Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

VLC contributor living in Aleppo writing about the Paris attacks

mailman.videolan.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

321–330 of 737 posts

Re: VLC contributor living in Aleppo writing about the Paris attacks

#321

Post by rmc »

steveklabnik wrote: post #276
crusso wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Significant numbers of non-Islam subscribers hold ideas that are incompatible with an open society too If that's your contention then you'd need to account for the high terrorist attack output of Islamists vs other non-Islam subscribers.

Not Jacques, but from a few months back: "White Supremacists More Dangerous To America Than Foreign Terrorists, Study Says" http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/06/24/domestic-terrorism-... > At least 48 people have been killed stateside by right-wing > extremists in the 14 years since since the September 11 > attacks -- almost twice as many as were killed by > self-identified jihadists in that time. As Jacques says, "…

It depends. For a long time the UK was happy to call Irish nationalists and the IRA terrorists.

Terrorism is what other groups do.

Re: VLC contributor living in Aleppo writing about the Paris attacks

#322

Post by nickik »

rmc wrote: post #163
cygx wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Exactly. And you tell them in no unertain terms that they are wrong, instead of making excuses because "it's their culture" or because of freedom of religion. Harmful ideologies do not get a free pass in my book just because they claim divine backing.

Try suggesting that Americans give up their guns, and you'll hear a lot about culture. Suggest that some places in USA don't fly a CSA flag and you'll hear about culture. Tell some christians that they need to teach their kids that's it's OK to be gay, and you'll hear a lot about religion and freedom of religion.

Its exactly what he said, those people should not get a pass either.

However I would also argue that for all of those their are non cultural/religion arguments that can be applied.

Re: VLC contributor living in Aleppo writing about the Paris attacks

#323

Post by alvarosm »

ousta wrote: post #22
jacquesm wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It only took 800 years.

are you serious??? How long did it take for muslims representatives to say sorry about the invasions and conquest that led to the creation of crusades? I have yet to hear an apology.

He doesn't care. In his view we're guilty of everything. In the end, sadly, he's just another primitive religious zealot, not unlike the ones who decapitate people.

Re: VLC contributor living in Aleppo writing about the Paris attacks

#324

Post by scrollaway »

tome wrote: post #296
Natanael_L wrote: post #290

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why? Why can't they be the same thing, just in different contexts? On both sides there's people who believe the enemy will destroy the world, and believes in a particular ideal, and who sends out armies to achieve their goals, and both sides are very clearly not very precise in who they actually target (the bombing on Doctor's Without Border, anyone?). Both sides cause tons of civilian casualties, both refuse to apol…

This kind of moral equivocation can only come if you really have no clue about the reality of these conflicts, in my opinion. It's one of the great weaknesses of our civilisation that we are "too broad-minded to take own own side in a quarrel" (to quote a phrase I just learned today). In the large, one side wants to impose rule based on beliefs about what an omnipotent sky person wants and is willing to sacrifice inn…

God has little to do with political plays. Not all muslim extremist are believers, just like not all the american politicians who say they're christians are actually christians[0]. More often than not, it's a facade from the leaders to draw in more pawn soldiers who believe in the cause.

You talk a lot about not having a clue on "the reality of the conflicts" and yet, you are unable to take a step back and look from the perspective of someone completely alien to the situation.

America has, time and time again, used and abused its armies for strategic and economical purposes (The "if you have oil..." meme has been beaten to death, hasn't it?). It certainly is willing to sacrifice innocent lives as long as it doesn't make the news - which it doesn't because of how hostile the entire country is to muslim ideals. And I've heard more than once the term "God" being thrown around by US politicians to justify these things. Does all of this ring a bell to you?

One of the sides is certainly a lot more barbaric than the other, what with the beheadings and what not... but whether your family is dying to american bombs or to barbarians doesn't really change squat for the victims. With the exception that one of them is actually less destructive - take a guess which?

[0] Since we're talking about countries with backwards ideologies, how is it that it's political suicide to be an atheist in the US? We have plenty of them in France and nobody gives a shit...

Edit: I'll add to this... It's really hard to take a step back and picture yourself as being the bad guy. It's nearly impossible, in fact. You are raised on one side of a conflict and you simply do not have the full picture unless you've yourself lived on the other side or been with people on the other side. But try to understand this: In these wars, there's no "bad guy and good guy". There's two bad guys and a lot of followers who have been completely brainwashed to think the causes are worthy.

Wars are not about justice. They're not about spreading culture, be that culture islam or democracy. We'd be at war with North Korea if they were about any of those things. Wars are strategic, and always about taking something away from the enemy, be it territory, riches or political power. The two sides are equally bad, and the civilians/soldiers on both sides only see how evil the other side is - they don't get to see the evil of their own.

