RE: Don’t Blame Religion for Boston Bombings

RE: Don’t Blame Religion for Boston Bombings (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

WantsOfTheFlesh -> RE: Don’t Blame Religion for Boston Bombings (4/27/2013 10:23:43 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Edwynn Sorry to belabor the point, but the religion of choice in this case was/is as much to blame as the manufacturers of the pressure cookers used for the bombs. And conversely. A nut case is free to chose whatever tools he wishes, both mentally and materially. Thus spake St. Eric Rudolph. Otherwise, the proposition is that any and all who visit a mosque, church, or temple (or use a rice steamer) are bomb throwers in waiting. way i see it nut cases have limited mental autonomy being in tha grip of psychological obsessions. in a sense anyone breathing has tha potential to murder but wit religion it aint an either/or proposition as i see it. folks interract wit religion differently. some folks become extreme but thankfully tha majority dont. it just provides comfort. if some religions or religious leaders promote extremism then tha cards are stacked more in tha direction of tha extreme.

Edwynn -> RE: Don’t Blame Religion for Boston Bombings (4/27/2013 10:34:24 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: WantsOfTheFlesh way i see it nut cases have limited mental autonomy being in tha grip of psychological obsessions. in a sense anyone breathing has tha potential to murder but wit religion (or talk radio, {Ed}) it aint an either/or proposition as i see it. folks interract wit religion differently. some folks become extreme but thankfully tha majority dont. it just provides comfort. if some religions or religious leaders (or talk radio hosts, {Ed}) promote extremism then tha cards are stacked more in tha direction of tha extreme. Pardon my interloping via the edits I placed in the above post, but the point needs to be made. Religion does not, even the extreme interpretations of it, hold any hegemony over extremism, nor do religions or talk radio themselves -cause- extremism, but the worst offenders calculatingly rattle the cages of those who most do NOT need that.

WantsOfTheFlesh -> RE: Don’t Blame Religion for Boston Bombings (4/27/2013 10:43:40 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Edwynn quote: ORIGINAL: WantsOfTheFlesh way i see it nut cases have limited mental autonomy being in tha grip of psychological obsessions. in a sense anyone breathing has tha potential to murder but wit religion (or talk radio, {Ed}) it aint an either/or proposition as i see it. folks interract wit religion differently. some folks become extreme but thankfully tha majority dont. it just provides comfort. if some religions or religious leaders (or talk radio hosts, {Ed}) promote extremism then tha cards are stacked more in tha direction of tha extreme. Pardon my interloping via the edits I placed in the above post, but the point needs to be made. Religion, not even the extreme interpretations of it, hold any hegemony over extremism, nor do religions or talk radio themselves -cause- extremism, they merely rattle the cages those who most do NOT need that. tha question of what causes extremism is complex but if religion aint a major element then terrorism from all tha faiths would be counted as pretty much equal. i will say tho that terrorism without any religious element is common.

Edwynn -> RE: Don’t Blame Religion for Boston Bombings (4/27/2013 10:48:33 AM)
"They can take my rice steamer away when they unwrap my melted, cauterized dead fingers from around it." Sorry, I couldn't resist.

fucktoyprincess -> RE: Don’t Blame Religion for Boston Bombings (4/27/2013 12:36:36 PM)
I don't think religion directly causes violence, but it can be used as a "cause" to embolden or provoke someone who is already predisposed. My earlier thread on young men and violence was trying to get at these distinctions. I don't have the answers, but it would be unwise for any of us to assume religion is the direct cause. I think it's an unsophisticated way to look at the overall problem - and is not going to lead to the best solutions in the long run. [sm=2cents.gif] http://www.collarchat.com/m_4429543/mpage_1/key_/tm.htm#4429707

