Brexit and the waning days of the United Kingdom

[Josquius]

How is that the oposite of what I said?  It's barely related except for the core subject matter.

[Martinus]

How is that the oposite of what I said?  It's barely related except for the core subject matter.

Weren't you saying that offering to talk to ISIS would help in getting moderate Muslims on our side? 

[Josquius]

How is that the oposite of what I said?  It's barely related except for the core subject matter.

Weren't you saying that offering to talk to ISIS would help in getting moderate Muslims on our side? 

Yes.
Just because you talk to a group of terrorists doesn't mean you are somehow condoning their actions.
You can think somebody is the absolute lowest of the low and still talk to them.

[garbon]

Moderate Muslims and the loony left.

I don't know (or care) for the loony left but I do actually follow a number of moderate Muslim reformists (like Maajid Nawaz or others associated with the Quilliam think tank, or Asra Nomani) and secularists from Muslim countries (like Faisal Saeed Al Mutar) and at least they do not want anything of the sort - quite the contrary, they keep saying that the Western liberals' lukewarm response and weakness in condemning atrocities of Islamism are helping to legitimize and strengthen Islamism in Muslim countries, while hindering reformists.

The left has this idea about moderate Muslims that if we protest atrocities done in the name of Islam by the likes of ISIL (or allow, say, exercise of free speech such as cartoons of Mohammed), we will somehow push the moderates into the arms of extremism. If this is true, then these people are not moderates, but should be treated as dangerous madmen, who are unable to function in a normal society. More likely, however, this picture of moderates is wrong and, ultimately, racist, as it paints a group of people as dangerous madmen.

I have no choice but to agree with Marti.

[Martinus]

And so I told you that not only it won't help get moderates on our side, but it will legitimise and strenghten the position of extremists in Muslim countries while making the position of reformist moderates more precarious.

Muslim moderates (at least the ones we should be caring for) hate ISIS and want it gone. This is because ISIS hates them too and wants them dead.

[Josquius]

And so I told you that not only it won't help get moderates on our side, but it will legitimise and strenghten the position of extremists in Muslim countries while making the position of reformist moderates more precarious.

Muslim moderates (at least the ones we should be caring for) hate ISIS and want it gone.

That makes no sense.
Your post had nothing to do.with the topic at hand.
In no way does talking to somebody strengthen their position. It definitely doesn't harm anyone else's.

[celedhring]

And so I told you that not only it won't help get moderates on our side, but it will legitimise and strenghten the position of extremists in Muslim countries while making the position of reformist moderates more precarious.

Muslim moderates (at least the ones we should be caring for) hate ISIS and want it gone.

That makes no sense.
Your post had nothing to do.with the topic at hand.
In no way does talking to somebody strengthen their position. It definitely doesn't harm anyone else's.

Of course it does. You talk to them because you want to reach some kind of deal with them. People then see ISIS as a valid agent to bargain with the West. You legitimize them. Sure, you might still want to blow their asses, but you have now reinforced their position versus other competing groups.

Don't make me side with Marti in an Islam-related thread, makes me feel dirty.

[Josquius]

And so I told you that not only it won't help get moderates on our side, but it will legitimise and strenghten the position of extremists in Muslim countries while making the position of reformist moderates more precarious.

Muslim moderates (at least the ones we should be caring for) hate ISIS and want it gone.

That makes no sense.
Your post had nothing to do.with the topic at hand.
In no way does talking to somebody strengthen their position. It definitely doesn't harm anyone else's.

Of course it does. You talk to them because you want to reach some kind of deal with them, hence you legitimize them.

Don't make me side with Marti in an Islam-related thread, makes me feel dirty.

Dog Day Afternoon. The armed bank robbers have hostages.
Do the police go in guns blazing?
No. They talk to them.
Does this mean the police were legitimising the bank robbers?

Really. Talking to isis is a no loss situation.  Probably won't lead anywhere productive given their demands and zeal, but at least opens a channel with them and shows that you're willing to talk and that this would be a good approach to take for anyone with less crazy demands.

[Martinus]

I have been trying to evolve on Islam - I now think that, in terms of domestic policy, we should combat the "bad" sects (Wahhabism, Salafism) while encouraging the good ones (Alawism, Sufism, etc.)

In terms of the foreign policy, we cannot afford going to war with Islamist regimes but we should support reformist Muslims and secularists in those countries. The WWII comparison does not work here - it is much closer to the Cold War so we are in for a long haul.

[celedhring]

Dog Day Afternoon. The armed bank robbers have hostages.
Do the police go in guns blazing?
No. They talk to them.
Does this mean the police were legitimising the bank robbers?

Really. Talking to isis is a no loss situation.  Probably won't lead anywhere productive given their demands and zeal, but at least opens a channel with them and shows that you're willing to talk and that this would be a good approach to take for anyone with less crazy demands.

Then you talk with the ones with less crazy demands and empower them, not ISIS. You make them more attractive than ISIS.

[Josquius]

 Except we aren't empowering them.
And which group do you suggest talking to here?

[celedhring]

Except we aren't empowering them.
And which group do you suggest talking to here?

I just told you the reasons why you are empowering them. Supporting ISIS becomes a valid way to extract concessions with the West. Can't you see the message you're sending out if you agree to "talk to ISIS"?

And that's why if you want to bargain with somebody, you talk to moderate Islamic branches. For example, you know the reason Spain is riddled with Salafist mosques? Because we make things so difficult for regular muslims to build them, that the Saudis barge in and use their vast money and influence to do it instead.

[Sheilbh]

I just read on the BBC that the dude wanting to lead labour wants to negotiate with Islamic State.

What a putz.

Very dumb. Of course earlier this year Corbyn said UK shouldn't talk directly to Isis but should try to develop back channels...

Yeah as has Jonathan Powell, Blair's former Chief of Staff. It is worth noting that, like Powell, Smith has direct experience of the Northern Ireland peace process. Northern Ireland taught  us a lot useful lessons but it's not a model that we can apply to every conflict ever. I wish he'd been clearer but Smith was saying talk with ISIS if they gave up violence as part of a general peace conference on Syria.

Incidentally, is using the word "Daesh" some sort of virtue signaling? It seems to me that people who use that term (especially exclusively, while refusing to ever use "ISIS", "ISIL" or "the Islamic State") are uniformly pieces of shit.

Why do you hate the French government?

But that's what they call themselves and they are clearly linked with Islam. It seems to me like a pathetic case of a "no true Scottsman" fallacy.

Daesh is the Arabic acronym. However ISIS hate it because it means something like cut-throats, so people in Syria have been killed for it. But it's what most other countries in the region and the French call them - precisely because it's insulting.

I think you just read way too much into the supposedly spurious motivations behind using one word or the other.

It's the entire problem with a chunk of the internet right. It's like they've only just discovered Barthes etc.

[celedhring]

It's the entire problem with a chunk of the internet right. It's like they've only just discovered Barthes etc.

Yeah, I chuckle whenever I see alt-righters and identity politics fanatics both engage in language policing. Birds of a feather.

[The Minsky Moment]

But that's what they call themselves and they are clearly linked with Islam. It seems to me like a pathetic case of a "no true Scottsman" fallacy.

There is no facepalm big enough for this.

It's telling that the only ones other than Daesh itself willing to give credence to their asinine claim to be the Caliphate reborn are the the self-proclaimed "enemies of Islam."  It requires a special level of obtuseness not see that the so-called anti-Islamists are in fact the most reliable allies for radical Islam in the West.