You are trying to color what I have written as suggesting something that I am not suggesting. [/quote]
No, you actually said it.
Earlier[quote]Sifu wrote:
The problem that people in the West are having a hard time getting their heads around is what we are going to have to do. The level of fanaticism that we are up against is not something that is going to be solved with a good talking to. The only thing we can do with the fanatics is kill them.
There are over a billion Muslims, if only one percent of them are hardcore fanatics that is ten million that we are going to have to kill. If the number of fanatics is ten percent, then we are going to have to kill over a hundred million people.
Right now we are not killing them fast enough. We are going to have to kill on a massive scale to get this solved, but a lot of people are in denial and refuse to accept that. [/quote]
Then, to be completely batty, you say:
So “we’re not killing them fast enough” but your solution is “peaceful”? This must be part of that peaceful final solution, huh?
I’m pretty sure your being called a nazi had to do with your argument that we have to kill “hundreds of millions”…just a hunch though.
Nah, you can spread your crazy, racist dialogue on the internet, you’re not a criminal yet. If you start to advocate the start of these mass killings your advocating though, then I hope you go to jail for a long, long time.
Nah, you can spread your crazy, racist dialogue on the internet, you’re not a criminal yet. If you start to advocate the start of these mass killings your advocating though, then I hope you go to jail for a long, long time.
You are trying to color what I have written as suggesting something that I am not suggesting.
No, you actually said it.
EarlierSifu wrote:
The problem that people in the West are having a hard time getting their heads around is what we are going to have to do. The level of fanaticism that we are up against is not something that is going to be solved with a good talking to. The only thing we can do with the fanatics is kill them.
There are over a billion Muslims, if only one percent of them are hardcore fanatics that is ten million that we are going to have to kill. If the number of fanatics is ten percent, then we are going to have to kill over a hundred million people.
Right now we are not killing them fast enough. We are going to have to kill on a massive scale to get this solved, but a lot of people are in denial and refuse to accept that.
[/quote]
The only ally in Afghanistan that is significantly contributing to the war effort there is Britain. If you read the British newspapers you will see that there are people in the UK who are pushing for a negotiated cease fire with the Taliban so they can withdraw the troops.
This shows that there is a real disconnect in peoples thinking as to what is possible. There is a reason why this is happening. Over the last fifty years the western world has become a lot less religious. Because of this many in the west simply do not have the necessary frame of reference needed to understand deeply held religious beliefs.
Religious beliefs are non-negotiable. If you don’t believe that look up the gay marriage thread.
There are a lot of Bill Maher’s in this country. People who in some ways may be smart but when it comes to religion and understanding the thought processes of religious people they do not have a fucking clue.
[quote]
Then, to be completely batty, you say:
You are correct Ephrem in that my thinking is not a danger. The reason why I can say that is because my thinking allows for a peaceful solution where mass numbers of people do not need to die. Because in my way of thinking people should be allowed to talk things through.
So “we’re not killing them fast enough” but your solution is “peaceful”? This must be part of that peaceful final solution, huh? [/quote]
Right now we are searching for a needle in a haystack. There are over a billion Muslims and we are trying to pick our way through them trying to figure out who is a good one and who is a bad one. Afghanistan and Iraq are the only places where we don’t have to search too hard for the bad ones because they will come out and attack our troops.
The fastest way to sort out who is good and who is bad will be to get the Muslims to face up to what their religion is. It is a cult of personality that focuses upon one man Mohammad. The way Mohammad lived his life and the things he did are why Islam produces Jihadists. This is why as long as there are practicing Muslims the Ummah will continue to produce Jihadists.
So my way to peacefully resolve this is to get the Muslims to face up to what their religion teaches and do the right thing. You cannot be on your knees five times a day giving all praise and glory to a mass murderer who committed crimes against humanity then turn around and say I reject murder and crimes against humanity therefore I am a good peaceful person and be truthful.
