[Scotty]

Reading comprehension check, Maslo.

When NGTM-1R says:

It's all going the same way that the white supremacists went.

Is there anything that implies, states, claims, declares, or gives you any reason to infer that he's equating either of those groups as they stand now to ISIS as it stands now?  Because it was pretty obvious that he was laying out how similar the progression of radical Islamic terrorism has been playing out as compared to the past ascendance and decline of other terror groups.  The KKK did not get to the point it is now (that is to say, almost totally and utterly irrelevant and ineffective) by magic coincidence, and ISIS is displaying a similar progression.

[Phantom Hoover]

Just like young white guys were conspicuously susceptible to shooting up schools for five years after Columbine.

Well what we didn't have were thousands of young white guys running away to fight overseas in a militant army in the name of... being edgy? They didn't identify with a consistent ideological cause, and the numbers were much smaller than the number of European Muslims taking up arms in the name of ISIS. The alt-right can take their xenophobia and culture war narrative and go **** themselves with it, of course, but I don't have much time for the mainstream liberal line that 'this isn't really a big problem, it's all exaggeration, we can't overreact'. This situation is clearly symptomatic of some vast ****up in the way European multiculturalism has been handled that needs immediate, effective action to repair.

[666maslo666]

Because it was pretty obvious that he was laying out how similar the progression of radical Islamic terrorism has been playing out as compared to the past ascendance and decline of other terror groups. 

But thats exactly how I understood his post.. so there is no lack of reading comprehension on my part. But maybe you should reread my post, this time with comprehension, hm? What I am saying is that this progression is not really similar.

[Scotty]

It is going the opposite way so far. Several decades ago, there was no large scary organized islamic terrorist state in the middle east, and no regular islamist attacks in the West. Now there are. Islamic terror is getting steadily worse and more powerful, not less.

The year is 1955.  Several decades ago, there was no large scary organized KKK in the Southern US, and no regular bombings in Birmingham, AL.  Now there are.  The KKK is getting steadily worse and more powerful, not less.

The part you either failed to grasp or outright dismissed is that every group, without exception, that is powerful in any sense of the word right now was once not powerful at all, and greater than 99(.99999)% of those powerful groups throughout history are once again not powerful at all if they even still exist.  ISIS is currently powerful.  In the (potentially near) future, it will not be.

[Grizzly]

Just like young white guys were conspicuously susceptible to shooting up schools for five years after Columbine.

Well what we didn't have were thousands of young white guys running away to fight overseas in a militant army in the name of... being edgy?

We did have Generation Kill though. Thousands of young white guys enlisting the army to fight overseas in the name of... Something.

[NGTM-1R]

Well what we didn't have were thousands of young white guys running away to fight overseas in a militant army in the name of... being edgy?

I'm not sure if you managed to connect the end of that era with 9/11. Perhaps you should have.

It is going the opposite way so far. Several decades ago, there was no large scary organized islamic terrorist state in the middle east, and no regular islamist attacks in the West. Now there are.

You literally do not know your history. There was actually more than one. We called them Libya. The PLO. Hamas. Hezbollah. Iran. Libya got themselves bombed for blowing up an airliner over Scotland in the '80s. Islamic Jihad under the aegis of Hamas or Hezbollah or both staged bombings in France and Germany. The Munich massacre, the original one, during the 1972 Summer Olympics, was Palestinian nationalist terrorists and is the reason the GSG 9 branch deployed to this incident exists. Iran suffered through several rounds of Tomahawk strikes for supporting terrorist attacks on US soil in the '90s, including the first try at blowing up the World Trade Center. These were all actions that required skilled people and significant financial resources.

Note that the modern era of lone-wolf terrorism explicitly denies the possibility of skilled plotters or significant financial resources, if you have the wisdom to make such a distinction.

[Phantom Hoover]

Well what we didn't have were thousands of young white guys running away to fight overseas in a militant army in the name of... being edgy?

