Assessing Al-Qaeda (merged thread)

[TheCurmudgeon]

I think your right carl,
One has to ask why are we afraid to face this? It is a religious war, the goal is to hurt America anyway possible. I am sure there are other motives to go along with this but it seems to be the primary mover. Political Correctness is going to destroy this country, it prevents the discussion of reality. What a propaganda win for the PC crowd, they have completely destroyed our ability to think as a Nation in order to defend ourselves and never fired a shot. Anything that violates the love boat foreign policy is not even considered no matter obvious it has become.

I did not realize "American" was a religion.

That statement, more than anything else, demonstrates the flaw in your thinking. You confuse religious organizations and political organizations. So you will never be able to define the problem correctly.

Bob is right, religion is NOT the main driver. By using religion to define the problem you include vast numbers of people who are unrelated to the problem. YOUR religious opinions make you see the problem as religious. You have defined the sides, the "us and them", based on your religious views. I wonder is Muslim Americans see the problem the same way.

So what is your solution, genocide?

[TheCurmudgeon]

Let me offer "a modest proposal" - a way to examine the question of religion in conflict. I will assume that the average American is Christian. Based on that observation alone, I can assume that the American answer to radical Islam is total annihilation of the entire Muslim population.

That is a fair interpretation because of the religious teachings of both Christians and Jews. The bible teaches them that, when confronted with an enemy it is appropriate to kill them all. In 1 Samuel 15 God instructed them to destroy Amalek completely, “man and women, child and infant, oxen and sheep, camel and donkey.” Total genocide.

So clearly the teachings of the bible would direct all Americans to engage in the total extermination of every Muslim in the world.

Think about this for a minute. Based on what I have just said is it fair to impute motivation and desire to every member of a religion based on the religions teachings. Is it really fair to say that, because there are a few passages in the Koran about killing infidels, that every Muslim is now a threat to my existence?

Religion is not the problem. Men interpret religion. They adapt it to their own thinking. It is not the religion that cause acts of terror, it is the motivations of the people and the way they twist the religion to fit their desires. It is those initial motivations that are the problem. They are what has to be addressed to find a solution.

[Bill Moore]

Slapout can speak for himself, but i think you just left the ballpark completely with your comment about America not being a religion, so therefore the other side can't wage jihadists. First off the religious conflict is principally between Muslims, we are simply seen as the far enemy viewed as a secular state that is supporting those the jihadists see as undesirable. Al-Qaeda linked movements are most definitely fighting to impose their view of Islam, which is also a political system. Just because we separate church and state doesn't mean that others do this. As we all recognize there are multiple groups fighting and the coalitions constantly shift. Some of those group are seeking political power regardless of religion, so it is complex. It is also wrong in my view to claim ISI isn't motivated by religion. Why we shy away from I don't understand.

[TheCurmudgeon]

Slapout can speak for himself, but i think you just left the ballpark completely with your comment about America not being a religion, so therefore the other side can't wage jihadists. First off the religious conflict is principally between Muslims, we are simply seen as the far enemy viewed as a secular state that is supporting those the jihadists see as undesirable. Al-Qaeda linked movements are most definitely fighting to impose their view of Islam, which is also a political system. Just because we separate church and state doesn't mean that others do this. As we all recognize there are multiple groups fighting and the coalitions constantly shift. Some of those group are seeking political power regardless of religion, so it is complex. It is also wrong in my view to claim ISI isn't motivated by religion. Why we shy away from I don't understand.

The problem is not that we shy away from religion, it is that we use it as the primary evil without looking any further. We make no effort to understand how religion is being used by the extremist. The history being invoked, to try to find the reason why anyone would follow them. We think in shallow terms - they are evil people who are religious, therefore their religion is evil and so is everyone who practices it.

The recent article "The Coming War with the Caliphate" is a prime example. The author had no idea what he was saying by using that term the way he did. He might have well have said "The Coming War with the Ummah."

