patrick.net

Dan8267 says

It's time we rethink this strategy.

Maybe, but some of the basic factors in the calculation have not changed, including Islam.

Long ago, people used to say that "all roads lead to Rome." In Islam, all roads lead to Jihad. Islam requires Jihad. According to Islam, death by Jihad is the only sure path to eternal paradise. Whatever setbacks or disappointments or disillusion a Muslim might experience, whatever behavior he might be shamed for, the answer is always Jihad, preferably fatal so he can go to paradise. If he dies by Jihad, all his sins and failures are washed clean, and he will dwell in paradise forever, and can advocate up to 70 of his relatives go to paradise as well. Dan, as much as you might want to help people or free them, you cannot save them from themselves; you cannot provide everyone a perfect life with no disappointments or setbacks. Everybody experiences disappointments and setbacks. The problem is that in Islam, these events become excuses for Jihad, because all roads lead to Jihad.

I encourage you to read George Packer's current article for The New Yorker, which I excerpted in the Islam thread. Now that one New Yorker (Donald Trump) started saying it, The New Yorker is beginning maybe to consider it. What happened in New York on 9/11 could happen in Brussels or anywhere else with large crowds and attractive targets. In Belgium, they have had to shut down the country for security, putting everyone under a sort of house arrest or domestic confinement, and in France they have had to give up constitutional freedoms for security. No country with more than 20% Muslims has ever been able to sustain the freedoms that we take for granted in the west, and even around 10% the Muslims outnumber the police and the country cannot afford to contain them while maintaining western levels of freedom.

RIP the 30 in Belgium. The only solution I can think of that is consistent with western values is to offer everyone a free one-way ticket to Mecca, on one condition: if they go, they can never return. Islam requires all believers to go to Mecca. If you offer them the opportunity, believers can't refuse. It's about the only vulnerability in the religion, as far as I can tell. Offering everyone a free ticket is not discriminatory, and it isn't persecution, but it might work, and it would cost less than our current campaigns of invade&invite&surveillance. If you guarantee that the believers can't come back, then those who don't believe could say so without fear of getting killed by the believers.

Europe is under no obligation whatsoever to accept muslim refugees. They must make peace with the "new normal" that comes with lower birthrates and adjust accordingly. I believe some of their decisions regarding refugee issue come from collective guilt they feel for their ancestors allowing nazis to come to power, but they need to step back and realize that the situation is not morally equivalent whatsoever. Since 9/11, the continent has been hit numerous times: renfe bombing in spain, bombing in london subway, 2 attacks in paris last year, and now belgium today. These atrocities warrant a merciless response that will etch themselves in memory of all those that would even consider committing further acts of terror.

curious2 says

The only solution I can think of that is consistent with western values

The first step of any solution is to go after the stupid ideas.
Ask "moderate" to renounce them.
Go full propaganda shaming for those (including foreign powers) who support them.

curious2 says

Until you export the believers who say they are required to cut off the heads of apostates, it seems unrealistic to expect the "moderates" to renounce Islam.

The point is not that everyone will accept. The point is to make it obvious: such person believes people should be killed on the basis of their beliefs.

From there submit them to constant shaming for such beliefs.

The point is also to make it obvious who and what we are fighting against - and who we are not fighting. If really Islam is a religion of peace and most Muslims are really peaceful then obviously most people will say they don't have such beliefs and will be willing to say it.

curious2 says

Also, asking people to renounce their religion, whether in whole or in part, may raise First Amendment issues.

This is not the same as asking people to renounce their religion. This is only asking people to agree to some common value with people around them: i.e. we are all equal regardless of beliefs, we don't kill people for beliefs.

curious2 says

Personally, I prefer to take a man at his word: if he says he believes he must go to Mecca, then let him go. We are not required to let him return.

You can never prevent people from not leaving or coming back. Especially citizens cannot be prevented from coming back and this is the end of your plan.

Heraclitusstudent says

You can never prevent people from not leaving or coming back. Especially citizens cannot be prevented from coming back and this is the end of your plan.

Your comment is incorrect there. In any free society, people are free to waive their visas or renounce their citizenship. As I wrote, offer everyone a free one-way ticket to Mecca, on one condition: if they go, they can never return. People agreeing that they can never return are inherently renouncing whatever right to return they may have had, whether visa or citizenship. So that isn't the end of the plan, it is the plan.

If you are saying we can never have secure borders, I believe that we could, actually, if TPTB wanted that. Alternatively, whatever happens once a believer has gone to Mecca is (according to believers) the will of Allah.

Islam has a lot in common with the KKK. Both are religious beliefs associated with violence, which in some instances they require believers to commit. They share similar clothing and beliefs, and a shared heritage among Abrahamic faiths. The major difference is KKK members insist on staying here. If they had a belief that they must go somewhere else, then I would be delighted to send them there, on condition that they never return here. It is neither hate nor phobia, it's just self-defense against doctrines that advocate overthrowing our government and killing us.

