ISIS beheads journalist, James Foley

raburrell · Aug 22, 2014

Nationlistic morale is one thing, but if the question is what to do about the fact that the UK and US have a growing number of citizens flocking to a jihadist call, then no, bombing isn't going to solve that. And if you're convinced that the biggest problem is that a couple dozen terrorists might waltz over loose borders to join the 2000 or so that are already there, can't say I find that a compelling argument.

Ambrosia · Aug 22, 2014

Is there a growing number of US and UK citizens "flocking" to a jihadist call? How many, precisely, are in this growing number?

Link?

robeiae · Aug 22, 2014

raburrell said:
I think this editorial gets at what I was trying to say yesterday a little better (or at least another facet of it): Should we call ISIS evil

The problem with that editiorial, with the point of view expressed therein, is that it's saying things like this (my boldface):

National Review's Jonah Goldberg tried to shame those who are trying to think seriously about ISIS. In a recent tweet, he mocked the attempt to understand ISIS in its social and political context, suggesting that we should focus instead on one fact: "They're evil. They do obviously evil things for evil ends."

The fact is, there are few things more dangerous now than allowing ourselves to think that way.

And this:

Nonetheless, trying to understand evil is an offense. It is an offense to everything we hold dear, because understanding -- that is, true and effective understanding -- must bring us close to the other, must help us see the world through their eyes.

That is a painful, offensive process, and that is exactly what we must do.

Why is it a "fact" that thinking in such a way is so dangerous? Why is the process "exactly what we must do"?

The author assumes there is a beneficial result to be had as a matter of course. And in that regard, he seems to simply be setting aside time frames and what is required re implementation of whatever solution is realized via the "process."

In the meantime, what happens? Who suffers and how much do they suffer? Who gets to make the call with regard to all of this? Returning to the godwinning, should the world have waited longer before engaging the Nazis, so as to better understand the reasons behind their rise, behind their goals?

Sure, ISIS is not running a formidable nation-state with an extensive military-industrial complex and is not rounding up and killing millions of people. Of course, one could argue that the evidence was ignored in the case of the Nazis, in favor of a potential peace produced by understanding their point of view in the moment. And thus, the great bulk of their atrocities were essentially allowed to occur...

Intellectualizing the issue is a fine thing, a valuable thing, to an extent. But supposing such is a necessary process prior to other actions is a very dangerous game, imo.

raburrell · Aug 22, 2014

That's been a pretty consistent theme with the investigation into Foley's death, no? That his executioner is believed to be a Brit?

As far as numbers go, the figure given by Cameron the other day was around 500 Britons fighting for ISIS, with about half that number having returned home. Some MP's have suggested the number is higher, around 2000.
Here are a couple of links, since you asked.
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/21/world/middleeast/james-foley-beheading-isis.html

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wor...eaded-journalist-is-Londoner-called-John.html

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/aug/20/isis-militant-islamic-state-james-foley-guards-british

raburrell · Aug 22, 2014

robeiae said:
Why is it a "fact" that thinking in such a way is so dangerous? Why is the process "exactly what we must do"?

The author assumes there is a beneficial result to be had as a matter of course. And in that regard, he seems to simply be setting aside time frames and what is required re implementation of whatever solution is realized via the "process."

I disagree with the author about the exactly bit, but I do think it's more constructive to try to understand what motivates people to take up the cause of militant Islam than it is to just sit back and call them evil.

In the meantime, what happens? Who suffers and how much do they suffer? Who gets to make the call with regard to all of this? Returning to the godwinning, should the world have waited longer before engaging the Nazis, so as to better understand the reasons behind their rise, behind their goals?

See above. I'm not advocating it as the only thing to do (I've been consistent throughout this thread that I believe we need to strike ISIS, but to not do so stupidly or blindly.

Intellectualizing the issue is a fine thing, a valuable thing, to an extent. But supposing such is a necessary process prior to other actions is a very dangerous game, imo.

And here's where we part again, at least slightly - we've done enough blundering about in that region for that past decade or so. A considered approach is a necessity, but does not preclude either swift or decisive action.

JimABassPlayer · Aug 22, 2014

Sheryl Nantus said:
Imagine no new innovations. No inventions, nothing that's not approved by their religious cadre - which will be pretty well nothing.

