ISIL, ISIS, Daesh discussion thread.

Rofflay said:
I gave up a so called Christian identity because i think a lot of it was evil fairtale hogwash. Are they giving it up by running around building more Mosques and wearing hijabs and calling thier kids Mohammed? No the fact that this makes people like you go into denial further proves my point that none of you seem to get it or are willing to get it. The single most dangerous thing we can do in the West is harbour a culture of sympathy for these cultural suporters of Islam.
Click to expand...

Do you duck for cover when you see a woman wearing a hijab?
 
StriderX said:
Bloody out of date farcebook as usual, daesh is an old term for one.

The US was purposely ignoring oil tankers for years, it happely ignores that, the Russians have done the most damage in that regard, forcing the almighty us to concede.

Aggravating. :cool:
Click to expand...

Daesh is hot on the liberal agenda, changing definitions around and playing games to avoid naming the problem. Calling them daesh tries to hide that the root cause is radical Islam. It also tries to turn them into a joke when ISIS is probably something you should be taking seriously.
 
Buddy said:
Do you duck for cover when you see a woman wearing a hijab?
Click to expand...

No, But when i see the burka hijab or a person named Aisha or Muhammad i know they are lending support to Islam in a way. This is something i think needs challanged. You are either properly secular, Or gtfo and Islam has never been moderate otherwise how did it conquer so much territory? There is no such thing as a moderate totalarian ideaology.

But derp bad Rofflay.
 
Rofflay said:
No, But when i see the burka hijab or a person named Aisha or Muhammad i know they are lending support to Islam in a way. This is something i think needs challanged. You are either properly secular, Or gtfo and Islam has never been moderate otherwise how did it conquer so much territory? There is no such thing as a moderate totalarian ideaology.

But derp bad Rofflay.
Click to expand...

You do you know can be called Brian Smith, not wear a Burka and be a Muslim don't you.
 
Rofflay said:
You are either properly secular, Or gtfo and Islam has never been moderate otherwise how did it conquer so much territory? There is no such thing as a moderate totalarian ideaology.
Click to expand...

Dem Christians too, what a bad lot! taking liberties and pushing their ideas all over the globe..............conquering, book following, unreasonable buggers :p





Note the difference between the everyday Muslims/Christians and any other religious types and their hardline idiot opposites, from both the past and present.
 
Rofflay said:
Wrong it does not give in to anything, It gets rid of the problem which is Muslims. Who do you think will be doing the next round of terror once ISIS goes? Muslims? who was doing it before ISIS? Muslims. Who benefits from me taking your advice and dropping my so called Islamophobia? Muslims.

Who seems to win no matter which solution we take? Muslims. Specifically the Western Muslims who are pretty much playing the good Muslim bad Muslim game. Here is a blunt fact that no one is going to admit on TV, If you wanted to stop all of this and make Europe safe? Remove Muslims. And there may be a few decent Muslims out there heck maybe many. But they still lend thier cultural support to Islam by being Muslims.


I gave up a so called Christian identity because i think a lot of it was evil fairtale hogwash. Are they giving it up by running around building more Mosques and wearing hijabs and calling thier kids Mohammed? No the fact that this makes people like you go into denial further proves my point that none of you seem to get it or are willing to get it. The single most dangerous thing we can do in the West is harbour a culture of sympathy for these cultural suporters of Islam.
Click to expand...

So:-

Muslim shooter = entire religion guilty?

Black shooter = entire race guilty?

White shooter = Mentally disturbed lone wolf?


Guilt by association has no place in a civilised society like ours. If you truly respected British values, you'd understand that.
 
Hitman_Leon said:
Dem Christians too, what a bad lot! taking liberties and pushing their ideas all over the globe..............conquering, book following, unreasonable buggers :p

Note the difference between the everyday Muslims/Christians and any other religious types and their hardline idiot opposites, from both the past and present.
Click to expand...

Islam kills apostates. Christianity attempts to get you to go back to church.

Christians are the problem guys! :p
 
amigafan2003 said:
So:-

Muslim shooter = entire religion guilty?

Black shooter = entire race guilty?

