The Political Discussion Thread

[Womble]

It's not an excuse, its a causative factor. People don't just wake up and say they want to blow themselves to pieces in an attempt to kill others indiscriminately, they get radicalized, and they get radicalized in -ridiculously- fast time frames. What makes a person do a suicide bombing, as opposed to some other attack that doesn't end in their own death?

Efficiency. Suicide bombings have a higher death toll, usually, and attacks are simpler to plan as you do not need to add the logistics of escaping the scene.

And suicide bombers do not usually wake up and say they want to die. They get told, by people whom they see as authority, to go out and kill in the name of something greater than themselves. Kill, not die. Dying is the means towards better killing.

I have no sympathy or empathy for these people, never think that again. That does not mean that I don't want to stop the next 1, or 5 or 10, or more, from getting to the point where they want to do it at all.

You don't stop them by taking away their talking points though. Talking points are cheap and easily generated, not to mention that those people don't care much for your opinion on their ideas, don't watch your TV and don't read your newspapers. They get radicalized by information sources which you either cannot control and suppress or you refuse to do so in the name of higher principles.

[garhkal]

Yeah, saw it about 6 hours ago, just after it happened as it was on the morning news here.
just catching up on it now, the current theory is it was a suicide bomber, but nothing is set in stone as yet.

When i first heard of it, i was like "So what's the betting it was a terrorist, who was being monitored/known to authorities, but slipped through the cracks"..
Guess i was proven right by the news this afternoon on whom it was...

Well..............
I know we have some laws on the books out here that allow the government to strip citizenship from anyone going to fight for ISIS, -but- you have to have gone to one of the terrorism hotspots in the M-E before they can do that. The problem of course is the vast majority of these "people" are not foreigners, but homegrown, 1st or second generation disaffected youth who never leave the country.
Terrorism isn't the real issue, it's a symptom of greater issues unfortunately.

But if it wasn't for the terrorists, there wouldn't be this radical ideology..

And i DO feel more countries need to get on board with stripping citizenship of anyone found GUILTY of working with/supporting or attempting to join one of these terrorist groups..

[Pharaoh Hamenthotep]

Strip citizenship.. and then what?

Send them to live on the high seas as a stateless pirate?

How does stripping citizenship from people committing these acts in their home countries help? They're not all descended from immigrants. There won't always be a parent's or grandparents home country to send them to.

[aretood2]

[QUOTE=Falcon Horus;14576195]
I think what you are looking for here is "nature vs nurture" -- or something similar.

You are born as male or female -- which goes on your birthcertificate, your ID-card (if you have that), into the social security database, and any other database which requires you to indicate m or f.
Every letter I design at the company has at least 1 reference to the sex of the child and thus letters send to parents talk about daughters or sons, even though it's very likely possible that they have a child which identifies as trans and then the gender-specification could very well be wrong.

However, since gender is the social construct, that is nurtured into the child. Born female, you're raised female. Born male, you're raised male. And there differences -- just look at the way toys are marketed, or sports. Jobs and education.[QUOTE]

That's the question, how can you be born with the wrong thing of which is impossible to be born with in the first place? If Gender is learned, how can you end up learning the wrong one?

I'm afraid I can't help you there. I think you'd have to be in a similar situation to understand it.

I can only speak for myself here (obviously) but as I was growing up the girl-part of me never made sense. It never felt right. It was like something was wrong with it. I wasn't a girl so why did everyone want me to be a girl. Because it said so on my birth certificate? Because I have a name befitting a girl? Even my godfather's name was femininized to be my middle name (I have two middle names, godfather's and godmother's first names).

It was wrong. It felt wrong and when my feminine features became more outspoken I hated it. i didn't want them. Good thing, I was lucky not to develop much in the breast-area and can easily pass for a guy when I'm not wearing tight shirts (which I rarely do). I also don't have my periods because I take contraceptives all year round (I would be down with migraines every month if I didn't -- so it's again, lucky me).

Over the years, I have come to accept the person that I am -- slowly, I might add. I don't fit inside the gender-box, and I also don't fit inside the hetero-box. I am me, unique, gay and genderfluid. Society-wise, not fitting into those boxes is currently still very much problematic.

You seem to be talking about sex though, breasts and all. Not gender. Breasts are just matched with one gender. Couldn't it be said that by rejecting the gender that breasts come with you are actually able to reject the body parts you feel you shouldn't have?