This is borne out by history -- that it is Islam itself (not the ethnicities of the people who reside within the region controlled by Islam) which has repressed the people of Islam for more than a millennia.

Prior to the rise of Islam, Persia, the Middle East and North Africa had flourishing, innovative cultures long before the rise of Western Civilization. Even after the rise of the Greeks and Romans, both whom subjugated those regions, the people thrived.

It was not until the rise of Islam that Europe began surpassing the peoples of North Africa and western Asia. Islam repressed everything in its own people which allowed Europe to rise from its lowest depths (during the Dark Ages, after the fall of Rome) to the pinnacle of commerce, industry, science, and the arts.

If Charles Martel had been defeated at the Battle of Tours, there would have been no Renaissance, no Enlightenment, no Constitutional Republics, no freedom -- only the darkness of repression and oppression under which that region of the world has been crushed beneath the brutal and despotic yoke of blind fanaticism for more than a thousand years.

robjvargas · Aug 22, 2014

JimABassPlayer said:
This is borne out by history -- that it is Islam itself (not the ethnicities of the people who reside within the region controlled by Islam) which has repressed the people of Islam for more than a millennia.

It was Islamic culture that brought zero to mathematics. It was the Moors and Islam that sustained much of our knowledge through the Dark Ages of Europe. Here's a good article with more.

This isn't the place to go back and forth on that. Let's just say there's plenty of light and dark in the history of virtually every culture on earth.

JimABassPlayer · Aug 22, 2014

robjvargas said:
It was Islamic culture that brought zero to mathematics. It was the Moors and Islam that sustained much of our knowledge through the Dark Ages of Europe. Here's a good article with more.

This isn't the place to go back and forth on that. Let's just say there's plenty of light and dark in the history of virtually every culture on earth.

All anyone has to do to see what would have happened in Europe had it been overrun by Islam, is look at what it's like TODAY where Islam rules. Compare the industry, commerce, science, art and freedom of Europe and the United States to any Islamic state now.

robjvargas · Aug 22, 2014

JimABassPlayer said:
All anyone has to do to see what would have happened in Europe had it been overrun by Islam, is look at what it's like TODAY where Islam rules. Compare the industry, commerce, science, art and freedom of Europe and the United States to any Islamic state now.

There's a whole subgenre of fiction writing to explore what might have been. What I know is that Islam, Christianity, Europe, the Middle East, they all have their histories of advances and atrocities.

MacAllister · Aug 22, 2014

Careful, Jim. Your assertions are both factually pretty questionable, and logically untenable. ISIS isn't any more generally representative of Islam than the Westboro Baptist Church is representative of Protestantism. Just as reasonable to assert that today's Islamic fanaticism is a product of rampant and unchecked Christianity in Europe.

You're being desperately insulting and offensive towards AW's many Muslim members. I strongly recommend you stop, immediately.

c.e.lawson · Aug 22, 2014

Regarding radicalization of Brits and other Europeans:

The following is an editorial from Shiraz Maher, a Senior Fellow at the International Centre for the Study of Radicalisation, King's College London.

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/aug/21/west-no-avoiding-isis-british-jihadis

For those of who have followed the conflict in Syria and Iraq closely, it came as no surprise – shocking though it was – to discover that a seemingly British jihadist had beheaded the American journalist James Foley. Over the past year jihadists from this country have participated in suicide bombings, tortured detainees in their care, and executed prisoners of war.

It is true that not every British fighter who has travelled to Syria engages in these types of acts. Indeed, many of the early fighters who went did so for humanitarian reasons. Through numerous interviews it is clear to me that their motivations and ambitions were materially different from those who followed them.

Over time, however, it is also clear that attitudes have hardened. Romantic notions of saving oppressed civilians from a government intent on killing them has given way to a culture of casual brutality and callousness.

If you're interested in an excellent discussion of this in interview form with the author of the above piece, here's a link to an interview from The Spectator titled Britain's Home Grown Jihadis. I found it FASCINATING and well-worth my 13 minutes.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1_UCcCzt0Sg&feature=youtu.be

At the 7 min mark, they address the question "Why Britain?"

Ambrosia · Aug 22, 2014

raburrell said:
That's been a pretty consistent theme with the investigation into Foley's death, no? That his executioner is believed to be a Brit?

