People Flocking to Join ISIL (isis daesh etc)

donaghs

What do people make of this? While we hear much condemnation of this, the numbers of Muslims globally trying to reach Syria and Iraq is staggering. Clearly many people are in favour of what's occurring there. It also forces us yet again to look at "Man's inhumanity to Man", as why there are so many willing participants in this.

I think this is a better forum for this than politics as its more of a philosophical question. Also, serious debate would be impossible on the Islam forum.

In the UK particularly, there's much debate about what can be done to stop people leaving the country and traveling there. But that raises more questions about such people. If someone is supportive of beheading, raping, or burning alive anyone who is deemed an enemy, throwing homosexuals off tower blocks, - and this can simply be someone who is judged not to following a particular version of Islam - then what sort of a place is suitable for them to live in?
And by the by, destroying historic sites, museums etc.

I still can't get my head around what ISIL do, and the numbers who have joined and wish to join. I can't find any similar comparison. Perhaps the closest comparison would be the thousands around Europe in the early 1940s who joined locally raised SS units to fight in Russia - mostly is the guise of an anti-Communist crusade? But even that comparison falls short. Anyone who joins ISIL knows well in advance, and in great detail, how they oppress the territory they control or capture.

seamus

"Flocking" is probably overstating it.

The answer here is most likely recruitment. Individuals are targetted by recruiters because of their family ties, or their known level of ideology. Young people are very easily manipulated, so if you take a scattergun approach and target 100 young people, you'll very likely get 20 or so interested people that becomes 5 people who believe your bull and will follow you.

After that, it's pretty easy. Recruitment is the same for all armed forces, be they national armies or terrorist forces. You paint a picture of a gallant band of comrades defending <insert thing here> while making lifelong friends and seeing and doing new and exciting things.

Look at advertisements for the Royal Marines and the US Army. You won't see any pictures of someone wetting themselves in a foxhole while the brain of the guy beside them explodes across the ground when he's hit by a sniper. It's all glory this, honour that, and learning to become a badass.

Young men in particular will lap up this bull****, especially if it's reinforced by the adults in their life.

ISIL aren't telling people that they're going to Syria to rape, pillage and murder. They're being told that they've been called to the fight for the glory of Allah and deliver a country of Islam in which the brave soldiers will be the guest of honour at every table.
You have to come from a place of ignorance to believe this, so it's not surprising that these people are unaware of what ISIL are actually doing in the middle east.

There are a few interesting reports going around which relay messages sent by young ISIL recruits to people back home. The majority are lamenting the fact that they're now someone's personal servant, or are in mortal danger, or that they can't get ready access to services like toilets, fresh water and internet. Similar stuff to what a new recruit in the Army will send back to their parents.

Torakx

I can't help but think this is more related to foreign powers trying to destabalize the middle east, than it is to do with any real internal need or struggle.
It has become very popular in the west to create terrorist groups in lands they wish to conquer and exploit.
In Ireland we have the same history. People joining the IRA,INLA etc etc thinking they are fighting the brits and furthering a national cause. When really it is a method for the British rulers to destabalize the country and keep it split.
I have met and known older men that have bombed places in England for these causes and did their time in prison. They still hold some of their old views and the history repeats when there is a need from foreign influence.

If Ireland tried to establish itself again, take itself out of europe, I am pretty sure we will find we suddenly have a problem with terrorism again.
It's one of the best excuses in modern times to bring in the army and shut the whole place down. It prevents nearly all forms of liberation to the common people of a land and so it is the number one tactic for colonial powers to stay in power.

At a ground level, yes, I think there are genuine terrorists. But above that and directly responsible I think are those powers that seek to exploit other countries for their resources.
In the middle east the common people I am thinking do not have as much access to education, as the lands that have already been conquered and established for resource exploitation.
It is generally peaceful here in Ireland. But we alsogive awayfor free our gas, oil etc.
Right now the Irish are putting up some resistance to foreigners selling us our own water. And if you pay attention to the mainstream media in Ireland, you will see mention of protesters and terrorism. Arming the gardai in preparation for terrorism counter tactics. Which will be applied to everyone.

I see the middle east going through the same woes we had, when the british killed off a couple of million and placed their laws on this land.
There willbe blood spilled and when the dust settles and enough people have been cleared out of the way, they can start integrating the middle east into whichever empire got to it first.