tweakabelle -> RE: Don’t Blame Religion for Boston Bombings (4/28/2013 3:35:52 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: WantsOfTheFlesh quote: ORIGINAL: tweakabelle I pointed out that terrorism occurs for real easily identifiable reasons. That is a million miles removed from any kind of approval for something I had just described as "atrocities". I also pointed out that terrorist attacks don't necessarily have to make sense to any one but the terrorists and the constituency they spring from. There's nothing original or particularly insightful or even controversial about these remarks, they will be found in serious analysis of asymmetrical warfare most likely on page 1, Chapter 1. If people are uninterested in understanding why terrorism happens, then whatever response to terrorism they choose to adopt is likely to be as much of a fiasco, and as utterly unsuccessful as the invasion of Iraq was. tweaks tha main point ya made was that tha west can fix tha political problems causing terrorism plus ya said loadsa things that kinda sound apologetic No that wasn't the main point that I made. Nor is it a belief that I subscribe to. The main point I made is in the first sentence: "I pointed out that terrorism occurs for real easily identifiable reasons." It is getting tiresome having to continually post to correct your mangled interpretations of my words. FWIW my opinion is that the West can address some but not all of the problems that cause terrorism. The main contribution the West can make is to withdraw its armies from the region, stop all arm sales to the region and force Israel to conclude a just peace with the Palestinians. These three things ought to happen in any event - irrespective of whether terrorism exists or not. There are other issues in the mix that only the people of region can solve themselves. I hope that is simple enough for you to get your head around without causing undue strain on your mental faculties, such as they are.

DesideriScuri -> RE: Don’t Blame Religion for Boston Bombings (4/28/2013 5:27:19 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tweakabelle quote: ORIGINAL: WantsOfTheFlesh quote: ORIGINAL: tweakabelle I pointed out that terrorism occurs for real easily identifiable reasons. That is a million miles removed from any kind of approval for something I had just described as "atrocities". I also pointed out that terrorist attacks don't necessarily have to make sense to any one but the terrorists and the constituency they spring from. There's nothing original or particularly insightful or even controversial about these remarks, they will be found in serious analysis of asymmetrical warfare most likely on page 1, Chapter 1. If people are uninterested in understanding why terrorism happens, then whatever response to terrorism they choose to adopt is likely to be as much of a fiasco, and as utterly unsuccessful as the invasion of Iraq was. tweaks tha main point ya made was that tha west can fix tha political problems causing terrorism plus ya said loadsa things that kinda sound apologetic No that wasn't the main point that I made. Nor is it a belief that I subscribe to. The main point I made is in the first sentence: "I pointed out that terrorism occurs for real easily identifiable reasons." It is getting tiresome having to continually post to correct your mangled interpretations of my words. FWIW my opinion is that the West can address some but not all of the problems that cause terrorism. This is part and parcel of your implying that terrorism is an acceptable response. It's not that terrorists should stop committing atrocities, but that the West should address some "of the problems of that cause terrorism." quote: The main contribution the West can make is to withdraw its armies from the region, stop all arm sales to the region and force Israel to conclude a just peace with the Palestinians. These three things ought to happen in any event - irrespective of whether terrorism exists or not. 2 out of 3 I completely agree with. Completely. I do believe that until the region (and/or the region's supporters) stop talking about erasing Israel off the map, there is no reason to end arms sales in the region (which means Israel can still buy our arms, but that others can as well). quote: There are other issues in the mix that only the people of region can solve themselves. I hope that is simple enough for you to get your head around without causing undue strain on your mental faculties, such as they are. How do you not get that blaming underlying problems for terrorism isn't implying that terrorism is a legitimate response?

PeonForHer -> RE: Don’t Blame Religion for Boston Bombings (4/28/2013 8:08:12 AM)
quote: How do you not get that blaming underlying problems for terrorism isn't implying that terrorism is a legitimate response? It's as though Kant never existed and never wrote a word about category mistakes. One argument is about cause and effect. The other argument is about what is and what isn't morally acceptable. Hell's bells . . . is any attempt to understand the root cause of a phenomenon to be cast as a tacit approval of the phenomenon? Do we say that anyone who goes in search of the root cause of cancer actually approves of the existence of cancer? If not, why on earth would we have different rules in the political sphere as opposed to the medical sphere?

WantsOfTheFlesh -> RE: Don’t Blame Religion for Boston Bombings (4/28/2013 8:43:56 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri How do you not get that blaming underlying problems for terrorism isn't implying that terrorism is a legitimate response? kinda legitimises terrorism too when someone sez its only a last resort after tha politics fails http://www.collarchat.com/fb.asp?m=4430558 [8\|] quote: ORIGINAL: tweakabelle Terrorism is a reaction to real, pre-exisiting problems that usually is deployed as a last resort - terrorism operates where there is a failure of politics to resolve these problems. I believe grasping this point is imperative if the issue of terrorism is going to be understood.