Actually, the only thing important is the kind of respect you are willing to show towards another person. After all, do you respect this other person (stranger or otherwise) enough to want to refer to them with their preferred pronouns, or their new name? Or not?

Also, referring to them by name -- never wrong (if you have forgotten their pronouns -- works for me).

For the record, I don't really have a preference -- use whatever you feel comfortable with.
You know, as long as it's not meant to be hurtful in any way. Derogatory terms, and the like.

There's no issue with using new names, people change names all the time. But yes, it's intention that really matters. I will use a certain pronoun just because I don't believe that it goes with gender as much as it goes with the person's sex.

[Gatefan1976]

Efficiency. Suicide bombings have a higher death toll, usually, and attacks are simpler to plan as you do not need to add the logistics of escaping the scene.

I don't think so. People who go the suicide bomber route tend to blow themselves up early, usually when challenged by security. This bomber in Manchester could have caused far, far more damage if he had waited a little longer.

And suicide bombers do not usually wake up and say they want to die. They get told, by people whom they see as authority, to go out and kill in the name of something greater than themselves. Kill, not die. Dying is the means towards better killing.

Not the point I was making, but sure.

You don't stop them by taking away their talking points though. Talking points are cheap and easily generated, not to mention that those people don't care much for your opinion on their ideas, don't watch your TV and don't read your newspapers. They get radicalized by information sources which you either cannot control and suppress or you refuse to do so in the name of higher principles.

OK, lets wipe Medina, Mecca, Jerusalem and the Vatican off the planet, burn all their books and purge their religions from the world.
Is that enough controlling and suppression for you?

[Annoyed]

Strip citizenship.. and then what?

Send them to live on the high seas as a stateless pirate?

How does stripping citizenship from people committing these acts in their home countries help? They're not all descended from immigrants. There won't always be a parent's or grandparents home country to send them to.

There can be benefits, although trivial. Loss of voting rights, whatever rights his citizenship gives him in his former country.

You oppose every action that has been taken to shut ISIS down. Doesn't matter what it is, whatever sort of punitive or corrective action someone suggests, you oppose it. What is your idea?

[Annoyed]

I think what you are looking for here is "nature vs nurture" -- or something similar.

You are born as male or female -- which goes on your birthcertificate, your ID-card (if you have that), into the social security database, and any other database which requires you to indicate m or f.
Every letter I design at the company has at least 1 reference to the sex of the child and thus letters send to parents talk about daughters or sons, even though it's very likely possible that they have a child which identifies as trans and then the gender-specification could very well be wrong.

However, since gender is the social construct, that is nurtured into the child. Born female, you're raised female. Born male, you're raised male. And there differences -- just look at the way toys are marketed, or sports. Jobs and education.

That's the question, how can you be born with the wrong thing of which is impossible to be born with in the first place? If Gender is learned, how can you end up learning the wrong one?

I think it's a combination of both. Men & Women's brains are structured differently, for example the two halves of a woman's brain communicate better than the two halves of a male brain. I'm sure there are other differences, I just remember reading that in a news article. But men and women are inherently different, and we behave differently.
And there is no doubt that societies treat a young female and a young male differently. So it seems to me that the person is the result of both nature and nurture.

You seem to be talking about sex though, breasts and all. Not gender. Breasts are just matched with one gender. Couldn't it be said that by rejecting the gender that breasts come with you are actually able to reject the body parts you feel you shouldn't have?

Actually, both men and women have breasts, men's just do not develop. And breast cancer is possible in males, too. The original drummer for KISS, Peter Criss was diagnosed with that about 10-15? years back. He did survive it.

[SGalisa]

OK, lets wipe Medina, Mecca, Jerusalem and the Vatican off the planet, burn all their books and purge their religions from the world.
Is that enough controlling and suppression for you?

Sorry to bring this up, but if the (Bible's) book of Revelation proves true, all of the above, except for Jerusalem just might end up getting wiped off the geographical map of earth.

Terrorism isn't the real issue, it's a symptom of greater issues unfortunately.

As if allowing vengeance to determine ancient and current history's various misdeeds and events -- makes a convenient excuse causing terrorism to be executed against people different than (generic) *you* is a poor argument to begin with. There's no such thing as evolving to a higher level of civilization when harboring that type of rationalization for an attitude.

When i first heard of it, i was like "So what's the betting it was a terrorist, who was being monitored/known to authorities, but slipped through the cracks"..
Guess i was proven right by the news this afternoon on whom it was...

