[UK] Explosion at Manchester Arena -- 22 dead + 50 Injured
552 replies, posted
I will never accept terrorism or organized crime as a fact of life. Their existence is representative of a vacuum in successful communities. There's no street gangs in the Hamptons. Gangs exist because people see a lack of protection and a way out in the inner cities. Hate groups exist because people who believe that way are ousted and ostracized in society. Their only hope for companionship is in a group of similar interests.
Likewise, terrorism breeds where there is no order. Terrorist groups run regions and countries. They kidnap children and demand payment. They are organized crime gangs that united under a distorted view of what Islam should be. They fester in the vacuum left behind after centuries of turmoil in the middle east. Because they often do a better job running communities than the government. The middle east has been a violent place for a very long time. The people there welcome groups for safety. A town run by Al Qaeda is a town that doesn't tolerate lawlessness as long as you abide by strict guidelines. ISIS offers the same security. If you're loyal to ISIS you can live in a city, have access to doctors, a career, a stable livelihood. But you have to abide by an extremely strick law.
Terrorism flourishes in the lack of authority. Because terror groups are authority. When my dad worked in the Herat Province​ of Afghanistan, the occurrence of terror attacks was low in relation to the rest of the country. This is because the region was run by local opium drug lords. Terrorism was not allowed because the region would rather run opium to Russia than blow shit up in the name of Allah. The vacuum was filled with order of a different kind.
What needs to be done is the vacuum needs to be filled with something that discourages terrorism. ISIS as an organization needs to be destroyed, the region needs to be controlled by a government. Obviously easier said than done. The Arab world needs to step up and form a coalition to regain control of Iraq and Syria, and install a president that will not tolerate terrorism. This, obviously, will be difficult.
If the west does it, it will fuel more terrorism as the white man bombing your village is bad optics. In Afghanistan the people were so remote that they didn't know why the US was there for years. They were so illiterate that they believed whatever the Taliban told them. Aka: the US is invading, join the cause. The west can help with assets, but it had to be seen as an Arab mission. Not a western one.
[editline]23rd May 2017[/editline]
The reason it's Islamic is because for centuries religion existed as a means of control. An extremely religious person will support their religion through anything. It's easy to exploit. The middle East is a religious culture. Religion is more important than politics. It's easy to drag people into your cause if it's a religious cause. The middle east is full of poor, disadvantaged, bombed out, tired people who are looking for a purpose. Why not God?
The worst part is i no longer feel surprised.
It is tragic, and steps should be taken to prevent this, but i just don't feel any surprise when reports of another Terrorist Attack show up on the news.
The worst part is that when i see news like this, i don't feel 'I can't believe this has happened.' It's 'Again?'
That's a very bad thing. I don't like it.
[QUOTE=OvB;52265243]There's no street gangs in the Hamptons. [/QUOTE]
I don't see how this is relevant. Aren't they rich?
[quote]median home sale price of $8.5 million.[/quote]
:thinking:
[quote]The Arab world needs to step up and form a coalition to regain control of Iraq and Syria, and install a president that will not tolerate terrorism. This, obviously, will be difficult.[/quote]
well the arab spring was a complete disaster and tbh made things worse.
Let's just hope Sadiq Khan doesn't embarrass himself again by normalizing terrorist attacks.
[QUOTE=CarnolfMeatla;52265171]There will be always terrorist attacks happening. No matter what we do. It is impossible to completely prevent them. We have to accept this and live life to its fullest.[/QUOTE]
what a defeatist fucking attitude. while there may always be evil people trying to destroy our way of life, there are ways to prevent extremists from entering the country and indoctrinating people or attempting mass homicides and minimizing THIS kind of event from happening again.
this is like telling me it's normal to worry about going to a concert and going home that night picking flesh out of my fucking hair, and that we should just shrug it off because it's normal now.
no.
[QUOTE=AK'z;52265281]I don't see how this is relevant. Aren't they rich?
:thinking:
well the arab spring was a complete disaster and tbh made things worse.[/QUOTE]
Thats the point. They're not poor, they have secure lifestyles, they have no reason to form gangs. Organized crime grows in unstable areas. Rich towns don't have street gangs because they don't have a reason to because they're rich. Dubai doesn't have a local terror group because they don't have a reason to. (If anything it's far more likely they would fund terrorism abroad to further their interests)
It's not so much purely that they're rich, but more so that they don't have a reason to deviate into organized crime. Middle Class folks don't ,either. Poor, disadvantaged people do. Because their livelihood may depend on it.
