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

731–737 of 737 posts

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

#731

Post by acqq »

the_af wrote: post #730
acqq wrote: post #729

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> And it's not a fight manual. Oh, yes, it is, absolutely is, especially combined with Hadith. Both together are the primary holy texts of Islam. Read it, read the historical materials, compare the texts and the history (what is written as the "words of god to Muslims" and what was done in the name of Islam in the last 1400 years -- the instructions and the actions match, and why wouldn't, if the "believers" performe…

Sorry, you're being unreasonable. I agreed the Quran was likely born as a fight manual (you chose to ignore that part and instead quoted out of context the next part). The fact is that it's not a fight manual now . Very similarly to how the Old Testament was born, out of desperate times, and which is not to be interpreted literally now . You can quote the Quran all you want. I can quote back verses preaching toleranc…

Tell that to the relatives of the Paris attack victims.

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

#732

Post by dang »

acqq wrote: post #731
the_af wrote: post #730

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sorry, you're being unreasonable. I agreed the Quran was likely born as a fight manual (you chose to ignore that part and instead quoted out of context the next part). The fact is that it's not a fight manual now . Very similarly to how the Old Testament was born, out of desperate times, and which is not to be interpreted literally now . You can quote the Quran all you want. I can quote back verses preaching toleranc…

Tell that to the relatives of the Paris attack victims.

Please stop. Religious flamewars are not welcome on Hacker News.

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

#733

Post by webXL »

fineman wrote: post #723
webXL wrote: post #713

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You think our occupation would prevent those things? I supported the Iraq invasion initially, and had some hope for the surge, but these wars are literally controlled by the news media, because every time a bomb goes off in the wrong place or a soldier shoots a kid for whatever reason, we get more tentative, and our troops lose support for their mission, then a new president comes a long to capitalize. I was wrong. 9…

Sorry, but "just cut our losses" isn't acceptable to me when people are being murdered. This is the Nazi murder of Jews/etc of our time and it's everyone's obligation to handle it better. Bush caused most of this current ISIS problem by lying about WMDs. At that point, we're the bad guys invading on a lie. It made us afraid of and hostile towards the Iraqis which caused the Abu Ghraib treatment, etc. He didn't make t…

> it's everyone's obligation to handle it better.

No, it's not. I have no expertise in ME affairs, do you? Who is the expert? What country has successfully demonstrated they can "handle it better"?

> Bush ... lie.

Yeah, and people died. I get it. But the next guy was elected partially because he wanted to withdraw from Iraq, and we did. Power vacuum. So we go back in and then what happens when we elect someone who wants to withdraw?

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

#734

Post by the_af »

acqq wrote: post #725
the_af wrote: post #718

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But I didn't attempt to read the Quran, so that cannot be the basis for your disagreement. I claimed that, since most Muslims aren't raving fanatics attempting to slay the infidel, there must be something more to Islam. I've also shown that people who have read the Quran (like a professor of religious studies who specializes in Islam) think it's open to interpetation. I also think that understanding a religious book…

Go away. If you aren't willing to read it yourself, your arguments are just the arguments of "intentional unwillingness" to even consider the original material I try all the time to discuss with you. You ignore the primary holy books of Islam and ignore the history of Islam conquest, some 1400 years. What's left? Your vain "argument" that not every Muslim blew himself up with the bomb belt already should prove that t…

I think reading the full Quran is immaterial to this discussion (I haven't read the Holy Bible fully either... gasp!). I rely on the testimony of experts on Islam, which you fully disregard even though you are not an expert yourself. I also haven't read every issue of The Watchtower but I still have an opinion about Jehovah's Witnesses. I don't find reading holy books about religions whose beliefs I don't share all that interesting.

I understand there are Islamic extremist groups; I've never disputed that. I'm arguing here that it's the extremism and not the Islamic that's worrying. I've read about Islamic culture and its history, and much like Christendom, it has both admirable and reprehensible parts. It's simply not true that the majority of the Muslim world do or support violent terrorist acts. Your position simply doesn't stand a reality check.

Have you read the Quran back to back, fully, including the verses that preach tolerance and compassion?

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

#735

Post by alvarosm »

dang wrote: post #568
lottin wrote: post #333

As an atheist, I see Islam as a barbaric belief system of some ancient cave men. Sorry but I feel very difficult to empathise with people who in this day and age feel so strongly about religion.

This comment and the ensuing subthread cross the line into generic religious flamewar. Please don't do that on HN.

