You are in a fantasy world as always. Don't ever change. If you really want to know what motivates ISIS just read their press releases because they tell us what their goals are. You are the one claiming they don't know what their goals are (but magically western liberals claim to know what ISIS's goals are better than ISIS itself). Like I said, you are in a fantasy world, dude.
See, this is where you could make an excuse for yourself to compile an actual list with examples. Of course you undermine yourself anyway by referring to Muslims as subhuman, so there's that.
Do you take Republican press releases at face value? Do you trust the KKK to describe themselves accurately? Or the Catholic Church, you think their official statements provide an accurate representation of what they're all about? Of course you don't, because that would be ridiculous. Unless it's terrorists, then you think they're completely trustworthy.
I think they are being completely honest about their religious beliefs and how they motivate them. How they really do want to practice Islam as written in the Koran and testified in the Hadith. They have always been completely forthright about that including with the barbarism found in those religious texts. You are the one claiming they are lying so you have the burden of proof here not me. Religion in general is some scary irrational shit and Islam is worse than just about all of them when it comes to violence. You can keep pretending they are secret liberals but they are not and you are not going to be able to reason with religious fanatics.
Of course. They murder, they steal, they rape... but lying? Putting out propaganda? No, they're too moral to do that.
Those other things are following the Koran when it comes to unbelievers (which they feel is everyone not exactly like them). That is what you are ignoring. They are following their religion to the letter and but you keep saying the fanatics just don't know their own religion as well as you do. You're delusional, dude. They tell you exactly what they believe and they walk the walk. Every ugly, dirty, immoral bit of it.
They are not. To name just a couple of examples... The "mastermind" of the Paris attack spent the days afterwards getting drunk and high. And The Koran is very clear that to falsely accuse anyone of being an apostate is to render oneself as such - yet ISIS throws the label about wildly at just about everyone who isn't them. So whatever you think of the Koran, ISIS are not by any means an example of pure obedience to it. You'd do well to inform yourself before making such claims.
We can even read what they tell each other about their motivations, but people still refuse to believe it. In contrast, everything Bruce Jenner says must be taken as gospel. If he wants to be called Kaitlyn, we have no choice but to agree. How come we have to take Bruce at face value but aren't permitted to do the same about al Baghdadi and his followers?
14D would be clueless enough to keep trying to lecture them about their own religion right up to the point they beheaded him. You are wrong and the religious fanatics really do know more about their own religion than you do. Western liberals have this sad tendency to believe deep down everyone is just like they are with the same basic values. That is just not true.
We've both seen plenty Christian fundies who know less about Christianity than a lot of atheists. We've even had a few of them post here. But this is different, right? Because reasons?
Most of the European Muslims who go to fight for IS don't come from particularly devout families and don't really know very much about Islam. http://m.huffpost.com/uk/entry/5697160
Al Baghdadi has a PhD in Islamic studies from the capital of an Islamic country. I'd say he knows a thing or two.
But, you don't get it, gturner. If you're not a Western piss liberal, you're automatically ignorant. It's like these folks going around trying to "teach" me stuff about Communism.
That's just because there are a lot more Muslims than non-Muslims where they live. If you can't find any true infidels, you'll have to make do with make-believe infidels.
According to them they were not true muslims. This is why I mentioned they only liked people exactly like them.
All true enough, but the chain of events that's led to the Taliban in Afghanistan and the this situation in Syria doesn't help, either. Because I'm sure you have at least double the brain cells that gtardo does, I'm sure you can understand the hypocrisy of us all but inciting the Arab Spring in Syria then saying "welp, fuck all of you because terrorism" as those who were protesting become sitting ducks waiting to leave.
It's not even causation. Many take their comfy middle-class existences and apply it, not just globally, but back through time too, but they can take their historically ignorant chin-stroking and fuck off. 99% of human history involves no small amount repression, the Middle East certainly wasn't a haven of joy when the European powers were playing colonial games. Britain's nascent RAF was bombing villages with nary a care of innocents being blown to bits, the Portuguese and Turks took turns in blasting Muscat away. The only thing happening now that can be regarded as new is that we're trying to avoid innocents dying (not always with great success), and they're not. We look - well the British and Germans tend to do, the rest of Europe has developed collective amnesia, and the French actively still fuck about in ex-colonies - back and regard our actions as unjust, wrong and with a cause that was nothing more than power accumulation and control over 'lessers.' Well, guess what, radical Islam is the same, with the same cause. If Western intervention was the primary cause, we'd be used to such responses by now because we've been doing this a long, long time and with much less justification in times past.
I'm seeing a lot of people saying it, maybe not on here, but certainly in a lot Western media and social media. "Well, what do you expect..." Much of it is little other than a cypher for anti-US sentiment, wrapped in faux concern and with a little bow self-aggrandizement. The shadow of Dubya still covers the US, and shrouds quite a lot of disjointed European noses at US ascendancy post-WW2. Oh, and you may not need be a prick to be radicalized, but yes, you do need to be a prick if you think going in and repeating your tragedy is in any way an answer. Apparently only we can stop the cycle of violence? Why? Are they, as @Dinner seems to think, animals? I don't subscribe to that, they're people, and whilst we cannot reason with all of them, neither can a peaceful solution be one-sided.
The British brutally oppressed Americans, levying outrageous taxes (2%) and holding soldiers in inhuman conditions on their warships, but American terrorism is down below scratchy toilet paper on their list of threats. The British invaded the US, set fire to the White House, and committed all sorts of other gross affronts, yet we drink together and occasionally date each other. Americans don't make up a bunch of bullshit about past atrocities as an excuse to execute random British shoppers en mass or behead British soldiers on the sidewalk. Muslims do.
That's hardly unique to ISIS, any group of 'true believers' of any ideology resent differences to their views as they not only represent a threat to their interpretation, but also to their power base. ISIS are just another reflection of what we've seen between various Christian groups and authoritarian governments. It's why plurality and rationality are so important in a nation, they're barriers to any 'pure' interpretation of something gaining enough traction to be a threat to the whole.
If being a true muslim means following what is literally written in the Koran and the Hadith then, yes. They are indeed trying to reproduce exactly what Mohammed declared in the 7th century.
True, but it does show the futility of trying to reason with violent religious fanatics or that violent religious fanatics would some how be less violent religious fanatics if only we had appeased them. Like I said, policy can have effects on the margins but only the margins. The 50 million or so Salafists would still remain as steadfast in their conviction to kill or convert the unbelievers by force until the whole world is bound by their religious beliefs.
Nobody is advocating that we "reason" with ISIS. They're disputing your claim that ISIS are representative of what's in the Koran.
