[Twosugars]

Originally Posted by Brillopad

A scary thought and one we can’t just justify/excuse/tolerate on that basis - or any basis. Enough lives have already been lost/ruined through the centuries and now is the time to stop especially when based on religion alone.

Absolutely.
The trouble with Islam though, seems to me, is not purely religious. The West has played a rather negative role in that region. Starting all the way back with colonisation and drawing arbitrary borders through constant meddling, propping up unpopular leaders and economic exploitation. So you have various "patriotic" justifications weaved into religious arguments for fighting the West.

[Brillopad]

Originally Posted by Twosugars

Absolutely.
The trouble with Islam though, seems to me, is not purely religious. The West has played a rather negative role in that region. Starting all the way back with colonisation and drawing arbitrary borders through constant meddling, propping up unpopular leaders and economic exploitation. So you have various "patriotic" justifications weaved into religious arguments for fighting the West.

When people shout words such as Allahu Akbar when committing mass murder they make it about religion. When they post videos on line making threats to the West based on Islam they make it about religion. When Western countries start to want to protect themselves by protecting their borders they can’t then complain. Such actions have consequences.

[user104658]

Originally Posted by Brillopad

When people shout words such as Allahu Akbar when committing mass murder they make it about religion. When they post videos on line making threats to the West based on Islam they make it about religion. When Western countries start to want to protect themselves by protecting their borders they can’t then complain. Such actions have consequences.

To be fair though it's mostly the other way round. The political motivations came first, Islam was then used to "weaponise" fanatics to use as an army, because that sort of hardcore belief is the easiest way to create a committed fighting force.

[Brillopad]

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

To be fair though it's mostly the other way round. The political motivations came first, Islam was then used to "weaponise" fanatics to use as an army, because that sort of hardcore belief is the easiest way to create a committed fighting force.

For many the motivations, religious or political, don’t really change anything as they are so closely intertwined. The outcome and risk is still the same hence the response.

[chuff me dizzy]

A fairy story for people who need a crutch in life and a lot of people have made big money from their gullibility

[Twosugars]

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

To be fair though it's mostly the other way round. The political motivations came first, Islam was then used to "weaponise" fanatics to use as an army, because that sort of hardcore belief is the easiest way to create a committed fighting force.

But they're so intermingled. Doesn't Koran call for a creation of a caliphate, like Isis tried to do?

[user104658]

Originally Posted by Twosugars

But they're so intermingled. Doesn't Koran call for a creation of a caliphate, like Isis tried to do?

Yes but that's why it's been ripe for manipulation. Religious texts are all full of rhetoric that's easy to frame in the context of War.

The tidal political forces in the middle east have frequently been western, right back to the middle ages, with Islam being used as a tool in that (just as Christianity has been used in the west, many times).

Whether or not there's still anyone at the wheel is another debate. ISIS was basically the result of deliberately created militant Islamic groups, funded, armed and promoted by the West and Russia throughout the 20th century. They then were "cut loose" and reformed as something different that DOES have religious motivation. But it's not a group that formed naturally.

[Nicky91]

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

Yes but that's why it's been ripe for manipulation. Religious texts are all full of rhetoric that's easy to frame in the context of War.

The tidal political forces in the middle east have frequently been western, right back to the middle ages, with Islam being used as a tool in that (just as Christianity has been used in the west, many times).

Whether or not there's still anyone at the wheel is another debate. ISIS was basically the result of deliberately created militant Islamic groups, funded, armed and promoted by the West and Russia throughout the 20th century. They then were "cut loose" and reformed as something different that DOES have religious motivation. But it's not a group that formed naturally.

ISIS was even a disgrace for the islam tbh, because it is stated in the Koran that terrorism is against their religion

what they did was paint all muslims as evil, and cause lots of destruction and terror throughout the world

[Brillopad]

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

Yes but that's why it's been ripe for manipulation. Religious texts are all full of rhetoric that's easy to frame in the context of War.

The tidal political forces in the middle east have frequently been western, right back to the middle ages, with Islam being used as a tool in that (just as Christianity has been used in the west, many times).

Whether or not there's still anyone at the wheel is another debate. ISIS was basically the result of deliberately created militant Islamic groups, funded, armed and promoted by the West and Russia throughout the 20th century. They then were "cut loose" and reformed as something different that DOES have religious motivation. But it's not a group that formed naturally.

To be honest with the risk involved, I don’t think the history, whatever it is, is as relevant as the here and now. It is the threat they pose to the West now that counts and people don’t need a history lesson to know that.

These people from certain minority groups - which are only a minority in the West, they are the majority in many other parts of the world, identify with this particular religion and group, whatever their motives, and there lies the problem. They may or may not be using religion as an excuse for their crimes but the threat is still the same. People naturally want to minimise the risk not increase it.

[Twosugars]

Originally Posted by Brillopad

When people shout words such as Allahu Akbar when committing mass murder they make it about religion. When they post videos on line making threats to the West based on Islam they make it about religion. When Western countries start to want to protect themselves by protecting their borders they can’t then complain. Such actions have consequences.

I have no doubt their main justification is religious, but politics play a role too, especially in recruitment. They play on grievances against the west, they call us crusaders etc
I'm not saying the west shouldn't defend themselves. But can't help thinking we helped to create that mess. Look at mass migration. Europe existed for decades alongside a poorer Africa and Middle East. There was no problem with mass migration until we destabilised the status quo in response to Osama. More terror groups emerged and people started moving, fleeing all over the place.
From the terrorists point of view, I'd imagine such chaos is perfect. It helps to foster conflict at home and it helps to smuggle their people into the West.
It is what it is. I have no problem with Europe closing borders. Such mass migration is not good for anybody, even those fleeing.
In the long run it may be cheaper and better for Europe to throw funds and resources to set up refugee camps in the region rather than accept them at home.
But we moving off-topic...