[editline]23rd May 2017[/editline]
The Arab spring failed because it was too easily taken over by extremist ideologies. It saught to tear down stable (albeit totalitarian) governments. It created the vacuum in which terrorism Fester's.
[QUOTE=OvB;52265243]I will never accept terrorism or organized crime as a fact of life. Their existence is representative of a vacuum in successful communities. There's no street gangs in the Hamptons. Gangs exist because people see a lack of protection and a way out in the inner cities. Hate groups exist because people who believe that way are ousted and ostracized in society. Their only hope for companionship is in a group of similar interests.
Likewise, terrorism breeds where there is no order. Terrorist groups run regions and countries. They kidnap children and demand payment. They are organized crime gangs that united under a distorted view of what Islam should be. They fester in the vacuum left behind after centuries of turmoil in the middle east. Because they often do a better job running communities than the government. The middle east has been a violent place for a very long time. The people there welcome groups for safety. A town run by Al Qaeda is a town that doesn't tolerate lawlessness as long as you abide by strict guidelines. ISIS offers the same security. If you're loyal to ISIS you can live in a city, have access to doctors, a career, a stable livelihood. But you have to abide by an extremely strick law.
Terrorism flourishes in the lack of authority. Because terror groups are authority. When my dad worked in the Herat Province​ of Afghanistan, the occurrence of terror attacks was low in relation to the rest of the country. This is because the region was run by local opium drug lords. Terrorism was not allowed because the region would rather run opium to Russia than blow shit up in the name of Allah. The vacuum was filled with order of a different kind.
What needs to be done is the vacuum needs to be filled with something that discourages terrorism. ISIS as an organization needs to be destroyed, the region needs to be controlled by a government. Obviously easier said than done. The Arab world needs to step up and form a coalition to regain control of Iraq and Syria, and install a president that will not tolerate terrorism. This, obviously, will be difficult.
If the west does it, it will fuel more terrorism as the white man bombing your village is bad optics. In Afghanistan the people were so remote that they didn't know why the US was there for years. They were so illiterate that they believed whatever the Taliban told them. Aka: the US is invading, join the cause. The west can help with assets, but it had to be seen as an Arab mission. Not a western one.
[editline]23rd May 2017[/editline]
The reason it's Islamic is because for centuries religion existed as a means of control. An extremely religious person will support their religion through anything. It's easy to exploit. The middle East is a religious culture. Religion is more important than politics. It's easy to drag people into your cause if it's a religious cause. The middle east is full of poor, disadvantaged, bombed out, tired people who are looking for a purpose. Why not God?[/QUOTE]
for the most part I agree but this doesn't really explain homegrown terrorists, this latest murderer( not definitely but possibly) was born and raised here like most musims in a predominantly muslim area amongst mainly muslim people. If these people feel marginalised or on the fringe, blame their culture not ours. Although I don't condone that the muslim religion preaches hate etc, it doesn't really lend itself well to mixing or accepting others cultures, by it's nature it is very insular. This in turn makes it easier to become extremist when you don't really see the flip side.
CNN was reporting that the authorities knew about a tweet made before the attack and that survivors are saying security was pretty lax for a concert.
If true, that's a massive fuck up on their part.
[QUOTE=TheJoey;52265291]what a defeatist fucking attitude. while there may always be evil people trying to destroy our way of life, there are ways to prevent extremists from entering the country and indoctrinating people or attempting mass homicides and minimizing THIS kind of event from happening again.
this is like telling me it's normal to worry about going to a concert and going home that night picking flesh out of my fucking hair, and that we should just shrug it off because it's normal now.
no.[/QUOTE]
Slow your roll there buddy. They're not saying "lmao fuckers suck it up and leave in fear of your own shadow". They are rightfully pointing out that these attacks are impossible to stop entirely. Someone will always want to strike fear into a nation at some point. Whether it's ISIS, Al-Qaeda, the Taliban, Sovereign Citizens, Extremist Anarchists, the IRA, whoever.
I can't think of a point in history where there wasn't some group committing terrorist acts against a state.
So just live your life, do whatever you were going to do normally. Don't jump at shadows or wince when a guy wearing a turban happens to enter your vision. Because that's the end goal of these attacks, to turn us into paranoid messes, to drive wider divides between the melting pot of social and ethnic groups we have, all in the hopes that we become so broken that we can't function any more.
