Notices
Results 1 to 75 of 75

Thread: The traitors in our midst

  1. #1 The traitors in our midst 
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    1,774
    Not the first one, not the last one.


    Reply With Quote  
     

  2.  
     

  3. #2  
    Ascended Member Ascended's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    3,380
    Perhaps this shows how far we have yet to go in combating terrorist propaganda. We have show that there is a place in society for everybody and work harder to teach that our values are important. This line that the West is immoral and against all of Islam just seems far to easy for terrorists groups to use as part of their campaign.

    I don't think we can effectively counter this problem without first fully engaging with the Islamic community and supporting them, they need to be able to show these kids that they have a place in society and that terrorism and violence is not what their religion is about.

    What we must do is identify the real problem i.e that of these terrorist groups themselves and not to blame peaceful communities within our own countries. We also need proper education in schools to show our kids what these groups are really all about, instead of leaving them at the mercy of glamourised propaganda that glorifies violence.

    If we can teach people who is really responsible then we can start to irradicate the ignorance and help to stop the demonisation of Islam which only serves as recruitment tool for these groups.

    We all have a responsibility to our young people though, whatever race or religion they might be, to successfully guide and help them find their place in our society, so that they understand and respect our values and if we can do this properly then just maybe we might not be seeing kids drawn towards these groups and throwing away their future.


    Everything has its beauty, but not everyone sees it. - confucius
    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #3  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    1,774
    The appeasment is working really well in the UK. Belgium and France are not that far behind. Germany is doing really well.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #4  
    Ascended Member Ascended's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    3,380
    Quote Originally Posted by Howard Roark View Post
    The appeasment is working really well in the UK. Belgium and France are not that far behind.
    But it's not about 'appeasment', there isn't anyone to appease in this situation, certainly not the terrorist groups who European Governments are actively fighting against. It's about teaching the right values to our young people and making them a part of our society. Many of the people joining up to these groups are seeing us as the enermy, we need to prevent our youngsters from growing up with this attitude and we can't do this by demonising them all.
    Everything has its beauty, but not everyone sees it. - confucius
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #5  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    1,774
    Quote Originally Posted by Ascended View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Howard Roark View Post
    The appeasment is working really well in the UK. Belgium and France are not that far behind.
    It's about teaching the right values to our young people and making them a part of our society.
    I agree but it is clearly not working.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #6  
    exchemist
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    London
    Posts
    2,657
    Quote Originally Posted by Howard Roark View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Ascended View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Howard Roark View Post
    The appeasment is working really well in the UK. Belgium and France are not that far behind.
    It's about teaching the right values to our young people and making them a part of our society.
    I agree but it is clearly not working.
    Do you have a suggestion, Howard?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #7  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    1,774
    Quote Originally Posted by exchemist View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Howard Roark View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Ascended View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Howard Roark View Post
    The appeasment is working really well in the UK. Belgium and France are not that far behind.
    It's about teaching the right values to our young people and making them a part of our society.
    I agree but it is clearly not working.
    Do you have a suggestion, Howard?
    Traitors get the death penalty, all the affected countries need to set an example.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #8  
    exchemist
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    London
    Posts
    2,657
    Quote Originally Posted by Howard Roark View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by exchemist View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Howard Roark View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Ascended View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Howard Roark View Post
    The appeasment is working really well in the UK. Belgium and France are not that far behind.
    It's about teaching the right values to our young people and making them a part of our society.
    I agree but it is clearly not working.
    Do you have a suggestion, Howard?
    Traitors get the death penalty, all the affected countries need to set an example.
    What a hopelessly naive and counterproductive suggestion. Ever heard of "martyrs"?

    I'd stick to physics if I were you.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #9  
    Time Lord
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    8,046
    Quote Originally Posted by Ascended View Post
    I don't think we can effectively counter this problem without first fully engaging with the Islamic community and supporting them, they need to be able to show these kids that they have a place in society and that terrorism and violence is not what their religion is about.
    You're ignoring the possibility that maybe violence is what Islam is about. Probably indirectly.

    It's kind of like how, after the Communist Revolution, people in the USSR began to find that the Communists were basically just a bunch of angry thugs, who would send secret police to your home and drag you off in the night and beat and/or torture you on the barest suspicion that you *might* have uttered a single word of disdain against the beautiful system of community that was being put in place.

    Islam has quite a lot in common with Communism in other respects. It's an ideal. It believes in a particular order (Sharia Law). It preaches that if people would just follow that order, absolutely every problem in the whole world would immediately be solved.

    Those kinds of ideologies easily lend themselves to "end justifies the means" rationalizations. Just as much in wealthy countries like Saudi Arabia (where Islam is most certainly not oppressed), as in poorer countries.



    What we must do is identify the real problem i.e that of these terrorist groups themselves and not to blame peaceful communities within our own countries. We also need proper education in schools to show our kids what these groups are really all about, instead of leaving them at the mercy of glamourised propaganda that glorifies violence.
    What are you talking about? Those groups are the vanguard of the Sharia Law movement. Champions of Allah.

    Sure, some of the things they do are brutal and distasteful, but you'll see!!! Once the whole world has converted to Sharia Law and we all live in a paradise on Earth, those people will be remembered as heroes for their sacrifice!!!

    Not villains!!!!

    (I hope you understand that I don't mean that. Just trying to describe it from the terrorists and sympathizers' point of view.)
    Some clocks are only right twice a day, but they are still right when they are right.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  11. #10  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    1,774
    Quote Originally Posted by exchemist View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Howard Roark View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by exchemist View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Howard Roark View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Ascended View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Howard Roark View Post
    The appeasment is working really well in the UK. Belgium and France are not that far behind.
    It's about teaching the right values to our young people and making them a part of our society.
    I agree but it is clearly not working.
    Do you have a suggestion, Howard?
    Traitors get the death penalty, all the affected countries need to set an example.
    What a hopelessly naive and counterproductive suggestion. Ever heard of "martyrs"?

    I'd stick to physics if I were you.
    Don't patronize me. I was defending my country (US) when you were sitting on your ass, thinking how to appease the traitors. The penalty for high treason IS death in the US. Don't know about the others but many other countries have the same penalty (check out UK and France) .
    Reply With Quote  
     

  12. #11  
    exchemist
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    London
    Posts
    2,657
    Quote Originally Posted by Howard Roark View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by exchemist View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Howard Roark View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by exchemist View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Howard Roark View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Ascended View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Howard Roark View Post
    The appeasment is working really well in the UK. Belgium and France are not that far behind.
    It's about teaching the right values to our young people and making them a part of our society.
    I agree but it is clearly not working.
    Do you have a suggestion, Howard?
    Traitors get the death penalty, all the affected countries need to set an example.
    What a hopelessly naive and counterproductive suggestion. Ever heard of "martyrs"?

    I'd stick to physics if I were you.
    Don't patronize me. I was defending my country (US) when you were sitting on your ass, thinking how to appease the traitors. The penalty for treason IS death in the US. Don't know about the others.
    I most certainly shall feel free to patronize you on this topic, at every turn, since you clearly know zippo about it.

    We have ample experience with the IRA of what it takes to neutralise a domestic terrorist threat. Threatening to kill the perpetrators is not any kind of a solution. There is no gung-ho, macho shithead, quick answer, unfortunately. It takes calm application of the rule of law, plus patience and insight into how communities develop feelings of alienation and steps to reduce this.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  13. #12  
    Life-Size Nanoputian Flick Montana's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Flatland
    Posts
    5,438
    Quote Originally Posted by Howard Roark View Post
    Don't patronize me. I was defending my country (US) when you were sitting on your ass, thinking how to appease the traitors.
    I won't patronize you if you don't break out the phoney baloney patriotism nonsense. One is not a better countryman simply for having worn a uniform and fired a weapon at enemy combatants.
    "Sometimes I think the surest sign that intelligent life exists elsewhere in the universe is that none of it has tried to contact us." -Calvin
    Reply With Quote  
     

  14. #13  
    Forum Radioactive Isotope cosmictraveler's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Key West, Florida, Earth
    Posts
    4,789
    There are well over 3 billion people living in America and with only a hand full of known traitors I don't think there's a big problem with Americas educational system. I believe the problem is with some people just want to be turncoats and there's little, if anything, that can be done to prevent that from happening. You can't tell if a new police recruit will be a bad cop until they are in their position.
    When the power of love overcomes the love of power the world will know peace.
    Jimi Hendrix
    Reply With Quote  
     

  15. #14  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    1,774
    Quote Originally Posted by exchemist View Post
    It takes calm application of the rule of law, plus patience and insight into how communities develop feelings of alienation and steps to reduce this.
    The standard appeasment lingo. After years of appeasment and apologies, at first opportunity they go fight for ISIS, against their OWN country. At the very least, do not let them back in the country, let them spend the rest of their lives in the Islamic State of Iraq Syria and Levant. They do not deserve to come back in.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  16. #15  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    1,774
    Quote Originally Posted by Flick Montana View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Howard Roark View Post
    Don't patronize me. I was defending my country (US) when you were sitting on your ass, thinking how to appease the traitors.
    I won't patronize you if you don't break out the phoney baloney patriotism nonsense. One is not a better countryman simply for having worn a uniform and fired a weapon at enemy combatants.
    Actually he is. Especially when the other sat on his ass poking his nose while appeasing the aforementioned enemy combatants and finding reasons for their actions.
    One last thing: I did not "fire my weapon at enemy combatants" I took them down. Ready to do it again, if necessary. By the looks of it, I will be doing it again.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  17. #16  
    Forum Radioactive Isotope cosmictraveler's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Key West, Florida, Earth
    Posts
    4,789
    If Iran , Turkey and Iraq would meld themselves together under one leader then that army could easily overthrow ISIS.
    When the power of love overcomes the love of power the world will know peace.
    Jimi Hendrix
    Reply With Quote  
     

  18. #17  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    1,774
    Quote Originally Posted by cosmictraveler View Post
    If Iran , Turkey and Iraq would meld themselves together under one leader then that army could easily overthrow ISIS.
    The combined armies of Iran, IraQ, Syria, Turkey and Lebanon are over 2 million strong. ISIS is , according to varying accounts 30,000 to 80,000. Wonder why ISIS is winning.....
    Reply With Quote  
     

  19. #18  
    exchemist
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    London
    Posts
    2,657
    Quote Originally Posted by Howard Roark View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by exchemist View Post
    It takes calm application of the rule of law, plus patience and insight into how communities develop feelings of alienation and steps to reduce this.
    The standard appeasment lingo. After years of appeasment and apologies, at first opportunity they go fight for ISIS, against their OWN country. At the very least, do not let them back in the country, let them spend the rest of their lives in the Islamic State of Iraq Syria and Levant. They do not deserve to come back in.
    There is a certain type of American redneck, usually ignorant of other countries but nevertheless highly opinionated about them, who thinks terrorism can be defeated if you simply kill all the "bad guys". However real life is seldom like a cheap video game, as the imbecile who last occupied the White House found out to his cost. I had thought a man of your erudition would be beyond such stereotypical thinking.