As far as numbers go, the figure given by Cameron the other day was around 500 Britons fighting for ISIS, with about half that number having returned home. Some MP's have suggested the number is higher, around 2000.
Here are a couple of links, since you asked.
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/21/world/middleeast/james-foley-beheading-isis.html

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wor...eaded-journalist-is-Londoner-called-John.html

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/aug/20/isis-militant-islamic-state-james-foley-guards-british

I read through the three articles you listed. The articles are putting the number of Brits at around 500 and one of the articles listed U.S. at 70 to 100 people.

The last article listed has this quote from Dr Afzal Ashraf, of the Royal United Services Institute (don't know what that institute is, actually):

Dr Afzal Ashraf, of the Royal United Services Institute, said the video was the latest in a propaganda war waged by Isis, intended to strike terror in the US and UK and act as a recruitment tool for western extremists. "There will be a minor effect on recruitment. It will affect a certain kind of psychopathic individual but it's a very minority sport, fortunately. There will be far more people put off by these guys but there is a market for this sort of thing.

"The message that really motivates people is it's a way of hitting back at what they perceive to be the US bullying and domination of the Muslim world. They feel impotent when they see the awesome US air and land power and they see this as a way of hitting back and that's the principal motivation."

500 Brits and 100 Americans is hardly a large group heading to the jihadist camps. There are crazy people in the world who want to belong to something. So they latch onto this. But I don't see this as a major movement by any means.

raburrell · Aug 22, 2014

Ambrosia said:
I read through the three articles you listed. The articles are putting the number of Brits at around 500 and one of the articles listed U.S. at 70 to 100 people.

The last article listed has this quote from Dr Afzal Ashraf, of the Royal United Services Institute (don't know what that institute is, actually):

500 Brits and 100 Americans is hardly a large group heading to the jihadist camps. There are crazy people in the world who want to belong to something. So they latch onto this. But I don't see this as a major movement by any means.

No, and I don't either - was responding to another poster's concerns in that post. The population of the UK is around 40M I think (might be way off on that) - fractionally, it barely registers. Which isn't to say those people aren't dangerous, but for me it's worthwhile to make the effort to address the factors that do cause individuals brought up in open societies to embrace radicalism.

firedrake · Aug 22, 2014

very interesting video, CE.
It makes me wonder, if ISIS wasn't the cause of the moment, whether these disaffected people would latch onto something else. And I do wonder if, with some of the British idiots, whether they've joined as a reaction to the rise of UKIP and the rabid fascist morons of Britain First.
Then there's the whole issue of disenfranchisement which was touched on in the video, it's bred many a malcontent over the years.

robeiae · Aug 22, 2014

JimABassPlayer said:
All anyone has to do to see what would have happened in Europe had it been overrun by Islam, is look at what it's like TODAY where Islam rules. Compare the industry, commerce, science, art and freedom of Europe and the United States to any Islamic state now.

I had written out a substantial reply to this nonsense, but I erased it by accident.

Suffice it to say, at more or less equal moments in the history of Islam and Christianity (now for Islam, 1500's for Christianity), there's not a whole lot of evidence that the latter was any better in the least, from the conquest of the Americas to the Inquisition, to the witch-hunting frenzy, all in the 1500's, leading directly into the Thirty Years War.

Sheryl Nantus · Aug 22, 2014

ISIS does NOT present the Islamic religion.

You might as well say the Klu Klux Klan represents Christianity.

Both are extremist groups using religion for the wrong reasons. Both are using their interpretation of their religion to harass, maim and kill those they deem to be "different".
Both are filled with evil men who want to remake the world in their own warped image.

William Haskins · Aug 22, 2014

Ambrosia said:
500 Brits and 100 Americans is hardly a large group heading to the jihadist camps. There are crazy people in the world who want to belong to something. So they latch onto this. But I don't see this as a major movement by any means.

Two French girls, ages 15 and 17, were caught by authorities after allegedly planning to fly to Syria and become jihadis. Not much information has been released about the teens or their motives, but at face value, the case isn't unusual—French authorities say they've caught 900 citizens participating in jihad or attempting to participate in jihad.

http://gawker.com/two-french-teens-busted-trying-to-join-terrorist-enter-1625654784

Opty · Aug 22, 2014

robjvargas said:
It was Islamic culture that brought zero to mathematics.

