4 ms·

>Speaking to the TV2 channel, Bondevik expressed further concern about the Trump administration’s tactics. “I understand the fear of terror, but one should not

by chopin 10y ago

>Speaking to the TV2 channel, Bondevik expressed further concern about the Trump administration’s tactics. “I understand the fear of terror, but one should not treat entire ethnic groups in such a way,” he said. >“I must admit that I fear the future. There has been a lot of progress over the last 10 years, but this gives great cause for concern, in line with the authoritarian leaders we see controlling other major countries.” I'd be curious to know of which "progress" Bondevik is talking here. My takeaway from the Western reaction on perceived terrorist threats is pretty much: the terrorists have won.

StavrosK 10y ago
Given that "the terrorists'" (Osama's, at least) goal was to have americans question their government's foreign policy, they most certainly have not won: https://www.reddit.com/r/WTF/comments/wcpls/this_i_my_friends_son_being_searched_by_the_tsa/c5cabqo/?st=iypxs7mp&sh=68938c28 https://www.reddit.com/r/WTF/comments/wcpls/this_i_my_friend...
- __derek__ 10y ago
  Al Qaeda and ISIL/ISIS/Daesh are different beasts. The latter's stated intention has been the establishment of a modern caliphate that counts all of the world's Sunni Muslims as citizens and that wages a war against the rest of the world (Shia, Jewish, Christian, whatever). It wants all Sunnis to be ejected from the West and sent back to live under its caliphate. Given that, it "wins" when the West (a) rejects Muslims (especially Sunnis fleeing ISIL) or (b) talks about Islamism as an existential threat (i.e. lionizes ISIL).
  - StavrosK 10y ago
    Sure, which means there's no "the terrorists". It's all different people.
vixen99 10y ago
So far the terrorists are certainly winning as the individuals at the wrong end of the received terrorist threat-made-actual will testify. Given that negotiation with ISIS is not on the table (nothing to negotiate unless you call submission a negotiating point) what would be the recommendation for the West to remedy the situation? Currently many Europeans are getting used to armed guards at churches and synagogues, crowded places and other strategic points; I wonder what would cause this situation to be different in say, ten years time?

by chopin 10y ago

StavrosK 10y ago

Given that "the terrorists'" (Osama's, at least) goal was to have americans question their government's foreign policy, they most certainly have not won: https://www.reddit.com/r/WTF/comments/wcpls/this_i_my_friends_son_being_searched_by_the_tsa/c5cabqo/?st=iypxs7mp&sh=68938c28 https://www.reddit.com/r/WTF/comments/wcpls/this_i_my_friend...

__derek__ 10y ago
Al Qaeda and ISIL/ISIS/Daesh are different beasts. The latter's stated intention has been the establishment of a modern caliphate that counts all of the world's Sunni Muslims as citizens and that wages a war against the rest of the world (Shia, Jewish, Christian, whatever). It wants all Sunnis to be ejected from the West and sent back to live under its caliphate. Given that, it "wins" when the West (a) rejects Muslims (especially Sunnis fleeing ISIL) or (b) talks about Islamism as an existential threat (i.e. lionizes ISIL).
- StavrosK 10y ago
  Sure, which means there's no "the terrorists". It's all different people.

vixen99 10y ago

So far the terrorists are certainly winning as the individuals at the wrong end of the received terrorist threat-made-actual will testify. Given that negotiation with ISIS is not on the table (nothing to negotiate unless you call submission a negotiating point) what would be the recommendation for the West to remedy the situation? Currently many Europeans are getting used to armed guards at churches and synagogues, crowded places and other strategic points; I wonder what would cause this situation to be different in say, ten years time?