Sanctimonious words of sympathy to the victims while condemning everyone proposing real solutions as racists is better than proposing a working solution? Yeah, right.

Sometimes killing people is the solution. I very much prefer an ISIS fighter dead to an innocent civilian.

You're using a thread about the brussels attacks to defend a candidate that will do more evil then good in the middle east.

I don't think this is completely fair to Lord. I don't think he's using the thread to defend Trump, but to try to draw attention to the fact that Obama and Europe and the Middle East are not solving the problem of Islamic Jihadism and the spread of ISIS.

Now I don't necessarily agree with Trump or Lord on the "way" to solve this issue, but I don't think we should (or could) reduce their entire position to "kill them". To be fair, Trump has taken some bold steps in addressing some concerns (legitimate or illegitimate is up to opinion) of people in the Middle East, such as saying he would be a neutral 3rd party in all negotiations between Israel and Palestine, even in opposition to AIPAC and the GOP.

Gods, I understand why Belgians would care upon this, but last week in Ankara, 37+ were killed. And what thread came upon here? Or when 41+ were killed in Yemen, also last week?

Many of the people putting up "Je suis" pics are the same ones who condemn all critics of Islam as racists.

Would you condemn all dogmatic faiths for literal interpretists? In that case, you are sound.

Edited 3/22/2016 23:12:23

I don't think this is completely fair to Lord.

TeamGuns has been butthurt since I called him an authoritarian progressive in his Trump meme thread.

Would you condemn all dogmatic faiths for literal interpretists? In that case, you are sound.

Eager strawmanning, I see. The truth is that adherents of Islam stand out from other religions in their violence and bigotry. Not only do they have ISIS and Al-Qaida, but the rank and file Muslim is also way more backwards than your average Christian or atheist. Some Muslims are good people, but the average Muslim is very radical by comparison.

Eager strawmanning, I see. The truth is that adherents of Islam stand out from other religions in their violence and bigotry. Not only do they have ISIS and Al-Qaida, but the rank and file Muslim is also way more backwards than your average Christian or atheist.

That's not what I'm talking about, nor what the folk you are taking about shielding. Violent Islamic extremism, everyone hates that. I'm not talking about their practitioners, I'm only taking about the faith itself, as you were.

Yeah but a religion is defined by its adherents. If you take things out of context, you can make the Bible or Qur'an to mean anything, so you cannot base much on that.

If you take things out of context, you can make the Bible or Qur'an to mean anything, so you cannot base much on that.

This. Given enough time, anything can be twisted to mean something horrible.

^Some would argue that's only possible because its inherently embedded with something horrible.

Some of this just seems like the Law of Unintended Consequences if you ask me. Take Darwin's theory of natural selection. Originally he meant it to explain the development of organisms from the origin of life, but others used it to justify colonialism, eugenics, and racism.

Yeah but a religion is defined by its adherents. If you take things out of context, you can make the Bible or Qur'an to mean anything, so you cannot base much on that.

This. Given enough time, anything can be twisted to mean something horrible.

A faith is meant by its dogma. Almost noone (not the Mashriqar, not the Base, not any violent Islamic extremist groups), follows the Reading or the Book to every letter, and it would be awful if they did.

By that thinking, if a dogma is "defined" by its adherents, then Trump's ideas must be bisexual yet heterosexual at the same time, 45 years or older, and whiteskins.

Some would argue that's only possible because its inherently embedded with something horrible.

Yes, I agree with that. Bigoted dogmatism of any kind is a bad thing.

To have ISIS bomb a western capital is a pretty big deal. We can now add Brussels to the list of capitals that have had some substantial lives lost in terrorist attacks.

Baghdad
Ankara
Damascus
Paris
Brussels
More.

Whatever we are doing to stop ISIS, it doesn't seem to be working. Let's stop tearing Syria apart please. That's step one. Let's recognize what ISIS is doing is genocide ("Never Again," you useless UN). Step two. Getting rid of oil, telling Saudi Arabia to f*ck off. Step three.

Or, we can do what we have been doing and wait for the next capital to be bombed, and then act surprised, as if we didn't see it coming.

(I still think my personal plan would be most effective.)

Edited 3/23/2016 00:57:27

Its a lose-lose-lose at this point. Even if we get rid of ISIS in Syria and Iraq, both those countries are going to be failed states with no political apparatus to rebuild their country, create stability, and end sectarian violence. Even if we get rid of ISIS in Syria and Iraq, neither of those countries are going to take back the millions of economic migrants and refugees that have poured in Europe, which means either Jordan, Turkey, or Germany will be dumped with the problem of assimilating millions of people psychologically scarred from war and (probably) angry from having their country destroyed. That's not something you want to have to deal with - anger + psychological instability = a whole of damage (see America's lone shooter gun violence). Even if we get rid of ISIS in Syria and Iraq, another Jihadist group will spring up somewhere else, get a foothold, and throw the region into chaos. The next stop is probably Pakistan.

The US, Europe, and the Middle East can't get out of this mess. Everyone made their mistakes long ago and now the plan or goal should be containment.

Osama bin Laden actually f*cked everyone in the western world, if indirectly. Impressive. Dick move, nonetheless.