You and many others (on other forum/blog sites) also speculating the same thing, since the M.O. tends to be the same each time the news keeps such stuff as hush/hush ("we can't say that yet..!").



Here's a few nagging thoughts..
Wiping out any one particular religious belief system isn't going to make "terrorism" go away. These types of people tend to adapt to utilizing other methods in achieving their ultimate end goals (purging the earth so they can rule supreme), once they figured out if a certain method is going to be observed to the hilt and possibly thwart or slow them down..

Murderous terrorists of all background types populate what % of our earth? Between those who plot and do the actual deeds, is it over 5%, 10%.. or what %..? Break down the obvious (pirate-type) terrorists hellbent on doing evil along with the more subtle variety, who wait in hiding like some predator waiting to lunge in an attack. The goal is the same, but the methods are spaced out differently.

Over the past year or so, the UK and even parts of Europe seem to have been harboring exactly the kind of idealogy we keep hearing from certain, hard core democrats in the USA.. coddle them and they'll change. Cave in to their demands (which may have started out as mere, desired suggestions) and they'll be nice to the rest of us. Pay the Jizya (infidel tax), and maybe those hellbent on wiping out anyone who disagrees with their method of living won't rape, maime, steal, destroy/kill, or whatever that would otherwise bring harm to someone even tolerant of such manipulating misdeeds.


"Terrorists" seem to be similar to feral cats and Tomcats -- they cannot be trusted, even for a few seconds. Those who practice in the art of deceit might live among people of other cultures and values for a while, and gain trust; but without warning (at a moment usually least expected) the *deceptive* terrorist will turn against even those who provided kindness towards them.

I've known a few feral (furry) cats that gained a human's trust, and suddenly without warning, either viciously bit or clawed with "cat-scratch fever" intensity -- thus, forever severing the bond of complete trust between the two different-minded creatures. Might have to take a 1,000 years or more for the injured person to ever trust that feral cat again, if either of them are able to actually live that long.

[garhkal]

You oppose every action that has been taken to shut ISIS down. Doesn't matter what it is, whatever sort of punitive or corrective action someone suggests, you oppose it. What is your idea?

Pharo sounds like one of the neighbors i occasionally get into arguments about them. Every idea i come up with for how we might be able to defeat them, he downs period. YET He's never offered any idea himself..

[Pharaoh Hamenthotep]

Pharo sounds like one of the neighbors i occasionally get into arguments about them. Every idea i come up with for how we might be able to defeat them, he downs period. YET He's never offered any idea himself..

All of your ideas involve blowing them up, or making life harder for all Muslims.

Which only makes them more marginalised in their communities, more isolated. And so much easier for Isis to radicalise and recruit for their cause.

After 16 years, how is that working out for you?

Maybe pushing them away isn't the answer?

Trump's Muslim ban. Do you think that will make them love America or hate it for turning against them?

They're not all terrorists. But if you treat them like they are, more of them will turn against you.

[Annoyed]

All of your ideas involve blowing them up, or making life harder for all Muslims.

Which only makes them more marginalised in their communities, more isolated. And so much easier for Isis to radicalise and recruit for their cause.

After 16 years, how is that working out for you?

Maybe pushing them away isn't the answer?

Trump's Muslim ban. Do you think that will make them love America or hate it for turning against them?

They're not all terrorists. But if you treat them like they are, more of them will turn against you.

Still not seeing your idea.

[Pharaoh Hamenthotep]

I'm not an Armchair General...

[Annoyed]

I'm not an Armchair General...

So, given your choice in the matter, you would just do nothing?

[Pharaoh Hamenthotep]

Yes. That's exactly what I said.

So, when are you sending your recommendations to the UN Security Council? Aren't you worried about brainstorming your ideas on a public forum?

[Womble]

I don't think so. People who go the suicide bomber route tend to blow themselves up early, usually when challenged by security. This bomber in Manchester could have caused far, far more damage if he had waited a little longer.

And if he intended to get out of there alive he would not have killed anyone at all.

Suicide bombers have a chance to be challenged by security (which gives them the chance to blow up the security personnel at least), but so do bombers who are trying to leave the device and scoot.

OK, lets wipe Medina, Mecca, Jerusalem and the Vatican off the planet, burn all their books and purge their religions from the world.
Is that enough controlling and suppression for you?

Absurd exaggerations do not a valid argument make.