141–150 of 228 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's also hard to imagine how not killing doesn't facilitate the vile activities of daesh. I swear this is the late 1930's all over again. "Surely Herr Hitler will get tired of invading countries before he gets to France. Surely military action will only anger him more..."
ISIS and the NSDAP are not even close to being similar geopolitical entities.
"A July 2014 poll by ICM Research suggested that more than one in four French youth of all creeds between the ages of eighteen and twenty-four have a favorable or very favorable opinion of ISIS . Even if these estimates are high, in our own interviews with young people in the vast and soulless housing projects of the Paris banlieues we found surprisingly wide tolerance or support for ISIS among young people " Despite…
We use EI, EIIL or more recently Daesh.
The only people who had any idea of what was talked about where those reading the English language media.
My guess is that people aither thought about something else, or not wanting to be caught being ignorant stated a random opinion.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If one says "keeping up the articles of Magna Carta, rather than resort to catastrophic violence on the part of the powerful outlawed states, would likely help lessen some of the chaos in today's world", does it imply that one is physically calling to go back to the thirteenth century? Similarly, Americans calling to restore the fourth amendment may not mean taking the clock back to the nineteenth century. Salafism i…
I don't understand what you're getting at but I'll try to explain. Fukuyama said that Capitalist Democracy was the pinnacle of civilisation. In the same way Salafi / Wahabbi ideology says that we must as much as possible live like the prophet and his contemporaries. Any innovation is derided as Bida/Heretical. So its not possible to reform certain laws in response to changing circumstances. Eg: Women can inherit only…
You're right but woman not being a breadwinner is no longer the social reality today. So do we change the law or go back to the old ways ?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't understand what you're getting at but I'll try to explain. Fukuyama said that Capitalist Democracy was the pinnacle of civilisation. In the same way Salafi / Wahabbi ideology says that we must as much as possible live like the prophet and his contemporaries. Any innovation is derided as Bida/Heretical. So its not possible to reform certain laws in response to changing circumstances. Eg: Women can inherit only…
I cant reply directly as HN has blockedit. You're right but woman not being a breadwinner is no longer the social reality today. So do we change the law or go back to the old ways ?
> I cant reply directly as HN has blockedit.
Yes, you can reply directly. Beyond a certain depth HN may not show a reply link when you view the whole thread, but you can still directly reply by clicking the direct link to the specific comment (the one that has the "5 minutes ago" or whatever the time interval is), and then the reply box will be shown.
I think this is intended to make people think before replying to a very deeply nested comment as a way of curbing unproductive Ping-Pong discussions, but it seems mostly to get people to post lateral replies (that is, replies attached to a comment somewhere upthread from the comment they actually respond to), invariably complaining about the inability to reply directly, which is worse for the flow of discussion than if they just posted direct replies.
I think the best course of actin would be to leave ISIS alone from military perspective.
Then airdrop food, water and medical supplies to the area. Not discriminating between fighters and civilians. Smother them.
Then give the civilians living in that area a way to voice their grievances. So that Muslim people in Egypt and France could feel sympathy for ordinary human beings trapped in that area. "How can you treat our fellow Muslims so bad?"
Now ISIS should be busy stopping people from messaging the outer world. And stopping people from drinking filthy crusader water. They would have to spend their energy enforcing a totalitarian state. It's difficult for them to explain how there is holy war when the enemy is being so nice.
The article is a nuanced view of the present situation, but doesn't go into the historical perspective. Contemporary radical Islam is a response to Western modernity and perceived decadence and has been brewing for decades if not centuries. It is an outgrowth of Salafi Islam, a severely literal interpretation of the Koran that has become widespread over the past 70 years thanks to trillions of petrodollars that fund…
Radical Islam is not solely a response to western influence. It sure is also that, but it is also due to the ideology of the islam itself and the failure to modernise it. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islam_and_war | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islam_and_modernity
Look no further than hate-motivated crimes against people of color, transgendered people, and non-heterosexual people - often backed up with violent rhetoric based on Christianity.
Does that mean the ideology of Christianity itself has failed to modernize?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Radical Islam is not solely a response to western influence. It sure is also that, but it is also due to the ideology of the islam itself and the failure to modernise it. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islam_and_war | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islam_and_modernity
I agree with this. We shouldn't forget that Muhammad was basically a military leader. Anyway, we are in danger that this narrative and others similar becomes the only explanation in the mainstream media, instead of only a factor that probably is not very relevant. After all, the majority of Muslims don't believe that they should go to war with other countries.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Beyond the complete lack of humanity in the outlook that we are like barrels of brent, it's simply wrong. Indeed. And there seems, to me, to be something nihilistic in the idea that Europeans should simply let immigrants replace them. Maybe instead, European nations should look into instituting domestic policies that encourage the population to maintain a healthy replacement rate. The article appears to be implying…
> Maybe instead, European nations should look into instituting domestic policies that encourage the population to maintain a healthy replacement rate. So, 18 months maternity/paternity leave, 180€ per month per child you have, plus tax breaks, plus better credit rating, plus 12 more sick days a year, plus subsidized kindergarten and daycare (with guaranteed daycare place from age 3 on), cheap whole-day school for chi…
Artificial wombs. Group day-care. Have women donate eggs, men donate sperm and combine them randomly. Make it the duty of every person to be a parent to 2 to 3 children with fines for not doing their part until they hit 30/40 years of age. The babies will be born never knowing their biological parents. Then they're sent to child-raising facilities, either government or private, which are subject to strict regulation against mistreatment and indoctrination. Only the mega-rich, or very rural will afford/choose to have babies the usual way.
This seems to be the only choice in a society where everyone has to work 40 hours per week to secure a living for him/herself. If you had guaranteed basic income that can cover the cost of children, people could leave their position for one to two years, maybe do contracting work from home on the side. You will need very strict laws against discriminating against those who chose to have children. Or, you know, make making children a specialised industry like everything else.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"Universal condemnation" is precisely what they're seeking. The more notoriety, the better. Hence, pushing gay men off of buildings and drowning men in cages (with underwater cameras filming). They are seeking street cred, a rep, a mystique of fear. Condemnation doesn't work. What does work is a combination of excellent police work in routing out cells of recruiters and operators, and precise, devastating bombing rai…
Bombing? Boots on the ground? You think these things work? Have you been asleep for the last 15 years?
If Iraq had a fully capable military(instead of the partially capable one they have now), ISIS would never have spread into the country. For all the problems the US and its allies created in Iraq, the country was comparatively much more stable, and for the most part people got on with their lives.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I find your comment very relevant and I agree with all of it but I miss some references to the influence of not Levant nations in all this mess. To your comments I would like to add: the Russians invading Afghanistan, the CIA arming and training of all kind of "rebels", the invasion of Irak, the protection of the House of Saud by the EUA, the interest of Israel in being the only strong nation in the area, the support…
Also the funding of the Syrian rebels by Obama and other Western nations. ISIS was just one of the groups in the Syrian civil war, a bunch brutal and crazy idiots, that would have never amounted to anything. At the same time CIA wanted to destabilize the region, to kick the currently Russia-friendly government out (and as a consequence kick Russia out of its pretty much only naval base in the region). So they kept fu…