Dzhokar: Boston bombing victims were "collateral damage" like those killed by the U.S

[Chris.B]

The single mother generation was orchestrated. You're seriously putting the blame on them for what's going on with the black community?


Better start being patriotic..??? You better stop being a bytch. You can't be patriotic and a man at the same time- and have never served your country... especially during a time of war.

if that is the case over 70% of Americans are not patriotic because they have not served in the military.:jada:

What a bullsh!t argument to make:obama3:

 

[theworldismine13]

if that is the case over 70% of Americans are not patriotic because they have not served in the military.:jada:

What a bullsh!t argument to make:obama3:

I think you lost this one,

70% of Americans are shyt talkers that's for sure

 

[Chris.B]

I think you lost this one,

70% of Americans are shyt talkers that's for sure

Most of the 70% do what it takes to support the military.
Not every one can be in the military.


The USA is a force for good.

 

[the next guy]

if that is the case over 70% of Americans are not patriotic because they have not served in the military.:jada:

What a bullsh!t argument to make:obama3:

I think you lost this one,

70% of Americans are shyt talkers that's for sure

Most of the 70% do what it takes to support the military.
Not every one can be in the military.


The USA is a force for good.

No you lost. Chris, you a liar a cheat, a pos coward and a bum. c00n.


You don't support america. Black women are a part of america.

 

[Chris.B]

No you lost. Chris, you a liar a cheat, a pos coward and a bum. c00n.


You don't support america. Black women are a part of america.

You can't serious with this comment.


I will repeat, the USA is a force for good.

 

[the next guy]

You can't serious with this comment.


I will repeat, the USA is a force for good.

You don't black women


Black women are a part of America. You're a proud c00n


Am I lying. Don't be dense


Canada, UK, Australia has nearly all the things the US does.

 

[Dusty Bake Activate]

How is not a distraction?

Like Glenwald said on the Maher show, bringing up random points about Islam while Islamic militancy is inherently political and intricately connected to US foreign policy is simply a distraction

Its a cheap tactic used to avoid taking any responsibility for your actions, preventing any meaningful discourse on the subject and keeps the masses riled up about the "other" while vested interests continue to manipulate American policy making to the over all detriment of the American citizenry

And even on a practical level it is such a useless discussion. I mean so you dont like the fac that otherwise different people sympathize ln a spiritual level. Can you stop that? Are you able to literally and physically stop people from being Muslims? Is that the answer to stopping Islamic violence? Whereas talking about US foreign policy, debating it, highlight citizen consciousness can lead to a different policy, changes in tactics and strateggies etc

Calling Islam, or more specifically many peoples' interpretations of Islam a distraction when it comes to terrorism, war, and U. S. relations is as equally absurd as calling U. S. foreign policy toward Muslim nations a distraction.

We are 11 years deep in U.S. wars in Afghanistan and Iraq and numerous drone bombing campaigns so it's very easy to see the cause-effect relationship and how the killing of civilians in those countries leads to the desire of retaliatory violence against the U. S., but let's go back to the words of Osama Bin Laden and Ayman Al-Zawahiri pre-9/11.

We were not at war with any middle eastern nation then. They said in interviews repeatedly that the primary reason why they engaging in terrorism from the embassy bombings, Khobar towers, the U.S.S. Cole and eventually 9/11 was the presence of U. S. military bases in "Muhammad's holy land." The Israel-Palestinian issue too, but the U. S. bases in Saudi Arabia thing was their biggest grievance. They didn't even care about the Gulf War and said they hated Saddam. But they were outraged over infidel forces stationed in their holy land.

They weren't drone bombing anyone from those bases. The U. S. about 1,000 bases worldwide. I don't see Japanese, or Germans, or Cubans, or whoever waging jihad against the U. S. It came from one place for a reason.

That is a distinctly religious argument and critique of a geopolitical phenomena, directed at appealing to the religiosity of Muslims. Which is why you can compartmentalize or strip religion away from these geopolitical issues, or dismiss it as a distraction when religiosity fuels and informs their actions.

I'll be the first to say that U. S. foreign policy is a prime causative agent. When you kill peoples' families, they don't like it very much. But you have to look at everything holistically, and calling Islam a distraction to the situation is not doing that to say the least, when people are saying straight up repeatedly that they feel it's their religious duty to terrorize America. There's violent Islamists everywhere from the Gulf states, to Iran, to Pakistan, to southeast Asia, to east Africa, to the old Soviet bloc, to America and what they have in common is a self-believed compulsion based on religious piety. We can't ignore that.

As far as saying you can't stop people from being Muslims you cant, but I hope you can stop them from being violent jihadists. If not, that sucks for the whole world. And by the same token, I could say you can't stop the U. S. military-industrial complex from eating. You need reason and clarity to inhibit either, and dismissing one isn't.

 

[Type Username Here]

Calling Islam, or more specifically many peoples' interpretations of Islam a distraction when it comes to terrorism, war, and U. S. relations is as equally absurd as calling U. S. foreign policy toward Muslim nations a distraction.

