planetf1.com

It is currently Wed Nov 14, 2018 6:24 am

All times are UTC


Forum rules






Post new topic Reply to topic
Author Message
PostPosted: Wed Jan 07, 2015 10:50 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jul 07, 2012 8:22 am
Posts: 127
Location: Bedford, UK
After the sickening events in Paris today. I believe we are ever closer to a Third World War caused by ISIS and radical Islam, but why aren't our leaders doing anything to prevent this from happening. People who fight for ISIS can get access back into Britain, radical Muslims who encourage world domination are allowed to roam free and anyone who dares to stand up against this are shot down by political correctness.

Things have to change for the sake of our civilisations and the people who live within them.

_________________
"Winning is like a drug...I can't settle for second or third in no circumstances whatsoever" (Ayrton Senna)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jan 07, 2015 11:27 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu May 23, 2013 1:05 pm
Posts: 7518
Shot down by political correctness for beig against extremists? I don't think that's true at all.

It's when people take the veiws of an extremist minority and scale those views up to supposedly represent an entire religion. (Not helped by the fear mongering trash spewed by media outlets such as Fox News, The Daily Mail etc.) That's when people, quite rightly, take issue with what's being said.

I think this thread is slightly over the top personally. I don't think any extremist group has the funding, support from countries, or the sheer number of fighters to start a full blown WW3.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jan 08, 2015 12:06 am 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jun 07, 2014 11:10 am
Posts: 478
Be very careful with where this thread goes. This is a sensitive issue based on today's events and posts that do not keep that in mind will be dealt with. Likewise, any attempt to use it as an excuse to post sentiments that are against the rules of the board will also not be tolerated.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jan 08, 2015 12:13 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jul 07, 2012 8:22 am
Posts: 127
Location: Bedford, UK
Black_Flag_11 wrote:
Shot down by political correctness for beig against extremists? I don't think that's true at all.

It's when people take the veiws of an extremist minority and scale those views up to supposedly represent an entire religion. (Not helped by the fear mongering trash spewed by media outlets such as Fox News, The Daily Mail etc.) That's when people, quite rightly, take issue with what's being said.

I think this thread is slightly over the top personally. I don't think any extremist group has the funding, support from countries, or the sheer number of fighters to start a full blown WW3.


I didn't phrase it right really, people are too scared to stand up to it because of political correctness and because of the fear of being called racist. Look at the Rotherham Police Scandal, a perfect example of that.

May not have the funding? Look at the Nazis, an extremist party who came from nowhere in the 1920s to starting the Second World War 20 years later. ISIS may not have the funding, but they can instil fear into people (Jihadi John and beheading innocent people) and a lot of support from around the world (Hundreds of Brits going abroad to help fight with them). They could easily spark a revolution and get control of a country.


Last edited by DisaterX47 on Thu Jan 08, 2015 12:34 am, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jan 08, 2015 12:15 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jul 07, 2012 8:22 am
Posts: 127
Location: Bedford, UK
Mod Aqua wrote:
Be very careful with where this thread goes. This is a sensitive issue based on today's events and posts that do not keep that in mind will be dealt with. Likewise, any attempt to use it as an excuse to post sentiments that are against the rules of the board will also not be tolerated.


Of course not, I have no problem with Muslims or the Islamic faith. However, I do have a problem with people who threaten our way of life and are nothing but cold-blooded murders.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jan 08, 2015 8:27 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat Oct 13, 2012 2:29 am
Posts: 1983
No, because no major Islamic country subscribes to that really radical interpretation of that religion. If Pakistan with its nukes ever got taken over by the Taliban then start worrying. Otherwise WWIII is more likely to be between the US and its allies against Russia and/or China as it has been by low-level proxy wars ever since 1945 e.g. Korea/Vietnam/Afghanistan/Ukraine etc.

