Newgrounds.com — Everything, By Everyone.

At 12/28/14 01:48 AM, Ranger2 wrote:

At 12/27/14 03:35 PM, Lumber-Jax12 wrote: if you have that much disdain for this country, than at the least we can agree the U.S. and by extension the west is the lesser of two evils.

I don't have disdain for the United States. I love my country. But I have a different perception of it than you do. You could say that America is the lesser of two evils, but evil doesn't factor into my thought process. Even if ISIS were tolerant and democratic, I would still oppose it as long as it remains a threat to US security and interests.

I wasn't calling you out specifically on the disdain portion, just as a sidenote since there are people out there who despise this country, despite being from Western nations and therefore the goals and ideals upheld by ours would be near identical to theirs.

I'm not trying to just do a profile about me here, just making a poin.

I guess you could I'm still say I am somewhat of a newboy (when compared to some of the others on here with profiles dating all the way back to the previous decade).I know I've contributed a few posts to this bbs, as it's really the only forum i frequent at all anymore.

That being said I'm not entirely that active here, I'll pop back in every once in a while and wouldn't put it past some of y'all to have forgotten about me. Point being though, I'm only really back on now since it's winter break for school.

So in regards to fresh blood, I think some people just don't have time to go on here, not that it's some sort of begrudging commitment. But when faced with the option of staying up at night debating politics or going out with friends, most are gonna choose the latter.

I don't really think there's a real issue in the proper way of debating here, sure some people get upset every now and then, and there are some on this forum who honestly have no business being here.

Not to undermine the thread, I think its a good idea, but Politics is Politics, people are gonna get heated and that's to be expected.

I do think a better tone when addressing people could be used, and yeah a select few here do come off as elitists , but I don't think that'd be enough to drive people away.

And I understand that and agree to an extent o the basis of furthering a nations own interests.

But taking away the fact that you and I are Americans, of the two entities here, i hope everyone in this forum can agree the furthering of American interests over that of IS's is clearly preferable, and if you have that much disdain for this country, than at the least we can agree the U.S. and by extension the west is the lesser of two evils.

As simply put as I can make it.

At 12/26/14 01:14 AM, Ranger2 wrote:

At 12/25/14 10:33 PM, Lumber-Jax12 wrote:

st human nature and goes far beyond that of just war.

But in terms of morality, Al-Qaeda may have been looking out for its own (like minded Sunnis), but to put them again on equal playing field with any western nation is absurd.

We can argue who's more moral 'til the cows come home. My point is, it doesn't matter who is more moral.

The reason we always go to war should be based on morality.

I believe what we are doing in the Middle East is just. Did we lose our way during the war, sure Iraq was a mistake, and that's another argument we can get it in, but I'm sure with this thread being 7 pages deep that whole misadventure has already been discussed and bringing it up would be beating a dead horse.

There will be a lot we won't know about, in regards to the actions of JSOC and the CIA/FBI, but in this day and age keeping things under wraps is extremely difficult.

If you're trying to insinuate that there have been multiple My Lais committed by our special operation units or SAD, I'd beg to differ. BlackWater couldn't even get away with what they did as a private institution. What makes you think an entity as large as they wouldn't spill something as grave as that?

You forget human nature doesn't simply stop because you look at an organization as a single entity, instead of the collection of people with multiple loyalties (as if members of DevGru would sooner view themselves as JSOC members over those of the USN).

People talk, that's just how it is. No one can stay silent forever, secrets are hard to keep, even if it's your profession to do so.

He'll we already even know the identity of the man who killed Bin Laden, something we never should have known as declared by these shadowy government figures.

EDIT: If the powers at be saw it fit to send assassination squads to do their bidding that'd be one thing, like a sniper or using poison. But since you mentioned drones, and seeing as how that's what the govt has started using, I should mention dropping a hellfire missile from out of the sky is about as clandestine as a sending a black operative undercover to Japan.

Again people talk, many of these jihadis roll with their families and friends, you don't think they'd instantly hit up social media if Omar and his boys were turned to Chechen ash if their home was instantly reduced to rubble from above?

Look simply put, I understand the notion that as x I support x against y.

That's just human nature and goes far beyond that of just war.

But in terms of morality, Al-Qaeda may have been looking out for its own (like minded Sunnis), but to put them again on equal playing field with any western nation is absurd.

