What ISIS Really Wants (The Atlantic)

[onager]

Very interesting article by Graeme Wood, and one of the best I've read explaining the core beliefs of ISIS:

Its rise to power is less like the triumph of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt (a group whose leaders the Islamic State considers apostates) than like the realization of a dystopian alternate reality in which David Koresh or Jim Jones survived to wield absolute power over not just a few hundred people, but some 8 million.

In fact, much of what the group does looks nonsensical except in light of a sincere, carefully considered commitment to returning civilization to a seventh-century legal environment, and ultimately to bringing about the apocalypse...

The reality is that the Islamic State is Islamic. Very Islamic. Yes, it has attracted psychopaths and adventure seekers, drawn largely from the disaffected populations of the Middle East and Europe. But the religion preached by its most ardent followers derives from coherent and even learned interpretations of Islam.

http://www.theatlantic.com/features/archive/2015/02/what-isis-really-wants/384980/

Rebuttal and counter-rebuttal at Raw Story. American Muslim leader denounced the article as "wrong." But as Wood points out, he didn't say specifically WHAT Wood got wrong:

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2015/02/americas-most-prominent-muslim-says-the-atlantic-is-doing-pr-for-isis/

[TexasTowelie]

1. Why is this thread in the A&A group?

I think that the Muslim/Islam group or the Religion group might be more appropriate.

[onager]

2. Feel free to re-post it anywhere you wish.

As to why it's here - mostly because this is where I hang out.

[TexasTowelie]

12. Fair enough.

After reading the SOP for this group I can understand why it can be considered relevant for this group.

[AlbertCat]

41. As to why it's here

Everyone's head won't explode after the 1st 3 words.

It can actually be discussed here.

[skepticscott]

3. Maybe it's because atheists are interested

in attempts to impose theocratic governance.

[Cartoonist]

4. To avoid an alert

Some people are touchy in protected groups. Don't dare try saying anything negative about religion in the interfaith group regardless what the SOP says.

[onager]

8. Yep, and I've already been torpedoed in this group today.

Hey, are all nautical references banned yet?

Thanks to progressoid for posting my jury results in the other thread. The one where I can't post because, you know, a hide.

[progressoid]

19. tsk tsk tsk

I hope you have learned your lesson!




I was juror 2, 4, or 5. (I didn't have time to "add an explanation&quot

[Warren Stupidity]

5. because we like to discuss this sort of stuff here.

We actually tend to have much more interesting discussions on issues like this here, rather than in the toxic waste dump forum, where what we have instead is endless snark, veiled insults, and anything but actual discussions.

Thanks for the question though. Perhaps you should alert on the op as inappropriate for the forum and see what the hosts think.

Or you could simply discuss the issue.

[TexasTowelie]

10. I have no reason to alert on the thread,

it just seemed like it was in a group where it did not belong. Thanks for your reply.

[Warren Stupidity]

13. So you just felt the urge to admonish the op?

I just can't imagine wandering into a group I rarely participate in and demanding to know why something which is actually completely on topic was being posted there. Did you, for example, read the SOP before you posted?

Here:

A place where atheists and agnostics can engage in frank discussions about the effects of religion on politics, free of debate about the existence of a deity or deities.

[TexasTowelie]

14. No, I did not read the SOP before I posted.

It seemed unusual for the topic to be discussed in this group though.

I was not admonishing the poster who made the OP; however, I notice that some of the people in this group have a tendency to over react whenever someone asks a question. I did not intend to offend anyone.

Have a good day.

[Act_of_Reparation]

15. Overreact? That's rich.

You don't think it slightly presumptuous to take it upon yourself to question whether a post in a forum in which you rarely participate is on-topic? Even if you had read the SOP, what business is it of yours what the people who frequently post here choose to discuss?

We have hosts, and I think all of us who participate here regularly agree they do a fine job on their own. They don't need your help.

To answer the second part of your question, as to why this was not posted in the Islam group: I would have to guess it is because we know better than to take a dump on someone's safe haven... it is a courtesy we rarely see reciprocated here.

[TexasTowelie]

16. The harshness of your response proves my point.

It is not my business as to what it is discussed in this group because I do not own DU. I merely felt it was odd to discuss Islam in the A&A group so for you to be snippy with me after I said that I did not mean to offend is also rich.

Please continue your discussion without me. I was interested in the topic and thought it should be in a different group than this one. By posting the article in this group I expect that the discussion will be quite limited which defeats the purpose of having a discussion board.

[Warren Stupidity]

18. actually the discussions here, except when we get tone trolled,

are generally more interesting and fruitful than any other forum, as they do not degenerate into theist vs atheist shit flinging orangutan raves.

[PassingFair]

40. "By posting the article in this group I expect that the discussion will be quite limited ...."

"By posting the article in this group I expect that the discussion will be quite limited which defeats the purpose of having a discussion board."


What?