_________________
Kimi: "Come on, get the McLaren out of the way!”


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jan 08, 2015 9:07 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Aug 09, 2008 9:22 pm
Posts: 8064
Don't know if anyone noticed, but the policeman that was shot in the head as he lay on the ground was a Muslim


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jan 08, 2015 10:40 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Nov 09, 2005 8:26 am
Posts: 586
You may have noticed that I don't post anymore, F1 being (almost) dead for me, and Japan 2014 the last race I saw. But I still read few times a week... I just hope this is not my last post on the forum, I wouldn't like to end so many years here with a post on such a topic.

We live in a sick world and every move about "foreign affairs" by any state around the world during the last 25 years have added to the sickness. Now, if muslim countries had to fall into the hands of fascists radical islamists it would have already been done. Algeria has known ten years of full scale terror after the "victory" of the islamist party was "canceled" by the power in place. What is never told is that 70% of the Algerian people didn't vote, not willing to chose between the islamists and the military ruling the country since its independence, and as a consequence suffered 10 years of terror but didn't surrender to the islamists. Never forget that most of the victims of radical islamists are muslims, slaughtered by muslims in muslim countries... I was born in a muslim country, and when Algeria burned, I was part of an association that rescued people purchased (and often wounded) by islamists... Some of them were practicing muslims, some are my friends nowadays. That said, what I can't stand anymore is the deafening silence of the majority of peaceful muslims in my country (to say nothing of the brainless morons who feel the need to applause)

I'm really devastated by what happened yesterday in my country. I've grown with cartoons by Cabu and Wolinski, and the people who were killed yesterday, though not known personally by most of us, were not only among the best cartoonists in the world, they were long time friends to most of us. Who could have thought they would die this way, target of bastards, and unwilling cause of the slaughtering of the people surrounding them...
As an illustrator, I also spent 10 years drawing benevolently political cartoons, for associative press... a handful of them were about Algeria and religious fundamentalism (that is not the appanage of Islam). That they could have been drawn today doesn't make me any prouder. I'll go back drawing cartoons again, that's all I can think of doing at the moment to show some respect to the people killed.

Sorry for being less funny than usually, and more rambling than ever.

_________________
As my brother said : "I've got the brain of a four year old. I'll bet he was glad to be rid of it".


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jan 08, 2015 10:56 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jun 24, 2008 4:07 pm
Posts: 7769
No. No Islamic country has big enough army to cause global conflict.

_________________
eeee


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jan 08, 2015 12:43 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu May 23, 2013 1:05 pm
Posts: 7518
DisaterX47 wrote:
Black_Flag_11 wrote:
Shot down by political correctness for beig against extremists? I don't think that's true at all.

It's when people take the veiws of an extremist minority and scale those views up to supposedly represent an entire religion. (Not helped by the fear mongering trash spewed by media outlets such as Fox News, The Daily Mail etc.) That's when people, quite rightly, take issue with what's being said.

I think this thread is slightly over the top personally. I don't think any extremist group has the funding, support from countries, or the sheer number of fighters to start a full blown WW3.


I didn't phrase it right really, people are too scared to stand up to it because of political correctness and because of the fear of being called racist. Look at the Rotherham Police Scandal, a perfect example of that.

May not have the funding? Look at the Nazis, an extremist party who came from nowhere in the 1920s to starting the Second World War 20 years later. ISIS may not have the funding, but they can instil fear into people (Jihadi John and beheading innocent people) and a lot of support from around the world (Hundreds of Brits going abroad to help fight with them). They could easily spark a revolution and get control of a country.

I'm not saying they couldn't start wars, just not on the scale of a world war.

Extremists would need a lot of support from countries with a proper military to pose any threat of that happening.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jan 08, 2015 2:20 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Oct 05, 2014 11:05 am
Posts: 1054
I don't think so. Sh!tty terrorist campaigns are an unfortunate part of life in the 20th century but they don't really have the capability to start world war III. Unless the Saudis actually stop clandestinely propping up Islamic terrorism and actually fully embrace it then their won't really be any wars in the traditional "state vs. state" sense over it.

