Paris: Dozens Killed In Terrorist Attack

[GenesisNemesis]

I love how the very people who are so against "political correctness" get so easily offended by opposing viewpoints regarding foreign policy, to the point where they believe the other side is the enemy.

Can you give an example of somebody so offended by opposing viewpoints regarding foreign policy that he believes the other side is the enemy?

In case you're talking about me, on what planet does "opposing viewpoint regarding foreign policy" qualify as a reasonable description of "Yes, god forbid the West ever pay for it's crimes."? The guy blatantly expressed the view that the Paris massacre was deserved! That's not a foreign policy opinion; that's a morally bankrupt moral judgment. He condoned the mass murder of innocent bystanders based on their nationality. Of course he's my enemy. If he isn't your enemy too, why the hell not?

I'm mainly talking about people like Max.

 

[Bomb#20]

The US, the US, the US. Come on Untermensche. Are you telling me that the people in the Middle East lack any independent agency or motive? That but for the US it'd be all smiles and roses? You're aware there's history of the Middle East before the US involvement? You're aware there's a history of the Middle East before the US even existed? It's like you're implying Muslims should be held to a lower standard. I mean, Vietnam endured two decades of war with foreign powers yet somehow, somehow, somehow, it didn't engage in a policy of terrorism.

Actually it did. Marxism is every bit as useful as Islam is at providing would-be murderers with feelings of justification.

Many People's Liberation Armed Forces of South Vietnam (PLAF) units operated at night,[45] and employed terror as a standard tactic.[46] Rice procured at gunpoint sustained the Viet Cong.[47] Squads were assigned monthly assassination quotas.[48] Government employees, especially village and district heads, were the most common targets. But there were a wide variety of targets, including clinics and medical personnel.[49] Notable Viet Cong atrocities include the massacre of over 3,000 unarmed civilians at Huế, 48 killed in the bombing of My Canh floating restaurant in Saigon in June 1965[50] and a massacre of 252 Montagnards in the village of Đắk Sơn in December 1967 using flamethrowers.[51] Viet Cong death squads assassinated at least 37,000 civilians in South Vietnam; the real figure was far higher since the data mostly cover 1967-72. They also waged a mass murder campaign against civilian hamlets and refugee camps; in the peak war years, nearly a third of all civilian deaths were the result of Viet Cong atrocities.[52] Ami Pedahzur has written that "the overall volume and lethality of Vietcong terrorism rivals or exceeds all but a handful of terrorist campaigns waged over the last third of the twentieth century".[53]​

(Source)

 

[Warpoet]

The majority of the world's Muslims acquiesce to laws discriminatory to non-Muslims and women. No non-Muslim may practice his faith in Saudi Arabia; Coptic Christians may not build or repair a church without state permission; and Malaysian Christians cannot even use the word "Allah" for God. Imagine if you're an atheist or agnostic? If you are a woman in any of these countries, good luck. And if you're gay? Hence, the majority of the world's Muslims are the problem. ISIS and Islamic terrorism may be an extreme variant of the religion, but it's the same religion. So long as the majority of the world's Muslims accept these oppressive practices, they are responsible for the consequences which flow from them.

Thank you for demonstrating exactly the sort of collective blame and shit reasoning I predicted at the outset of the thread. People like you will throw all manner of shit at the wall - or rather, at your target (Muslims) and hope that just some of it sticks.

Every point you raised has fuck all to do with what is being discussed. That you cite an oppressive regime like Saudi Arabia's as evidence that the world's 1.5 billion Muslims ought to be held accountable for the likes of ISIS indicates that you have nothing intelligent to say on the matter and should refrain from commenting.

 

[Warpoet]

More bluster and hand waving. It pains you to concede there are plenty muslims down with Isis and their operations. I expect more such attacks on the infidels and an uptick in the number of muslims making their way to the caliphate.

You really have trouble with this "burden of proof" concept, don't you?

You made a claim about these "many" Muslims celebrating the Paris attacks; therefore, it's up to you to validate that claim. It's no one else's responsibility to disprove your claim, and without substantiation, the claim means nothing.

If these expectations are too much for you to handle, kindly do as I suggested and head back to the anti-Muslim blogosphere, where you obviously get your "information" from anyway.

 

[Warpoet]

Dude: ISIS probably dosn't represent even a majority of Sunni Muslims. However, you have to concede that ISIS controls currently controls approximately 40% of the ME. It's being reported that ISIS sanctioned these attacks.

