Evolution of Terrorism

[portia]

Please list the differences. I would be interested to see what you think are differences.

[Minardil]

All non-Christian Syrian refugees should be banned from entering the US - even the tiny handful who have already gone through the 2 year vetting and application process, some Mosques should be closed, and all Muslims currently living in the United States -even US Citizens - should be required to register with the Government.

These are actual Republican proposals from sitting elected officials and from front-running Presidential Candidates.


Republicans no longer even pretend not to be Fascists.

[Storyteller]

Please list the differences. I would be interested to see what you think are differences.

Let's start with the shorter list. Please list the similarities.

[Minardil]

Please list the differences. I would be interested to see what you think are differences.

Let's start with the shorter list. Please list the similarities.

They are Human Beings, in need, fleeing war and violence, and we have the ability to help them.

What other effing "simularities" do you need???

[Storyteller]

Please list the differences. I would be interested to see what you think are differences.

Let's start with the shorter list. Please list the similarities.

They are Human Beings, in need, fleeing war and violence, and we have the ability to help them.

What other effing "simularities" do you need???

When one draws comparison to Jewish refugees of the 1930-s, it's not really enough to be Human Beings Fleeing War And Violence (capitalization doesn't add meaning, you know). There is, for example, the little difference of whether or not said human beings are facing threat of genocide. There's a case to be made that non-Muslim refugees from Syria are indeed facing a threat of genocide by ISIL, but there's no case to be made that Syrian Muslims are likewise threatened with violent extinction. Maybe they should be taken in and maybe not, but trying to draw parallel between European Jewish refugees of the 30-s and Syrian Muslim refugees in 2015 is a disingenuous emotional manipulation.

Syrian Muslim refugees are not fleeing genocide. They're fleeing war and economic hardship. This puts them on the exact same footing as the refugees from Afghanistan, Sudan, Iraq, Libya, Ukraine - basically, they're a fairly typical case of displaced persons as far as causes. Yet they're treated as warranting special attention, special care and special rules which no other refugees in the category warrant.

[portia]

First, We didn't know that the Jewish refugees were facing genocide. No one would have believed such a charge, so you are playing cynical games with history in adding that in.
Second: if a building or a bomb, falls on you, you are dead, and you are just as dead as if you were gassed.

More similarities. The refugees are being endangered because of their religion. If they do not subscribe to ISSI's idea of Islam, they might as well be Christians. Trying to paper over the differences by calling them all Muslims is, again, cynical.
There does not seem to be a place of safety for them, in their homeland.

I a still waiting for a list of differences.

[Storyteller]

First, We didn't know that the Jewish refugees were facing genocide. No one would have believed such a charge, so you are playing cynical games with history in adding that in.

By the time of MS St. Louis' "voyage of the damned" in 1939, Kristallnacht had already happened, "racial defilement" laws were on the books, Jews were disenfranchised and barred from education instutitions and public places, Jewish passports were stamped with the letter J etc. There wasn't much to not know.

Second: if a building or a bomb, falls on you, you are dead, and you are just as dead as if you were gassed.

And just as dead as if you were stabbed by a criminal in a blind alley. Or as if you broke your neck by slipping and falling in a bath tub.

One dead person becomes exactly as dead as the other, but it's not a good argument for anything.

More similarities. The refugees are being endangered because of their religion. If they do not subscribe to ISSI's idea of Islam, they might as well be Christians. Trying to paper over the differences by calling them all Muslims is, again, cynical.
There does not seem to be a place of safety for them, in their homeland.

Jews in Germany couldn't evade persecution by changing their beliefs. They were persecuted by descent, which they couldn't change at will.

To draw a correct parallel, it would be more appropriate to compare Syrian Muslims to 1940-s Germans than to 1930-s Jews.

Incidentally, are there any grounds to believe that the Syrian Muslim refugees have fled because they do not subscribe to ISIS' idea of Islam rather than because the economic situation got worse? They're not exactly being put to any beliefs test, and I suspect that the mere idea of introducing such a test would spark outrage among the advocates of accepting SYrian refugees in unlimited numbers.



Back to your original subject, "evolution of terrorism". It would be interesting, in light of the Paris attacks, to revisit the post-9/11 discussions and the widely expressed view that terrorism was to be treated as a form of crime rather than a form of warfare, and fought with police measures and "intelligence" (usually unspecified) rather than military ones. It seems pretty commonly accepted now that terrorism as practiced by radical Islamists is a form of warfare, and that the correct response is taking the battle to the radical Islamists' home turf. Anyone rethinking their past beliefs yet?