I do understand that life there can be harsh for certain people, possibly minorities for the most part.
But maybe, I can say the same for the most dominant powers of the western world.
We can safely say that Britain and for the most part the USA are the dominant forces in the west.

http://mic.com/articles/86519/19-actual-statistics-about-america-s-prison-system

The USA has 5% of the worlds population, but 25% of the worlds prisoners.
With an increase of 500% in the last 30 years.
1 in 28 American children has a parent behind bars.
And apparently 100% of the armies helmets badges and other such utilities are manufactured by inmates for something like 27 odd cents an hour.
While they ban importing of items made using slave labour abroad.
What is worrying is that the Americans are taking the lead in the western worlds culture, legislation and policing of it's citizens.

Britain is right behind america with those types of stats, as the next highest on that list, from what I hear anyway...

http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/3913/uk-muslim-prison-population

The statistics -- from a July 29 House of Commons research report entitled, "Prison Population Statistics" -- show that the number of Muslim inmates in England and Wales jumped to 11,248 in 2012, up from 3,681 in 1997. Stated another way, over the past 15 years, the number of Muslims in British prisons has jumped by more than 200%.

We all know that muslims have been especially targeted by the state and its police, since the 7/7 bombings. A terrorist act that has all the hallmarks of a false flag. Need I say more than the fact that the anti-terrorism squads in london were doing a training exercise, for the exact thing that happened, on the day it happened, at the time it happened, in the same area?

But, then as mentioned, you have media reports apparently of people being thrown off buildings because of their sexuality. In a country thatdoe snot enslave it population as much as the west.
Does the "civilised" western person prefer corrupt slavery over corrupt freedom?
It is quite difficult for me to say just how bad life is there, for people in the middle east.
I have never been that far abroad and the media is not something a sensible person would trust fully.
How can I tell which incidents are isolated and few and far between, with those that are happening on a large scale and acting as forms of severe repression.

In the west you can become a slave and hounded for the rest of your life. In the middle east you might have similar or worse, but on a smaller scale(albeit maybe more severe)?

Any reliable (or not so reliable) stats on those controvercial incidents mentioned?
How many minorities are tortured,killed,imprisoned in the middle east?
Maybe we can compare it to the slavery and incarceration of those in the west.
It is probably not a good idea to try draw comparisons with such differign cultures. But I think a very rough idea would help me see a clearer picture.

fly_agaric

^^You covered an awful lot of ground (800 years, evil Brits, conspiracy theories, America's horrible prison system and plots to arm the guards to viciously put down the coming uisce eireann revolt in Ireland) but I don't think anything in your post attempts to explain why people might be travelling (often abandoning lives of reasonable comfort in wealthy countries) to join ISIL! ISIL exists at least partly because of the chaos US foreign policy has created in the middle east but that doesn't explain why some teenager living in the UK would want to pack everything in and go and join up.

I believe the thread just kicked the bucket. I was thinking this might be interesting but ah well.

Torakx

Sorry you feel that way.
It is all part of the same web of influence in my view. The use of Irelands situation is an exmaple of the practise of creating terrorists, something we Irish may be more able to relate to.
The same practise I think is being put to Islamic sympathizers, where England is a good example from the little mainstream news I do see.
The stats on prisoners was in response to the mention of people being thrown off roofs. The general quality of life for societies are dependant on very different variables because of the economic and political and cultural situations, so it may seem more bizzare to us in the west.

But also... I know I do tend to think in a very different and random way to most, and it shows a lot in my writing. Can't help myself..
I would encourage people to completely ignore my comments if they don't see anything they can work with. I won't be offended at all, honestly.
Besides, Seamus comment pretty much covered everything of import in the scenario first posed. It was a pretty good summary of the situation.

donaghs

seamus wrote: »

"Flocking" is probably overstating it.

The answer here is most likely recruitment. ....

There are a few interesting reports going around which relay messages sent by young ISIL recruits to people back home. The majority are lamenting the fact that they're now someone's personal servant, or are in mortal danger, or that they can't get ready access to services like toilets, fresh water and internet. Similar stuff to what a new recruit in the Army will send back to their parents.

I'd agree with a lot of what you said. The lure of becoming a gun-totting "badass", while simultaneously being able to do the "holy" and "righteous" thing. And recruiters painting a more attractive picture, than what's actually happening on the ground.