I'd counter the statement that "anyone who dares to stand up against this are shot down by political correctness" too. The USA and allies are currently bombing the crap out of ISIS. I'd say that's "standing up".

One interesting article I read recently made the point that Mexican Cartel violence is just as brutal, perhaps even more so than anything radical Islam yet we almost never hear about it in the media. Remember to look beyond what you're reading/watching.

_________________
Image
"You mad, bro?"

"Noise is a form of energy and the less you hear means the more you use for propulsion" - Ulrich Baretzky


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jan 08, 2015 3:25 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed May 09, 2012 10:57 pm
Posts: 3124
Read beyond what you're reading/watching maybe. That doesn't mean ignore what you're reading and watching.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jan 08, 2015 3:45 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Oct 05, 2014 11:05 am
Posts: 1054
I guess my point is, before we start thinking that Islam is going to start a third world war and destroy the world, consider that all sorts of people are committing acts of barbarism on an equal scale that could be just as dangerous.

_________________
Image
"You mad, bro?"

"Noise is a form of energy and the less you hear means the more you use for propulsion" - Ulrich Baretzky


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jan 08, 2015 4:06 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2012 6:27 am
Posts: 670
Well it's just your opinion. Will it cause WW3? I don't know, what I do know is the guys dressed formally, wearing ties, calling the shots have more capability to do so.

_________________
Even the best of drivers crash, stay safe and be responsible!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jan 08, 2015 4:16 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu May 12, 2011 6:08 pm
Posts: 3652
I'd like to think it's only ignorant people who would believe that the majority of people from a certain religion would agree with what has happened in Paris and others parts of the world over recent years.

I don't for one minute think it would start WW3 because there is nowhere near enough people supporting their kind of actions to warrant a full on war. Sadly I do think that this will certainly not be the end of it, not for many years I am afraid.

_________________
Power tends to corrupt and absolute power corrupts absolutely. [Lord Acton]
My own Google Earth Motor Sport file. http://www.mediafire.com/?jzm1ieatytv
Follow me @asphalt_world


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jan 08, 2015 4:39 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Nov 29, 2009 9:41 pm
Posts: 4218
Asphalt_World wrote:
I'd like to think it's only ignorant people who would believe that the majority of people from a certain religion would agree with what has happened in Paris and others parts of the world over recent years.

I don't for one minute think it would start WW3 because there is nowhere near enough people supporting their kind of actions to warrant a full on war. Sadly I do think that this will certainly not be the end of it, not for many years I am afraid.


Yeah, I agree. This isn't the work of a nation. This is the work of a small number of people. I think we'll likely have a number of small isolated attacks in the ilk of yesterday rather than a full on war.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jan 08, 2015 4:44 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Mar 16, 2013 1:40 pm
Posts: 6629
There is little that speaks in favor of islamic extremism causing a major international war between the countries of the world. To start with, the causes to both previous World Wars have been all different that what would be in this case (basically, those were imperialistic wars, not ideological/religious) and the wars were fought between the major powers of the world. The present world powers are in a large scale all non-Islamic countries. If they would start war against each others, it ought to be caused by having grave differences and confrontations over something else (well, the power re-distribution comes as the most logical cause). If anything else, the radical Islamist terrorism brings these countries together, on the same page. They all experience it (with some variations of it), the West and Russia and even China.

Actually, nobody is completely spared, and the least the Muslim world. Pakistan is the leading military power among the Muslim countries, and they have been under the attack. The recent mass murder attack on the school in Pakistan demanded over 130 lives of students. This attack in Paris, as much as terrible it is, pales in comparison to that. In last 3 years, the reports say that over 3000 people died only in Pakistan due to the terrorist attacks.
http://fivethirtyeight.com/datalab/tali ... terrorism/
Not to talk about Iraq and Syria. It is but a little bit of it that spills over to the West (not talking about 9-11, of course). It is the Muslim worlds that suffers mostly, and they seem to not have enough resources and strength to successfully deal with that, not to speak of attempting starting some huge war conflict with the major powers in the world.

