Things Trump says...

[*PhilHos*]

(09-08-2017, 03:56 PM)Benton Wrote: http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/783202/London-terror-attack-parliament-westminster-shooting-lone-wolf-ISIS


https://www.theguardian.com/media/2015/aug/01/media-coverage-terrorism-further-violence


https://www.carnegiecouncil.org/publications/ethics_online/0117




There's been some discussion about this the last several years, mostly in the military and how to cut down terrorism, and in other countries. Not a lot here as very few major news outlets want to say "Oh yeah, we're extremists best recruiters!"

But the thinking is (basically): for terrorism to work you need 1. terrorists 2. people to be terrified. You can't get either one if nobody knows who you are. And the people in charge of terrorist organizations need people willing to die/get arrested to expand their network. No terrorists means no income, and what self-respecting terror leader wants to get into a jihad if he can't even pay the mortgage? So you've got to take credit for something, or at least find someone willing to elevate your group for an attack. The more you get elevated, the more employees you get. 

It's a pyramid scheme of violence. 

Terrorist groups have rallied around different things in the past. Sunni-Shiite differences. Jews. Christianity. Right now the way to shoot up the terrorism chart is: western Democracies. Recruits are told western Democracies are the cause for all the problems. And you've got a lot of groups right now hammering that message, so new groups grab onto it. And every time a western leader says "this is all because of terrorists" it gives a recruiter a chance to say "look, this is what we're doing and how much of an impact you can make." 

I don't have an answer for how to end terrorism, but recruiters use a variety of tools to fill in the lowest level of the pyramid. One of their chief ones is how effective terrorism is, which gets perpetuated every time an elected official jumps up and says something against Islam, the Middle East, etc. He's helping recruiters by promoting a 'us vs. them' idea.

That's all well and good, but none of that supports the claim that Islamic terrorists want to be called Islamic terrorists so as to encourage others to join their cause. 

(09-08-2017, 04:11 PM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: 1)If you don't condemn white nationalist aren't you tolerating it?

2)Is this the same Obama conservatives were upset at for all the indiscriminate drone strikes to kill suspected terrorists?

3)That's the biggest disconnect I don't understand. Obama constantly defending Islamic terrorist while killing them to the point conservatives are worried he is killing too loosey goosey.

1) No. In the same way as if you don't praise white nationalists, you're not condemning them.
1)B) Trump's condemned white nationalists, soooooooooooooooooo ...

2)I was not one of those conservatives.

3)Meh. It's not that different than those criticizing Trump for not condemning white nationalists when he has, IMO.