The Paris Attack Debate Thread

[Razgovory]

Kill Them All!  Sterilize the whole region and put the fear of God into the survivors who lurk within our borders, since the maggots are so eager to invoke it on others...

They want a war?  Let's give it to them.  The West has an overabundance of nukes it no longer has any need for; we might as well put them to use.


Ahh... but that was a fantasy.

In reality we'll temporize, obfuscate and wring our collective hands - wondering 'how come they hate us so much'...  until the next attack comes.  And with mindless idiots like the new Canadian PM, who's already wetting himself with his promise of welcoming twenty-five thousand potential Syrian terrorists - before Christmas no less - we'll just have to wait for the next assault.

Here's an unpleasant truth, for all the 'sympathizers' of those mongrels...

Even if the West was to pull out of every Muslim country tomorrow; even if we were to stop any military actions against any of them - and repatriate all of our fellow citizens operating there in any capacity - such wanton slaughter would still be conceived, prepared and executed.

The worm is in the fruit already.

Islam *must* die!



G.

But I'm not a Nazi!

[LaCroix]

Even if the West was to pull out of every Muslim country tomorrow; even if we were to stop any military actions against any of them - and repatriate all of our fellow citizens operating there in any capacity - such wanton slaughter would still be conceived, prepared and executed.

actually, this nonsense raises an interesting point.

yi, going back to this

I think it is an effort to comply with Allah's will, to make war on those not already in the House of Submission.

if the US/west completely and utterly pulled out of the middle east, out of all commitments and obligations, etc. but, the US/west didn't "submit" (house of submission...?), do you think ISIS would continue carrying out these attacks?

[Admiral Yi]

if the US/west completely and utterly pulled out of the middle east, out of all commitments and obligations, etc. but, the US/west didn't "submit" (house of submission...?), do you think ISIS would continue carrying out these attacks?

Yes.  I think they would try to emulate the great Muslim conquerors of their age of expansion.

[LaCroix]

Yes.  I think they would try to emulate the great Muslim conquerors of their age of expansion.

if they took everything and all that was left was the US, yeah. but i mean before that.

[Berkut]

I am always baffled by the idea that the content of religious beliefs is immaterial to the behavior of those holding the beliefs.

If religion A has one tenet "Do no harm to others" and religion B has one tenet "Kill the infidels", it doesn't take any really sophisticated logic to understand that people genuinely holding those beliefs are going to behave differently.

[LaCroix]

I am always baffled by the idea that the content of religious beliefs is immaterial to the behavior of those holding the beliefs.

If religion A has one tenet "Do no harm to others" and religion B has one tenet "Kill the infidels", it doesn't take any really sophisticated logic to understand that people genuinely holding those beliefs are going to behave differently.

because "positive" religions aren't any better.

[Jaron]

I am always baffled by the idea that the content of religious beliefs is immaterial to the behavior of those holding the beliefs.

If religion A has one tenet "Do no harm to others" and religion B has one tenet "Kill the infidels", it doesn't take any really sophisticated logic to understand that people genuinely holding those beliefs are going to behave differently.

because "positive" religions aren't any better.

How do you figure? This seems like just anti-religious sentiment. Religion brings out the worst in some people, but it can bring out the best in others.

[Admiral Yi]

if they took everything and all that was left was the US, yeah. but i mean before that.

That's kind of a silly hypothetical, don't you think?

ISIS *might* not attack the US if they're busy conquering the rest of the world and the US promises not to interfere, until ISIS has conquered the rest of the world, at which point I would expect ISIS to try and conquer the US.

[LaCroix]

How do you figure? This seems like just anti-religious sentiment. Religion brings out the worst in some people, but it can bring out the best in others.

not an anti-religious statement. no religion is better/worse than another. it's the same old thing as anything else, and there's nothing unique about it that makes it worthy of taking a stand against. look at all the non-religious people who hate science (GMO food).

[Admiral Yi]

because "positive" religions aren't any better.

Fucking Quaker psychos.  They need to get their heads examined.

[LaCroix]

That's kind of a silly hypothetical, don't you think?

ISIS *might* not attack the US if they're busy conquering the rest of the world and the US promises not to interfere, until ISIS has conquered the rest of the world, at which point I would expect ISIS to try and conquer the US.

but that sounds awfully strategic and based on something that isn't purely religion

[Grallon]

actually, this nonsense raises an interesting point.

...

So this individual agrees with me yet pretends he doesn't - only so he can raise the same point...  Who's the more foolish - the fool or the fool who follows him? 




G.

[LaCroix]

Fucking Quaker psychos.  They need to get their heads examined.

there's a constitutional law case where a quaker goes absolutely nuts, screaming obscenities at people. acts like a real prick.

[Admiral Yi]

there's a constitutional law case where a quaker goes absolutely nuts, screaming obscenities at people. acts like a real prick.

If a Muslim had started screaming obscenities at people in Paris we wouldn't be having this discussion.

[LaCroix]

If a Muslim had started screaming obscenities at people in Paris we wouldn't be having this discussion.

and quakers don't come from a broken world