You think any territory under their control would be able to experience the basic rights many of the nations fighting against them enjoy?

You think the same can be said of those in Raqqa?

Sure the U.S. is not without it's own far share of problems, but for Gods sake we haven't had mass exodus of populations fleeing their homes in utter fear of what we can do to them.

The CIA is getting the shit grilled out of them for at worst subjecting a select few of our enemies to water boarding and a week straight of listening to heavy metal on repeat.

On the other side IS is mounting the heads of their enemies on pikes and displaying them for the world to see, butchering children like you would sway a fly simply because its presence is irritating to you, forcing thousands of women into a backward way of life with many of their rights suppressed at best, and forced into service as a rape slave at worst.

So again, I'd rather my country be invaded by a western power than my town by these demonic nutjobs.

Just to preface this: I respect you, Warforger, so if at any point this seems like an attack (it shouldn't as I'll try to give out my points as politely as possible, but this is the politics bbs, and we all know how quick tempers can flare here) it's not.

First I think in times of war: attacks on civilians are unfortunate, but again inevitable byproduct of war. Now I agree the names by which we call these acts are pure semantics. Dead is dead, the means by which an individual is eliminated matters little in theory. Dropping a nuke on Japanese cities, brings about the same result as gassing Jews, Poles, Slavs, and other undesirables: Death.

Now than, debating the morality of these actions, that's where we run into problems, but again that's for another topic.

You claim terrorism is simply acts of terror, and again I agree wholeheartedly. But there is a thing as connotation and denotation.

When ISIS as a state entity commits the atrocities that it does locally, the names by which we call them is irrelevant.

However, the connotation of terrorism in the modern era, is that of an act of terror, committed by individuals unaligned with a state for a "higher purpose".

The reason I add that higher purpose is because there are many despicable acts that come to mind that have not been referred to as terrorism, even though they both are acts of violence by individual(s).

Newton and Aurora were acts that bring forth calls of crazed gunmen and calls for mental illness/gun-control, though the actions themselves are no less destructive or terrifying than say what the Tsarnaev boys did.

Now with Al-Qaeda. We were never at war with them prior to 9/11. Sure I'd be stupid to deny that we ever engaged in covert actions against them, but when Bin Laden saw fit to attack U.S. civilian personnel, that was an act of terrorism.

In fact the very first attack on Civilians conducted by AQ was through indiduals linked to them in the '93 WTC bombings. The most the U.S. did directly against the organization was raiding the home of a former special forces member who left to join up with UBL and his boys over in S.W. Asia.

What we did against Lebannon, Egypt, Iran (not that he'd give a shit about that, but it's simply a notable M.E. country where admittedly America swung it's dick around), Nasser, Qaddafi, etc. does not matter, because those individuals are NOT A.Q.

Claiming to attack the U.S. on their behalf when there was nothing we did before them to warrant such a reaction, THAT is terrorism.

Now after subsequent assaults on them, whatever actions they do against us, can be labelled as an act of war, or terrorism. Again it does not matter the label once exchanges on both sides have been dealt.

However I do take issue with you comparing the actions the United States, and other members of ISAF, and the coalition have conducted in the two wars (let's not play stupid and make it seem as if those other countries have not conducted in similar behavior and the U.S. is to bear all the responsibility alone.), to those of ISIS, the Taliban, AQAP, HAMAS, and others as similar.

And I'm hoping I am misinterpreting what you are saying in regards to that, because if you are trying to argue that both sides are on an equal moral high ground, you are soundly mistaken.

But again I hope that is not the case. If any of this came of as an insult to your character, that is my fault, and I will try to use less harsh language and phrasing in my response to yours.

Seriously what is with these people. I don't think I've ever heard a single positive thing about Chechens, they always seem to be in the headlines doing god knows what. It's hard to sympathize with them, sure the Russian have been world class pricks to them, but come on its hard to feel sorry when your people are one of the more notable mercenaries. Its bad enough a good portion of then wage jihad in the Caucasus and middle east, but then they're in the ukraine (as if the jihadist version was bad, the prorussian Kadyrovites are worse).

Then offourse we have the wonderful Tsarnaev brothers.

