09-25-2015, 11:30 AM | #1 |
我が名は勇者王!
|
ISIS
Let's start off with this: a slice of horror.
The temptation is to invite comparisons between ISIS and Nazi Germany, but beyond the animal brutality this guy argues they're the exact opposite, a nation that celebrates primal emotions of conquest and carnality under the veil of religion. For emasculated feeling, misanthropic men, there's some obvious if chilling appeal to this group. Given all the terror tales we've heard about them, would you go to war against them, and why/why not?
__________________
あなたの勇気が切り開く未来
ふたりの想いが見つけだす希望 今 信じあえる あきらめない 心かさね 永遠を抱きしめて |
09-25-2015, 01:09 PM | #2 |
Banned
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 14,729
|
No.
You cannot kill an idea. But you can create an army of terrorists that have their hatred of you ingrained in their racial memory and ruin the state's infrastructure so it can do nothing about it, which is what we have now. |
09-28-2015, 11:17 PM | #3 |
プラスチック♡ラブ
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: 蒸気の波の中
Posts: 14,766
|
And if we go to war, we will do it again.
Though I have to wonder how we can solve the problem of rapidly proliferating radicals without war. I'm sure it exists but it's not something that I'm aware of being solve without some sort of violence over the course of human history. |
09-29-2015, 12:19 AM | #4 |
Barghest Barghest Barghe-
|
I have to agree with Kush honestly. Ultimately, going to war with ISIS is probably something we will have to do. I think that's rather unavoidable. But its similar to the war on communism...just because we fought in the Korean and Vietnam War (to middling or no success on our side) doesn't mean that the idea will fade away. In particular, a lot of these anti-American sentiments comes from us continuing going to war in the Middle East and meddling with affairs we may or may not have had the right to, and probably not for the most wholesome of reasons. Going to war and meddling seems...a bit counter productive.
tl;dr Going to war is something we will probably have to do, but I don't see it being beneficial in the long-term, or even in the short term.
__________________
|
09-29-2015, 01:43 AM | #5 |
我が名は勇者王!
|
I personally don't agree with the sense that ideas can't be killed, and point out ISIS is very different from communism, national socialism or even Al Qaeda's jihad. For ideas, in a very literal sense, if you kill the person harbouring the idea, you kill the idea. It's no different from stopping viral contamination, culling the contaminated animals. And I don't think it's realistic if, say, every Christian on Earth died and the atheists and non-Christian religious convert to Christianity to reoccupy their niche. Christianity will never become as dominant a religion as it once was if most of the practitioners disappear. Think Latin, and how influential it was, and yet it's a dead language because there are no native speakers of it. War therefore is an effective way to prune out an idea that is especially dangerous if it continues to spread to willing men.
I don't fully understand the true nature of ISIS since a distorted view is fed through the Western media for me to digest, but from what I've seen they're basically barbarians clad in the clothing of Islam, using Muhammad's military exploits as excuse to revert back to a more primitive time in Islamic history. In that, ISIS is founded not on religion, or ideology (as in the case of communism), but in raw male id. That is the enemy of communist, capitalist and republican alike. Radicals can be stopped without war - we have Christians as extreme in their views as ISIS, such as the KKK, here in the United States, but either the peaceful teachings of the New Testament or a strong, unified, secular government work as a powerful check against such radicalism capturing the imagination as ISIS has in the Middle East. A good chunk of Isis's influence stems from the land owning they have through conquest. It's almost offered as proof they're legitimate, not unlike Muhummad in the Quran
__________________
あなたの勇気が切り開く未来
ふたりの想いが見つけだす希望 今 信じあえる あきらめない 心かさね 永遠を抱きしめて |
09-29-2015, 08:50 AM | #6 | |
Archbishop of Banterbury
|
My instinctive reaction (having grown up in a time of constant Iraq war news coverage) is that I'm opposed to deployment of the British military except in direct, immediate defence of British territory. Swap British for your own nationalities.
__________________
Quote:
Last edited by Concept; 09-29-2015 at 12:15 PM. |
|
09-29-2015, 03:12 PM | #7 |
The Path of Now & Forever
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 5,304
|
Dopple, your plan to kill an idea is with mass genocide?
|
09-29-2015, 04:33 PM | #8 |
Thankful For The Results
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Past the Ledge
Posts: 2,184
|
I've never been one to actually pay attention to the news (partially due to the fact that I've never had Cable or the like), so everything I know I learned after the fact. That doesn't affect my opinion here in the slightest, though. When George Washington left office way back one, he told America explicitly not to do two big things. He knew that going against his final decrees would only bring the then-young nation trouble, and ISIS is simply proof that he was correct. If we were to break down and actually listen to the guy, then no, we wouldn't go to war with these people. And, frankly, we shouldn't. Though it seems most of us here, American and otherwise, agree on one thing : we done goofed up way too badly to ignore it this time. At this point, war is inevitable. But that doesn't mean we should just move all our forces over and to them right this second. There is the (very) off chance that if we leave them alone, they'll calm down. Sure, waiting for them to attack will likely cost us quite a few people, but so will just invading them now. There is no easy way out of it, but we have to atone for our mistakes sometime...
The idea has spread too far for there to be any other interpretation, unfortunately. While this is indeed the most blatantly obvious way of getting rid of the people themselves, it really isn't the most humane. It is possible to convince a group of people that their beliefs are wrong without just killing them all. Even Nazi Germany eventually figured out it's problems. Given how history's been going lately, though... the U.S. may very well try something similar to that anyway, regardless of how non-Islamic these people are acting. Too many Americans know Islam because of the extremists and see it horribly as a whole. We've seen a major instance of this recently- the "Ahmed's bomb" never should've happened. One can only hope that it helped us realize how stupid we're being when dealing with Islam, but that is unfortunately unlikely... |
09-29-2015, 06:00 PM | #9 |
我が名は勇者王!
|
We don't have to go as far as genocide, because it's clear who the leaders of ISIS are, and what territory they control. Just like, you don't have to puncture every organ in the body to kill someone, you can just hit one vital and the whole system dies.
Bands of rampaging rapists are going to be antagonized by the communities living in territories where ISIS isn't in control to endorse/protect the bands' plundering. Fewer people will join them if they know it's increasingly likely they'll be caught and/or killed. I don't think this ideology is powerful enough to live in caves and tunnels like Al Qaeda was willing to.
__________________
あなたの勇気が切り開く未来
ふたりの想いが見つけだす希望 今 信じあえる あきらめない 心かさね 永遠を抱きしめて |
09-30-2015, 01:44 AM | #10 |
Banned
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 14,729
|
Gotta say Doppel that is an awful idea. The kind of thinking that led to the creation of IS.
|
09-30-2015, 08:30 PM | #11 | |
我が名は勇者王!
|
Quote:
At the very least, reconquering ISIS' controlled territory and killing their leaders will regress the organization to Al Qaeda-esque jihadist sect, which while not ideal is far less fearsome and what they currently are.
__________________
あなたの勇気が切り開く未来
ふたりの想いが見つけだす希望 今 信じあえる あきらめない 心かさね 永遠を抱きしめて |
|
Lower Navigation | ||||||
|
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
Thread Tools | |
|
|