But even still, I don't get it. There's enough info out there about what's really going on. It doesn't also explain the appeal to women who aren't involved in the fighting.

Part of the answer is perhaps is a widespread chauvinism and intolerance among many Sunni Muslims for all others who don't follow their particular fundamentalist version of Islam. All those "others", are disposable, or deserving of death.

fly_agaric

I'm probably not helping the thread with this but may as well carry on,,,

Torakx wrote: »

Sorry you feel that way.
It is all part of the same web of influence in my view. The use of Irelands situation is an exmaple of the practise of creating terrorists, something we Irish may be more able to relate to.

I just don't see the connections - I'm sorry. They just create confusion. ISIS does not seem to be a liberation movement at all. It is more an imperialism. They wish to take territory, put their ideas into practice, collect tribute from their subjects and "cleanse" those who they consider inferior or who won't go along with their new dispensation. If you listen to their propaganda they are full of pipe-dreams to take over Europe (or perhaps the world!) in the future etc - i.e. impose their idea of Islam by force on a whole lot of people who aren't even muslims. I've never heard that sort of stuff from the likes of the IRA, Farc, ETA, or to take some regional examples the PLO, Fatah or even Hamas (which the Israelis sometimes compare to ISIL with a straight face)?

If you speak of "foreign powers trying to destabilize the middle east" (the West, the US etc) the main US and UK contribution to ISIL has been indirect: Bush's Iraq adventures which has created space where it could develop, and less so their desire to overthrow Assad (sanctions on Syria and aid to rebels in earlier stages). The policies of other nearby states have probably had a more direct role in ISIL's creation than the US or the West imo, and these are not "foreign powers" looking for control in the same way since they intrinsic parts of the region.

When you examine the theory of "creating" terrorists/terrorist movements as a system of control, you have to ask yourself how exactly is the US or the West more generally stands to benefit from all this chaos in the middle east? If anything I'd say their influence let alone control over what is going on in the middle east has been waning of late; I don't think they exactly predicted let alone planned the "Arab spring". I see some sectional interests in US (arms makers,the strong Israel lobby which currently desires weak nation states around Israel) that might see it all as a good but that's about it. There's even less benefit for Europe - only people I can see benefiting at all are weapons makers. As regards energy/resources extraction or development/corporate interests; I doubt the instability and violence makes any of that easier. I wonder how Western business interests in Libya are faring now a couple of years after Gadaffi has gone (an honest question!).

Returning somewhat to the subject of the thread Europe of course also has large Islamic minorities that are being whipped up to violence by what is going on. They are going to be an internal security threat for years, possibly generations to come. Europe is quite close to alot of the countries that either at war, torn up by civil wars and generally made miserable places to live by all of this. The flows of refugees are increasing; these will be a major cost to Europe and also potentially politically destabilising too.

Torakx wrote: »

The stats on prisoners was in response to the mention of people being thrown off roofs. The general quality of life for societies are dependant on very different variables because of the economic and political and cultural situations, so it may seem more bizzare to us in the west.

That seems to be a sort of relativism. Whatever about the variables we're all people. We all feel pain, we all bleed, most of us feel some empathy when others suffer. The US prison system is bad. people being executed without trial is a also very bad, worse I'd say, people being executed for nothing at all, well...
And as regards other Western countries following the US; I don't see it. AFAIR the US is the outlier in the West with its levels of incarceration, executions, income inequality etc.

Torakx wrote: »

But also... I know I do tend to think in a very different and random way to most, and it shows a lot in my writing.

Sorry, I just get a bit frustrated with some of these ideas that edge somewhat into conspiracy. IMO alot of US foreign policy in the region as driven by different interests has been negative for the US as much as for anyone else and yet people seem to want to believe its all parts of a functioning master plan for control, empire building etc.

donaghs wrote:

It doesn't also explain the appeal to women who aren't involved in the fighting.

