The Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant Megathread

[Martinus]

Just because they call themselves the Islamic State should not lead one to believe anything they do has anything to do with Islam.

Why not? Your reasoning seems to be the classic case of No True Scottsman fallacy.

[mongers]

Just because they call themselves the Islamic State should not lead one to believe anything they do has anything to do with Islam.

Why not? Your reasoning seems to be the classic case of No True Scottsman fallacy.

Time to update it: 

A certain proportion of Scotsmen hate the English.

A certain proportion of Muslims hate non-believers. 

?

[Martinus]

That is fine. However, Valmy's line of reasoning seems to be that, because not all Muslims hate non-believers, hating non-believers has nothing to do with Islam. This is patently false.

The fact is that Muslims are statistically more likely than members of other religions to engage in violence against non-believers. And when they do, they almost always justify that violence by their religious text and teachings.

You can engage in academic discussions of a chicken-and-an-egg nature, as to whether this is cultural or religious or both, but that does not change the fact that statistically, Muslims are more dangerous than members of other religions. I guess a good question would be whether this difference is statistically significant or not.

[Baron von Schtinkenbutt]

I wanted to write: when they wont need Gulf oil anymore, and it made me think: is it possible that the Saudis are in these powerplays because the US is getting closer of not needing them?

The US already doesn't need them.  The vast majority of our oil imports come from Canada and Mexico.  We get hardly anything from the Gulf.

[Tamas]

I wanted to write: when they wont need Gulf oil anymore, and it made me think: is it possible that the Saudis are in these powerplays because the US is getting closer of not needing them?

The US already doesn't need them.  The vast majority of our oil imports come from Canada and Mexico.  We get hardly anything from the Gulf.

So why not ditch them?

[crazy canuck]

The fact is that Muslims are statistically more likely than members of other religions to engage in violence against non-believers. And when they do, they almost always justify that violence by their religious text and teachings.

In Vancouver the only violence carried out against non believers that can could be attributed to relgious intolerance or motivation that I can recall* was carried out by Christians who murdered a doctor who performed abortions.  The murderer and his co-conspirators justified the crime on the basis that they were carrying out God's will. 


* It may well be that homophobic violence may also be an example of that but I don't think anyone has actually claimed it was God's will that they attack homosexuals.


In my community, statistically speaking, Christians are far more dangerous than any other religious group.  This of course is not to suggest that Christians are in any way dangerous.  This is just to point out your logical fallacy of attributing the behaviour of extremists to a whole group.

[The Minsky Moment]

The fact is that Muslims are statistically more likely than members of other religions to engage in violence against non-believers. And when they do, they almost always justify that violence by their religious text and teachings..

Where are these statistics to be found?

[Berkut]

However they also want to the Americans to attack them.  They want the American boots on the ground so they can gain credibility by killing Western soldiers.  This will also lend them prestige and credibility as leaders of the nutty Muslim world.

That idea has been parroted around for years, and it never really works out for these guys.  Street cred doesn't mean anything when you're dead.

Indeed.

But it certainly does work when you aren't dead, and the people getting the street cred are generally not the people getting killed by US bombs...at least not right away.

[derspiess]

The fact is that Muslims are statistically more likely than members of other religions to engage in violence against non-believers. And when they do, they almost always justify that violence by their religious text and teachings..

Where are these statistics to be found?

Maybe he meant empirically.

[Admiral Yi]

The question is whether or not the beheading are dictated by their religion.  If it were true, then we'd have a lot of beheading everywhere.  I have no reason to think that the Muslims of Morocco or Bangladesh are any less devout then the ones in Syria.  Yet they are not sending out beheading videos.

That is *a* question, but not the one Viking was trying to answer.

[Berkut]

I wanted to write: when they wont need Gulf oil anymore, and it made me think: is it possible that the Saudis are in these powerplays because the US is getting closer of not needing them?

The US already doesn't need them.  The vast majority of our oil imports come from Canada and Mexico.  We get hardly anything from the Gulf.

I am really tired of this line of reasoning. It is patently false.

The oil market is a global market. It doesn't matter one bit to the US who owns the oil, it just matters that it be sold.

SA cannot refuse to sell oil to the US. It is a commodity market. If they sell it, they sell it to whoever buys it, and where the particular gallon of oil comes from matters very little in the overall scheme of things.

What the US (and really it is the entire world, not the US specifically) wants in regards to all that oil is that it be sold in a stable, predictable market.

As long as that is the case, we will continue to make rather unpleasing choices about who we are "friends" with...

[CountDeMoney]

I am really tired of this line of reasoning. It is patently false.

No shit.  Oil is a fungible commodity traded on the global market.  I don't understand why people insist on thinking oil is some sort of specific import/export widget.  Even I grasp the fucking concept.

[derspiess]

You just like saying "fungible"

[CountDeMoney]

You just like saying "fungible"

I like it when she says it more, just when I'm about to blow my crude all over her derrick.

[KRonn]

Besides the way the oil market works on a global scale, it would seem that the high US (and some Canadian?) production is doable, at least in many places, due to the high cost of oil per barrel. Shale and probably oil sands oil production cost a lot more than what it costs the Saudis and others to drill. So I would think if the Saudis/OPEC want to drive down US or N.American oil production they could act to cut the price per barrel. IMO though, I'd rather see more US production, even if more expensive prices at the pump, if it reduces oil imports from more unstable  parts of the world. But given how oil sales work in the global market that wouldn't likely work, unless somehow the US could use mainly oil from N. America. As it is the US exports gasoline and some oil producers are trying to get permits to sell oil which generally isn't allowed except in certain circumstances.