Drastically reducing the size of the Ummah will make it much easier for us to spot the Jihadists and deal with them. It would also make the Jihadists more likely to behave. Because if they didn’t have the potential to drag over a billion people into a war against the rest of humanity they would be a lot less confidant in their chances of success.
Peaceful co-existence with people who want to enslave all of humanity is not possible. All the Jihadists have got to go. If there is even one left he will produce more. It is just like cancer. You can’t just remove part of a tumor if you leave so much as one stem cell it will grow back.
…Sifu: on one hand you’re saying that you can’t reason with religious zealots, and yet the only peaceful solution you see is for religious muslim zealots to change…
…on the other hand you say: [quote]Peaceful co-existence with people who want to enslave all of humanity is not possible. All the Jihadists have got to go. If there is even one left he will produce more. It is just like cancer. You can’t just remove part of a tumor if you leave so much as one stem cell it will grow back.[/quote]
…so basically you do advocate the mass murder of millions of people on a scale similar to Hitler’s Endlösung, don’t you?
[quote]ephrem wrote:
…Sifu: on one hand you’re saying that you can’t reason with religious zealots, and yet the only peaceful solution you see is for religious muslim zealots to change…
…on the other hand you say: Peaceful co-existence with people who want to enslave all of humanity is not possible. All the Jihadists have got to go. If there is even one left he will produce more. It is just like cancer. You can’t just remove part of a tumor if you leave so much as one stem cell it will grow back.
…so basically you do advocate the mass murder of millions of people on a scale similar to Hitler’s Endlösung, don’t you?
[/quote]
You have to be simple to compare what Hitler did and the killing of Jihadists who want to kill us all. They are not equivalent things.
Nah, you can spread your crazy, racist dialogue on the internet, you’re not a criminal yet. If you start to advocate the start of these mass killings your advocating though, then I hope you go to jail for a long, long time.
Seriously, seek help.
[/quote]
I’m beginning to think you’re mentally retarded.
First of all, Islam is not a race. It’s composed of pretty much every race on the planet, from Uighur Turks, to Filipinos, to Malays, white Europeans, Chechyans, Arabs, black Africans, Berbers, etc.
Secondly, I didn’t advocate genocide anywhere. I pointed out that the Muslims will undoubtedly use a nuke on some infidel nation, which will result in retaliation of the same nature. Given Ahmedinejad’s Jew paranoia, Iran’s nuclear designs, and Israel’s stature as a nuclear power, I hope such a scenario isn’t regarded as implausible to a “gifted” thinker such as yourself. Given that you kept asking me about “Invisible Man” on a thread about “Dreams from My Father,” it’s not surprising that your reading comprehension is so poor that you misunderstood me.
Your profile says you are a “student.” Perhaps you should adjust your studies to focus on reading comprehension and critical thinking skills for at least a couple of semesters. I find it appalling that “students” of such obviously poor verbal skills are admitted into schools these days outside of those admitted based on athletic ability, and given your short stature, I find it hard to believe you are one of the latter.
[quote]doogie wrote:
ephrem wrote:
…Sifu: on one hand you’re saying that you can’t reason with religious zealots, and yet the only peaceful solution you see is for religious muslim zealots to change…
…on the other hand you say: Peaceful co-existence with people who want to enslave all of humanity is not possible. All the Jihadists have got to go. If there is even one left he will produce more. It is just like cancer. You can’t just remove part of a tumor if you leave so much as one stem cell it will grow back.
…so basically you do advocate the mass murder of millions of people on a scale similar to Hitler’s Endlösung, don’t you?
You have to be simple to compare what Hitler did and the killing of Jihadists who want to kill us all. They are not equivalent things.[/quote]
…simple? You’re supporting the murder of millions of people, and i’m simple? I’d rather be simple than an utter failure of a human being, thank you very much (-:
Nah, you can spread your crazy, racist dialogue on the internet, you’re not a criminal yet. If you start to advocate the start of these mass killings your advocating though, then I hope you go to jail for a long, long time.
