5 ms·
You're making things up. You're not writing clearly about it and need to perform some more research. What persecution or mass extermination of which groups of p
by Kequc 9y ago
You're making things up. You're not writing clearly about it and need to perform some more research. What persecution or mass extermination of which groups of people for example are you talking about?
- breatheoften 9y agoUh -- the west has been killing large numbers of people in countries throughout the Middle East for decades. What research is needed to demonstrate that? Airwars reports that us forces killed 432 civilians in Syria last month alone. That's a lot of people -- and they are being killed for imaginary reasons.
- reitanqild 9y agoYou are defending something else. Nobody I'm aware of here is denying what you say. This is what threadstarter wrote: declared fervent worshippers of a particular deity calling for outright murder, persecution and mass extermination of entire groups of people
- breatheoften 9y agoThat is a characterization of the right wing base of the counter terrorism movement. There is a huge group of people in the West who believe that Christianity/West and Islam are in a holy war -- these play a large role in defining the actions of the counterterrorism movement. Many many western soldiers will profess that they believe the problem with terrorism is about Islam - and many of those just happen to be Christian's themselves. They might cloak their words but they have slowly over time cemented their positions. Given their actions and the deaths they have caused what reason do you have to claim they are not pursuing a goal of murdering groups of people to extermination? The west has actually started using the word "exterminate" to characterize their goals with regard to ISIS -- the reality is that this goal can be spoken in a narrow term as targeted toward some small specific thing like ISIS -- but it cannot (and does not and has not for a long time) exist as such a narrow specific thing when put into action. Large numbers of innocents are killed as this objective is chased -- and the targeting process only ever expands to include more targets. If we are generous, we at best could describe western fundamentalists as having the goal of murdering mass groups of people to marginalization -- is that really that different than quoted passage?
- watwut 9y agoThere are also differences through. No one in West is thrown out of roof for being gay, people can speak against Christianity and holy war without being executed. While wearing too revealing cloth may disadvantage me in workplace due to assumptions, I won't be stoned or whatever. 14 years old boys are not radicalised to by preachers to become martyrs. Those are rather important differences. Conservative Christian journal I read may whine about men not being head of the families anymore and women not being women anymore, but even they don't dispute voting and property rights.
- breatheoften 9y agoI'm not sure how this is related to what I wrote? Are you saying that "exterminate ISIS" should expand to "exterminate Saudi Arabia" because Saudi Arabia currently mistreats homosexuals and women?
- reitanqild 9y agoI honestly find it hard to understand what you mean. It's like you are discussing with someone who isn't here.
- watwut 9y agoWestern fundamentalism and isis are fundamentally different. They are not nearly equivalent. They can be made to sound similar, as your comment did, if you ignore important differences between them. That is however, imo, just manipulation tractic.
- breatheoften 9y agoI'm not sure where I argued an equivalence between these forces. Western fundamentalism doesn't have to be equivalent to Isis to be damaging in nature. It's my position that the counterterrorism movement is off the rails -- a negative, objectiveless, and misguided force on the world that is more damaging (because of scale) than terrorism. There are many different groups of people who support and feed the counter-terrorism movement -- among them are many people who are happy to advocate for extreme levels of violence against unknown or imagined enemies. If you ask, many people in the us support "turning the deserts to glass" -- they have perceived enemies in the deserts and don't particularly care for who else they kill in pursuit. People in the west want to pretend that terrorists are unique in their lack of regard for civilian lives -- but there is an objective question we can ask to determine the truth of this. Who's actions result in the deaths of more innocent civilians? These numbers reveal that western hands are not so innocent as they pretend. Semantic quibbling (and often misdirection) about the relationship of "intent" to these deaths is the manipulation tactic -- a frequently biased mechanism for the whitewashing of responsibility and guilt off the hands of the chosen marked as noble without regard to evidence.
- breatheoften 9y agoI'm re-reading some comments and it seems some people are disagreeing about the nature of the twitter supporters referenced in the parent post. Maybe it's possible commenters have never trawled through the twitter mass? I've done so and occasionally tweeted to try and find if the people were real -- many are. I'm not sure how people can disagree that there is merit to the parents characterization if they perform this exercise themselves ...
- reitanqild 9y agoI have a strong feeling that he is talking about Christians but I have never seen any of this. I might hang in the "wrong" circles though.