Trump's divisive Comments

[outhouse]

Muslims are not even a readily identifiable group

That is the problem with islam imho.

There is no control, there is no government, there is no unity, its a wild card.

Hell a muslims worst enemy is another muslim.

 

[lewisnotmiller]

War has become dynamic in its modern nature, no longer is it about land or power. The game has changed.

Oh well...I agree totally. But that game has been in play for nigh on a hundred years, in a vaguely modern form.
That's my exact point, though. His 'border-blocking' tactics include a literal wall between the US and Mexico, and a mystical ability to identify problematic Muslims. These tactics were last used by the US in approximately 1915, and were ineffective even then.

 

[lewisnotmiller]

Hell a muslims worst enemy is another muslim.

Yes. Sectarianism is a huge issue within Islam. Christianity had these type of issues in the past as well, but introducing modern weaponry, etc, makes it all the more deadly.

 

[outhouse]

From a purely strategic point of view, I think the broad brush approach is not only ineffective, but is actually counter-productive. 'Something must be done' should never be conflated with 'This must be done'

Agreed whole hearted.

Eyes and minds need to be opened. I agree with his sound bite, but I do not agree with any aspect of his possible protocol to implement.

Act in a cohesive manner, considering both long-term and short-term goals.
Appeals to populace are not an effective means of strategic decision making, since the vast majority of people have effectively zero understanding of the matter at hand, and are simply responding in the same way they would to a bully in the playground.

Agreed knowledge is key. The "art of war" goes into exactly that.

But take this into account. I live in a mostly white area, we have no gang issues, we have no major violence, we have no real trouble at all. Lets expand this to a Paris type event and place. They let them in by the thousands and have large muslim communities, and now they have very large pile of dead people to bury.

Fanaticism and fundamentalism, there is no excuse, nor should any be made for a primitive behavior. Trump making a sound bite to put up an imaginative stop sign for the American public was nothing more then political rhetoric. I'm old enough to see the difference, I believe you are as well. Here is the sad fact though, if you let fanaticism and fundamentalism in your country you going to by that action alone, kill more of your own population. That's how 9/11 happened, and we dropped the ball. It happened to Paris, and its going to happen anywhere where there is a large population of fanaticism.

Education and knowledge generally cures this false reality, but the religion has a built in firewall keeping education out, and the sad thing is, the followers have no idea about the danger.

 

[outhouse]

These tactics were last used by the US in approximately 1915, and were ineffective even then.

Agreed, at this point its damage control.

We do not need to repeat mistakes made. Increase the volume, you increase the death.

 

[lewisnotmiller]

Fanaticism and fundamentalism, there is no excuse, nor should any be made for a primitive behavior. Trump making a sound bite to put up an imaginative stop sign for the American public was nothing more then political rhetoric. I'm old enough to see the difference, I believe you are as well.

Yes. To be honest, and at the risk of sounding like a pompous arse, I wouldn't be worried if people thought more like I do. But taking his message as a literal one, rather than a more political/metaphorical stop sign, as you say, is exactly why there is such a thing as Islamic extremism in the first place. I'm not convinced enough people can introduce nuance and judgement when provided a simple 'solution' to their problems.

Here is the sad fact though, if you let fanaticism and fundamentalism in your country you going to by that action alone, kill more of your own population. That's how 9/11 happened, and we dropped the ball. It happened to Paris, and its going to happen anywhere where there is a large population of fanaticism.

I agree. I just don't limit my view of 'fanaticism' to Islamic extremism.

Education and knowledge generally cures this false reality, but the religion has a built in firewall keeping education out, and the sad thing is, the followers have no idea about the danger.

I don't know, honestly. I always assumed this, but there are too many educated jihadists for me to know what to believe now. I need to think/study more on this, but I am kinda interested in messaging at the moment. The attraction of both ISIS and Trump appears to be their ability to give simple messages to followers which on the face of things offer improvement to believers via blaming those who are different. To be clear, I am not suggesting Trump is like ISIS, I am just looking more from a recruitment point of view.

Not sure. Like I said, I need to think more on this.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

That is the problem with islam imho.

So? Plenty of groups have members that are not readily identifiable.

There is no control, there is no government, there is no unity, its a wild card.

Buddhist, Hindus, Pagans, Christians, Jews, none of them have a centralized controlling government or agency, and they all have their different views within the group.

Christianity had these type of issues in the past as well

They aren't killing each other (not at least here in America), but different denominations still often hate each other and go on-and-on about they got it all wrong and they're going to Hell (in my experience Baptists are the worst when it comes to this).

But take this into account. I live in a mostly white area, we have no gang issues, we have no major violence, we have no real trouble at all. Lets expand this to a Paris type event and place. They let them in by the thousands and have large muslim communities, and now they have very large pile of dead people to bury.

Timothy McVaugh left us a huge pile of bodies to bury, but we didn't seek to ban anything he was. We'll pass hateful and seething judgement against Marilyn Manson and Grand Theft Auto, but we don't seek to ban Christianity even though they occasionally go out and blow up an abortion clinic and kill people in the process. We don't even fear anti-abortion people, or their ideology, but they have killed over it. And we don't try and ban Christianity over violence towards GLBT, or over the fact the Klan is a Christian group and Christians used the Bible to defend and support slavery. And we don't try to ban the Bible for the things it says about women and things it permits to be done against them.

 

[lewisnotmiller]

They aren't killing each other (not at least here in America), but different denominations still often hate each other and go on-and-on about they got it all wrong and they're going to Hell (in my experience Baptists are the worst when it comes to this).