[QUOTE=OvB;52265299]Thats the point. They're not poor, they have secure lifestyles, they have no reason to form gangs. Organized crime grows in unstable areas. Rich towns don't have street gangs because they don't have a reason to because they're rich. Dubai doesn't have a local terror group because they don't have a reason to. (If anything it's far more likely they would find terrorism abroad to further their interests)
[/QUOTE]
I am not going to praise rich people for their lack of crime.
Dubai is a place where people think they live in another universe. You've got rich people living miles away from workers stuffed in horrible housing in secret who were imported there and promised a better life.
[media]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gMh-vlQwrmU[/media]
Yes Dubai is full of crime. The middle east is shitty and ripe with crime. But the countries that have stable governments don't have terrorism messing shit up. Assad didn't until he bombed his own country into dust. Your missing my point. I'm not defending rich Arabs because the often reprehensible and funders of terrorism themselves. I'm saying terrorism flourishes where there is no authority.
[QUOTE=OvB;52265345]Yes Dubai is full of crime. The middle east is shitty and ripe with crime. But the countries that have stable governments don't have terrorism messing shit up. Assad didn't until he bombed his own country into dust. Your missing my point. I'm not defending rich Arabs because the often reprehensible and funders of terrorism themselves. I'm saying terrorism flourishes where there is no authority.[/QUOTE]
terrorism is flourishing in Europe though?
[QUOTE=AK'z;52265326]I am not going to praise rich people for their lack of crime.
Dubai is a place where people think they live in another universe. You've got rich people living miles away from workers stuffed in horrible housing in secret who were imported there and promised a better life.
[media]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gMh-vlQwrmU[/media][/QUOTE]
Funny thing is that human rights in Dubai are based on the Constitution and enacted law, which supposedly promise equitable treatment of all people, regardless of race, nationality or social status, per Article 25 of the Constitution of the UAE. Despite this, they treat workers with subhuman standards which shows how oppressive they are to non-native workers. They think oil can buy privileges, to which it does.
[QUOTE=UK Bohemian;52265359]terrorism is flourishing in Europe though?[/QUOTE]
Not nearly at the rate it is in the middle east. Not even in the same ballpark. Terrorism in the West is a result of extreme terrorism in the middle east.
but the thing is, when you've got individual attacks like this, there really isn't much you can do.
you can watch for all suspicious activity, you can heighten security in high risk areas, everything you can do will only be as a preventative measure. you can never completely remove the risk, because this isn't like nazism.
people are not treating this like they do nazism. And there is no way you could treat this as nazism because you have 1 billion people across all continents.
You are correct in saying this battle needs to be won from within the Islamic world, but there is absolutely no chance that is ever going to happen.
Syria was a stable totalitarian dictatorship under Assad. A totally valid protest and movement happened. Assad being a murderous asshole bombed them. The completely valid movement turned into a completely valid militia. Syria was bombed to the ground, order was destroyed, terrorist groups got involved, surprise surprise, it's mostly terrorism now.
Iraq was a stable totalitarian dictatorship under Saddam. They were shit and the US invaded them we destroyed the government and tried to appoint a new one. Insurgencies fought back, terrorists got involved. Surprise, surprise, it's mostly terrorism now.
Lack of authority (Democratic or otherwise) + highly religious population + a lifetime of violence (even at no fault of your own) = high potential for terrorists to take control.
[editline]23rd May 2017[/editline]
[QUOTE=AK'z;52265371]but the thing is, when you've got individual attacks like this, there really isn't much you can do.
you can watch for all suspicious activity, you can heighten security in high risk areas, everything you can do will only be as a preventative measure. you can never completely remove the risk, because this isn't like nazism.
people are not treating this like they do nazism. And there is no way you could treat this as nazism because you have 1 billion people across all continents.
You are correct in saying this battle needs to be won from within the Islamic world, but there is absolutely no chance that is ever going to happen.[/QUOTE]
You're right there. There's not much we can do. Intelligence groups can do a good job but suspects will always fall through. We have to fight it at the source. Terrorists in the West are inspired by actions in the heartland. They are influenced by extremist imams in Western mosques and online by ISIS propagandist. You have to defeat the ideology at its source in the middle east. The west will eventually follow suit as the source of the propaganda fades out. It will take decades, but ideologies can be beaten by replacing them with something better.
