The True Threat of ISIS

[Craig B]

I guess because the Japanese weren't threatening white people, the west should have let them pillage their way across China?

Ah, the West is motivated in the Middle East by a desire to protect non-White people (by fighting other non-White people). Not doing too well so far, on the protection side, eh? http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-11107739 On the fighting against non-White people side, results have certainly been achieved.

 

[McHrozni]

You mean the same agency that you don't seem to believe is able to effective prevent returning Jihadists from pulling off major terrorist attacks?

But ... you argued they aren't capable of inflicting enough damage to be dangerous. Now you want the police force to actively prevent them from making the attempts?
Which one is it going to be, are they a threat or not?

McHrozni

 

[McHrozni]

Suppose some Mad Mullah is being wire tapped because of his current followers, but they blow themselves up in a suicide bomb outrage, and become past followers? That means the Mad Mullah is now in the clear, eh? And the buggers can stop bugging him. That's self evident to you?

It's self-evident to me you really aren't interested in the proposal and resort to cheap shots. It's also quite self-evident that if someone from the congregation (or however is it called) blows himself up in the name of Allah, the Imam should be scrutinized. He may be innocent, but it is a probable cause.

If you think it's a problem, consider the following: a black man is lynched by the KKK. Do you investigate the local KKK leader or not? He may be innocent, and you could unnecessarily violate his privacy.

Aha, "followers" means "people to whom a cleric has preached". And if there's no evidence that the cleric has ever preached in favour of violence?

Then the investigation (including wiretapping) will either uncover evidence he's doing so in secret, or determine there indeed is a different source of religious hatred and he's an innocent victim.

McHrozni

 

[Craig B]

You're welcome. I didn't realize there was a question to answer though

McHrozni

See my edited version too. To the person to whom things are self evident, issues seem very plain, and questions may be missed.

 

[McHrozni]

See my edited version too. To the person to whom things are self evident, issues seem very plain, and questions may be missed.

Yeah, it makes more sense now. Please tell me which question did I miss?

Please answer on this one too:
A black man is lynched by the KKK. Do you investigate the local KKK leader or not? After all, he may be innocent, and you could unnecessarily violate his privacy.

McHrozni

 

[angrysoba]

What I am saying is that fif you take them out now, you will get a lot less grief from the middle east. They may be insignificant to the west now, but if they are allowed to consolidate like those horsemen near Russia or that man with a funny moustache, will they remain insignificant?

Okay, but here's the thing.

What do you propose that will "take them out"? Please give some specifics here.

What do you think the West should do that the regional actors cannot do?

And you have lost me with this "horsemen of the steppe" thing. Who are you specifically referring to?

I know the man with the funny moustache, he is endlessly (some may say tediously) brought up whenever someone is urging military action.

 

[Craig B]

Yeah, it makes more sense now. Please tell me which question did I miss?

Please answer on this one too:
A black man is lynched by the KKK. Do you investigate the local KKK leader or not? After all, he may be innocent, and you could unnecessarily violate his privacy.

McHrozni

An Imam who happens to have had in his congregation someone who later travels to Syria with the intention, in all probability, of joining ISIS, but who has never said anything to arouse concern that he is other than law abiding and peaceful: such a person looks to you like a KKK leader after his subordinates have just conducted a lynching. I see.

The Muslim religious establishment in principle resembles the KKK. OK.

 

[Mudcat]

Does anyone seriously think that the KKK is in any way comparable to ISIS these days?

 

[PhantomWolf]

But ... you argued they aren't capable of inflicting enough damage to be dangerous.

Actually, no, I have never argued that they "aren't capable of inflicting enough damage to be dangerous" because dangerous is a relative term. Dangerous to who? To what? I am dangerous all by my self if I wish to be. What I have argued, and will continue to argue, is that ISIS is not a threat the existence of the Western World. That they cannot destroy our way of life. That doesn't mean that they aren't dangerous, but then a tiger in the jungle is dangerous too, but it doesn't pose a threat to you until you go into its territory and start acting like an idiot around it. Similarly Great White Sharks are dangerous, if you go into the water around them and do stupid things. ISIS is not a threat to Westerners unless Westerners go into their territory.

Now you want the police force to actively prevent them from making the attempts?
Which one is it going to be, are they a threat or not?

No, I want the police to continue to do the job they were doing prior to the formation of ISIS, part of which is detecting those people who have a fundamental bent and feel like killing others, regardless of who they are. ISIS has made that easier in many regards to locate the Islamic extremists in that group because we know who the Westerners are that have gone to fight for them, so we now know who, it's a good idea to keep a very closer eye on when they come back.

What we don't have to do is start creating new laws and running around like Chicken Little screaming about how the sky is falling, the systems we need to protect against returning western fighters for ISIS already exist, are already in place, and have already shown to be effective. As such, their threat is minimal.

 

[PhantomWolf]

Does anyone seriously think that the KKK is in any way comparable to ISIS these days?

