Truck Drives Through Crowd in Nice, France

[Unified Governments]

The problem has spread far beyond Saudi Arabia.

True, the cancer has spread far beyond. But Saudi Arabia is still the biggest and most malignant tumor.

Interestingly, Saudi Arabia put together a coalition to combat ISIS.

Their own monster child has come back to bite them.

[Patridam]

One in the same, or a subtype?

that's like picking out the paleoconservatives at the RNC
I mean, yeah, they're technically distinct, but also you're at the RNC

Hey, I don't care about the difference between Baptists and Evangelists, so I'm not about to care about Islamic groups besides Sunnis and Shias.

[Geilinor]

A subtype.

Salafists are another dangerous subtype

They're actually very similar. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salafi_movement Wahabbis prefer to call themselves Salafis.

[Yumyumsuppertime]

I'd prefer you not to be a cheap-shot artist and then whine endlessly if others do the same. Seeing it go on for so long grows tiresome after a while. Especially when you're so uncreative.

I'm not a cheap shot artist or do I try to be. The Left is full of cheap shot mantra.... So much that I cannot comprehend.

No, he's not accusing you of being a cheap shot artist. He's accusing me of hypocrisy for taking my own cheap shots in the past, but criticizing you for it. You're in the clear on this.

[IndependentGreenland]

Salafists are another dangerous subtype

They're actually the same. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salafi_movement Wahabbis prefer to call themselves Salafis.

You learn something new everyday!

[The East Marches]

Perhaps at the moment yes. Geo-politically in the long run, they are the same. The Shia are the ones whose radicalism caused so much shit in Iraq. They are trouble as well.

Iraq is not the Muslim world at large. Clearly, Iran urges Saudi Arabia forward in a never ending show-down, but Shia Islam is a minority and less of a threat, simply due to its numbers.

Iraq may not be the Muslim world at large but it is at the center of the Middle East. Two fanatical groups going all out for influence between the Saudis and the Iranians. Both are bad will destabilize things. You are right there are more Sunnis, I don't believe this precludes the Shia from being an equal threat in the future should we anger the puppet masters in Iran. They are merely laying low because we are co-belligerents at the moment.

[Olerand]

But it is utterly meaningless when an IS fanatic drives into a crowd, who probably included Muslims too. You cannot coexist with such a person, and here, there is only him and the crowd. Who should coexist? Coexisting with fanatical Islam is impossible, clearly. So who's supposed to be coexisting?

The message is that you co-exist with vast majority of Muslims that live their lives like any other person of any other kind of religious persuasion who's trying to live comfortably and without incident. That you don't call any Muslim you meet a terrorist. That you don't terrorize them with threats and beatings. That you defend their right to practice their religion peacefully like you would a Christian or a Jew.

The message is out of place. This was a terrorist attack. There is the terrorist and the crowd. There is no coexistence between the two. At best, this is out of place, at worst, they are conflating this terrorist with all Muslims.

True, the cancer has spread far beyond. But Saudi Arabia is still the biggest and most malignant tumor.

Interestingly, Saudi Arabia put together a coalition to combat ISIS.

Their own monster child has come back to bite them.

A show for Westerners. As it did that, it and its coalition members disengaged from fighting the IS to fight the Shia and Iran-backed Houthis in Yemen.

[Dameth]

I think you're overselling us. We can't "take the fight into enemy territory". Nor should we. This is the Arab world's fight. I now regret shielding them from it.

If you propose we pull back from Syria, I'd give you a point for consistancy, but do you think this is reasonable ? If we can't attack, what can we do. Raising emergency level does not work, and it's not like the international weeping campaign will do any good.

[IndependentGreenland]

I'm not a cheap shot artist or do I try to be. The Left is full of cheap shot mantra.... So much that I cannot comprehend.

No, he's not accusing you of being a cheap shot artist. He's accusing me of hypocrisy for taking my own cheap shots in the past, but criticizing you for it. You're in the clear on this.

Ok thanks

[Eol Sha]

Wahhabis are Sunnis.

One in the same, or a subtype?