WantsOfTheFlesh -> RE: Don’t Blame Religion for Boston Bombings (4/28/2013 8:54:02 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: PeonForHer Hell's bells . . . is any attempt to understand the root cause of a phenomenon to be cast as a tacit approval of the phenomenon? Do we say that anyone who goes in search of the root cause of cancer actually approves of the existence of cancer? If not, why on earth would we have different rules in the political sphere as opposed to the medical sphere? p yr cancer comparison is plain silly coz no one advocates for tha universal spread of cancer last time i looked. [8\|] theses a clear blue difference between understanding terrorism & supporting it. course we need to understand tha motivations but some folks claim terrorism can be fixed by tha west making tha concessions tha terrorists want. understanding any sorta cause doesnt mean it can be fixed. would ya say tha same about eric rudolph or tha white supremicists? nah, i doubt it very much coz you may find tha concessions unpalatable.

PeonForHer -> RE: Don’t Blame Religion for Boston Bombings (4/28/2013 9:40:43 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: WantsOfTheFlesh understanding any sorta cause doesnt mean it can be fixed. would ya say tha same about eric rudolph or tha white supremicists? nah, i doubt it very much coz you may find tha concessions unpalatable. Well, on balance, I reckon we have a better chance of fixing a problem if we understand its cause than if we don't. That's been the average human experience, anyway, so far as I've seen. And, yes, that certainly does apply to Rudolph-types, or white supremacists. I cannot see why it's necessary or somehow more virtuous that we become less logical, and basically more stupid and emotion-driven, when it comes to political issues and their possible solutions. BTW: Wants, I have to tell you now that I'm getting to the point where I'm skating past your posts. I'm baffled by your need to write the way you do, TBH. Could you please try to write in adult English? I'd appreciate it and would treat your points with more respect.

WantsOfTheFlesh -> RE: Don’t Blame Religion for Boston Bombings (4/28/2013 9:56:27 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: PeonForHer quote: ORIGINAL: WantsOfTheFlesh understanding any sorta cause doesnt mean it can be fixed. would ya say tha same about eric rudolph or tha white supremicists? nah, i doubt it very much coz you may find tha concessions unpalatable. Well, on balance, I reckon we have a better chance of fixing a problem if we understand its cause than if we don't. That's been the average human experience, anyway, so far as I've seen. i meant fix wit concessions as i said. quote: And, yes, that certainly does apply to Rudolph-types, or white supremacists. I cannot see why it's necessary or somehow more virtuous that we become less logical, and basically more stupid and emotion-driven, when it comes to political issues and their possible solutions. where is it suggested that we should be illogical r unthinking? i said we need to understand tha motivations but tha solution isnt to give in to terrorist demands unlike what tweaks says. tha terrorist attacks would not stop if tha US did as asked anyway. quote: BTW: Wants, I have to tell you now that I'm getting to the point where I'm skating past your posts. I'm baffled by your need to write the way you do, TBH. Could you please try to write in adult English? I'd appreciate it and would treat your points with more respect. p yr approval isnt high on my priorities & it bothers me none if ya dont treat my views wit respect.