I'm not saying the man sucks, I lovea good bit of his films, I just find him overrated is all, though thats my opinion Too many people hail him as a visionary and other such things, when I don't think its necessarily true. Again my opinion though.

I was just saying that i prefer casino to pulp fiction, though that could have been because i saw it only recently, and by then I've seen samuel jackson act like a pissed off badass one too many times, and the movie was overhyped before i saw it so expectations were a little high.

At 8/12/14 09:21 PM, Bremaine wrote: I'd say he's a top tier director, but Scorsese is the best director in my opinion. Tarantino makes awesome movies and all, but I don' see him being the best. But He is one of the best around, I'll say that for sure.

Agreed, Many of his movies are tributes and as such they pale in comparison to the true gems of the genres he tries so hard to emulate.

If django comes on I'll spend maybe half an hour watching it, depending where it is in the film. But if any scene of Good, Bad and the Ugly (or any other clint western for that matter) comes on, i aint moving til the credits are shown. Same goes for films like Casino when compared to Pulp fiction, etc.

Now Scorsese...

I still am waiting for a trial until making a certain judgement, but I'd be lying if I said after reviewing the case it appears the officer did indeed act out. The fact that the police haven't shown any evidence at all to support their defense just seems more suspicious than anything.

At 8/13/14 01:08 PM, Feoric wrote:

At 8/13/14 12:26 PM, Lumber-Jax12 wrote: I have a hard time believing this lone officer appeared out of the blue and demanded their surrender in such a manner. I don't care if you're the biggest racist in hicksville, USA. Shit like that does not happen, in broad day light to less.

First, blatant police discrimination and cases of brutality are not rare. At all. It does happen, all the time. Second, the officer didn't immediately demand surrender, he demanded they walk on the sidewalk in an allegedly combative manner.

Obviously police discrimination is a thing, that I'm not contesting.

But an officer driving up to these kids and saying "get the fuck down" for no reason then shooting the kid is hard to believe. Considering all the shit thats erupted now from ferguson, it's only more a harder sell.

Again if hes proven guilty than by all means let him fry, any person who would kill randomly like that in a fit of rage is an animal.

I just would prefer to believe the men and women who are called to protect and serve are above blatant and arbitrary murder, and if that was the case its unfortunate but a rare event.

Now a person resisting arrest or making a threatening gesture, which would cause some to assume he was going for a gun or such some weapon in common.

Now again, wait for the trial, if one never comes to light then thats the crime. But until then lets see.

Let's wait for more information to be presented. Push this to trial, if the cops guilty than he'll face necessary punishment, if not than he's free to walk.

I have a hard time believing this lone officer appeared out of the blue and demanded their surrender in such a manner. I don't care if you're the biggest racist in hicksville, USA. Shit like that does not happen, in broad day light to less.

If this is true, then by all means jail the son of a bitch. But until then lets see a trial before we start jumping the gun.

Regardless of what your beliefs are you are innocent until proven guilty.

At 8/10/14 01:18 PM, Feoric wrote: I don't think I'll ever understand how you can become an ISIS supporter when you live in a first world country. These guys are in the same league as the Khmer Rouge. It's hard to imagine how anyone could be more radicalized than them.

I equate it to just social rejects asserting dominance or some other such belief.
I sincerely believe there to be no difference between men like Adam Lanza, James Holme, etc and these IS thugs. The only difference being these men felt lost and angry searching for a reason to project this pent up anger and coming up with their own convoluted reasons.

Then despicable men like Al Baghdadi, cunning enough to manipulate such feelings offer some sort of support group for like minded guys wanting to unleash their violence.

I fail to see how this war is unstoppable, when the rebels are trapped in their last bastions and getting shelled none stop. This war will be over in a few weeks unless Putin does something really stupid.

I agree with a lot of what you said, I would not say the US is not particularly adept at unconventional, we did make considerable gains in Iraq.

Regardless of what people say the surge was effective and by 2011 Iraq was at least stable.
Now like you said yes, you can't win such wars militarily. Much of that stability was these insurgent elements consolidating strength and waiting for the us and its allies to leave.

Our special forces and our allies, particularly the brit's SAS are more than adept at this type of warfare. Their records speak for themselves. I think it's wise and most likely probable that Such forces will be deployed in Iraq.

