Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Breaking - explosions at Brussels Airport **Mod warning in post 1**

1…2223252728…61

Comments

  • #722
    Polo_Mint
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,504 ✭✭✭Polo_Mint


    walshyn93 wrote: »
    Moreso than any other immigrant group, yes. We are entitled to take the best in the world. The increase in terror threat sort of eliminates any economic or social benefit.

    Westerners aren't committing terrorist attacks in Muslim countries.

    No. Western Countries call it collateral damage when killing 100s of thousands of Innocent people over the past 20 years in Muslim Countries.

    But as long as its renamed, Its fine by you.

    Anyone who paints a all people connected to a religion like you need to take off their blinkers


  • #723
    Timberrrrrrrr
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 25,862 ✭✭✭✭Timberrrrrrrr


    Eugene Norman wrote: »
    That's the US. This is Belgium.

    So the US is not a western country now?


  • #724
    RDM_83 again
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,116 ✭✭✭RDM_83 again


    sunshine and showers wrote: »
    Lads, it's not difficult - these attacks were carried out by an extremist Muslim terrorist organisation, most likely IS.

    So say that. Call IS and their followers all the names under the sun. Curse them all you like. Declare war on them. Great.

    But it is harmful, whether you like it or not, to say simply that Muslims did it. That's the best way to compound bigotry against the average Muslim and potentially drive people into the arms of groups like IS.

    That's exactly what happened with the IRA attacks being blamed on the Irish and Catholics. Treating everyone from a particular community like a potential criminal is wrong and dangerous.

    Hating on IS and extremist Muslims is fine. I'll agree with you all damn day. Hating on Muslims in general (and disrespecting their faith with terms like "paedophile") is not. It's bigotry. Plain and simple.

    And yes, I do know that Islam has violent stuff in the Koran. So does the Bible. Get over yourself. People interpret stuff to suit themselves because they're assholes, not because they're a particular religion.

    You don't think every Irish Catholic supported and condoned the IRA. You can't blame all Jews for the treatment of Palestinians when that's the work of Zionists and extremism. The current Islamic extremism problem is bigger than both those problems, but the same principle applies.

    This is not PC gone mad. It's reality. Semantics matter.

    I posted about the falseness of this equivalency before, well its either false or worrying, all Irish Catholics shouldn't be considered supporters of the IRA, however a majority of NI Catholics supported the goals of the IRA and not the methods, shown by SDLP pre ceasefire and SF post ceasefire being largest parties supported by them
    The IRA could operate for decades because of a level of tacit support for their goals from a good proportion of the Nationalist community.
    Are you saying the same applies in Muslim Communities in Europe?


  • #725
    walshyn93
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,685 ✭✭✭walshyn93


    Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »
    Really?

    http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2014/01/the-wedding-that-a-us-drone-strike-turned-into-a-funeral/282936/

    1. That's not terrorism. That's a targeted assassination. They bomb weddings because the hit a lot of known terrorists in one go. They always attend family events.

    2. A travel ban on American tourists would not prevent these sorts of attacks so it's not really relevant.


  • #726
    Irish Stones
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,308 ✭✭✭Irish Stones


    Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »
    They were still Italian though, did they have children born in Italy? Are those children considered Italian?

    They had me and my sister, born in a different Italian region than them. Of course they were Italian, of course I am Italian, but I cannot consider myself as a northern citizen.
    In a larger scale, if my parents went to France and I was born there, my parents were still Italian and I would have been an Italian born in France, but not French, despite what my passport would say.


  • Advertisement
  • #727
    Timberrrrrrrr
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 25,862 ✭✭✭✭Timberrrrrrrr


    walshyn93 wrote: »
    1. That's not terrorism. That's a targeted assassination. They bomb weddings because the hit a lot of known terrorists in one go.

    Evidence that a lot of "terrorists" were killed in thay strike?

    Civilian deaths are ok with you? Innocent children blown apart Is ok with you?


  • #728
    Ave Sodalis
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,555 ✭✭✭Ave Sodalis


    @long range shooter, that's not answering the question. What can they do that we can't?


  • #729
    walshyn93
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,685 ✭✭✭walshyn93


    Polo_Mint wrote: »
    No. Western Countries call it collateral damage when killing 100s of thousands of Innocent people over the past 20 years in Muslim Countries.

    But as long as its renamed, Its fine by you.

    Anyone who paints a all people connected to a religion like you need to take off their blinkers

    If an American tourist blew up an airport in a Muslim country we'd rightly call it terrorism. But since there's a fundamental difference between private citizens and government agents, your comparison isn't relevant.


  • #730
    EagererBeaver
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,739 ✭✭✭EagererBeaver


    RDM_83 again wrote: »
    The IRA could operate for decades because of a level of tacit support for their goals from a good proportion of the Nationalist community.
    Are you saying the same applies in Muslim Communities in Europe?