The radical religious terrorism, in this case the radical Islam, won't do it. In a cynical way, so long so it is still within the "reasonable" parameters, it benefits the governments by giving them the opportunity to act and galvanize the country. The governments simply love the concept of 'external enemy' as it empowers them by this mean of people turning to them for the protection, and the local political differences become obscure. After the Cold War ended, the external enemy was quite absent in the West. Till the Global War on Terrorism replaced it in 2001. And now, again, we have somebody or something to be afraid for our existence...


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jan 08, 2015 5:03 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Sep 26, 2006 9:21 am
Posts: 3517
Does it require a whole nation to spark a war? The world isn't what it was a century ago, lone voices can rally a lot of support these days. Social media in some ways has a lot to answer for [and I realise that definition includes forums such as this one].

_________________
AlienTurnedHuman wrote:
Eurytus probably thought he was God. At least until he was banned. Which means if he was God, it makes me very scared of PF1-Mod.

Please report forum problems to us, via PM/Feedback Thread. Screenshots will also help.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jan 08, 2015 5:22 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu May 23, 2013 1:05 pm
Posts: 7518
P-F1 Mod wrote:
Does it require a whole nation to spark a war? The world isn't what it was a century ago, lone voices can rally a lot of support these days. Social media in some ways has a lot to answer for [and I realise that definition includes forums such as this one].

I would say no, a group such as ISIS could start wars, but for it to grow to the scale of a WW3 scenario it would take a lot more support than they have now. That wouldn't necessarily need to be countries, but ISIS would surely need hundreds of thousands, perhaps millions of fighters & volunteers.

This is all in reference to starting "WW3" though, terrorist groups have sparked war in the past & will do so in the future.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jan 08, 2015 5:34 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Aug 09, 2008 9:22 pm
Posts: 8064
It depends how much oil they have and how badly other people want it.

For instance, Country A has oil to sell and country B wants it, possibly has been having it for a while, but A sells it to C instead, who are the "opposition" to B.

B sees this this as a military threat and wades in. C fight to defend "their" oil supply and there is a war.

If B or C have enough allies and influence, or are considered "strategic" by a super power, it can easily escalate into a major war. Bring in a little collateral and economic pressure and it could end up very big


Edit, religion is not really relevant to this, but would affect peoples opinions of it, who pressurize/restrain their government


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jan 08, 2015 6:33 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Mar 16, 2013 1:40 pm
Posts: 6629
P-F1 Mod wrote:
Does it require a whole nation to spark a war? The world isn't what it was a century ago, lone voices can rally a lot of support these days. Social media in some ways has a lot to answer for [and I realise that definition includes forums such as this one].


Actually exactly a century ago, the WW1 was sparked not by a nation. But by an isolated, specific incident: the assassination of Franz Ferdinand of Austria in Sarajevo, Bosnia, by the member of Yugoslav nationalistic organization in Bosnia. But that was not what caused the war. The incidents that spark wars are rarely the very causes for it, but rather the pretexts. Serbia did not want to enter the war with, then one of the big powers in Europe, Austria-Hungary. Neither the organization that the assassin came from was really from Serbia; the guy happens to be a Serb by his nationality that was born in Bosnia. Yet, Austria-Hungary was all happy to start the invasion of Serbia... and over 30 million people died.

To spark a war, basically anything could be taken for. But to have the causes for it, and particularly in order to conduct it, it got to be on the national levels, or perhaps the blocks of nations, as it was so before and as it stands so nowadays.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jan 08, 2015 6:48 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu May 12, 2011 6:08 pm
Posts: 3652
Of topic, are mods supposed to share their opinions this way? Surely they would post as the usernames and leave mod accounts for moderation.