Uh, no, I don't have to concede that because it's demonstrably false. ISIS does not control 40% of the Middle East. But even if they did, putting aside the fact that the overwhelming majority of the world's Muslims don't live in the Middle East, it doesn't mean anything. Unless you buy into Trausti's shitty line of reasoning that anyone who lives under oppressive governments is complicit in their crimes.

 

[Warpoet]

https://www.google.com.au/url?q=ht...&usg=AFQjCNFpbwOmgt2cKgX9pG--m72mSuE6cQ

Your link is paywalled, but even overlooking that, it does nothing to salvage Tswizzle's smear campaign. Some tweets from assholes don't come close to validating his claim.

 

[Trausti]

The majority of the world's Muslims acquiesce to laws discriminatory to non-Muslims and women. No non-Muslim may practice his faith in Saudi Arabia; Coptic Christians may not build or repair a church without state permission; and Malaysian Christians cannot even use the word "Allah" for God. Imagine if you're an atheist or agnostic? If you are a woman in any of these countries, good luck. And if you're gay? Hence, the majority of the world's Muslims are the problem. ISIS and Islamic terrorism may be an extreme variant of the religion, but it's the same religion. So long as the majority of the world's Muslims accept these oppressive practices, they are responsible for the consequences which flow from them.

Thank you for demonstrating exactly the sort of collective blame and shit reasoning I predicted at the outset of the thread. People like you will throw all manner of shit at the wall - or rather, at your target (Muslims) and hope that just some of it sticks.

Every point you raised has fuck all to do with what is being discussed. That you cite an oppressive regime like Saudi Arabia's as evidence that the world's 1.5 billion Muslims ought to be held accountable for the likes of ISIS indicates that you have nothing intelligent to say on the matter and should refrain from commenting.

Yes, sorry 'bout the whole "collective blame" thing. Forgot that's it's only okay if it's used against the West.

 

[angelo]

Hardly a peak from the left and pc brigade when the West, or Israel is the victim!

 

[Warpoet]

Yes, sorry 'bout the whole "collective blame" thing. Forgot that's it's only okay if it's used against the West.

There is a difference between blaming governments for their policies and blaming everyone who happens to belong to a certain religion for the behavior of nutjobs. Even if you and the others on this forum with an axe to grind against Muslims can't comprehend it.

 

[Crazy Eddie]

Yes, sorry 'bout the whole "collective blame" thing. Forgot that's it's only okay if it's used against the West.

There is a difference between blaming governments for their policies and blaming everyone who happens to belong to a certain religion for the behavior of nutjobs. Even if you and the others on this forum with an axe to grind against Muslims can't comprehend it.

And to be very clear: no one here has ever pulled punches when it comes to blaming Muslim GOVERNMENTS for being absolutely abysmal at just about everything. Petty dictators, incompetent bureaucrats, graft, corruption and rampant abuse of power all justified by tradition, religion, superior firepower, or nothing at all. They have their own share of the blame and will burn in a special place in hell for intentionally shitting on their own people just to enrich themselves.

The reason Western governments draw so much fire is because they are OUR governments; they're the people who act on our behalf while claiming to represent us and our way of life. The "shame on the west" attitude of westerners is, simply and purely, the resentment we harbor towards OUR incompetent leaders for their part in fucking everything up.

And maybe at the end of the day, their part is smaller than the corrupt governments of the middle east. Maybe at the end of the day, the Sheikhs and the Imams are MOSTLY to blame for leading their people down one blind alley after another in search of political expedience. Maybe the governments and leaders and social movements of the Muslim world are blessed with suck and wouldn't be much more successful if western governments weren't constantly pissing on them. But the fact is, our governments ARE pissing on them, and they are definitely NOT helping the situation. Such behavior is not becoming of the people who claim to represent us, and we want them to fucking stop.

 

[Metaphor]

There is a difference between blaming governments for their policies and blaming everyone who happens to belong to a certain religion for the behavior of nutjobs. Even if you and the others on this forum with an axe to grind against Muslims can't comprehend it.

And to be very clear: no one here has ever pulled punches when it comes to blaming Muslim GOVERNMENTS for being absolutely abysmal at just about everything. Petty dictators, incompetent bureaucrats, graft, corruption and rampant abuse of power all justified by tradition, religion, superior firepower, or nothing at all. They have their own share of the blame and will burn in a special place in hell for intentionally shitting on their own people just to enrich themselves.

The reason Western governments draw so much fire is because they are OUR governments; they're the people who act on our behalf while claiming to represent us and our way of life. The "shame on the west" attitude of westerners is, simply and purely, the resentment we harbor towards OUR incompetent leaders for their part in fucking everything up.