Just a minor historical quibble; no they didn't.

They were partly responsible for the modern word "zero" but the mathematical concept had been around for centuries before that in various cultures.

/end derail

Ambrosia · Aug 22, 2014

William Haskins said:
Two French girls, ages 15 and 17, were caught by authorities after allegedly planning to fly to Syria and become jihadis. Not much information has been released about the teens or their motives, but at face value, the case isn't unusual—French authorities say they've caught 900 citizens participating in jihad or attempting to participate in jihad.

Click to expand...

http://gawker.com/two-french-teens-busted-trying-to-join-terrorist-enter-1625654784

What's up with the French? That's more than the Brits.

William Haskins · Aug 22, 2014

they eat snails.

firedrake · Aug 23, 2014

Ambrosia said:
What's up with the French? That's more than the Brits.

France has a large immigrant population from its former north African colonies. A lot of them live in inner cities, in poor neighbourhoods. Perfect breeding ground for discontent. And when the government
introduces laws like this, it doesn't really help.

cornflake · Aug 23, 2014

I was listening to an NPR piece about the 'foreign' people joining ISIS, and they had the number of Brits at 2000, with an American contingent <100. Two experts attributed the disparity to greater integration into general society of most Muslims in the U.S., and the simple disparity in geographic distances between Europe and the Middle East and the U.S and the Middle East.

JimABassPlayer said:
All anyone has to do to see what would have happened in Europe had it been overrun by Islam, is look at what it's like TODAY where Islam rules. Compare the industry, commerce, science, art and freedom of Europe and the United States to any Islamic state now.

I barely know where to begin. Islam is the world's youngest major religion (well, except, of course, for Scientology - don't hurt me, Tom Cruise!). This is like suggesting the Crusades would've persisted, because you know how those Christians are.

In addition to the folly of equating ISIS with Islam, the religion of the populous is not a defining factor in the government of every nation. Before the invasion, Iraq was a pretty modern country. Iran a few decades ago was a free country - both of those, of course, FAR ahead of the U.S. and many countries in Europe in production of art, with much longer histories of commerce, industry, etc.

Countries that are currently majority Muslim and much like Europe and the U.S. in many ways include Indonesia, Lebanon, Turkey and others.

waylander · Aug 23, 2014

Ambrosia said:
The last article listed has this quote from Dr Afzal Ashraf, of the Royal United Services Institute (don't know what that institute is, actually):

Just to note that RUSI is a well-respected Institute consisting of many former senior military, diplomatic and intelligence staff as well as academics. Moderate, serious and well-informed.

William Haskins · Aug 23, 2014

A Canadian imam known for his pacifist sermons has warned that Islamist militant group IS was actively recruiting in Canada and said one member issued him a death threat.

Syed Soharwardy, founder of the Islamic Supreme Council of Canada (ISCC), called on Canadian and Western authorities to intensify the fight against jihadist movements.

"Absolutely I am convinced that this recruitment is going on right here in this country, under our noses, in our universities, in our colleges, in the places of worship, in our community," he told CBC public television.

Soharwardy added that a Muslim man from Ottawa who was fighting with IS in Mosul in northern Iraq had sent him a death threat on Facebook.

"He was condemning me for condemning ISIS, and he was saying that 'You are a deviant imam and your version of Islam is not the right version,'" Soharwardy said, using another acronym by which IS is known.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wor...te-recruiting-in-Canada-local-imam-warns.html

blacbird · Aug 23, 2014

cornflake said:
Islam is the world's youngest major religion (well, except, of course, for Scientology.

And Mormonism, which shares some astonishingly similar attributes with Islam.

caw

ISIS beheads journalist, James Foley

Treguna Makoidees Trecorum SadisDee

Grand Duchess

Touch and go

Treguna Makoidees Trecorum SadisDee

Treguna Makoidees Trecorum SadisDee

only four strings

only four strings

'Twas but a dream of thee

Grand Duchess

Treguna Makoidees Trecorum SadisDee

practical experience, FTW

Touch and go

Holding out for a Superhero...

poet

Grand Duchess

poet

practical experience, FTW

practical experience, FTW

Who's going for a beer?

poet