[QUOTE=OvB;52265243]The reason it's Islamic is because for centuries religion existed as a means of control. An extremely religious person will support their religion through anything. It's easy to exploit. The middle East is a religious culture. Religion is more important than politics. It's easy to drag people into your cause if it's a religious cause. The middle east is full of poor, disadvantaged, bombed out, tired people who are looking for a purpose. Why not God?[/QUOTE]
You also have the inherent idea of politics and religion being one and the same within Islam. Muhammad, the most perfect man on earth according to Islamic teaching, was not only a religious prophet. He was a political leader who created a nation through conquest. All the subsequent leaders did the same thing. I'm not sure how Islam can separate that deep seated theology from a secular state where politics aren't religious by nature. Islam doesn't have the Old Testament/New Testament separation that Christianity has, and, interestingly enough, the more violent Quranic verses are the later verses, not the earlier verses; making the issue even more theologically precarious because of the doctrine of abrogation (the Islamic idea that if two verses seem to contradict, then the later verse takes precedence.)
[QUOTE=OvB;52265364]Not nearly at the rate it is in the middle east. Not even in the same ballpark. Terrorism in the West is a result of extreme terrorism in the middle east.[/QUOTE]
it's more prevelant in the middle east because there are more extreme islamists in the middle east.
I find it concerning that people here can't accept it's flourishing in europe though and that people feel it's because terrorists here are easily radicalized because they feel marginalised or fragile and not because they subscribe to the extreme ideology that they are taught.
I can't imagine how horrific it must have been to be amongst that incident. I'm a regular gig goer, I've seen loads of bands in the past couple of years. Every gig I've been to has been great fun, it's so enjoyable and the atmosphere is amazing. Everyone gets along, they look out for each other and take care of each other in the venue. To have that amazing post show buzz in the air to complete terror in a second flat is something I just can't fathom.
I went to see Judas Priest in Glasgow a week or so after the Bataclan attack in Paris. Everyone was on edge, you could tell there were some nerves about, but once we were inside and the show started, all the worries melted away and it was an amazing experience. I also saw Iron Maiden and followed them for 2 nights last week, and I don't doubt that they could easily have been the target of this as they also played Manchester a couple of weeks ago. Hearing this news after having seen a huge band in 2 massive venues really messed with me. It could happen anywhere at any time. Something about live music and events in huge arenas and shit like that is that they will always happen, and to me there are few things better in life than going and seeing your favourite band perform live. Moreso when it's your birthday as it was when I saw one of the Iron Maiden shows last week.
I really hope that Ariana Grande doesn't suffer too much from this, it wasn't something she had control over in the slightest. I would think that there's a high likelihood of the rest of this tour being cancelled and I don't think anyone would blame her for doing so. Some of the stories I've seen in the news of people on site and nearby are incredible. For example, there was a homeless man that was going to the arena to beg after the show, but after the bomb went off he headed straight in to help.
Something that's maybe not been reported in the thread so far is that there were nuts and bolts all over the floor amongst other debris from the explosion, meaning that this was essentially a suicide nailbombing, against a largely young, female audience. It takes some real scum to carry out an attack like this but to carry it out against that kind of crowd. The people in the surrounding area, like the hotels and homes that took people in to get them out of the streets and keep them safe, the taxi company owner who demanded ALL of his taxis shut off their meters and provide people will free transport away from the scene, they're fantastic people and show off how communities pull together in times of need.
And a reminder: not all terrorists are muslims, and not all muslims are terrorists.
[QUOTE=UK Bohemian;52265478]it's more prevelant in the middle east because there are more extreme islamists in the middle east.
I find it concerning that people here can't accept it's flourishing in europe though and that people feel it's because terrorists here are easily radicalized because they feel marginalised or fragile and not because they subscribe to the extreme ideology that they are taught.[/QUOTE]
I wouldn't necessarily say that terrorism is flourishing, but there is something to be said about the cultural difference between the liberal, secularised society of Europe coming into conflict with the conservative culture of the Middle East, which is still highly religious and hasn't undergone the same liberal movements experienced in Europe during the Reformation, the Renaissance and the various republican revolutions deposing the religious monarchical authorities.
I think it would be incredibly naive to say that Islam perceived through the lens of Middle Eastern culture is appropriate or compatible for western liberal societies and this deflection of Islamic terrorism away from Islam is incredibly patronising and obfuscates dialogue with Islamic religious leaders in the west to help integrate Muslim communities better, by promoting western liberalism and hopefully dilute the extremist interpretation of Islam in the west.
