Jump to content
Political Discussion Forums
DogOnPorch

Sri Lanka Terror Attack Redux (and all things related)

Recommended Posts

Robert Spencer vs London Imam on BBC...one knows Islam better than the other....guess who?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Goddess said:

Hahaha!  They will just "tell" you if they plan on killing anyone.  No worries!

OMG - and you call ME stupid.

 

It's like a hand grenade with the pin pulled and the spoon missing...

If it doesn't blow-up in 20 seconds...it's a peaceful grenade.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, dialamah said:

What can I say, pick stupid sources, get laughed at.

Where did I say Churches aren't getting attacked?   

Please be aware that thanks to sites like the one you referenced falsehoods are deliberately and accidentally spread.  For instance, and I have no doubt this is included in your link, there were reports of many Christians killed in Nigeria in February and March of this year.  Many people asked why "This was being ignored in MSM media", even though it could be found in MSM.  But even more important, most sources - especially the right-wing and/or anti-Muslim ones, failed to mention that Christians had also carried out their own massacre, attacking and killing about 130 Muslims.  It's also not made clear in Western media that the conflict is not primarily religious in nature, but is a conflict between herders and farmers, which has been exacerbated by the effects of climate change.  

Facts matter.  Sources matter.  Figure it out.

Yes, yes.  The entire list is "fake news". The whole thing about Muslims attacking churches all over the world is complete fabrication.  Got it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Goddess said:

Yes, yes.  The entire list is "fake news". The whole thing about Muslims attacking churches all over the world is complete fabrication.  Got it.

 

The Religion of Peace site like Jihad Watch are mainly concerned with listing terrorist events with links to the media source as well as teaching basic Islam 101 to those interested.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, DogOnPorch said:

 

The Religion of Peace site like Jihad Watch are mainly concerned with listing terrorist events with links to the media source as well as teaching basic Islam 101 to those interested.

Ahhh, but if you don't like the source, then you can just dismiss every incident of terrorism they list and call the whole thing "fake news."  Never happened and you're a stupid racist for taking any of it seriously.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, Goddess said:

Hahaha!  They will just "tell" you if they plan on killing anyone.  No worries!

OMG - and you call ME stupid.

That isn't what I said. Maybe you could get someone nearby to read it and explain it to you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, Goddess said:

Hahaha!  They will just "tell" you if they plan on killing anyone.  No worries!

OMG - and you call ME stupid.

That isn't what I said. Maybe you could get someone nearby to read it and explain it to you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, Goddess said:

Hahaha!  They will just "tell" you if they plan on killing anyone.  No worries!

OMG - and you call ME stupid.

That isn't what I said. Maybe you could get someone nearby to read it and explain it to you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, dialamah said:

I do not think that's true, but even if it were the surrounding events were different.  The White guy streamed his atrocity as it happened and published a manifesto explaining his motives.  The Sri Lankan atrocity had several targets and perpetrators, and multiple possibilities as to who might be responsible; no handy manifesto or live streaming to help figure it out.  

As far as "ideology being abhorred" quickly enough, in both cases I saw the action abhorred immediately, which I think abhors the ideology behind that action, even if not explicitly stated.  This argument looks to me like a make-work project for some people to feel offended that one of their own was identified as a barbaric xenophobe and islamophobe.

Here is what Mediabiasfactcheck says about The Spectator:

These media sources are slightly to moderately conservative in bias. They often publish factual information that utilizes loaded words (wording that attempts to influence an audience by using appeal to emotion or stereotypes) to favor conservative causes. These sources are generally trustworthy for information, but may require further investigation. See all Right-Center sources.

  • Overall, we rate The Spectator UK Right-Center biased based on story selection and editorial positions that moderately favor the right. We also rate them Mixed for factual reporting due to a few failed checks.

I disagree with your point about ideology.  It takes a lot longer for Islam to be abhorred, even with the "not all Muslims" option.  Islam has often been the word that is not spoken until it absolutely can no longer be ignored.

The Spectator makes no bones about its leanings.  It's a right of centre paper.  "Slightly to moderately conservative".  Nothing wrong with that.  It's still generally trustworthy for information, as the article says.  It's not a newspaper, though, and should not be regarded as a source for up to date information.  It's commentary.  That said, one has to use one's own judgement.  I do with all my sources.  I saw no reason to disagree with the posted comment there though.

Edit>  I didn't realise there were now three pages on this topic when I wrote this reply.  I'm sorry if my points have been discussed already. 

