[AJS]

We could talk about the crusades but you would do well to look at how they came about - after centuries of Islamic conquest of historically Christian land, subjugation of ancient Christian and other communities living there and harassment of pilgrims visiting the Holy Land.

You can find all sorts in the Bible but it's worth remembering that the Bible is mostly descriptive of things that happened and contains some revelations. The Quran to Muslims is prescriptive. A revelation in its entirety, held to be perfect and eternal in all major schools of Islam.

Lastly even if that's all true and Christianity is all violent and evil that doesn't exonerate Islamic terrorism or negate the fact that Islam contains violent and supremacist doctrines which some Muslims act on.

[Godstud]

The Bible has the same things, as I demonstrated.

I'll repeat what I said., Terrorism against the USA is a result of US government
policy.http://www.huffingtonpost.com/doug-band ... 31942.html

[AJS]

Yes but the bible doesn't hold the same place in Christianity as the Quran does in Islam.

Why is there no Christian doctrine of warfare in any of the mainstream interpretations of the religion if it's fundamentally the same?

[Godstud]

It's still used, and denying it denies the reality.

Christian Terrorist Bissonnette Kills Six at Quebec Mosque
Alexandre Bissonnette, Trump loving terrorist and self-described Christian Crusader, has been charged with six counts of murder.

It seems clear Bissonnette was a Christian terrorist. Yet it is unlikely that many in the mainstream media will identify him as such. However, rest assured, had he been a self-identified Muslim Crusader shooting up a Christian church, the media would have been quick to identify him as a Muslim terrorist.

The fact is, white nationalism, and the alt-right movement the killer embraced, is imbued with Christianity. Properly understood, the movement must be considered to be a manifestation, at least in part, of Christian extremism.
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/progressiv ... ec-mosque/

[AJS]

Foreign policy of the US (and others) has a lot to answer for but it didn't invent jihad.

Anyway even if you accept that entirely it doesn't tell us what to do about it now.

Do we leave the middle east entirely and hope it all works out fine?

Do we try to undo the damage caused?

Or do we try to better understand the problems and adjust policy to suit the problem?

[Suntzu]

We need to get out of the Middle East (and the rest of the world) and mind our own business. We are spending as much on our military as the rest of the world combined. It is time we stop being the world policeman.

[Godstud]

Foreign policy of the US (and others) has a lot to answer for but it didn't invent jihad.

I posted information about what Jihad actually means, and you consistently ignore it because it doesn't match your confirmation bias.

Do we leave the middle east entirely and hope it all works out fine?

That'd be a good start. Good luck finding a politician with the balls to do it, though.

Do we try to undo the damage caused?

This is just more unwanted meddling.

We need to get out of the Middle East (and the rest of the world) and mind our own business. We are spending as much on our military as the rest of the world combined. It is time we stop being the world policeman.

QFT, Suntzu.

[AJS]

It seems Bissonette was a Christian and a terrorist, so a Christian terrorist.

Were his actions informed by his Christian beliefs? Which teachings in particular made him think this was a Christian act? Which church was he a member of and what do they teach?

Definitely things we should look at in that case. That doesn't mean we shouldn't look at them in cases where the attacker is a Muslim.

[Godstud]

Terrorism is simply terrorism. Putting a religious label on the front does a disservice to those religions. I am an Atheist and dislike religion, and even I think this is wrong.

[AJS]

I did read it Godstud. One source on a partisan website does not invalidate 1400 years of Islamic scholarship.

Even if we did entirely disengage from the middle east tomorrow it doesn't solve the problem of the Muslims already in the west.

The attacker who struck in London recently was a British born convert of West Indian ancestry. Which part of western foreign policy towards the Islamic world has offended him?

[AJS]

Do you disagree with analysing motives in general then? You seem quite keen to blame foreign policy. Why dismiss any other contributory factors out of hand?

[Pants-of-dog]

Do you disagree with analysing motives in general then? You seem quite keen to blame foreign policy. Why dismiss any other contributory factors out of hand?

The trouble with blaming Islam is that it is an unverifiable claim.

Moreover, people who do blame Islam tend to ignore actual verifiable causes of militancy from Muslims.

Also, blaming Islam does not account for the vast majority of Muslims who are not militant. When I am at the mall, in line for my Timbits, I am not in any danger from the many Muslim families also wanting coffee and donuts. If Islam were as monstrous as you claim, should I not be in danger every time I am near a Muslim?