[Warren Stupidity]

17. unusual how?

Look at the other posts here. In what way is this particular op unusual?

I realize you may not think you were admonishing anyone, but tone on the internet is real tricky, and discussing an op by asking why it was posted where it was posted is real difficult to do without coming off the wrong way.

I notice that some of the people in this group have a tendency to over react whenever someone asks a question.

Oh we have a regular parade of alert nannies, sock puppets, and presumptuous visitors who show up not to participate so much as to tell us how we should participate. Your question fit right into that bucket. You may or may not have known that, but that is how your question was going to be experienced.

[TexasTowelie]

21. Warren,

By "unusual" I meant discussing a faith-based topic within the A&A group.

I realize that this is a safe haven group, but I think that it does not serve any group well when someone from outside the group asks a seemingly innocuous question (which I now realize was "loaded" from the perspective of other people). While I was raised as a Christian, there are also times that I'm more agnostic about questions of faith. It would be helpful to be able to participate in a group where I could discuss those ideas. I may be incorrect since I'm not an active participant within the group, but the group does seem to be dominated by atheists over agnostics.

I apologize for the perceived tone of my question, but it seemed legitimate to ask in my opinion. I left it to other members of the group to decide whether to alert on the thread because I certainly did not wish to tell other how to participate within the group.

I hope that clarifies why I asked the question initially and after reading the SOP for the group I can see why the OP can be posted here.

Sincerely,

TxT

[Warren Stupidity]

26. You might try actually discussing issues here instead of bringing the meta.

You might be pleasantly surprised.

[EvolveOrConvolve]

37. Actually, faith-based topics are the almost exclusive content of A&A

We just happen to be, in general, on the other side of the faith equation. You'll actually probably find the most rational discussion of Islam (and in particular, incidents like those in Paris). We lie somewhere between the mouth-breathing, moronic conservative "go to war with and kill all the Muslims" rhetoric and the sometimes misguided liberals on our side that insist that Islam has nothing to do with these sorts of terror attacks.

[mountain grammy]

45. I'm not offended, TT, feel free to drop in anytime.

I tend to like your posts and know you meant no offense.

I've read this article often, having bookmarked it months ago. I just re-read it after the Paris attacks. It's challenging me to look at this problem in ways I really don't want to. End timers, Muslim or otherwise, scare me. They have nothing to lose.

[Act_of_Reparation]

7. Reading is hard.

The A&A Group's Statement of Purpose:

A place where atheists and agnostics can engage in frank discussions about the effects of religion on politics, free of debate about the existence of a deity or deities.

Any questions?

[TexasTowelie]

11. See post #10. nt

[LiberalAndProud]

22. Gracious, you've been harshed!

Is that a word? If it's not, I just coined it.


Just wanted to say I didn't take offense. TT

[TexasTowelie]

23. Thank you.

I thought that it was an innocuous question and suggestion, but I realize and understand why others could think otherwise. Please attribute it to foot-in-mouth disease.

[Warren Stupidity]

27. harshed has a long history.

[LiberalAndProud]

28. I thought so.

[AlbertCat]

42. Just wanted to say I didn't take offense.

Me neither.

And, I'm sure some posts sound more harsh than they really are intended. That's a feature of message boards.

But notice how you weren't instantly banned. Go post it in some other safe groups and see what happens.

[RussBLib]

38. TT, just a quick note

I think your head is in the right place, but I think you have been in and out of this group long enough to know that Onager, the poster of the OP, is a long-time and well-respected member of this group. Don't you think it would be rather unlikely that Onager would violate the terms or intent of this group?

Now, if an unknown someone with close to zero posts had posted this OP here, your question would be much more valid.

IOW, take the actual poster into consideration.

[mountain grammy]

6. I don't care where it's posted, it's important work.

Thanks for posting. I've bookmarked for further reference.

Since many non believers are legitimately concerned about religious rule, I feel the post is appropriate here.

[Curmudgeoness]

9. We all know that ISIS's intent

is to bring fundamentalist and extreme Islam to the Middle East, and beyond. These are the "true believers" who wish to impose their brand of Islam on all Muslims as well as wipe the infidels off the face of the earth. Anyone who does not think this is the purpose of their actions is deluding themselves.

It really should fall upon the moderate Muslims, those who say that ISIS does not speak for them regarding Islam, to stop them. From what I am told, these are a minority of extremists and do not represent Islam, so it is time for the people who are saying this to fight back against them. The same goes with the Taliban. Stop giving them power and respectability.

[AlbertCat]

43. Salvation religions..... ugh...

All the world must be Islam


All the world must be Christendom.


Sorry guys.... never gonna happen. They can't even decide what's "correct" among themselves!


Give it up already!

[onager]

20. I'd rather not make enemies unnecessarily.

T.T. may not post here a lot, but I have seen them participating in this group and never causing trouble, AFAIK.