    But clearly the vein has been throbbing in your neck from the moment you started this thread. I was just laughing to myself to imagine you might come back with Spike Milligan's retort: "Look, I died in the war for people like you!"…only to find you have done practically that.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  20. #19  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    1,774
    Quote Originally Posted by exchemist View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Howard Roark View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by exchemist View Post
    It takes calm application of the rule of law, plus patience and insight into how communities develop feelings of alienation and steps to reduce this.
    The standard appeasment lingo. After years of appeasment and apologies, at first opportunity they go fight for ISIS, against their OWN country. At the very least, do not let them back in the country, let them spend the rest of their lives in the Islamic State of Iraq Syria and Levant. They do not deserve to come back in.
    There is a certain type of American redneck,
    Riiight, it is the fault of the subjects of terrorism, not of the terrorists themselves.


    usually ignorant of other countries
    I know much more history than you do. I lived in Korea, Japan, France, Italy and Germany. I speak French,Italian, Russian (all fluently), some German and some Japanese.

    but nevertheless highly opinionated about them, who thinks terrorism can be defeated if you simply kill all the "bad guys". However real life is seldom like a cheap video game, as the imbecile who last occupied the White House found out to his cost. I had thought a man of your erudition would be beyond such stereotypical thinking.
    Precisely. This is why I have no patience with the stereotypical thinking of the appeasers. Maybe , if we gave the traitors a free phone, they will stop betraying us, eh?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  21. #20  
    exchemist
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    London
    Posts
    2,657
    Quote Originally Posted by Howard Roark View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by exchemist View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Howard Roark View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by exchemist View Post
    It takes calm application of the rule of law, plus patience and insight into how communities develop feelings of alienation and steps to reduce this.
    The standard appeasment lingo. After years of appeasment and apologies, at first opportunity they go fight for ISIS, against their OWN country. At the very least, do not let them back in the country, let them spend the rest of their lives in the Islamic State of Iraq Syria and Levant. They do not deserve to come back in.
    There is a certain type of American redneck,
    Riiight, it is the fault of the subjects of terrorism, not of the terrorists themselves.


    usually ignorant of other countries
    I know much more history than you do. I lived in Korea, Japan, France, Italy and Germany. I speak French,Italian, Russian (all fluently), some German and some Japanese.

    but nevertheless highly opinionated about them, who thinks terrorism can be defeated if you simply kill all the "bad guys". However real life is seldom like a cheap video game, as the imbecile who last occupied the White House found out to his cost. I had thought a man of your erudition would be beyond such stereotypical thinking.
    Precisely. This is why I have no patience with the stereotypical thinking of the appeasers. Maybe , if we gave the traitors a free phone, they will stop betraying us, eh?
    Thanks Howard, then there is some point in talking to you about this, after all.

    Do you know what went into defusing Irish terrorism? Can you give us a short summary of the key elements?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  22. #21  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    1,774
    Quote Originally Posted by exchemist View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Howard Roark View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by exchemist View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Howard Roark View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by exchemist View Post
    It takes calm application of the rule of law, plus patience and insight into how communities develop feelings of alienation and steps to reduce this.
    The standard appeasment lingo. After years of appeasment and apologies, at first opportunity they go fight for ISIS, against their OWN country. At the very least, do not let them back in the country, let them spend the rest of their lives in the Islamic State of Iraq Syria and Levant. They do not deserve to come back in.
    There is a certain type of American redneck,
    Riiight, it is the fault of the subjects of terrorism, not of the terrorists themselves.


    usually ignorant of other countries
    I know much more history than you do. I lived in Korea, Japan, France, Italy and Germany. I speak French,Italian, Russian (all fluently), some German and some Japanese.

    but nevertheless highly opinionated about them, who thinks terrorism can be defeated if you simply kill all the "bad guys". However real life is seldom like a cheap video game, as the imbecile who last occupied the White House found out to his cost. I had thought a man of your erudition would be beyond such stereotypical thinking.
    Precisely. This is why I have no patience with the stereotypical thinking of the appeasers. Maybe , if we gave the traitors a free phone, they will stop betraying us, eh?
    Thanks Howard, then there is some point in talking to you about this, after all.

    Do you know what went into defusing Irish terrorism? Can you give us a short summary of the key elements?
    I am not interested in deflections. I am interested in discussing the subject put forward in the OP. If you want to discuss Irish terrorism, open a different thread, don't hijack this one.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  23. #22  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    1,774
    Quote Originally Posted by exchemist View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Howard Roark View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by exchemist View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Howard Roark View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by exchemist View Post
    It takes calm application of the rule of law, plus patience and insight into how communities develop feelings of alienation and steps to reduce this.
    The standard appeasment lingo. After years of appeasment and apologies, at first opportunity they go fight for ISIS, against their OWN country. At the very least, do not let them back in the country, let them spend the rest of their lives in the Islamic State of Iraq Syria and Levant. They do not deserve to come back in.
    There is a certain type of American redneck,
    Riiight, it is the fault of the subjects of terrorism, not of the terrorists themselves.


    usually ignorant of other countries
    I know much more history than you do. I lived in Korea, Japan, France, Italy and Germany. I speak French,Italian, Russian (all fluently), some German and some Japanese.

    but nevertheless highly opinionated about them, who thinks terrorism can be defeated if you simply kill all the "bad guys". However real life is seldom like a cheap video game, as the imbecile who last occupied the White House found out to his cost. I had thought a man of your erudition would be beyond such stereotypical thinking.
    Precisely. This is why I have no patience with the stereotypical thinking of the appeasers. Maybe , if we gave the traitors a free phone, they will stop betraying us, eh?
    Thanks Howard, then there is some point in talking to you about this, after all.

    Do you know what went into defusing Irish terrorism? Can you give us a short summary of the key elements?
    I am not interested in deflections. I am interested in discussing the subject put forward in the OP. If you want to discuss Irish terrorism (last I checked, NOT defused, contrary to your claims), open a different thread, don't hijack this one.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  24. #23  
    exchemist
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    London
    Posts
    2,657
    Quote Originally Posted by Howard Roark View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by exchemist View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Howard Roark View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by exchemist View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Howard Roark View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by exchemist View Post
    It takes calm application of the rule of law, plus patience and insight into how communities develop feelings of alienation and steps to reduce this.
    The standard appeasment lingo. After years of appeasment and apologies, at first opportunity they go fight for ISIS, against their OWN country. At the very least, do not let them back in the country, let them spend the rest of their lives in the Islamic State of Iraq Syria and Levant. They do not deserve to come back in.
    There is a certain type of American redneck,
    Riiight, it is the fault of the subjects of terrorism, not of the terrorists themselves.


    usually ignorant of other countries
    I know much more history than you do. I lived in Korea, Japan, France, Italy and Germany. I speak French,Italian, Russian (all fluently), some German and some Japanese.

    but nevertheless highly opinionated about them, who thinks terrorism can be defeated if you simply kill all the "bad guys". However real life is seldom like a cheap video game, as the imbecile who last occupied the White House found out to his cost. I had thought a man of your erudition would be beyond such stereotypical thinking.
    Precisely. This is why I have no patience with the stereotypical thinking of the appeasers. Maybe , if we gave the traitors a free phone, they will stop betraying us, eh?
    Thanks Howard, then there is some point in talking to you about this, after all.

    Do you know what went into defusing Irish terrorism? Can you give us a short summary of the key elements?
    I am not interested in deflections. I am interested in discussing the subject put forward in the OP. If you want to discuss Irish terrorism (last I checked, NOT defused, contrary to your claims), open a different thread, don't hijack this one.
    Oh I had thought you would have been able to see the connection. You propose the death penalty for returning foreign fighters of UK origin, right? We could have done that in the case of the IRA, too. But we didn't. I'm suggesting to you it is worth asking yourself why we didn't. Just because we were - and are? - degenerate, weak-willed, liberal, commie pinkoes? Possibly. But maybe, just maybe, there was more to it, eh? And the eventual solution to that problem - and don't pretend to me it is not now largely solved - involved a lot more than legal punishment for those we caught. Didn't it?

    Now, my point to you, apropos your OP, is that the death penalty for returning foreign muslim fighters would have just the same drawbacks as it would have if we had been stupid enough to implement it in the case of the IRA.

    Do you see the connection now?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  25. #24  
    Forum Freshman precious siraj's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    Still searching true and relative place of my birth, in cosmos
    Posts
    91
    Reply With Quote  
     

  26. #25  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    1,774
    Quote Originally Posted by exchemist View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Howard Roark View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by exchemist View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Howard Roark View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by exchemist View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Howard Roark View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by exchemist View Post
    It takes calm application of the rule of law, plus patience and insight into how communities develop feelings of alienation and steps to reduce this.
    The standard appeasment lingo. After years of appeasment and apologies, at first opportunity they go fight for ISIS, against their OWN country. At the very least, do not let them back in the country, let them spend the rest of their lives in the Islamic State of Iraq Syria and Levant. They do not deserve to come back in.
    There is a certain type of American redneck,
    Riiight, it is the fault of the subjects of terrorism, not of the terrorists themselves.


    usually ignorant of other countries
    I know much more history than you do. I lived in Korea, Japan, France, Italy and Germany. I speak French,Italian, Russian (all fluently), some German and some Japanese.

    but nevertheless highly opinionated about them, who thinks terrorism can be defeated if you simply kill all the "bad guys". However real life is seldom like a cheap video game, as the imbecile who last occupied the White House found out to his cost. I had thought a man of your erudition would be beyond such stereotypical thinking.
    Precisely. This is why I have no patience with the stereotypical thinking of the appeasers. Maybe , if we gave the traitors a free phone, they will stop betraying us, eh?
    Thanks Howard, then there is some point in talking to you about this, after all.

    Do you know what went into defusing Irish terrorism? Can you give us a short summary of the key elements?
    I am not interested in deflections. I am interested in discussing the subject put forward in the OP. If you want to discuss Irish terrorism (last I checked, NOT defused, contrary to your claims), open a different thread, don't hijack this one.
    Oh I had thought you would have been able to see the connection. You propose the death penalty for returning foreign fighters of UK origin, right?
    Not UK, US. Pay attention. I am not talking about your country, I am talking about mine. What you do in your country is your business. And I am suggesting either death penalty or no re-entry (stay there, in your hell-hole that you are wishing to create).

    We could have done that in the case of the IRA, too. But we didn't.
    Good for you, a lot of good it did in solving the issue. Now,please take your deflection in your own thread, would you?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  27. #26  
    exchemist
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    London
    Posts
    2,657
    Quote Originally Posted by Howard Roark View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by exchemist View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Howard Roark View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by exchemist View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Howard Roark View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by exchemist View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Howard Roark View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by exchemist View Post
    It takes calm application of the rule of law, plus patience and insight into how communities develop feelings of alienation and steps to reduce this.
    The standard appeasment lingo. After years of appeasment and apologies, at first opportunity they go fight for ISIS, against their OWN country. At the very least, do not let them back in the country, let them spend the rest of their lives in the Islamic State of Iraq Syria and Levant. They do not deserve to come back in.
    There is a certain type of American redneck,
    Riiight, it is the fault of the subjects of terrorism, not of the terrorists themselves.


    usually ignorant of other countries
    I know much more history than you do. I lived in Korea, Japan, France, Italy and Germany. I speak French,Italian, Russian (all fluently), some German and some Japanese.

    but nevertheless highly opinionated about them, who thinks terrorism can be defeated if you simply kill all the "bad guys". However real life is seldom like a cheap video game, as the imbecile who last occupied the White House found out to his cost. I had thought a man of your erudition would be beyond such stereotypical thinking.
    Precisely. This is why I have no patience with the stereotypical thinking of the appeasers. Maybe , if we gave the traitors a free phone, they will stop betraying us, eh?
    Thanks Howard, then there is some point in talking to you about this, after all.