To be clear, I was talking about waaaaaay back. They were certainly killing each other. At some point outright warfare got wound back to rhetoric, although I suspect the decoupling of religion and nationalism had as much to do with that as any actual emotional growth.

 

[outhouse]

Plenty of groups have members that are not readily identifiable.

islam has the highest illiteracy, and required fanaticism with the largest population out of any single group. In my honest opinion, It has been breeding terrorism and embarrassing humanity daily in the news papers

 

[outhouse]

And we don't try to ban the Bible for the things it says about women and things it permits to be done against them.

Someone is trying to ban the koran? The followers are the ones who cannot come to grip with it, and are perverting its pages. Which is the books fault due to the vague nature of text.

 

[outhouse]

Timothy McVaugh left us a huge pile of bodies to bury

So its your position that we should add to the pile?

When does something get done?


Lett me tell you how the government works, it will when its to late. only someone going against the grain might stand a chance to save lives.

Do you back terrorism? why defend their ideology? why not boot that ideology out of the country.


There is freedom of speech, but you cannot yell fire! in a crowded building, nor can you make threats to people.

There is freedom of religion, and we have a right to be free of fanaticism, or at least do what we can to stop fanaticism.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

I guess my point is, people blame Islam, they are terrified of Muslims, but they don't bat an eye at things that actually present a real danger to us. Saying things like "required fanaticism" shows that you really aren't thinking this through rationally.

Do you back terrorism? why defend their ideology? why not boot that ideology out of the country.

I'm not backing terrorism or defending terrorist ideology. However I do not lump all Muslims into this huge group that we have to be afraid of because they may be a terrorists, even though that is very unlikely. I'm not assuming there is one "Muslim culture" where people are widely and mostly illiterate for being Muslim, or that all Muslims believe the same things. People want to keep Muslims out, but the reality is that chances are far greater of a deadly disease coming in past the border than a Muslim terrorist.
I also realize that people are dangerous, and it doesn't matter what they believe because people will latch onto whatever is within grasp to justify their ways.

 

[leibowde84]

"Violence has to be stopped in the minds of men. You'll never keep your enemy out. You are your enemy."

Do you really think there is a sliver of a chance that anyone can "change the minds" of ISIS?

 

[viole]

I think utilitarianism in this specific context is ok.

Yes, me too. But I am a naturalist. i do not believe in eternal or divine justice.

I am not sure whether dropping a nuclear bomb that burns a whole lot of innocents is justifiable under the assumption of an eternal justice that will settle everything.

Ciao

- viole

 

[outhouse]

Saying things like "required fanaticism" shows that you really aren't thinking this through rationally.

Pointing out a fact, is not thinking this through? you will not be able to explain that with any credibility.

Maybe it is yo who is not thinking this through, after all your defending a religion that breeds hatred and violence and has been in almost constant war since its origin.

How many of our children will have to be murdered before you would take steps to address this?

I guess my point is, people blame Islam

Maybe because they are in the news ever day for doing terrible tings to humanity

Islam is to blame, it creates severe fanaticism, because extreme fanaticism is required by every last member.


When people think god controls their thoughts and actions, its pretty easy to avoid reality, reason and logic.




How many of our children will have to be murdered before you would take steps to address this?

 

[leibowde84]

Yes, me too. But I am a naturalist. i do not believe in eternal or divine justice.

I am not sure whether dropping a nuclear bomb that burns a whole lot of innocents is justifiable under the assumption of an eternal justice that will settle everything.

Ciao

- viole

Why? Because we all can't be sure what happens after death, it is absurd to make decisions in this world based on any assumption that "eternal justice will settle everything". I think JFK put it best when he explained that here, on earth, we must work for each other, not God.

 

[viole]

Why? Because we all can't be sure what happens after death, it is absurd to make decisions in this world based on any assumption that "eternal justice will settle everything". I think JFK put it best when he explained that here, on earth, we must work for each other, not God.

Yes, well. But I am addressing JC, not JFK. Maybe I am naive, but I would expect that Christians give priority to the former, not the latter.

That would actually work only if dropping atomic bombs frying babies in their craddle can be considered an act of love towards our enemies.

Look, I agree. But I see some big contradictions with the message of Jesus, here.

Ciao

- viole

 

[outhouse]

would actually work only if dropping atomic bombs frying babies in their craddle can be considered an act of love towards our enemies.

We would have fire bombed the whole country, had they not surrendered.

And its not wise to play the sympathy card for these people at this time period. They committed terrible crimes against humanity so vile and disgusting, it need not even be repeated.

We were saints in comparison.

 

[viole]

We would have fire bombed the whole country, had they not surrendered.

And its not wise to play the sympathy card for these people at this time period. They committed terrible crimes against humanity so vile and disgusting, it need not even be repeated.

We were saints in comparison.

And, again, I agree. Bombing Germany towns to the ground was also morally justified, I think.

I am just challenging the tenability of this position from the vantage point of a Christian.

Is this really what Jesus said? Is bombing women and children, or even Schutzstaffeln members (aka SS), an act of love towards the enemy?

Ciao

- viole

 

[outhouse]

Is this really what Jesus said?

I wish we knew what he said or did. I have quite the interest in that topic, and have studied intensely, and cannot answer with certainty.

But I think he was ready to start a war that would have killed tens of thousands of his fellow Jews.

The temple was on shaky ground, the attendants were half a million angry people, and Pilate and Caiaphas only job was to keep peace at any cost.

The temple fell a few decades later from a similar action. And hundreds of thousands died.