Now this doesn't mean they'll fight directly as they could simply offer morale support and training to the Iraqis to help them fight IS. I think such forces deployed to Kurdistan is key.

Shiite Iraq will not fall to IS, Iran won't allow it. I doubt they have the strength to topple both Maliki and Assad.
They must be thin at this point. I can't imagine this momentum will continue, especially now with combined pressure from outside nations.

Maliki needs to go though, he's a despot and has brought on this on himself.

At 8/9/14 04:35 AM, Korriken wrote:

At 8/9/14 03:13 AM, Lumber-Jax12 wrote:

That is the problem wort g discussing, because if ISIS can raise their black flag over Erbil, then we're fucked.

Thankfully Obama has FINALLY decided to do something about that. Better late than never I suppose. the US military bombing ISIS back to the cesspool they emerged from will hopefully save civilians from their brutality. It's just a shame they weren't stopped before they took over several cities and orchestrated massacres in each one.

On reflection it's my bad to have detracted from this, still i believe this to be a bigger problem than gaza.

Hopefully we also throw in some special forces to help the kurds. Also this must be a multi-national operation else it will fail as people will simply cry how the US is back their old tricks again or some such nonsense while this threat, which quite frankly i think to be worse than Al Qaeda was is allowed to remain intact because of some public opinion bullshit.

Plus it wouldn't hurt to have SAS and GROM back to help us.

Seriously fuck this thread now.

The world has much much bigger problems on its hands than this side show. ISIS invading Kurdistan is a much more worrying reality than this. It gets annoying now that we all sit here talking about this when 100x the amount of people have been killed in iraq and syria and now this monstrosity calling itself a caliphate is raping the land they touch.

That is the problem wort g discussing, because if ISIS can raise their black flag over Erbil, then we're fucked.

You know what fair enough, I'm not to big to admit it, I'll try to find out more on Hamas, do I still see them as a less favorable to Israel yes.

I just want to ask this to you, they are know to use civilians as meat shields for their rockets, I have read countless news stories on both sides which assert this claim. Clearly you and I can agree regardless of Israel's crimes they do not put their own in harms way.

Second my claim about Israel being an aggressor and yet hamas still to be blame is like the analogy of a hungry wolf yards away from your flock, and you shoot it before it can do anything. Again you may see that as wrong and if it prove me wrong. But my point still is that they have vowed to not rest until Israel is ashes, thats written in their constitution.

If i am wrong on all account show me the necessary material and I'll rethink my position.

This is directed at Feoric, don't get the impression that i didn't read your post I did, anyway here goes.

My question to you is about Hamas, as you yourself said in an earlier post that they are a violent group, but i get the feeling you see them as legitimate. And I say that not as in their right to exist but their right to speak for the palestinians in Gaza, Am i wrong in assuming this on you?

Also while I understand that one lone wolf does not represent an entire organization, i believe its a stretch to make it seem as if this happened out of nowhere, this current invasion that is. While yes Israel maybe the aggressor I think its foolish to make this out to be like Netanyahu is abusing the event to wage war. Did he start it yes, and did he use the opportunity to go to war over this yes, but heres my take.

This invasion has been tense and the Israelis have met fierce resistance. This wasn't unexpected, it was planned. What this was is Sarajevo, 1914. In both cases both sides were waiting for war, they just needed an excuse, and Israel happened to jump the gun.

Now this does paint them as more than just defending themselves, but really is it any better to wait for the inevitable attacks?

Also mr reasoning for wanting Hamas gone is simple, no matter how you slice it they are the main agitators at the moment. Has Israel done wrong in the past, sure. But are they in any shape or form worse than Hamas no. Third when i was referring to their election i was insinuating that they seized power through back channels and not an actual election much like how our boy Vlad does up north.

At 8/8/14 09:53 AM, Feoric wrote:

At 8/8/14 01:00 AM, Lumber-Jax12 wrote: Again, end the conflict, kick out Hamas, and work to better the lives of these unfortunate people is my overall message.

How is kicking out a democratically elected government a good way to help people? When did this ever do anything good?

Gee I don't know maybe because its a terrorist organization one that im sure my government and yours probably also labels.

There are probably millions world wide in support of ISIS, just because a government's legitimate, doesn't mean its in any way a moral or ethically sound government.