    Do you know what went into defusing Irish terrorism? Can you give us a short summary of the key elements?
    I am not interested in deflections. I am interested in discussing the subject put forward in the OP. If you want to discuss Irish terrorism (last I checked, NOT defused, contrary to your claims), open a different thread, don't hijack this one.
    Oh I had thought you would have been able to see the connection. You propose the death penalty for returning foreign fighters of UK origin, right? We could have done that in the case of the IRA, too. But we didn't.
    Good for you, a lot of good it did in solving the issue. Now,please take your deflection in your own thread, would you?
    No need. My point is made, for anyone willing to see it.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  28. #27  
    Forum Cosmic Wizard
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    San Diego
    Posts
    2,008
    Quote Originally Posted by exchemist View Post
    There is no gung-ho, macho shithead, quick answer, unfortunately. It takes calm application of the rule of law, plus patience and insight into how communities develop feelings of alienation and steps to reduce this.
    On the plus side, the gung-ho, macho shithead solutions make gung-ho macho shitheads feel better about the issue.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  29. #28  
    exchemist
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    London
    Posts
    2,657
    Quote Originally Posted by billvon View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by exchemist View Post
    There is no gung-ho, macho shithead, quick answer, unfortunately. It takes calm application of the rule of law, plus patience and insight into how communities develop feelings of alienation and steps to reduce this.
    On the plus side, the gung-ho, macho shithead solutions make gung-ho macho shitheads feel better about the issue.
    Yeah, for a bit. And then it all comes back to bite us in the arse, a few years later. Just like the Iraq invasion.

    I'm all for putting these fighters on trial if they fight against British troops and sentencing them through the regular courts. And I'm all for MI5 to watch likely miscreants and try to nip terrorist plans - and dubious package holiday excursions to Syria - in the bud. But in the end we have got to stop the Saudis promoting Wahhabism and we have got to find a way to get muslims to promote more vigorously a moderate strain of Islam that is compatible with Western lifestyle. A few imams that actually speak English and are not 1st generation immigrants from Pakistan would be a good start. And we have got to try to avoid ghettoes of jobless young muslim men, with no stake in Western society. And we do NOT, under any circumstances whatsoever, want to make martyrs of people who seem only too happy to give up their lives in the first place.

    Howard's proposal strikes me as being at about the level of one of the less thoughtful of our London taxi drivers.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  30. #29  
    Ascended Member Ascended's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    3,380
    [QUOTE=kojax;600376]
    Quote Originally Posted by Ascended View Post
    I don't think we can effectively counter this problem without first fully engaging with the Islamic community and supporting them, they need to be able to show these kids that they have a place in society and that terrorism and violence is not what their religion is about.

    You're ignoring the possibility that maybe violence is what Islam is about. Probably indirectly.

    Sorry kojax but I simply don't believe this. There are millions of Muslims all over the world that are just like most everybody else. They go to work, work hard, want the best in life for their children and try to raise them with the values of honesty, decency and caring for others. To them this concept of terrorism or fighting is just as alien as it is for the rest of us. But sadly all too often when some people turn on the television news and see stories of violence and suffering they get angry and need to blame somebody. Though this is an understandable reaction to what they are seeing, however the problems occur when people get the false and very wrong idea that all Muslims are either involved in or support such violence.

    The reality is that in many many cases it is indeed other Muslims who are the victims of terrorism and violence.

    If we really want to win the war on terror we need to know who the real enermy is and that certainly isn't the millions of ordinary peaceful Muslims around the world living side by side everyone else.

    To these people Islam is just a religion, no different than Judaism or Christianity and they are no more terrorists than anybody else.


    It's kind of like how, after the Communist Revolution, people in the USSR began to find that the Communists were basically just a bunch of angry thugs, who would send secret police to your home and drag you off in the night and beat and/or torture you on the barest suspicion that you *might* have uttered a single word of disdain against the beautiful system of community that was being put in place.

    Islam has quite a lot in common with Communism in other respects. It's an ideal. It believes in a particular order (Sharia Law). It preaches that if people would just follow that order, absolutely every problem in the whole world would immediately be solved.

    Those kinds of ideologies easily lend themselves to "end justifies the means" rationalizations. Just as much in wealthy countries like Saudi Arabia (where Islam is most certainly not oppressed), as in poorer countries.
    What many of the followers of the world's major religions are struggling with is to take the best from the religion and make it relevant to their 21st century lives. Yes there is still great disparity between some countries in the way that people are interpreting their faith but this doesn't make their faiths inherently bad. Particular ideologies come from the way people are choosing to interpret their, and this is usual heavily influenced by politics and their situation rather than the actual religion itself.

    Whilst personally I don't like or approve of Sharia Law, I still don't think we can use it take make a judgement upon Islam because of. If we consider the time period of which it came from then perhaps we can see that by standards of that era it wasn't so barbaric as it now appears with Western standards in the modern era.

    Suleiman the Magnificent gave his own interpretations of the Sharia in order to make it more relavant for his people, with this in mind there is hope that Muslims can come together to choose and implement only the best of the Sharia to make it more appropriate to their modern lives.

    We have seen this happen with laws and rules dictated by other religions but it doesn't happen over night it takes time, so possibly comparisons with communism do seem a bit extreme.


    What we must do is identify the real problem i.e that of these terrorist groups themselves and not to blame peaceful communities within our own countries. We also need proper education in schools to show our kids what these groups are really all about, instead of leaving them at the mercy of glamourised propaganda that glorifies violence.
    What are you talking about? Those groups are the vanguard of the Sharia Law movement. Champions of Allah.

    Sure, some of the things they do are brutal and distasteful, but you'll see!!! Once the whole world has converted to Sharia Law and we all live in a paradise on Earth, those people will be remembered as heroes for their sacrifice!!!

    Not villains!!!!

    (I hope you understand that I don't mean that. Just trying to describe it from the terrorists and sympathizers' point of view.)
    Again here I have to strongly disagree, sure there will be elements amongst these communities that might see us as the enermy. But this just proves how hard we have to work and how far we have to go show them we are not there enermy.

    The terrorists are telling them we hate them and want to hurt them all, we have to 'show' them this just simply isn't true, we have educate them about our values but we also in turn have to make an effort to understand them, their fears and concerns and work with them.

    Only by showing trust and solidarity can we start to really build the trust and support we need to defeat the terrorist propaganda. We have to fight hatred with trust, respect, solidarity and education.
    Everything has its beauty, but not everyone sees it. - confucius
    Reply With Quote  
     

  31. #30  
    exchemist
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    London
    Posts
    2,657
    [QUOTE=Ascended;600458]
    Quote Originally Posted by kojax View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Ascended View Post
    I don't think we can effectively counter this problem without first fully engaging with the Islamic community and supporting them, they need to be able to show these kids that they have a place in society and that terrorism and violence is not what their religion is about.

    You're ignoring the possibility that maybe violence is what Islam is about. Probably indirectly.

    Sorry kojax but I simply don't believe this. There are millions of Muslims all over the world that are just like most everybody else. They go to work, work hard, want the best in life for their children and try to raise them with the values of honesty, decency and caring for others. To them this concept of terrorism or fighting is just as alien as it is for the rest of us. But sadly all too often when some people turn on the television news and see stories of violence and suffering they get angry and need to blame somebody. Though this is an understandable reaction to what they are seeing, however the problems occur when people get the false and very wrong idea that all Muslims are either involved in or support such violence.

    The reality is that in many many cases it is indeed other Muslims who are the victims of terrorism and violence.

    If we really want to win the war on terror we need to know who the real enermy is and that certainly isn't the millions of ordinary peaceful Muslims around the world living side by side everyone else.

    To these people Islam is just a religion, no different than Judaism or Christianity and they are no more terrorists than anybody else.


    It's kind of like how, after the Communist Revolution, people in the USSR began to find that the Communists were basically just a bunch of angry thugs, who would send secret police to your home and drag you off in the night and beat and/or torture you on the barest suspicion that you *might* have uttered a single word of disdain against the beautiful system of community that was being put in place.

    Islam has quite a lot in common with Communism in other respects. It's an ideal. It believes in a particular order (Sharia Law). It preaches that if people would just follow that order, absolutely every problem in the whole world would immediately be solved.

    Those kinds of ideologies easily lend themselves to "end justifies the means" rationalizations. Just as much in wealthy countries like Saudi Arabia (where Islam is most certainly not oppressed), as in poorer countries.
    What many of the followers of the world's major religions are struggling with is to take the best from the religion and make it relevant to their 21st century lives. Yes there is still great disparity between some countries in the way that people are interpreting their faith but this doesn't make their faiths inherently bad. Particular ideologies come from the way people are choosing to interpret their, and this is usual heavily influenced by politics and their situation rather than the actual religion itself.

    Whilst personally I don't like or approve of Sharia Law, I still don't think we can use it take make a judgement upon Islam because of. If we consider the time period of which it came from then perhaps we can see that by standards of that era it wasn't so barbaric as it now appears with Western standards in the modern era.

    Suleiman the Magnificent gave his own interpretations of the Sharia in order to make it more relavant for his people, with this in mind there is hope that Muslims can come together to choose and implement only the best of the Sharia to make it more appropriate to their modern lives.

    We have seen this happen with laws and rules dictated by other religions but it doesn't happen over night it takes time, so possibly comparisons with communism do seem a bit extreme.


    What we must do is identify the real problem i.e that of these terrorist groups themselves and not to blame peaceful communities within our own countries. We also need proper education in schools to show our kids what these groups are really all about, instead of leaving them at the mercy of glamourised propaganda that glorifies violence.
    What are you talking about? Those groups are the vanguard of the Sharia Law movement. Champions of Allah.

    Sure, some of the things they do are brutal and distasteful, but you'll see!!! Once the whole world has converted to Sharia Law and we all live in a paradise on Earth, those people will be remembered as heroes for their sacrifice!!!

    Not villains!!!!

    (I hope you understand that I don't mean that. Just trying to describe it from the terrorists and sympathizers' point of view.)
    Again here I have to strongly disagree, sure there will be elements amongst these communities that might see us as the enermy. But this just proves how hard we have to work and how far we have to go show them we are not there enermy.

    The terrorists are telling them we hate them and want to hurt them all, we have to 'show' them this just simply isn't true, we have educate them about our values but we also in turn have to make an effort to understand them, their fears and concerns and work with them.

    Only by showing trust and solidarity can we start to really build the trust and support we need to defeat the terrorist propaganda. We have to fight hatred with trust, respect, solidarity and education.
    Go along with this. But I would add that the rule of law (the law of England, not sharia, that is) must be applied fairly and impartially to all communities. I also think multiculturalism was a wrong turning: we need ground rules to militate in favour of integration, not isolation and tolerance of ghettoes. I think firm expectations of speaking English, on the part of immigrants, is an important part of this.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  32. #31  
    Ascended Member Ascended's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    3,380
    Quote Originally Posted by Howard Roark View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by exchemist View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Howard Roark View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Ascended View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Howard Roark View Post
    The appeasment is working really well in the UK. Belgium and France are not that far behind.
    It's about teaching the right values to our young people and making them a part of our society.
    I agree but it is clearly not working.
    Do you have a suggestion, Howard?
    Traitors get the death penalty, all the affected countries need to set an example.
    If we are forced to resort to such violence upon our own citizens then we have already lost. I don't believe we should ever resort to the discusting methods of the terrorists. We need to set higher standards and not to compromise our values or principles no matter how appalling the acts of terrorists.
    Last edited by Ascended; October 8th, 2014 at 01:10 PM. Reason: spelling
    Everything has its beauty, but not everyone sees it. - confucius
    Reply With Quote  
     

  33. #32  
    Ascended Member Ascended's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    3,380
    [QUOTE=exchemist;600465]
    Quote Originally Posted by Ascended View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by kojax View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Ascended View Post
    I don't think we can effectively counter this problem without first fully engaging with the Islamic community and supporting them, they need to be able to show these kids that they have a place in society and that terrorism and violence is not what their religion is about.