_________________
Power tends to corrupt and absolute power corrupts absolutely. [Lord Acton]
My own Google Earth Motor Sport file. http://www.mediafire.com/?jzm1ieatytv
Follow me @asphalt_world


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jan 08, 2015 8:37 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Aug 09, 2008 9:22 pm
Posts: 8064
Prema wrote:
P-F1 Mod wrote:
Does it require a whole nation to spark a war? The world isn't what it was a century ago, lone voices can rally a lot of support these days. Social media in some ways has a lot to answer for [and I realise that definition includes forums such as this one].


Actually exactly a century ago, the WW1 was sparked not by a nation. But by an isolated, specific incident: the assassination of Franz Ferdinand of Austria in Sarajevo, Bosnia, by the member of Yugoslav nationalistic organization in Bosnia. But that was not what caused the war. The incidents that spark wars are rarely the very causes for it, but rather the pretexts. Serbia did not want to enter the war with, then one of the big powers in Europe, Austria-Hungary. Neither the organization that the assassin came from was really from Serbia; the guy happens to be a Serb by his nationality that was born in Bosnia. Yet, Austria-Hungary was all happy to start the invasion of Serbia... and over 30 million people died.

To spark a war, basically anything could be taken for. But to have the causes for it, and particularly in order to conduct it, it got to be on the national levels, or perhaps the blocks of nations, as it was so before and as it stands so nowadays.



As yo usay, the event its self can be a single incident, the reaction, and moreso the expectation and preperation can be waiting for it.

For example, a small boat attacking a warship?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jan 08, 2015 8:57 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Oct 13, 2012 2:29 am
Posts: 1983
Serbia sponsored that Austrian assassination squad. WWI was always going to happen as it was a clash of competing Empire alliances who were sizing each other up for a long time before hostilities broke out. Radical Islam is purely a local low-level terrorist threat not a global one. The West learning to live with the less liberal countries of Russia and China and their ambitions is the key to avoid a future WWIII.

_________________
Kimi: "Come on, get the McLaren out of the way!”


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jan 08, 2015 9:45 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Mar 17, 2013 5:36 pm
Posts: 1390
WW3 presented itself to the world with 9/11. An ideology war.
A new type of war with no end, as it has no borders.

Lets be honest, the extremists would use a nuclear bomb if they had one. Am I wrong?


Tolerance, in the extremist sense, has changed definition and become a stealth weapon that gives extremist islamists a vacuum to breed.

Now we have gone from fearing being judged politically incorrect, to fearing being randomly killed or, chosen as a target for miscalculating our definition of free speech and expression.

You cannot defeat an insane army that has many heads that, regenerate randomly in every corner of the world.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jan 08, 2015 10:08 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Aug 18, 2008 1:38 pm
Posts: 2553
Start WW3? No. Help all the extreme right-wing parties (especially here in Europe) growing even more? Yes, no doubt.

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jan 08, 2015 10:40 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Mar 16, 2013 1:40 pm
Posts: 6629
mas wrote:
Serbia sponsored that Austrian assassination squad. WWI was always going to happen as it was a clash of competing Empire alliances who were sizing each other up for a long time before hostilities broke out. Radical Islam is purely a local low-level terrorist threat not a global one. The West learning to live with the less liberal countries of Russia and China and their ambitions is the key to avoid a future WWIII.


Serbia was blamed, indeed, that was the pretext to declaring the war to Serbia. But the Serbian organization that was supporting the Bosnian one that carried out the assassination, was secret illegal organization within military ranks. Not Serbia, not the government. That same organization stood behind the assassination of the king of Serbia, some 10 years earlier. But as you pointed out, the scene for the big war had been set already before.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jan 08, 2015 10:45 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu May 12, 2011 6:08 pm
Posts: 3652
Mr-E wrote:
Start WW3? No. Help all the extreme right-wing parties (especially here in Europe) growing even more? Yes, no doubt.


Yes, it didn't take Farage long to use the Paris events for a bit of cheap publicity!

