| We hope you enjoy your visit. You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. Join our community! If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: |
| Jihadist terrorists | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Jan 10 2005, 07:50 AM (2,281 Views) | |
| Dwayne | Jan 10 2005, 07:50 AM Post #1 |
|
Profanity deleted by Hoss
|
What best describes the Jihadist Mohammedans fighting from the Sudan to Indonesia? |
| Offline | Profile | ^ |
| Dwayne | Jan 10 2005, 07:51 AM Post #2 |
|
Profanity deleted by Hoss
|
They are people who are not fighting so that all peoples may be free, but are fighting to subjugate large portions of their population. |
| Offline | Profile | ^ |
| captain_proton_au | Jan 10 2005, 08:01 AM Post #3 |
![]()
A Robot in Disguise
![]()
|
I think you could have expanded those choices They are basically those that have been swayed by propaganda, not really smart enough or brave enough to think for themselves or live in an area where joining a terrorist organisation is the best employment opportunity, i.e. it's better than begging or prostitution |
| Offline | Profile | ^ |
| 8247 | Jan 10 2005, 08:04 AM Post #4 |
|
Apparently we look like this now
|
This group doesnt care about people...only their cause, and I doubt that any one of them could give you the same answer about what their cause really is. If they are freedom fighters, why do they kill innocent civilians? They are anti government, and dont care who gets in the line of their attacks. |
| Offline | Profile | ^ |
| Hoss | Jan 10 2005, 08:41 AM Post #5 |
![]()
Don't make me use my bare hands on you.
|
They can't be considered freedom fighters, unless you consider that they are fighting against freedom, to define the phrase. They're just ignorant thugs filled with hatred by some nut-job thumping the Koran around telling them that Allah wants them to enslave the world in his name so that they can have bunches of virgins, to enslave I suppose. |
| Offline | Profile | ^ |
| Dandandat | Jan 10 2005, 08:54 AM Post #6 |
|
Time to put something here
|
I picked other, many territories are poor ignorant and misguided people who have been taken advantage of by men who are much worse then Incorrigible thugs. So nether option is correct in my opinion. |
| Offline | Profile | ^ |
| somerled | Jan 10 2005, 10:29 AM Post #7 |
|
Admiral MacDonald RN
|
Other. Depends on what they stuggling for and their history. It is too easy in the current climate of fear which has been encouraged by the ultra-right to demonise these people because of small mindedness and an unwillingness to take the trouble to understand, it is easier and to scapegoat people, and for biggots and racists to capitalise on these fears. |
| Offline | Profile | ^ |
| 24thcenstfan | Jan 10 2005, 10:35 AM Post #8 |
|
Something Wicked This Fae Comes
|
I chose Other. For the most part I think the terrorists are thugs whose only purpose is to cause destruction and mayhem. They are not interested in freedom except for maybe themselves (freedom to dominate, terrorize and subjugate the masses). I think several of the younger recruits are probably operating under the delusion that they are freedom fighters (due to brainwashing by unscrupulous individuals who operate under the guise of religion). Then there may be a few instances where "freedom fighter" is an applicable term. I can’t think of any at the moment, but that doesn’t mean there aren’t any legitimate cases of freedom fighting going on in the Middle East at the moment. So I chose Other, because the situation is rarely as cut and dry as one or the other. |
| Offline | Profile | ^ |
| Admiralbill_gomec | Jan 10 2005, 10:57 AM Post #9 |
|
UberAdmiral
|
So you, as a member of the ultra-left, want to sit down and open up a dialog with them and try and come to an understanding as to why they want to kill us? Pardon me for a moment... Okay, sorry about that. Whatever floats your boat. Let us know how the talks work out, especially after Ahmed the terrorist slits your throat and gives his reasons for it by attaching the note to your chest with a knife. |
| Offline | Profile | ^ |
| fireh8er | Jan 10 2005, 11:01 AM Post #10 |
|
I'm Captain Kirk!
|
What will the note say?
|
| Offline | Profile | ^ |
| Dr. Noah | Jan 10 2005, 11:50 AM Post #11 |
|
Sistertrek's Asian Correspondant
|
I choose other: Brainwashed desperate fools who think violence is the answer to all their problems. |
| Offline | Profile | ^ |
| Fesarius | Jan 10 2005, 06:05 PM Post #12 |
|
Admiral
|
I chose 'Other.' They are humans, and as such prone to sin just like anyone else. |
| Offline | Profile | ^ |
| Dwayne | Jan 10 2005, 10:02 PM Post #13 |
|
Profanity deleted by Hoss
|
Some pretty good answers. It's nice that no one characterized them as people fighting for freedom, though I think somerlad was really wanting to choose "TRue freedom fighter".
I can tell you whose fighting for freedom in the Middle East ... every day average Iraqi's trying to police their nation, rout the terrorists, build the infrastructure and live their lives.
Sin or lack thereof is not the issue, but just if the terrorists fighting through out the Middle East fight for freedom or if they are unrepentant thugs. |
| Offline | Profile | ^ |
| cptjeff | Jan 10 2005, 11:23 PM Post #14 |
|
Captain of the Enterprise-J
|
I choose other- Many are freedom fighters in the sense that they wish for occupational forces to get out, some are brainwashed fools who decided that they could only follow the directions of terrorist leaders to ever truly be their own nation, and some are terrorists who have nothing but thier own self interests in mind. but some are freedom fighters- what would you do if a nation invaded yours, destroyed it's government and people, even citys virtually completly, and tried to set up it's own form of government? wait, for most that's been answered- fight. The American revolution was a fight against a power that was invading- in a manner of speaking. remember paul Revere? George Washington? yup- they were labeled rabble- rousers anadrebel leaders- almost the same terms we apply to insurgents today- insurrgent meas the same thing as rebel. It's just a change of words. And my 2 cents about the poll- It was too general with too limited options. If you had asked about the Majority of Iraqi insurgents, you would have had a poll that would have been a lot less weigeted. Or even better, you could have made this a plain topic instead of a poll. then everyone would have to specify exactly what they thought eventually. |
| Offline | Profile | ^ |
| Franko | Jan 11 2005, 12:38 AM Post #15 |
|
Shower Moderator
|
I think it's important to separate true Islam from what the Islamofascists believe in. Likely a lot of honest muslims in the middle east are often too afraid to speak out and condemn terrorism. Having said that though, it would be nice to get a clear and honest denunciation or condemnation of Islamic terrorists from all these Ayatolahs and Mullahs, who serve as religious leaders for millions of people. If they are condemming it, it isn't loud enough. I'm certain that if Timothy McViegh had gone to Mecca and blown up a whole bunch of moslems in the name of Christ, the Arab world would hold America and Christian leaders somewhat accountable, and would at least demand that we all condemn his actions, which we would. |
| Offline | Profile | ^ |
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · Politics and World Events Forum · Next Topic » |





9:45 AM Jul 11