    You're ignoring the possibility that maybe violence is what Islam is about. Probably indirectly.

    Sorry kojax but I simply don't believe this. There are millions of Muslims all over the world that are just like most everybody else. They go to work, work hard, want the best in life for their children and try to raise them with the values of honesty, decency and caring for others. To them this concept of terrorism or fighting is just as alien as it is for the rest of us. But sadly all too often when some people turn on the television news and see stories of violence and suffering they get angry and need to blame somebody. Though this is an understandable reaction to what they are seeing, however the problems occur when people get the false and very wrong idea that all Muslims are either involved in or support such violence.

    The reality is that in many many cases it is indeed other Muslims who are the victims of terrorism and violence.

    If we really want to win the war on terror we need to know who the real enermy is and that certainly isn't the millions of ordinary peaceful Muslims around the world living side by side everyone else.

    To these people Islam is just a religion, no different than Judaism or Christianity and they are no more terrorists than anybody else.


    It's kind of like how, after the Communist Revolution, people in the USSR began to find that the Communists were basically just a bunch of angry thugs, who would send secret police to your home and drag you off in the night and beat and/or torture you on the barest suspicion that you *might* have uttered a single word of disdain against the beautiful system of community that was being put in place.

    Islam has quite a lot in common with Communism in other respects. It's an ideal. It believes in a particular order (Sharia Law). It preaches that if people would just follow that order, absolutely every problem in the whole world would immediately be solved.

    Those kinds of ideologies easily lend themselves to "end justifies the means" rationalizations. Just as much in wealthy countries like Saudi Arabia (where Islam is most certainly not oppressed), as in poorer countries.
    What many of the followers of the world's major religions are struggling with is to take the best from the religion and make it relevant to their 21st century lives. Yes there is still great disparity between some countries in the way that people are interpreting their faith but this doesn't make their faiths inherently bad. Particular ideologies come from the way people are choosing to interpret their, and this is usual heavily influenced by politics and their situation rather than the actual religion itself.

    Whilst personally I don't like or approve of Sharia Law, I still don't think we can use it take make a judgement upon Islam because of. If we consider the time period of which it came from then perhaps we can see that by standards of that era it wasn't so barbaric as it now appears with Western standards in the modern era.

    Suleiman the Magnificent gave his own interpretations of the Sharia in order to make it more relavant for his people, with this in mind there is hope that Muslims can come together to choose and implement only the best of the Sharia to make it more appropriate to their modern lives.

    We have seen this happen with laws and rules dictated by other religions but it doesn't happen over night it takes time, so possibly comparisons with communism do seem a bit extreme.


    What we must do is identify the real problem i.e that of these terrorist groups themselves and not to blame peaceful communities within our own countries. We also need proper education in schools to show our kids what these groups are really all about, instead of leaving them at the mercy of glamourised propaganda that glorifies violence.
    What are you talking about? Those groups are the vanguard of the Sharia Law movement. Champions of Allah.

    Sure, some of the things they do are brutal and distasteful, but you'll see!!! Once the whole world has converted to Sharia Law and we all live in a paradise on Earth, those people will be remembered as heroes for their sacrifice!!!

    Not villains!!!!

    (I hope you understand that I don't mean that. Just trying to describe it from the terrorists and sympathizers' point of view.)
    Again here I have to strongly disagree, sure there will be elements amongst these communities that might see us as the enermy. But this just proves how hard we have to work and how far we have to go show them we are not there enermy.

    The terrorists are telling them we hate them and want to hurt them all, we have to 'show' them this just simply isn't true, we have educate them about our values but we also in turn have to make an effort to understand them, their fears and concerns and work with them.

    Only by showing trust and solidarity can we start to really build the trust and support we need to defeat the terrorist propaganda. We have to fight hatred with trust, respect, solidarity and education.
    Go along with this. But I would add that the rule of law (the law of England, not sharia, that is) must be applied fairly and impartially to all communities. I also think multiculturalism was a wrong turning: we need ground rules to militate in favour of integration, not isolation and tolerance of ghettoes. I think firm expectations of speaking English, on the part of immigrants, is an important part of this.
    Completely agree.
    Everything has its beauty, but not everyone sees it. - confucius
    Reply With Quote  
     

  34. #33  
    Forum Cosmic Wizard
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    San Diego
    Posts
    2,008
    Quote Originally Posted by exchemist View Post
    Yeah, for a bit. And then it all comes back to bite us in the arse, a few years later. Just like the Iraq invasion.
    For every problem there is an answer that is simple, elegant - and wrong.

    I'm all for putting these fighters on trial if they fight against British troops and sentencing them through the regular courts. And I'm all for MI5 to watch likely miscreants and try to nip terrorist plans - and dubious package holiday excursions to Syria - in the bud.
    Definitely.

    But in the end we have got to stop the Saudis promoting Wahhabism and we have got to find a way to get muslims to promote more vigorously a moderate strain of Islam that is compatible with Western lifestyle.
    No more so than we should get Americans to embrace a moderate strain of Confucianism that is more compatible with the Asian lifestyle. I mean, sure, we would get along better with China (who will be the #1 superpower shortly) - but is it really important that our lifestyle be compatible with theirs? Tolerance, not compatibility, should be our goal. Muslims could worship Beelzebub for all I care, and think we are all hopeless sinners, as long as that isn't expressed as violence. Likewise, if they were very much like us - materialist, capitalist, less prone to following Fatwas - but they expressed that by constant violence, theft and piracy, that would be no better than what we see today.

    And we have got to try to avoid ghettoes of jobless young muslim men, with no stake in Western society. And we do NOT, under any circumstances whatsoever, want to make martyrs of people who seem only too happy to give up their lives in the first place.
    Change that to "with no stake in society" and I would agree. Western society is not a goal any more than Asian society should be a goal.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  35. #34  
    Forum Masters Degree
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    592
    Quote Originally Posted by cosmictraveler View Post
    There are well over 3 billion people living in America
    There is no way that's true.

    Quote Originally Posted by Howard Roark View Post
    Good for you, a lot of good it did in solving the issue. Now,please take your deflection in your own thread, would you?
    You seem to think that Islam and its issues aren't comparable to any other group, that any attempt to bring up White Supremacists or IRAs or any other religious extremists is irrelevant and deflecting. If we can't look at how we have dealt with terrorists from other groups, all we have to go on is our experiences in dealing with Islamic terrorists to see what works. And we haven't been particularly effective on that front. It is perfectly reasonable to look at how various nations have dealt with past terrorists threats and see what has failed and what has been successful. Sure, each terrorist group will have its own nuances. But surely radical Islam isn't so different from every other terrorist/extremist group that we may as well throw out past experiences with other similar groups.

    Quote Originally Posted by exchemist View Post
    Howard's proposal strikes me as being at about the level of one of the less thoughtful of our London taxi drivers.
    For a second I thought of Travis Bickle, then I remembered that he was in New York and you are British.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  36. #35  
    exchemist
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    London
    Posts
    2,657
    Quote Originally Posted by billvon View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by exchemist View Post
    Yeah, for a bit. And then it all comes back to bite us in the arse, a few years later. Just like the Iraq invasion.
    For every problem there is an answer that is simple, elegant - and wrong.

    I'm all for putting these fighters on trial if they fight against British troops and sentencing them through the regular courts. And I'm all for MI5 to watch likely miscreants and try to nip terrorist plans - and dubious package holiday excursions to Syria - in the bud.
    Definitely.

    But in the end we have got to stop the Saudis promoting Wahhabism and we have got to find a way to get muslims to promote more vigorously a moderate strain of Islam that is compatible with Western lifestyle.
    No more so than we should get Americans to embrace a moderate strain of Confucianism that is more compatible with the Asian lifestyle. I mean, sure, we would get along better with China (who will be the #1 superpower shortly) - but is it really important that our lifestyle be compatible with theirs? Tolerance, not compatibility, should be our goal. Muslims could worship Beelzebub for all I care, and think we are all hopeless sinners, as long as that isn't expressed as violence. Likewise, if they were very much like us - materialist, capitalist, less prone to following Fatwas - but they expressed that by constant violence, theft and piracy, that would be no better than what we see today.

    And we have got to try to avoid ghettoes of jobless young muslim men, with no stake in Western society. And we do NOT, under any circumstances whatsoever, want to make martyrs of people who seem only too happy to give up their lives in the first place.
    Change that to "with no stake in society" and I would agree. Western society is not a goal any more than Asian society should be a goal.
    I see what you are saying but I have to stand up for Western values at this point. Extreme Wahhabi Islam denies basic freedoms and legal principles that define a country such as the UK. The UK is in Europe, has culture and traditions accordingly and those should be retained, I think. People who live here must abide by our system and values, it seems to me. If we allow a parallel society within a society we will have permanent conflict and permanent second class status for some of our citizens. Policing and women's rights are the two most obvious issues.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  37. #36  
    Forum Masters Degree
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    592
    Quote Originally Posted by exchemist View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by billvon View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by exchemist View Post
    Yeah, for a bit. And then it all comes back to bite us in the arse, a few years later. Just like the Iraq invasion.
    For every problem there is an answer that is simple, elegant - and wrong.

    I'm all for putting these fighters on trial if they fight against British troops and sentencing them through the regular courts. And I'm all for MI5 to watch likely miscreants and try to nip terrorist plans - and dubious package holiday excursions to Syria - in the bud.
    Definitely.

    But in the end we have got to stop the Saudis promoting Wahhabism and we have got to find a way to get muslims to promote more vigorously a moderate strain of Islam that is compatible with Western lifestyle.
    No more so than we should get Americans to embrace a moderate strain of Confucianism that is more compatible with the Asian lifestyle. I mean, sure, we would get along better with China (who will be the #1 superpower shortly) - but is it really important that our lifestyle be compatible with theirs? Tolerance, not compatibility, should be our goal. Muslims could worship Beelzebub for all I care, and think we are all hopeless sinners, as long as that isn't expressed as violence. Likewise, if they were very much like us - materialist, capitalist, less prone to following Fatwas - but they expressed that by constant violence, theft and piracy, that would be no better than what we see today.

    And we have got to try to avoid ghettoes of jobless young muslim men, with no stake in Western society. And we do NOT, under any circumstances whatsoever, want to make martyrs of people who seem only too happy to give up their lives in the first place.
    Change that to "with no stake in society" and I would agree. Western society is not a goal any more than Asian society should be a goal.
    I see what you are saying but I have to stand up for Western values at this point. Extreme Wahhabi Islam denies basic freedoms and legal principles that define a country such as the UK. The UK is in Europe, has culture and traditions accordingly and those should be retained, I think. People who live here must abide by our system and values, it seems to me. If we allow a parallel society within a society we will have permanent conflict and permanent second class status for some of our citizens. Policing and women's rights are the two most obvious issues.
    That's an outdated mode of thinking. People have to follow your laws, but no more have to adopt British cultural traditions and personal family values than you have to adopt theirs. Two people of different sub-cultures are perfectly capable of being neighbors and friends with neither being in conflict or a second class citizen. Besides, no concerted effort need be made to encourage integration. It happens naturally over time, without violating people's cultures. Almost universally throughout the world, third generation immigrants don't even speak the language of their grandparents.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  38. #37  
    exchemist
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    London
    Posts
    2,657
    Quote Originally Posted by SowZ37 View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by exchemist View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by billvon View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by exchemist View Post
    Yeah, for a bit. And then it all comes back to bite us in the arse, a few years later. Just like the Iraq invasion.
    For every problem there is an answer that is simple, elegant - and wrong.