Horrid horrid man

_________________
Power tends to corrupt and absolute power corrupts absolutely. [Lord Acton]
My own Google Earth Motor Sport file. http://www.mediafire.com/?jzm1ieatytv
Follow me @asphalt_world


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jan 09, 2015 1:04 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon May 31, 2010 10:02 am
Posts: 1406
Location: Far side of Koozebane
I agree with most posters here that it is highly unlikely to result in WW3.

I think the greater fear is civil unrest spreading among western nations resulting in an increase reprisal attacks from others with extremist views, rioting etc. This could then cause a snowball effect with an increase in the radicalisation of young Muslims and so on.

As we have seen with the recent attacks in London, Ottawa, Sydney & Paris, these attacks are increasing and can happen anywhere, at anytime and to anyone, and while I don't think it has reached the stage yet where the general population are concerned about the Muslim family living down the road, or the young Muslim bloke walking past you in the street, I think it is getting to that point where xenophobia starts to overtake rational & reasoned thinking, which I guess in a way is what these terrorist groups want.

With governments around the world treading a fine line with civil liberties, multiculturalism, political correctness,anti racism etc, it is not inconceivable to me that somewhere down the line some non-Muslim extremist groups may choose to take action in reprisal for these attacks and in absence of strong (some would say radical) government policy. This may then have the potential to ignite great civil unrest worldwide.

Either that or nations start electing governments who are prepared to deal with this issue in a radical manner.

_________________
Question: If a compulsive liar tells you they're a compulsive liar, are they really a compulsive liar?

2017 WCC CPTTC - Jalopy Racing (Herb & Me)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jan 09, 2015 8:08 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jun 11, 2012 3:22 am
Posts: 3860
Kolby wrote:
Well it's just your opinion. Will it cause WW3? I don't know, what I do know is the guys dressed formally, wearing ties, calling the shots have more capability to do so.

Couldn't agree more.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jan 09, 2015 8:46 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2014 9:50 am
Posts: 877
Location: UK
Recent attacks by Radical Islam against others that have a different opinion only strengthen the right to hold that opinion, you can't behead an idea or shoot dead a cartoon!
The current "I am Spartacus", campaign from the film of the same name inspired me as a child, as does so again. The question is, as a society where does free speech end and offence begins. Finding that point will be critical to maintaining support against senseless violence. It doesn't have to be a war to cause worldwide damage.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jan 09, 2015 9:32 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat Aug 23, 2003 9:50 am
Posts: 151
I do believe that the next major armed conflict will be based around the current issues that are facing the Islamic faith. It is viewed by a lot of people as a hostile and somewhat barbaric faith. What this is doing is stirring up nationalism (a nice word for right wing sociopaths). Even people I know who are defenders of the faith are starting to lose patience.

Recent events have highlighted that this is an unconventional war, where you can't see nor know who your enemy is. God help us if one of the extremist groups get their hands on a nuke.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jan 09, 2015 10:21 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Aug 09, 2008 9:22 pm
Posts: 8064
Juans Girl wrote:
I do believe that the next major armed conflict will be based around the current issues that are facing the Islamic faith. It is viewed by a lot of people as a hostile and somewhat barbaric faith. What this is doing is stirring up nationalism (a nice word for right wing sociopaths). Even people I know who are defenders of the faith are starting to lose patience.

Recent events have highlighted that this is an unconventional war, where you can't see nor know who your enemy is. God help us if one of the extremist groups get their hands on a nuke.


Forget Nukes, they are old hat now. Terror is the active word in terrorist, and the media are helping them out more than any funding from islam.

Watch for the " we have Ebola " type reports from them and watch how many BILLIONS get wasted needlessly as a result.

Dont know how many here are old enough to remember how even the smallest company had to change their reception and mail procedures when one or two high profile people had a sprinkling of washing powder on their mail?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jan 09, 2015 11:01 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Mar 27, 2011 1:59 pm
Posts: 5226
moby wrote:
Juans Girl wrote:
I do believe that the next major armed conflict will be based around the current issues that are facing the Islamic faith. It is viewed by a lot of people as a hostile and somewhat barbaric faith. What this is doing is stirring up nationalism (a nice word for right wing sociopaths). Even people I know who are defenders of the faith are starting to lose patience.

