matuski
Footballguy
It is the age old routine. People do awful stuff with religion as their shield, members of that religion argue they aren't representative of said religion.
Chicken or the egg?
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.
When do we go in and wipe out ISIS? (3 Viewers)
- Thread starter Otis
- Start date
Chicken or the egg?
TobiasFunke
Footballguy
We can agree that it's not worded as well as it could be
I don't really find that troubling, though.
The Commish
Footballguy
I'm not sure this is the reason we shouldn't be on our moral high horses personally. By this logic, all Muslims are "guilty" for what ISIS is doing. I know I wasn't alive when the Crusades were taking place. Lots of vicious people doing vicious things under the guise of Christianity doesn't mean that all Christians are "guilty". There are plenty of reasons this country needs to get over ourselves and climb down out of the ivory tower, but this isn't one of them. Terrorism knows no bounds. If one wants to label what's going on here as Islamic terrorism and harp on them because that's what Islam supposedly teaches, go for it. However, if you're a Christian, be prepared to have the Crusades labeled Christian terrorism.
However, none of the labeling should place "guilt" on any of the folks NOT committing the acts. That's just silly. These people are responsible for their acts regardless of what excuse they create to justify them
PatsWillWin
Footballguy
Way to send out the bat signal for Tim.If you are serious (apparently you are?), it appears you want to get into a comparison of which list of atrocities is worse?Why?Way to set the bar so low.. made it easy.
If our President is comparing the acts of ISIS to the Crusades, it can't be based solely on burning people alive. Do you believe that those in the Crusades did some of the other atrocities that ISIS is doing? Selling 10 year old girls into prostitution? Burying mentally handicapped children alive?
I would need you to assign a point system to each atrocity then we can do a fantasy torture draft and see who wins. The losing team can say they weren't quite as awful as the other, amiright?
matuski
Footballguy
I'll be damned.. just when I think to myself "I probably won't find this exact example in the book":jamny said:
Numbers 31:17 "Now kill all the boys. And kill every woman who has slept with a man, but save for yourselves every girl who has never slept with a man."
Last edited by a moderator:
roadkill1292
Footballguy
Even on this board there is no shortage of people who staunchly believe we need the world's largest defense budget in order to intercede in cases like this. I'm not one of those people. I don't give a crap if Otis is scared.
matuski
Footballguy
I'll just keep pointing to the region's history over the last few millenia, including our own efforts in several decades.
Stuff is just gonna grow another head somewhere else.
Last edited by a moderator:
jamny
Footballguy
BustedKnuckles
Footballguy
ISIS and other such groups are teaching kids as young as 3 to hate us and anyone else that doesnt believe what they believe...its never going to change or end
jonessed
Footballguy
Obviously not, but I find it hard to believe it wasn't done. The world was quite brutal at that time.
Either way it has nothing to do with what's going on now. It was a silly comment by Obama and I doubt he makes that same mistake again.
CowboysFromHell
Footballguy
I think this is why it's much better to have Jordan and/or other ME countries go in and wipe them out instead of us doing it. Let the region address their own problems! Yeah, they still hate the West, but it's exactly because of us getting involved over there militarily that gave rise to that hatred in the first place.
jamny
Footballguy
I'm not naïve enough to believe it was never done, but this is a wholesale method being deployed by ISIS. Not some random individuals. This is accepted practice.
Fennis
Footballguy
I'm not sure what point you are making. In the Crusades they ate children, so there is that. There were plenty acts of barbarism. I would be shocked to find out that they didn't rape those they conquested.
The Commish
Footballguy
Yeah...no idea where that's going. It's an illustration that adultery is punishable by death. Odd thing is, there is never a mention about men being killed because they were doing the same thing. Something I've never understood. Of course, this was an illustration of a specific problem that was going on at the time and what the punishment should be for that problem.
The Commish
Footballguy
CowboysFromHell
Footballguy
This is very well said.
Personally, I would label both ISIS as "Islamic terrorists" and the Crusades as "Christian terrorists", so I pass your test.
And I agree with the last part as well. I don't want to blame ALL Muslims, or ALL Christians, only the ones that are committing the actual evil acts.
ETA: The reason I would label these groups as religious terrorists is because they are using their religion to justify their acts. That does not mean the entire religion is at fault. It doesn't even mean the terrorists actually believe what they are preaching.
Last edited by a moderator:
jonessed
Footballguy
I imagine the fact that we spend $1 billion a year funding the Jordanian military isn't lost on them.No one in the Middle East has the military capability of seriously damaging ISIS. That doesn't mean we should send in troops, but ISIS isn't going anywhere unless we get involved. Allowing them to essentially carve out their own country was a huge mistake, but it's done.
Last edited by a moderator:
The Commish
Footballguy
So really the only place we differ on this is I'd call them all terrorists and leave it at that. That's the primary issue as far as I'm concerned. I don't really care what they're using as their excuse. It's of little significance to me.This is very well said.
Personally, I would label both ISIS as "Islamic terrorists" and the Crusades as "Christian terrorists", so I pass your test.