WantsOfTheFlesh -> RE: Don’t Blame Religion for Boston Bombings (4/28/2013 10:09:23 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tweakabelle quote: ORIGINAL: WantsOfTheFlesh quote: ORIGINAL: tweakabelle I pointed out that terrorism occurs for real easily identifiable reasons. That is a million miles removed from any kind of approval for something I had just described as "atrocities". I also pointed out that terrorist attacks don't necessarily have to make sense to any one but the terrorists and the constituency they spring from. There's nothing original or particularly insightful or even controversial about these remarks, they will be found in serious analysis of asymmetrical warfare most likely on page 1, Chapter 1. If people are uninterested in understanding why terrorism happens, then whatever response to terrorism they choose to adopt is likely to be as much of a fiasco, and as utterly unsuccessful as the invasion of Iraq was. tweaks tha main point ya made was that tha west can fix tha political problems causing terrorism plus ya said loadsa things that kinda sound apologetic No that wasn't the main point that I made. Nor is it a belief that I subscribe to. The main point I made is in the first sentence: "I pointed out that terrorism occurs for real easily identifiable reasons." tweaks like all tha folks here let ya be measured by yr words for this is what ya wrote http://www.collarchat.com/fb.asp?m=4430558 quote: Ultimately, this perspective is an optimistic one as it offers as solution to the problem of terrorism and a practical strategy to marginalise terrorist groups and ideologies. By focusing on addressing the underlying political issues as part of an overall response to terrorism, it is possible to separate the terrorists and their support base, quote: It is getting tiresome having to continually post to correct your mangled interpretations of my words. nah tweaks whats "tiresome" is yr failure to be open bout yr truwe opinions. its clear ya give some d-fense to terrorist interests tho folks ya share yr perspective wit will deny that. i quoted ya as saying things that kinda sound supportive of terrorism http://www.collarchat.com/fb.asp?m=4431896 tho conveniently ya didnt answer that part of my post. [8\|] quote: FWIW my opinion is that the West can address some but not all of the problems that cause terrorism. The main contribution the West can make is to withdraw its armies from the region, stop all arm sales to the region and force Israel to conclude a just peace with the Palestinians. These three things ought to happen in any event - irrespective of whether terrorism exists or not. when ya say western armies ya mean tha US armies dont ya? your blame tha US & israel for most porblems in tha ME & thats exactly tha perspective jihadi terrorists have. quote: I hope that is simple enough for you to get your head around without causing undue strain on your mental faculties, such as they are. ad hominem attacks wont help yr cause tweaks. [X(]

PeonForHer -> RE: Don’t Blame Religion for Boston Bombings (4/28/2013 10:12:49 AM)
quote: i said we need to understand tha motivations but tha solution isnt to give in to terrorist demands unlike what tweaks says She didn't ask for that. If you don't agree, please point me to where, exactly, she asked for that. This is crap, Wants. What we need here is adult politics, not the politics of children. The politics of children hasn't got the USA anywhere other than deeper into a hole. quote: ORIGINAL: WantsOfTheFlesh p yr approval isnt high on my priorities & it bothers me none if ya dont treat my views wit respect. Then I don't need to respond to your posts. Let me know if/when you've grown up. Till then: Goodbye! [:)]

WantsOfTheFlesh -> RE: Don’t Blame Religion for Boston Bombings (4/28/2013 10:33:29 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: PeonForHer quote: i said we need to understand tha motivations but tha solution isnt to give in to terrorist demands unlike what tweaks says She didn't ask for that. If you don't agree, please point me to where, exactly, she asked for that. This is crap, Wants. What we need here is adult politics, not the politics of children. The politics of children hasn't got the USA anywhere other than deeper into a hole. she did tho not without being vague bout it. whats clear tho is ya dont want to hear it. i quoted a lotta stuff on tha last 2 pgs quote: quote: ORIGINAL: WantsOfTheFlesh p yr approval isnt high on my priorities & it bothers me none if ya dont treat my views wit respect. Then I don't need to respond to your posts. Let me know if/when you've grown up. Till then: Goodbye! [:)] goodmorrow my limey friend. [X(]

DesideriScuri -> RE: Don’t Blame Religion for Boston Bombings (4/28/2013 10:51:11 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: PeonForHer quote: How do you not get that blaming underlying problems for terrorism isn't implying that terrorism is a legitimate response? It's as though Kant never existed and never wrote a word about category mistakes. One argument is about cause and effect. The other argument is about what is and what isn't morally acceptable. Hell's bells . . . is any attempt to understand the root cause of a phenomenon to be cast as a tacit approval of the phenomenon? Do we say that anyone who goes in search of the root cause of cancer actually approves of the existence of cancer? If not, why on earth would we have different rules in the political sphere as opposed to the medical sphere? We do have different rules. Is the cancer picking and choosing which person to infect? No? Oh. The person/group is choosing to use terrorism to protest. That is their choice. Are there any other ways to protest other than terrorism? If not, then the terrorism is a legitimate reaction. If there are other ways to protest, then, terrorism isn't a legitimate reaction regardless of the reasoning.

