Is communism behind radical Islam?

[Rojava Free State]

9/11 are some examples of US-planned events.

Good joke, my dude.

I'm dead, play this at my funeral:
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Rf-5_o3-oxY

[East African Unitary State]

Well, unfortunately that's not a joke : (

That’s true. A joke has to be funny.

Not true. See: Puns

[Tokora]

The real cause are the Saudis. The Soviets only tried to take advantage of the chaos left by imperialism and the West was stupid enough to think that the only counter was funding an antisemitic theocracy second in oppressiveness only to North Korea.

[Trollzyn the Infinite]

second in oppressiveness only to North Korea.

lmao

That Beijing propaganda working wonders, it seems.

[Luminesa]

Maybe you don’t need to act like a prick.


Bullshit.


Also bullshit


Dude we fucking trained OBL. We gave them the tools needed to form AQ and then we left them high and dry.


That’s a bullshit and fucking stupid idea

1:
Ah the ad hominems even though I've not been rude at all.
2 and 3:
Americans tend to overrate their impact on conflicts. I debated this on your stance with a friend and he pulled up many articles and made me realize I was wrong. I need to find those articles for the evidence again, as I did not save them as I never believed it would come up.
4: It is, read the Tragedy of Great Power Politics, Diplomacy, The Might of Nations, the Barbarian Invasions of Rome, etc.

Tragedy can be inevitable, sometimes-in fact a lot of times-political decisions due to many various factors are also inevitable.
Those decisions start a chain reaction.

ISIS was also inevitable, as was the Ottoman Empire's fall which started what would be the catalyst for ISIS.
Giving the whole region to the Arabs wouldn't have really helped us as This guy realized after he initially believed it would.
The Ottoman's rise was also inevitable, as were the Turkic migrations.

Essentially, the world is not as short-term effects as people think it is, my study of history, the long timeline of countries and world politics-even without those books mind you and way before-made me come to understand that which shaped this view, reading many history books and wikipedia articles and studying stuff historians said.

So I'm sorry, but it's true. We can fight for change, and not be doomed to nihilism and fight against the tide of history as we cannot know what will happen and what is inevitable, but we must understand that history is history for a reason, and if it could have gone a different way, it very likely would have.

It is our job to fight for what we see as the positive change and learn from history not blame our ancestors, but we can harshly criticize evil people i.e. the Nazis and Slavers.

I wouldn’t say ISIS was inevitable. ISIS was the result of a few factors, one of them being the power-vacuum which was not filled after Saddam Hussein’s execution in 2004. If we had found some way to stabilize that region, we could have at least mitigated ISIS’s development. 9/11 also very easily could have been avoided if Bill Clinton had taken the initiative to do stamp-out terrorists in the 90’s. The rise of the Mujahideen from a group of backwater fighters to the powerful force they are now would not have happened to such a degree, either, without American funding. We have had a lot of influence in modern history, and it would be a mistake to underplay it. With great power comes great responsibility, as Uncle Ben once said, and also great sorrow if we do not use our power responsibly.

[El-Amin Caliphate]

Actually the United States organized what would become al qaeda to attack the communists, so it's really America's fault for radical Islam spreading. We also are friends with the Saudis and armed numerous jihadists in Syria and libya, but yeah, totally the commies ' fault

I don't know of any jihaadists in Libya, and the only ones I know of that are legitimate jihadists in Syria are either Ahraarush-Shaam or Tahrirush-Shaam (I always get their names mixed up, I think I'm referring to the latter tho)

[Al Mumtahanah]

Taliban literally stops 99% of heroin trade in the country
U.S. topples them, heroin starts back up
Taliban deny supporting it (proven track record) in your own article
America: SHUSH! It is your doing!

Taliban sold poppies during that one year they enforced a ban on it, then allowed farmers to farm it again after the September 11th attacks but before the American Invasion. Plus I would take what a bunch of murdering arseholes say with quite a large grain of salt.

I don't get any of your reasoning here, the Taliban are unequivocally bad.

The U.S. military murders and the U.S. government has a track record of supporting Nicarguan cartels and lying to their own people and experimenting on them with drugs. I am supposed to take their word the Taliban is a heroin cartel despite the Taliban's track record of fighting the war on drugs far more zealously than the U.S. and despite Taliban's strong denials? I'm sorry, being white just doesn't carry the credibility it used to.