Edited by bcsapper
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, dialamah said:

Anything to avoid a few facts, eh?  The Media Bias Fact Check does their own assessment of media; in this case, they merely noted that the ReligionofPeace site uses Robert Spencer as a source.  Spender is a well-known alt-right figure**, and that the SPLC had put him on their hate list.  If you want to use that sort of "logic" to accept without question the information from TheReligionofPeace, that's up to you of course.  But you may as well quit calling yourself 'moderate', 'reasonable' or even 'well-informed'.

**Oops, I am thinking of Richard Spencer. Nonetheless, whether Robert Spencer deserves SPLC center designation, he is very ani-Muslim.

And in what universe do you imagine a web site which is NOT anti-Muslim is going to compile a list of atrocities committed in the name of Islam? You think the CBC is gonna do it?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, DogOnPorch said:

Islam isn't a race or a skin colour.

Might as well be the way you treat it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Argus said:

And in what universe do you imagine a web site which is NOT anti-Muslim is going to compile a list of atrocities committed in the name of Islam? You think the CBC is gonna do it?

Ask and you shall receive ...

https://ourworldindata.org/terrorism

Of course, that one won't satisfy you because it doesn't use the phrase "Islamic terrorism", right?  

Google "Global Terrorism Index 2018"; it provides an in-depth review of terrorism around the world since 1998.  That report explicitly examines Islamic terrorism, along with terrorism inspired by other ideologies.  It also discusses radicalization and trends.

Even Wikipedia is a better source for Islamic terrorist incidents than the Religion of Peace website, because it provides actual links to the incidents.  I found one incident that authorities didn't know who the shooters were, but the Religion of Peace website claimed it as terrorism.  That incident is not included in the Wikipedia link.

If people are going to use garbage sites to support their opinion, I am going to call them out on it.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, bcsapper said:

I saw no reason to disagree with the posted comment there though.

Well, we will just have to disagree then.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, dialamah said:

Well, we will just have to disagree then.

Well, why not?  Most of us do, most of the time.  It wouldn't be any fun if we had nothing to argue about.

Edited by bcsapper

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, dialamah said:

Ask and you shall receive ...

https://ourworldindata.org/terrorism

Of course, that one won't satisfy you because it doesn't use the phrase "Islamic terrorism", right?  

Uh, yeah it does, just not that precise phrase.

The shifting concentration of global terrorist activity can be seen in the following map. Terrorism post-9/11 has been concentrated in predominantly muslim countries as a result of radical Islamic ideologies and sectarian violence.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, Argus said:

Uh, yeah it does, just not that precise phrase.

The shifting concentration of global terrorist activity can be seen in the following map. Terrorism post-9/11 has been concentrated in predominantly muslim countries as a result of radical Islamic ideologies and sectarian violence.

 

 

Yeah, I noticed that, too:

Quote

One major consequence of the rise of international terrorism, particularly Islamic extremist groups, has been the global War on Terror. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

 

One major consequence of the rise of international terrorism, particularly Islamic extremist groups, has been the global War on Terror.

 

And the rise of international terrorism, particularly Islamic extremist groups was a major consequence of...?

...crickets...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎4‎/‎30‎/‎2019 at 11:11 PM, dialamah said:

Ask and you shall receive ...

https://ourworldindata.org/terrorism

Of course, that one won't satisfy you because it doesn't use the phrase "Islamic terrorism", right?  

Google "Global Terrorism Index 2018"; it provides an in-depth review of terrorism around the world since 1998.  That report explicitly examines Islamic terrorism, along with terrorism inspired by other ideologies.  It also discusses radicalization and trends.

Even Wikipedia is a better source for Islamic terrorist incidents than the Religion of Peace website, because it provides actual links to the incidents.  I found one incident that authorities didn't know who the shooters were, but the Religion of Peace website claimed it as terrorism.  That incident is not included in the Wikipedia link.

If people are going to use garbage sites to support their opinion, I am going to call them out on it.  

Well then let's look at the stats.  Please do not call sites you disagree with garbage sites. That is petulant. Just say you disagree with them. You don't have a monopoly on determining what sites are acceptable on this forum, be fair.