Sect would be a better term, I think. Their ideology is grounded in the Sunni interpretation of the Quran and various other Islamic holy texts.

[Salus Maior]

That's backwards and kind of stupid to be frank. You can't tell people to not feel sad for the deaths of innocent people in a country they're fond of.

I can't tell you what to do. Just realize people weeping on our behalf is irritating and makes you appear weak af.

That's easier said than done. And in that case I would suggest that France actually do more than just bombing which isn't nearly as effective.

That's sensible. I would not mind a big bad retributive strike. Or at least some financial help for local militias. Let's give the YPG some guns if we can't land more boots. They want to fight, let's make it happen.

Oh please, with the "can't appear weak" machismo. That's vain and pointless. You can accept that things are tragic while remaining confident in the strength of your country. However you decide to define "strength", whether it's spiritually or militarily.

It'd be great if someone supported the Kurds. Give them a chance of independence after the war.

[Olerand]

Iraq is not the Muslim world at large. Clearly, Iran urges Saudi Arabia forward in a never ending show-down, but Shia Islam is a minority and less of a threat, simply due to its numbers.

Iraq may not be the Muslim world at large but it is at the center of the Middle East. Two fanatical groups going all out for influence between the Saudis and the Iranians. Both are bad will destabilize things. You are right there are more Sunnis, I don't believe this precludes the Shia from being an equal threat in the future should we anger the puppet masters in Iran. They are merely laying low because we are co-belligerents at the moment.

They don't have the capabilities of the Sunnis, and never will. If there was no problem with Sunni Islam, and it was only the Shia who were so retrograde and radicalized, there wouldn't even be any terrorist attacks in the West or the vast majority of the Muslim world.

[Eol Sha]

The message is that you co-exist with vast majority of Muslims that live their lives like any other person of any other kind of religious persuasion who's trying to live comfortably and without incident. That you don't call any Muslim you meet a terrorist. That you don't terrorize them with threats and beatings. That you defend their right to practice their religion peacefully like you would a Christian or a Jew.

The message is out of place. This was a terrorist attack. There is the terrorist and the crowd. There is no coexistence between the two. At best, this is out of place, at worst, they are conflating this terrorist with all Muslims.

Given how quickly some people are to blame all Muslims for the actions of a few, I understand why people say it. I don't really think any minds are changed, but I understand it nonetheless.

[The East Marches]

Iraq may not be the Muslim world at large but it is at the center of the Middle East. Two fanatical groups going all out for influence between the Saudis and the Iranians. Both are bad will destabilize things. You are right there are more Sunnis, I don't believe this precludes the Shia from being an equal threat in the future should we anger the puppet masters in Iran. They are merely laying low because we are co-belligerents at the moment.

They don't have the capabilities of the Sunnis, and never will. If there was no problem with Sunni Islam, and it was only the Shia who were so retrograde and radicalized, there wouldn't even be any terrorist attacks in the West or the vast majority of the Muslim world.

I 100% disagree with you. They have proven willing to give arms to Sunni groups too if it gets their goals met. Though I may agree on the terror attacks in the West. There would not be as many as most those in the West are not Shia.

[Olerand]

I think you're overselling us. We can't "take the fight into enemy territory". Nor should we. This is the Arab world's fight. I now regret shielding them from it.

If you propose we pull back from Syria, I'd give you a point for consistancy, but do you think this is reasonable ? If we can't attack, what can we do. Raising emergency level does not work, and it's not like the international weeping campaign will do any good.

I don't think we should pull back, I think we should amplify our support for the Kurds. All that we can do other than that is urge the Arabs to fight the IS. I regret that we limited the IS' expansion however, since its borders reaching Saudi Arabia might have just jolted the Arabo-Islamic world into reality. At the cost of much bloodshed of course, but it could have perhaps sealed this coffin once and for all.

[IndependentGreenland]

Iraq may not be the Muslim world at large but it is at the center of the Middle East. Two fanatical groups going all out for influence between the Saudis and the Iranians. Both are bad will destabilize things. You are right there are more Sunnis, I don't believe this precludes the Shia from being an equal threat in the future should we anger the puppet masters in Iran. They are merely laying low because we are co-belligerents at the moment.