Heraclitusstudent says

most people will say

You should read about taqiyya and dawa. Islam allows believers to say what they must, especially to infidels, until they become powerful enough in a particular area to impose Sharia, at which point they are required to do that. Islam defines "peace" to mean the peace that will prevail when people stop denying Islam.

curious2 says

You should read about taqiyya and dawa. Islam allows believers to say what they must, especially to infidels, until they become powerful enough in a particular area to impose Sharia

That's ignoring several important propaganda principles: the heart follows the hand, rationalization and social proof.
1 - If a large number of people, of the same community, come out and say the same, it becomes acceptable.
2 - the desire for consistency is a potent technique, particularly if repeated, and public.
3 - Rationalization it is the final nail. If used well, it can change how one sees oneself. i.e. you're made to think that you believe this not because you had to, but because it makes sense and that's actually who you are.

These religious beliefs are not that powerful. They plainly don't make sense. They are plainly medieval and obviously evil for anyone that takes the time to think about it. The only power they have comes from the fact that no one is in fact trying to debunk them.

curious2 says

People agreeing that they can never return are inherently renouncing whatever right to return they may have had, whether visa or citizenship. So that isn't the end of the plan, it is the plan.

All you are offering is a free ticket to renounce citizenship? No one will take it. They will pay for their own trip. Or some rich Saudi asshole will.

Heraclitusstudent says

These religious beliefs are not that powerful. They plainly don't make sense. They are plainly medieval and obviously evil for anyone that takes the time to think about it. The only power they have comes from the fact that no one is in fact trying to debunk them.

Please read The New Yorker article that I excerpted. Tunisia has in fact been trying to shame the Muslims who are "radical" (i.e. faithful) while accepting Muslims who are "moderate" (i.e. blasphemers and infidels). It hasn't worked.

To the contrary, the believers cite the blasphemy and shaming as provocations to "defend Islam" by means of violence, as required by Islam.

Heraclitusstudent says

All you are offering is a free ticket to renounce citizenship? No one will take it. They will pay for their own trip.

That's a point. I suppose you could also enact a law saying anybody who chooses to go to a specific list of places that advocate the violent overthrow of our government are, by going there, renouncing whatever right to return here that they may have had.

curious2 says

To the contrary, the believers cite the blasphemy and shaming as provocations to "defend Islam" by means of violence, as required by Islam.

The US is not Tunisia, and you can select the most extreme idea.
Imagine in the US people defending their right to believe that apostate should be killed...
Have the press interview them and ask them to elaborate on why they thing they need to do that.
Make sure their opinions are publicly known.
I want to see how it will work for them.

Heraclitusstudent says

I want to see how it will work for them.

It works all too well, not with a majority but with enough to get a large number of people killed. Maybe you call the murdered and maimed "statistically insignificant" but I disagree. When you look at what is happening in France (8% Muslim), and what happened to Lebanon when it got above 10% Muslim, and what is happening in Pakistan and Iran, I think the evidence shows the fork in the road. No civilization has ever sustained western Enlightenment liberties amid a population even 20% Muslim. If you look what happened to Weimar, things fell apart when the Nazis outnumbered the police. If you want a police state where the police outnumber the Muslims and spy on everyone, then that is the most likely consequence of what you are advocating: giving Muslims a platform where they can promote one version of Islam while others promote a different version. Again, I wish you would please read George Packer's article in The New Yorker; I am not even saying he would agree with me, and to the contrary his article does not advocate what I do, but he is a serious journalist who has devoted extensive travel and study throughout the Muslim world.

People define themselves with their identity. As they say of British expats "More British than Britons". Therefore, we shouldn't be surprised that 1st/2nd Gen immigrant youth are more "Muslims than most Muslims".

The reason Europe can't do anything is the Neoliberal line of the EU and the Centrist parties, which are open borders oriented; they feel they can't discriminate. Also their supporters want to stop wage increases or rental income decreases from a declining population.

thunderlips11 says

People define themselves with their identity. As they say of British expats "More British than Britons". Therefore, we shouldn't be surprised that 1st/2nd Gen immigrant youth are more "Muslims than most Muslims".

The reason Europe can't do anything is the Neoliberal line of the EU and the Centrist parties, which are open borders oriented; they feel they can't discriminate. Also their supporters want to stop wage increases or rental income decreases from a declining population.

This. Precisely this, plus the fact that converts can be even more extreme than native born. I say that without hatred; to the contrary, I love Anglophiles and Scotophiles, but if they move to Britain they will find they are more enthusiastic about kilts or whatever than the average native.