Re: VLC contributor living in Aleppo writing about the Paris attacks

#325

Post by rmc »

ptaipale wrote: post #285
claudius wrote: post #226

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oklahoma_City_bombing https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Socialist_Underground https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oktoberfest_terror_attack https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Army_Faction https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irish_Republican_Army All these are fairly recent examples of non-Muslim radicals attempting to effect social change by the same means Muslim radicals use to try and effect s…

You really have to go back in time to find these examples. Their dates of terror operation are 1970's, 1980, 1980's, 1995 and for one which doesn't very well compare, 2010. And then they were largely hounded down and imprisoned (or executed, for McVeigh). Islamist terrorism is a newer and also much bigger trend (even in the West, although the vast majority of people killed are in Muslim countries). I see this line of…

The IRA was not bought down by miltiary operations. Various leaders of it are currentling serving in governments in Northern Ireland. (Martin McGuinness is Deputy First Minister of Northern Ireland, Gerry Adams is a TD in Ireland)

Re: VLC contributor living in Aleppo writing about the Paris attacks

#326

Post by [deleted] »

jacquesm wrote: post #268
fauigerzigerk wrote: post #264

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>his main motto is 'close the borders' I'm not out of touch enough to have missed this opinion. But that is not the same as saying that people should be sent back to war zones. We don't have borders with Syria. But you are right that I don't know specifically what that Dutch politician actually demands other than closing the borders.

If it were up to Geert Wilders we'd be going around with a color chart in shades of brown and a burning Koran to figure out who we should kick out and who is allowed to stay.

[deleted]

Re: VLC contributor living in Aleppo writing about the Paris attacks

#327

Post by coldtea »

crusso wrote: post #151
jacquesm wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> a significant number of adherents of Islam hold ideas that are incompatible with an open society. Significant numbers of non-Islam subscribers hold ideas that are incompatible with an open society too. All these people have at least one thing in common: they would like to change society to suit their ends. And a very large number of people in my country would happily throw back those fleeing the carnage to become v…

Significant numbers of non-Islam subscribers hold ideas that are incompatible with an open society too If that's your contention then you'd need to account for the high terrorist attack output of Islamists vs other non-Islam subscribers.

Because these people live in societies that have been colonized, manipulated, held down and bombed for decades on end, forcing them to get radically hateful and fundamentalist as a response and pass that on to others (younger men etc). Why would a white Swedish, Canadian etc. have any reason to do the same?

Besides, is it just terrorism that's incompatible with an "open society", or other acts of murder and oppression too? Because from the extermination of 6 million jews down to colonialism, slavery, the pogroms, nukes on civilians, gulags, the massacre in Manchuria, 2 world wars, etc, most western and asian countries don't look that good either.

Re: VLC contributor living in Aleppo writing about the Paris attacks

#328

Post by fauigerzigerk »

coldtea wrote: post #301
fauigerzigerk wrote: post #237

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>And a very large number of people in my country would happily throw back those fleeing the carnage to become victims of that 40% That statement really doesn't make much sense at all. People are fleeing a war, among them people from the 40% and the 60% group alike. And no one in Europe is advocating throwing anyone back into a war zone. Many want the refugees stay somewhere in the region instead of letting them come…

> There is no 40% group of the population in Europe that holds views that are anywhere near as disgusting as that. Well, only 50+ years ago there was an over 40% population in the US that thought that blacks were inferior and shouldn't sit in the same restaurants/hotels/schools with whites. In fact it was even law in some states. Beyond that, there were about all major western countries, France, UK, Belgium, Holland,…

>There have been over 2 million victims of those interventions in the last 10 years alone

I was comparing social attitudes not counting casualties of armed conflict and its repercussions. Comparing these two things quantitatively makes very little sense.

The conservative advocates of Sharia who execute people for their sexual orientation are executing people who live right now in those countries. They don't execute European or American racists from the 1950s and they don't do it as an act of revenge for the Iraq war (that I strongly opposed by the way)

Re: VLC contributor living in Aleppo writing about the Paris attacks

#329

Post by 1_player »

alvarosm wrote: post #304

It never ceases to amaze me to what lengths people go to stay in the land they're attached to. I'd have fled my country a very long time ago if I had ISIS that close.

I'm afraid it's not as easy as booking a flight and taking a cab to the airport.

Re: VLC contributor living in Aleppo writing about the Paris attacks

#330

Post by bjelkeman-again »

jacquesm wrote: post #266
vinceyuan wrote: post #230

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Weapons, food, training cost a lot of money. So who are giving so much money to ISIS?

I already posted this elsewhere in this thread: http://www.newsweek.com/2014/11/14/how-does-isis-fund-its-re... It's from 2014 but still a good read on the subject.

It is interesting how many allegations there is in something like this, but there is essentially now way for anyone like me to verify any of it. Not saying it is wrong. Just saying I'd love verify it.
Post reply on HN