Take a look:

https://www.statista.com/statistics/937553/terrorism-most-active-perpetrator-groups-worldwide/

 

Terrorism: Most active perpetrator groups worldwide in 2017, based on number of attacks

 
Expand statistic
Search:
  Number of attacks
Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) 1,321
Taliban 907
Al-Shabaab 573
New People's Army (NPA) 363
Boko Haram 337
Communist Party of India - Maoist (CPI-Maoist)/Maoists 317
Khorasan Province of the Islamic State 197
Kurdistan Workers' Party (PKK) 159
Houthi extremists (Ansar Allah) 158
Sinai Province of the Islamic State 117
Tehrik-i-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) 106
Fulani extremists 79
Bangsamoro Islamic Freedom Movement (BIFM) 73
Gorkha Janmukti Morcha (GJM) 70
Abu Sayyaf Group (ASG) 65
Barisan Revolusi Nasional (BRN) 62
National Liberation Army of Colombia (ELN) 61
Communist Party of Nepal - Maoist (CPN-Maoist-Chand) 61
Jamaat Nusrat al-Islam wal Muslimin (JNIM) 59
Hizbul Mujahideen (HM) 49
 
How do you ignore Dialamah the rate of Muslim terrorist attacks in the above statistics?
 
With due respect the stats you provided are relevant to the issue as are the above. There are two sides
at least to this issue.
 
Also Dialamah may I say one thing about the site you use. It quotes a Political Science Professor who claims
terrorism can be defined as a rational action with underlying rational motives.
 
I think that kind of political bias or agenda is not helpful. It insults the people from the very same environment
as terrorists who do NOT embrace or choose terrorism.
 
I have seen the aftermath of terrorism. I can not imagine anyone who is rational trying to explain it as a rational act
and with due respect certain Academics live in an ivory tower and the Political Scientist on your site is such an
example.
 
I know personally survivors of terrorist attacks and mothers whose children were taken from them by terrorists and I know those
who refused and refuse to become terrorist. It is insulting to suggest terrorists are more rational than they are.
 
Terrorism is the act of choosing to kill the innocent and cause as much emotional as well as physical suffering as is possible
in the name of a political or religious motive. It is a violent act and no violent act attacking the innocent is rational and if a
an ivory tower academic can not understand that they need to come put some body parts in bags.
 
That said if you truly want to discuss this issue and quite Wikepedia you would also need to quote:
 
 
 
 

Al Jazeera poll, 81% of respondents approved of ISIS  "In a recent survey conducted by AlJazeera.net, the website for the Al Jazeera Arabic television channel, respondents overwhelmingly support(aljazeera.net/votes/pages?voteid=5270") the Islamic State terrorist group, with 81% voting “YES” on whether they approved of ISIS’s conquests in the region. The poll, which asked in Arabic, “Do you support the organizing victories of the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria (ISIS)?” has generated over 38,000 responses thus far, with only 19% of respondents voting “NO” to supporting ISIS." (muslimstatistics.wordpress.com/2015/10/15/poll-81-of-muslims-around-the-world-support-islamic-state-al-jazeera-arabic-poll/ )

Pew poll: 63 mil to 287 mil ISIS supporters in just 11 countries.  A new poll(pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2015/11/17/in-nations-with-significant-muslim-populations-much-disdain-for-isis/ft_15-11-17_isis_views/") by the Pew Research Center reveals significant levels of support for ISIS within the Muslim world.  In 11 representative nation-states, up to 14 percent of the population has a favorable opinion of ISIS, and upwards of 62 percent “don’t know” whether or not they have a favorable opinion of the Islamist group." (muslimstatistics.wordpress.com/2015/11/19/pew-poll-63-mil-to-287-million-isis-supporters-in-just-11-countries/)

81% of Al Jazeera Poll support ISIS, "al-Jazeera Poll (2015): 81% of respondents support the Islamic State (ISIS)."
(breitbart.com/national-security/2015/05/25/shock-poll-81-of-al-jazeera-arabic-poll-respondents-support-isis/)

Saudi Arabia, 92% of Saudis say ISIS conforms to Islamic Law, "Informal poll of Saudis in August 2014 shows 92% agree that Islamic State (ISIS) “conforms to the values of Islam and Islamic law.” (muslimstatistics.wordpress.com/2014/08/24/92-of-saudis-believes-that-isis-conforms-to-the-values-of-islam-and-islamic-law-survey/)

America, 38% of American Muslims says ISIS beliefs are correct, "The Polling Company CSP Poll (2015): 38% of Muslim-Americans say Islamic State (ISIS) beliefs are Islamic or correct.  (43% disagree)." (centerforsecuritypolicy.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/150612-CSP-Polling-Company-Nationwide-Online-Survey-of-Muslims-Topline-Poll-Data.pdf)