[QUOTE=Big Dumb American;52264501]What does it cite as the primary reason(s) for why/how somebody on the radar can be overlooked until it's too late?[/QUOTE]
Phillip Haney essentially focuses on the ramifications that switching from a strategic focus on Radical Islam to the current "Countering Violent Extremism" (CVE) doctrine has had on intelligence agencies.
His main critique is that CVE makes identifying terrorist groups and connections even more difficult by making the language and process of identifying radical islamists restricted. The other important part is he believes that it focuses on civil liberties and rights of groups so much that it delays actions, discourages reporting, and allows for abuse of the system in place to try and uproot extremists. And he argues that this civil liberty extension is now giving foreign nationals protections they don't have and creates a huge security risk.
He points out specific manifestations of this problem with examples like;
- How the DHS has to use a certain lexicon (Counterterrorism Analytical Lexicon), or other sponsored language that was approved by organizations/leaders in the Islamic community like CAIR, which have proven ties to the Muslim Brotherhood from the Holy Land Foundation [url=https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/federal-judge-hands-downs-sentences-holy-land-foundation-case]trial[/url], and thus the terminology is often misleading or watered-down to the point it obstructs classifying threats.
- His own data that he collected on people related to the Deobandi Movement and Tblighi Jammat Movement was scrubbed from the databases because of this doctrine change and well into the Obama administration. He believes and shows in his book that such data would have made it possible for the San Bernardino suspects to have been apprehended or impeded due to their links to certain mosques and terrorist sponsoring groups they were associated with in relation to the data he collected.
There is more to the book and I am only halfway, but that is a summation of what he has pointed at right now. He also goes into the Boston Marathon bombing later.
So essentially, we have the information, but it is a classic example of the ability to act on it.
Here is a video of him if anyone is interested. He does a better job than what I can do to put out his case. Or you can read some of his articles [url=http://thehill.com/blogs/congress-blog/homeland-security/268282-dhs-ordered-me-to-scrub-records-of-muslims-with-terror]online like this one.[/url]
[media]https://youtu.be/bClwr4osp50[/media]
[QUOTE=Vasili;52264535]Is there anywhere I can donate to help those effected?[/QUOTE]
[URL="https://www.justgiving.com/crowdfunding/westandtogethermanchester"]https://www.justgiving.com/crowdfunding/westandtogethermanchester[/URL]
[QUOTE=UK Bohemian;52265478]it's more prevelant in the middle east because there are more extreme islamists in the middle east.
I find it concerning that people here can't accept it's flourishing in europe though and that people feel it's because terrorists here are easily radicalized because they feel marginalised or fragile and not because they subscribe to the extreme ideology that they are taught.[/QUOTE]
But [I]why[/I]? Why is average Joe Muslim not subscribing to the radical ideology? 99% are not taught 'radical Islam' as you say, so why are the minority turning to it? Your main point seems to be that radicalisation is not a factor (or not a large one) and that then is clearly untrue.
from Tony Iommi's facebook:
[IMG]http://i66.tinypic.com/25yzsro.png[/IMG]
I'd agree completely. a crowd at a concert is one big family.
[QUOTE=UK Bohemian;52265478]it's more prevelant in the middle east because there are more extreme islamists in the middle east.
I find it concerning that people here can't accept it's flourishing in europe though and that people feel it's because terrorists here are easily radicalized because they feel marginalised or fragile and not because they subscribe to the extreme ideology that they are taught.[/QUOTE]
And why do you think they subscribe to it?
[QUOTE=UK Bohemian;52265478]it's more prevelant in the middle east because there are more extreme islamists in the middle east.
I find it concerning that people here can't accept it's flourishing in europe though and that people feel it's because terrorists here are easily radicalized because they feel marginalised or fragile and not because they subscribe to the extreme ideology that they are taught.[/QUOTE]
Once again you fail to understand what anyone has said to you at all. Marginalization is the reason they turn to the extreme ideology usually. They are two different things that both contribute
[QUOTE=OvB;52265566]And why do you think they subscribe to it?[/QUOTE]
Indoctrination?
Like you, I don't know for sure.
muslim teachings and the religion itself are pretty intense, it's more political than other religions with a very strong leaning towards the whole lifestyle.
OK, so if every islamic terrorist becomes a terrorist because they somehow feel marginalised then there must be something fundamentally wrong with being islamic that makes them fee this way?
are you suggesting that every single terrorist is mentally ill. or is it not possible for them to believe in a radical ideology?