Recent events have highlighted that this is an unconventional war, where you can't see nor know who your enemy is. God help us if one of the extremist groups get their hands on a nuke.


Forget Nukes, they are old hat now. Terror is the active word in terrorist, and the media are helping them out more than any funding from islam.

Watch for the " we have Ebola " type reports from them and watch how many BILLIONS get wasted needlessly as a result.

Dont know how many here are old enough to remember how even the smallest company had to change their reception and mail procedures when one or two high profile people had a sprinkling of washing powder on their mail?

That wasn't that long ago, but it is a valid point, the fear of an attack makes the general populace more afraid than they need to be of the chances of an actual attack and as others pointed out, attacks from radical Muslims against other Muslims has been much worse than anything they have done to the western world.

I do know what Juans Girl means about nationalists (as well as how she described them, I'd also call them radical nationalist extremists), this video as broadcast nationally in the US is the perfect example.....
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7nm8aW7WOsc

Russell Brand did a critique of this clip and although I generally don't listen to what he says and think he's a complete pickle, he made some decent points. How is what she is doing different to the propaganda vids we see from radical Muslims? She's first off alluring to them all as infidels themselves and the saying bomb them, bomb them, bomb them - well that's a good message to send!

I know that she is obviously not speaking for the majority of the US, but it's views like this from extreme right wingers and media that make me worry that it is not radical Muslims who have the potential to start WWIII, but more the minority suit wearing right wing radical American nationalists that have not only the means, but also the will to start a huge conflict if they take things too far, killng too many innocents and are unable to be stopped with words and agreements and other countries or the UN feel they need to step in to stop American attacks on the middle east.

But what scares me and worries me more, is if the situation arose, what would the UK do?

_________________
There is no theory of evolution, just a list of animals that Chuck Norris allows to live.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jan 09, 2015 11:42 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jun 11, 2012 3:22 am
Posts: 3860
minchy wrote:
moby wrote:
Juans Girl wrote:
I do believe that the next major armed conflict will be based around the current issues that are facing the Islamic faith. It is viewed by a lot of people as a hostile and somewhat barbaric faith. What this is doing is stirring up nationalism (a nice word for right wing sociopaths). Even people I know who are defenders of the faith are starting to lose patience.

Recent events have highlighted that this is an unconventional war, where you can't see nor know who your enemy is. God help us if one of the extremist groups get their hands on a nuke.


Forget Nukes, they are old hat now. Terror is the active word in terrorist, and the media are helping them out more than any funding from islam.

Watch for the " we have Ebola " type reports from them and watch how many BILLIONS get wasted needlessly as a result.

Dont know how many here are old enough to remember how even the smallest company had to change their reception and mail procedures when one or two high profile people had a sprinkling of washing powder on their mail?

That wasn't that long ago, but it is a valid point, the fear of an attack makes the general populace more afraid than they need to be of the chances of an actual attack and as others pointed out, attacks from radical Muslims against other Muslims has been much worse than anything they have done to the western world.

I do know what Juans Girl means about nationalists (as well as how she described them, I'd also call them radical nationalist extremists), this video as broadcast nationally in the US is the perfect example.....
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7nm8aW7WOsc

Russell Brand did a critique of this clip and although I generally don't listen to what he says and think he's a complete pickle, he made some decent points. How is what she is doing different to the propaganda vids we see from radical Muslims? She's first off alluring to them all as infidels themselves and the saying bomb them, bomb them, bomb them - well that's a good message to send!

I know that she is obviously not speaking for the majority of the US, but it's views like this from extreme right wingers and media that make me worry that it is not radical Muslims who have the potential to start WWIII, but more the minority suit wearing right wing radical American nationalists that have not only the means, but also the will to start a huge conflict if they take things too far, killng too many innocents and are unable to be stopped with words and agreements and other countries or the UN feel they need to step in to stop American attacks on the middle east.

