9 ms·

How about first stopping with what we know makes things worse - NOT provoking them by for example interfering the way CIA have staged coups for decades, causing

How about first stopping with what we know makes things worse - NOT provoking them by for example interfering the way CIA have staged coups for decades, causing internal animosity, bombing carelessly (see the US bomb that hit Doctors Without Borders recently), etc... All these countries are being careless and heavy handed, and the origins of most of the high profile terrorists of today can be traced back to actions taken by western countries. So many rebel groups armed by western agencies later turned into terrorists and guerillas once the agencies left, so many times, over and over. So many aided coup makers just defected and kept their power for themselves. The most effective way to get rid of terrorists is to take away their recruitment base, by not giving people more reasons to attack. Yes, it will take long until all the current terrorists are gone. But the current methods are only making things worse.

criddell 11y ago
Forgive me if this is in the linked article (it's not loading for me), but if we were to say to ISIS "let's negotiate", what is it that they want? Is it something reasonable?
- pan69 11y ago
  He's saying the west should stop interfering in the middle east, with which I whole heartily agree.
- notsony 11y ago
  What do they want? Here you go. This is the first (and only?) interview ever given to a Western journalist. https://www.facebook.com/JuergenTodenhoefer/videos/10152723644955838/ https://www.facebook.com/JuergenTodenhoefer/videos/101527236...
  - criddell 11y ago
    I just watched that entire video and it's pretty terrifying.
- vixen99 11y ago
  Why would they want to negotiate? They're winning hands down. Seems pretty clear from many sources that their stated goal is to restore the "caliphate" — an Islamic state under the rule of a community of religious scholars guided by a caliph taken to mean the successor to the Prophet Muhammad For them anyone who doesn't believe in their interpretation of Islam must convert or die. Meanwhile President Obama has encouraging words for them: “The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam”. So much for free speech and cartoons.
- qohen 11y ago
  What is it that they want? "What ISIS Really Wants" (The Atlantic, March 2015) [0]: The Islamic State is no mere collection of psychopaths. It is a religious group with carefully considered beliefs, among them that it is a key agent of the coming apocalypse. Here’s what that means for its strategy—and for how to stop it. [0] http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2015/03/what-isis-really-wants/384980/?single_page=true http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2015/03/what-isi...
- Natanael_L 11y ago
  No, that's not what we should do at all. They got power because people in the region thought it was a better idea to give them power than to allow our destabilizing influence to continue. Take away all reasons for why they got support in the first place, and they will be marginalized by the people themselves.
notsony 11y ago
NO NO NO Let's end the myth that Western foreign policy is (solely) to blame. What about Islamic terrorists killing people in Southern Thailand? Is there something wrong with their foreign policy? What about Islamic terrorists killing Filipinos for the past 20-30 years? Have Christians been oppressing Muslims over there? What about the recent clashes between Muslims and Buddhist monks in Burma? What did the monks do wrong? Radical Islam is a GLOBAL jihad movement.
- tomelders 11y ago
  Wastern foreign policy absolutely is to blame. You need to look at it on a timeline of a century to get the complete picture.
- pan69 11y ago
  Radical Islam has become a global jihad movement and it was created by the west interfering in the middle east.
  - iofj 11y ago
    Because it's not like attacks like this weren't committed by muslims before ? In reality they've been at it since the early middle ages.
    - pan69 11y ago
      You mean those middle ages where a bunch of Christians went over to the middle east to kill a bunch of Muslims? You mean those middle ages?
      - iofj 11y ago
        First crusade: 1096 AD Muslim expansion wars: 736 AD In a way you're right, you've just got the agressor wrong. In fact the crusades were started because of muslim agression. Because, and I'm quoting muslim historical sources here "the blood of Christians was standing above our knees in Jerusalem".
rdancer 11y ago
You're thinking different war theatre. Negotiating with ISIS will not bring the fruits you envision. You know when we say "we don't negotiate with terrorists"? These guys don't negotiate with us.
- Natanael_L 11y ago
  Who said we'll negotiate? The real problem is that our actions are large part of the reason for WHY they have such an easy time recruiting people. Lets not keep making it easy for them to recruit people.
iofj 11y ago