    I'm all for putting these fighters on trial if they fight against British troops and sentencing them through the regular courts. And I'm all for MI5 to watch likely miscreants and try to nip terrorist plans - and dubious package holiday excursions to Syria - in the bud.
    Definitely.

    But in the end we have got to stop the Saudis promoting Wahhabism and we have got to find a way to get muslims to promote more vigorously a moderate strain of Islam that is compatible with Western lifestyle.
    No more so than we should get Americans to embrace a moderate strain of Confucianism that is more compatible with the Asian lifestyle. I mean, sure, we would get along better with China (who will be the #1 superpower shortly) - but is it really important that our lifestyle be compatible with theirs? Tolerance, not compatibility, should be our goal. Muslims could worship Beelzebub for all I care, and think we are all hopeless sinners, as long as that isn't expressed as violence. Likewise, if they were very much like us - materialist, capitalist, less prone to following Fatwas - but they expressed that by constant violence, theft and piracy, that would be no better than what we see today.

    And we have got to try to avoid ghettoes of jobless young muslim men, with no stake in Western society. And we do NOT, under any circumstances whatsoever, want to make martyrs of people who seem only too happy to give up their lives in the first place.
    Change that to "with no stake in society" and I would agree. Western society is not a goal any more than Asian society should be a goal.
    I see what you are saying but I have to stand up for Western values at this point. Extreme Wahhabi Islam denies basic freedoms and legal principles that define a country such as the UK. The UK is in Europe, has culture and traditions accordingly and those should be retained, I think. People who live here must abide by our system and values, it seems to me. If we allow a parallel society within a society we will have permanent conflict and permanent second class status for some of our citizens. Policing and women's rights are the two most obvious issues.
    That's an outdated mode of thinking. People have to follow your laws, but no more have to adopt British cultural traditions and personal family values than you have to adopt theirs. Two people of different sub-cultures are perfectly capable of being neighbors and friends with neither being in conflict or a second class citizen. Besides, no concerted effort need be made to encourage integration. It happens naturally over time, without violating people's cultures. Almost universally throughout the world, third generation immigrants don't even speak the language of their grandparents.
    Sure, sure what I was getting at is things such as the proposals (so far resisted) we have had for sharia law to be recognised in certain communities for minor offences, and the pressure for women to stay in the house and be isolated from the community when they go out by (a) being veiled or wearing the burqa (b) being discouraged from learning English, and also being subjected to arranged marriages - generally treated as property rather than as independent citizens. There is no way such things can be allowed without depriving some people of their full rights as UK citizens, that's what I meant.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  39. #38  
    Forum Masters Degree
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    592
    Quote Originally Posted by exchemist View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by SowZ37 View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by exchemist View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by billvon View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by exchemist View Post
    Yeah, for a bit. And then it all comes back to bite us in the arse, a few years later. Just like the Iraq invasion.
    For every problem there is an answer that is simple, elegant - and wrong.

    I'm all for putting these fighters on trial if they fight against British troops and sentencing them through the regular courts. And I'm all for MI5 to watch likely miscreants and try to nip terrorist plans - and dubious package holiday excursions to Syria - in the bud.
    Definitely.

    But in the end we have got to stop the Saudis promoting Wahhabism and we have got to find a way to get muslims to promote more vigorously a moderate strain of Islam that is compatible with Western lifestyle.
    No more so than we should get Americans to embrace a moderate strain of Confucianism that is more compatible with the Asian lifestyle. I mean, sure, we would get along better with China (who will be the #1 superpower shortly) - but is it really important that our lifestyle be compatible with theirs? Tolerance, not compatibility, should be our goal. Muslims could worship Beelzebub for all I care, and think we are all hopeless sinners, as long as that isn't expressed as violence. Likewise, if they were very much like us - materialist, capitalist, less prone to following Fatwas - but they expressed that by constant violence, theft and piracy, that would be no better than what we see today.

    And we have got to try to avoid ghettoes of jobless young muslim men, with no stake in Western society. And we do NOT, under any circumstances whatsoever, want to make martyrs of people who seem only too happy to give up their lives in the first place.
    Change that to "with no stake in society" and I would agree. Western society is not a goal any more than Asian society should be a goal.
    I see what you are saying but I have to stand up for Western values at this point. Extreme Wahhabi Islam denies basic freedoms and legal principles that define a country such as the UK. The UK is in Europe, has culture and traditions accordingly and those should be retained, I think. People who live here must abide by our system and values, it seems to me. If we allow a parallel society within a society we will have permanent conflict and permanent second class status for some of our citizens. Policing and women's rights are the two most obvious issues.
    That's an outdated mode of thinking. People have to follow your laws, but no more have to adopt British cultural traditions and personal family values than you have to adopt theirs. Two people of different sub-cultures are perfectly capable of being neighbors and friends with neither being in conflict or a second class citizen. Besides, no concerted effort need be made to encourage integration. It happens naturally over time, without violating people's cultures. Almost universally throughout the world, third generation immigrants don't even speak the language of their grandparents.
    Sure, sure what I was getting at is things such as the proposals (so far resisted) we have had for sharia law to be recognised in certain communities for minor offences, and the pressure for women to stay in the house and be isolated from the community when they go out by (a) being veiled or wearing the burqa (b) being discouraged from learning English, and also being subjected to arranged marriages - generally treated as property rather than as independent citizens. There is no way such things can be allowed without depriving some people of their full rights as UK citizens, that's what I meant.
    Oh, well then I agree. You can't treat Islamic communities like the Sovereign Navajo Nation. Their people should be subject to the same laws and have access to the same rights as anybody else. If a woman chooses to participate in an arranged marriage, she may. But she can also go to the police or a human rights organization if her community is pressuring her. In the same way, a strict Orthodox community in Brooklyn shouldn't be able to make it illegal to violate the Sabbath inside their neighborhood.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  40. #39  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    1,774
    Quote Originally Posted by billvon View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by exchemist View Post
    There is no gung-ho, macho shithead, quick answer, unfortunately. It takes calm application of the rule of law, plus patience and insight into how communities develop feelings of alienation and steps to reduce this.
    On the plus side, the gung-ho, macho shithead solutions make gung-ho macho shitheads feel better about the issue.
    ...and there are always the appeasers that think that they can negotiate with terrorists. History shows them to be the actual shitheads.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  41. #40  
    Forum Masters Degree
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    592
    Quote Originally Posted by Howard Roark View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by billvon View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by exchemist View Post
    There is no gung-ho, macho shithead, quick answer, unfortunately. It takes calm application of the rule of law, plus patience and insight into how communities develop feelings of alienation and steps to reduce this.
    On the plus side, the gung-ho, macho shithead solutions make gung-ho macho shitheads feel better about the issue.
    ...and there are always the appeasers that think that they can negotiate with terrorists. History shows them to be the actual shitheads.
    But history also shows that killing them doesn't really solve much. As much as he deserved it, I wish George Rockwell hadn't been shot outside of that convenient store in Arlington. Sure, sometimes you have to kill people, but it is a short term solution that creates more long term problems.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  42. #41  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    1,774
    Quote Originally Posted by SowZ37 View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Howard Roark View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by billvon View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by exchemist View Post
    There is no gung-ho, macho shithead, quick answer, unfortunately. It takes calm application of the rule of law, plus patience and insight into how communities develop feelings of alienation and steps to reduce this.
    On the plus side, the gung-ho, macho shithead solutions make gung-ho macho shitheads feel better about the issue.
    ...and there are always the appeasers that think that they can negotiate with terrorists. History shows them to be the actual shitheads.
    But history also shows that killing them doesn't really solve much.
    Put them on trial for high treason. The penalty for high treason is death.
    Or, deny them re-entry in the country of origin, let them live in the hellhole they are aspiring to create.
    These are traitors, they have no business being here.

    As much as he deserved it, I wish George Rockwell hadn't been shot outside of that convenient store in Arlington.
    We are not talking George Rockwell, we are talking traitors in our midst. George was not a traitor.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  43. #42  
    Forum Cosmic Wizard
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    San Diego
    Posts
    2,008
    Quote Originally Posted by Howard Roark View Post
    ...and there are always the appeasers that think that they can negotiate with terrorists. History shows them to be the actual shitheads.
    There are at least 52 Americans - and a fair number of US soldiers - who would beg to differ.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  44. #43  
    Samurai of Logic Falconer360's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Somewhere in Washington
    Posts
    398
    Quote Originally Posted by SowZ37 View Post
    You seem to think that Islam and its issues aren't comparable to any other group, that any attempt to bring up White Supremacists or IRAs or any other religious extremists is irrelevant and deflecting. If we can't look at how we have dealt with terrorists from other groups, all we have to go on is our experiences in dealing with Islamic terrorists to see what works. And we haven't been particularly effective on that front. It is perfectly reasonable to look at how various nations have dealt with past terrorists threats and see what has failed and what has been successful. Sure, each terrorist group will have its own nuances. But surely radical Islam isn't so different from every other terrorist/extremist group that we may as well throw out past experiences with other similar groups.
    Exactly. In order to combat groups like this, we have to learn from how we handled other similar groups. A good comparison of modern day terrorist groups would be gangs in cities. Realistically gang violence in the US is a form of domestic terrorism. The same things that lead people to join gangs is a lot of times the same things that lead people to join terrorist groups.
    -It gives them a sense of belonging
    -Gives there existence validation
    -Gives the person a sense of power
    -They see it as a chance to improve their current situation
    -It gives them something to live/die for (some twisted sense of honor)

    As mentioned above, killing them only makes them a martyr and gives others a rallying point.
    "For every moment of triumph, for every instance of beauty, many souls must be trampled." Hunter S Thompson

    "It is easy to kill someone with a slash of a sword. It is hard to be impossible for others to cut down"
    - Yagyu Munenori

    "Only a warrior chooses pacifism; others are condemned to it."
    Reply With Quote  
     

  45. #44  
    Forum Masters Degree
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    592
    Quote Originally Posted by Howard Roark View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by SowZ37 View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Howard Roark View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by billvon View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by exchemist View Post
    There is no gung-ho, macho shithead, quick answer, unfortunately. It takes calm application of the rule of law, plus patience and insight into how communities develop feelings of alienation and steps to reduce this.
    On the plus side, the gung-ho, macho shithead solutions make gung-ho macho shitheads feel better about the issue.
    ...and there are always the appeasers that think that they can negotiate with terrorists. History shows them to be the actual shitheads.
    But history also shows that killing them doesn't really solve much.
    Put them on trial for high treason. The penalty for high treason is death.
    Or, deny them re-entry in the country of origin, let the live in the hellhole they are creating.
    These are traitors, they have no business being here.

