Originally posted by Robtard
HYG:http://mediamatters.org/research/2015/02/19/the-problem-with-right-wing-media-outrage-over/202575Right-wing media are scandalizing President Obama's refusal to conflate terrorism with all of Islam, attacking the president for not focusing on "Islamic extremism" in the three-day White House summit to combat violent extremism. But the conservative outrage ignores the fact that conflating terrorism with an entire religion would harm U.S. national security and foreign policy interests by alienating allied Muslim nations and play into the hands of terrorists who claim the U.S. is at war with Islam. -snip
Making more enemies and helping groups like ISIS more easily recruit impressionable idiots isn't a good idea.
ISIS desperately wants the West to bite into the "War on Islam" propaganda machine, as it directly helps their cause and many Conservatives seem more than happy to play along. It's baffling.
Originally posted by Robtard
HYG:http://mediamatters.org/research/2015/02/19/the-problem-with-right-wing-media-outrage-over/202575Right-wing media are scandalizing President Obama's refusal to conflate terrorism with all of Islam, attacking the president for not focusing on "Islamic extremism" in the three-day White House summit to combat violent extremism. But the conservative outrage ignores the fact that conflating terrorism with an entire religion would harm U.S. national security and foreign policy interests by alienating allied Muslim nations and play into the hands of terrorists who claim the U.S. is at war with Islam. -snip
Making more enemies and helping groups like ISIS more easily recruit impressionable idiots isn't a good idea.
ISIS desperately wants the West to bite into the "War on Islam" propaganda machine, as it directly helps their cause and many Conservatives seem more than happy to play along. It's baffling.
You must agree that source is as left wing as and as bias as the source people claim Star posted. So why does this get credit?
Originally posted by Robtard
LoL, K. It shouldn't be a Left or Right thing though, it's common sense. Propagating enemy propaganda that helps said enemy isn't a good idea.
Originally posted by AsbestosFlaygon
There is no such thing as a moderate Muslim. I don't understand why liberals refuse to acknowledge this simple fact. Even Muslims themselves don't consider themselves as moderate.
Originally posted by Robtard
LoL, K. It shouldn't be a Left or Right thing though, it's common sense. Propagating enemy propaganda that helps said enemy isn't a good idea.
Originally posted by AsbestosFlaygon
There is no such thing as a moderate Muslim. I don't understand why liberals refuse to acknowledge this simple fact. Even Muslims themselves don't consider themselves as moderate.
Originally posted by Robtard
Is that you Longpig? Still trying to cope with your micro-penis it seems. Have a good one either way 👆
Originally posted by Peace Keeper
Like "Islam is a religion of peace"?Islam is by its very nature anti white Christian male. Liberals believe all the world's evil stems from white Christian males. So, in the mind of a liberal, Islam is their friend.
Close!
LMAO@ Retard's obsession with "micro penises" and LOL@him claiming we're "helping" the enemy by calling them what they really are. That's like saying the Allies were helping the Germans in WW2 by calling them "Nazis".
Originally posted by Q99this whole semantic argument is pretty uninteresting to me... but i don't understand what is so overly broad about the phrase "radical islam"
I think I'd rather point out how you and Star are acting butthurt over people not using the over-generalized language you want them to- even though right now, Muslims, Arab and non-Arab, even ones you'd probably call 'radical,' are doing far more to fight Isis than you could hope to.You're acting really, really sore, over people not using a phrase. Think about that for a second. Not using a word you have a problem with, or misusing a word, or even a semantic argument, nothing that insults you, or anyone you know, or anyone period, but just not using a phrase.
And even the only Republican in 20 years who actually showed he could win the presidency and who is way too warlike for probably every liberal here, is not on your side on this.
The reason why people don't use it has been mentioned- it's overly broad, it includes people who aren't our enemies, it includes people fighting our enemies, and we have actual specific names for our enemies so we don't have to rely on inaccurate generalities. Everyone is even on the same page that Isis/Daesh is our enemies who need to be wiped out. And Al Qaeda, and so on. There's no disagreement on that part.
You are, in effect, very angry that people are simply just using different, more precise words. That's an impressive level of thin-skinned, I must say.
it really depends on who you define as radicals. sure, we're not at war with all radicals. only the particular groups that are openly hostile to us. but at the end of the day, referring to "radical islam" as the source of the terrorists who we are specifically fighting seems pretty accurate to me. and while we aren't at war with all religious extremists, all religious extremists are problematic for a secular society.
i mean we have no problem referring to christian extremists as christian extremists... based on the arguments against using the phrase posed by the democrats, basically they just think that using the word "islam" will alienate muslims, even if the term in question is completely accurate. this is just a case of calculated political correctness for the sake of shoring up votes and political good will... which maybe makes sense for career politicians, but doesn't make sense for the rest of us. so why would we (normal people) imitate this nonsense? just makes you guys look like brainwashed pawns to me.
Originally posted by Star428
LMAO@ Retard's obsession with "micro penises" and LOL@him claiming we're "helping" the enemy by calling them what they really are.That's like saying the Allies were helping the Germans in WW2 by calling them "Nazis".
So you do read what I write. LoL!
That's a very poor analogy, a proper analogy would have been: "like the Allies referring to Nazi rhetoric of them being a master race and agreeing with it."
Originally posted by red g jacks
this whole semantic argument is pretty uninteresting to me... but i don't understand what is so overly broad about the phrase "radical islam"it really depends on who you define as radicals. sure, we're not at war with all radicals. only the particular groups that are openly hostile to us. but at the end of the day, referring to "radical islam" as the source of the terrorists who we are specifically fighting seems pretty accurate to me. and while we aren't at war with all religious extremists, all religious extremists are problematic for a secular society.
i mean we have no problem referring to christian extremists as christian extremists... based on the arguments against using the phrase posed by the democrats, basically they just think that using the word "islam" will alienate muslims, even if the term in question is completely accurate. this is just a case of calculated political correctness for the sake of shoring up votes and political good will... which maybe makes sense for career politicians, but doesn't make sense for the rest of us. so why would we (normal people) imitate this nonsense? just makes you guys look like brainwashed pawns to me.
We also don't really use the term Radical Christianity (and if mainstream sources or Obama did the Christians in our country would feel alienated, and places like Fox News would lose their shit).
I think the argument that it helps push away neutral Muslims, increases Islamophobia within our countries, and is a good recruiting tool for Daesh and other groups like it is a very valid one, why do you not buy that?
Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
Rob since when does calling them radicals become generalizing? Everyone on the left keeps flip flopping here. When is it going to stop?
Why not just call them what they are? Terrorist. Why force it to be something about "Islam" when 99.999% of Muslims aren't out chopping heads off and shooting people while shouting 'durrka durrka'?
Forcing it to be a "Us vs Islam" sort of thing is what groups like ISIS wants, they need that separation in order to survive and recruit.