I'm not sure if you managed to connect the end of that era with 9/11. Perhaps you should have.

possibly you should stop ****posting in every political topic like it's a rhetorical game for other people to figure out how much smarter you are than them

[NGTM-1R]

possibly you should stop ****posting in every political topic

Physician, heal thyself.

[Scotty]

Both of you cut it out.  PH, at least NGTM-1R actually contributes instead of posting driveby one liners about other posters.  NGTM-1R, don't be a condescending dick.

I don't care if there's exaggeration in the above, cut it out.

[Phantom Hoover]

at least my ****posts are in earnest

[Bobboau]

Best part is there is no direct link to them, so there is no stopping it.

That's where your theory falls flat, actually. ISIS doesn't care about anyone trying to stop them. That, and they want attacks to be linked to them. They operate more like a cult than Anon, really. ISIS may give stupids ideas to some idiots, but really, what they're actually doing through social media is recruiting people so that they come to them for training. They're inspiring amateurs, alright, but they're inspiring them to come to them and learn, not to act on their own.

you misunderstood the advantage they are getting, it's not that ISIS doesn't get 'tainted' with their actions, it's the fact there is no way to find the people who are going to be committing attacks, it's like trying to find a TV using a broadcast signal.

IS is causing terrorism the same way Videogames are causing violence! It's all clear to me now!

Not what I said.
IS is making available plans for making bombs and tactics for committing attacks.
Are you familiar with Inspire and Dabiq? Are you familiar with how Anonymous operated in the 2008 Scientology raid?
None of this is like vidjya not even in the Sarkeesian/Thomson sense.

[666maslo666]

The year is 1955.  Several decades ago, there was no large scary organized KKK in the Southern US, and no regular bombings in Birmingham, AL.  Now there are.  The KKK is getting steadily worse and more powerful, not less.

The year is 1955. Several decades ago, there were regular lynchings and society didnt care, and few decades before that, slavery was the norm and accepted. Now there arent.

The fact is, white suprematism is on a downward trajectory for several centuries. Its peak was somewhere around colonization period, and ever since then it is slowly but surely declining.

On the other hand, islamic extremism is as strong as ever, in fact it is on the rise over the past few decades.

And its not even about ISIS, if ISIS is defeated, then another group will take their place or it just decentralizes. I am talking about islamic extremism in general.

As I said, maybe your optimistic scenario is right, maybe it isnt. Surely it is a possibility that islamic extremism will begin to decline in the future, too. But trying to "prove this fact" it by some vague comparisons with unrelated events in history is complete pseudoscience and nothing more than an opinion.

[666maslo666]

You literally do not know your history. There was actually more than one. We called them Libya. The PLO. Hamas. Hezbollah. Iran. Libya got themselves bombed for blowing up an airliner over Scotland in the '80s. Islamic Jihad under the aegis of Hamas or Hezbollah or both staged bombings in France and Germany. The Munich massacre, the original one, during the 1972 Summer Olympics, was Palestinian nationalist terrorists and is the reason the GSG 9 branch deployed to this incident exists. Iran suffered through several rounds of Tomahawk strikes for supporting terrorist attacks on US soil in the '90s, including the first try at blowing up the World Trade Center. These were all actions that required skilled people and significant financial resources.

Note that the modern era of lone-wolf terrorism explicitly denies the possibility of skilled plotters or significant financial resources, if you have the wisdom to make such a distinction.

Current wave of islamic terrorism easily matches or exceeds those past waves.

Also, lone wolf terrorism is much worse, because it is usually homegrown. And thats what makes it especially dangerous and persistent. There is very little defense possible against homegrown terrorism, while you can defend against foreign terrorists. And while attacks by some foreign state actors will only go on as long as that particular regime or group exists (usually not long in the middle east, lol) and the west interferes in their affairs, attacks by homegrown terrorists will go on indefinitely unless the cultural divide present inside the country itself is resolved (and it is just not possible to appease an ISIS sympathiser). These lone wolf attacks are the like the first stage of a civil war, and there is a reason why civil wars are considered the worst wars. So no, this is an indication of things getting worse, not better. It will be a much more persistent and ultimately a more deadly problem than a handful of attacks by the likes of Iran ever could be.