I highly doubt the case is that a majority of Gaza voted for these thugs, and if they did, then hey you get what you asked for, if that be a war you could in no way shape or form win in any capacity save for some anti-Israel PR stunt than be my guest.

But I doubt thats the case and even if it is, i pity the minority who were forced to accept this grim reality now forced on them.

So it seems the battle of Donetsk is well underway.

I've seen and read a few reports on whats been happening an curious what do yall think about the possibility of Russian intervention in the region on the separatists behalf. Ive see. This floated around a bit on some sites but i can't believe Putin would be that bold. The crimea was one thing, and the way he handled it was expertly done, maybe not legal, but expertly done none the less. A full blown invasion of the Ukraine though is much harder to do.

Sure he could sell it as a 'peace-keeping' mission but given the worlds reaction over his involvement (albeit inadvertent) with the downing of MH17 he'd simply be putting the final nail in the coffin for international support and i would expect harsher sanctions.

Though then again the world did little about crimea and could care less about it anyway what with Gaza stealing the headlines, so it could be possible, i'd view it as unlikely but what do i know?

And second some have called the battle to be a new Stalingrad. Thoughts on this? I don't see the separatists as a huge challenge to the Ukrainian army. I'd imagine with most of the civilians fleeing, the style of urban warfare they'd wage would be limited as they don't have the advantage to hide behind civilians like in iraq. Also i just don't see them as being dedicated or combat ready to prolong this battle anymore than say a month or two.

Anyway thoughts on the recent development?

At 8/7/14 04:24 PM, MrPercie wrote:

At 8/4/14 08:28 PM, Lumber-Jax12 wrote: And I'd also wager that if such wanton destruction of Israel were to occur we'd see celebrations in their streets, similar to the ones during 9/11. In case y'all forgot about that little tidbit about these many "innocents".

Stop right fucking there, don't tell me your that fucking insulted by some shitty 9/11 celebrations that these people should be bombed, seriously, fuck off.

No, clearly you picked one point and stuck with it.

First lets get one thing clear, there are millions of innocents in gaza and its unfortunate they've been killed. But don't be so naive to think that there is a strong faction in the area thats vehemently anti-western to the point that yes they do celebrate our deaths as awe inspiring.

When you're born in and raised to hate the west and want to kill all the people who live in it. Thats a pity, but you don't lament the fact and sympathize to the point of inaction. I don't blame a wolf for killing sheep thats what it does and all it knows to do but its still being put down.

And for the love of god before some other idiot gets hung up on this. Im not saying wipe it off the map. What im saying is there is a severe radical element in the region, and while yes many are innocent, its very relative in certain situations where a ten year old one day is a suicide bombing jihadist the next.

Again, end the conflict, kick out Hamas, and work to better the lives of these unfortunate people is my overall message.

Ultimately the reason Gaza gets more attention is because its more inclusive.

When mexicans are killing mexicans, its brushed aside as something internal, something those outside of the area have no say in. Because when Israelis bomb Palestinians, it becomes "us" vs "them".

Its the reason the situation in syria/iraq (some one needs to coin a term that refers to both military conflicts as they're essentially the same war now, just with many changing sides) is ignored because not all Arabs can agree as to whose 'right'. But an outsider such as the jews, with whom they feuded for decades is a common enemy.

They all rally against them, so thats one aspect of this.

Secondly as Israel is considered part of the West ( as in a modern democratic country) people in the west assume it should be above it, and they more openly talk about gaza over syria, simply because its an easier conflict to follow, most can't be bothered to keep up with the intricacies of such wars in mexico/syria/iraq so they choose their humanitarian fight in what they see as a more simple fight.

And in keeping with the us vs them idea, westerners see Israel as an extension of the west, and therefore they now have a "right" to talk about the conflict.

First let me say this, since last i checked 60 Israeli soldiers have been killed, if all this war has been is random indiscriminate bombing of civilian areas how then do you think their deaths came about? A seizure caused by the realization of how overly immoral their actions are?

Or return fire of the enemy they've set out to destroy. In such a war where the aggressor has such sophistication, technology and combat prowess how then are their men dying by such numbers?

Clearly they're facing opposition at least a third of fourth of their own. So my counter is this, since no media outlet has bothered to separate combatant deaths from civilians how many of those 2k dead do you truly believe were just "innocents caught in a cross-fire"?.