[portia]

Even as some of the camps were being found, there was widespread doubt that these were extermination camps. The fact that SOME PEOPLE knew of Kristallnacht is irrelevant, as it was not widely known nor the consequences understood. ("Surely the civilized Germans could not be thinking of these things.")

You are deliberately missing the point. How is someone whose building blows up and kills him any better off that someone whose is gassed? The consequences are the same.

Yes, in Germany there was more than just belief. However, outside of Germany, where the refugees were, refugees resorted to pretense, and hiding of background. And, some people didn't need to hide, they were accepted as they were.


- - - - - - - - - - -

I understand that Trump doesn't rate highly in trust worthiness, but; really aren't 5 or 6 lies per day a bit much? And that doesn't even count his "off-the-cuff" statements that are soon retracted.

[Storyteller]

Even as some of the camps were being found, there was widespread doubt that these were extermination camps. The fact that SOME PEOPLE knew of Kristallnacht is irrelevant, as it was not widely known nor the consequences understood. ("Surely the civilized Germans could not be thinking of these things.")

Wait a minute. Are you saying that we can't currently be sure that there isn't an organized campaign of extermination of Muslims being conducted in Syria? Seriously?

You are deliberately missing the point. How is someone whose building blows up and kills him any better off that someone whose is gassed? The consequences are the same.

No, YOU are missing the point and quite deliberately so, by trying to make it about the manner of death. One dead person is as dead as another, so if it's about being gassed vs. being shot, then people knifed by criminals or killed in accidents are just as dead as the victims of the Holocaust. Congratulations on finding the most useless lowest common denominator in the history of mankind.

Many of the victims of the Holocaust were shot, stabbed, burned to death, stabbed, or put into conditions where they would die en masse from starvation, cold and diseases. In the city where I was born, the last inhabitants of the ghetto were walked onto the frozen river and had the ice broken under them. The manner of death was not the common denominator of the Holocaust and it wasn't what made it a genocide; it was the intent to cause an extinction of a population.

In Syria, the minorities are indeed facing the threat of genocide, but Syrian Muslims certainly do not. Their plight is the same as of any other people in a warzone- Ukrainians, Iraqis, Afghans, Nigerians, Sudanese, Central Africans, Somalis and further down the list of ongoing conflicts. Hence Syrian Muslims aren't a special case. If you believe that ALL refugees from ALL war zones should be accepted into the USA, it makes perfect sense to add Syrians to the list. If you don't, it doesn't.

[portia]

We cannot be sure how deliberate the extermination of Muslims is in Syria. Is, but who cares--the dead are just as dead. Would you please decide whether there is or is not an extermination campaign? your internally inconsistent comments are confusing me.
Other than the people who may need to investigate the deaths, the only only ones who want or need to make political capital are interested in why they died. That is not a need that affects the dead.
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

Concerning the shootings in San Bernardino yesterday:

It is probably not a surprise that someone would add the elements of a terrorist attack to what may have been a workplace dispute.The whole field is evolving.

Well, my ideas are also evolving. I think we must also add mental/emotional support to the mix, along with gun control. When, a number of years ago, state hospitals were closed on the (unfounded) assumption that local controls would take their place. here was speculation on what would take the place of state hospitals. well, it seems we have the answer.

[Storyteller]

We cannot be sure how deliberate the extermination of Muslims is in Syria. Is, but who cares--the dead are just as dead.

Like I said, most useless lowest common denominator in the history of mankind.

Would you please decide whether there is or is not an extermination campaign? your internally inconsistent comments are confusing me.

Other than the people who may need to investigate the deaths, the only only ones who want or need to make political capital are interested in why they died. That is not a need that affects the dead.

There is an extermination campaign against non-Muslims in ISIS territory. There is no extermination campaign against Muslims. The Muslim refugees from Syria are more comparable to Germans fleeing bombed-out Berlin around 1944 than to the 1930-s Jews. Where precisely am I being inconsistent?

[portia]

What makes you think that there is no extermination campaign against Syrian Muslims? If they do not adopt the ISIS idea of Muslims--what happens to them? extermination?

If you start out with an incorrect premis, the rest is likely to be wrong, too.

[Storyteller]

What makes you think that there is no extermination campaign against Syrian Muslims? If they do not adopt the ISIS idea of Muslims--what happens to them? extermination?

When Germans did not adopt the Nazi beliefs, a lot of bad things could happen to them. Was Hitler running an extermination campaign against ethnic Germans?

ISIS is Muslim. The population living under their rule is Muslim. The parts of that population which reject ISIS ideas may be coerced but are not subject to extermination the way the Yazidis were targeted for extermination.

[portia]

What makes you think that there is no extermination campaign against Syrian Muslims? If they do not adopt the ISIS idea of Muslims--what happens to them? extermination?