Seriously, seek help.
I’m beginning to think you’re mentally retarded.
First of all, Islam is not a race. It’s composed of pretty much every race on the planet, from Uighur Turks, to Filipinos, to Malays, white Europeans, Chechyans, Arabs, black Africans, Berbers, etc. [/quote]
Think my calling you a “racist” might have something to do with your comment about Bush “doing something right if he’s pissing off the race X” ? Or perhaps your comment, “If we are going to bring democracy to Country X, we’ll have to ethnically cleanse group Y”?
I even highlighted it for you in the other thread. I don’t use words like “bigot” or “racist” lightly. You’ve earned them.
[quote]
Secondly, I didn’t advocate genocide anywhere. I pointed out that the Muslims will undoubtedly use a nuke on some infidel nation, which will result in retaliation of the same nature. Given Ahmedinejad’s Jew paranoia, Iran’s nuclear designs, and Israel’s stature as a nuclear power, I hope such a scenario isn’t regarded as implausible to a “gifted” thinker such as yourself. [/quote]
You advocated killing millions of Pakistanis. [quote]Since we’re the ones with all the brainpower on our sides, perhaps places like Pakistan will go from “most populous” to “least populous” in a relatively short period of time. [/quote] And only an extremist such as yourself would think that “Muslims will undoubtedly use a nuke”.
[quote]
Given that you kept asking me about “Invisible Man” on a thread about “Dreams from My Father,” it’s not surprising that your reading comprehension is so poor that you misunderstood me. [/quote]
I kept asking because you never bothered to answer a single question. Care to bump the thread and actually have a discussion? I don’t think you have the balls or the intellect, honestly. That thread was simply an appeal to bigotry.
How cute. I bet with your intellect you’ve even figured out I’m about your age and a grad student…or maybe not…
[quote]ephrem wrote:
…Sifu: on one hand you’re saying that you can’t reason with religious zealots, and yet the only peaceful solution you see is for religious muslim zealots to change… [/quote]
No. The zealots are for the most part not going to change. The moderates who reject violence are the one who can reasoned with. They are already half of the way to where they need to be by rejecting violence.
What they need to do is come to the realization that worshiping a warlord who committed acts of torture, rape, slavery, mass murder while rejecting such behavior for themselves is to be terribly conflicted. The moderate Muslims are living a life of extreme contradiction.
When moderates raise their children up to worship this same warlord and take him as a role model, they are creating young minds that are available to being talked into believing that they should emulate aspects of this role model that Mommy and Daddy don’t agree with.
While I do not believe that is should be considered hatred to try and get the Muslims to face up to the contradictions in their religion I can understand how and why it is going to be a painful and difficult process for them. But it is something they are going to have to do.
If the moderates do not make the choice to leave the religion eventually the Jihadists are going to drag them into the Jihad. Case in point Pakistan. A lot of the Pakistanis are moderate good people but right now they are all at risk of being dragged into a war with India by the Jihadists.
No I do not advocate mass murder, but this is war and war is about killing. With the Jihadists what other choice is there? These are people who are not going to get along. By their actions in Mumbai they have shown that they are not concerned about pushing two nuclear armed countries into a war. The scale of mass murder that could result would make Hitler look like a punk.
WASHINGTON (CNN) – Terrorists are likely to use a weapon of mass destruction somewhere in the world in the next five years, a blue-ribbon panel assembled by Congress has concluded.
They are more likely to use a biological weapon than a nuclear one – and the results could be devastating, the chairman of the commission told CNN.
“The consequences of a biological attack are almost beyond comprehension. It would be 9/11 times 10 or a hundred in terms of the number of people who would be killed,” former Sen. Bob Graham said.
