Donate SIGN UP

Answers

41 to 60 of 61rss feed

First Previous 1 2 3 4 Next Last

Avatar Image
Damn savage - should never see the light of day again!
15:05 Sun 27th Jun 2021
A very wishy-washy answer,Atheist.Sorry to say this,but reading between the lines i would say that you are not particularly unsympathetic towards these terrorists.Perhaps im wrong,perhaps im right...
// and Allah, for instance tried to terrorise people into obedience,//
noop

Islamic law prohibits forced conversion, following the Quranic principle that there is "no compulsion in religion" (Quran 2:256)

christians are ahl el-kitab -- children of the book

but hey this is a TTT thread so anything goes.......7.......
-- answer removed --
ynnaf; I wrote "The OT God, and Allah, for instance tried to terrorise people into obedience, but any self-respecting person despises such behaviour."
I am self-respecting and so I despise such behaviour. I don't want to kill them, and so you seem to think I am wishy-washy. That's your call.
I despise people who want to kill others because of their beliefs. That's not the same as saying that I would not defend myself against attacks.
Question Author
"I despise people who want to kill others because of their beliefs." - that's ALL religion by definition, welcome on board.
I'm unsure what the thrust of the OP actually is.

TTT has used it before.

I wonder if he imagines that anyone on here ever has or ever would defend such behaviour, and he thinks he will see it on this thread.

The fact is, as Pixie has pointed out, no-one has ever defended terrorism, and I can;t imagine that anyone ever would.

If that's what TTT is waiting for, I suggest he is waiting in vain.
These isolated terrorist attacks (even nine-eleven etc.) - however motivated & however horrendous to the victims - are like a flea bite on an elephant's bum to the western world. Every effort should be made to combat radicalisation, monitor suspects, deal with their actions and make them suffer the consequences. Maybe they will realise the futility, maybe not. We can only hope.
davebro - // Maybe they will realise the futility, maybe not. //

I suggest not.

If murdering random innocent people is supposed to make the West behave in a different way than it has thus far, then clearly it is not working.

I doubt that message will be received though.

When you are dealing with people who kill people because it enhances their unfounded belief in the superiority of themselves, their beliefs, and the notion that this is the way to convince people of their rightness, they don;t see that they are not causing an iota of change.

They simply think that their message is not getting through, and that's carte blanche to carry on hammering it home.
"They simply think that their message is not getting through, and that's carte blanche to carry on hammering it home."

Aye, wearing us down with endless repetition.
Who could believe in such an approach?
Question Author
doug: "Aye, wearing us down with endless repetition.
Who could believe in such an approach?" - seems to be wee jimmy's approach me old china!
//I'm unsure what the thrust of the OP actually is.//

I think the thrust of the OP is the complacency with which acts of terrorism carried out by Islamic fundamentalists is regularly greeted with.
naomi - // //I'm unsure what the thrust of the OP actually is.//

I think the thrust of the OP is the complacency with which acts of terrorism carried out by Islamic fundamentalists is regularly greeted with. //

If that is so - and it is only your interpretation - then maybe TTT should address that perceived complacency wherever it is that he finds it - which is clearly not on here.
Where’s ‘here’?
Naomi - // Where’s ‘here’? //

That would be here on the Answerbank - but I think you know that.
AH, No, I didn't know that because you said complacency is 'clearly not here'. That, in my opinion, is grossly inaccurate. I think complacency emanating from a determined refusal to address the real issue is rife here.
naomi - // AH, No, I didn't know that because you said complacency is 'clearly not here'. That, in my opinion, is grossly inaccurate. I think complacency emanating from a determined refusal to address the real issue is rife here. //

That is a matter of perception, on which I guess we must agree to differ.
I don’t think it is a matter of perception. When people say the religion has nothing to do with it, that’s not perception. That’s ignorance. But as you say, we’ll leave it there.
naomi - // I don’t think it is a matter of perception. When people say the religion has nothing to do with it, that’s not perception. That’s ignorance. But as you say, we’ll leave it there. //

Th view that you think what one person sees as perception, another sees as ignorance is again, perception.
As I said, I'm leaving it there.

41 to 60 of 61rss feed

First Previous 1 2 3 4 Next Last