Sorry but what has classic cars/bikes have to do with the murder of an innocent man? Or am I missing the point somewhere?.
Not a lot, but this thread doesn't have much to with the fire at the dog shelter either, another emotive issue.
It's more about freedom of speech, which apparently does not extend to criticism of one particular religion,
here, despite it being one the root causes of most problems in the Middle East and many other places.
It's here because of tolerance, not allowed in it's originating countries, where it has a majority.
It doesn't have moderates in our sense, even these apparently need to bang their heads on some floor at regular
intervals, to satisfy some ancient gobbledegook text. We don't understand it, since most of us are not
indoctrinated at birth, so it's tolerated here, at least in politics (votes), and media.
I'm technically a christian, but couldn't care less about the repeated platitudes from an archbishop, nor would
burning bibles cause me the slightest distress. I don't need right and wrong defining to the nth degree by some book,
and it's time for the Middle East to move into the modern world and stop trying to drag everyone else backwards.
It refuses to do that, despite being given the opportunity, at great cost to all concerned, and it's modern message
is no different and clear enough. Submit to our archaic way of life, or we'll blow you up!
We no longer understand devout religious people, or a system which integrates them into government, much less
the concept of private armies belonging any particular religious sect, but imagine a situation where the Salvation
Army was just that. We'd be down on it like a ton of bricks, but we pussy foot with the infiltrated Islamic version.
If you truly believe it, rather than paying lip service to an accident of birth, you're not a moderate, and don't belong here.
Don't parade around waving banners, abusing our tolerance. You are free to leave for a country that already has
what you think you want, but have probably never lived in, or have left.
Back to the current outrage, deliberately designed to provoke a response, with at least another one in the pipeline.
While we don't understand the mentality, they do understand our democratic process and the effect of media manipulation.
An innocent man is butchered, not the first and tbh widely expected. It's intended to draw us into a conflict for which the
opposing factions are fully responsible, and don't intend to stop. If the West gets heavily involved again, it will be blamed
by the general innocent (ish) population, whatever the outcome. The only time it will stop is when the populations affected
have had enough, or one side is destroyed completely. After about 1300 years, that seems unlikely, and even then the
ex-pats will pick up the flags. I often wonder whether it would be better to flatten the lot, oil may run out before this
is over in any case, and if you haven't got fossil fuel you can't burn it etc. Does radiation count?
Which brings me to the only beneficiary of this mess, the modern caliphate which already exists, called Iran.
It was held in a delicate balance, by Iraq and Saddam. Who buggered all that up, and on what pretext I wonder?
Alright he was brutal, but it's pretty obvious he was needed for any kind of stability, as in Iran. Even just air strikes,
Libyan style to start getting rid of Gaddafi, another brute, resulted in a bigger mess.
Iran has the ability to drive out ISIS from Iraq and Syria, and you'd think it would, so close to it's own border.
However, the price for "assistance" is the West backing off on the sanctions which (maybe) are slowing nuclear "research".
We have enough basket cases with nuclear weapons already, and potential for genocide of a new scale.
ISIS took over most of northern Iraq while the West was hand wringing for weeks about Israel and Gaza (again).
I sometimes wonder if the western intelligence services follow the media as well. Or, maybe they thought ISIS
would eventually provide a Sunni buffer against Iran, Saddam style. Either way, Iran must have known it was happening
but instability is their stock in trade, so they probably let it run for future exploitation. Around 3000 died, after deliberate
provocation, on a recurring basis, by Hamas, again backed by Iran. Nothing significant compared to Syria, where
one side (and possibly both) are backed by Iran. Malachi was an Iranian puppet, causing most of the dissent
in Iraq. The Iraqi army wasn't there to protect the Sunni areas, it was there to stop them causing trouble for the
Shia government. Not surprising then, that they "retreated" from ISIS, they wanted rid of the Sunni factor anyway.