When Germans did not adopt the Nazi beliefs, a lot of bad things could happen to them. Was Hitler running an extermination campaign against ethnic Germans?

ISIS is Muslim. The population living under their rule is Muslim. The parts of that population which reject ISIS ideas may be coerced but are not subject to extermination the way the Yazidis were targeted for extermination.

Some of the ethnic Germans were targeted. I am not aware of any evidence that exempts Syrian Muslims---and why do you single them out?

[Storyteller]

Some of the ethnic Germans were targeted.

"Some of them were targeted" vs. "there was a genocide aimed at eradicating them". Are you really not getting the difference?

I am not aware of any evidence that exempts Syrian Muslims---and why do you single them out?

A better question is, why do YOU single them out? Why compare them to the 1930-s Jews and painting them as a special case, when they're no different from Sudanese, Somalis or Ukrainians?

[portia]

I am not aware of any evidence that exempts Syrian Muslims---and why do you single them out?

A better question is, why do YOU single them out? Why compare them to the 1930-s Jews and painting them as a special case, when they're no different from Sudanese, Somalis or Ukrainians?[/quote]

A better question is why have you singled them out, repeatedly? You have drawn some sort of distinction between them and other Muslims. Why?
How many times have you been asked to give more information on this, but not given it. Glittering generalities in response to questions for detail (We'll manage it" etc) make you sound more like Donald Trump that anyone else.

[Storyteller]

A better question is why have you singled them out, repeatedly? You have drawn some sort of distinction between them and other Muslims. Why?
How many times have you been asked to give more information on this, but not given it. Glittering generalities in response to questions for detail (We'll manage it" etc) make you sound more like Donald Trump that anyone else.

I have drawn a distinction between Syrian Muslims and other Muslims? Where?!? Please quote.

I have certainly drawn a distinction between Syrian Muslims and Syrian non-Muslim minorities, on clearly explained grounds that the latter are facing a genuine threat of genocide whereas the former do not. You appear to have a problem with it, but you seem unable to explain why.

[portia]

Back to your original subject, "evolution of terrorism". It would be interesting, in light of the Paris attacks, to revisit the post-9/11 discussions and the widely expressed view that terrorism was to be treated as a form of crime rather than a form of warfare, and fought with police measures and "intelligence" (usually unspecified) rather than military ones. It seems pretty commonly accepted now that terrorism as practiced by radical Islamists is a form of warfare, and that the correct response is taking the battle to the radical Islamists' home turf. Anyone rethinking their past beliefs yet?

And that is the effect of 14 plus years passage of time. Just as the fight against terrorism has changed, so have the terrorists methods and tactics. To think that the two would not change together is strange. The 2011 and pre- terrorists were a world apart from what we have now.

[portia]

Well, I am astounded that Story thinks there are no values that a Western person would be willing to die for. We have thousands who signed up for the military and other projects who can easily prove him wrong.

Would those be the same people commonly discounted by a typical American Democrat or European... anyone as hawkish, warmongering right wing nationalists representing a regrettable stain on their otherwise progressive society?

And how many people in Europe - as opposed to the USA - sign up for the military for ideological reasons? [quote="Storyteller"]

WOW! your information on American Soldiers is suffering from an enormous dose of erroneous stereotypical thinking! Your head needs to be straightened out, quickly.
I have even less information on European thinking than you do, and who cares? If/when they sign up; they sign up. Their thinking is not much to the point, is it?

[portia]

Well, I am astounded that Story thinks there are no values that a Western person would be willing to die for. We have thousands who signed up for the military and other projects who can easily prove him wrong.

Would those be the same people commonly discounted by a typical American Democrat or European... anyone as hawkish, warmongering right wing nationalists representing a regrettable stain on their otherwise progressive society?

And how many people in Europe - as opposed to the USA - sign up for the military for ideological reasons?

When you have close relations that have spent more than 60 years in the USA military, since 1940, you might have some idea what their thinking is. In the meantime. . .

WOW! your information on American Soldiers is suffering from an enormous dose of erroneous stereotypical thinking! Your head needs to be straightened out, quickly.
I have even less information on European thinking than you do, and who cares? If/when they sign up; they sign up. Their thinking is not much to the point, is it?

[LleuLlewGyffes]

The Thirty Years War, per capita the most destructive war in European history, was begun as a conflict between two "sects" of Christianity, Catholic in arms against Protestant. It was a war of ideological religious purity.

In Syria, we have a frighteningly similar pattern, in which an extremist Sunni sect, Wahhabism (sponsored it is depressing to acknowledge, by the USA's ally, Saudi Arabia) through ISIS and the al qaeda splinter groups that constitute the FSA wage war against the pluralistic Syrian state.