They don't have the capabilities of the Sunnis, and never will. If there was no problem with Sunni Islam, and it was only the Shia who were so retrograde and radicalized, there wouldn't even be any terrorist attacks in the West or the vast majority of the Muslim world.

And that's why we should support Assad and the Shias instead of Salafist Sunnis who are fighting for a "Free" Syria. Most of their weapons end up falling in the hands of ISIS.

[Dameth]

Oh please, with the "can't appear weak" machismo. That's vain and pointless. You can accept that things are tragic while remaining confident in the strength of your country. However you decide to define "strength", whether it's spiritually or militarily.

I'm just tired of this "Je suis Charlie" bullshit. I mean, ffs. Do that service to us. No more.
Pretty please.

It'd be great if someone supported the Kurds. Give them a chance of independence after the war.

That's a program I can get behind. The kurds definitely proven themselves. We need to have some serious talk with turkey real soon.

[Novus America]

Wahhabis are Sunnis.

One in the same, or a subtype?

Subtype, all Wahhabis are Sunnis. Not all Sunnis are Wahhabis.

[Salus Maior]

And that's why we should support Assad and the Shias instead of Salafist Sunnis who are fighting for a "Free" Syria.

HAH....Assad..."Free Syria". Nice one.

You do realize he actively targets his own civilians, right? And is responsible for the civil war in his own country?

[Olerand]

They don't have the capabilities of the Sunnis, and never will. If there was no problem with Sunni Islam, and it was only the Shia who were so retrograde and radicalized, there wouldn't even be any terrorist attacks in the West or the vast majority of the Muslim world.

I 100% disagree with you. They have proven willing to give arms to Sunni groups too if it gets their goals met. Though I may agree on the terror attacks in the West. There would not be as many as most those in the West are not Shia.

Without Sunni radicalism, there would be no Sunni groups to give weapons to. Iran would be effectively contained.

[Olerand]

They don't have the capabilities of the Sunnis, and never will. If there was no problem with Sunni Islam, and it was only the Shia who were so retrograde and radicalized, there wouldn't even be any terrorist attacks in the West or the vast majority of the Muslim world.

And that's why we should support Assad and the Shias instead of Salafist Sunnis who are fighting for a "Free" Syria. Most of their weapons end up falling in the hands of ISIS.

I'd rather we support the Kurds.

[IndependentGreenland]

And that's why we should support Assad and the Shias instead of Salafist Sunnis who are fighting for a "Free" Syria.

HAH....Assad..."Free Syria". Nice one.

You do realize he actively targets his own civilians, right?

Only ISIS and rebel supporters. Also I find it hard to believe that he gassed his civilians like Hussein or Gaddafi.

[Unified Governments]

And that's why we should support Assad and the Shias instead of Salafist Sunnis who are fighting for a "Free" Syria.

HAH....Assad..."Free Syria". Nice one.

You do realize he actively targets his own civilians, right?

A common trait among dictators.

[Salus Maior]

HAH....Assad..."Free Syria". Nice one.

You do realize he actively targets his own civilians, right?

A common trait among dictators.

Which is why he's not really an option for a better Syria post-war.

Especially considering he's the cause of the Civil War that allowed ISIS to get stronger in the first place.

[Republic of Wijaya]

Iraq is not the Muslim world at large. Clearly, Iran urges Saudi Arabia forward in a never ending show-down, but Shia Islam is a minority and less of a threat, simply due to its numbers.

Iraq may not be the Muslim world at large but it is at the center of the Middle East. Two fanatical groups going all out for influence between the Saudis and the Iranians. Both are bad will destabilize things. You are right there are more Sunnis, I don't believe this precludes the Shia from being an equal threat in the future should we anger the puppet masters in Iran. They are merely laying low because we are co-belligerents at the moment.

The Problem is not about Islam Religion. This Problem just about Power and Who will lose.
And Fact The Largest Nation with Islam Population is Indonesia. Indonesia as the Largest Islam Population in the World they have peace with another