Abadi may be different, but if the West restore control, I doubt it. New players, same old game.
Morsi in Egypt tried to gain control by democracy, a new toy to them, they actually thought he would represent all
the population, not just his religious voters. So much for the Arab spring, now back to Mubbarack style.
I don't know whether Morsi had Iranian connections, but I would be surprised if they weren't involved somewhere.
Turkey has finally decided to get off the fence, if in a pretty ambiguous way. Eurduan seems to be another ditherer
more inclined to Iran, probably because of the Shia element in his population, and a historical Kurdish dispute.
All the surrounding countries, or even a coalition of a committed few are capable of driving back ISIS, along with their
own air cover. They can't work together because each (apart from Iran) has to keep an eye on volatile religious factions
of it's own population. If you can't see religion as a personal belief, and nothing more, expect perpetual turmoil.
The only solution, from our point of view, is to stay out of the game. Forget the "hearts and minds" strategy, they have
little of either. We should accept that they need to be run by Ayatollas, Saddams, Gaddafies, Assads and Mubbaracks,
until they decide otherwise and, more importantly, do something about it by themselves, and at their own pace.
It takes a long time to deal with freedom when you've been browbeaten and regimented since birth.
That has to stop for any significant change, but I can't see any progress. Too much power attached.
The best we can do is contain the origin, and deal with the cretinous foothold here. I don't have a problem with
individuals personally, but just leave your religious baggage at the border.
If this offends your religious sensitivity, feel free to criticize mine. Sorry, I won't go rampaging through the streets,
marching around with placards, writing to my MP, complaining to my community leader (who chose them anyway)
and I don't have a Muslim council to represent my view. I wouldn't even complain to my local vicar if I knew (or cared)
who he was. We have many religions here, but as far as I'm aware most co exist without these special facilities.
Our churches are more a matter of history than anything else, largely for weddings and funeral services.
In short your religion is no dafter than my nominal version, but I don't feel the need to blow anyone up about it,
or convert the world. As a group, your leaders seemed very hesitant about condemning ISIS until recently.
I wonder if they fear the monsters they helped create, or just deny anything from habit, as do ours.
Put another way, our religious leaders, who believe in legend (mainly for their own ends) are no better than yours,
but no longer have direct power. I'm not sure about the USA, religion still seems to have a lot of influence.
If I seem unconcerned about all this, and light hearted enough to make jokes, it's more in frustration and the need
to get a sense of perspective. An innocent and well meaning man has been executed to provoke two days of media frenzy,
and demands for action. From "no boots on the ground", we've gone to tentative maybe, the possibility "shouldn't
be taken off the table" etc etc. We're slowly being suckered into involvement yet again, and will get the blame
when it all goes tits up. Bush and Blair are responsible for the Iraq war, and destruction of the original power balance,
Iraq had the opportunity to create an inclusive government (and the money to rebuild) but created this mess instead.
It's all their own work this time, they created it, they'll have to fix it themselves. Whichever way it goes, the Iranian fist
will get the ruins, it's had fingers in there right from the start. Chalk up another monumental success for our peace envoy,
at least Bush stopped meddling, but he was rich to start with!
We lost a good man who was just trying to help, but it has to be said it was his choice to go there.
How many more good men (who have no choice) do you want to send to be killed or injured in this nuthouse?
You want to bomb someone in revenge. Pause and think about those who have to do it, and the risk involved.
The Americans are busy bombing in Syria, no doubt Assad and Iran are delighted. Can't you see we're being used?
How much use is a Tornado flying all the way from Cyprus, or even daily flights of half a dozen?
Gathering snapshot intel on a highly mobile army is not much use, and not worth the risk, afaik they've destroyed a pick
up truck with a gun bolted to it. The video was impressive, Top Gear had much more difficulty destroying a pick up,
if I remember correctly. Sorry, I sound flippant again.