Was interesting program about this on the BBC a few days ago. They covered a few factors. ISIL's sympathisers etc seem to target teenagers they think will be susceptible (presumably young muslims) through social media. It was compared to paedophile grooming on the program! I think another recruit on it was persuaded and aided by people through her mosque. Of course they did not express this view on the program but my thought is that many of the ideas (not the violent ones, more the general narrative) that ISIL espouses are quite deeply embedded in muslim communities in the West now. The recruiters just need to reach out and put across their message in a good and persuasive way (which they are well capable of doing) to snare some recruits. For women recruits it seemed to be similar levers to men (following the "true path" of your religion, helping bring in some sort of new Islamic era [and sure if people have to die you can't make an omelette without cracking a few eggs and they are all bad enemies of Islam anyway].
Lots of youthful idealistic stuff like that with a side helping of domestic bliss with a strong Jihadi husband by your side and a gaggle of young warriors for Islam around your feet. I find it hard to understand also but then the numbers involved are not massive, and I think of things like the Branch Davidians, the Aum Cult in Japan, the many other cults - some violent and very dangerous that people (often highly intelligent and educated) have thrown away their lives to go and join. I think the SS comparison is also valid - apart from their brutality I think they also had that idealistic big idea at their core (saving Europe from the bolsheviks, jews and "subhumans" etc for the aryans) that seems to appeals to the young especially, no matter how violent the means are. Mao's red guards also come to mind here.

seamus

fly_agaric wrote: »

I just don't see the connections - I'm sorry. They just create confusion. ISIS does not seem to be a liberation movement at all. It is more an imperialism. They wish to take territory, put their ideas into practice, collect tribute from their subjects and "cleanse" those who they consider inferior or who won't go along with their new dispensation. If you listen to their propaganda they are full of pipe-dreams to take over Europe (or perhaps the world!) in the future etc - i.e. impose their idea of Islam by force on a whole lot of people who aren't even muslims. I've never heard that sort of stuff from the likes of the IRA, Farc, ETA, or to take some regional examples the PLO, Fatah or even Hamas (which the Israelis sometimes compare to ISIL with a straight face)?

Perspective is everything.

Talk to a Unionist during the 1970s and they would likely say all of these things about the IRA; violent people looking take territory by force, impose new law in that territory and cleanse anyone who won't go along with it. Talk to a nationalist at the same time and they'll tell you the IRA are liberation fighters.

Like they say, one man's freedom fighter is another man's terrorist. From the perspective of a young Muslim, what ISIL are doing may be seen as "liberating" Islamic peoples from the immoral influences of the West.

galljga1

Torakx wrote: »

I can't help but think this is more related to foreign powers trying to destabalize the middle east, than it is to do with any real internal need or struggle.
It has become very popular in the west to create terrorist groups in lands they wish to conquer and exploit.
In Ireland we have the same history. People joining the IRA,INLA etc etc thinking they are fighting the brits and furthering a national cause. When really it is a method for the British rulers to destabalize the country and keep it split.
I have met and known older men that have bombed places in England for these causes and did their time in prison. They still hold some of their old views and the history repeats when there is a need from foreign influence.

If Ireland tried to establish itself again, take itself out of europe, I am pretty sure we will find we suddenly have a problem with terrorism again.
It's one of the best excuses in modern times to bring in the army and shut the whole place down. It prevents nearly all forms of liberation to the common people of a land and so it is the number one tactic for colonial powers to stay in power.

At a ground level, yes, I think there are genuine terrorists. But above that and directly responsible I think are those powers that seek to exploit other countries for their resources.
In the middle east the common people I am thinking do not have as much access to education, as the lands that have already been conquered and established for resource exploitation.
It is generally peaceful here in Ireland. But we alsogive awayfor free our gas, oil etc.
Right now the Irish are putting up some resistance to foreigners selling us our own water. And if you pay attention to the mainstream media in Ireland, you will see mention of protesters and terrorism. Arming the gardai in preparation for terrorism counter tactics. Which will be applied to everyone.

I see the middle east going through the same woes we had, when the british killed off a couple of million and placed their laws on this land.
There willbe blood spilled and when the dust settles and enough people have been cleared out of the way, they can start integrating the middle east into whichever empire got to it first.

I do understand that life there can be harsh for certain people, possibly minorities for the most part.
But maybe, I can say the same for the most dominant powers of the western world.
We can safely say that Britain and for the most part the USA are the dominant forces in the west.

http://mic.com/articles/86519/19-actual-statistics-about-america-s-prison-system

The USA has 5% of the worlds population, but 25% of the worlds prisoners.
With an increase of 500% in the last 30 years.
1 in 28 American children has a parent behind bars.
And apparently 100% of the armies helmets badges and other such utilities are manufactured by inmates for something like 27 odd cents an hour.
While they ban importing of items made using slave labour abroad.
What is worrying is that the Americans are taking the lead in the western worlds culture, legislation and policing of it's citizens.