If an American says he has converted to Islam, I would love to be able to say, "Congratulations, did you know about the free program offering everyone a free ticket to Mecca? Islam says believers have to go Mecca, and all you have to do now is visit the Post Office and sign up for your free ticket. Bon voyage!"

www.youtube.com/embed/ntf-SMAxjMU

This was filmed 11 days before the tragic ISIS attacks 3/22/2016 in Brussels. Mischal Modrikamen (born 22 February 1966) is a Belgian lawyer and politician. He is the co-founder and leader of the People's Party. He is the vice-prsident of the Alliance For Direct Democracy in Europe and the publisher of Le Peuple.

curious2 says

It works all too well, not with a majority but with enough to get a large number of people killed. Maybe you call the murdered and maimed "statistically insignificant" but I disagree.

Not sure what you are talking about. The US has a tiny fraction of Muslims.
Have a public register of Muslims who do not renounce extreme ideas the way we have a register of sex offenders.
Bar them from buying weapons.
They will be harassed. Their children will be bullied at school. Maybe they will leave.
It will be a giant confrontation, but a confrontation focused strictly on their worse and most vulnerable ideas.
The problem now is that the refusal of any confrontation gives a free pass to the most extreme ideas. The final result of this - as Trump shows - can only be a confrontation with *all* Muslims. That would be very unfortunate.

thunderlips11 says

The reason Europe can't do anything is the Neoliberal line of the EU and the Centrist parties, which are open borders oriented; they feel they can't discriminate.

And the regressive left that would hold hands and sing Kumbaya with the devil.
What I said above would halt that by isolating individuals who believe in absolutely indefensible ideas.

And remember once you renounce even one extreme idea, you admit that these ideas are not absolute and dictated by God.
That cracks the entire edifice of beliefs in an irreparable way, and puts you on a slippery slope to the liberal side.

Heraclitusstudent says

once you renounce even one extreme idea, you admit

No, again, read about taqiyya. Islam allows Muslims to lie in service of Islam. They don't even have to cross their fingers behind their backs.

thunderlips11 says

This was filmed 11 days before the tragic ISIS attacks 3/22/2016 in Brussels

"A majority of Muslims within 15-20 yrs" in Brussels.
Europe should smell the coffee and wake up. fast.

curious2 says

No, again, read about taqiyya and dawa. Islam allows Muslims to lie in service of Islam. They don't even have to cross their fingers behind their backs.

You assume that taqiyya and dawa is more powerful in someone minds than anything else. This is not the case.

Heraclitusstudent says

more powerful in someone minds than anything else.

I believe the evidence shows religion can become more powerful in a person's mind than anything else, even the instinct to survive. Once a person accepts the basic premise of a particular religion, e.g some pederast was a prophet and his writings are sacred, they can rationalize following those writings at any time. Their past sins, and even past renunciations within the context of taqiyya and dawa, will be forgiven if they die in Jihad. If they stay, then you must beware if they experience any stress at all in life: a divorce, the loss of a job, foreclosure, any stress that might set them off. It's like keeping a timebomb in the middle of a classroom, and saying the timer says it isn't about to blow up yet: you're going to need to keep a very close eye on that timer, until you get the bomb out of the classroom.

That's why I say offer everyone a free one-way ticket to Mecca, on condition they can never return, and maybe add a rule that going forward anyone who chooses to go to a specific list of places (including Mecca) can never return. It gets the bomb out of the classroom.

curious2 says

I believe the evidence shows religion can become more powerful in a person's mind than anything else

Yeah, this is a cult and I agree the effects are very strong. However the remedies for that are well known as well. It can be done. It's just that no one even starts. And most people don't have beliefs so strong as you describe. People are absorbed by their lives and most just don't care that much, though they are vulnerable.

Heraclitusstudent says

Yeah, this is a cult and I agree the effects are very strong. However the remedies for that are well known as well.

Deprogramming remedies may work among people who fell into tiny cults, once they are rescued and returned to the outside world where practically nobody believes in the cult. There is no known remedy to deprogram people from a cult that has more than a billion members, and in fact there is even a definitional question regarding whether such a widely held belief can still be called a cult after more than 1,000 years.

Heraclitusstudent says

What I said above would halt that by isolating individuals who believe in absolutely indefensible ideas

How do you do that ? Truth serum ?

curious2 says

there is even a definitional question regarding whether such a widely held belief can still be called a cult after more than 1,000 years.

It is a cult in propaganda terms.

marcus says

Heraclitusstudent says

What I said above would halt that by isolating individuals who believe in absolutely indefensible ideas

How do you do that ? Truth serum ?

Do you defend the right of people to believe apostates should be killed?

Heraclitusstudent says

curious2 says

there is even a definitional question regarding whether such a widely held belief can still be called a cult after more than 1,000 years.