White shooter = Mentally disturbed lone wolf?


Guilt by association has no place in a civilised society like ours. If you truly respected British values, you'd understand that.
Click to expand...

See the trouble is this...

Muslim shooter = often carried out in the name of their religion thus yes, religion plays a hand.

Black shooter = in UK typically gang related and black people are statistically more likely to be in a gang so there are racial associations, yes.

White shooter = more likely to act alone in isolation, frequently a crime of passion or murder suicide.

Note that white shooters and black shooters can be muslim too.
 
Dis86 said:
Note that white shooters and black shooters can be muslim too.
Click to expand...

There are Muslims of different colours :eek:

Must be a paint job, disguise to confuse the EDL.............?

(Being that they are already confused beyond reason, this just a cruel trick by those Muslims to mentally damage those already damaged beyond repair) :p
 
opethdisciple said:
I would like to know what the political landscape is currently like between the Arabic countries.

What do the main Arabic countries have to say on the matter of ISIS?
Click to expand...

Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, UAE, and Jordan have all conducted air strikes against ISIS, although less so since Russian and US strikes stepped up in pace (due to risk of friendly fire etc).

Iraq are obviously involved in a ground offensive and have signed a pact with Iran to fight ISIS.

Kuwait has officially declared war on ISIS and are involved in intelligence gathering and providing strike targets to the US and France.

Egypt is providing logistical support and air base usage (since the Arab spring they aren't in a position to directly intervene - that's the same for Libya).
 
Just watched Question Time on this, and was incredibly disappointed.

Basically, this was the result of the discussion:

Wanted more surveillance powers, or at least a retention of the current far-reaching powers.
Didn't think Muslim communities should be doing more, accused anyone who said otherwise of proliferating islamophobia.
Wanted to remove Assad more than they wanted to combat ISIS. Claimed that he was a worse problem.
Said that the west was partially responsible for causing the Syrian civil war, which is true of course, but there was no mention of the other destabilising powers.
No one mentioned who could possibly replace Assad, and whether they would actually be any better.
Talk of "we need a plan for the aftermath" but no idea as to what that plan could be.
Minor mention of re-evaluating the Schengen agreement, but still a commitment to a seemingly endless welcome of refugees - no limits were mentioned.


The crowd was allowed to be whipped into a near frenzy by a few of the debators, and you could also tell that Lebedev was biting his tongue numerous times and was afraid to speak his mind on the matters.

Not what I would call a fair or balanced debate in the slightest.
 
amigafan2003 said:
Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, UAE, and Jordan have all conducted air strikes against ISIS, although less so since Russian and US strikes stepped up in pace (due to risk of friendly fire etc).

Iraq are obviously involved in a ground offensive and have signed a pact with Iran to fight ISIS.

Kuwait has officially declared war on ISIS and are involved in intelligence gathering and providing strike targets to the US and France.

Egypt is providing logistical support and air base usage (since the Arab spring they aren't in a position to directly intervene - that's the same for Libya).
Click to expand...

Or to put it another way.
It's about the only time in recent history that most of the Arab nations have agreed on anything, the fact that Iran and Iraq have signed a pact together is probably one of the biggest things given their normal relations.
 
amigafan2003 said:
Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, UAE, and Jordan have all conducted air strikes against ISIS, although less so since Russian and US strikes stepped up in pace (due to risk of friendly fire etc).

Iraq are obviously involved in a ground offensive and have signed a pact with Iran to fight ISIS.

Kuwait has officially declared war on ISIS and are involved in intelligence gathering and providing strike targets to the US and France.

Egypt is providing logistical support and air base usage (since the Arab spring they aren't in a position to directly intervene - that's the same for Libya).
Click to expand...

Blimey. And yet combined with the power of the US and Russia, we still cant take down a bunch of rebels. :confused:
 
opethdisciple said:
Blimey. And yet combined with the power of the US and Russia, we still cant take down a bunch of rebels. :confused:
Click to expand...

Mainly because the rebels don't wear uniforms, don't live in nice obvious military bases, don't ride around in clearly marked vehicles, and are often indistinguishable from the general population (who are also often armed), until they actually do something.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom