Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Neonivek]

Even really radical Muslim leaders find the IS interpretation of Islam baffling for the most part, to suggest it's a literal version is absurd

No, clearly IS's version of Islam is as accurate to Islam as the KKK is accurate to Christianity (or Catholicism... whichever is which)

And we all clearly use the KKK as experts in religious doctrine.

---

But seriously... if you got a beef with Islam don't shove out IS as if they are an example. (You is a general you... not you Leafsnail)

[martinuzz]

It's ironic that the beheading of a journalist, who dedicated his life to spreading images to the world from wartorn territories, now leads to the debating on laws that will label spreading images from wartorn territories a terrorist activity. UK is actually thinking of criminalizing the people at home that watch, or link videos through social media, that are labelled as 'terrorist propaganda'. Like, we can'get at the producers, so let's instead criminalize the audience. It is going to be very hard to make a legal case on what video has journalistic value, and what video is 'terrorist propaganda', I'd say.

[LordSlowpoke]

uk's looking for excuses to copy and paste the american police state, don't think it was the journalist who did anything - his death is just convenient

[burningpet]

Even really radical Muslim leaders find the IS interpretation of Islam baffling for the most part, to suggest it's a literal version is absurd

No, clearly IS's version of Islam is as accurate to Islam as the KKK is accurate to Christianity (or Catholicism... whichever is which)

And we all clearly use the KKK as experts in religious doctrine.

---

But seriously... if you got a beef with Islam don't shove out IS as if they are an example. (You is a general you... not you Leafsnail)

Have you read the Quran?

[LordSlowpoke]

Even really radical Muslim leaders find the IS interpretation of Islam baffling for the most part, to suggest it's a literal version is absurd

No, clearly IS's version of Islam is as accurate to Islam as the KKK is accurate to Christianity (or Catholicism... whichever is which)

And we all clearly use the KKK as experts in religious doctrine.

---

But seriously... if you got a beef with Islam don't shove out IS as if they are an example. (You is a general you... not you Leafsnail)

Have you read the Quran?

does israel practice literally everything found in the old testament

[Digital Hellhound]

Let's drop the 'Islam/anything as religion of evil' debate before it can begin. We've had that countless times and it adds very little to the conversation.

[Neonivek]

I think it does show one reason why people in the west might be less inclined to help though.

If people honestly believe that IS is just a natural result of Islam, then why would they believe that interfering would be beneficial?

[burningpet]

Right. So, the Islamic State has nothing to do with Islam. lets just agree to disagree and move on.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/belgium/11051337/The-13-year-old-Belgian-boy-fighting-in-Syria.html

[Ai Shizuka]

Italy is sending 30 thousands AK and other assorted stuff. Shit that has been seized and dumped somewhere in the 90s during the Yugoslav war.

Anyway, the Kurds seem to be the most reliable faction there. But what happens if they actually...win?
What happens if they decide to keep northern iraq and the oil?
If they win, they are the good guys in that region. The guys who did all the heavy lifting against ISIS.
Can their claim still be ignored at that point? Someone will be pissed off big time in any case.

What happened the last time we armed someone in that area?
Right, syrian rebels.
Current ISIS happened, wich is the good old stuff again, with a different name.
No matter what we (west) do, it's not going away. Actually, it becomes something worse every time.

[smjjames]

Italy is sending 30 thousands AK and other assorted stuff. Shit that has been seized and dumped somewhere in the 90s during the Yugoslav war.

Anyway, the Kurds seem to be the most reliable faction there. But what happens if they actually...win?
What happens if they decide to keep northern iraq and the oil?
If they win, they are the good guys in that region. The guys who did all the heavy lifting against ISIS.
Can their claim still be ignored at that point? Someone will be pissed off big time in any case.

What happened the last time we armed someone in that area?
Right, syrian rebels.
Current ISIS happened, wich is the good old stuff again, with a different name.
No matter what we (west) do, it's not going away. Actually, it becomes something worse every time.

We kind of, as you might say, 'half assedly' supplied them, plus it's one clusterfuck with many factions. The Kurds at least are a much larger and more cohesive group.

No idea how much they are willing to take major autonomy (like current Scotland maybe? first thing that comes to mind there), but unless whoever replaces Maliki is willing to accept Kurdish autonomy and the Kurds are willing to accept some form of high level autonomy, I don't see them not splitting off to form Kurdistan.

I certainly hope it doesn't become worse by supplying the Kurds. I can certainly see Iran having some problems with an independent Kurdistan because there are a good deal of Kurds inside the country and as the map earlier shows, theres a pretty big swath of territorial claims.

[burningpet]

Italy is sending 30 thousands AK and other assorted stuff. Shit that has been seized and dumped somewhere in the 90s during the Yugoslav war.

Anyway, the Kurds seem to be the most reliable faction there. But what happens if they actually...win?
What happens if they decide to keep northern iraq and the oil?
If they win, they are the good guys in that region. The guys who did all the heavy lifting against ISIS.
Can their claim still be ignored at that point? Someone will be pissed off big time in any case.

What happened the last time we armed someone in that area?
Right, syrian rebels.
Current ISIS happened, wich is the good old stuff again, with a different name.
No matter what we (west) do, it's not going away. Actually, it becomes something worse every time.

Hmm, no?

ISIS was established long before the crisis in Syria. a common and more logical assertion in the world is that ISIS rose to power precisely because the west didn't sufficiently armed the moderate rebels.

The west isn't responsible for the creation of any of these groups. islamic terror existed since the inception of islam and continued to exist throughout this religion existence until now.

[Strife26]

The Kurds in Northern Iraq have been a semi-autonomous semi-functional area for quite a long time now.

Get some wikipedian edumacation all, don't act like an American.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kurdish_Iraq

[martinuzz]

Don't forget Saddam Hoessein, who was trained by, and installed to power by CIA originally.

[Ai Shizuka]

 islamic terror existed since the inception of islam and continued to exist throughout this religion existence until now.

This is why discussions about the middle-east always end up in flames.
Not sure if serious, honestly, but I'll leave it here. Maybe someone else will deal with this gem.

About ISIS: it was a fractured non-factor before the syrian civil wars. Maybe the western shipments of weapons didn't help them directly, but ignoring the syrian clusterfuck for years certainly did.
It's the same issue again. The west ignored the war and now suddenly realizes we might have a problem. Why is it NOW a problem and not three years ago? Keep ignoring it or admit we made a big mistake.
OT: This could lead to another interesting, but irrelevant, topic: why are 2 thousands dead a big deal in Gaza, but no fucks were given about 150 thousands in Syria? Until chemical weapons, obviously. Because, you know, CHEMICAL WEAPONS OMG. Dead people aren't as dead when killed by mere bombs or bullets. /OT

Kurdistan: I mean the whole Kurdistan obviously. If Iraq will be fixed somehow, the Kurds will press their claims (and rightly so). Not only on Iraq, but also on Iran and Turkey. This is what I mean by "someone will be pissed off".
Or is everyone still going to ignore them?

[burningpet]

This is why discussions about the middle-east always end up in flames.
Not sure if serious, honestly, but I'll leave it here. Maybe someone else will deal with this gem.

I am not sure how stating an historic truth is to drive the thread into flames.

For the sake of this discussion, at least read the wikipedia article. i am not asking to read whole books of experts on that field, simply a pretty short wikipedia article:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islam_and_war

And go read the quran and what it has to say about all of this:
http://www.quranexplorer.com/quran/

About ISIS: it was a fractured non-factor before the syrian civil wars. Maybe the western shipments of weapons didn't help them directly, but ignoring the syrian clusterfuck for years certainly did.
It's the same issue again. The west ignored the war and now suddenly realizes we might have a problem. Why is it NOW a problem and not three years ago? Keep ignoring it or admit we made a big mistake.

First you are saying the west should be blamed for arming the rebels in syria which brought ISIS to power, then after i mention the US hardly sent anything meaningful help to the rebels, you say that the west should be blamed for ignoring the rebels in syria, which brought ISIS to power. you contradict yourself.

And what would you propose the west should have done in syria? bomb Assad and remove him from power, like they did with qaddafi? that didn't turn out too good:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/worldviews/wp/2014/08/22/islamists-carry-out-public-execution-on-a-libyan-soccer-field/

Bomb ISIS so a barbaric tyrant like Assad could keep his power? that's an unrealistic expectation of the west.

Help the "moderate" rebels who would have most likely turned against the west the second they win the war at the worst case, or more probably, turned syria into somalia by fighting each other? (Not that its vastly different, which is exactly my point)