We are 11 years deep in U.S. wars in Afghanistan and Iraq and numerous drone bombing campaigns so it's very easy to see the cause-effect relationship and how the killing of civilians in those countries leads to the desire of retaliatory violence against the U. S., but let's go back to the words of Osama Bin Laden and Ayman Al-Zawahiri pre-9/11.

We were not at war with any middle eastern nation then. They said in interviews repeatedly that the primary reason why they engaging in terrorism from the embassy bombings, Khobar towers, the U.S.S. Cole and eventually 9/11 was the presence of U. S. military bases in "Muhammad's holy land." The Israel-Palestinian issue too, but the U. S. bases in Saudi Arabia thing was their biggest grievance. They didn't even care about the Gulf War and said they hated Saddam. But they were outraged over infidel forces stationed in their holy land.

They weren't drone bombing anyone from those bases. The U. S. about 1,000 bases worldwide. I don't see Japanese, or Germans, or Cubans, or whoever waging jihad against the U. S. It came from one place for a reason.

That is a distinctly religious argument and critique of a geopolitical phenomena, directed at appealing to the religiosity of Muslims. Which is why you can compartmentalize or strip religion away from these geopolitical issues, or dismiss it as a distraction when religiosity fuels and informs their actions.

I'll be the first to say that U. S. foreign policy is a prime causative agent. When you kill peoples' families, they don't like it very much. But you have to look at everything holistically, and calling Islam a distraction to the situation is not doing that to say the least, when people are saying straight up repeatedly that they feel it's their religious duty to terrorize America. There's violent Islamists everywhere from the Gulf states, to Iran, to Pakistan, to southeast Asia, to east Africa, to the old Soviet bloc, to America and what they have in common is a self-believed compulsion based on religious piety. We can't ignore that.

As far as saying you can't stop people from being Muslims you cant, but I hope you can stop them from being violent jihadists. If not, that sucks for the whole world. And by the same token, I could say you can't stop the U. S. military-industrial complex from eating. You need reason and clarity to inhibit either, and dismissing one isn't.

Very well said.

 

[Type Username Here]

Not every one can be in the military.

.

You said you CHOSE not to go into the military.

That seems like a bytch move to me, no disrespect meant.

 

[Type Username Here]

Of course I know you're against the things I mentioned, but I'm just saying what's the implication of our thinking? As a Muslim I can personally tell you that Islam is not "a religion of peace" as so famously parroted, but what are the implications of that? The point I was trying to make is that it all really boils down to the only thing that matters really and that's money. The corporate interests who dominate the political apparatus also dominate the defense department. As such they will continue to do things that rub people the wrong way around the globe, and all these peoples do have a cultural propensity to violence. If the US was bombing strictly Sub Saharan African terrorists, and some African immigrants from the Congo blew up a marathon, would we be talking about the Congolese propensity to violence, their historical violence, implying a violent nature about the Congo, and calling them irrational, or try and put 2 and 2 together. Maybe this kid is a maniac a$$hole or maybe this is endemic of blow back and all of the evidence goes with the former.

We'll see. All I'm saying is that the Boston Marathon bombing had the opposite effect of showing people the US crimes around the world. All it did was wipe growing criticism of Obama/Bush policies off the front page.

When Senator Paul challenged the Obama Administration on use of Drones with his filibuster, there were people on my newsfeed ( who I know don't pay attentio) who finally started waking up. The Huffington Post, one of the biggest news websites, had pictures of dead drone victims at the top of their headlines for about 3 days in a row, spreading the message of these illegal activities.

All of that progress of mainstream saturation was wiped clean in an instant. Now, they just gave those close minded people a reason to support what the government is doing even more so. There difference now is that some of us are now facing a two-front war, where as even some of the liberal population feels they have to defend The President/Democrats' actions due to this two-party nonsense.

 

[The_King_of_Everything]

Sitting like a Muslim,
as I type/
Ima eat ya ass,
And you didn't wipe?/ (adlib: incredible)

 

[the next guy]

Calling Islam, or more specifically many peoples' interpretations of Islam a distraction when it comes to terrorism, war, and U. S. relations is as equally absurd as calling U. S. foreign policy toward Muslim nations a distraction.

We are 11 years deep in U.S. wars in Afghanistan and Iraq and numerous drone bombing campaigns so it's very easy to see the cause-effect relationship and how the killing of civilians in those countries leads to the desire of retaliatory violence against the U. S., but let's go back to the words of Osama Bin Laden and Ayman Al-Zawahiri pre-9/11.

We were not at war with any middle eastern nation then. They said in interviews repeatedly that the primary reason why they engaging in terrorism from the embassy bombings, Khobar towers, the U.S.S. Cole and eventually 9/11 was the presence of U. S. military bases in "Muhammad's holy land." The Israel-Palestinian issue too, but the U. S. bases in Saudi Arabia thing was their biggest grievance. They didn't even care about the Gulf War and said they hated Saddam. But they were outraged over infidel forces stationed in their holy land.