DesideriScuri -> RE: Don’t Blame Religion for Boston Bombings (4/28/2013 10:53:36 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: WantsOfTheFlesh quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri How do you not get that blaming underlying problems for terrorism isn't implying that terrorism is a legitimate response? kinda legitimises terrorism too when someone sez its only a last resort after tha politics fails http://www.collarchat.com/fb.asp?m=4430558 [8\|] quote: ORIGINAL: tweakabelle Terrorism is a reaction to real, pre-exisiting problems that usually is deployed as a last resort - terrorism operates where there is a failure of politics to resolve these problems. I believe grasping this point is imperative if the issue of terrorism is going to be understood. There is no failure of politics when there aren't many attempts at using politics to correct the issue(s). And, if all other avenues have been exhausted, then terrorism very well may be a legitimate way to bring attention to the problem. If that is the only way it will be done, then it is a legitimate option.

WantsOfTheFlesh -> RE: Don’t Blame Religion for Boston Bombings (4/28/2013 11:03:53 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri quote: ORIGINAL: WantsOfTheFlesh quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri How do you not get that blaming underlying problems for terrorism isn't implying that terrorism is a legitimate response? kinda legitimises terrorism too when someone sez its only a last resort after tha politics fails http://www.collarchat.com/fb.asp?m=4430558 [8\|] quote: ORIGINAL: tweakabelle Terrorism is a reaction to real, pre-exisiting problems that usually is deployed as a last resort - terrorism operates where there is a failure of politics to resolve these problems. I believe grasping this point is imperative if the issue of terrorism is going to be understood. There is no failure of politics when there aren't many attempts at using politics to correct the issue(s). And, if all other avenues have been exhausted, then terrorism very well may be a legitimate way to bring attention to the problem. If that is the only way it will be done, then it is a legitimate option. may be tha legitimate option as ya say. it depends on tha context & how tha militants target coz it can easily be military or state not civilain. thing is loadsa terrorist groups have big political wings & movements. maybe they believe they can make change wit political means as well as tha bomb. kinda debunks folks suggesting terrorism is only a last resort. looks like its more a question of how fast a group want change & how much they are happy to kill & terrorise to get their aims.

GotSteel -> RE: Don’t Blame Religion for Boston Bombings (4/28/2013 6:57:29 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri This is part and parcel of your implying that terrorism is an acceptable response. Reading fail! Learn how to comprehend English.

tweakabelle -> RE: Don’t Blame Religion for Boston Bombings (4/29/2013 3:27:07 AM)
Thus far we two explanations for terrorism. These are: 1. it is an outcome of political failure to deal with underlying political and social problems; and 2. it is an outcome of certain religions/ideologies (if I understand WOTF's position correctly) This brings us to the question of solutions or appropriate responses to terrorism. What do people see as a solution/appropriate response to this issue? I can only offer measures that are consistent with the analysis that I have advanced consistently. The main measures I would like to see are: 1. withdrawal of all Western armies from the Middle East region; 2. force Israel to conclude a just peace with the Palestinians on the basis of Two States and UN resolution 242; and 3. cease all arms sales to the region. All of these measures should be part of an integrated overall strategy to withdraw support. from unrepresentative Govts in the region, promotion of democracy and human rights and making the entire region a nuclear weapons free zone. All of these measures are do-able within a relatively short time span. They will have the effect of removing the West from the firing line and encouraging the people of the region to solve their own problems without outside interference. They will also separate the terrorists from their support base and effectively marginalise them. Where they agree to renounce violence they should be encouraged to enter into the political process of their country. Until the threat of terrorism is finally removed by the effect of these measures, terrorism ought to be regarded as a policing/security matter, (NOT a military issue) with closer co-operation between countries' police forces, info sharing and punitive sentencing the main points of counter-terrorist strategy. It is imperative that no existing rights be diminished/abolished - our rights and values are what separate us from the terrorists and they ought to be strengthened and emphasised, not reduced. It is up to the people of the region to decide what kind of Govts they have. The role of the West should be to foster good relations trade and matters of mutual benefit with those Govts that reflect the wishes of their populations and to deny active support to those than don't. All the elements I have mentioned above ought to be Western policy in any event, that is they ought to be enacted whether anti-Western terrorism exists or not.

Page: << < prev 1 2 3 [4] 5 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875