Can we please drop this pretense ? One only has to look at the terrorists to know for sure that provoking them is not the issue, neither is poverty, or racism. I'm also seriously wondering what the Kurds ever did to provoke them ? The Yezidi ? The Shi'a ? The Iranians ? Iraqi Christians ? Alawites ? Druze ? The Lebanese ? Even if I can sort-of understand that Israel, Turkey and Jordan did do a few attacks, it did not justify the response at all. I realize the problem : if you follow a normal way of thinking you'll invariable end up with that the problems are located in the ideology, and of course that indirectly attacks a lot of people. That however is not a valid line of reasoning, as it Sorry I am posting this because Dyab Abou Jahjah posted an article in the newspaper. He's a local muslim, a mouthpiece for muslims and he posted an article that stands out massively : it does NOT condemn the attack, but the "western response" to it [1], describing it as a consequence of the conflict "the west created". Half of all muslims I know on facebook are reposting that. I just want to say, if that's the attitude of even 10% of muslims, civil war is inevitable. And it sure looks like it's more like 50%. [1] http://www.standaard.be/cnt/dmf20151114_01970768 http://www.standaard.be/cnt/dmf20151114_01970768
- alfapla 11y ago
  Your considerations may be true but there is simply no denying that there is some serious hypocrisy going on at the core of our value system. We fume when muslim terrorists bomb Paris, but we claim the right to bomb pretty much any muslim country whose government is not laying in bed with the West. The fact that we make some half-assed efforts to avoid "innocent" victims is no proof of moral superiority. The next time NATO blows up some wedding party in Afghanistan, I'd like to see the flag of Afghanistan projected on the opera house of Sidney.
- Natanael_L 11y ago
  > One only has to look at the terrorists to know for sure that provoking them is not the issue Maybe you shouldn't look at their behaviours today, but at their origins. Most such groups appear because somebody felt excluded and powerless, or because some sociopath exploited a power vacuum. They grow because there's large populations of people who feel powerless and excluded. Prevent that from becoming a problem in the first place and the few remaining terrorists would be powerless, because they'd be too few and far between.
TelmoMenezes 11y ago
I completely agree that not interfering with the middle east would have been the way to go. Unfortunately, that ship has sailed, and there is no undo button. > The most effective way to get rid of terrorists is to take away their recruitment base, by not giving people more reasons to attack. Yes, but this is not an option in this case because their demands are simply not reasonable. What are we to do? Convert to islam or kill ourselves? They have no single reasonable demand or space for compromise. Are we to enact laws that go against the very principles of our civilization, purely out of fear? There is no simple way out of this.
- Natanael_L 11y ago
  > their demands But this same "their" would only be a very tiny pool of powerless people if nobody else was willing to listen to them.
maxharris 11y ago
"Provoking" the Islamic State did not make them: execute people, including children, for being gay (https://news.vice.com/article/the-islamic-state-executes-9-men-and-a-boy-for-being-gay https://news.vice.com/article/the-islamic-state-executes-9-m...) sever the hands of people accused of theft (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3007498/Sickening-moment-ISIS-cut-thief-s-hand-industrial-paper-guillotine.html http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3007498/Sickening-mo...) write sex slavery into its laws (http://www.nytimes.com/2015/08/14/world/middleeast/isis-enshrines-a-theology-of-rape.html http://www.nytimes.com/2015/08/14/world/middleeast/isis-ensh...) But you know what actually did cause them to be like that? A literal interpretation of Islam. Christianity is no better, but that is only obvious when you observe it in its unmuzzled form during the Dark Ages. Islam needs to be restrained in exactly the same way.
- Natanael_L 11y ago
  The interesting question in stopping them is why do people choose to follow them? Attacking them for their poor justifications will not help you get anything done. Ensuring nobody WANTS to help them is how you stop them. And to do that, you need to make sure people don't feel that extremely desperate and make sure they don't have a reason to blame your for their situation - because the people joining them feel that it is their best choice for improving their situation. Give people there a better choice and ISIS will lose their power.
  - maxharris 11y ago
    They follow out of religious devotion: https://news.vice.com/video/the-islamic-state-full-length https://news.vice.com/video/the-islamic-state-full-length (9:57 into the video) Passenger: "We are fighters." Driver: "I swear, we hope for hardship. We don't want a happy life and trips, the opposite, such things take us away from God. The harder the situation is, the closer we are to God."
    - Natanael_L 11y ago
      And again, what drove them to take that position?