Under Assad, and he is anything but a "kind" leader, Allawites, Yazidis, Shia, Sunni et al co-existed relatively peacefully, until the engineered uprising began, following the plan leaked by wikileaks, from as early as 1999 (according to General Wesley Clark) to inculcate regime change, one of the dominoes orchestrated to fall, including Afghanistan, Iraq, Lebanon and culminating in the planned assault on Iran.

This is what we are seeing unfold in Syria. A longterm plan. The people of the region are but pawns, once more, in the "Great Game".

[portia]

Intellectually, I understand that various sects have started fighting one another. But, "emotionally" I have no understanding of it. Why anyone should fight over religion, particularly when it is a closely related religion, is a mystery.

Sometimes, I compare it to being for a particular sports team. Although the loyalty to the team is not based on much (geography?) nevertheless it is very enthusiastic. Is it just based on resentment of someone elses differing loyalties? If I cannot understand --or imagine--what the differing loyalties are based on I clearly am not likely to be any help in negotiations. Good thing no-one is likely to ask.

[Storyteller]

And that is the effect of 14 plus years passage of time. Just as the fight against terrorism has changed, so have the terrorists methods and tactics. To think that the two would not change together is strange. The 2011 and pre- terrorists were a world apart from what we have now.

And what would be the tremendous differences between the Taliban and Al-Qaeda then and the Islamic State now?

WOW! your information on American Soldiers is suffering from an enormous dose of erroneous stereotypical thinking! Your head needs to be straightened out, quickly.

Please do correct me. Last I checked, the US army servicemen and veterans' voting patterns overwhelmingly favored Republicans, whom you routinely file under " hawkish, warmongering right wing nationalists representing a regrettable stain on their otherwise progressive society". So what am I so terribly misunderstanding?

[portia]

Please do correct me. Last I checked, the US army servicemen and veterans' voting patterns overwhelmingly favored Republicans, whom you routinely file under " hawkish, warmongering right wing nationalists representing a regrettable stain on their otherwise progressive society". So what am I so terribly misunderstanding?

Who the H are you saying characterizes soldiers that way??? Not me. Not ever me. Please stop making up regrettable quotes and then attributing them to other people.
Are you becoming as nuts as Trump??

[LleuLlewGyffes]

Intellectually, I understand that various sects have started fighting one another. But, "emotionally" I have no understanding of it. Why anyone should fight over religion, particularly when it is a closely related religion, is a mystery.

Sometimes, I compare it to being for a particular sports team. Although the loyalty to the team is not based on much (geography?) nevertheless it is very enthusiastic. Is it just based on resentment of someone elses differing loyalties? If I cannot understand --or imagine--what the differing loyalties are based on I clearly am not likely to be any help in negotiations. Good thing no-one is likely to ask.

My feeling is that the internecine conflicts are a consequence of the peculiarity of the Abrahamic religions. The fundamental cause is the status of the one god. Where there are a multiple of gods, there is room for difference in worship, but where there is but one god, a jealous god that allows no other, then there is a tendency to proscription. Each sect declares they have the truth, and other determinations of the one god's strictures are, consequently, heretical. By rejecting the one sect's orthodoxy, other sects are deemed to be tantamount to rejecting the one god, and sadly, the end result is conflict.

[portia]

And, similarly with Christianity. We have had plenty of conflicts over religious issues. I should not have implied that this is an Islamic issue.

My own opinion is that religion is a matter between God--if any--and the person and no one else's business.

[portia]

Q;

There is no question of guilt for the transfer of the guns.
But, I have some Qs about these other plans for attacks. Talk is one thing, and conspiracy is another. Was the "planning" just talk and nothing happened, or an actual conspiracy? I suppose the testimony will show which.
I can't tell whether the intent was to charge a conspiracy on the San Bernardino shootings, but if it was, I do not think that will hold up.

[Storyteller]

Please do correct me. Last I checked, the US army servicemen and veterans' voting patterns overwhelmingly favored Republicans, whom you routinely file under " hawkish, warmongering right wing nationalists representing a regrettable stain on their otherwise progressive society". So what am I so terribly misunderstanding?

Who the H are you saying characterizes soldiers that way??? Not me. Not ever me. Please stop making up regrettable quotes and then attributing them to other people.
Are you becoming as nuts as Trump??

Republicans, portia, not soldiers. You characterize Republicans that way as a matter of routine. Then you choose to forget that the majority of your servicemen vote Republican, and get indignant that you've never said any such thing about soldiers.

[portia]

Still wrong. I suggest that Some Republicans are not thinking well. I usually omit the Leadership, since they usually have more experience and are less likely to go off half-cocked. I also do not recognize the description at all. You still made it all up.