[El-Amin Caliphate]

Taliban sold poppies during that one year they enforced a ban on it, then allowed farmers to farm it again after the September 11th attacks but before the American Invasion. Plus I would take what a bunch of murdering arseholes say with quite a large grain of salt.

I don't get any of your reasoning here, the Taliban are unequivocally bad.

The U.S. military murders and the U.S. government has a track record of supporting Nicarguan cartels and lying to their own people and experimenting on them with drugs. I am supposed to take their word the Taliban is a heroin cartel despite the Taliban's track record of fighting the war on drugs far more zealously than the U.S. and despite Taliban's strong denials? I'm sorry, being white just doesn't carry the credibility it used to.

What does being white have to do with anything? Also, you used whataboutism which is a logical fallacy.

[Rojava Free State]

Taliban sold poppies during that one year they enforced a ban on it, then allowed farmers to farm it again after the September 11th attacks but before the American Invasion. Plus I would take what a bunch of murdering arseholes say with quite a large grain of salt.

I don't get any of your reasoning here, the Taliban are unequivocally bad.

The U.S. military murders and the U.S. government has a track record of supporting Nicarguan cartels and lying to their own people and experimenting on them with drugs. I am supposed to take their word the Taliban is a heroin cartel despite the Taliban's track record of fighting the war on drugs far more zealously than the U.S. and despite Taliban's strong denials? I'm sorry, being white just doesn't carry the credibility it used to.

It really isn't even that. the taliban was an ally of America till it helped al qaeda attack us. When Russians were dying, it was cool. When Afghan people died, it's alright. Americans die and then it's a problem

[Thermodolia]

Maybe you don’t need to act like a prick.


Bullshit.


Also bullshit


Dude we fucking trained OBL. We gave them the tools needed to form AQ and then we left them high and dry.


That’s a bullshit and fucking stupid idea

1:
Ah the ad hominems even though I've not been rude at all.

Oh right accusing me of using a logical fallacy when I wasn’t, talking down to me, and acting like I don’t know any better is definitely not fucking rude.

2 and 3:
Americans tend to overrate their impact on conflicts. I debated this on your stance with a friend and he pulled up many articles and made me realize I was wrong. I need to find those articles for the evidence again, as I did not save them as I never believed it would come up.

Dude we literally funded and trained the Mujahideen and what would become the AQ leadership. That’s not overstating our impact that’s a fucking fact.

4: It is, read the Tragedy of Great Power Politics, Diplomacy, The Might of Nations, the Barbarian Invasions of Rome, etc.

Tragedy can be inevitable, sometimes-in fact a lot of times-political decisions due to many various factors are also inevitable.
Those decisions start a chain reaction.

I believe that’s bullshit. Tragedy isn’t inevitable. That’s a bullshit excuse to rationalize doing nothing

ISIS was also inevitable, as was the Ottoman Empire's fall which started what would be the catalyst for ISIS.
Giving the whole region to the Arabs wouldn't have really helped us as This guy realized after he initially believed it would.

Fucking bullshit. ISIS was not inevitable. It only came around after we took out Saddam. Something we never should have done.

The Ottoman's rise was also inevitable, as were the Turkic migrations.

Only because you assume they are.

Essentially, the world is not as short-term effects as people think it is, my study of history, the long timeline of countries and world politics-even without those books mind you and way before-made me come to understand that which shaped this view, reading many history books and wikipedia articles and studying stuff historians said.

Your research is faulty. Things are not inevitable. That’s utterly stupid to believe so.

So I'm sorry, but it's true.

It’s not. It’s fake ass shit just like the “End of history” bullshit

We can fight for change, and not be doomed to nihilism and fight against the tide of history as we cannot know what will happen and what is inevitable, but we must understand that history is history for a reason, and if it could have gone a different way, it very likely would have.

You claim things are inevitable yet you only say they are after they happen which leads me to say it’s a bullshit ideology and belief system

It is our job to fight for what we see as the positive change and learn from history not blame our ancestors, but we can harshly criticize evil people i.e. the Nazis and Slavers.

Fuck that. We can and should blame our ancestors. We are justified in blaming the formation of AQ on Reagan and Co.

[Romanian-Slavia]

Well, unfortunately that's not a joke : (

Yes it is. And a tired one that has been so over told that not even a first grade class would find it amusing.