Britain, about 1/2 of Muslims support ISIS,  ICM (Mirror) Poll 2015: 1.5 Million British Muslims support the Islamic State, about half the total population." (mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/muslim-leader-isis-supporting-brits-disenfranchised-6018357)

1/5th of Muslims in U.S. approve of violence in order to institute sharia, "Nearly one-fifth of Muslim respondents said that the use of violence in the United States is justified in order to make shariah the law of the land in this country." (centerforsecuritypolicy.org/2015/06/23/nationwide-poll-of-us-muslims-shows-thousands-support-shariah-jihad/)
 
300,000 U.S. Muslims want to impose Sharia worldwide, "...300,000 Muslims living in the United States who believe that shariah is “The Muslim God Allah’s law that Muslims must follow and impose worldwide by Jihad.”" (centerforsecuritypolicy.org/2015/06/23/nationwide-poll-of-us-muslims-shows-thousands-support-shariah-jihad/)

19% of U.S. Muslims say violence is justified to impose sharia, "The Polling Company CSP Poll (2015): 19% of Muslim-Americans say that violence is justified in order to make Sharia the law in the United States (66% disagree)." (centerforsecuritypolicy.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/150612-CSP-Polling-Company-Nationwide-Online-Survey-of-Muslims-Topline-Poll-Data.pdf)

Britain

"28% of British Muslims want Britain to be an Islamic state." (civitas.org.uk/pdf/ShariaLawOrOneLawForAll.pdf)                      

Center for Social Cohesion: 40% of British Muslim students want Sharia." (socialcohesion.co.uk/pdf/IslamonCampus.pdf)

Canada

"MacDonald Laurier Institute: 62% of Muslims want Sharia in Canada (15% say make it mandatory)"
(torontosun.com/2011/11/01/strong-support-for-shariah-in-Canada)

Percentage of Muslims World Wide who approve of Terrorism: "61% of Egyptians approve of attacks on Americans 32% of Indonesians approve of attacks on Americans 41% of Pakistanis approve of attacks on Americans 38% of Moroccans approve of attacks on Americans 83% of Palestinians approve of some or most groups that attack Americans (only 14% oppose) 62% of Jordanians approve of some or most groups that attack Americans (21% oppose) 42% of Turks approve of some or most groups that attack Americans (45% oppose) A minority of Muslims disagreed entirely with terror attacks on Americans: (Egypt 34%; Indonesia 45%; Pakistan 33%) About half of those opposed to attacking Americans were sympathetic with al-Qaeda’s attitude toward the U.S." (worldpublicopinion.org/pipa/pdf/feb09/STARTII_Feb09_rpt.pdf)

Percentage of Muslims World Wide who approve of Terrorism, "Pew Research (2007): 26% of younger Muslims in America believe suicide bombings are justified. 35% of young Muslims in Britain believe suicide bombings are justified (24% overall). 42% of young Muslims in France believe suicide bombings are justified (35% overall). 22% of young Muslims in Germany believe suicide bombings are justified.(13% overall). 29% of young Muslims in Spain believe suicide bombings are justified.(25% overall). (pewresearch.org/assets/pdf/muslim-americans.pdf#page=60)
United States

Percentage of United States Muslims that approval of Suicide Bombings, "Pew Research (2011): 8% of Muslims in America believe suicide bombings are often or sometimes justified (81% never)."
(people-press.org/2011/08/30/muslim-americans-no-signs-of-growth-in-alienation-or-support-for-extremism/)

25% of US Muslims say violence against the US is justified. "The Polling Company CSP Poll (2015) 25% of Muslim-Americans say that violence against Americans in the United States is justified as part of the “global Jihad (64% disagree)." (centerforsecuritypolicy.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/150612-CSP-Polling-Company-Nationwide-Online-Survey-of-Muslims-Topline-Poll-Data.pdf)

 
Belgium

Percentage of Belgium Muslims that approval of Suicide Bombings, "16% of young Muslims in Belgium state terrorism is “acceptable”.(hln.be/hln/nl/1275/Islam/article/detail/1619036/2013/04/22/Zestien-procent-moslimjongens-vindt-terrorisme-aanvaardbaar.dhtm

 
Indonesia and Nigeria

Percentage of Indonesia and Nigeria Muslims that approval of Suicide Bombings, "Pew Research (2010: 15% of Indonesians believe suicide bombings are often or sometimes justified. 34% of Nigerian Muslims believe suicide bombings are often or sometimes justified." (pewglobal.org/2010/12/02/muslims-around-the-world-divided-on-hamas-and-hezbollah/)