Now im not saying the numbers are all Hamas but considering that the last report puts a sizable portion of deaths on males age 21-27. I don't think its a stretch to make that a good 1/3 or 1/4 have been militants too stupid to realize the beast theyve thrown themselves against.

http://time.com/3035937/gaza-israel-hamas-palestinian-casualties/

Now digest this as well. Hamas is the legal recognized government of Palestine, according to the Palestinians themselves. While I'm sure the elections were rigged, but at the same time people of violence don't rise to power by violence alone.

One man with a gun can not force his rise to power, consent does. The reality is that yes a select few pick up weapons against Israel but to paint them as a fringe group and the civilians in the middle as completely blameless is also naive.

If thats the case does no blame rest on the germans and southerners for a select few actions?

I highly doubt Hamas puts their weapons of which im sure they have few in any home. What makes more sense to force an innocent to harbor these weapons at gunpoint, or find like minded individuals willing to keep them for a greater cause?

Yes there have been hundreds killed who are completely innocent and those deaths I lament, but don't be so naive as to put Israel on the same level of morality as Hamas.

WW2 has been considered the most moral and honorable of wars, and yet still the number of civilians deaths have been placed at the millions, many of whose blood is on the allies hands.

Another thing, the amount of restraint that Israel has applied, and yes they have applied it, else gaza would not exist if they had none, would never be shown by Hamas.

And I'd also wager that if such wanton destruction of Israel were to occur we'd see celebrations in their streets, similar to the ones during 9/11. In case y'all forgot about that little tidbit about these many "innocents".

I don't agree with your views all the time, but I respect the fact that your consistent if anything.

Quite honestly I believe morally that if a land has been populated for a certain amount of time and has risen above its previous incarnation, such as America, Israel and England has done, than it belongs to them.

Though lets face it at the end of the day something is yours when you claim ownership and can guarantee that claim. Land is not an heirloom because it is stationary. It never moves and therefore can not be truly stolen, only claimed.

The crimea is russian, no one can, being the operative word here, dispute this at this point in time, though once the rebels in the east are put down i will be very interested to see what happens next.

And in regards to Kurdistan, i believe the idea of the single nation is dead, and practically impossible. Turkey and Iran will never give up their shares. But in Iraq and Syria the Kurds claim is justified, they have proven themselves capable of not only running but claiming and defending this land, therefore its theirs.

It is unfortunate what we did to the Native Americans but far too much time, and progress has passed that the idea of returning this land to them is simply retarded and quite frankly would be even more immoral to give them ownership as the disruption this would cause would be catastrophic, we have accommodate them to the best of our abilities and that is fine enough.

In regards to Palestine, Israels claim to the land is a stretch, as again far too much time has passed. But at the same time they have proven themselves worthy of it through the sheer advances they have made with the land and progress they've attained.

But also bear this in mind, Palestine has never once existed as an Independent state, at the most they have been provinces passed around from empire to empire, never once progressing or improving the land to any notable extent.

So it seems the ProRussian Insurgents have lost ground to the Ukrainians and is steadily on its way to defeat, can't quite say I'm surprised either, too many people got hung up on their SAM capabilities and mistook their advanced gear for being a harder fight than say ISIS, admittedly I myself thought that for a second.

But It seems gear is no replacement for zeal or morale, as ISIS fighters seem more disciplined, or at the least willing to throw their lives away rather than turn and run.

It seems to me this war will end quickly as the DPR is partially encircled around Donetsk, and hopefully this silly insurgency can be put to rest.

Wish the same can be said about Syria and Iraq, but if anything it seems ISIS is gaining more ground than anything, and unsettlingly so across Europe. Hopefully these goons have only played their hand and foreign intelligence services are now onto these guys, and maybe that could get somewhere in ending them.

Fair enough I'll agree with that sentiment.

Now how do you feel about government restriction on such protests? Its my understanding some European governments have been limiting these demonstrations. My other concern is that I hope intelligence agencies have infiltrated or are monitoring some of these cliques.

Now obviously the majority of these demonstrations are relatively peaceful, but I hope as soon as that black flag is raised intelligence outlets are keeping tags on just who it is holding it and screaming death to jews.

This topic is gonna digress into a religious debate, but let me say this religion or not, this behavior is intolerable.