For some people it is enough to know that they are Muslim extremists. That categorization alone explains their motivations. It is this narrow thinking that causes the problem.

Extremists of all strips use a doctrinal base from which to espouse their message. Be it Muslim, Cristian, Communism, or some ethnic identity myth. Again, it is not the religion that is at issue, it is the base of the extremist view and why that view resonates with a particular segment of the population.

Thinking that way is complicated. Thinking that way is hard. But what we have done up until now is not working. There is no reason to expect that it will in the future.

BTW, it was Slap that compared America to a religion, not me. You can't mix metaphors without revealing a little about how you think.

Explain to me how Islam is a political system. What part of the Koran explains how a government should be established? What part discusses who the executive is? How laws are made? How budgets are determined? The reason there is a Sunni Shia split is because Mohamed failed to leave anything like a plan for future governance. So no, Islam is not a form of government. It lays out some laws, just as the bible does. That is nothing new. It certainly does not make Islam a political system.

[Bill Moore]

The problem is not that we shy away from religion, it is that we use it as the primary evil without looking any further. We make no effort to understand how religion is being used by the extremist. The history being invoked, to try to find the reason why anyone would follow them. We think in shallow terms - they are evil people who are religious, therefore their religion is evil and so is everyone who practices it.

The recent article "The Coming War with the Caliphate" is a prime example. The author had no idea what he was saying by using that term the way he did. He might have well have said "The Coming War with the Ummah."

For some people it is enough to know that they are Muslim extremists. That categorization alone explains their motivations. It is this narrow thinking that causes the problem.

Extremists of all strips use a doctrinal base from which to espouse their message. Be it Muslim, Cristian, Communism, or some ethnic identity myth. Again, it is not the religion that is at issue, it is the base of the extremist view and why that view resonates with a particular segment of the population.

Thinking that way is complicated. Thinking that way is hard. But what we have done up until now is not working. There is no reason to expect that it will in the future.

BTW, it was Slap that compared America to a religion, not me. You can't mix metaphors without revealing a little about how you think.

Explain to me how Islam is a political system. What part of the Koran explains how a government should be established? What part discusses who the executive is? How laws are made? How budgets are determined? The reason there is a Sunni Shia split is because Mohamed failed to leave anything like a plan for future governance. So no, Islam is not a form of government. It lays out some laws, just as the bible does. That is nothing new. It certainly does not make Islam a political system.

First off I think very few people in uniform default to all Muslims are evil terrorists, and I think more than half have actually read a fair amount of history on the topic. You and Bob can come across as more than a little condescending at times. Our military is full of bright and educated folks who have put their lives on the line to protect Muslims, so keep that in mind.

Second we have always had our share of simpletons, to include rednecks, in the public sector who form opinions based on 15 second sound bytes in the news. Those people don't make policy, but admittedly if stupidity mobilizes voters then it could influence policy.

Islam according to al-Qaeda and I believe the Wahabbists should guide both social and political life. The laws are based on Sharia law, and law is a function of the state. I agree that governments must eventually form institutions, and since Saudi Arabia seems to be a state that follows Islam closely maybe a close look at their institutions would be informative.

http://www.merip.org/mer/mer205/what-political-islam

What is Political Islam

by Charles Hirschkind

Over the last few decades, Islam has become a central point of reference for a wide range of political activities, arguments and opposition movements. The term “political Islam” has been adopted by many scholars in order to identify this seemingly unprecedented irruption of Islamic religion into the secular domain of politics and thus to distinguish these practices from the forms of personal piety, belief and ritual conventionally subsumed in Western scholarship under the unmarked category “Islam.” In the brief comments that follow, I suggest why we might need to rethink this basic framework.