And maybe at the end of the day, their part is smaller than the corrupt governments of the middle east. Maybe at the end of the day, the Sheikhs and the Imams are MOSTLY to blame for leading their people down one blind alley after another in search of political expedience. Maybe the governments and leaders and social movements of the Muslim world are blessed with suck and wouldn't be much more successful if western governments weren't constantly pissing on them. But the fact is, our governments ARE pissing on them, and they are definitely NOT helping the situation. Such behavior is not becoming of the people who claim to represent us, and we want them to fucking stop.

Is there any act of terrorism committed in the past 20 years that Western governments are not to blame for?

 

[Crazy Eddie]

And to be very clear: no one here has ever pulled punches when it comes to blaming Muslim GOVERNMENTS for being absolutely abysmal at just about everything. Petty dictators, incompetent bureaucrats, graft, corruption and rampant abuse of power all justified by tradition, religion, superior firepower, or nothing at all. They have their own share of the blame and will burn in a special place in hell for intentionally shitting on their own people just to enrich themselves.

The reason Western governments draw so much fire is because they are OUR governments; they're the people who act on our behalf while claiming to represent us and our way of life. The "shame on the west" attitude of westerners is, simply and purely, the resentment we harbor towards OUR incompetent leaders for their part in fucking everything up.

And maybe at the end of the day, their part is smaller than the corrupt governments of the middle east. Maybe at the end of the day, the Sheikhs and the Imams are MOSTLY to blame for leading their people down one blind alley after another in search of political expedience. Maybe the governments and leaders and social movements of the Muslim world are blessed with suck and wouldn't be much more successful if western governments weren't constantly pissing on them. But the fact is, our governments ARE pissing on them, and they are definitely NOT helping the situation. Such behavior is not becoming of the people who claim to represent us, and we want them to fucking stop.

Is there any act of terrorism committed in the past 20 years that Western governments are not to blame for?

In the age of globalism, where the policies of a powerful government can cause waves of unintended consequences that circle the world three times over before anyone feels them, it would be truly amazing to find such an incident that the West was not at least PARTIALLY involved with.

But there's a difference between a government having a share of the responsibility for instigating over-the-top militant reactions around the world, and the militant assholes who actually do the crime. A criminal is accountable for what he does, not what made him that way.

Western governments are accountable to the extent that their actions directly contributed to the attacks either through direct or indirect material support or political patronage of those very same terrorists. They may also accountable to the extent to which those terrorists' actions are a reaction/retaliation/protest against Western policies in the first place. The first of these is BORDERING on actual culpability; dropping a bunch of military aid in Iraq and then watching ISIS collect the crates is close to criminal negligence and heads would fucking roll if some of those U.S. supplied weapons wound up being involved in the Paris Attack. Below that, there's the general "piss on everyone and call it rain" that the West has ALWAYS done which makes people who live in those areas more prone to resort to violence than attempt to solve their problems peacefully; that is FAR beneath a charge of capability, even if it's something we would REALLY like our governments to stop doing all the time.

 

[angelo]

And to be very clear: no one here has ever pulled punches when it comes to blaming Muslim GOVERNMENTS for being absolutely abysmal at just about everything. Petty dictators, incompetent bureaucrats, graft, corruption and rampant abuse of power all justified by tradition, religion, superior firepower, or nothing at all. They have their own share of the blame and will burn in a special place in hell for intentionally shitting on their own people just to enrich themselves.

The reason Western governments draw so much fire is because they are OUR governments; they're the people who act on our behalf while claiming to represent us and our way of life. The "shame on the west" attitude of westerners is, simply and purely, the resentment we harbor towards OUR incompetent leaders for their part in fucking everything up.

And maybe at the end of the day, their part is smaller than the corrupt governments of the middle east. Maybe at the end of the day, the Sheikhs and the Imams are MOSTLY to blame for leading their people down one blind alley after another in search of political expedience. Maybe the governments and leaders and social movements of the Muslim world are blessed with suck and wouldn't be much more successful if western governments weren't constantly pissing on them. But the fact is, our governments ARE pissing on them, and they are definitely NOT helping the situation. Such behavior is not becoming of the people who claim to represent us, and we want them to fucking stop.

Is there any act of terrorism committed in the past 20 years that Western governments are not to blame for?

Not many according to the intelligentsia.

 

[Metaphor]

Western governments are accountable to the extent that their actions directly contributed to the attacks either through direct or indirect material support or political patronage of those very same terrorists. They may also accountable to the extent to which those terrorists' actions are a reaction/retaliation/protest against Western policies in the first place.