If stripping the middle east is what you feel necessary to bring some semblance of peace than so be it, but really thats an extremely simplified idea, and without further digressing into the religious aspect of it, that is not the cause of all this unrest.

MENA has always been a turbulent region, At least since the fall of the Ottomans. Blaming religion its too easy, and disregards the underlying reason for conflict. There are millions of muslims here in the US, and it is only a select few who have gone on to devout themselves to jihad. If religion truly bred such hate and Aggression ISIS would be millions strong, and not simply several thousand disillusioned social rejects flocking to the only entity they feel truly appreciated in.

At 7/29/14 01:12 AM, Warforger wrote: My issue with this is that Islam has not lost its backbone as Christianity has in the West. In the West abandoning beliefs from your religion with contradict secular values (i.e. gay marriage or evolution) is seen as virtue rather than a lack of belief in religion. It's interesting to watch as Christians and Jews retreat from their more controversial beliefs, there are even Catholics who openly go against the Pope. Muslims in the Middle East however are proud of their religion. They're very devoted to it which is why telling them that what they should do is be less pious and forsake their beliefs because secular society doesn't like them seems a little ridiculous to me.

Im not entirely sure what your trying to say with this, the meaning that is. I agree with the assessment that the older religions have certainly folded on many issues in Western Society. although quite personally I attribute that to culture more than anything, Europeans have never been a particularly pious bunch, even the crusades where highly motivated by politics more so than religion and the protestant reformation was nothing more than a way for the various monarchs to assert their authority/independence over the pope and his pawns in the HRE.

But, and correct me if im wrong here, you almost seem to say that Muslims are less willing to change than most. I was simply saying their radical elements are much more apparent today and have ben allowed to spread across this society and they must be greatly reduced. I hope you weren't insinuating that violence is some how integral to Islam.

Every religion at one point or another has been manipulated by madmen seeking their own personal gains, it just happens to be Islam currently at the moment, as quite frankly judaism and christianity's influence has waned.

Id like to believe the first step to righting this wrong is stabilization of the Middle East, and while a controversial view, I believe allowing the Kurds to become independent and set an example to the other nations of a moderate and successful government will help. I don't trust the Sheiks of the Arabia to be our friends, nor do I consider Pakistan an ally to anyone either.

The biggest Problem i have with this argument is the need to put Hamas on an equal playing field with Israel, when in reality they are their lesser in practically every aspect.

Hamas is no legitimate political organization it is an Islamic jihadist group who has won their political power through sheer force.

Are they on the same level or threat as ISIS or Al Nusra? No. Admittedly they are more a moderate ( and i use that term lightly and somewhat oxymoronic) extremist group. However they are not a proper embodiment of Palestinian Authority, they are thugs who care more about shedding jewish blood than protecting their own. I am sorry that so many have had to die, yet at the same time the Palestinian should realize they are losing this war militarily, economically and socially.

Make no mistake I dont absolve Israel of their deeds, but bear in mind the old adage that war is hell. In war civilian casualties will happen, and in a guerrilla war those casualties are doubled if not more. And the yes Gaza is very much so an open air prison and reforms must be made to improve their condition, but at the same time the Palestinians have shown they are incapable of fixing their situation internally, and as demonstrated by their numerous wars, any peace or assistance the Israelis offer is ignored.

Israel's approach is like a hammer to deal with a fly, yes its excessive, but its not as if they haven't tried to take some precautions, which is more than what Hamas has done.

They would kill as many jews as they could get their hands on if they had the capability to do so, and since they don't they loss of life has been skewed simply because Israel has the capabilities to protect their population.

Honestly the best solution, while costly would be Israeli occupation, stamp out Hamas and try to integrate the Palestinians into Israeli culture/society. Chechens are a hardy, and fiercely independent people, but they have been subdued and the caucus is a relatively peaceful area now, sure it cost many lives and there is corruption, but the bottom line is there is finally some semblance of peace there, because the Russians hunkered down for the fight and brought order back to the region.

Israel is not Russia, despite what some would tell you they are not as overtly corrupt or harsh. If an occupation must happen then the path to peace would be much easier under an Israeli led government that of a Palestinian one which has shown time and time again, they simply can not govern themselves properly, these words are harsh but hold some truth to them

.