Politiks wrote:To one terrorist might be the other. Islamic values are unique to Islam, what you call terrorism they call Martir's. ISIS, AL Qaeda, Boko Haram, they always existed, their practices are no different from Mohammad's actions. What we call terrorism always existed, specially in the Middle East.
What you fail to address is that unlike ETA, FARC, Communism or Nazism, Islamic terror never ended, wont end unless everyone decides to submit to Allah.
Here is the thing, WW1 shapped WW2 Germany. Mao's revolution shapped Chinese Communist Genocide. All those countries changed, Islam is still the same.
The problem with Islam is that islam is, wont and can't be reformed. Brits and Americans shapped how Muslims fight their wars by arming them. They shapped who would thrive by playing favorites, but neither Americans or Brits invented Muslim terror, was always there and they only took advantage of it.
To one terrorist might be the other. Christian values are unique to Christianity, what you call terrorism they call Martyrs. The KKK, the UVF, Anti-balaka, they always existed, their practices are no different from Christ's calls to action. What we call terrorism always existed, specially in the Europe.
What you fail to address is that unlike ETA, FARC, Communism or Nazism, Christian terror never ended, wont end unless everyone decides to submit to Jesus.
Here is the thing, WW1 shapped WW2 Germany. Mao's revolution shapped Chinese Communist Genocide. All those countries changed, Christianity is still the same.
The problem with Christianity is that Christianity is, wont and can't be reformed. Brits and Americans shapped how Christians fight their wars by arming them. They shapped who would thrive by playing favorites, but neither Americans or Brits invented Christian terror, was always there and they only took advantage of it.
---
The above is just as true as what you wrote.
Let us, for example, say that Texas succeeded in becoming independent at some point in the Cold War. Would it have been that difficult for the CIA to give ops information to the Branch Dividians? In order to make sure that the Soviets via Cuba didn't get a foothold, to maybe play up that there was a problem in mainstream Christianity that needed to be fixed. Give David Koresh a little information about the people around him. Have a whisper campaign about how other ministers were failing. So on and so forth. If this were to have happened, is it not very possible--in fact a certainty--that David Koresh would have had more followers?
What if David Koresh were suddenlly in possession of more money than he could possibly spend. He bough a giant mega church, he had all the advertising he ever needed. When a hurricane came into Texas, he had endless food, endless medical, and he was there with armed people on the street to keep order until the disaster was over.
What if, through some wheeling and dealing, Koresh was then put in charge of a government that was put together by opposition groups that were suspiciously well armed and funded?
This is basically what we're looking at in the Middle East if it's not just a full, "kill anyone that opposes and send the military in to put Koresh on the throne."
The CIA, or the Brits, or anyone else didn't give a fuck about Islam. What they cared about was that the most militant versions of Islam were reliant upon them to keep control against the communists.
I'm not blaming them for this. It's a valuable tactic to take the enemy of your enemy and fold that together.
But it's completely insane to pretend that people in the Middle East are unique monkeys that can't put logic together and become obsessed with some ideology you imagine for no apparent reason at all and become irredeemable as a result.
Alis Volat Propriis; Tiocfaidh ár lá; Proletarier Aller Länder, Vereinigt Euch!