"Reaction/retaliation/protest". I part ways with you on this idea; it is clearly blaming the victim.

A man may murder his pregnant daughter because he feels she has brought shame to the family; she is not responsible for his reaction.

Gays and lesbians are routinely beaten up for existing; we are not to blame for the reactions others have.

 

[Crazy Eddie]

Asked question on a nuanced topic.

Responds with bumper-sticker soundbite:

Is there any act of terrorism committed in the past 20 years that Western governments are not to blame for?

Not many according to the intelligentsia.

And they wonder why Donald Trump is still leading the polls...

 

[angelo]

"In the hour of savage licence, when every passion was inflamed, and every restraint was removed, a cruel slaughter was made of the Romans; and the streets of the city were filled with dead bodies.
Whenever the Barbarians were provoked by opposition, they extended the promiscuous massacre to the feeble, innocent, and the helpless."
Edward Gibbon, History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire. [Published between 1776-1788]
Gibbon is describing the slow burn of the Roman empire. He could very well be describing the slow burn of the Western empire, more particularly, the European empire.

 

[Crazy Eddie]

Western governments are accountable to the extent that their actions directly contributed to the attacks either through direct or indirect material support or political patronage of those very same terrorists. They may also accountable to the extent to which those terrorists' actions are a reaction/retaliation/protest against Western policies in the first place.

"Reaction/retaliation/protest". I part ways with you on this idea; it is clearly blaming the victim.

The victim's actions always contribute in some way to his/her BEING the victim, else they wouldn't have been involved in the first place. That isn't a matter of "blame" so much as situational awareness. That's what I mean about culpability: Western governments DO INDEED play a role in this, but not always one that implies responsibility for the outcome.

In this case it's sort of like a bunch of kids complaining about they keep getting beaten up by other kids because their father is constantly going on long-winded racist tirades that alienate his family from the entire town. Yes, it's not fair to us that WE get punished for the stupid shit that our father does (and even his racist tirades don't warrant a beating so much as a strongly worded letter). But here we're talking amongst ourselves, And there's one thing we all bear in mind: "I really wish dad would shut the fuck up."

Gays and lesbians are routinely beaten up for existing; we are not to blame for the reactions others have.

We are to "blame" only for the extent to which our actions affect those around us, NOT for the things that INSPIRE those actions.

You can blame my dad for pissing off the entire town, because that's something HE did. But you can't blame him for YOU overreacting to his racist asshattery; that's something YOU did.

For those who do not deal with with analogies:
You can blame the west for pissing off the entire middle east, because that's something the West did (and continues to do) through its policies. But you can't blame the West for Muslims overreacting to their asshattery; that's something THEY are doing.

Meanwhile, we are all generally agreed that we wish dad would shut the fuck up.

 

[arkirk]

Western governments are accountable to the extent that their actions directly contributed to the attacks either through direct or indirect material support or political patronage of those very same terrorists. They may also accountable to the extent to which those terrorists' actions are a reaction/retaliation/protest against Western policies in the first place.

"Reaction/retaliation/protest". I part ways with you on this idea; it is clearly blaming the victim.

A man may murder his pregnant daughter because he feels she has brought shame to the family; she is not responsible for his reaction.

Gays and lesbians are routinely beaten up for existing; we are not to blame for the reactions others have.

I don't think you understand. There is a direct line of responsibility for these bombing raids for example or the drones killing innocent people. That gets people who lost loved ones mad at you. Then it doesn't take a particularly talented recruiter to add another terrorist to their roster. We keep blowing things up and killing innocent people (often children) and that kind of thing is an ENEMY GENERATOR. We create a condition in the mind of the recruit that they think they know we are evil because we destroy what they love. What is so hard for some of us to understand about that? Your examples are all non violent alleged offenses. Killing people and blowing up a family's house or business is a different kind of OFFENSE. Stop imagining our war mongering government is innocent in these matters. We know better and you better figure it out too. This country is seeking the old Alexander the Great goal...world domination and after that, the space command takes over. It is being done by liars and cheaters and people who stand to gain from conflict like arms manufacturers and military contractors of all types. The Islamists are perhaps just leaning blindly on their religious morons to lead them to revenge more than actually swallowing all the crap these cult like warrior groups put out. A lot of these terrorists feel with all their heart they are right. They are crazy and dangerous at the same time, yet we are not necessarily any less crazy and dangerous.

 

[bilby]

 

[none]

More likely culprit: Faith over reason.