Britain is right behind america with those types of stats, as the next highest on that list, from what I hear anyway...

http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/3913/uk-muslim-prison-population



We all know that muslims have been especially targeted by the state and its police, since the 7/7 bombings. A terrorist act that has all the hallmarks of a false flag. Need I say more than the fact that the anti-terrorism squads in london were doing a training exercise, for the exact thing that happened, on the day it happened, at the time it happened, in the same area?

But, then as mentioned, you have media reports apparently of people being thrown off buildings because of their sexuality. In a country thatdoe snot enslave it population as much as the west.
Does the "civilised" western person prefer corrupt slavery over corrupt freedom?
It is quite difficult for me to say just how bad life is there, for people in the middle east.
I have never been that far abroad and the media is not something a sensible person would trust fully.
How can I tell which incidents are isolated and few and far between, with those that are happening on a large scale and acting as forms of severe repression.

In the west you can become a slave and hounded for the rest of your life. In the middle east you might have similar or worse, but on a smaller scale(albeit maybe more severe)?

Any reliable (or not so reliable) stats on those controvercial incidents mentioned?
How many minorities are tortured,killed,imprisoned in the middle east?
Maybe we can compare it to the slavery and incarceration of those in the west.
It is probably not a good idea to try draw comparisons with such differign cultures. But I think a very rough idea would help me see a clearer picture.

This belongs on the conspiracy theory forum and has probably derailed any chance of rational discussion of the OP.

Torakx

I appreciate the responses. However I think I over did myself with being open
If the mods feel my comments are an interruption, I have no issues with them deleting my posts and I apologize if my perspective was too much for one post.
In hindsight I should have spent a few days leading people to those conclusions.
It took my many years to get there though..
I hope I can be forgiven for my impatience.

The comparison of incarceration in the west and unjust acts in the middle east might not have been well laid out. I would have had to write a whole lot more to explain my point
I see that a lot of the cultures in the middle east are still quite superstitious.
They rely on old laws for justice.
They might throw homosexuals off roofs(how often I would like to know), In the US they incarcerate people for many years because they had a certain plant in their pocket that is relatively harmless and in some cases used as medication. My point is that we cannot judge with a clear head and as Seamus pointed out, we must repsect thatwe may not have the same culture and perspective. Our filters are different and so we judge differently. Therefore people whohave come from this culture or identify with this or thatculture, are more capable of symptathizing with that culture. Leading to easier recruitment.
The prison culture in Britain and the forced sign up of recruits under duress, is a good example of why some of flocking to that cause as well.

Consider a person who was put in prison for smoking marijuana. Then for protection is forced to join and convert.
I was forced as a child toconvert toanother religion and after a few years of struggling against it, I unconsciously and slowly gave in and believed.
I began to preach and have a high attitude for myself.
It is very easy to turn a normal person into a sociopath.
This is generally what army training is about and the recruitment of terrorists.

I won't address any other points for now. I am trying not to be disruptive..
But please people, work around me if needs be.. I ignore those comments that are trolling, you can treat me in such a manor as well.
There is an ignore function and it is fairly effective(apart from when I am quoted unfortunately).

donaghs

seamus wrote: »

Perspective is everything.

Talk to a Unionist during the 1970s and they would likely say all of these things about the IRA; violent people looking take territory by force, impose new law in that territory and cleanse anyone who won't go along with it. Talk to a nationalist at the same time and they'll tell you the IRA are liberation fighters.

Like they say, one man's freedom fighter is another man's terrorist. From the perspective of a young Muslim, what ISIL are doing may be seen as "liberating" Islamic peoples from the immoral influences of the West.