I know we're all a mite touchy from looking over our shoulders for the Hall Monitors these days. But I'd rather give people the benefit of the doubt until they prove otherwise. Like those who barge in here calling us racists and haters - they can FOAD.

T.T., sorry about the splash damage. I think you were just curious about why the post was here and asked a reasonable question.

[TexasTowelie]

24. Thank you onager.

I found the articles to be quite interesting.

[LiberalAndProud]

25. It's only "wrong" in the sense that not all Muslims believe in the armageddon prophecy,

a perfect mirror of their Christian cousins.

Just because some religious folks do not think we should catapult head first into the end times, it doesn't mean there aren't a whole lot of true believers who abso-fucking-lutely do.

[edhopper]

29. Why do they want

The Atlantic Ocean, I didn't know they had a navy?

[onager]

30. Well, they want the whole world.

But your question started me wondering about how they do intend to expand.

I read some Internet posts by ISIS members who've actually gone there. They say ISIS is Paradise: every brother gets a free house, clothing, etc. Wood mentions that in the article - it's mandatory for their government to provide those things, under the form of Islam they are trying to incorporate.

But that just means their government stole all that stuff from other people and is re-distributing it to the "brothers." Leaving out the Islamic hocus-pocus, that's something all conquerors routinely do. The same thing happened when Yugoslavia fell apart - apply some ethnic cleansing to the hated minority, then confiscate their property and give it to your guys.

At some point, ISIS will run out of stuff they can steal. Along with the stockpiles of weapons and ammo left in Saddam-era Iraq.

And as you mention about their navy - how do they support their military logistically? How do they hope to have an air force (or navy)? Modern weapons systems require big stockpiles of spare parts, a supply chain to replace those parts, and trained technicians to maintain/repair the systems. Where does all that come from?

So far, they're getting some funding thru illegal oil sales. That can't last forever, either.

And speaking of funding - they plan to establish a new economic order in the Caliphate. Modern currency systems are considered haram (forbidden).

Only money directly backed by gold and silver is halal (allowed). Yeah, that should work out well. Maybe we can send Ron Paul over to advise them on goldbuggery.

As always, I have no solutions and am just randomly spinning both of my brain cells. But the "navy" remark just got me wondering.

[edhopper]

31. I think due to the things you mentioned

and the harshness of their behavior, turning the World against them, they will be short lived or isolated to a small pocket.

[Act_of_Reparation]

32. If history has taught us anything, it is that conquering a nation is easy...

...but holding onto it can be really hard.

Sooner or later, ISIS is going to wind up pissing on a pair of boots that don't belong to an ineffectual government wrecked by corruption and sectarian conflict, and they're probably going to get their asses beat.

I just worry for those who suffer under them in the meantime.

[HuckleB]

33. Kick for current importance.

[RussBLib]

34. I wonder, if ISIS acquired nukes....

...would they happily use them to try to wipe out all us heathens?

I haven't read the Atlantic story yet, but will, but if they want to "take over" every square inch of the planet for their "paradise" they are more insane than I imagined. And as for a "paradise" as Onager mentioned, how do the women really feel about that?

[haikugal]

35. I don't think anyone asks them, they're basically property.

[RussBLib]

36. right. you may have some women who prefer being behind the veil

but that's no reason to put them ALL behind the veil.

The way Islam, and especially radical Islam, treats women should disqualify it from the global stage. We shouldn't even be paying it lip service.

I'm mostly a pacifist, but these barbaric pieces of ISIS shit need to be wiped. Out.

[RussBLib]

39. I'm sorry, but ISIS is Islamic

They quote from the Koran; they use the Koran to justify their actions; it's all about Islam. They even use it in their name: Islamic State of Syria.

Just because they may be an extreme version of Islam does not make them non-Islamic, in the same sense that the extreme elements of Christianity are still linked to Christianity.

I really don't understand this hesitation to proclaim that ISIS is Islamic.

You know, we've had religious wars throughout the last 2,000 years. One more doesn't seem like the end of the world, no matter how much it may play into their apocalyptic vision. This type of indiscriminate killing cannot go unanswered.

[Duppers]

44. when will ISIS come to blows with their funders, the House of Saud?

As long as the oil money continues to flow?

I'm not trying to divert the discussion from the importance of religion. Just wish the world would convert to alternative energies and cut off this religion's money source.

My hat's off to this poster, olegramps:

"The Islamists' sole determination is to impose their religion on every living man, woman and child. They view anyone who opposes their goal to establish a theocracy as an enemy of their faith and an enemy worthy of death.
We are not immune to this threat. It is little different than what the extreme right wing Republicans preach when they want to make their interpretation of the Judeo-Christian teachings the law of the land. This message is preached daily by the Christian Ayatollahs who are intent of destroying secular government which they view as un-godly atheism.
Superstitious beliefs are the plague of mankind and the real enemy of peace."

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=7347114

[mountain grammy]

46. It's all in their books.

The rapture.