Seventy

[Jacqueline]

* A 'lil eminem for everyone

:rofl:



Screw the extremists! They want us to argue and die. Resist their wrath.

 

[Flanker]

Flanker,

Do you have something to add other than accusations? Refute the facts, why don't you? It's been asked of you already but you won't. Why?

Ok. Let's go straight to the facts.

1.
In the beginning, the article tries to compare 1943 with the present.
The article claims Canadians do not see "the big picture" now as they did in 1943.

Nearly 65 years ago, in 1943 most, but not all, Canadians saw the ‘big picture.’
Sixty-five years later most Canadians do not see the ‘big picture.’

Good. That is correct.
But, then we read:

Admittedly, the ‘enemy’ appears to be pretty laughable: a ragtag collection of borderline maniacs leading failed states and certifiable lunatics hiding in mountain caves in places most Canadians cannot find on a map. That would have been a good description of Benito Mussolini and Adolph Hitler in 1928

Stop.
There seems to be an error in the logic.
Why 1943 mentionned in the beginning has suddenly became 1928?
How Canadians can see the "big picture" now if nobody did see this big picture in similar circumstances in 1928?
Not good.

2.
The article pretends to see ahead the Clash of Civilizations.
Who are these civilizations?
Do al-Qaeda, of Tanzeem-e-Islami have enough members to have the status of civilizations?
I don't think so.

 

[Bruce Monkhouse]

That post made no sense at all.........relax, take your time and try again.

 

[George Wallace]

2.
The article pretends to see ahead the Clash of Civilizations.
Who are these civilizations?
Do al-Qaeda, of Tanzeem-e-Islami have enough members to have the status of civilizations?
I don't think so.

So, you are of the opinion that they don't.  That their beliefs are not lost in the Dark Ages.  That they, along with their Religious beliefs have advanced beyond fanaticism and that they have advanced in their social mores to the stage that they are accepting of all as equals in the eyes of their Gods.  That they harbour no ill wills towards their neighbours.

I think you are one of two things:  Living in a fantasy world or a borderline "Racist" walking through life with blinders on, crying foul whenever anyone mentions your religion in any way other than what you perceive as being the truth, right or wrong.  You are not a moderate open to discussion, but a fanatic who doesn't believe he could be wrong.

 

[bilton090]

   George you hit the nail on the head with that one. I'm still trying to under stand what Flanker is saying except that he doesn't like  the way we are picking on his religion, but sometime's I'm as brite as 2wt. light bulb.

          I'm still a little F-ed up from my over 6 months outside the wire, but the people are starting to get there s**t togetter.

 

[Franko]

I'm really trying to understand why you make a post Flanker, see that someone has responded, then edit your post.

Quote from: Flanker on Today at 10:32:40

« Last Edit: Today at 10:38:45 by Flanker »

Such tactics at best show that you are trying to cover your tracks and put on the best show for the masses, to your own benefit and not to the topic at hand.

I suggest that you think before you hit the post button in the future.

The ball is now in your court.

The Army.ca Staff

 

[Flip]

I suspect Flanker is trying to manuever us in a fairly specific direction.

I think he wants us to admit we (the west) are at war with Islam.
We're not, but that's Osama's spin on it.

If you remove the distinction between his idea of what an Islamist is
and the commonly accepted meaning of the term, that's how it looks.

In a way I agree, we don't label the "bad guys" very well.
Militant Islam is a better handle - I like Islamofascists , but doesn't
roll off the tongue.

No, I don't think we see religious indignation here - this is political.

Flanker, this is a pretty thoughtful,and logical bunch of people.
Your angleing is getting old.

 

[armyvern]

I suspect Flanker is trying to manuever us in a fairly specific direction.

I think he wants us to admit we (the west) are at war with Islam.
We're not, but that's Osama's spin on it.

If you remove the distinction between his idea of what an Islamist is
and the commonly accepted meaning of the term, that's how it looks.

In a way I agree, we don't label the "bad guys" very well.
Militant Islam is a better handle - I like Islamofascists , but doesn't
roll off the tongue.

No, I don't think we see religious indignation here - this is political.

Flanker, this is a pretty thoughtful,and logical bunch of people.
Your angleing is getting old.

I'd agree with you flip ... save for the fact that the Ruxted article etc all do specifcly state: Militant Islam

he's trolling ... plain and simple. He knows full well what he's up to, and it's already been pointed out to him that the Militant Islam distinction is there ... and is made by those western governments and Canadian soldiers he now profess' to push as "in a war against Islam."