[quote]ephrem wrote:
doogie wrote:
ephrem wrote:
…Sifu: on one hand you’re saying that you can’t reason with religious zealots, and yet the only peaceful solution you see is for religious muslim zealots to change…
…on the other hand you say: Peaceful co-existence with people who want to enslave all of humanity is not possible. All the Jihadists have got to go. If there is even one left he will produce more. It is just like cancer. You can’t just remove part of a tumor if you leave so much as one stem cell it will grow back.
…so basically you do advocate the mass murder of millions of people on a scale similar to Hitler’s Endlösung, don’t you?
You have to be simple to compare what Hitler did and the killing of Jihadists who want to kill us all. They are not equivalent things.
…simple? You’re supporting the murder of millions of people, and i’m simple? I’d rather be simple than an utter failure of a human being, thank you very much (-:
[/quote]
If someone is trying to kill you but you kill them first it isn’t murder. It’s self preservation. If anyone is a failure as a human being it is those who are not willing to do whatever it takes to put an end to the Jihad.
[quote]Think my calling you a “racist” might have something to do with your comment about Bush “doing something right if he’s pissing off the race X” ? Or perhaps your comment, “If we are going to bring democracy to Country X, we’ll have to ethnically cleanse group Y”?
[/quote]
Yes, this speaks to your reading incomprehension. Did you manage to read the part where I added, “…which would run into just war problems?” That means, (if it’s possible to break it into small enough chunks for even you), that I DON’T advocate ethnic cleansing. I was merely describing what WOULD be necessary in order to achieve a certain goal. Since no one wants to wipe out millions of people, obviously the alternative that avoids ethnic cleansing is desirable since it agrees with just war theory. I thought liberals like you were better at nuance?
[quote]
I even highlighted it for you in the other thread. I don’t use words like “bigot” or “racist” lightly. You’ve earned them. [/quote]
LOL. Use the terms all you want. Point at the sky and call it green if you want.
Uh, yeah. That’s what happens when one side uses a nuke against a nuclear power - they get nuked themselves. My point, (again - to break it up into morsels bite-sized enough for even you), was that the Muslims will keep up their jihad until they really bite off more than they can chew. Ahmedinejad is a big proponent of “wiping Israel off the map,” Ahmedinejad wants to do so with the nuclear weapons he’s developing, Iran will face reciprocity if they do so. Does this connect the dots sufficiently for you, or do I need to break out a dry-erase board or some finger puppets?
Yes, that’s what you do with a non-sequitur - you ignore it. You may have mistakenly concluded that I have never read “Invisible Man” because I didn’t respond to your incessant babble about “Invisible Man.” That is not my fault.
Yes, everything is an appeal to bigotry to the brown-shirt spectrum of liberalism that you occupy. Anyone who disagrees is a bigot, and must therefore be jailed, right? You were calling for me to be jailed a post back, weren’t you?
Yeah, uh, how is that relevant to your intelligence? All it speaks to is declining admission standards. Some programs, (apparently), will admit people who can only fog a mirror. Did your admission’s package come with a free drool pan as well?
Yippeee! YOu’re a grad student. Why, you must have a stratospheric IQ as well! Why can’t you generate more than pathetic, non-witty one-liners full of manufactured moral outrage rather than arguments substantiated with facts? Has grad school kept you too busy?
It sounds to me, based on our interactions, that this graduate degree of yours will qualify you to become only a better Starbucks barrista (or a manager, if you’re lucky), which is where “intellectuals” such as yourself tend to gravitate while they pine away about how the “system” is broken, indicated by the fact that they’re Starbucks barristas.
[quote]Sloth wrote:
WASHINGTON (CNN) – Terrorists are likely to use a weapon of mass destruction somewhere in the world in the next five years, a blue-ribbon panel assembled by Congress has concluded.
They are more likely to use a biological weapon than a nuclear one – and the results could be devastating, the chairman of the commission told CNN.
“The consequences of a biological attack are almost beyond comprehension. It would be 9/11 times 10 or a hundred in terms of the number of people who would be killed,” former Sen. Bob Graham said.