criddell 11y ago

Forgive me if this is in the linked article (it's not loading for me), but if we were to say to ISIS "let's negotiate", what is it that they want? Is it something reasonable?

pan69 11y ago
He's saying the west should stop interfering in the middle east, with which I whole heartily agree.
notsony 11y ago
What do they want? Here you go. This is the first (and only?) interview ever given to a Western journalist. https://www.facebook.com/JuergenTodenhoefer/videos/10152723644955838/ https://www.facebook.com/JuergenTodenhoefer/videos/101527236...
- criddell 11y ago
  I just watched that entire video and it's pretty terrifying.
vixen99 11y ago
Why would they want to negotiate? They're winning hands down. Seems pretty clear from many sources that their stated goal is to restore the "caliphate" — an Islamic state under the rule of a community of religious scholars guided by a caliph taken to mean the successor to the Prophet Muhammad For them anyone who doesn't believe in their interpretation of Islam must convert or die. Meanwhile President Obama has encouraging words for them: “The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam”. So much for free speech and cartoons.
qohen 11y ago
What is it that they want? "What ISIS Really Wants" (The Atlantic, March 2015) [0]: The Islamic State is no mere collection of psychopaths. It is a religious group with carefully considered beliefs, among them that it is a key agent of the coming apocalypse. Here’s what that means for its strategy—and for how to stop it. [0] http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2015/03/what-isis-really-wants/384980/?single_page=true http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2015/03/what-isi...
Natanael_L 11y ago
No, that's not what we should do at all. They got power because people in the region thought it was a better idea to give them power than to allow our destabilizing influence to continue. Take away all reasons for why they got support in the first place, and they will be marginalized by the people themselves.

notsony 11y ago

NO NO NO Let's end the myth that Western foreign policy is (solely) to blame. What about Islamic terrorists killing people in Southern Thailand? Is there something wrong with their foreign policy? What about Islamic terrorists killing Filipinos for the past 20-30 years? Have Christians been oppressing Muslims over there? What about the recent clashes between Muslims and Buddhist monks in Burma? What did the monks do wrong? Radical Islam is a GLOBAL jihad movement.

tomelders 11y ago
Wastern foreign policy absolutely is to blame. You need to look at it on a timeline of a century to get the complete picture.
pan69 11y ago
Radical Islam has become a global jihad movement and it was created by the west interfering in the middle east.
- iofj 11y ago
  Because it's not like attacks like this weren't committed by muslims before ? In reality they've been at it since the early middle ages.
  - pan69 11y ago
    You mean those middle ages where a bunch of Christians went over to the middle east to kill a bunch of Muslims? You mean those middle ages?
    - iofj 11y ago
      First crusade: 1096 AD Muslim expansion wars: 736 AD In a way you're right, you've just got the agressor wrong. In fact the crusades were started because of muslim agression. Because, and I'm quoting muslim historical sources here "the blood of Christians was standing above our knees in Jerusalem".

rdancer 11y ago

You're thinking different war theatre. Negotiating with ISIS will not bring the fruits you envision. You know when we say "we don't negotiate with terrorists"? These guys don't negotiate with us.