    As much as he deserved it, I wish George Rockwell hadn't been shot outside of that convenient store in Arlington.
    We are not talking George Rockwell, we are talking traitors.
    And we are also talking about what happens when your primary strategy is to kill members of terrorist and extremist groups. It's a temporary solution that creates more long term problems. If you catch people conspiring to commit high treason or in the act, sure, I'm not saying you don't try them to the fullest extent. But what's the next step? That isn't enough. Creating martyrs makes the problem all the worse. So what's step number two?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  46. #45  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    1,774
    Quote Originally Posted by SowZ37 View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Howard Roark View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by SowZ37 View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Howard Roark View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by billvon View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by exchemist View Post
    There is no gung-ho, macho shithead, quick answer, unfortunately. It takes calm application of the rule of law, plus patience and insight into how communities develop feelings of alienation and steps to reduce this.
    On the plus side, the gung-ho, macho shithead solutions make gung-ho macho shitheads feel better about the issue.
    ...and there are always the appeasers that think that they can negotiate with terrorists. History shows them to be the actual shitheads.
    But history also shows that killing them doesn't really solve much.
    Put them on trial for high treason. The penalty for high treason is death.
    Or, deny them re-entry in the country of origin, let the live in the hellhole they are creating.
    These are traitors, they have no business being here.

    As much as he deserved it, I wish George Rockwell hadn't been shot outside of that convenient store in Arlington.
    We are not talking George Rockwell, we are talking traitors.
    And we are also talking about what happens when your primary strategy is to kill members of terrorist and extremist groups. It's a temporary solution that creates more long term problems. If you catch people conspiring to commit high treason or in the act, sure, I'm not saying you don't try them to the fullest extent.
    Good, we agree on that.


    But what's the next step? That isn't enough. Creating martyrs makes the problem all the worse. So what's step number two?
    You find out the roots of their treason. They are born in their respective western countries, they have a good life, why do they betray their country of birth in favor of a country that they may have never seen? Who and what is turning them against their own? Some radical imams at the mosques? Definitely. Stories of "heroism" from their buddies in the "old country"? Possibly. Hatred for the "whitey whores" who reject them? Quite likely. In three years in Afghanistan I heard them all.
    The dream of "restoring the caliphate"? This is a new one. Definitely. There are many other reasons. Can you name a few?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  47. #46  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    1,774
    Quote Originally Posted by billvon View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Howard Roark View Post
    ...and there are always the appeasers that think that they can negotiate with terrorists. History shows them to be the actual shitheads.
    There are at least 52 Americans - and a fair number of US soldiers - who would beg to differ.
    Agreed, the parents of James Foley would beg to differ but this is not what I am talking about. Besides, obama already violated the rule in swapping the berdahl deserter for the talibs over saving James Foley.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  48. #47  
    Forum Masters Degree
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    592
    Quote Originally Posted by Howard Roark View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by SowZ37 View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Howard Roark View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by SowZ37 View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Howard Roark View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by billvon View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by exchemist View Post
    There is no gung-ho, macho shithead, quick answer, unfortunately. It takes calm application of the rule of law, plus patience and insight into how communities develop feelings of alienation and steps to reduce this.
    On the plus side, the gung-ho, macho shithead solutions make gung-ho macho shitheads feel better about the issue.
    ...and there are always the appeasers that think that they can negotiate with terrorists. History shows them to be the actual shitheads.
    But history also shows that killing them doesn't really solve much.
    Put them on trial for high treason. The penalty for high treason is death.
    Or, deny them re-entry in the country of origin, let the live in the hellhole they are creating.
    These are traitors, they have no business being here.

    As much as he deserved it, I wish George Rockwell hadn't been shot outside of that convenient store in Arlington.
    We are not talking George Rockwell, we are talking traitors.
    And we are also talking about what happens when your primary strategy is to kill members of terrorist and extremist groups. It's a temporary solution that creates more long term problems. If you catch people conspiring to commit high treason or in the act, sure, I'm not saying you don't try them to the fullest extent.
    Good, we agree on that.


    But what's the next step? That isn't enough. Creating martyrs makes the problem all the worse. So what's step number two?
    You find out the roots of their treason. They are born in their respective western countries, they have a good life, why did they betray? Who and what is turning them against their own? Some radical imams at the mosques? Definitely. Stories of "heroism" from their buddies in the "old country"? Possibly. Hatred for the "whitey whores" who reject them? Quite likely. In three years in Afghanistan I heard them all.
    The dream of "restoring the caliphate"? This is a new one. Definitely. There are many other reasons. Can you name a few?
    Promises of rewards in the afterlife, mental illness, resentment at prejudice, family already fighting the 'holy war' giving them a sense of obligation. I'm sure all of these account for more than a few.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  49. #48  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    1,774
    Quote Originally Posted by Falconer360 View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by SowZ37 View Post
    You seem to think that Islam and its issues aren't comparable to any other group, that any attempt to bring up White Supremacists or IRAs or any other religious extremists is irrelevant and deflecting. If we can't look at how we have dealt with terrorists from other groups, all we have to go on is our experiences in dealing with Islamic terrorists to see what works. And we haven't been particularly effective on that front. It is perfectly reasonable to look at how various nations have dealt with past terrorists threats and see what has failed and what has been successful. Sure, each terrorist group will have its own nuances. But surely radical Islam isn't so different from every other terrorist/extremist group that we may as well throw out past experiences with other similar groups.
    Exactly. In order to combat groups like this, we have to learn from how we handled other similar groups. A good comparison of modern day terrorist groups would be gangs in cities. Realistically gang violence in the US is a form of domestic terrorism. The same things that lead people to join gangs is a lot of times the same things that lead people to join terrorist groups.
    -It gives them a sense of belonging
    -Gives there existence validation
    -Gives the person a sense of power
    -They see it as a chance to improve their current situation
    -It gives them something to live/die for (some twisted sense of honor)

    As mentioned above, killing them only makes them a martyr and gives others a rallying point.
    We are talking HIGH treason, not gangs. Please stay on topic.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  50. #49  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    1,774
    Quote Originally Posted by SowZ37 View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Howard Roark View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by SowZ37 View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Howard Roark View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by SowZ37 View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Howard Roark View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by billvon View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by exchemist View Post
    There is no gung-ho, macho shithead, quick answer, unfortunately. It takes calm application of the rule of law, plus patience and insight into how communities develop feelings of alienation and steps to reduce this.
    On the plus side, the gung-ho, macho shithead solutions make gung-ho macho shitheads feel better about the issue.
    ...and there are always the appeasers that think that they can negotiate with terrorists. History shows them to be the actual shitheads.
    But history also shows that killing them doesn't really solve much.
    Put them on trial for high treason. The penalty for high treason is death.
    Or, deny them re-entry in the country of origin, let the live in the hellhole they are creating.
    These are traitors, they have no business being here.

    As much as he deserved it, I wish George Rockwell hadn't been shot outside of that convenient store in Arlington.
    We are not talking George Rockwell, we are talking traitors.
    And we are also talking about what happens when your primary strategy is to kill members of terrorist and extremist groups. It's a temporary solution that creates more long term problems. If you catch people conspiring to commit high treason or in the act, sure, I'm not saying you don't try them to the fullest extent.
    Good, we agree on that.


    But what's the next step? That isn't enough. Creating martyrs makes the problem all the worse. So what's step number two?
    You find out the roots of their treason. They are born in their respective western countries, they have a good life, why did they betray? Who and what is turning them against their own? Some radical imams at the mosques? Definitely. Stories of "heroism" from their buddies in the "old country"? Possibly. Hatred for the "whitey whores" who reject them? Quite likely. In three years in Afghanistan I heard them all.
    The dream of "restoring the caliphate"? This is a new one. Definitely. There are many other reasons. Can you name a few?
    Promises of rewards in the afterlife, mental illness, resentment at prejudice, family already fighting the 'holy war' giving them a sense of obligation. I'm sure all of these account for more than a few.
    Good list. Give all of them a one way ticket, you can go but you can never come back.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  51. #50  
    Malignant Pimple shlunka's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Dogbox in front of Dywyddyr's house.
    Posts
    1,784
    I fail to see the logic in threatening what are essentially suicide soldiers with death.
    "MODERATOR NOTE : We don't entertain trolls here, not even in the trash can. Banned." -Markus Hanke
    Reply With Quote  
     

  52. #51  
    Forum Cosmic Wizard
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    San Diego
    Posts
    2,008
    Quote Originally Posted by shlunka View Post
    I fail to see the logic in threatening what are essentially suicide soldiers with death.
    Yep. You are giving them exactly what they want - and more to the point, what their leaders want. There is nothing a terrorist leader fears more than a terrorist with second thoughts talking to a less-bloodthirsty enemy.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  53. #52  
    Time Lord
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    8,046
    Quote Originally Posted by exchemist View Post
    There is a certain type of American redneck, usually ignorant of other countries but nevertheless highly opinionated about them, who thinks terrorism can be defeated if you simply kill all the "bad guys". However real life is seldom like a cheap video game, as the imbecile who last occupied the White House found out to his cost. I had thought a man of your erudition would be beyond such stereotypical thinking.
    There is another group that believes "ignorance" is not seeing everyone in a positive light.

    That it is only "ignorance" if you fail to see the good. Not if you fail to see the bad.

    I think the balanced position is to acknowledge that pretty much all utopian ideals breed thuggery. Just as Pol Pot's vision of a collectivized Cambodia never really worked out, and a lot of people died trying to make it work, so also Sharia Law will inevitably cause world wide hardship if the matter isn't looked into.

    It's not because Communists are hateful. Indeed, they're actually very caring. The philosophy of Communism is all about people sharing and getting along. (Just as Islam isn't inherently hateful.) The trouble is that nobody has ever found a way to successfully implement either system in a way where thugs don't dominate it.
    Some clocks are only right twice a day, but they are still right when they are right.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  54. #53  
    Forum Junior
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    282
    I know very little about Howard, essentially only what can be derived from his comments on this thread. Apparently he has served in the U.S. military and spent several years deployed overseas, some or all of it in Afghanistan. It seems he has had opportunity to meet some of these "traitors" as he calls them. Close enough to hear their rationalizations for their actions.

    I don't know for certain, but feel confident in assuming, that Howard has been shot at by some of these people with completely lethal intent. Presumably he has friends and acquaintances that have also been shot at. Quite likely he has had close associates who have been killed by them.

    I don't have any problem accepting that Howard has a hell of a lot better idea what is going on over there than I do. Implying that he is too ignorant to know what he is talking about is ridiculous. He may be wrong, but if so, he is wrong because his traumatic experiences have colored his thinking. Ignorance doesn't have a damn thing to do with it.

    I find the phrase "gung-ho macho shithead" extremely offensive as applied to Howard. I think the person who first used it should apologize.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  55. #54  
    Forum Freshman precious siraj's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    Still searching true and relative place of my birth, in cosmos
    Posts
    91
    Quote Originally Posted by danhanegan View Post
    I find the phrase "gung-ho macho shithead" extremely offensive as applied to Howard. I think the person who first used it should apologize.
    I vote against this. No need to apologise. He is a radical person. For your information. Watch thread about ISIS.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  56. #55  
    exchemist
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    London
    Posts
    2,657
    Quote Originally Posted by danhanegan View Post
    I know very little about Howard, essentially only what can be derived from his comments on this thread. Apparently he has served in the U.S. military and spent several years deployed overseas, some or all of it in Afghanistan. It seems he has had opportunity to meet some of these "traitors" as he calls them. Close enough to hear their rationalizations for their actions.

    I don't know for certain, but feel confident in assuming, that Howard has been shot at by some of these people with completely lethal intent. Presumably he has friends and acquaintances that have also been shot at. Quite likely he has had close associates who have been killed by them.

    I don't have any problem accepting that Howard has a hell of a lot better idea what is going on over there than I do. Implying that he is too ignorant to know what he is talking about is ridiculous. He may be wrong, but if so, he is wrong because his traumatic experiences have colored his thinking. Ignorance doesn't have a damn thing to do with it.