    Wow. What a reach to try and put words in someone's mouth.


  • #731
    Eugene Norman
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,191 ✭✭✭Eugene Norman


    wes wrote: »
    No I didn't:


    I said no single leadership, which due to the existence of sects, is a simple factual statements.



    It is still a sect, regardless of its size. Also, in the West Christian sects are regularly separated, where as other Religions, they are largely ignored and referred to as a monolith.

    So basically unless all the religions in the world have one single leader there are no religious leaders, even one who is the religious leader of 1B people. And yet you say the differential between a party and a religion is that the party has one single leader (which is also wrong as there have been dual leaders). And parties can be tiny.

    No point in arguing this further. Religions do have leaders.


  • Advertisement
  • #732
    Timberrrrrrrr
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 25,862 ✭✭✭✭Timberrrrrrrr


    walshyn93 wrote: »
    If an American tourist blew up an airport in a Muslim country we'd rightly call it terrorism. But since there's a fundamental difference between private citizens and government agents, your comparison isn't relevant.

    So you advocate the indiscriminate bombing of civilians as long as the government says it's ok?


  • #733
    stunmer
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 279 ✭✭stunmer


    Nodin wrote: »
    Fairly irrelevant why he did it, because whoever did this isn't doing for the same thing the majority believe in, and its safe to say whatever is going on in LM's head is similarily unrepresentative of his community, be it defined by gender, age, ethnicity, religion or anything else.

    No it isn't. It is very relevant why he did it.

    You are separating people beliefs with their actions. I am not.

    I understand people may have different interpretations of a faith, however to disregard people's beliefs when trying to work out the reason for their actions is ignoring the elephant in the room.

    Edit: To add, the main reason you look at why someone did something is to work out whether the action is a once off or whether it will be repeated.


  • #734
    walshyn93
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,685 ✭✭✭walshyn93


    Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »
    Evidence that a lot of "terrorists" were killed in thay strike?

    Civilian deaths are ok with you? Innocent children blown apart Is ok with you?

    I'm not of the opinion that we can avoid civilian deaths in war. Deliberately targeting civilians in an indiscriminate way is totally wrong and the fact that you would compare bombing an airport terminal to blowing up an event where terrorists are gathering says it all.

    Tired old Chomskyite arguments.


  • #735
    long range shooter
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,493 ✭✭✭long range shooter


    sup_dude wrote: »
    @long range shooter, that's not answering the question. What can they do that we can't?

    They can start by dealing with exremists in their own communities.
    How many muslims opposed against this imam in Denmark?

    http://www.thelocal.dk/20160303/denmark-eyes-deportation-of-foreign-imams

    http://www.thelocal.dk/20160301/imam-at-danish-mosque-hit-children-educationally


  • #736
    thattequilagirl
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,158 ✭✭✭thattequilagirl


    Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »
    Evidence that a lot of "terrorists" were killed in thay strike?

    Civilian deaths are ok with you? Innocent children blown apart Is ok with you?

    When you bomb a white skinned child who prays to God, it's murder.

    When you bomb a brown skinned child who prays to Allah, it's collateral damage.

    If you're wondering what the motive behind attacks in Europe is, the attitude illustrated above is a massive part of it.

    Devastating as today's news is, horrific as these attacks are, the death toll won't even come close to the number of Iraqi and Syrian children blown to bits by Western forces as "collateral damage"

    Either blowing up civilians is okay or it's not. I say it's not.


  • #737
    Ave Sodalis
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,555 ✭✭✭Ave Sodalis


    long range shooter wrote:
    They can start by dealing with exremists in their own communities. How many muslims opposed against this imam in Denmark?


    How? You're basically just repeating yourself and avoiding the question.


  • #738
    Ronaldinho
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 829 ✭✭✭Ronaldinho


    frozenfrozen wrote: »
    What actually can be done? It's seemingly all too easy to get 10 or 15 like minded individuals together, get some 1970's era military gear and take several innocent lives.

    It would be obtuse to not assume this was extremist muslims. I would be shocked if this turned out to be unrelated to the recent happenings in Brussels re: the perpetrators of the paris attacks

    In terms of what can be done, I would advocate judicial reform at national and international levels so that it's easier to deport the bad apples without it being tied up in the courts for months or years.

    Also worth having a debate on whether we would be prepared to give our blessing to more intrusive\widespread monitoring of electronic communications with the hope being that it would help to prevent atrocities such as those this morning. My own attitude is that I have nothing to hide so if the 'spooks' want to screen my e-mails/texts/phone calls/web usage they are welcome to, but I know not everyone feels the same way. Still it's a debate worth having I think.

    Mods have warned against turning this into another immigration thread so all I'll say is that a rethink of the open door policy espoused by Merkel in 2015 is warranted. This is already happening but a lot of damage has already been done.