Natanael_L 11y ago
Who said we'll negotiate? The real problem is that our actions are large part of the reason for WHY they have such an easy time recruiting people. Lets not keep making it easy for them to recruit people.

iofj 11y ago

Can we please drop this pretense ? One only has to look at the terrorists to know for sure that provoking them is not the issue, neither is poverty, or racism. I'm also seriously wondering what the Kurds ever did to provoke them ? The Yezidi ? The Shi'a ? The Iranians ? Iraqi Christians ? Alawites ? Druze ? The Lebanese ? Even if I can sort-of understand that Israel, Turkey and Jordan did do a few attacks, it did not justify the response at all. I realize the problem : if you follow a normal way of thinking you'll invariable end up with that the problems are located in the ideology, and of course that indirectly attacks a lot of people. That however is not a valid line of reasoning, as it Sorry I am posting this because Dyab Abou Jahjah posted an article in the newspaper. He's a local muslim, a mouthpiece for muslims and he posted an article that stands out massively : it does NOT condemn the attack, but the "western response" to it [1], describing it as a consequence of the conflict "the west created". Half of all muslims I know on facebook are reposting that. I just want to say, if that's the attitude of even 10% of muslims, civil war is inevitable. And it sure looks like it's more like 50%. [1] http://www.standaard.be/cnt/dmf20151114_01970768 http://www.standaard.be/cnt/dmf20151114_01970768

alfapla 11y ago
Your considerations may be true but there is simply no denying that there is some serious hypocrisy going on at the core of our value system. We fume when muslim terrorists bomb Paris, but we claim the right to bomb pretty much any muslim country whose government is not laying in bed with the West. The fact that we make some half-assed efforts to avoid "innocent" victims is no proof of moral superiority. The next time NATO blows up some wedding party in Afghanistan, I'd like to see the flag of Afghanistan projected on the opera house of Sidney.
Natanael_L 11y ago
> One only has to look at the terrorists to know for sure that provoking them is not the issue Maybe you shouldn't look at their behaviours today, but at their origins. Most such groups appear because somebody felt excluded and powerless, or because some sociopath exploited a power vacuum. They grow because there's large populations of people who feel powerless and excluded. Prevent that from becoming a problem in the first place and the few remaining terrorists would be powerless, because they'd be too few and far between.

TelmoMenezes 11y ago

I completely agree that not interfering with the middle east would have been the way to go. Unfortunately, that ship has sailed, and there is no undo button. > The most effective way to get rid of terrorists is to take away their recruitment base, by not giving people more reasons to attack. Yes, but this is not an option in this case because their demands are simply not reasonable. What are we to do? Convert to islam or kill ourselves? They have no single reasonable demand or space for compromise. Are we to enact laws that go against the very principles of our civilization, purely out of fear? There is no simple way out of this.

Natanael_L 11y ago
> their demands But this same "their" would only be a very tiny pool of powerless people if nobody else was willing to listen to them.

maxharris 11y ago

"Provoking" the Islamic State did not make them: execute people, including children, for being gay (https://news.vice.com/article/the-islamic-state-executes-9-men-and-a-boy-for-being-gay https://news.vice.com/article/the-islamic-state-executes-9-m...) sever the hands of people accused of theft (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3007498/Sickening-moment-ISIS-cut-thief-s-hand-industrial-paper-guillotine.html http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3007498/Sickening-mo...) write sex slavery into its laws (http://www.nytimes.com/2015/08/14/world/middleeast/isis-enshrines-a-theology-of-rape.html http://www.nytimes.com/2015/08/14/world/middleeast/isis-ensh...) But you know what actually did cause them to be like that? A literal interpretation of Islam. Christianity is no better, but that is only obvious when you observe it in its unmuzzled form during the Dark Ages. Islam needs to be restrained in exactly the same way.

Natanael_L 11y ago
The interesting question in stopping them is why do people choose to follow them? Attacking them for their poor justifications will not help you get anything done. Ensuring nobody WANTS to help them is how you stop them. And to do that, you need to make sure people don't feel that extremely desperate and make sure they don't have a reason to blame your for their situation - because the people joining them feel that it is their best choice for improving their situation. Give people there a better choice and ISIS will lose their power.
- maxharris 11y ago
  They follow out of religious devotion: https://news.vice.com/video/the-islamic-state-full-length https://news.vice.com/video/the-islamic-state-full-length (9:57 into the video) Passenger: "We are fighters." Driver: "I swear, we hope for hardship. We don't want a happy life and trips, the opposite, such things take us away from God. The harder the situation is, the closer we are to God."
  - Natanael_L 11y ago
    And again, what drove them to take that position?