It's bull, he knows it. But then ... it's so easy to ignore the facts while safe and snug in your bed back in Canada. And damned be those who have gone there, seen it, and done it and know the difference because we are all just a bunch of brainwashed uneducated shits apparently. None of your opionins or facts matter to people like this ... who just love to hate you for protecting their ass' here at home and for aiding the oppressed abroad.

I'm putting him on ignore now ... not worth burning off the calories for typing on my keyboard ...

 

[Franko]

And damned be those who have gone there, seen it, and done it and know the difference because we are all just a bunch of brainwashed uneducated shits apparently. None of your opionins or facts matter to people like this ... who just love to hate you for protecting their ***' here at home and for aiding the oppressed abroad.

Kinda interesting that I know of at least 4 Muslims that have gone over and didn't have a problem with their moral compass at all.

But I guess that they are the infidels....not the Taliban, Al Quaida and their supporters.

Regards

 

[Flanker]

I suspect Flanker is trying to manuever us in a fairly specific direction.

I think he wants us to admit we (the west) are at war with Islam.
We're not, but that's Osama's spin on it.

If you remove the distinction between his idea of what an Islamist is
and the commonly accepted meaning of the term, that's how it looks.

In a way I agree, we don't label the "bad guys" very well.
Militant Islam is a better handle - I like Islamofascists , but doesn't
roll off the tongue.

No, I don't think we see religious indignation here - this is political.

Not at all, I don't push anyone to war at Islam. Instead, that is exactly what I want we all have to avoid.
I just found the article a bit provocative (or generalizing/passionate/emotional, whatever you like the most) in that sense.

Anyway, there seems to be a common consensus as to a clear distinction between religion and extremism calling itself the same name.
Thanks for your contribution, in particular ArmyVern and Flip.
Bilton090, your sincere PM is also appreciated.

 

[KevinB]

Someone call for an Infidel...  ;D

  I work day in and out with Iraqi's trying to rebuild their country, none with his head above his beltline (as opposed to H-U-A or H-I-S) can believe that this is a war on Islam -- it is a war against Islamofascists who seek to destroy ANYONE who does not adhere to their perverted version.

 

[GUNS]

Flanker, for the benefit of those who use this forum. Could you please fill in your profile. ie: military/civvy/student, age. etc.etc.

Would be nice to know your background as to your experience on this subject.

Amuse me.

 

[Flip]

Flanker, for the benefit of those who use this forum. Could you please fill in your profile. ie: military/civvy/student, age. etc.etc.

Would be nice to know your background as to your experience on this subject.

Amuse me.

Me too.... ;D

 

[Edward Campbell]

I agree, broadly, with the contention that there is too much anti-Islam sentiment abroad and, consequently, too little focus on the various and sundry Arabist, extremist and fundamentalist Islamic movements out there (many loosely affiliated) which are our real enemies.

As Ruxted said, “… this new war is not between nation states or even traditional, ‘national’ sub-national groups … Since their inception the mujahideen have been pan-Islamic in nature … The moral and religious power of Islam … has been harnessed for evil ends … This new, long war is being waged with guns and bombs in Afghanistan and Iraq, as it is with words in mosques in Marseilles and Montreal and in the salons of political and media heavyweights in Georgetown, and with money in Geneva … the enemy plans a super-national Muslim world – one firmly rooted in 12th century Arab culture.”

Islam, per se, is no more the root cause of Islamist terrorism than Catholicism was the root cause of the IRA’s campaign of terrorism.

Infidel-6 has it about right, even though I don’t like the term Islamofascists even though I think  the various movements are essentially fascist in nature (as defined by Britt, Lyon, et al).

The problem for Ruxted is to present a clear, concise explanation of a complex subject: in this case the analog of the threat we, in the secular, liberal West (and the secular, conservative East, too, I hasten to add) face in 2007 to that which we faced some sixty-five to seventy years ago and to explain that seventy (sadly, now seventy-one) fatalities have forced our attention away from the big issue and on to a sideshow. The ‘war’ is not with Islam but the enemy is trying to conscript Islam into its army.

 

[Brad Sallows]

If the factions have political control, it doesn't make much difference.  We once were at war with Germany and Japan, not just the Nazis and militarist faction.  How useful were appeals to the German and Japanese people that we were at war with their governments, not them?  As long as the people were either content or lacked the courage to overthrow those in control, their resources were at the command of the factions.

It is necessary to at least neutralize the passive contributors as well as defeat the active ones.  In that respect, one is "at war" with the passive elements until the aim is achieved.