    I find the phrase "gung-ho macho shithead" extremely offensive as applied to Howard. I think the person who first used it should apologize.
    Dan, it was I who used the phrase. What I actually said was:

    "We have ample experience with the IRA of what it takes to neutralise a domestic terrorist threat. Threatening to kill the perpetrators is not any kind of a solution. There is no gung-ho, macho shithead, quick answer, unfortunately. It takes calm application of the rule of law, plus patience and insight into how communities develop feelings of alienation and steps to reduce this."

    As you can see, the term was applied to a particular type of simplistic notion of how to solve a problem. I stand by my characterisation of it 100%.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  57. #56  
    Universal Mind John Galt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    14,169
    I should just like to echo exchemists remarks. And then add: we are dealing with biology. We can make our decisions using those portions of our brain that are present in the lower mammals and even the reptiles. Or we can use that uniquely human neocortex and make a logical, reasoned and ultimately compassionate decision. A compassion that is extensive, not discriminatory. A simple, challenging choice with many potential rewards, if we make it wisely.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  58. #57  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    1,774
    Quote Originally Posted by danhanegan View Post

    I find the phrase "gung-ho macho shithead" extremely offensive as applied to Howard. I think the person who first used it should apologize.
    I think that exchemist and his cheerleaders are referring to the appeasers that think that they can "negotiate" with terrorists. Even obama has finally figured out that one cannot.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  59. #58  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    1,774
    Quote Originally Posted by precious siraj View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by danhanegan View Post
    I find the phrase "gung-ho macho shithead" extremely offensive as applied to Howard. I think the person who first used it should apologize.
    I vote against this. No need to apologise. He is a radical person. For your information. Watch thread about ISIS.
    I am not radical, I am a person that has had a lot of first hand experience with terrorists (unlike the armchair quarterbacks lurking here) and I can expose both the terrorists and their appeasers/apologists for what they are. My direct experience has been fighting and terminating both afghani and paki talibans (you know, the Paki invention) for three years. Some of the ones I personally terminated were arabs (palis).
    Reply With Quote  
     

  60. #59  
    Forum Masters Degree Tranquille's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Solar System
    Posts
    733
    Quote Originally Posted by Howard Roark View Post
    I am not radical, I am a person that has had a lot of first hand experience with terrorists (unlike the armchair quarterbacks lurking here) and I can expose both the terrorists and their appeasers/apologists for what they are. My direct experience has been fighting and terminating both afghani and paki talibans (you know, the Paki invention) for three years. Some of the ones I personally terminated were arabs (palis).

    Anyone who disagrees with your assessment is an appeaser or an apologist.

    This is not the way to conduct a rational debate.

    One final note. I don't know if you are aware, but referring to Pakistani's as "Pakis" is very offensive and it is a racist and derogatory term. I would really appreciate it if you toned down that level of racist language. It is not necessary in any discussion.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  61. #60  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    1,774
    Quote Originally Posted by Tranquille View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Howard Roark View Post
    I am not radical, I am a person that has had a lot of first hand experience with terrorists (unlike the armchair quarterbacks lurking here) and I can expose both the terrorists and their appeasers/apologists for what they are. My direct experience has been fighting and terminating both afghani and paki talibans (you know, the Paki invention) for three years. Some of the ones I personally terminated were arabs (palis).

    Anyone who disagrees with your assessment is an appeaser or an apologist.
    No, just the ones who sat on their asses poking their noses and trying to find reason in what the terrorists do while people like me fought to defend the aforementioned appeasers.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  62. #61  
    Forum Cosmic Wizard
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    San Diego
    Posts
    2,008
    Quote Originally Posted by kojax View Post
    There is another group that believes "ignorance" is not seeing everyone in a positive light.
    That it is only "ignorance" if you fail to see the good. Not if you fail to see the bad.
    Ignorance is, in general, a failure to see either, generally caused by assuming that "they" all share the same characteristics based purely on their membership in that group. ("They" can be Muslims, blacks, Jews, democrats, women etc)

    I think the balanced position is to acknowledge that pretty much all utopian ideals breed thuggery. Just as Pol Pot's vision of a collectivized Cambodia never really worked out, and a lot of people died trying to make it work, so also Sharia Law will inevitably cause world wide hardship if the matter isn't looked into.
    Or Cuba's vision of communism. Note how that problem was resolved.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  63. #62  
    Forum Masters Degree Tranquille's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Solar System
    Posts
    733
    Quote Originally Posted by Howard Roark View Post
    No, just the ones who sat on their asses poking their noses and trying to find reason in what the terrorists do while people like me fought to defend the aforementioned appeasers.
    People have a right to their opinions. We get it, you are filled with blood lust and a desire to kill or "terminate" those you perceive as being the enemy. We get it. You don't need to keep telling us. Just as you don't need to keep trying to remind everyone that you served. A lot of people also served. They also do not share your desire to kill people. Nor do they keep expecting others to agree with them and their desire to kill people because they served. Which is exactly what you are doing in this thread.

    Disagreeing with your beliefs that they should be killed does not mean that we are appeasers. We just feel there are better options out there instead of just killing as killing them will not solve the problem, it will just make it worse.

    If you don't want people to disagree with you or if you can't stand to have anyone to disagree with you without calling them appeasers and apologists, perhaps a blog may be more to your taste on this subject matter.

    I will say this, however, a lot of the people who have been radicalised are often rejected or feel rejected by their communities in the West, so they go where they feel they are wanted. Killing them when they come home will only create more and more, as disenfranchised youngsters feel their place in our society dwindling as they are viewed with distrust and fear by angry yokels who keep going on about killing them. It doesn't help.

    In fact, the whole 'kill them' routine just makes it worse and you end up pushing more towards groups like ISIS than away from them.

    Pointing this out doesn't make anyone an appeaser or an apologist. It just makes them a realist.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  64. #63  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    1,774
    Quote Originally Posted by Tranquille View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Howard Roark View Post
    No, just the ones who sat on their asses poking their noses and trying to find reason in what the terrorists do while people like me fought to defend the aforementioned appeasers.
    People have a right to their opinions.
    Absolutely. When they start offering reasons for the terrorists and their act they become appeasers and apologists.


    A lot of people also served.
    Doubtful that any of the appeasers did. You certainly didn't.



    They also do not share your desire to kill people. Nor do they keep expecting others to agree with them and their desire to kill people because they served. Which is exactly what you are doing in this thread.
    This thread is about the traitors amongst us, not about killing terrorists. Stop moving the goalposts.


    Disagreeing with your beliefs that they should be killed does not mean that we are appeasers. We just feel there are better options out there instead of just killing as killing them will not solve the problem, it will just make it worse.
    One more time, for your benefit, the options I offered were:

    1. Put them on trial for high treason (they might get the death penalty, tough)
    2. Refuse them re-entry in their country of origin (so they can spend the rest of their lives in the hellholes they are fighting to create).

    Killing them when they come home will only create more and more, as disenfranchised youngsters feel their place in our society dwindling as they are viewed with distrust and fear by angry yokels who keep going on about killing them. It doesn't help.
    What do you suggest? Meet them at the airport and give them a free phone?




    I will say this, however, a lot of the people who have been radicalised are often rejected or feel rejected by their communities in the West,
    Right on cue comes the rationalization.

    so they go where they feel they are wanted.
    Excellent, let them STAY there. And the ones who find reason for their acts of terror, should follow them.
    Last edited by Howard Roark; October 9th, 2014 at 12:39 PM.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  65. #64  
    Ascended Member Ascended's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    3,380
    Quote Originally Posted by Tranquille View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Howard Roark View Post
    No, just the ones who sat on their asses poking their noses and trying to find reason in what the terrorists do while people like me fought to defend the aforementioned appeasers.
    People have a right to their opinions. We get it, you are filled with blood lust and a desire to kill or "terminate" those you perceive as being the enemy. We get it. You don't need to keep telling us. Just as you don't need to keep trying to remind everyone that you served. A lot of people also served. They also do not share your desire to kill people. Nor do they keep expecting others to agree with them and their desire to kill people because they served. Which is exactly what you are doing in this thread.

    Disagreeing with your beliefs that they should be killed does not mean that we are appeasers. We just feel there are better options out there instead of just killing as killing them will not solve the problem, it will just make it worse.

    If you don't want people to disagree with you or if you can't stand to have anyone to disagree with you without calling them appeasers and apologists, perhaps a blog may be more to your taste on this subject matter.

    I will say this, however, a lot of the people who have been radicalised are often rejected or feel rejected by their communities in the West, so they go where they feel they are wanted. Killing them when they come home will only create more and more, as disenfranchised youngsters feel their place in our society dwindling as they are viewed with distrust and fear by angry yokels who keep going on about killing them. It doesn't help.

    In fact, the whole 'kill them' routine just makes it worse and you end up pushing more towards groups like ISIS than away from them.

    Pointing this out doesn't make anyone an appeaser or an apologist. It just makes them a realist.
    Like.
    Everything has its beauty, but not everyone sees it. - confucius
    Reply With Quote  
     

  66. #65  
    Forum Cosmic Wizard
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    San Diego
    Posts
    2,008
    Quote Originally Posted by danhanegan View Post
    I know very little about Howard, essentially only what can be derived from his comments on this thread. Apparently he has served in the U.S. military and spent several years deployed overseas, some or all of it in Afghanistan. It seems he has had opportunity to meet some of these "traitors" as he calls them. Close enough to hear their rationalizations for their actions.

    I don't know for certain, but feel confident in assuming, that Howard has been shot at by some of these people with completely lethal intent. Presumably he has friends and acquaintances that have also been shot at.
    I've only been mugged once, by a black man in New York City. That's a direct experience that changes you.

    From that experience, I could decide that blacks are criminals, and that anyone who disagrees is an armchair quarterback who sits on their ass, and who has never had to fight one.
    Or I could decide that I dislike muggers, and that his skin color doesn't really mean that much.

    Likewise, I can understand Howard's hatred for the people who shoot at him. I would feel the same way in his shoes. It would be a mistake to transpose that feeling to Muslims or Arabs in general.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  67. #66  
    Samurai of Logic Falconer360's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Somewhere in Washington
    Posts
    398
    Quote Originally Posted by Tranquille View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Howard Roark View Post
    No, just the ones who sat on their asses poking their noses and trying to find reason in what the terrorists do while people like me fought to defend the aforementioned appeasers.
    People have a right to their opinions. We get it, you are filled with blood lust and a desire to kill or "terminate" those you perceive as being the enemy. We get it. You don't need to keep telling us. Just as you don't need to keep trying to remind everyone that you served. A lot of people also served. They also do not share your desire to kill people. Nor do they keep expecting others to agree with them and their desire to kill people because they served. Which is exactly what you are doing in this thread.

    Disagreeing with your beliefs that they should be killed does not mean that we are appeasers. We just feel there are better options out there instead of just killing as killing them will not solve the problem, it will just make it worse.

    If you don't want people to disagree with you or if you can't stand to have anyone to disagree with you without calling them appeasers and apologists, perhaps a blog may be more to your taste on this subject matter.

    I will say this, however, a lot of the people who have been radicalised are often rejected or feel rejected by their communities in the West, so they go where they feel they are wanted. Killing them when they come home will only create more and more, as disenfranchised youngsters feel their place in our society dwindling as they are viewed with distrust and fear by angry yokels who keep going on about killing them. It doesn't help.