I don't recall the IRA or Unionists involved in mass beheadings, public crucifixions, or punishing gay people by throwing them off high buildings?
Even if one side or the other in Northern Ireland feared a genocidal attack, unlike ISIL in Iraq, it didn't actual happen that one side or another took over an area an wiped out anyone who they felt didn't meet their standards.
What do you mean with your comparison?

seamus

The IRA were involved in plenty of atrocities though. Jean McConville, The Kingsmill massacre, punishment beatings, the disappeared. For anyone not of a nationalist persuasion living in NI, it would be very easy to look at these and think that you're dealing with a bunch of violent ideological animals, hell bent on destroying your way of life and remorselessly butchering anyone who gets in their way, man, woman or child.

And from another perspective, the IRA were liberators, freedom fighters.

That's what I mean by my comparison. For us looking on at ISIL, all we see are ideological savages with no respect for human life. But for someone with a different perspective they may see liberators and freedom fighters.

I don't think it's that hard to understand. Its the same tactics all cults use to recruit foot soldiers. Get people in their late teens/early twenties, during a particularly idealistic phase of their development, and posit a scenario where they can help save the world through a particular course of action, offer incentives and kudos (imaginary and spiritual or deferred material), and you have them brainwashed.

The young people heading to Syria etc aren't bad people, they're probably quite decent people who will do very bad things believing them to be right, after the recruitment, indoctrination, and brainwashing phases that lead to the surrender of objective thought.

I've some compassion for them, they're losing their lives too, sacrificing themselves in the name of religion. The real question is why they're so ready to abandon their lives, and what's missing in them that leaves them vulnerable to such psychological manipulation.

zeffabelli

If you are talking about British muslims, then you could also consider the alienation experienced by first generation immigrants. ISis have also used the internet to call back the yourh from Canada and France.

If you want to compare to the IRA, which may be an approximate analogy, though not necessarily perfect by any stretch, the IRA was substantially funded by begging bowls in Boston pubs by romantic first and second generation Irish descendants.

There is a romance to the mother land and combine that with the neither here, nether thereness of being a citizen of a nation in which your family is 'other," that probably contributes to it also. Combine that growing up hearing your parents constant complaints and disgrutledness at their new homeland, forever in exile because they reject the pain of transformation, so you too are of this land, but not of it either. This drives the need to belong, ISIS offers belonging. It looks like we need food, shelter, and meaning, ISIS offers meaning.

I dont think its the IRA you have to look at for insight, it's Hitler youth. Isis are on a whole other conquest.

Orwell in his review of Mein Kampf

Fascism is psychologically far sounder than any hedonistic conception of life … Whereas Socialism, and even capitalism in a more grudging way, have said to people “I offer you a good time,” Hitler has said to them, “I offer you struggle, danger, and death,” and as a result a whole nation flings itself at his feet … We ought not to underrate its emotional appeal.

chttp://www.theatlantic.com/features/archive/2015/02/what-isis-really-wants/384980/

zeffabelli

seamus wrote: »

The IRA were involved in plenty of atrocities though. Jean McConville, The Kingsmill massacre, punishment beatings, the disappeared. For anyone not of a nationalist persuasion living in NI, it would be very easy to look at these and think that you're dealing with a bunch of violent ideological animals, hell bent on destroying your way of life and remorselessly butchering anyone who gets in their way, man, woman or child.

And from another perspective, the IRA were liberators, freedom fighters.

That's what I mean by my comparison. For us looking on at ISIL, all we see are ideological savages with no respect for human life. But for someone with a different perspective they may see liberators and freedom fighters.

From what, even the most flexible of perspectives could you argue Islamic Statits are fighting for freedom. They are in a theological and territorial war that wants to bring Islam back to the 7th century.

And like the IRA, the persepective of calling them freedom fighters is moral rationalisation for what are evil acts. Same old same old....down the line in history.

shruikan2553

zeffabelli wrote: »

From what, even the most flexible of perspectives could you argue Islamic Statits are fighting for freedom. They are in a theological and territorial war that wants to bring Islam back to the 7th century.

And like the IRA, the persepective of calling them freedom fighters is moral rationalisation for what are evil acts. Same old same old....down the line in history.

One of their goals, and a goal among many of those groups is to remove foreign forces from their land. Creating a society based on Islam is a good thing to them and the people who are killed are either enemies trying to stop them or sacrifices must be made for the greater good.

