Charlie Hebdo Paris shooting: 12 dead after gunmen storm newspaper's HQ

rgambs

I sit in the middle. Feom where I am sitting it looks like the terrorists' intellectual will to war comes from politics, and emotional will to war comes from religion and destruction in their lands (where that applies)

benjs

rgambs wrote: »

I sit in the middle. Feom where I am sitting it looks like the terrorists' intellectual will to war comes from politics, and emotional will to war comes from religion and destruction in their lands (where that applies)

I always love your answers, rgambs. Great reminder for me to stop thinking in such binary ways, I wouldn't have even sub-divided into emotion versus intellectual will.

rgambs

Thanks ben! The reason I see it that way is likely because I am a secular atheist. I can think of many reasons to start or join a conflict intellectually, but deep down, my gut doesn't want to risk it's tenuous hold on this life I truly feel to be singular. This is it, so guard it my gut says. I think religion allows one to overcome that gut feeling, for better sometimes, and worse sometimes. Self and family defense is the only motivator to violence for me, and even the most brainwashed of terrorists knows they aren't actually defending anyone IMO.

BS44325

What are my goals and what am I doing badbrains? What hate am I spreading? All I ask is that you recognize the zealots that are destroying your culture. If Israel vanished and Western capitalism/imperialism disappeared from the middle east tomorrow all that would be left is one massive islamic caliphate that would subgugate it's own people. That is not hate. That is reality. You dodge this post after post because it is too hard for you to confront.

Thirty Bills Unpaid

benjs wrote: »

BS44325 wrote: »

null

Not sure if quoting is working on my phone Brianlux but your higlighted sentence from Fuck shows where the massive disconnect is.

These grievances which were once mainly political are becoming thoroughly religious.

Hm. So let me get this straight. Palestinians have a bone to pick with the state of Israel, and it's alright, because they were oppressed. Now because Israel is not just a state, but a Jewish state, since religion is involved, we should condemn it. But Israel itself pushes for the distinction of Jewish state instead of a secular state (which clearly at least embodies the Jewish homeland) - so who's making it about religion?

Arabs/Palestinians/Muslims decided to align themselves with the religious extremists in their midst in order to achieve their ultimate political goals.

Good thing it's so unheard of for world leaders to recognize barbaric behaviour and join right in after recognizing personal gain. Also, is doing something out of fear, delusion, or propaganda an unfamiliar notion to you?

As time has moved on the religious fanatics have grown more powerful and have pretty much consumed all the secular and moderates among them to the point where this is no longer about historical grievances.

Sounds a little bit like the way Netanyahu bends over when the right-wing ultra-Orthodox have something to say to him. After all, the only legitimate reason for Israel containing Gaza and the West Bank is "biblical claim".

My point on these boards from the beginning is that as long as the moderate palestinians/arabs/muslims throw their lot in with the religious fanatics further atrocities like hebdo will continue and ultimately their political goals will fail.

How convenient: because of the existing power dynamics, you're right, which, again, Islamic militant group leaders don't mind one bit - their power remains, the remainder of the populace's is absent. Good thing Israeli Jews are on top so they can preach religious fanaticism without any negative ramifications. Leaders and citizens happy - what a deal!

I appreciate that Fuck wants to see the return of his homeland but by becoming an Islamopologist he harms his cause. He should print his pretty little post in a Japanese newspaper so that the people there can be more understanding of the barbarians who beheaded their countrymen.

It seems pretty obvious to me that global condemnation of Islam forces the hand of people like fuck, who see innately noble goals of peaceful coexistence found within the religion, and have others' perceptions of Muslim barbarism shoved down their throats on a regular basis. If my friend draws a cartoon of me, with a huge beak-nose and orthodox Jewish attire, stealing money from a homeless person, I'm going to speak up against that offensive statement, in spite of Judaism having been an inherently negative presence in my life. Why is it socially acceptable that a North American man should be seen as a gentleman, when a Middle Eastern man is seen as an animal?

I just want to expand on your 'point from the beginning' in addition to my italicized comments on yours.

If I rip out your larynx so you can't tell a story, cut off your knees so you can't run to a friend to try to communicate it, tie your hands behind your back because I wouldn't want you writing it down, and then someone comes along and says "join us - the people who did this to you should not be allowed to do so" - what reasonable person, battered and beaten and broken, is going to turn down that opportunity? Fanaticism is literally the only way that us selfish developed-world folks have even taken notice to the fact that the Middle East exists for anything but oil, and to the fact that there are humans there.

I'm getting sick and tired of saying this over and over again, but fanaticism isn't the biggest issue the world has: it's this general lack of giving a shit about anyone other than ME.

Then how does this account for IS actions against other peoples that live in the middle east?

BS44325

To simplify my thoughts to all those who think I'm filled with hate...I see this all through the lens of the The Matrix

The humans are "The West/Israel/Capitalism" (your choice)

The machines are "Arabs/Palestinians/Aggrieved member of the middle east" (again your choice and remember...if you know the backstory of the matrix it was the humans that attacked the machines first so that doesn't mean the machines are necessarily the bad guys even though they want to destroy ZION)

Agent Smith represents the Islamists. Fights on behalf of the machines but eventually seeks to consume and destroy everything.