    In fact, the whole 'kill them' routine just makes it worse and you end up pushing more towards groups like ISIS than away from them.

    Pointing this out doesn't make anyone an appeaser or an apologist. It just makes them a realist.
    *Like*
    "For every moment of triumph, for every instance of beauty, many souls must be trampled." Hunter S Thompson

    "It is easy to kill someone with a slash of a sword. It is hard to be impossible for others to cut down"
    - Yagyu Munenori

    "Only a warrior chooses pacifism; others are condemned to it."
    Reply With Quote  
     

  68. #67  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    1,774
    Quote Originally Posted by billvon View Post
    Likewise, I can understand Howard's hatred for the people who shoot at him. I would feel the same way in his shoes. It would be a mistake to transpose that feeling to Muslims or Arabs in general.
    There is no "transposition", stop trying to make it personal about me. This thread is an account of the traitors who go overseas to fight the armies of their OWN country of origin, it is about THEM, not about me. THEIR acts constitute high treason. The fact that a bunch of you can find reason for these heinous acts of treason is what makes you apologists and appeasers. Bill von Novak, Tranquille, exchemist, Flick Montana, John Galt, live with it!
    Reply With Quote  
     

  69. #68  
    Samurai of Logic Falconer360's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Somewhere in Washington
    Posts
    398
    Quote Originally Posted by Howard Roark View Post
    One more time, for your benefit, the options I offered were:

    1. Put them on trial for high treason (they might get the death penalty, tough)
    2. Refuse them re-entry in their country of origin (so they can spend the rest of their lives in the hellholes they are fighting to create).
    3. Sentence them to life in prison with no chance of parole, which happens to be cost effective to the public than the death penalty. This is also better punishment than death because it does not turn them into a martyr for their cause.
    "For every moment of triumph, for every instance of beauty, many souls must be trampled." Hunter S Thompson

    "It is easy to kill someone with a slash of a sword. It is hard to be impossible for others to cut down"
    - Yagyu Munenori

    "Only a warrior chooses pacifism; others are condemned to it."
    Reply With Quote  
     

  70. #69  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    1,774
    Quote Originally Posted by Falconer360 View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Howard Roark View Post
    One more time, for your benefit, the options I offered were:

    1. Put them on trial for high treason (they might get the death penalty, tough)
    2. Refuse them re-entry in their country of origin (so they can spend the rest of their lives in the hellholes they are fighting to create).
    3. Sentence them to life in prison with no chance of parole, which happens to be cost effective to the public than the death penalty. .
    No, they do not deserve to breathe the air of the country they have betrayed. Refuse them re-entry, let them spend the rest of their miserable lives in the hellholes they are fighting to create. Besides, other scumbags like them would be tempted to kidnap people in a hope of exchanges (look at berdahl)

    This is also better punishment than death because it does not turn them into a martyr for their cause
    A piece of sh!t does not become a martyr by the mere fact of being killed.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  71. #70  
    Samurai of Logic Falconer360's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Somewhere in Washington
    Posts
    398
    Quote Originally Posted by Howard Roark View Post

    This is also better punishment than death because it does not turn them into a martyr for their cause
    A piece of sh!t does not become a martyr by the mere fact of being killed.
    Yes they are a piece of sh*t, but to their allies, the death becomes a rallying point and only adds more fuel to their fire. Not to mention that in these twisted mindsets, death by the enemy is the ultimate way to die. So you are just granting their wish.
    "For every moment of triumph, for every instance of beauty, many souls must be trampled." Hunter S Thompson

    "It is easy to kill someone with a slash of a sword. It is hard to be impossible for others to cut down"
    - Yagyu Munenori

    "Only a warrior chooses pacifism; others are condemned to it."
    Reply With Quote  
     

  72. #71  
    Ascended Member Ascended's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    3,380
    Quote Originally Posted by Howard Roark View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by billvon View Post
    Likewise, I can understand Howard's hatred for the people who shoot at him. I would feel the same way in his shoes. It would be a mistake to transpose that feeling to Muslims or Arabs in general.
    There is no "transposition", stop trying to make it personal about me. This thread is an account of the traitors who go overseas to fight the armies of their OWN country of origin, it is about THEM, not about me. THEIR acts constitute high treason. The fact that a bunch of you can find reason for these heinous acts of treason is what makes you apologists and appeasers. Bill von Novak, Tranquille, exchemist, Flick Montana, John Galt, live with it!
    Perhaps the anger here is just misdirected, yes we should be angry at murderous terrorists who think it's acceptable to behead innocent people. These are people we need to hunt down and irradicate. But our own citizens being drawn towards these organisations are also victims. We can't just wash our hands of them, many don't even understand what they are getting themselves into. We have to stop the terrorist groups from using propaganda to manipulate them, because many of these young kids going over to Syria or Iraq are somebodies son or daughter, sister or brother, friend or neighbour, these are our people and we need to remember this.

    Our anger should be focussed upon the terrorists and towards stopping their recruitment actions, our kids should be prevented from going over there and getting involved. We need to be doing more inside communities in our own countries. We can also start education programs and actively recruiting from communities considered at risk. Showing communities that they are valued and are part of our country, giving the people from them a place and role to play on the right side of the war on terror so that they arn't as susceptible to propaganda.

    Instead of viewing certain communities as potential risks we need to see them as areas of improvement where we can make a difference. We need to show them we know who our enermy is and that is the terrorists not them, we need to teach them that terrorists are their enermy also and that is where their anger should directed towards.

    We can't fight the whole of Islam, we can't make the whole of Islam our enermy, all Islam is not our enermy, we must know who our enermy is. Though terror groups may claim to fight for some perverted interpretation of their religion we shouldn't be influenced by this. Terrorism, and the perpatrators of terrorism are the enermy of everyone, not Islam or any other religion.

    We must understand and teach this if we are successfully to defeat the terrorists.

    People from our own countries who are being radicalised and do go to join these terrorist organisations should be judged upon the actual crimes they commit, tried and punished accordingly and then efforts must be made to de-radicalise them.

    But save our anger for those who would hurt and kill, for these people are our real enermies.
    Everything has its beauty, but not everyone sees it. - confucius
    Reply With Quote  
     

  73. #72  
    Forum Cosmic Wizard
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    San Diego
    Posts
    2,008
    Quote Originally Posted by Howard Roark View Post
    There is no "transposition", stop trying to make it personal . . . .

    is what makes you apologists and appeasers. Bill von Novak, Tranquille, exchemist, Flick Montana, John Galt, live with it!
    So it's wrong to make it personal about you, followed by a personal attack on others. That would make you a hypocrite.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  74. #73  
    Time Lord
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    8,046
    Quote Originally Posted by Ascended View Post

    Our anger should be focussed upon the terrorists and towards stopping their recruitment actions, our kids should be prevented from going over there and getting involved. We need to be doing more inside communities in our own countries. We can also start education programs and actively recruiting from communities considered at risk. Showing communities that they are valued and are part of our country, giving the people from them a place and role to play on the right side of the war on terror so that they arn't as susceptible to propaganda.
    That sounds a lot like the way we fight the war on drugs. Focus all our police effort on stopping the distribution and sale of drugs, instead of focusing on stopping consumption.

    With no buyers, the drug trade would fall apart. But as for sellers, well, for the right price there will always be a seller. If we reduce the number of sellers by half, we may find we double the price the drugs sell for, which then motivates the sellers to increase in number. It's a viscious cycle with no end.



    Instead of viewing certain communities as potential risks we need to see them as areas of improvement where we can make a difference. We need to show them we know who our enermy is and that is the terrorists not them, we need to teach them that terrorists are their enermy also and that is where their anger should directed towards.
    Right, our enemy isn't the communists. It's just the KGB. I get it.


    We can't fight the whole of Islam, we can't make the whole of Islam our enermy, all Islam is not our enermy, we must know who our enermy is. Though terror groups may claim to fight for some perverted interpretation of their religion we shouldn't be influenced by this. Terrorism, and the perpatrators of terrorism are the enermy of everyone, not Islam or any other religion.
    But it appears likely that Islam itself IS the problem. Utopian ideals are always problems. They never lead anywhere good.


    People from our own countries who are being radicalised and do go to join these terrorist organisations should be judged upon the actual crimes they commit, tried and punished accordingly and then efforts must be made to de-radicalise them.

    But save our anger for those who would hurt and kill, for these people are our real enermies.
    You're just not understanding how utopian idealists look at things. They don't fight us out of fear of us. They think they're doing us a favor.

    They think it is kind to murder us, because it will help break our will so we can finally accept their "greater vision" for us.

    So you see.... appeasement doesn't work for exactly the same reason as why intimidation doesnt' work. It's not about that stuff. Most of these people will gladly die to serve their cause. The rich and the poor equally. (Most of the 19 attackers on 9/11 were rich kids.) They will do so with eactly the same willingness if they are sure we don't want to harm them as they will if they are sure we do want to harm them.

    It makes absolutely no difference at all.
    Some clocks are only right twice a day, but they are still right when they are right.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  75. #74  
    Time Lord
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    8,046
    Quote Originally Posted by Falconer360 View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Howard Roark View Post
    One more time, for your benefit, the options I offered were:

    1. Put them on trial for high treason (they might get the death penalty, tough)
    2. Refuse them re-entry in their country of origin (so they can spend the rest of their lives in the hellholes they are fighting to create).
    3. Sentence them to life in prison with no chance of parole, which happens to be cost effective to the public than the death penalty. This is also better punishment than death because it does not turn them into a martyr for their cause.
    Keeping them alive makes them martyrs too. And from prison they can write books, and potentially gain new followers, and even make money.


    Quote Originally Posted by billvon View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by kojax View Post
    There is another group that believes "ignorance" is not seeing everyone in a positive light.
    That it is only "ignorance" if you fail to see the good. Not if you fail to see the bad.
    Ignorance is, in general, a failure to see either, generally caused by assuming that "they" all share the same characteristics based purely on their membership in that group. ("They" can be Muslims, blacks, Jews, democrats, women etc)
    If the group is defined by a common trait, such as a shared ideology, then that assumption may be quite accurate.

    IE - if I say, all Muslims believe that Mohammad was a prophet. There is no logical error in that.

    I think the balanced position is to acknowledge that pretty much all utopian ideals breed thuggery. Just as Pol Pot's vision of a collectivized Cambodia never really worked out, and a lot of people died trying to make it work, so also Sharia Law will inevitably cause world wide hardship if the matter isn't looked into.
    Or Cuba's vision of communism. Note how that problem was resolved.
    Good point about Cuba.
    Some clocks are only right twice a day, but they are still right when they are right.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  76. #75  
    Moderator Moderator Cogito Ergo Sum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Belgium
    Posts
    2,507
    Howard Roark, I do not doubt the fact that you are an intelligent member, nor do I question your ability to have a civil discussion with members who have different views. However, in posts #57, #67 and #69, you used foul language and denigrating terms. This is not allowed, I am afraid, thus I have to warn you (and the other who have partaken into this discussion up to now).

    Moderator Warning: Please keep the discussion civil and refrain from using condescending terms.
    "The only safe rule is to dispute only with those of your acquaintance of whom you know that they possess sufficient intelligence and self-respect not to advance absurdities; to appeal to reason and not to authority, and to listen to reason and yield to it; and, finally, to be willing to accept reason even from an opponent, and to be just enough to bear being proved to be in the wrong."

    ~ Arthur Schopenhauer, The Art of Being Right: 38 Ways to Win an Argument (1831), Stratagem XXXVIII.
    Reply With Quote  
     

Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •