Brussels Belgium attacks.

Drowned Out said:

Obliterate a way of thinking?!
Good luck with that.
Besides, isn't that what 'they' want to do?

Last page shawshank said Islam has a problem with violence....the US is responsible in whole or in part for more than 4 million deaths in that region, and that's only goung back a couple decades. Mostly Islamic brown people. That's genocide, and it's just one corner of the world. The fact that it's pretty much the opposite corner of the world should speak to justification a little, no? And it's Islam that has a problem with violence....lost, indeed.

You dirty apologist, you America hating fuck, how dare you criticize this country?
Oh, that's right...facts.

Can't bring facts or history into it, that makes you a terrorist apologist and a circle jerker, you are only allowed to invoke God and get angry.

I think the thing is this:

I completely understand the anger swelling in many Middle Eastern people towards the United States and its accomplices. I completely understand why many have been driven to violence. People who have lost family members have every reason to loathe soldiers occupying their country who's hands have, ultimately, dealt them death.

I don't understand taking out their anger on travellers inside an airport or concert goers though. If my family was killed by the hands of some country's soldiers... I wouldn't be exacting my revenge against soft targets in malls, airports, and concert halls. 'Other' innocent people wouldn't be on my list of people to kill.

And I'm only talking about those that have been directly involved in the fighting. Why the f**k do some punk ass shit kids think they've got a cause to ruthlessly slaughter their fellow countrymen- the people they have lived alongside for the larger part of their lives if not all?

blueandwhite said:

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

I don't understand taking out their anger on travellers inside an airport or concert goers though. If my family was killed by the hands of some country's soldiers... I wouldn't be exacting my revenge against soft targets in malls, airports, and concert halls. 'Other' innocent people wouldn't be on my list of people to kill.

I'm guessing that a lot of it has to do with the fact that there is significant emotional impact in targeting civilians. Moreover, when you consider that these terrorists are at a massive military disadvantage and have no way of dealing a significant blow to the Western world attacking civilians is probably the result of years of accumulated frustration and hatred. There is no justification for what these Islamic terrorists are doing but I'm not surprised that they continue to target innocent bystanders.

I know why they're doing it. And I get that part of it (as much as anyone can given I can't even begin to imagine).

But there's this to my last post which probably was the most significant portion of it given it was what I was getting at: And I'm only talking about those that have been directly involved in the fighting. Why the f**k do some punk ass shit kids think they've got a cause to ruthlessly slaughter their fellow countrymen- the people they have lived alongside for the larger part of their lives if not all?

How do people explain the 'terrorist attacks nobody cares about'?

Is the west at the root of the bloodlust in these attacks too?

I think that if our governments, (and societies for that matter) aren't going to recognise that their policies and laws of exclusion are in part responsible for the rise of extremism then nothing will change. when our young become so disenfranchised that theyre able to be swayed into extreme ways of thinking and the abhorrent actions that come from that thinking something has to change. our leaders need to step up and lead instead of just continually condemning actions.

Shawshank said:

You people wanting to blame this on past are utterly lost. There is no excuse for any of this...none! What the hell did the people of Belgium do? The country hardly has a reputation for being an invading, murderous, empire of any sort. Blaming past events is essentially your ignorance of the fact that Islam has a serious problem with violence, and that has been shown over and over and over and over and over again.

I'm getting tired of seeing this idiotic remark around here. Why do you think we're unable to hold bad people accountable for their actions, while at the same time attempting to reverse engineer the premises that led them to act as they did to ensure that that set of circumstances don't once again arise? Especially when those set of circumstances were avoidable and shouldn't have been accepted in the first place? It is possible to have a guilty party AND an underlying cause.

In a talk I listened to with Glenn Greenwald, he stated that our foreign policy with regards to terror attacks is not unlike a hypothetical scenario where with each car crash, the government gave no half measures nor preventative situations, and unequivocally committed to greater budgets for road signs. Death sucks, but death through interventionism to potentially prevent death through terror attacks when history shows it doesn't work? Now there's something I don't understand.

The reason that the underlying causes are so important to discuss compared to the actions of reprehensible people, is that any reprehensible person with half a brain can avoid being found, which therefore seriously limits the return on investment of finding "the rest of them". Rather, it's more useful to analyze trends catalyzing the creation of these radicalized groups, and stop spoon feeding reasons for joining them through perpetuating unjust inequalities unto other nations, international law be damned: something which few countries (if any) have been better at than the USA.

Gern Blansten said:

Tom Cotton was on MSNBC this morning talking about how weak Obama has been toward ISIS and how there are so many restrictions on our military that they can't do their jobs.

Now it comes out that the US killed ISIS 2nd in command yesterday....Commando's stopped his car and attempted to capture him but ended up killing him.

Weak?

Typical military asshole, my buddy says the same bullshit, when you press him on what restrictions tie their hands, each example is a simple application of Geneva Convention rules of engagement or an exercise of basic human rights and decency.

rgambs said:

Gern Blansten said:

Tom Cotton was on MSNBC this morning talking about how weak Obama has been toward ISIS and how there are so many restrictions on our military that they can't do their jobs.

Now it comes out that the US killed ISIS 2nd in command yesterday....Commando's stopped his car and attempted to capture him but ended up killing him.

Weak?

Typical military asshole, my buddy says the same bullshit, when you press him on what restrictions tie their hands, each example is a simple application of Geneva Convention rules of engagement or an exercise of basic human rights and decency.

I was pissed that the reporter didn't press him on specifics..."what situations are you referring to?" type questions.

I still can't get over how the GOP is somehow making Obama responsible for the attack in a foreign country.

Gern Blansten said:

rgambs said:

Gern Blansten said:

Tom Cotton was on MSNBC this morning talking about how weak Obama has been toward ISIS and how there are so many restrictions on our military that they can't do their jobs.

Now it comes out that the US killed ISIS 2nd in command yesterday....Commando's stopped his car and attempted to capture him but ended up killing him.

Weak?

Typical military asshole, my buddy says the same bullshit, when you press him on what restrictions tie their hands, each example is a simple application of Geneva Convention rules of engagement or an exercise of basic human rights and decency.

I was pissed that the reporter didn't press him on specifics..."what situations are you referring to?" type questions.

I still can't get over how the GOP is somehow making Obama responsible for the attack in a foreign country.

How could they not? They have backed themselves into a tea party nightmare for 7 years and reality hasn't been important to them for decades.

Gern Blansten said:

rgambs said:

Gern Blansten said:

Tom Cotton was on MSNBC this morning talking about how weak Obama has been toward ISIS and how there are so many restrictions on our military that they can't do their jobs.

Now it comes out that the US killed ISIS 2nd in command yesterday....Commando's stopped his car and attempted to capture him but ended up killing him.

Weak?

Typical military asshole, my buddy says the same bullshit, when you press him on what restrictions tie their hands, each example is a simple application of Geneva Convention rules of engagement or an exercise of basic human rights and decency.

I was pissed that the reporter didn't press him on specifics..."what situations are you referring to?" type questions.

I still can't get over how the GOP is somehow making Obama responsible for the attack in a foreign country.

Nobody is saying that Obama is responsible for the attack in a foreign country but his policies have only resulted in a stronger ISIS and not a weaker one. Plus while Americans were dying in Brussels he was busy doing the wave with Raul. He is not leading, he is not a leader and the world is taking notice.