But what scares me and worries me more, is if the situation arose, what would the UK do?

Recent history tells us that the UK would follow the US. As a previous poster pointed out, governments prefer the population to be in fear of an outside threat - it makes it far easier for them to erode rights and exert control.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jan 09, 2015 12:59 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Dec 19, 2011 1:23 am
Posts: 290
I'm not really liking what I'm reading here in some posts. No there's not going to be a WW3 mainly because in war, you have countries against countries and neither the west (freedom) or any of the other non-freedom loving countries want this.

Let me try to explain something here. The wacko islamist terrorist don't care what color you are, they don't care what background you come from, they don't care if you're short or tall, they don't care if you like to watch racing cars go around a track - they only want to kill you if you don't change to their way of thinking. PERIOD. Until most of you realize this, we're all doomed. We cannot fight a faith unless you're ready to find these people in their homes and kill them first (or at least put them away forever).

Also, I am a extreme right winger in America, by the presses definition. My definition is that I'm for Freedom and I'm for our Constitution. These are two words that some liberals hate. So, you can call me extreme but be sure you understand what that means. We are not your enemy, wake up.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jan 09, 2015 1:16 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2014 9:50 am
Posts: 877
Location: UK
Steve C wrote:
We cannot fight a faith unless you're ready to find these people in their homes and kill them first (or at least put them away forever).

Also, I am a extreme right winger in America, by the presses definition. My definition is that I'm for Freedom and I'm for our Constitution. These are two words that some liberals hate. So, you can call me extreme but be sure you understand what that means. We are not your enemy, wake up.


So you are proposing 'inverted terrorism' ? We do not want ANYONE living in terror, or terrorism becomes the norm.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jan 09, 2015 1:26 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Dec 19, 2011 1:23 am
Posts: 290
Option or Prime wrote:
Steve C wrote:
We cannot fight a faith unless you're ready to find these people in their homes and kill them first (or at least put them away forever).

Also, I am a extreme right winger in America, by the presses definition. My definition is that I'm for Freedom and I'm for our Constitution. These are two words that some liberals hate. So, you can call me extreme but be sure you understand what that means. We are not your enemy, wake up.


So you are proposing 'inverted terrorism' ? We do not want ANYONE living in terror, or terrorism becomes the norm.


We have people living in terror all the time. IT has become the norm.

I'm proposing we fight back. We're going to have to kill a lot of people before this gets better. I'm proposing that we keep our eyes open and fight back when needed. Our Gov'ts certainly know who these people are. Go find them and bring them to trial or remove them from the face of the planet.

It's not going to any of us any good to stand shoulder to shoulder and light our candles unless we do something about it. We can go to FB and Twitter all day long but in the end - it does nothing to fix the problem. Remember, the terrorist don't care anything about us, they just want us dead. How do you feel knowing this?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jan 09, 2015 1:55 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed May 09, 2012 10:57 pm
Posts: 3124
So what exactly do you propose we do. Go round killing innocents? It has to be treated very carefully otherwise we risk harming more innocents making us no worse than the terrorist. Standing shoulder to shoulder lighting candles and holding up Charlie placards isn't a way of doing something its a way of showing others we are there and showing terrorist we don't fear them.

The removal of legal guns would make the world a much safer place but as an American you wouldn't have that!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jan 09, 2015 2:01 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jun 02, 2012 6:58 pm
Posts: 3796
I totally agree with pubpokerplayer.

In addition, I think most of the larger states aren't stupid enough to enter a war with another major state. Nuclear weapons are too much of a threat. Add that to the fact that ISIS and other terrorist organizations don't have anywhere near the amount of manpower for a full blown war against the amount of people they've angered, and as far as I know, aren't affiliated with any particular state and have few allies, save other terrorist groups. War in the middle east was a bad idea in the first place, I don't see the point of doing it again.

The doomsday clock is at 11:55, the closest to midnight it has been since 1981 (11:56)

_________________
IV
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic

All times are UTC


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group