BF2S Forums Look Out Great Britain, Your Appeasement Is Showing!!

FatherTed wrote:

David.P wrote:

FatherTed wrote:

I'm defending nothing but common sense. And how exactly did you come up with this 80% figure?

Do you have a magical database with every terrorist in the world entered, with name, local, religion and ethnicity?

I like you, as a poster, but anything, literally anything even slightly ascociated with Islam, and you become a fucking idiot.

By terrorist attack.

"According to statistics gathered for 2005 by the National Counterterrorism Center of the United States...Islamic terrorism was responsible for approximately 25% of all terrorism fatalities worldwide, though responsibility could not be conclusively determined for 56% of all terrorism fatalities."

Your own country says this.

Enough?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_te … ts%2C_2008

This is just from the beginning of the year.

14 attacks total. 10 related to Islam.

FatherTed wrote:

David.P wrote:

FatherTed wrote:

"According to statistics gathered for 2005 by the National Counterterrorism Center of the United States...Islamic terrorism was responsible for approximately 25% of all terrorism fatalities worldwide, though responsibility could not be conclusively determined for 56% of all terrorism fatalities."

Your own country says this.

Enough?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_te … ts%2C_2008

This is just from the beginning of the year.

14 attacks total. 10 related to Islam.

2008 is 19 days old.

I would hardly call that conclusive.

I'm not gonna bring up 2007, But this is just a start if we keep bending over.

David.P wrote:

FatherTed wrote:

David.P wrote:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_terrorist_incidents%2C_2008

This is just from the beginning of the year.

14 attacks total. 10 related to Islam.

2008 is 19 days old.

I would hardly call that conclusive.

I'm not gonna bring up 2007, But this is just a start if we keep bending over.

Terrorism is centurys old David, you cannot pick recent years and use them as proof.

And i can't help but feel your anti-muslim comments are just a little influenced by a touch of racism, which i care not for in any form.

Last edited by FatherTed (2008-01-19 13:16:48)

David.P wrote:

FatherTed wrote:

David.P wrote:

I'm not gonna bring up 2007, But this is just a start if we keep bending over.

Terrorism is centurys old David, you cannot pick recent years and use them as proof.

True but i choose the ones starting in the 50's when communism reared it's deformed and lying head.

LOL what the hell does communism have to do with terrotism?

David.P wrote:

EDIT: Cam you make me lol sometimes with these bullshit arguements.

Your low IQ makes me lol.

As usual, a moronic American spouting shit making all Americans look bad? Is this the same scenario? No offence intended at all.

KEN-JENNINGS wrote:

daddyofdeath wrote:

As usual, a moronic American spouting shit making all Americans look bad? Is this the same scenario? No offence intended at all.

One moronic American =/= all of America.  One Islamic terrorist =/= all Muslims.  One Armed Forces Veteran committing an act of terror =/= all Armed Forces Veterans. 

I know you know that Daddy, I am just trying to make it simpler for our IQ intolerant people here.

Did you read past the word moronic?  He didnt say that all Americans are morons, just that the ones spouting shit make all Americans look bad.

And your insult doesnt even make sense... IQ intolerant?  Maybe if you cut down on the weed you might make more sense...

i think its silly to call it islamic terrorism or anti-islamic terrorism. you could add a race or religion qualifier to anything, but most likely you are just invoking the identity of some vast group of people that don't have a thing to do with the subject matter. you can find violent and peaceful teachings in the quran, so you could choose to call someone both islamic and anti-islamic at the same time and in some sence, be correct.

you would be more effectively communicating by simply leaving out their debatable religious motivation and focusing on what you know from immediate evidence (for example that they are a terrorist if you are talking about someone from some terrorist organization). but you seem to be suggesting that islam IS a terrorist organization, and that is just laughably ignorant. like Cam was saying, we could start referring to a lot of our crime as "white terrorist" or "christian terrorist" activity, but it would be pointless since none of us mean to imply white people make up some terrorist organization with agendas. "Al-Qaeda terrorists," fine, "KKK terrorists," fine, "black terrorists," "islamic," "anti-islamic," "white," all of these are too vague to be useful. every time a white pedophile is caught, should we call it "white pedophilia?" anthropologists have exhaustively shown that by temperament and mental faculties, there is more variation within each race or religion than can be found between groups taken as a whole.

