War on ISIS

I've been preaching this since day one. Saudi Arabia is the closest thing to Vatican City or Jerusalem Islam has in terms of religious importance. It does not look good to the world when the den of Islam is run by totalitarian theocrats. Israel may be human rights violators, but AFAIK, they aren't to their own people.

And I saw a video in which an Islamic man told Cnn that other countries with majority Muslims did not practice such abuses, including ones with female rights allowing multiple female heads of state. and that it was a regional problem. Sadly though, that does not excuse the fact that Muslims pretty much accept or ignore that the place where the Holiest of the Holy has left the physical trace of His presence are being monsters to their own people. Muslims worldwide do not hold the sharia law views of Saudi Arabia, but they also do not make widespread protests of it's practice. It makes it look as though Muslims suffer from Kitty Genovese syndrome. Even worse, it makes it seem that on some level, that is what God wants to happen, which pretty much means Muslims view it with some kind of justification.

Look at gay rights. Although there are definitely still Christians against it, even punishing it with death in some theocratic Christian African countries, Christian protests supporting it were so much that both the Pope, the highest leader of the Catholic Church, and the state ended up supporting it, because the Pope understood that the highest officials of Christianity supporting human rights abuses such as homophobia made Christianity look horrible.

But sadly Muslims and Saudi Arabia do not seem to understand this. Millions of Muslims travel to Mecca every year, but AFAIK, never is there a widespread protest for human rights change. Instead they go and leave with complacency, meaning that may they view God as accepting of the atrocities going on in his Holiest house of prayer, or maybe they are just fearful of the Saudi government. Either way, it makes Muslims appear to accept human rights violations on some level out of either dogma or cowardice, and that leads to one phucked up public image.

But then this leads back to us, the U.S. We openly deal with Saudi Arabia and our government does not openly protest their human rights violations for fear of loss of business, which means we are essentially giving the Saudi government the funds they need to suppress people, which makes us look bad to the rest of the world.

In the end, Islam looks bad, we look like hypocrites, and terrorists are given the moral justification they need to perform human rights abuses (admittedly ISIS has performed acts forbidden even by Islam, such as live immolation, but when compared to stoning, is it really different on a moral level and not only a dogmatic one?)

Israel may be human rights violators

But then this leads back to us, the U.S. We openly deal with Saudi Arabia and our government does not openly protest their human rights violations for fear of loss of business, which means we are essentially giving the Saudi government the funds they need to suppress people, which makes us look bad to the rest of the world.

In the end, Islam looks bad, we look like hypocrites, and terrorists are given the moral justification they need to perform human rights abuses (admittedly ISIS has performed acts forbidden even by Islam, such as live immolation, but when compared to stoning, is it really different on a moral level and not only a dogmatic one?)

Originally posted by psmith81992
This begs proof but you have been incredibly consistent with your baseless assertions.

I'm not sure what reality you live in. We live in a world where we occasionally deal with "bad" people. This is pretty much the norm worldwide. Your "utopia" doesn't exist.

This was once accused by the U.N. and Amnesty International, but I will admit fault as these claims have been dismissed by many credible sources.

Okay. Well then, don't complain about the violence these bad people inspire. Like I said, sharia law in the den of Islam is what gives ISIS and other terrorist organizations the moral justification they need to do what they do. So if you don't mind the US dealing with and thus supporting and funding them, also don't mind the violence they inspire.

This was once accused by the U.N. and Amnesty International, but I will admit fault as these claims have been dismissed by many credible sources.

Okay. Well then, don't complain about the violence these bad people inspire. Like I said, sharia law in the den of Islam is what gives ISIS and other terrorist organizations the moral justification they need to do what they do. So if you don't mind the US dealing with and thus supporting and funding them, also don't mind the violence they inspire.

Originally posted by FinalAnswer
We should really just kill everyone so nobody can threaten anybody ever again.

It's the simplest solution, really.

Originally posted by psmith81992
Wonderful retort!

Not particularly.

There might be innocents over there, but the harsh truth is we absolutely have killed thousands upon thousands of innocent people in the past with various bombings.

It doesn't mean kill everyone, but these religious fanatics will never be swayed from their beliefs. These kids that are out beheading people are going to be the next friggin generation of terrorists, with each batch coming out more sadistic then the last.

Nah if we do the job, we can't do it half-assed. Just slaughter everyone east of Israel until we reach the Pacific, it's the only way to be sure.

Originally posted by FinalAnswer
Nah if we do the job, we can't do it half-assed. Just slaughter everyone east of Israel until we reach the Pacific, it's the only way to be sure.

This is the usual sarcasm you expect from a pacifist, because a middle ground doesn't exist for them.

Originally posted by FinalAnswer
Nah if we do the job, we can't do it half-assed. Just slaughter everyone east of Israel until we reach the Pacific, it's the only way to be sure.

I agree. I ****ing hate those whiney tibetan (unts.

Prove I'm sarcastic

Originally posted by FinalAnswer
Nah if we do the job, we can't do it half-assed. Just slaughter everyone east of Israel until we reach the Pacific, it's the only way to be sure.

You've gone mad with power.

Originally posted by FinalAnswer
Prove I'm sarcastic

Obvious does not need proof.

Originally posted by psmith81992
Obvious does not need proof.

.....Have you not been paying attention to how the REAL WORLD works any more?

Have you ever made a post that made sense?

I hope not.

Originally posted by psmith81992
Obvious does not need proof.

I accept your concession

Apparently, you missed Ush's warnings about using that phrase: "concession accepted". Something about it being "immature" or something similar, iirc. Don't worry though, I brought it to his attention. 😉

Let's see if you get the same stern warning that TI did when he used it.

I didn't say concession accepted though.

Originally posted by psmith81992
Good, because neither of those organizations are credible.

Your point does not make sense. If I'm ok with the US supplying ISIS (they supply their enemies actually), then I shouldn't mind the violence? How are those two things connected exactly?

I am saying that on an ideological level, when terrorists see human rights violations being committed in Saudi Arabia, it gives them the impression that God/Allah is immoral and accepts atrocities done in His name, which gives them the justification to commit atrocities, since based on Saudi sharia law, Allah permits violence and oppression. The Saudi government is able to commit such atrocities with US funding. Thus the U.S. inadvertently helps uphold the violent dogmatic side of Islam that inspires terrorists.

ISIS just beheaded a Syrian Kallid Al-Asad.

This story brought me to tears.