Terrorist rarely exists for the fun of killing people, there's usually some goal that can be viewed as good for people to sign up to it. For every terrorist theres someone who views them as doing whats best, whos "good" and "evil" varies on your perspective. (Im not saying they are in any way right but Im sure there are people who have suffered and see the likes of ISIS as a way to improve their life)

zeffabelli

shruikan2553 wrote: »

One of their goals, and a goal among many of those groups is to remove foreign forces from their land. Creating a society based on Islam is a good thing to them and the people who are killed are either enemies trying to stop them or sacrifices must be made for the greater good.

Terrorist rarely exists for the fun of killing people, there's usually some goal that can be viewed as good for people to sign up to it. For every terrorist theres someone who views them as doing whats best, whos "good" and "evil" varies on your perspective. (Im not saying they are in any way right but Im sure there are people who have suffered and see the likes of ISIS as a way to improve their life)

Most evil is accomplished by people thinking they are obliterating evil. If anything has remained through the ages, it's that.

But that doesn't change the monstrosity of it, no matter what way you want to spin in. I don't mean to Godwin the thread here, but I do think we are looking at monsters along the lines of the Nazis who by the way, lest you forget, also thought they were doing the world a favor. It's just so incredible.

If you look at the "theatre' of it, the imagination of cruelty, the display, the flaunting....the design...

Manach

Historically there always had been a some disseffected youth elements right/left in the social structure of European countries seeking to engage in Foreign conflicts. For instance Spanish Civil war, where the number would have been highest fighting for causes they believed were vital truths.

In contrast, while there is much more of a toleration of other viewpoints in this generation (so long it is in the new mainstream), there is also more emphasis of relative truths. Hence while a flowering of Internet warriors ready to do battle to type the new society into existence, there are relatively few willing to take up arms to defend/fight for the new truths. Compared to the volunteers (in numbers but not seemly to justify the term flocking), the older Islamic traditions of conflict are still deemed culturely relevant along with the historical memories of similar call for volunteers taking part in campaigns from the Causcuses or Spain.

Therefore these are outliers and a challenge to the post-Modern Europe which authorities will have problems dealing with.

Mongfinder General

I don't think Europe will really be arsed dealing with ISIS until are half way across Turkey or blowing up shopping malls in Munich and Amsterdam on a Saturday afternoon.


I look at these guys and I wonder if they've ever had a day of fun in their whole lives. They look and sound like miserable tw4ts. These tools dress like a cross between a charcater from Pirates of the Carribeen and an extra from Kill Bill. I mean what's their plan? Wipe non muslims out? Then what?

Boskowski

While this IS phenomenon is clearly very bad I think we (the west) are probably playing a large part in their existence. Between the colonial past, creation of artificial states, the Palestine problem and the divide and conquer games we played to secure their resources for us I'd say it's no surprise that large swaths of the Middle East have little love for western values and are driven to extremist and fundamentalist views.

zeffabelli

Boskowski wrote: »

While this IS phenomenon is clearly very bad I think we (the west) are probably playing a large part in their existence. Between the colonial past, creation of artificial states, the Palestine problem and the divide and conquer games we played to secure their resources for us I'd say it's no surprise that large swaths of the Middle East have little love for western values and are driven to extremist and fundamentalist views.

This is like the Versailles argument- and yes there is something to this, and it might explain Al Queda and other extremist groups or the terrorists who blew up the plane over Scotland back in the 80s.

But I think it's a tactical error to think ISIS is like Al Q. ISIS have a blood lust that AL Q did not have.

Blood revenge breeds blood revenge, so the scary thing is ...what's next?

donaghs

zeffabelli wrote: »

From what, even the most flexible of perspectives could you argue Islamic Statits are fighting for freedom. They are in a theological and territorial war that wants to bring Islam back to the 7th century.

I agree also also find it hard understand any rational for creating an extremely intolerant caliphate as being "freedom fighting".

zeffabelli wrote: »

And like the IRA, the persepective of calling them freedom fighters is moral rationalisation for what are evil acts. Same old same old....down the line in history.

I do see clear differences though. The IRA had a simple clear aim of removing British control of Northern Ireland, and from their secret negotiations from the early 70s onwards etc were clearly prepared to make some compromises. They were not interested in converting all people to their point of view - and enslaving or killing the rest.

zeffabelli wrote: »

This is like the Versailles argument- and yes there is something to this, and it might explain Al Queda and other extremist groups or the terrorists who blew up the plane over Scotland back in the 80s.