 
Britain

Percentage of British Muslims that approval of Suicide Bombings, "Populus Poll (2006): 12% of young Muslims in Britain (and 12% overall) believe that suicide attacks against civilians in Britain can be justified.  1 in 4 support suicide attacks against British troops." (populuslimited.com/pdf/2006_02_07_times.pdf)

 

Turkey

Percentage of Turkish Muslims that approval of Suicide Bombings, Pew Research (2013): 15% of Muslims in Turkey support suicide bombings (also 11% in Kosovo, 26% in Malaysia and 26% in Bangladesh).(pewforum.org/uploadedFiles/Topics/Religious_Affiliation/Muslim/worlds-muslims-religion-politics-society-full-report.pdf)

Violence Statistics regarding percentage of population of Muslims in a society. 1% to 2% they are peaceful; 5%, heavy proselytizing to gain converts;  5+%, Push for halal food, pressure businesses to comply. 10%, increased lawlessness to ensure their demands; 20%, rioting, sporadic killings, burning of Christian Churches and Jewish Synagogues; 40%, Chronic terror attacks; 60%, persecution of non-Muslims, sporadic ethnic cleansing, Sharia Law, tax upon infidels; 80%, Daily intimidation, violence, state-run ethnic cleansing, genocide with aim of 100% Islamic nation. (Adapted from examiner.com/article/as-muslim-population-grows-what-can-happen-to-a-society)

Violence Statistics regarding percentage of population of Muslims in a society. 1%, peaceful; 2% to 3%, The proselytized he disaffected and ethnic minorities, recruiting from jails and street gangs; 5%, he exercised an inordinant amount of influence upon a society in relationship to their percentage of the population. They will insist on Islamic standards of food preparation (Halal) ith increased pressure on food supply chains to adapt to the Muslim rules; 10%, they increase in lawlessness as a means of getting what they want in harmony with Islamic teaching; 20%, there is rioting sporadic killings with church and synagogue burnings. 40%, widespread massacres with chronic terror attacks; 60%, widespread persecution of unbelievers from different religions with sporadic ethnic cleansing; 80%, state-run ethnic cleansing; 100%, complete domination with the oppression of religious and ethnic minorities not in harmony with Islam.(Adapted from heavenawaits.wordpress.com/muslim-behavior-with-population-increase)

Violence Statistics regarding percentage of population of Muslims in a society. "Now let’s go back to Hammond’s research which shows that when the Muslim population of a country reaches 10% (and the significance will be higher in Germany because we’re focusing only on Muslim males), there are increased threats of violence and actual violence, including arson, riots, and murder. At 20% Hammond notes (based on real-world models) that rioting and murder become increasingly commonplace, jihad militias are formed, and churches and synagogues are burned." (americanthinker.com/blog/2015/09/muslims_and_the_power_of_numbers_large_and_small.html)

  • "In 2011, Sunni Muslims accounted for the greatest number of terrorist attacks and fatalities for the third year in a row. Over 5,700 incidents were committed by Sunni Muslims, responsible for nearly 56 percent of all attacks and about 70 percent of 12,533 fatalities. Another 24 percent of the fatalities are on Shi´a Muslims. So in 2011, Muslims were responsible for 94 percent of the fatalities in terrorist attacks. Since 2011, with ISIS on the scene, the number of the fatalities –victims of the Muslim terrorist attacks- sharply grew, together with Muslims´ share in the world terrorism that is steadily closing in on 100%." (chersonandmolschky.com/2015/04/13/islamic-terrorism-japan)
 
I deliberately obtained the web sites for these above statistics and put them in because Dialamahall of the above can be found on
the following web-site:
 
 
and with due respect you may have chosen to write off the validity of these stats given they were posted on the above web site.
 
Please consider this salient point. No it is not fair to call all Muslims terrorists. However to ignore the terrorists who engage in terrorism because of their extremist Muslim ideology is not helpful. Trying to sanitize the name of terrorism to take out its correlation to Islam is not accurate.
 
I will never agree with anyone stereotyping all Muslims as terrorists but with due respect trying to sanitize the word Muslim extremist from its correlation to terrorism is not helpful or genuine.
 
Muslim extremists kill more Muslims than anyone else in the world. For that reason alone pretending they don't exist discriminates against Muslims more than it does non Muslims.
 
