Raqqa, the last stronghold of ISIS, has been retaken.

ISIS is just the present face of Islamic Extremism, the next will be more insidious as it will be fighting on our doorsteps. I have many, many, many Muslim friends both male and female and they do not want to spread Islam by force, they often give me books and things trying to convert me, because they see it as saving me. It isn't going to work clearly and I do worry when all Muslims are tarred with the same brush. But what's coming isn't going to be funny or pretty and evil people will use it to push agenda's of hate because that is who they are and equally evil people will push equally heinous agenda's of hate in response. What's coming when ISIS fall is a response in our own countries and in Arabic countries who were against ISIS, they will decentralise and work as cells and it will go on for decades.

I don't buy that. Not at all...

Originally posted by Steve Zodiac
. I have many, many, many Muslim friends both male and female

Not At ALL!

Something even worse than ISIS? Oh boy, I can hardly wait...

Originally posted by Steve Zodiac
ISIS is just the present face of Islamic Extremism, the next will be more insidious as it will be fighting on our doorsteps. I have many, many, many Muslim friends both male and female and they do not want to spread Islam by force, they often give me books and things trying to convert me, because they see it as saving me. It isn't going to work clearly and I do worry when all Muslims are tarred with the same brush. But what's coming isn't going to be funny or pretty and evil people will use it to push agenda's of hate because that is who they are and equally evil people will push equally heinous agenda's of hate in response. What's coming when ISIS fall is a response in our own countries and in Arabic countries who were against ISIS, they will decentralise and work as cells and it will go on for decades.

I will convert you to the proper path one of these days, Steve.

Robbie does know that road. It is pretty wide and paved with good intentions.

Originally posted by Robtard
Do you think it's harder or easier to convince said Muslim to strap a bomb to his back if he's seen his family killed and his country wrecked because a shitlord dictator was propped up by a Western country and then later had to be removed via force, which destabilized the country?

I think it'd be easier to convince a Muslim to do that then...say, a Buddhist or a Jainist. Or even a Christian. Do you disagree?

Originally posted by Surtur
I think it'd be easier to convince a Muslim to do that then...say, a Buddhist or a Jainist. Or even a Christian. Do you disagree?

Originally posted by Rockydonovang
Wouldn't know as we don't bomb the sh!t out of or prop tryants up in majority Christian, janist or Buddhist countries.

Well, you usually don't beat up the people that are on your team so...

Originally posted by Surtur

It's almost like he thinks the problem is us, because if the problem isn't us then it's the elephant in the room with the bomb strapped to its back screaming allahu akbar.

Originally posted by socool8520
Well, you usually don't beat up the people that are on your team so...

Originally posted by Rockydonovang
Why or why we don't bomb them doesn't change that it's folly to act like we can assume what a Christian would do if their country suffered the transgressions we often commit with majority muslim nations. This hypothetical Surt's trying to form here doesn't get us anywhere.

It's also folly to assume that countries that have been warring with each other forever are only doing so now because of us, but that bandwagon was jumped on fairly quick. lol

Originally posted by socool8520
It's also folly to assume that countries that have been warring with each other forever are only doing so now because of us, but that bandwagon was jumped on fairly quick. lol

Originally posted by Rockydonovang
Wouldn't know as we don't bomb the sh!t out of or prop tryants up in majority Christian, janist or Buddhist countries.

Dude...this is a silly statement lol. Think about it for a second. We are talking about suicide bombers. You think if Christians were bombed they'd respond with...suicide bombers? Or rather you are saying you just don't know?

Do...okay, let me ask you: what does that faith teach about suicide? Is it a crazy cult that says you'll be rewarded for suicide as long as you kill some non-believers when you do it?

Originally posted by Rockydonovang
Nobody has argued they are only warring because of us, that doesn't man our actions haven't further exacerbated the issues that were there or even created new ones. A bad situation can be made worse.

That's pretty much what Carthage did.

Some of these countries asked us for our aid. Now I would love to pull every American out and let those people keep fighting about the important things like religion and what not, but then we would be criticized for not helping the less fortunate nations.

Originally posted by socool8520
That's pretty much what Carthage did.

Originally posted by socool8520

Some of these countries asked us for our aid. Now I would love to pull every American out and let those people keep fighting about the important things like religion and what not, but then we would be criticized for not helping the less fortunate nations.

Originally posted by Rockydonovang
Carthage never implied or tried to suggest that our actions were the only reason terrorism exists or that terrorism would magically go away if we left these countries. He argued our intervention was making things worse and that things would be better if we left, not that things would automatically become good.

Then let them criticize us.

There is no guarantee things would be better. Less precision bombs? Sure, but still the same amount of suicide bombs. Don't really see a stoppage of coups or rampant murder either.

Ok

Originally posted by Surtur
I think it'd be easier to convince a Muslim to do that then...say, a Buddhist or a Jainist. Or even a Christian. Do you disagree?

You dodged my point while turning it around as an attack on Muslims. Clever?

Originally posted by Robtard
You dodged my point while turning it around as an attack on Muslims. Clever?

I feel like if you genuinely felt it wouldn't be easier to convince Muslims to do it than Christians, etc. you'd have made that known. So okie dokie, all I needed to know.

Originally posted by Surtur
I feel like if you genuinely felt it wouldn't be easier to convince Muslims to do it than Christians, etc. you'd have made that known. So okie dokie, all I needed to know.

Anyone can be convinced if you've made them suffer, you intellectually dishonest ass. It's not a skin color, race or religious thing.

eg During the Vietnam war Vietnamese civilians sympathetic to the North would run into groups of GI's with a grenade or other explosive, killing themselves in order to kill Americans. Why? Because their country was (and had been for a very long) being torn apart and their loved ones killed because of Western interest/meddling.

edit: In case you're wondering, Vietnam is predominantly Buddhist, 86%.

Originally posted by Robtard
Anyone can be convinced if you've made them suffer, you intellectually dishonest ass. It's not a skin color, race or religious thing.

eg During the Vietnam war Vietnamese civilians sympathetic to the North would run into groups of GI's with a grenade or other explosive, killing themselves in order to kill Americans. Why? Because their country was (and had been for a very long) being torn apart and their loved ones killed because of Western interest/meddling.

edit: In case you're wondering, Vietnam is predominantly Buddhist

Rob, I didn't ask if anyone could be convinced. I was asking about the ease in with which they would be convinced in comparison to others. Again, I feel like because you just felt you needed to make the distinction you did, you know the Muslims could be more easily convinced.