[Ghostavo]

So an attack that, going by what has been publicised so far, had nothing to do with IS and all to do with one man's mental health issues, has actually been orchestrated by IS.

Got it.

Bobboau: Ah, I get it! IS is causing terrorism the same way Videogames are causing violence! It's all clear to me now!

(In other words, in case the above sarcasm wasn't coming through loud and clear: Leave the conspiracy theories to the Trumps, please.)

Well, at least one of these opinions seem to be popular enough to be spouted by the German Interior Minister.

[Deathsnake]

And the next one.

This time one woman dead and two injured. the guy is catch by the Police.
http://www.msn.com/de-de/nachrichten/panorama/mann-mit-machete-%E2%80%93-eine-tote-zwei-verletzte/ar-BBuKL2S#image=1

🆘‼️ BREAK: In #Reutlingen (Germany) a man killed with a machete at least one woman and injured more people!

[NGTM-1R]

Current wave of islamic terrorism easily matches or exceeds those past waves.

Doubtful. The current wave doesn't include any just-short-of-3000 bodycount events. Your denial is sure to be forthcoming, but 9/11 doesn't belong to what we look at now; it was the most extreme example of the coordinated terror attack planned and financed from a large organization outside the country the attack took place in, and in many ways was the end of an era for global terrorism. After 9/11 a much higher level of scrutiny and resources began to be applied to them, and a much higher willingness to come at them preemptively with lethal force. Say what you will for the drone campaign, but when people associate talking on a satellite or cellular phone with dying, it's a lot harder to coordinate an operation. If someone were to write a history of Islamic terrorism, 9/11 would be a "then everything changed" and in most cases not in a good way for terrorism.

I've done you the courtesy of proving why you're wrong one way, but there are other reasons waiting in the wings if you have actually studied the issue. You haven't countered any of them. You've simply made a bald statement. I only remember Lockerbie dimly. I was three. But I actually bothered to learn about this stuff before I started talking about it. Show me you've got more than your conviction that this is special.

Also, lone wolf terrorism is much worse, because it is usually homegrown.

But it's not. You're arguing it's much worse because it's harder to defend against. So are gnats compared to mosquitoes. But mosquitoes can give you lifelong illnesses. Gnats can...get in your eye and make you uncomfortable for about a half-hour if you're really unlucky?

You need organization and resources to fight organization and resources. Humans are the dominant species on the planet because we can communicate, organize, and execute complex plans. That is our strength as a species and you need only look at a picture of New York, Berlin, London, or Beijing to understand just how incredibly powerful that ability is.

A "lone wolf" reduces themselves to a level below even than their namesake. At least a wolf is capable of simple communication and planning. These are people who won't even do that. They can kill us, in relatively small numbers. But they can't make us change our minds. Terrorism as a political and social tool works through constant pressure, through the stabbing a day that can't be stopped, through the regular civil defense siren call, through a campaign across months and years. Operating alone, and more or less ensuring they'll never be able to stage a repeat performance, such is impossible.

[Bobboau]

9/11 doesn't belong to what we look at now

You are completely full of ****.

"done you the courtesy"
"actually studied the issue"
and you're arrogant as possible in the process. I'm sorry I don't keep a folder on what credentials everyone has, but what PhD in terror studies do you have?

The panicked flailing of arms the US did after 9/11 did nothing to stop terrorism, the biggest thing we did was give every jihadi on earth a huge flashing bullseye in iraq to go after, THAT is the only reason there were not that many major events in the western world (none in the US iirc) for 8ish years. Making you take off yours shoes and making you split your gallon of liquid into a dozen smaller containers had no affect other than making the populous think they were doing something.