And I agree with the last part as well. I don't want to blame ALL Muslims, or ALL Christians, only the ones that are committing the actual evil acts.
ETA: The reason I would label these groups as religious terrorists is because they are using their religion to justify their acts. That does not mean the entire religion is at fault. It doesn't even mean the terrorists actually believe what they are preaching.
CowboysFromHell
Footballguy
Good point. I guess our hands are bloody no matter what. It's a mess no matter what we do. Can't sit by and watch. Anything we do to influence the outcome usually ends up backfiring in terms of hatred towards us and/or the next group popping up and using our own weapons, technology, etc. against us.I imagine the fact that we spend $1 billion a year funding the Jordanian military isn't lost on them.No one in the Middle East has the military capability of seriously damaging ISIS. That doesn't mean we should send in troops, but ISIS isn't going anywhere unless we get involved. Allowing them to essentially carve out their own country was a huge mistake, but it's done.
Fennis
Footballguy
CowboysFromHell
Footballguy
It appears so. I can't remember which side you fall on in the religious debates, but as an atheist, I see all religion as having the potential to be used as a tool to make good people do bad things. But, I'll also admit that even if religion were to go away entirely, the next group of thugs would no doubt come up with some other crazy ideology to justify their quest for power.So really the only place we differ on this is I'd call them all terrorists and leave it at that. That's the primary issue as far as I'm concerned. I don't really care what they're using as their excuse. It's of little significance to me.This is very well said.
Personally, I would label both ISIS as "Islamic terrorists" and the Crusades as "Christian terrorists", so I pass your test.
And I agree with the last part as well. I don't want to blame ALL Muslims, or ALL Christians, only the ones that are committing the actual evil acts.
ETA: The reason I would label these groups as religious terrorists is because they are using their religion to justify their acts. That does not mean the entire religion is at fault. It doesn't even mean the terrorists actually believe what they are preaching.
SaintsInDome2006
Footballguy
There is not a Christian in the western world who feels a stake in what people say about the Crusades, considering the kingdom ended/happened around 1090. The only people who care about that are extremist fundamentalists.
jamny
Footballguy
The Commish
Footballguy
Pretty much the same for me as a believer in Christ. Religion has been and always will be a tool. How it's used is a reflection of the individual not the belief system. Bad people are going to be bad regardless of the presence of religion.It appears so. I can't remember which side you fall on in the religious debates, but as an atheist, I see all religion as having the potential to be used as a tool to make good people do bad things. But, I'll also admit that even if religion were to go away entirely, the next group of thugs would no doubt come up with some other crazy ideology to justify their quest for power.So really the only place we differ on this is I'd call them all terrorists and leave it at that. That's the primary issue as far as I'm concerned. I don't really care what they're using as their excuse. It's of little significance to me.This is very well said.
Personally, I would label both ISIS as "Islamic terrorists" and the Crusades as "Christian terrorists", so I pass your test.
And I agree with the last part as well. I don't want to blame ALL Muslims, or ALL Christians, only the ones that are committing the actual evil acts.
ETA: The reason I would label these groups as religious terrorists is because they are using their religion to justify their acts. That does not mean the entire religion is at fault. It doesn't even mean the terrorists actually believe what they are preaching.
The Commish
Footballguy
There are plenty of people who care. That's why it's used as an "example" over and over in religious debates. Those using it know it gets under the skin of a lot of folks. If they didn't care, it wouldn't bother them. One can throw it out there as stinky bait all they want as far as I'm concerned. Helps me understand who's who and what they actually know. It's a silly argument, but there are plenty who take issue with it.
matuski
Footballguy
Observing that a group is accepting of its own actions does not distinguish it from another. It is stating the obvious.
Your focus on distinguishing atrocity from atrocity is weird.
Last edited by a moderator:
Dinsy Ejotuz
Footballguy
And yet they rally like a stirred nest of hornets every time it gets brought up.
Lutherman2112
Footballguy
Yes. You might want to read about Papal Indulgences during the Crusades. These "Indulgences" offered forgiveness of all sins committed on the part of the Crusader.
The worst was the siege of Constantinople during the Fourth Crusade when nuns opposed to the crusade were targeted for rape.
RBM
Footballguy
Well yeah, especially when it's in the context of being compared in some way, shape or form to these islamic terrorists. Do you blame them?
tommyboy
Footballguy
CowboysFromHell
Footballguy
Hmmmm. I guess it depends on how you interpret your religion. Is the Bible morally superior to the Quran? I don't think so. Literal interpretations of either one can lead to belief systems that are morally inferior to modern secular morality. That's because our society today is morally superior to what it was when those books were written.
Dinsy Ejotuz
Footballguy
If that's what you think he's saying I can see why you're upset.
But it's not what he's saying. He's saying that all religions have the capacity for good and for evil. And to pretend that an entire religion is bad based on the actions of a minority of its adherents during one particular time is pretty narrow minded. To help make that point to skeptical Christians he's pointing out that Christianity, as a religion, has done its share of evil too.