That's what CIA wants you to believe, but CIA support Saudi-Mujahedeen insurgency in Afghanistan commanded by Osama Bin Laden during the 80's. At the 9/11 attack 15 out of the 19 hijackers were Saudis (US strong ally), but nobody from Afghanistan. Why US invaded Afghanistan less than a month later in the name of the so-called "war on terrorism" which in the reality is a "war of Middle-Eastern resources".

[Bombadil]

For some bizarre reason I receive the Teaparty newsletter, it's full of nutty theories like this. It's like looking over the horizon to see what's coming along for discussion.

Another strand of all this will culminate in how Google is fixing to deny Trump the presidency.

[Trollzyn the Infinite]

Yes it is. And a tired one that has been so over told that not even a first grade class would find it amusing.

That's what CIA wants you to believe, but CIA support Saudi-Mujahedeen insurgency in Afghanistan commanded by Osama Bin Laden during the 80's. At the 9/11 attack 15 out of the 19 hijackers were Saudis (US strong ally), but nobody from Afghanistan. Why US invaded Afghanistan less than a month later in the name of the so-called "war on terrorism" which in the reality is a "war of Middle-Eastern resources".

1. These events were a decade apart; quite a lot changes in a decade.
2. The Saudis don't like us and never have; they're our "allies" because we let them exert influence over the region at the expense of Iran - their sworn enemy.
3. The Taliban supported Al-Qaeda, literally everyone knows this. They were in bed together for fucking years. Taking out an Al-Qaeda ally helps us immeasurably.
4. There is no oil in Afghanistan.

[Thermodolia]

That's what CIA wants you to believe, but CIA support Saudi-Mujahedeen insurgency in Afghanistan commanded by Osama Bin Laden during the 80's. At the 9/11 attack 15 out of the 19 hijackers were Saudis (US strong ally), but nobody from Afghanistan. Why US invaded Afghanistan less than a month later in the name of the so-called "war on terrorism" which in the reality is a "war of Middle-Eastern resources".

1. These events were a decade apart; quite a lot changes in a decade.
2. The Saudis don't like us and never have; they're our "allies" because we let them exert influence over the region at the expense of Iran - their sworn enemy.
3. The Taliban supported Al-Qaeda, literally everyone knows this. They were in bed together for fucking years. Taking out an Al-Qaeda ally helps us immeasurably.
4. There is no oil in Afghanistan.

There wouldn’t have been a taliban if we let the Soviets win in Afghanistan

[Heloin]

The U.S. military murders and the U.S. government has a track record of supporting Nicarguan cartels and lying to their own people and experimenting on them with drugs. I am supposed to take their word the Taliban is a heroin cartel despite the Taliban's track record of fighting the war on drugs far more zealously than the U.S. and despite Taliban's strong denials? I'm sorry, being white just doesn't carry the credibility it used to.

What does being white have to do with anything? Also, you used whataboutism which is a logical fallacy.

Look at me I'm white and nerdy. I'm not sure what it has to do with anything but Mumta has decided to defend the Taliban so I guess calling me whitey is the best we can hope for as a counter argument.

Yes it is. And a tired one that has been so over told that not even a first grade class would find it amusing.

That's what CIA wants you to believe, but CIA support Saudi-Mujahedeen insurgency in Afghanistan commanded by Osama Bin Laden during the 80's. At the 9/11 attack 15 out of the 19 hijackers were Saudis (US strong ally), but nobody from Afghanistan. Why US invaded Afghanistan less than a month later in the name of the so-called "war on terrorism" which in the reality is a "war of Middle-Eastern resources".

Sure, all those Afghani resources like... Heroin.

[Trollzyn the Infinite]

1. These events were a decade apart; quite a lot changes in a decade.
2. The Saudis don't like us and never have; they're our "allies" because we let them exert influence over the region at the expense of Iran - their sworn enemy.
3. The Taliban supported Al-Qaeda, literally everyone knows this. They were in bed together for fucking years. Taking out an Al-Qaeda ally helps us immeasurably.
4. There is no oil in Afghanistan.

There wouldn’t have been a taliban if we let the Soviets win in Afghanistan

Here we have an example of "Missing the Point"; take pictures, kids!

[Al Mumtahanah]

The U.S. military murders and the U.S. government has a track record of supporting Nicarguan cartels and lying to their own people and experimenting on them with drugs. I am supposed to take their word the Taliban is a heroin cartel despite the Taliban's track record of fighting the war on drugs far more zealously than the U.S. and despite Taliban's strong denials? I'm sorry, being white just doesn't carry the credibility it used to.