ISIS has the same Wahabi/Salafi ideology behind it the 9/11 attacks had. It is directly descended from the war in Iraq (back when they called themselves Al Qaeda in Iraq). The ware was directly caused by 9/11. yeah, 9/11 was a changing point, but to say that event and current events are unrelated distinct things, that there was some sort of break between then and now, is the height of idiocy. A shift in tactics does not denote a completely different war.  Please tell me you are joking here.

The current strategy of large numbers of small attacks is arguably more effective because it keeps the terror in people's minds constantly at a lower operational cost and with a lower requirement of complexity. complex plans requiring resources are inherently vulnerable, if you can get the same result with something simpler that is less likely to fail due to some of the many complexities going awry, you have a better plan.

[Bobboau]

also. another one:
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-36880758

[NGTM-1R]

You are completely full of ****.

You going to actually refute my explanation of why? No? Okay, you're completely full of **** too. That's the level you want to argue on.

and you're arrogant as possible in the process.

To quote Battuta, maslo's only contribution to most of these topics is that by his ignorance other people might learn something when it's explained to him. I dunno man where were you when he was talking about doing exactly what ISIS wants us to do so that we can beat ISIS? When he could never engage with a point, only slide the goalposts?

The panicked flailing of arms the US did after 9/11 did nothing to stop terrorism, the biggest thing we did was give every jihadi on earth a huge flashing bullseye in iraq to go after, THAT is the only reason there were not that many major events in the western world (none in the US iirc) for 8ish years.

Like, I hate to be the guy to tell you this, but Osama bin-Laden doesn't agree with your analysis. The papers picked up in the raid that killed him and have been declassified are pretty clear about his frustration with his compatriots. He urged them to go global, they went local, he urged them to go big, they went small, he urged them to coordinate, they decentralized (because gathering together exposed them to elimination by drone strike, natch).

Of course, you're also not actually engaging with what I said really did change after 9/11, which was that resources were applied on the intelligence side via NSA and the drone campaign started disrupting leadership and coordination. Rather than argue about what I actually said, you're moving the goalposts to airport security because that makes a more convenient argument for you.

To borrow your own phraseology, you're full of ****. You don't even have the courtesy to pretend otherwise.

ISIS has the same Wahabi/Salafi ideology behind it the 9/11 attacks had.

Actually it doesn't. Remember al-Qaeda still exists and considers ISIS an enemy to the point blood has been shed between the two. ISIS' ideology and theology has crossed a line in al-Qaeda's eyes, taken on apocalyptic nonsense and a disturbing willingness to accuse other Muslims of apostasy on what even al-Qaeda would regard as flimsy pretexts.

I've pointed this out in previous threads.

A shift in tactics does not denote a completely different war.

Go back and read the posts again. I never argued for a completely different war. I argued for a break in methodology, effectiveness as a social and political tool, and in organization and skill level. Eras and wars are not the same thing.

The current strategy of large numbers of small attacks is arguably more effective because it keeps the terror in people's minds constantly at a lower operational cost and with a lower requirement of complexity. complex plans requiring resources are inherently vulnerable, if you can get the same result with something simpler that is less likely to fail due to some of the many complexities going awry, you have a better plan.

This is all true insofar as it goes, but you're making some assumptions that aren't warranted. Europe's going through a sequence right now, but there was no way to know beforehand that it would become a series, or to ensure it did so. America's experience with the lone-wolf ISIS method has been distinctly less continuous, with months elapsing between attacks; global media doesn't make for local experience of fear. Europe is thousands of miles away and they're not particularly real to the average person in front of a television. Leaderless resistance lacks a guiding force to sustain or start it, as the white supremacists (coming full circle now) have learned to their frustration.

[Phantom Hoover]

To quote Battuta, maslo's only contribution to most of these topics is that by his ignorance other people might learn something when it's explained to him.

Yeah but when Battuta posted in these threads he was eloquent and insightful, whereas everything you post comes with a torrent of abusive sophistry.