[quote]Sifu wrote:
If someone is trying to kill you but you kill them first it isn’t murder. It’s self preservation. If anyone is a failure as a human being it is those who are not willing to do whatever it takes to put an end to the Jihad. [/quote]
…has a Jihadist tried to kill you? If so, where do you live? If not, then you’re allowing your life to be ruled by fear. Out of this fear, you are willing to commit to mass murder on an unprecedented scale, and thát is scary stuff…
[quote]PRCalDude wrote:
Sloth wrote:
WASHINGTON (CNN) – Terrorists are likely to use a weapon of mass destruction somewhere in the world in the next five years, a blue-ribbon panel assembled by Congress has concluded.
They are more likely to use a biological weapon than a nuclear one – and the results could be devastating, the chairman of the commission told CNN.
“The consequences of a biological attack are almost beyond comprehension. It would be 9/11 times 10 or a hundred in terms of the number of people who would be killed,” former Sen. Bob Graham said.
[quote]Sifu wrote:
ephrem wrote:
…Sifu: on one hand you’re saying that you can’t reason with religious zealots, and yet the only peaceful solution you see is for religious muslim zealots to change…
No. The zealots are for the most part not going to change. The moderates who reject violence are the one who can reasoned with. They are already half of the way to where they need to be by rejecting violence.
What they need to do is come to the realization that worshiping a warlord who committed acts of torture, rape, slavery, mass murder while rejecting such behavior for themselves is to be terribly conflicted. The moderate Muslims are living a life of extreme contradiction.
When moderates raise their children up to worship this same warlord and take him as a role model, they are creating young minds that are available to being talked into believing that they should emulate aspects of this role model that Mommy and Daddy don’t agree with.
While I do not believe that is should be considered hatred to try and get the Muslims to face up to the contradictions in their religion I can understand how and why it is going to be a painful and difficult process for them. But it is something they are going to have to do.
If the moderates do not make the choice to leave the religion eventually the Jihadists are going to drag them into the Jihad. Case in point Pakistan. A lot of the Pakistanis are moderate good people but right now they are all at risk of being dragged into a war with India by the Jihadists.
…on the other hand you say: Peaceful co-existence with people who want to enslave all of humanity is not possible. All the Jihadists have got to go. If there is even one left he will produce more. It is just like cancer. You can’t just remove part of a tumor if you leave so much as one stem cell it will grow back.
…so basically you do advocate the mass murder of millions of people on a scale similar to Hitler’s Endlösung, don’t you?
No I do not advocate mass murder, but this is war and war is about killing. With the Jihadists what other choice is there? These are people who are not going to get along. By their actions in Mumbai they have shown that they are not concerned about pushing two nuclear armed countries into a war. The scale of mass murder that could result would make Hitler look like a punk. [/quote]
…i agree with you that we have a problem. A problem that’s growing, sure. Your solution however is unacceptable…
Well Ephrem I do not like the idea of having to kill millions of people either. But there is a hardcore of militants that probably numbers into the millions.
They are ready to kill for what they believe in and some of them have. They are also ready to die for what they believe in. We can’t be squeamish about what needs to be done and we have to accept it.
[quote]Sloth wrote:
WASHINGTON (CNN) – Terrorists are likely to use a weapon of mass destruction somewhere in the world in the next five years, a blue-ribbon panel assembled by Congress has concluded.
They are more likely to use a biological weapon than a nuclear one – and the results could be devastating, the chairman of the commission told CNN.
“The consequences of a biological attack are almost beyond comprehension. It would be 9/11 times 10 or a hundred in terms of the number of people who would be killed,” former Sen. Bob Graham said.
[/quote]
That means we should actually hope that some worldwide power does control things, or its lights out.
I personally think that space aliens control us for some inscrutible reason and will prevent us from destroying ourselves. Ever see the NASA vid where a light beam gets shot at an alien craft? Perhaps they’re our protectors, guarding us until we’re sane. Our world is one big madhouse.