I'm not uncaring, or a pacifist by any means, but I see no point in following America into another pointless conflict
providing air cover on behalf of a local temporary alliance, about as much use as a house of cards built on quicksand.
Apart the Kurds who have an interest in protecting their area, and the hard line Iranians who want the country,
the "alliance" it will melt away if it thinks western troops will get involved again.
ISIS don't have aircraft and they are still outnumbered, why does the alliance need air support from the west, they
already have enough between them. Let them cause "collateral damage" for a change. It can't be avoided in this
kind of war, and they know it. It will be a bloody ground war, but it's of their own making this time, not ours.
How about re arming the "moderates" in Syria? After 3 years in that hellhole, if there ever were any moderates,
there won't be now. Another half baked idea!
As for the media, it'll have a field day, or days, for every innocent slaughtered, as ISIS intend. They are worse
than the rest, but not by much. The only way to win is to stay out, unless you want to start counting body bags again.
Or can you resist the urge to dance to their music again, and sit this one out? I try to avoid repeating the same mistake,
so even a media driven government with an election looming should know better. Reaction is not worth the price,
leave them to sort out their own problems. Whichever side finally has ownership of the ruins, a lot less believers
of this peaceful religion will marching in our direction, at least for a generation or two.
If you find that offensive, so be it, but look at the result of your ideology, and your attempts to force it on others,
directly or otherwise. I find that offensive too, and one sided tolerance may finally get the result it deserves.
I'm afraid future wars are inevitable as resources deplete, and demand from an ever increasing population rises.
At least they will have a valid reason, and, to some extent moderate the cause.
Any war under a religious cover is as daft as it gets. I know we've sent our share of nutters out there.
It's also obvious where they had to originate. Perhaps our Muslim leaders really can't see through their lofty ideals,
but some must know. The rest just close ranks to protect the faith, a familiar pattern worldwide in all religions.
The numbers suggest it's not at grass roots level, so they must an idea.
I only know a few muslims, and after about twenty years still have occasional contact. Many would say they're more
normal than I am, and religion was only mentioned in casual conversation. I worked with them for a good few years,
without any friction at all. Along with a few friends I was invited to what we would call a stag night with a different name.
Four of us turned up not sure what to expect, mainly to pay what we thought of as token respect, following the invitation.
The forbidden drink had been flowing freely long before we arrived, and continued until the next morning, interspersed
with smoking various things I knew nothing about. There must have been around twenty presumed muslims, all speaking
English technically better than I do. A few mustaches, the fashion then, but not a beard in sight. Most emphasized it
was only a very special occasion, but they held the drink remarkably well for novices, and good natured religious banter
was exchanged mainly from our loose tongues as we attempted to catch up. There were some ceremonial parts later
in the evening, part way though what seemed to be the conventional mayhem, but the festivity carried on in another
room, the general attitude being it was just something they had to put up with. We were all taken home by taxis
kindly provided by our host around 4am. A small group of us still meet once a month to ramble through old memories
and drink more than we are now comfortable with. A few still working join us when they finish. Our former host is one.
He now has a family, as do most of his friends. Only a couple have children they've allowed to enter a mosque area
while young, and none have shown signs of any interest. I don't know how typical he/they are, but I hope there are
many more like them. He still feels vaguely uneasy about the lack of worship for many years now. His parents, now dead,
were pretty strict when he was younger and it seems to run deep. His parents kept the costumes he wore as a child,
which his children still taunt him about from time to time. I only mention this because he's my idea of a moderate,
and he finds the beards stomping round the streets annoying, to put it mildly. I gather his memories were not too rosy.
This could be the longest reply to a one liner ever, and may well be deleted, but I'm fed up to the back teeth of even
hearing about Islam, never mind seeing it constantly. I'm not a fan of any religion, but off hand I can't think of one more repugnant.
A little humor is just my response to frustration, and we look to be creeping towards another reaction that makes no sense.
Is all that serious enough, M'Lud?
