4 ms·
Wow, I didn't expect to find such shameless propaganda on HN. Every single sentence is factually wrong and insulting to readers' intelligence here. If it's not
by lazyjones 12y ago
Wow, I didn't expect to find such shameless propaganda on HN. Every single sentence is factually wrong and insulting to readers' intelligence here.
If it's not obvious to someone: just read some actual interviews with radical muslims, purported reasoning by Bin Laden etc. - their reasons are always political, the US is targeted specifically because of all the death and destruction it has brought to the Middle East. Japanese "aid workers and journalists" (actually: a military contractor and a journalist) were targeted because Japan donated $100 mil. to the fight against IS (as said in the videos: http://www.newsnation.in/article/67223-is-threatens-kill-japanese-hostages-video.html http://www.newsnation.in/article/67223-is-threatens-kill-jap...), the ransom asked was $100 mil. for each hostage.
Don't believe the crappy propaganda: look for facts and then ask yourselves why the US supporters need these lies.
- happyscrappy 12y ago> Every single sentence is factually wrong You don't believe ISIS would kill as many innocents as possible? It is practically their mission statement.
- lazyjones 12y ago> You don't believe ISIS would kill as many innocents as possible? It is practically their mission statement. It's pointless to argue about statements containing words with highly subjective and arbitrary meanings like "innocents". Were the employees of the TV station the US bombed (with good precision and information!) in Serbia "innocent"? Of what crime were they guilty if not? The US apparently thought they weren't innocent. Who are we to claim the people brutally murdered by the IS are - to the IS - "innocent"? The IS kills Japanese citizens because their government is "guilty". The US kills women and children because their high-tech drones aren't good enough and their information seems to be bad. Or so they've been saying for years, while still consciously deciding to use these weapons to said effect. While both are morally wrong, the latter is also disingenuous and not worthy of a civilized nation. It's the consequence of trying both to enforce the "right of the strongest" and to attempt to claim a moral high ground.
- happyscrappy 12y ago> Who are we to claim the people brutally murdered by the IS are - to the IS - "innocent"? If you believe the West and IS are morally equivalent then you may want to revisit your worldview.
- tomp 12y agoThere is little moral difference in my mind between ISIS armies and Western armies attacking and killing people.
- tomjen3 12y agoThe your worldview is so devoid from reality as to be useless.
- saiya-jin 12y agoyes, US is less bad than ISIS. Still far from being good guys though
- happyscrappy 12y agoEurope works with the US on these attacks, are they evil too?
- knowaveragejoe 12y agoIt's actually a mixture of both. Some extremists(particularly ISIS) firmly believe they are in they end times and are carrying out what they think scripture dictates, others are involved for the reasons you stated.
- TeMPOraL 12y agoSo is the US, apparently, if you're to believe the story about Bush's motivations. > In the prelude to the 2003 Invasion of Iraq, President George W. Bush told Jacques Chirac that Gog and Magog were at work in the Middle East: "This confrontation is willed by God," he told the French leader, "who wants us to use this conflict to erase his people's enemies before a New Age begins." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gog_and_Magog#Modern_apocalypticism http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gog_and_Magog#Modern_apocalypti...
- knowaveragejoe 12y agoI would argue that this represents an almost trivial minority sentiment today, in contrast to a pervasive belief among IS militants and supporters.