Until Neo convinces the Matrix that they must work together to destroy Agent Smith peace is not achieved.

badbrains

Wow, u fucken lost me. And here this whole time I thought I was Neo. Damn

BS44325

Sorry BadBrains but I think you're Cypher

badbrains

Cool

rr165892

im lost

rgambs

Hahaha me too, I think we have succeeded in making one of the most complex issues facing the world even more complicated lol
:-?

JimmyV

I'm lost too but can't help thinking there was a clearer and more culturally current way to make the same point using Game Of Thrones in place of the Matrix.

rr165892

rgambs wrote: »

I have to say, BS44, you seem to embody the exact sort of ideology that you rail against. You talk about Islamopology without acknowledging the role that western imperialism plays, effectively being an imperiopologist. You end your post with a shot about his pretty post and reference tje Japanese people as if they have some great cause for mass outrage. I try to hold all lives as equal, and not keep score, but 1 Japanese citizen beheaded by "barbarians" doesn't balance well against a million dead Iraqis and a cancer/birth defect that surpasses that which the world witnessed when "the greatest nation" dropped nukes. As big of an enemy as extremist religion is, if you fail to see that extremist capitalism is worse, you are much worse than an "islamopologist"

Gambs,although everything you mention above is horrible and def worth discussion and consideration you must simplify the equation.Yes there have been plenty of injustices against the Muslim world(many are at hands of Muslims)It can in no way excuse,justify or give credibility to violent acts against others simply because of the past.Some of What happened in Iraq at the hands of the west is deplorable.No excuses,blood on our hands.But no two wrongs can make a right.

You can say the same thing about Black people in USA.After years of disgusting treatment at the hands of bigotry and slavery and lack of human rights and dignity,we all agree it's a black eye on our countries history.This does not give reason or excuse for a person of color to shoot up a mall in Mississippi in revenge for treatment of family members 4-5 generations ago.That would be asinine.So no matter the brutality of past actions one cannot strike out against others who are innocent and say with any good conscience that is is understandable.

brianlux

Just a little side note/observation: Amongst us here, "confront" seems to be the operative word. Certainly more so than "collaborate".

hedonist

JimmyV wrote: »

I'm lost too but can't help thinking there was a clearer and more culturally current way to make the same point using Game Of Thrones in place of the Matrix.

Never seen either (well, I tried with the Matrix and stopped after my "give it 20-minutes" rule.

Regardless of views, some incredibly well-spoken folks here - thank you.

BS44325

Culturally current? This is a Pearl Jam message board. We are children of the 90's! The exact opposite of culturally current!

JimmyV

Fair point. ;-)

HughFreakingDillon

fuck wrote: »

paulonious wrote: »

if fundamentalism is the real enemy, which I agree with, there's really nothing that can be done about that, am I right? I mean, we all come from a long line of fundamentalists, don't we? our culture had to evolve away from that naturally, as in not being bombed away from it. the problem is, centralized fundamentalism wasn't as big a problem as global fundamentalism is, and by that I mean our fundamentalist ancestors didn't have the "reach" that current ones do. do we let those cultures evolve naturally, or because of the current time period we're in, do we have to run interference? which one will cause the least amount of casualties?

It's not the real enemy though. Fundamentalism is a Western concept that only applies to Christianity, and in some cases to Judaism. It does not apply to Islam. All Muslims are "fundamentalists" on some level. We follow the "fundamentals" of the faith, of the text. I reject the idea that to be a "good" Muslim we have to reject fundamental parts of our faith. This is not the way forward, to impose a good Muslim/bad Muslim dichotomy. The issues are political. Address the political grievances, and religious justification for violence will fade because reasons for violence in general will fade.

There is a big difference between following "some fundamentals" and being a actual fundamentalist, which is someone who follows the original written text to the letter. We all follow some christian fundamentals (because, in reality, they are human fundamentals-ethics-not invented by any historic scroll written by a deity), but being a christian fundamentalist is entirely different.

Fundamentalism can be applied to people of both religions, and I disagree with your assessment that it's all politics. Religious fanatacism cannot be solved by political means. Do tou really believe that if Palestine/Israeli conflict were ended by those in power, that the violence would stop? You can't please everyone, and at least one, if not both of those groups, or possibly a new, even more militant group, would emerge from that. It is the clash of religions that causes these, if not the good majority, of all conflicts.

rr165892

BS44325 wrote: »

Culturally current? This is a Pearl Jam message board. We are children of the 90's! The exact opposite of culturally current!

I would think most of us are children of the 70/80s entering adulthood as the 90s were coming in.Side track thought-what is the most common age on this board.I would think its a bit older here in the AMT.more big kid convo and thought.

rgambs

At just a few weeks past 29 I think I am the resident whippersnapper on the AMT.