The claim that contemporary Muslim activities are putting Islam to use for political purposes seems, at least in some instances, to be warranted. Political parties such as Hizb al-‘Amal in Egypt or the Islamic Salvation Front (FIS) in Algeria that base their appeal on their Islamic credentials appear to exemplify this instrumental relation to religion. Yet a problem remains, even in such seemingly obvious examples: In what way does the distinction between the political and nonpolitical domains of social life hold today? Many scholars have argued that “political Islam” involves an illegitimate extension of the Islamic tradition outside of the properly religious domain it has historically occupied. Few, however, have explored this trend in relation to the contemporaneous expansion of state power and concern into vast domains of social life previously outside its purview -- including that of religion.

Gets more interesting as you keep reading....

[TheCurmudgeon]

I think your article makes my point:

Grasping such complexity will require a much more subtle approach than one grounded in a simple distinction between (modern) political goals and (traditional) religious ones. Terms such as “political Islam” are inadequate here as they frame our inquiries around a posited distortion or corruption of properly religious practice.

My issue is that we, as professionals, should not give into the the desires to simplify the problem. If we start using terms like "political Islam" without the necessary clarifications between the terrorist/insurgents' interpretation of Islam and a more pedestrian meaning of the term Islam then how can we hope those who read our writing to understand there is a difference. If we are incapable of understanding and articulating the difference in conversations amongst ourselves, how are we ever going to get the general population to understand.

As professionals, people listen to what we say. We should be clear when we use terms like "political Islam."

BTW, the article you site makes a great point on how Islam is blamed for socioeconomic problems that are larger than Islam.

[Bill Moore]

I think your article makes my point:



My issue is that we, as professionals, should not give into the the desires to simplify the problem. If we start using terms like "political Islam" without the necessary clarifications between the terrorist/insurgents' interpretation of Islam and a more pedestrian meaning of the term Islam then how can we hope those who read our writing to understand there is a difference. If we are incapable of understanding and articulating the difference in conversations amongst ourselves, how are we ever going to get the general population to understand.

As professionals, people listen to what we say. We should be clear when we use terms like "political Islam."

BTW, the article you site makes a great point on how Islam is blamed for socioeconomic problems that are larger than Islam.

As professionals it probably way past time to explore updating our lexicon.

Obviously Islam isn't a cause for economic problems, since the same economic problems impact other societies and states that are not Islamic. A lot of countries that are primarily Muslim suffer from the same issues of corruption, the resource curse, and borders drawn to facilitate exploitation by western powers as many non-Muslim countries. On the other hand, those that practice fundamental Islam do have an issue with marginalizing approximate 50% of their population by hindering the ability of women to get an education and pursue professions, and I can't help but think that is a factor in some countries for retarded economic growth.

Islam is the underlying reason for the wide ranging jihad we're wrestling with now. That doesn't mean every Muslim embraces it, and most likely a small percentage do, nonetheless a small percentage of 1.3 billion people is still a lot of people. We have to understand our adversary and ourselves, and based on the recent dialogue I fear we understand neither.

[slapout9]

BTW, it was Slap that compared America to a religion, not me. You can't mix metaphors without revealing a little about how you think.

If you are gonna quote me get it right!!!! I never said that read it again.

[slapout9]

I did not realize "American" was a religion.

I go to work for awhile and you just fall off a cliff....Read it again I did not say American....You said that! I said America!!! referring to the country....based upon a conversation with a Muslim American who asked me directly "Why America doesn't get it?" Allah is everything....All must start with him not Politics according to my friend. But he is right most people don't get it which why we are in the mess we are in.

That statement, more than anything else, demonstrates the flaw in your thinking. You confuse religious organizations and political organizations. So you will never be able to define the problem correctly.

I have no flaw in my thinking but you sure do. I am stunned you are such a Cartesian thinker that you really have know clue do you? Here let me help you. Please read "Understanding Islamic Fundamentalism" by William R. Polk

http://consortiumnews.com/2014/06/29...undamentalism/


And finally NO! I do not nor have never recommended genocide!