They weren't drone bombing anyone from those bases. The U. S. about 1,000 bases worldwide. I don't see Japanese, or Germans, or Cubans, or whoever waging jihad against the U. S. It came from one place for a reason.

That is a distinctly religious argument and critique of a geopolitical phenomena, directed at appealing to the religiosity of Muslims. Which is why you can compartmentalize or strip religion away from these geopolitical issues, or dismiss it as a distraction when religiosity fuels and informs their actions.

I'll be the first to say that U. S. foreign policy is a prime causative agent. When you kill peoples' families, they don't like it very much. But you have to look at everything holistically, and calling Islam a distraction to the situation is not doing that to say the least, when people are saying straight up repeatedly that they feel it's their religious duty to terrorize America. There's violent Islamists everywhere from the Gulf states, to Iran, to Pakistan, to southeast Asia, to east Africa, to the old Soviet bloc, to America and what they have in common is a self-believed compulsion based on religious piety. We can't ignore that.

As far as saying you can't stop people from being Muslims you cant, but I hope you can stop them from being violent jihadists. If not, that sucks for the whole world. And by the same token, I could say you can't stop the U. S. military-industrial complex from eating. You need reason and clarity to inhibit either, and dismissing one isn't.

Awesome.

 

[Chris.B]

You said you CHOSE not to go into the military.

That seems like a bytch move to me, no disrespect meant.

So everyone who chooses not to join the military can't be a patriot?

 

[Chris.B]

You don't black women


Black women are a part of America. You're a proud c00n


Am I lying. Don't be dense


Canada, UK, Australia has nearly all the things the US does.

I only call out bad behavior

 

[Techniec]

Calling Islam, or more specifically many peoples' interpretations of Islam a distraction when it comes to terrorism, war, and U. S. relations is as equally absurd as calling U. S. foreign policy toward Muslim nations a distraction.

We are 11 years deep in U.S. wars in Afghanistan and Iraq and numerous drone bombing campaigns so it's very easy to see the cause-effect relationship and how the killing of civilians in those countries leads to the desire of retaliatory violence against the U. S., but let's go back to the words of Osama Bin Laden and Ayman Al-Zawahiri pre-9/11.

We were not at war with any middle eastern nation then. They said in interviews repeatedly that the primary reason why they engaging in terrorism from the embassy bombings, Khobar towers, the U.S.S. Cole and eventually 9/11 was the presence of U. S. military bases in "Muhammad's holy land." The Israel-Palestinian issue too, but the U. S. bases in Saudi Arabia thing was their biggest grievance. They didn't even care about the Gulf War and said they hated Saddam. But they were outraged over infidel forces stationed in their holy land.

They weren't drone bombing anyone from those bases. The U. S. about 1,000 bases worldwide. I don't see Japanese, or Germans, or Cubans, or whoever waging jihad against the U. S. It came from one place for a reason.

That is a distinctly religious argument and critique of a geopolitical phenomena, directed at appealing to the religiosity of Muslims. Which is why you can compartmentalize or strip religion away from these geopolitical issues, or dismiss it as a distraction when religiosity fuels and informs their actions.

I'll be the first to say that U. S. foreign policy is a prime causative agent. When you kill peoples' families, they don't like it very much. But you have to look at everything holistically, and calling Islam a distraction to the situation is not doing that to say the least, when people are saying straight up repeatedly that they feel it's their religious duty to terrorize America. There's violent Islamists everywhere from the Gulf states, to Iran, to Pakistan, to southeast Asia, to east Africa, to the old Soviet bloc, to America and what they have in common is a self-believed compulsion based on religious piety. We can't ignore that.

As far as saying you can't stop people from being Muslims you cant, but I hope you can stop them from being violent jihadists. If not, that sucks for the whole world. And by the same token, I could say you can't stop the U. S. military-industrial complex from eating. You need reason and clarity to inhibit either, and dismissing one isn't.

I should've been more clear. I don't think bringing Islam in to the conversation is illegitimate. When TUH mentioned the differences in post colonial reactions amongst Muslims and Non Muslims I specified clearly that yes a Muslims faith compels them to react differently

Islam demands resistance, Islam mythologizes the Martyr, many Islamic cultures are patriarchal tribal communities with heavy emphasis on conceptions of honour and valour and much of the Islamic worlds resistance is soaked in Islamic rhetoric and based on justifications from scripture. It's also clearly that a significant element of Islamic militancy is globalize so of course Islam plays a role.

I DO NOT want to be the "it's all Uncle SAMs fault" guy here on KTL. All I'm saying is any response to or discussion of Islamic militancy should be based on a nuanced, multi faceted, contextualized discourse that speaks to not just the religious side but the socio-political-economic side as well

A Muslim attributing EVERY act of violence in the Islamic world to imperialism is being just as disingenuous as a dumb azz like that no name poster from earlier name dropping Islam in every post, and leaving it at that