Whatever we are doing to stop ISIS, it doesn't seem to be working. Let's stop tearing Syria apart please. That's step one. Let's recognize what ISIS is doing is genocide ("Never Again," you useless UN). Step two. Getting rid of oil, telling Saudi Arabia to f*ck off. Step three.

+1 Petrol needs to be internationally banned.

both those countries are going to be failed states with no political apparatus to rebuild their country, create stability, and end sectarian violence.

Before 2011, Syria hadn't any (stability/governmental weakness) problems, and nor did Iraq before...well, it's had loads of war and instability, but still. War doesn't mean no way to rebuild. It can be tough to rebuild, yes, but it definitely gets rebuilt. Oslo was rebuilt. West Germany was rebuilt. Iraq and Syria can definitely hypothetically be rebuilt.

Even if we get rid of ISIS in Syria and Iraq, neither of those countries are going to take back the millions of economic migrants and refugees that have poured in Europe

And if the EU was smart, they wouldn't try to give them back, either. Syria and Iraq would love a population, though, that frankly would not be much poorer than the median man there.

which means either Jordan, Turkey, or Germany will be dumped with the problem of assimilating millions of people psychologically scarred from war and (probably) angry from having their country destroyed.

Well, they already are. It's not a problem, as TeamGuns showed you, it's a good. Even if it weren't, it doesn't have to be left to these 3 countries, it's just these 3 countries are the only ones really accepting immigrants in bulk. And assimilating - ha, don't give me that. In short, EU culture is not going to disappear. You know, more ethnic Russians leave Russia than are born each year, since 1991, and Russia's main demographic growth is from (majority Islamic) Kazakh and other immigrations. Russia's culture is not in danger at all, there are few problems with "assimiliation". Also, if they're angry for their country being wrecked, then they're patriots, and support the Ba'ath panarabic movement that their countries were picked on.

That's not something you want to have to deal with - anger + psychological instability = a whole of damage (see America's lone shooter gun violence).

America's lone shooter gun violence = mad folk that got a gun. Also, that's out of 300,000,000 folk, here, there's less than 10,000,000 immigrants and stricter gun checks (with, f.e. psychologic checks).

Even if we get rid of ISIS in Syria and Iraq, another Jihadist group will spring up somewhere else, get a foothold, and throw the region into chaos.

If America/NATO have anything to do with it, it will.

The next stop is probably Pakistan.

Maybe, America has been hitting Pakistan low-scale since 2004.

The US, Europe, and the Middle East can't get out of this mess.

Sure America and EU can - just get out of the Middle East; at least stop military misdeeds there. It won't solve the problem tomorrow, it will in a few years. Russia solved most their Islamist problem by putting a mad devout Muslim former Chechen resistance fighter as Chechnya's head (Ramzan Kadyrov), and then pretty much forgetting about it. By 2010 or so, no problems.

Everyone made their mistakes long ago and now the plan or goal should be containment.

The supposed goal of American government in each war is to "topple dictatorships" "free folk" and "do good". Even if you believe that it is their goal, they're obviously bat awful at it. No America, no NATO.

Why vote for Trump if you can just put a picture like the above into your profile?

Mine is not hypocritical. Many of the people putting up "Je suis" pics are the same ones who condemn all critics of Islam as racists.

Tell me who is the main hypocrite here?

Again you are spreading your political views in a thread that was created to show our support and sympathy to the victims and to the people of Brussels, and talk about a dramatic event, and you derail this thread and you are attacking us for what? Our profile pics? "Je suis" or people with Belgian flags or gathering in public to pray for the victims, all of these have nothing to do with politics.

Whats with the 'Je Suis' thing? I understand the 'Je Suis Charlie' reference, but isn't the language of Belgium Dutch?

And speaking of US presidential candidates, look at Bernie Sander's Facebook profile... hasn't made a single mention of the crisis... I wonder why....
Act least Hillary Clinton has got the usual 'stand in solidarity' speech already!?

How many more 'Je Suis' and 'solidarity' speeches does it take for people to realise that hashtags and profile pictures won't solve a problem? I think its great if these acts attract help trigger new debates, but every time these disasters happen, certain people will 'mourn' in such a manner and a few days later it will be business and politics as usual.

they speak both french and dutch (although they insist on calling the dutch 'flemish' and saying its different)

Always nice to see that horrible events are immediately used to defend and attack politicians. Another reminder how not only terrorists are horrible people, but many others are as well.

Yeah, maybe you don't kill people, but "less horrible" can still be pretty horrible.

It would be nice if everyone could just stop with the blanket statements after days like these (we saw it after Paris as well), but I guess the egoistic and narrow-minded nature of some people cannot be helped. It's difficult not to get pessimistic from all of this.

Trump is a greedy bastard. If he takes the oil and ISIS gets destroyed, then there is no way he will give any of that oil back to Iraq / Syria (who it belongs to)

@Pulsey

Belgium is a trilingual country. Dutch,French and German are the official languages.

On social media Bernie Sanders did mention the attacks on his twitter account and showed respect.

My solution: get cozy with Vlad and Bashar.
Send in men.
F*ck shit up.
Get the hell out of there and let Bashar and Vlad work their dictatorial magic.
And if the Muslims resent foreign control, it isn't us. Voila!