  • #739
    walshyn93
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,685 ✭✭✭walshyn93


    Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »
    So you advocate the indiscriminate bombing of civilians as long as the government says it's ok?

    When did you stop beating your wife?


  • #740
    Eugene Norman
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,191 ✭✭✭Eugene Norman


    Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »
    Evidence that a lot of "terrorists" were killed in thay strike?

    Civilian deaths are ok with you? Innocent children blown apart Is ok with you?

    What's it got to do with Belgium? If the actual victims here were to go to the us and attack the drone users, or the manufacturers, or Obama himself it would be justified.

    The victims here are Shia by the way. The war against them is US-Saudi alliance and the latter also props up Isis and radicalised European Muslims.


  • #741
    walshyn93
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,685 ✭✭✭walshyn93


    thattequilagirl wrote: »
    Either blowing up civilians is okay or it's not..

    Objectives matter.

    It's not black and white.


  • Advertisement
  • #742
    thattequilagirl
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,158 ✭✭✭thattequilagirl


    walshyn93 wrote: »
    I'm not of the opinion that we can avoid civilian deaths in war. Deliberately targeting civilians in an indiscriminate way is totally wrong and the fact that you would compare bombing an airport terminal to blowing up an event where terrorists are gathering says it all.

    Tired old Chomskyite arguments.

    Bombing a wedding, which you already admitted happens, is deliberately and indiscriminately targeting civilians.


  • #743
    thattequilagirl
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,158 ✭✭✭thattequilagirl


    walshyn93 wrote: »
    Objectives matter.

    It's not black and white.

    You can't have it both ways.


  • #744
    Irish Praetorian
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,745 ✭✭✭Irish Praetorian


    Can someone remind me how many drone strikes Belgium carried out last year?


  • #745
    Polo_Mint
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,504 ✭✭✭Polo_Mint


    walshyn93 wrote: »
    If an American tourist blew up an airport in a Muslim country we'd rightly call it terrorism. But since there's a fundamental difference between private citizens and government agents, your comparison isn't relevant.

    If a Catholic blew up a pub, A main Street , A shopping district does that make Catholics a Terrorist Organisation or does it make that individual a terrorist?


  • #746
    Eugene Norman
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,191 ✭✭✭Eugene Norman


    thattequilagirl wrote: »
    When you bomb a white skinned child who prays to God, it's murder.

    When you bomb a brown skinned child who prays to Allah, it's collateral damage.

    If you're wondering what the motive behind attacks in Europe is, the attitude illustrated above is a massive part of it.

    Devastating as today's news is, horrific as these attacks are, the death toll won't even come close to the number of Iraqi and Syrian children blown to bits by Western forces as "collateral damage"

    Either blowing up civilians is okay or it's not. I say it's not.

    As far as I can see here this is an apology for killing white people (in reality Europeans of any colour) because a western country (not 100% white either ) is engaged in imperialism.

    It seems like the kind of generalisations you don't apply anywhere else. All western people are responsible for us imperialism. Or something. Therefore all are legitimate targets.


  • #747
    Timberrrrrrrr
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 25,862 ✭✭✭✭Timberrrrrrrr


    walshyn93 wrote: »
    I'm not of the opinion that we can avoid civilian deaths in war. Deliberately targeting civilians in an indiscriminate way is totally wrong and the fact that you would compare bombing an airport terminal to blowing up an event where terrorists are gathering says it all.

    Tired old Chomskyite arguments.

    Again

    Evidence there were terrorists there?

    The bombing of civilians in an indiscriminate way happens every day in these countries but because it's a government doing it seems to allow people like you to dismiss it for what it is.

    And then people wonder why these lads bomb us.


  • #748
    thattequilagirl
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,158 ✭✭✭thattequilagirl


    walshyn93 wrote: »
    Objectives matter.

    It's not black and white.

    Okay, so remind me what the objective for the wars in Iraq were?


  • #749
    Eugene Norman
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,191 ✭✭✭Eugene Norman


    Polo_Mint wrote: »
    If a Catholic blew up a pub, A main Street , A shopping district does that make Catholics a Terrorist Organisation or does it make that individual a terrorist?

    If he belonged to Opus Dei then it would be a form of Catholic violence. Nobody denies this when a Christian blows up an abortion clinic.


  • #750
    long range shooter
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,493 ✭✭✭long range shooter


    sup_dude wrote: »
    How? You're basically just repeating yourself and avoiding the question.

    Nope,you are clearly not answering my question.
    When is muslim communities going to deal with extremists in their own communities?


  • Advertisement
  • #751
    cfuserkildare
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,600 ✭✭✭cfuserkildare


    Ronaldinho wrote: »
    In terms of what can be done, I would advocate judicial reform at national and international levels so that it's easier to deport the bad apples without it being tied up in the courts for months or years.

    If we stop making the Legal profession such a money oriented scheme, then fewer cases would be trying to get to court.


Advertisement