We have discussed on this forum that Muslim attacks in the US are less than other groups. That is a fact however it does not change the complexion of the above and to try argue Muslim extremism is not the most likely source of terrorist attacks globally at this time, is just not accurate.
 
I say that with no intention to negatively stereotype anyone but to point out we need to openly talk about terrorism and not engage in political correctness if it distorts the method of operations and motives behind terrorism.
 
Obama tried that having people white wash the FBI statistics erasing the word Muslim before terrorist in all their manuals and materials. Trudeau deliberately pandered to Siekhs in BC two weeks ago  sanitizing his words to avoid acknowledging Siekh extremism in India .  That is as insulting to Siekhs as it is the rest of us.
 
Give some of us credit to know that not all terrorists are Muslim when we present the above stats and we will not use it to hate Muslims. Please.  I know you may not think so with some people on this board. I get that but don't give in to that anymore than I will believe terrorism is rational. Stand your ground as to using stats to justify hate but don't be afraid of the stats either.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

 

 

 

Edited by Rue
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The rise of certain groups like AL-Queda and ISIS (both had weapons and training supplied directly by western nations, or via Saudi Arabia) were created when dictators were taken out by western powers thinking that the people of Iraq (and elsewhere) would treat them as liberators.    That never happened.  Why? 

 

We can talk about Islamic terrorism but let's not forget how much of an affect certain western nations that have contributed to the rise of radical Islamic terrorism.  Our governments (Canada, USA, UK, and other EU nations) are complicit in this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's disgusting to see anyone supporting ISIS or Al Qaeda. It's also disgusting to see Americans or anyone else who supports US' military adventures around the world,. Here are Americans and their support for the Iraq war:

May 2003

A Gallup poll made on behalf of CNN and USA Today concluded that 79% of Americans thought the Iraq War was justified, with or without conclusive evidence of illegal weapons. 19% thought weapons were needed to justify the war.

Link

Opinion shifted, but there were still people who supported the war in Iraq

2007

On May 4–7, CNN polled 1,028 adults nationwide. 34% said they favored the war in Iraq, 65% opposed, and 1% was undecided. The margin of error was plus or minus 3%.[2]

On August 6–8, CNN polled 1,029 adults nationwide. 33% said they favored the war in Iraq, 64% opposed, and 3% was undecided. The margin of error was plus or minus 3%.[2]

On September 10–12, in an Associated Press-Ipsos poll of 1,000 adults conducted by Ipsos Public Affairs, 33% approved of George Bush's handling of the "situation in Iraq", while 65% disapproved of it.[2] On September 14–16, Gallup conducted a poll asking if the United States made mistake in sending troops to Iraq. 58% believed it was a mistake, 41% did not believed it was a mistake, and 1% had no opinion.[21]

On December 11–14, an ABC News/Washington Post Poll of 1,003 adults nationwide found 64% felt the Iraq War was not worth fighting, with 34% saying it was worth fighting, with 2% undecided. The margin of error was 3%.[22]

 

So what makes people support criminal behaviour like ISIS attacks and the U.S. attacks on other countries? Is it brainwashing? Is it ignorance of the facts? Is it the "us vs them" mentality that has been propagated to them? Probably a little of everything. 

Edited by marcus

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/6/2019 at 12:06 PM, GostHacked said:

We can talk about Islamic terrorism but let's not forget how much of an affect certain western nations that have contributed to the rise of radical Islamic terrorism.  Our governments (Canada, USA, UK, and other EU nations) are complicit in this.

Haven't those certain western nations had much MORE effect on Central and South America?

Haven't they had at least as much affect on Africa? 

Pakistan and India were one country. Their colonial experience is largely identical until they gained individual self-government in 1947. 

Why is India more or less neutral to the West, with no anti-Western terrorism, while Pakistan is a hotbed of Muslim extremism and terrorism which hates the West?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Argus said:

Haven't those certain western nations had much MORE effect on Central and South America?

Haven't they had at least as much affect on Africa? 

Pakistan and India were one country. Their colonial experience is largely identical until they gained individual self-government in 1947. 

Why is India more or less neutral to the West, with no anti-Western terrorism, while Pakistan is a hotbed of Muslim extremism and terrorism which hates the West?

And what does raping and enslaving 9 year old Yazidi girls have to do with US foreign policy?

When Sunnis are killing Shias all over the world - what does that have to do with US foreign policy?

No, there's lots of Muslim terrorism going on that has Zero to do with dislike for Westerners.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...