Last edited by Marinejuana (2008-01-19 15:13:29)

lowing wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

I don't have a problem with Muslims becoming more religious.  I also don't have a problem with them becoming more significant as an immigrant group in America or Europe.  The only cause for concern here should be one regarding conservative policies.  The thing that both America and Europe must continually fight is any attempt by Muslims to restrict the behaviors of all of society (like banning alcohol or pork, for example).  I'm not saying that conservative Muslims will necessarily try this, but there is a tendency for religiously conservative people to try to control the personal lives of others.  We've already seen this agenda among certain conservative Christians.  The last thing we need is a second religious group to push the same agenda.

So basically, if people want to become more religious (Christian, Muslim, or otherwise), that's fine as long as they respect the freedoms of others.

Islam goes against everything western society strives to achive. Islam believes that world wide peace is attainable and desirable, and can be accomplished as soon as the world converts to it.

Some Christians hold a similar view.

The point is, Muslims and Christians really aren't that different.  There are fanatics and there are sensible people.  The only problem right now is that there is a higher percentage of fanatics among the Muslims, and their fanatics are usually a lot more violent.

Still, that's not the same thing as saying all or even the majority of Muslims are terrorists.  Likewise, we shouldn't treat Islam overall as an enemy to the West.

However, certain sects of Islam are certainly an enemy to the West and freedom in general (like Wahhabism).

lowing wrote:

dayarath wrote:

lowing wrote:

lol, we could also avoid conflict if we all just converted to Islam. You are actually advocating appeasement for fear of upsetting the Muslims.  Shame on you.

Yes, because the last thing you want is trouble in your own country. You make them happy, then you use them for your cause, simple as that. Getting everyone in line is a good move.

you rather prefer riots and a little chaos in your own country huh?

Nope, I would rather take a stand and say enough is enough. But it is painfully apparent you and your Euro-weenie counter parts choose another path. Lets make them happy before they hurt us.....Good stuff.

Last time I check our solders were fighting and dieing side by side with the US, Enough of your Euro-Weenie shit, got a point lay off the insults

adam1503 wrote:

lowing wrote:

http://www.news.com.au/dailytelegraph/story/0,22049,23070687-5001028,00.html

well apparently there are some Europeans that recognize what is happening in Europe and are trying to do something about it.

A tip of the hat to the  "Cities against Islamisation".

The fact that that story even mentions the BNP should tell you its not worth reading.  Movements like that only widen the rift between us and the militant extremists.  That kind of intolerant stance against Islam is what feeds the terrorist ideology.  We need to show the Islamic world that we are not the aggressive invading powers that these terrotists claim we are.  Unfortunately, our current actions dont do much to help us in this.

Here's something else for you all: Appeasement means "giving in to the demands of a foreign aggressor in order to avoid war".  Did Al Qaeda or the Taleban ask to be callled "anti-Islamic"?  No, they didnt, so ayone calling this appeasement is wrong.  It is partly PC, but I think it is just one part of what should be a wider plan to isolate the extremists from mainstream Islamic thought.... but at the moment were not doing enough.

Ever thought that maybe it should be up to "mainstream Islam" to isolate themselves from radical Islam??? Ask CAIR about it.

KEN-JENNINGS wrote:

Lowing, you are an idiot.  I can't believe some people in this thread actually bother arguing with you or Davey P.

I often think of a mental picture I have of Major Spittle when he was here - grunting and getting physically upset while reading this type of article, then foaming around the mouth as you pound out your neanderthalic responses on the keyboard.

To be honest, your delusion is not worth my time.

This I love, here is a guy calling me names and throwing insults, about how idiotic I am, yet posts nothing to counter my points. He just calls me names and leaves. Guys like this make me laugh.

Anyway, I guess I am no longer on your Christmas Card list then?

paranoid101 wrote:

lowing wrote:

dayarath wrote:

Yes, because the last thing you want is trouble in your own country. You make them happy, then you use them for your cause, simple as that. Getting everyone in line is a good move.

you rather prefer riots and a little chaos in your own country huh?

Nope, I would rather take a stand and say enough is enough. But it is painfully apparent you and your Euro-weenie counter parts choose another path. Lets make them happy before they hurt us.....Good stuff.

Last time I check our solders were fighting and dieing side by side with the US, Enough of your Euro-Weenie shit, got a point lay off the insults

I'd probably agree but I usually don't group the UK in with anti Euro comments. Mainland Europe is a lot differant. Though he probably is on this occasion because it's a UK thread...



I'mm make sure that the next time an America politician says something stupid I'll generalise that and say that everyone American thinks like that.