Typo, it's obviously Jan

http://www.businessinsider.com/obama...illance-2016-3

Chris "Ted Cruz is my real Dad but I'm ashamed to admit it in public" V thinks this is appeasement, right? I'm starting to think Obama hasn't even watched ONE Sam Harris youtube!!!??!?!?!

I'll open this up to everyone: what's the issue, again?

I guess this maybe needs to get stickied, but "I get mad online when people call my bad opinions bad" does not count as anyone else's problem.

People calling others opinions bad was labeled as bad as blowing up other human beings by one poster ITT, so we don't have consensus on this.

Immigrants/muslims/... in Belgium are also given alot of opportunities and financial aid if needed so. It's a cheap excuse.
Anyway, watching the news now.

Typical 2p2 back and forth.

"You can't blame Islamic terrorism on Islam, most Muslims are peaceful and abhor violence."
"What about the fact that millions of mainstream Muslims approve of things like stoning adulterers, or death for apostates?"
"Bigot!"

Same question: do you think moderate Muslims actually exist?

1. There were a couple non white/Muslim title holders of this title in the last century. Cambodian genocide, Rwandan genocide, etc.
2. If you're suggesting the title flipped from white to Muslim in 2001 I'd like to see your math.

Of course they do.

revots- Wait, even more basic. What do you think the word "most" means?

Actually, step 3 has been more along the lines of pointing out that those millions of mainstream Muslims are never the less not actually killing people.

The bigotry is in thinking it's reasonable to treat holding objectionable beliefs as being equivalent to carrying out acts of terrorism in terms of justifying various policy proposals.

So can we agree that radicalized Islam is a threat to national security but moderate Muslims are no big deal? Cause, I think most all the liberals here would agree.

Put it another way, do moderate Muslims deserves the same dignity and respect we afford to say, moderate Humans? Or is there something inherently different about Muslims?

I agree with you entirely that each new terrorist attack on the West is bound to push more and more people into the Trump camp, especially if when they try to discuss their fears they keep getting something, something about lightening strikes and damn they must just simply be horribly racist people.

I think you make lots of good points, and so does Wookie and many others, but it does no good if it falls on deaf ears. You're competing for those ears, and you lose each time you seemingly don't take the problem seriously. I don't think Hillary will make that mistake.

Why would spreading lies be necessary? Unless Islam is so bad that people can't practice it peacefully, then the question is irrelevant except for Buzzfeed lists of the world's worst religions. Even posters who vehemently insist that Islam is the worst can't be bothered to attempt to show how lecturing people on their superterrible religion leads to any improvement at all.

Both very good points, but especially #2. Muslims are just THE WORST, to a tune of death tolls in the ~hundreds (or less) of Europeans per year.

FYP

I'm glad you will admit that blaming cartoonists for cartoons was ridiculous.

I consider this a move in the right direction in terms of understanding.

Some key updates:

* It is 100% sure that the suicide bombers from yesterday's attacks have ties to Salah Abdeslam and the others involved in the Paris attacks.

* The attacks in Brussels were supposed to take place next Monday, which is Eastern Monday. The attacks were hastened because terrorists feared getting caught aswell, after Abdeslam's arrest last Friday.

* About the brothers Al Bakraoui. They were both known by the authorities for non-terrorist crimes. One of them was known for a series of carjackings and the other for armed robbery... After spending a couple years in prison, they were released earlier. After violating some of their probation conditions, they were searched but authorities lost track of them. Very likely they made a trip to Syria.

* Erdogan's insulting statements are mostly incorrect and the result of a small conflict between Belgium and Turkey that took place at the European top a couple days ago. If anyone wishes, I can go more into detail about this.

* A third suicide bomber (one that blew up in the airport) has been identified.
His name is Najim Laachraoui. Investigators were very close to tracking him down. He used the alias Soufiane Kayal. It is also assumed that he built the bomb belts that were used in the Paris attacks.

Just trying to get you to admit to yes.

That's normally the first step to understanding the problem, actually acknowledging a problem exists. Why else would you want to throw the "if" in there if you didn't actually believe it to be true?

In before intellectually dishonest statements from flyberbole trying to frame me as wanting to carpet bomb countries and ban all Muslims.


Maybe, between the crazies that want to ban Muslims, carpet bomb them, patrol their neighbours, and other crazies that think there's no Islamic extremism and no link between terrorist acts and Islamism (no true scotsman), there's some middle ground to be had to solving this? Western Europe closed their eyes to this issue, with thousands of foreign fighters walking right back into the country.

I would propose something along the lines of much tougher control on ex-fighters that have fought with ISIS or other in middle east, because that seems to be the #1 common denominator between all of them. Right now they're being "monitored", i.e not monitored at all. That's just step 1.

Step 2 is solving this massive migrant flood that western born nationals fighting in Syria and other zones are using to migrate back. Something has to be done. The Merkel strategy of status quo everything is fine is just not working.

I actually like Obama's approach to this terrorist attack. Go to a baseball game. Unless you change the laws why do you put so much stress on yourself watching all these small terrorist attacks and gun shootings. If we lose less than 500 a year, that is almost a rounding error to being overweight or driving a car.

What more likely to happen is Trump gets elected. He is going to torture some innocent Muslim by mistake. In retaliation they are going to kidnap his daughter and torture her. Then he going to drop bombs to retaliate. This country is going to be rather big and declare war on U.S., U.S will bomb them, however they are going to have bigger allies. Then they are going to drop bombs on USA. Then Trump will nuke a city. then they will take out LA, SF, Washington, and NY. Then they will invade with million troops. Then we will fight back claiming we were provoked. Then the death toll starts rising 100 million, 200 million, 300 million. Then when the bullets run out we are all back to eating Jack in the box tacos for 50 years until someone decides deficits don't matter and the other side starts electing gold bugs.

In summary, go to a ballgame today!

Nope. The target is still Isis. You may have increased collateral damage by targeting isis in situations where there is are civilians close vicinity.

So Cruz refuses to use the standard definition of carpet bombing and you refuse to use the standard definition of targeting.

Where do you draw the line? If you're going to kill 9 civilians for every 1 bad guy, who would you say is being targeted? What if the ratio is 99:1? And ok, suppose you still say you're targeting the 1. Does that 1 justify the 99? If so, then I guess you're fine with being bombed in a shopping mall if there happens to be a hard-to-catch bad guy there at the same time as you?

(Putting aside that the US' definition of "combatant" or "target" is any Muslim-looking man within a certain age group, in a certain country, who is not physically handicapped from using a weapon should he one day decide to.)

15 minutes ago from AP:

http://bigstory.ap.org/article/1c166...wave-bloodshed

I guess the JV is a little more nimble than previously thought.

The attack yesterday was 'scheduled' to go off the day after Easter, but the date was moved up after the conspirators learned their compatriot was talking to the police after being picked up.

This is like the Paris attack in Team America

This is disingenuous "logic" to defend cult behavior.

People aren't killed for apostasy because people don't become apostates because they will be killed. Savvy?

Being supportive of murder for switching religions or adultery is evil and abhorrent, no matter if they wield the instrument of death.
More like tens/hundreds of millions.