Wasn't Lockerbie done by Libya? An regular state, in a direct line of tit-for-tat with the USA? (gulf of sidra, berlin nightclub bomb, us bombing of tripoli). Not really relevan to the ISIL debate I think.

Boskowski wrote: »

While this IS phenomenon is clearly very bad I think we (the west) are probably playing a large part in their existence. Between the colonial past, creation of artificial states, the Palestine problem and the divide and conquer games we played to secure their resources for us I'd say it's no surprise that large swaths of the Middle East have little love for western values and are driven to extremist and fundamentalist views.

Creating states doesn't have to lead to this. Look at Belgium and Panama. I wouldn't call the opposite of ISIL, tolerance and respect for human life, "western values". It's insulting to people in the region, and the extremes of ISIL are doing simply have no justification.

Mongfinder General wrote: »

I look at these guys and I wonder if they've ever had a day of fun in their whole lives. They look and sound like miserable tw4ts. These tools dress like a cross between a charcater from Pirates of the Carribeen and an extra from Kill Bill. I mean what's their plan? Wipe non muslims out? Then what?

I imagine that i they did kill everyone they thought to be an infidel, they'd turn on each other over who was "holier than thou" and interepretation of rules etc. Or simply human reasons like personal or financial disputes.

Manach wrote: »

Historically there always had been a some disseffected youth elements right/left in the social structure of European countries seeking to engage in Foreign conflicts. For instance Spanish Civil war, where the number would have been highest fighting for causes they believed were vital truths.

I thought about the example of the Spanish Civil War, international brigades etc when posting this. But I don't think its a good enough comparison. In the early days maybe when there seemed to be a media consensus that Assad was a terrible man who needed to be removed at all costs. But now, as mentioned before, there can be no illusions about what ISIL are doing. The British jihadi in the link below, despite eventually fleeing from Syria, boasted to family in the UK that he needed condoms for the “war booty”. i.e. the anyone woman who didn't meet there standards is fair game for rape. In a video could be seen picking up severed heads from the back of a flatbed truck and saying: “Heads. Kuffar (non-Muslims). Disgusting”.
So its hard at this point to take seriously the idea that someone would really join ISIL for high-minded idealistic reasons. They'd have to have a very low opinion of the rest of humanity which doesn't meet their religious standards.

http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015/feb/06/british-jihadi-fled-syria-training-camp-jailed-12-years-imran-khawaja

shruikan2553 wrote: »

One of their goals, and a goal among many of those groups is to remove foreign forces from their land. Creating a society based on Islam is a good thing to them and the people who are killed are either enemies trying to stop them or sacrifices must be made for the greater good.

Who are the foreign forces they are trying to remove? If anything, Syria and Iraq now find themselves fighting a foreign fighters in ISIL from all corners of the world.

zeffabelli

donaghs wrote: »

Wasn't Lockerbie done by Libya? An regular state, in a direct line of tit-for-tat with the USA? (gulf of sidra, berlin nightclub bomb, us bombing of tripoli). Not really relevan to the ISIL debate I think.

Yes. I was pointing it out as an example of using a Versailles style argument for complicity or cause and effect in atrocity - it only takes us so far.

donaghs wrote: »

I thought about the example of the Spanish Civil War, international brigades etc when posting this. But I don't think its a good enough comparison. In the early days maybe when there seemed to be a media consensus that Assad was a terrible man who needed to be removed at all costs. But now, as mentioned before, there can be no illusions about what ISIL are doing. The British jihadi in the link below, despite eventually fleeing from Syria, boasted to family in the UK that he needed condoms for the “war booty”. i.e. the anyone woman who didn't meet there standards is fair game for rape. In a video could be seen picking up severed heads from the back of a flatbed truck and saying: “Heads. Kuffar (non-Muslims). Disgusting”.
So its hard at this point to take seriously the idea that someone would really join ISIL for high-minded idealistic reasons. They'd have to have a very low opinion of the rest of humanity which doesn't meet their religious standards

There are a couple ways to look at what ISIS are doing.

One is that its straightforward blood lust and we are letting OUR own need for reason and meaning cloud our acceptance of this.

The second consideration is that all they have as weapons are the use of fear tactics. The killing methods they use are intimate, whereas the west and AL Q kill remotely. It is not easy to kill at close range....but they make it look easy and that is their primary war tactic.