What does being white have to do with anything? Also, you used whataboutism which is a logical fallacy.

Being white is the implied basis for credibility.

I didn't use whataboutism, I don't consider the Taliban murdering assholes unless we are talking about the Pakistani Taliban.

[Heloin]

What does being white have to do with anything? Also, you used whataboutism which is a logical fallacy.

Being white is the implied basis for credibility.

I didn't use whataboutism, I don't consider the Taliban murdering assholes unless we are talking about the Pakistani Taliban.

But you're the one trying to make this a race thing.

You can consider Broccoli a fruit for all anyone cares that doesn't make it true.

[Thermodolia]

There wouldn’t have been a taliban if we let the Soviets win in Afghanistan

Here we have an example of "Missing the Point"; take pictures, kids!

No I got the point. I just wanted to make said remark

[Romanian-Slavia]

That's what CIA wants you to believe, but CIA support Saudi-Mujahedeen insurgency in Afghanistan commanded by Osama Bin Laden during the 80's. At the 9/11 attack 15 out of the 19 hijackers were Saudis (US strong ally), but nobody from Afghanistan. Why US invaded Afghanistan less than a month later in the name of the so-called "war on terrorism" which in the reality is a "war of Middle-Eastern resources".

1. These events were a decade apart; quite a lot changes in a decade.
2. The Saudis don't like us and never have; they're our "allies" because we let them exert influence over the region at the expense of Iran - their sworn enemy.
3. The Taliban supported Al-Qaeda, literally everyone knows this. They were in bed together for fucking years. Taking out an Al-Qaeda ally helps us immeasurably.
4. There is no oil in Afghanistan.

1. Saudi Arabia-USA is a very important strategical relationship; Saudi Arabia and Israel are the only allies of the US in the Middle-East
2. The Taliban were supported by CIA and Saudis (including Bin Laden family); Osama bin Laden trained Talibans; Some Talibans couldn't be win a war against Soviets if theye weren't supported by the other world power, United States
3. Oil isn't the only resource in the Middle-East that USA is interested of

[El-Amin Caliphate]

What does being white have to do with anything? Also, you used whataboutism which is a logical fallacy.

Being white is the implied basis for credibility.

Which has nothing to do with the topic at hand.

I didn't use whataboutism

You literally just did. Heloin (?) was talking about the wrongs of the Taliban and instead of addressing her argument you talking about the wrongs of the US. That's what whataboutism means.

I don't consider the Taliban murdering a*sholes unless we are talking about the Pakistani Taliban.

Both are murdering a-holes.

[Al Mumtahanah]

The U.S. military murders and the U.S. government has a track record of supporting Nicarguan cartels and lying to their own people and experimenting on them with drugs. I am supposed to take their word the Taliban is a heroin cartel despite the Taliban's track record of fighting the war on drugs far more zealously than the U.S. and despite Taliban's strong denials? I'm sorry, being white just doesn't carry the credibility it used to.

It really isn't even that. the taliban was an ally of America till it helped al qaeda attack us. When Russians were dying, it was cool. When Afghan people died, it's alright. Americans die and then it's a problem

The Taliban had nothing to do with 9/11

[Al Mumtahanah]

Being white is the implied basis for credibility.

Which has nothing to do with the topic at hand.

I didn't use whataboutism

You literally just did. Heloin (?) was talking about the wrongs of the Taliban and instead of addressing her argument you talking about the wrongs of the US. That's what whataboutism means.

I don't consider the Taliban murdering a*sholes unless we are talking about the Pakistani Taliban.

Both are murdering a-holes.

The topic is the credibility of the U.S.

[Romanian-Slavia]

It really isn't even that. the taliban was an ally of America till it helped al qaeda attack us. When Russians were dying, it was cool. When Afghan people died, it's alright. Americans die and then it's a problem

The Taliban had nothing to do with 9/11

True

[El-Amin Caliphate]

Which has nothing to do with the topic at hand.

You literally just did. Heloin (?) was talking about the wrongs of the Taliban and instead of addressing her argument you talking about the wrongs of the US. That's what whataboutism means.

Both are murdering a-holes.

The topic is the credibility of the U.S.

No it's not.