try to quell the violence of the Lebanese civil war.

The Marines were not allowed to load their weapons.

Hezbollah admits to having terrorist cells in most Western countries.

Hezbollah is violently anti-West, anti-demcoracy, anti-religous freedom etc.[/quote]

They did attack the US embassy in Lebanon and kill many Marines. That is obviously anti-Western, but the attack was in their own country and their is not much evidence in favor of Hezbollah having much influence outside of their immediate region. Their stated goals don’t include anything that would necesitate attacks on Western interests outside of their home turf and its vicinity.

[quote]semper_fi wrote:
sactown1 wrote:
The idea that Islamic extremist groups want to commit jihad against the west because they are jealous of us and because they dont like us because we are free is a very ignorant idea, and that is what i was trying to point out.

These Islamic extremist groups exist for other reasons, Osama Bin Laden personally said that US military presence in Saudi Arabia was an occupying force of holy lands, these and other political issues is what really creates terrorists.

In order to effectively fight an enemy you must understand the enemy, you must understand why ordinary people are turing to these terrorist organizations and eliminate that cause, so that you can stop the viscous cycle.

Once we win over the minds of the ordinary muslim people around the world they will see these extremists for what they are and they will take care of these evil terrorists. If The general public does not support these groups then they will be much less of a threat.

Why the hell should they care if we have a base in their country? What’s so bad about it?[/quote]

Apparently, sactown1 doesn’t know or doesn’t care that the real reason Bin-Laden originally objected to U.S. bases in Saudi Arabia is that he wanted his own private army to be responsible for defending the kingdom against an Iraqi invasion after Saddam occupied Kuwait.

Bin-Laden wants to reestablish the Islamic caliphate and be the all-powerful ruler of an empire that covers most of the Middle East and South Asia. He and many of his followers have a bizarrely idealized vision of the past and basically want to turn back the clock in the Arab world by about a thousand years.

In a globalized world, the prospect of a power-mad religious fanatic taking control over most of a continent (particularly one that contains most of the world’s remaining supply of a certain critical resource) is NOT a local matter in which other countries have no business sticking their nose.

To suggest anything else is childishly naive. It is equally naive not to see that other Islamist groups (Hamas, Hizb’allah, etc.), while they may have come into being in response to specific local political situations, are focused primarily on retaining and perpetuating their own power and influence.

I have to say, I’m quite disappointed to see a number of people whose opinions I have in the past agreed with and supported appear in this thread to be arguing for a Pat-Buchanan-style disengagement from the rest of the world.