Depends, as a threat to people in Iraq and Syria? ISIS wins hands down.

As a threat to people in the US, depends on skin colour, but if you're black or Jewish, the KKK are a bigger threat.

 

[PhantomWolf]

A black man is lynched by the KKK. Do you investigate the local KKK leader or not? After all, he may be innocent, and you could unnecessarily violate his privacy.

An abortion clinic is bombed by a radical pro-lifer. Do you investigate the Pastor of his church?

 

[Craig B]

Please answer on this one too:
A black man is lynched by the KKK. Do you investigate the local KKK leader or not? After all, he may be innocent, and you could unnecessarily violate his privacy.

That would be in the course of a murder enquiry? I'd be investigating all manner of people. Is that the same as keeping permanent wiretaps on all clerics (that's what your idea would amount to) because someone who once was a member of their congregation has gone to join a gang of violent extremists?

 

[McHrozni]

An abortion clinic is bombed by a radical pro-lifer. Do you investigate the Pastor of his church?

Definitely. Assuming he was also a part of a Bible study group, I'd also investigate what was discussed there.

McHrozni

 

[McHrozni]

An Imam who happens to have had in his congregation someone who later travels to Syria ...

I explicitly said differently before. I see no need to address straw men.

McHrozni

 

[McHrozni]

Actually, no, I have never argued that they "aren't capable of inflicting enough damage to be dangerous" because dangerous is a relative term. Dangerous to who? To what? I am dangerous all by my self if I wish to be. What I have argued, and will continue to argue, is that ISIS is not a threat the existence of the Western World. That they cannot destroy our way of life. That doesn't mean that they aren't dangerous, but then a tiger in the jungle is dangerous too, but it doesn't pose a threat to you until you go into its territory and start acting like an idiot around it. Similarly Great White Sharks are dangerous, if you go into the water around them and do stupid things. ISIS is not a threat to Westerners unless Westerners go into their territory.

As I said, by this standard, there are only a few entities we should worry about, apparently. I hope your myopia improves with time, but if not it's your loss and your loss only.

McHrozni

 

[PhantomWolf]

Definitely. Assuming he was also a part of a Bible study group, I'd also investigate what was discussed there.

McHrozni

Criminality by association, nice...

 

[PhantomWolf]

As I said, by this standard, there are only a few entities we should worry about, apparently. I hope your myopia improves with time, but if not it's your loss and your loss only.

McHrozni

There are very few threats capable of destroying the Western World, the biggest one is from ourselves and our fear, allowing our leaders to use it to strip us or our rights and freedoms. Falling into the paranoid trap of xenophobia and the sky is falling is far more dangerous to us than a bunch of religious fanatics halfway around the world. But hey, allow yourself to be distracted by the fantasies that politicians keep dreaming up, you'll make a great follower for them.

 

[McHrozni]

Criminality by association, nice...

Em no, that would be punishing them on that basis alone.

You seem to be totally ignorant about police work and fail to spot a difference between investigating someone and locking someone up.

I see no need to take you seriously until you do.

There are very few threats capable of destroying the Western World, the biggest one is from ourselves and our fear, allowing our leaders to use it to strip us or our rights and freedoms. Falling into the paranoid trap of xenophobia and the sky is falling is far more dangerous to us than a bunch of religious fanatics halfway around the world. But hey, allow yourself to be distracted by the fantasies that politicians keep dreaming up, you'll make a great follower for them.

As above, until you see the difference between investigating someone and drawing and quartering him, I see little use in taking these 'discussions' any further. You're patently ridiculous.

McHrozni

 

[ddt]

There are very few threats capable of destroying the Western World, the biggest one is from ourselves and our fear, allowing our leaders to use it to strip us or our rights and freedoms. Falling into the paranoid trap of xenophobia and the sky is falling is far more dangerous to us than a bunch of religious fanatics halfway around the world. But hey, allow yourself to be distracted by the fantasies that politicians keep dreaming up, you'll make a great follower for them.

Seconded. In that line, I'd add that I'm reminded of the effects of 9/11 each time I have to take off my shoes at the airport security checks. Or that my bag has to be scanned thrice because the tooth paste tube might contain explosives. Another, much more fundamental, worry is that various countries have enacted legislation that habeas corpus and other due process rights are lifted or severely restricted once the prosecutor mutters the magic word "terrorism".

On a couple of other items discussed in the thread:

Abdul Khan would surely be happy to sell his nuclear knowledge to ISIS, or to whoever writes a big enough number on the cheque. But I don't think it is in any way realistic that ISIS would have the industrial base to actually develop a bomb.

As to radicalization of (immigrant-descended) Muslim youngsters in the Western world, surely intelligence services and police should and do keep a close eye on that, and cooperate with each other. Common wisdom around here, however, is that they don't acquire these radical ideas through their local mosques but primarily through radical websites.

 

[bit_pattern]

I'm enjoying PhantomWolf's reasoning in this thread