It is a cult in propaganda terms.

It's a cult that never stopped growing. We are in deep poo poo.

zzyzzx says

Crazy Liberal.

Meanwhile, in Hungary....

Strategist says

We are at war against Islam

Actually Islam is at war against us.

P N Dr Lo R says

Strategist says

We are at war against Islam

Actually Islam is at war against us.

And we "have not yet begun to fight," though we have enabled the jihadis by toppling some governments that had previously kept them mostly under control (e.g. Iraq and Tunisia).

P N Dr Lo R says

Strategist says

We are at war against Islam

Actually Islam is at war against us.

They were always at war with non Muslims. They seldom lost.

curious2 says

And we "have not yet begun to fight," though we have enabled the jihadis by toppling some governments that had previously kept them mostly under control (e.g. Iraq and Tunisia).

Iran too. The one nation we should have supported. Most Iranians in the US are atheists or secular Muslims.

Strategist says

Most Iranians in the US are atheists or secular Muslims.

That's why they are in the US instead of Iran. Supporting the theocratic regime in Iran would not be a good idea. Ironically though, they are the principal beneficiaries of our misguided misadventures in Iraq.

When the terrorists took hostages in Tehran, they gave America a cassus belli to go there and take the oil. Alas, America was too exhausted by the misguided misadventure in Viet Nam, and had elected a President who was too decent and kind to seize the opportunity. I love President Carter, but Iran became his undoing.

curious2 says

Dan8267 says

It's time we rethink this strategy.

Maybe, but some of the basic factors in the calculation have not changed, including Islam.

Of course Islam is bad and the world would be safer if all religions were abandoned. However, the strategy of using military force, essentially murder and death threats, to gain access to other nation's resources is based on the faulty assumption that less technologically advanced nation-states are not a threat to our national security and can never be. The past half century of terrorism has unequivocally demonstrated that this assumption is wrong.

Even ignoring the immorality of such policies, asymmetric warfare makes such policies stupid and jeopardizes the lives of Americans. So even if we value non-American lives at zero, such policies are still foolish and all the cost-benefit analysis favoring them are wrong.

We will never defeat Islam by living up to the moniker of the great Satan. Alternative strategies must be implemented.

curious2 says

I believe the evidence shows religion can become more powerful in a person's mind than anything else, even the instinct to survive.

Yep, and that kind of irrational force is dangerous precisely for that reason. One cannot erect deterrents to irrational behavior. A deterrent inherently assumes a rational mind to deter.

Dan8267 says

One cannot erect deterrents to irrational behavior.

Most people are predictably irrational. The question is, how to get them to what you want and stop doing what you don't want. Offering everyone a free one-way ticket to Mecca, on condition that they never return, is a carrot that could get believers in Islam to do what you want (go away and not come back). As for the stick to deter them from joining ISIL/Daesh, I refer you to my prior comment. Don't give up on people simply for being irrational; irrationality complicates only slightly your task of programming, like Hewlett Packard's Reverse Polish notation.

This is an interesting article:
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/03/23/opinion/the-islamic-states-european-front.html

Of note: one reason that the US is successful in stopping plots is that the US Muslim population often reports the plots to police. In Europe, there is less trust between the Muslim population and police, and there is more of an us against them feeling, so plots are not getting reported.

It seems to me that it is a little early to be sure of such things, but it's a theory that makes sense to me. We are not trying to convince ISIS fighters that we are OK. We are trying to convince moderates that they are better off turning in terrorists and fitting into society than turning inward and fighting the West. It's about cutting off the pipeline and claiming the hearts and minds (and sympathy) of more people.

Also from the article: ISIS is losing in the middle east, and they are likely to try to stage attacks in Europe to get some 'wins' to help with recruiting. I guess they are ripe for a Trump type candidate to come in and say, "We don't win anymore. People love me. I'm going to win, and then we are going to win, and win, and win." Such a character could surely rise to the top of the ISIS promotion ladder.

anonymous says

These events should be downplayed and coverage of their losses and setbacks expanded. Then again broadcasting what our strategies, plans etc. are to combat these groups is giving them a heads up and a chance to prepare.

When I saw the headline that they captured the guy from the Paris attack, and that he was planning another attack, I immediately thought - crap, now they are going to 'go now' to carry it out before they get caught. Why on earth anyone leaked that information to the press is beyond me. ISIS should be mocked in the global news, not given prominence. I agree that they should report ISIS setbacks, but just the obvious ones like the number that have been killed in Iraq/Syria, and the cities they are losing control of.

Strategist says

You really think major terrorist attacks like 911 should be treated by the local police? This is war. We are at war against Islam, just like the rest of the world.

Oceania is at war with Eurasia! We have always been at war with Eurasia...