He's not equating today's Christians with ISIS. He's pointing out that condemning a faith and all its followers is pretty silly and that people who do that might want to take a step back and look at their own history.
Last edited by a moderator:
cstu
Footballguy
I completely disagree with the bolded. Now instead of us having to go after them, Muslims are doing it. The only way to win the war on religious extremists is to get non-extremists Muslims to fight them. Mission accomplished.
jonessed
Footballguy
You're right. Allowing ISIS to carve out a nation-state was pure genius. The Jordanians are sure to annihilate them.
Fennis
Footballguy
If you don't like that they control some territory inside of Iraq, sounds like your beef is with Iraq.
You're right. Allowing ISIS to carve out a nation-state was pure genius. The Jordanians are sure to annihilate them.
tri-man 47
Footballguy
The increased attacks following the death of the Jordanian pilot (and the fight against ISIS in general) must create a lot of frustration for the African countries trying to deal with Boko Haram. They gotta be thinking "could you send a few bombers down this way for a bit?"
TheIronSheik
SUPER ELITE UPPER TIER
I tend more to believe that she was killed BECAUSE of the air strike. But even then, I don't believe anything they say.
G
General Tso
Guest
So the excuses and the diversions continue, but I keep coming back to the same question over and over... At what point do you start blaming the religion? I know it's the topic nobody wants to talk about, but aren't we getting to that point? I'm 47 years old and we've seen problems come and go in the world - Communism, fascism, tyrants, territorial battles... But the common theme throughout my lifetime has been this seemingly intractable problem of violence and terrorism coming from the Middle East.
It was initially painted as the Palestinian problem. I've also heard it attributed to post-Colonialism, crooked oil-empires, civil wars, poverty, lack of education...
The Israeli / Palestinian issue has gotten better. Land deals have been made. Tyrants have been overthrown. Foreign occupying forces have come and gone. The situation should be getting better at some point. But it's not. It continues to get worse beyond belief.
I'm left with very few options to explain the continued violence and insanity. By process of elimination, it is absolutely fair and reasonable to start questioning the religion itself - a religion that has as one its basic written tenets a passage called "the verse of the sword" which conveniently allows radical Muslims to commit atrocities in the the name of that religion.
Probably a topic for another thread, but it does tie into my main complaint with Obama's handling of this issue and his stubborn insistence not to even use the term "Radical Islam". If religion is not at the core of the problem here, then what else is it? What explains the "whack-a-mole" we've been playing in the Middle East for the last half a century? I'd love to hear an intelligent explanation.
Sometimes the simple answer is the correct one. Fascism was a failed concept, as was Communism. The Muslim world is still living in the dark ages and at what point do we start to call out the obvious - that their views on violence, intolerance, and misogyny just don't work in the 21st century? And why is it inappropriate to ask these questions?
It was initially painted as the Palestinian problem. I've also heard it attributed to post-Colonialism, crooked oil-empires, civil wars, poverty, lack of education...
The Israeli / Palestinian issue has gotten better. Land deals have been made. Tyrants have been overthrown. Foreign occupying forces have come and gone. The situation should be getting better at some point. But it's not. It continues to get worse beyond belief.
I'm left with very few options to explain the continued violence and insanity. By process of elimination, it is absolutely fair and reasonable to start questioning the religion itself - a religion that has as one its basic written tenets a passage called "the verse of the sword" which conveniently allows radical Muslims to commit atrocities in the the name of that religion.
Probably a topic for another thread, but it does tie into my main complaint with Obama's handling of this issue and his stubborn insistence not to even use the term "Radical Islam". If religion is not at the core of the problem here, then what else is it? What explains the "whack-a-mole" we've been playing in the Middle East for the last half a century? I'd love to hear an intelligent explanation.
Sometimes the simple answer is the correct one. Fascism was a failed concept, as was Communism. The Muslim world is still living in the dark ages and at what point do we start to call out the obvious - that their views on violence, intolerance, and misogyny just don't work in the 21st century? And why is it inappropriate to ask these questions?
Last edited:
cstu
Footballguy
TheIronSheik
SUPER ELITE UPPER TIER
Also, why is gang violence still a problem in America? Maybe capitalism is a failure. What should be done about it?
CowboysFromHell
Footballguy
Maybe it's human nature to slaughter each other in the quest for money and power.
Fennis
Footballguy
The Commish
Footballguy
I'll take a shot at this. This kind of fighting will always exist. As long as there are conflicting positions or conflicting visions of "how things should be" the fighting will always exist. It doesn't matter what the fighters use as their tool of choice, they are still going to fight.
lod01
Footballguy
Pretty much. Take away law and order in this country and we go back into mid-evil times within a month. The exact same things we see in the middle east would be happening here.
They live in a mind set where might makes right. Power is taken, not ceded. They are not thugs because they are muslim, they are thugs without regard to religion. In that part of the world, religion conveys undue power, so those that seek power utilize the biggest weapon - not because they adhere to the religion, but because reliance on that religion lends credence to their power grab.
Similar threads