The censorship on HN is outright disgusting.

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

#736

Post by Sideloader »

ufmace wrote: post #606
Ygg2 wrote: post #576

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Right? Just like killing Saddam and Gadafi stabilized the region. I'm sure nothing bad would happen. It's not like something worse than Al Quaida can happen again. Europe fully deserves the migrant crisis. It went into Middle East guns blazing, and expects to come out of it unscathed.

If done at the right time, it would have at least had a chance of transitioning to a somewhat more democratic form of government. As opposed to what actually happened when we did nothing, which is Islamic extremists being the main supporters of the resistance, versus the Russian and Iranian backed Assad. Assad believes that the West will grudgingly back him against ISIS extremists, and not so much against secular reb…

Who are the ostensibly secular rebels? Every rebel group seems to have propaganda videos on YouTube except the 'secular' ones. Call me sceptical. The only secular group we know of for sure is the Syrian National Army but Assad is their leader and he has been labeled Official Bad Guy Who Must Go. (Just prior to the war HRC said she considers the Assads "close friends".) Hmmm.... Former US pal Sadaam (secular despot) and the secular despot Gadaffi had "to go" too and look what that did.

At any rate, the 'secular' fighters are now more often called 'moderate' rebels. Hell, Al Queda (fighting in Syria as the Al-Nusra Front) is moderate compared to Daesh. Since 2012 they and other 'moderate' Islamist groups received funding and weapons from the US, UK, France, Israel, the Gulf States, Saudi Arabia. Many of the arms ended up in Daesh's hands anyway. One doesn't hear a lot about the, at one point much lauded, Free Syrian Army except that many in their ranks have defected to Daesh.

The stuff I mentioned above is as close to factual as it gets in this chaotic war. The information comes from so-called reliable media sources with supporting documents provided. This doesn't guarantee absolute truth of course.

It's interesting how almost every person has strong opinions about the clusterfuck unfolding in Syria/Iraq and the role Daesh plays in it, but very few of those people actually have enough trustworthy information to make an informed opinion. The fog of war and the spread of disinformation, and just plain old misinformation, is as relevant here as in any other war.

It doesn't help that Senator McCain advocated supplying Daesh with weapons to shoot down Russian fighter aircraft and even had his picture taken posing with Daesh. The US and its allies and lackeys have a rich history supporting and arming extremely vile regimes and insurgent groups when it serves their interests.

The West provided the fertile soil from which Daesh sprouted and now the chickens have come to roost. Big time.

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

#737

Post by ufmace »

Sideloader wrote: post #736
ufmace wrote: post #606

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If done at the right time, it would have at least had a chance of transitioning to a somewhat more democratic form of government. As opposed to what actually happened when we did nothing, which is Islamic extremists being the main supporters of the resistance, versus the Russian and Iranian backed Assad. Assad believes that the West will grudgingly back him against ISIS extremists, and not so much against secular reb…

Who are the ostensibly secular rebels? Every rebel group seems to have propaganda videos on YouTube except the 'secular' ones. Call me sceptical. The only secular group we know of for sure is the Syrian National Army but Assad is their leader and he has been labeled Official Bad Guy Who Must Go. (Just prior to the war HRC said she considers the Assads "close friends".) Hmmm.... Former US pal Sadaam (secular despot) a…

Might be a bit late to reply, but FWIW and IMHO, any moderate/secular rebel groups are essentially gone at this point.

In any type of rebellion, or any other organization for that matter, the views of the group will naturally change over time to be more in line with whatever the source of funding and resources wants them to be. Let a couple of years go by with the West providing essentially no support, and all of the support coming from the Gulf Arab states with a history of exporting extremism, and naturally any moderate groups and moderate elements in less moderate groups will wither and fade away, and the extremist elements will come to the front. The more time goes by, the harder it is to find any actual moderation to back.

Whatever moderate and secular-leaning elements there may have been at the beginning, they've long since withered and died, and there isn't much of anybody good left to back, aside from the Kurds. We have the Iranian-Russian aligned Assad regime, versus the ISIS extremists so out there that even Al-Quada is fighting them. I don't see much in the way of good options now, honestly.

It might have been different if we had backed groups heavily from the start and gotten that view-shifting effect working in our favor. Of course, it also might not have. And it's hard to fault the American people for not wanting to get deeply involved in another messy Middle-Eastern war. But if you care about spreading democracy and liberal western values, this is pretty much the worst thing to do.

Post reply on HN