[Rich]

When the Germans came into the Soviet Union anyone wanting a peaceful place to live picked up a rifle and did their part to kick the krauts back.

Many welcomed the Germans as liberators. Personally Hitler or Stalin as my Fuhrer is not a choice I would have liked to have been given.

[AJS]

That Islam has a doctrine of warfare is verifiable; and not to the exclusion of other causes of militancy.

Not all Muslims are terroritsts or support militant Islamism. It's a 1400 year old religion with 1.5 billion followers across the world. Not all Christians turn the other cheek and love their neighbours. The ideology exists and shouldn't be ignored in seeking to explain and counter Islamist terrorism.

[Pants-of-dog]

That Islam has a doctrine of warfare is verifiable; and not to the exclusion of other causes of militancy.

The same could be said of any ideology or religion. Far more people have died in the name of freedom, democracy, and capitalism than have died at the hands of Islam.

Not all Muslims are terroritsts or support militant Islamism. It's a 1400 year old religion with 1.5 billion followers across the world. Not all Christians turn the other cheek and love their neighbours. The ideology exists and shouldn't be ignored in seeking to explain and counter Islamist terrorism.

It is not being ignored. In fact, it is discussed ad nauseum to the exclusion of almost any other possible cause.

[AJS]

But it wasn't a libertarian, capitalist or democratic terrorist, again. So it's the Islamist doctrine of war which matters here.

Discussed ad nauseum? Really? I see foreign policy and western imperialism discussed ad nauseum. I hear social exclusion and racism discussed ad nauseum. I see Israel, ISIS and Assad discussed as though they were the be all and end all of the problems in the middle east. Ad nauseum.

I see embarrassed shuffling of feet and cries of bigotry and racism when the theological aspects of Islam which underpin terrorism are discussed.

[Pants-of-dog]

But it wasn't a libertarian, capitalist or democratic terrorist, again. So it's the Islamist doctrine of war which matters here.

It seeems you are referring to a specific situation.

When freedom loving democratic capitalists blow other people up, they use drones or soldiers. But your comment does not, in any way, contradict my point that all ideologies have doctrines of warfare and thus it makes no sense to assume that Islam is somehow unique in this respect.

Discussed ad nauseum? Really? I see foreign policy and western imperialism discussed ad nauseum. I hear social exclusion and racism discussed ad nauseum. I see Israel, ISIS and Assad discussed as though they were the be all and end all of the problems in the middle east. Ad nauseum.

For example, you have only discussed Islam as a possible cause, and you have ignored these other causes. Now you seem to be complaining that others discuss these causes. I assume you would be more comfortable if only Islam was discussed.

I see embarrassed shuffling of feet and cries of bigotry and racism when the theological aspects of Islam which underpin terrorism are discussed.

Really? I see Islamophobes cherry picking certain verses of the Quran and Hadith to support their violent and militant interpretation of Islam. Just like Islamic terrorists do.

[AJS]

I'm not complaining that they're discussed at all. I'm complaining that the theological elements are completely ignored by policy makers and media, and often considered racist or bigoted.

Look at the treatment of Robert Spencer, Tommy Robinson and co. Even Maajid Nawaz is listed as an Islamophobe by the Southern Poverty Law Center.

[Pants-of-dog]

I'm not complaining that they're discussed at all. I'm complaining that the theological elements are completely ignored by policy makers and media, and often considered racist or bigoted.

I doubt it. Trump, for example, wants to ban all Muslims.

Look at the treatment of Robert Spencer, Tommy Robinson and co. Even Maajid Nawaz is listed as an Islamophobe by the Southern Poverty Law Center.

Please provide links that support whatever your claim is. Thanks.

[AJS]

UK centric as I live here and follow it most closely but....

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-23064355
Robert Spencer and Pamela Gellar refused entry to the UK

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/ ... inson.html
Some of the harassment Tommy Robinson has suffered from British police

https://www.bloomberg.com/politics/arti ... tion-talks
Main Dutch parties rule out coalition talks with 2nd biggest party in the elections

https://www.splcenter.org/20161025/jour ... ists#nawaz
Maajid Nawaz, a practicing Muslim, listed as someone who spreads Islamophobia

https://www.splcenter.org/20161025/jour ... emists#ali
As is Ayan Hirsi Ali, an ex Muslim