[editline]23rd May 2017[/editline]
[QUOTE=Crumpet;52265558]But [I]why[/I]? Why is average Joe Muslim not subscribing to the radical ideology? 99% are not taught 'radical Islam' as you say, so why are the minority turning to it? Your main point seems to be that radicalisation is not a factor (or not a large one) and that then is clearly untrue.[/QUOTE]
you answered your own question.
99% are not turning to it because 99% are not being taught it!!
my argument is that they are not necessarily unstable, that they can believe the ideology without feeling marginalised.
my point being that the catalyst isn't their mindset or how we behave towards them, the catalyst is extreme ideology.
[QUOTE=UK Bohemian;52265718]Indoctrination?
Like you, I don't know for sure.
muslim teachings and the religion itself are pretty intense, it's more political than other religions with a very strong leaning towards the whole lifestyle.
OK, so if every islamic terrorist becomes a terrorist because they somehow feel marginalised then there must be something fundamentally wrong with being islamic that makes them fee this way?
are you suggesting that every single terrorist is mentally ill. or is it not possible for them to believe in a radical ideology?
[editline]23rd May 2017[/editline]
you answered your own question.
99% are not turning to it because 99% are not being taught it!!
my argument is that they are not necessarily unstable, that they can believe the ideology without feeling marginalised.
my point being that the catalyst isn't their mindset or how we behave towards them, the catalyst is extreme ideology.[/QUOTE]
But WHY are they being taught it, I dunno if you're missing the point on purpose or we're just not being clear. These people must have intention when carrying out such an action. Everyone must do. Therefore there must be intention in choosing to align with the radicals and be taught by them - are you saying this minority is born into it? Because that is not the case (In the west, at least). Are they doing it for the hell of it? In which case that transcends any fundamental cause that could be attributed to Islam and instead is a personal issue. They must have a reason. What do you think it is? Indoctrination is the process yes, but you don't become indoctrinated... just because.
[QUOTE=UK Bohemian;52265718]Indoctrination?[/QUOTE]
So, like a cult? Like I explained over multiple posts? It's not about mental illness. It's not about being a special fragile snowflake. It's not even about being a Muslim, really. If that was the case we'd have a much bigger problem considering 23% of the population is Islamic. You've fundamentally missed my point. Commiting acts of terrorism in the West comes from two sources. "Lone wolf/home grown terrorists" who are independently inspired to carry out these acts by propaganda and/or local radicalizers like extremist imams, or by imported terrorists from the middle east that travel to the west to carry out terrorism like the 9/11 hijackers. The reason we see more and more homegrown terrorism is because the leadership in the middle east has changed focus to inspiring people abroad to commit acts, rather than directly exporting terrorists to these countries.
If it was a problem with being a Muslim in the West, we would have so much more terrorism. There are a lot of Muslims in the West. Most of them are peaceful "normal" people. But as with every ideology there are outliers. These outliers, who live in the West, are directly or indirectly targeted by groups for exploitation to commit these acts. The reason they're all Muslim is because the terror groups use distorted views of Islam to control, so the people they target are going to be Muslim.
It's a cult. A cult of extremist Islam. Lead by bosses in the middle east. Exported to the west because the West is an easy target due to our cultural differences and activities in the middle east. The terrorism is intended to make us more hostile towards Muslims because it builds the very thing that makes people seek an extremist fringe.
We have a group in the United States that operates similarly. You've probably heard of them. They're called the Ku Klux Klan. The Klan stands against minorities, Muslims, Jews, Catholics, and other non-Christian, non-white groups. For all intents and purposes, the KKK is a Christian extremist group. They don't blow things up (yet) but they have committed acts of terrorism in the past. They directly target disgruntled veterans returning from the middle east and exploit anti-muslim feelings within them. They offer the same purpose and sense of family that ISIS and others offer to people with no outlet. It's the same thing, different demographics. We don't have many Klansman anymore in the US, and membership has drastically declined over the decades because the ideology is being snuffed out because the United States has drastically improved in the past 120 years, and the South, where the Klan flourished, developed into a modern bustling Urban environment. The Klan is forced to exist in the rural backwater where their ideology still exists... For now.
[Media]https://youtu.be/nXIYQxMN9-4[/media]
[Media]https://youtu.be/jzCAPJDAnQA[/media]
(Both really good documentaries, I recommend watching them in full)
Now, a good chunk of the middle east is still a rural backwater so to speak, where extremist ideals can still flourish. The way to beat terrorism is to turn the entire middle east into more progressive urban environments like Kuwait, Jordan, Qatar, UAE, etc.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
