Explosion at Ariana Grande Concert in England

[nik-]

oh god

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

Originally Posted by nik-

oh god

Just stay off twitter. Trust me. This is mild by comparison.

[CampbellsTransgressions]

Originally Posted by driveway

If we're going to have the conversation about what's wrong with Islam, the other conversation that needs to be had is what is wrong with men?

Did anyone, even for a split second, think this might have been carried out by a woman? Does anyone think that anytime there is a bombing, mass shooting, serial killing, violent kidnapping, assault, robbery, car jacking, or incidence of vandalism?

If anyone is going to draw a link between Islam and violence, they must acknowledge the vastly stronger link between masculinity and violence.

So: what's wrong with men, and what do we do about it?

Religion is a clear cut motive for suicide bombings while masculinity is not typically a motive for the crimes you have mentioned.

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by driveway

If we're going to have the conversation about what's wrong with Islam, the other conversation that needs to be had is what is wrong with men?

Did anyone, even for a split second, think this might have been carried out by a woman? Does anyone think that anytime there is a bombing, mass shooting, serial killing, violent kidnapping, assault, robbery, car jacking, or incidence of vandalism?

If anyone is going to draw a link between Islam and violence, they must acknowledge the vastly stronger link between masculinity and violence.

So: what's wrong with men, and what do we do about it?

Like I said, Venn diagram with a circle for radical Islam and another circle for alienated males.

As for what to do about male violence, since men demonstrate far more violent behaviour than women in every society we know of (as well as our closest relatives), there`s good reason to believe the disparity is largely innate. Can we reduce it with better socialization? Yes. And in fact, violence has been going down pretty dramatically for centuries. Not long ago, squabbles between neighbours routinely escalated into someone getting their head stove in with an axe.

Still, the problem of what to do about low-status males (and the ones who carry out these attacks are almost all low-status) and their susceptibility to violent rampages isn't going away any time soon. The traditional remedy for this kind of thing - making sure men get married off young so you don't have lots of 20-something singles kicking around - is not practical or desirable in a liberal society.

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by driveway

If we're going to have the conversation about what's wrong with Islam, the other conversation that needs to be had is what is wrong with men?

Did anyone, even for a split second, think this might have been carried out by a woman? Does anyone think that anytime there is a bombing, mass shooting, serial killing, violent kidnapping, assault, robbery, car jacking, or incidence of vandalism?

If anyone is going to draw a link between Islam and violence, they must acknowledge the vastly stronger link between masculinity and violence.

So: what's wrong with men, and what do we do about it?

Not really true though.

There have been quite a few woman suicide bombers.

There have also been some fairly prominant female jihadists that not only left to join ISIS but also served in operational roles.

Its not just men, woman have been radicalized as well.

• Sana’a Mehaidli, a 17-year-old member of the Syrian Socialist Party (SSNP/PPS), a pro-Syrian Lebanese organization, is believed to have been the first female suicide bomber. On April 9, 1985, she blew up herself and a truck of explosives next to an Israeli convoy in Lebanon during the Israeli occupation of south Lebanon.[13] She worked at a video store where she recorded her will, saying "I am very comfortable with carrying out this operation. I choose to do this because I am fulfilling my duty towards my land and my people...Now I am loving my country, sacrificing my life and respecting the people of the south."[14]
• Wafa Idris Arafat called for an "Army of Roses." Wafa became an icon and served under Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigade. Wafa was born in a refugee camp, and her father died in when she was a child. During the First Intifada, she served on the refugee camp’s women’s committee, helping prisoners’ families and distributing food. When she delivered a stillborn and was told she would never be able to carry a baby to full-term, her husband divorced her.[15]
• Sri Lanka's political group, Liberation Tigers of Tamil Ealam (LTTE), under the control of the Black Tigers serves as another example. The Black Tigers are known for suicide bombing attacks, and also for the fact that mostly women execute them.[16] Thenmozhi Rajaratnam, also known as Dhanu, is thought to have been a member of the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (Tamil Tigers), and involved in the Assassination of Rajiv Gandhi, the ex-Prime minister of India, and sixteen other bystanders in 1991.[17] She allegedly had been raped by Indian Peace Keeping Force soldiers and her four brothers were killed. [9]
• Muriel Degauque was a Belgian convert to Islam who performed a suicide car bomb attack on November 9, 2005 against a U.S. military convoy in Iraq. She originally worked at a bakery and after marrying a Muslim man, she moved to Iraq and became radicalized.
• Blasts from two female suicide bombers at a crowded fish market in Nigeria's northeastern city of Maiduguri killed at least 20 people on June 22, 2015.[18]
• In Dagestan, Russia a 17-year-old widow of a Caucasus militant wearing a suicide bomb vest approached a Ministry of the Interior office in the village of Gubden . She was apparently stopped at a security post outside the office where she detonated her explosives, killing one police officer and injuring four others. The attack was claimed by the Caucasus Emirate militant Jihadist group, Dokku Umarov.[19]
• A woman detonated a suicide bomb vest at the entrance to Baghdad College on February 25, 2007, killing at least 40 people and wounding more than 30 others with hot shrapnel.[20]
• On December 23, 2016, the first female suicide bomber in Bangladesh detonated her explosive during a police raid.[21]

I don't think its a matter that woman don't want to martyr themselves or they're drawn away from it, in a lot of cases the woman are forced into a secondary role by their husbands or other males.

There are also examples of woman taking roles in ISIS in guarding non Muslim female prisoners and participating in beating them conditioning them and force marrying them as sex slaves.

Indoctrination is indoctrination its not a male or female thing.

[longsuffering]

Originally Posted by Clarkey

I wonder how many Calgarypuckers woud be proponents of a Donald Trump-esque travel/immigration moratorium right now if this heinous mass-murder happened at the Saddledome...

Not this one.

[longsuffering]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

They looked at advanced and prosperous countries in North America and Europe and asked themselves what they could copy from them. They valued education. Rewarded innovation. Established firmly secular rule of law. Used birth control to limit population growth.

Essentially, they were forward-looking. They didn't let the glories or the misfortunes of the past oppress them with resentment.

True to a point.

However, let's not forget that the US essentially rebuilt Japanese industry and their society while occupying the country after the end of the war.

S. Korea also benefitted from generous foreign aid from Japan and the USA.

We should also mention how Europe after WW2 was rebuilt on the back of the Marshall Plan.

I don't have the faintest idea how it could be done but the idealist in me thinks a Marshall Plan for the Middle East is an interesting albeit impractical idea.

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by longsuffering

True to a point.

However, let's not forget that the US essentially rebuilt Japanese industry and their society while occupying the country after the end of the war.

S. Korea also benefitted from generous foreign aid from Japan and the USA.

We should also mention how Europe after WW2 was rebuilt on the back of the Marshall Plan.

I don't have the faintest idea how it could be done but the idealist in me thinks a Marshall Plan for the Middle East is an interesting albeit impractical idea.

I don't think it would work, what helped the Marshall plan in Europe, and the rebuilding of Japan and the acceleration of Korea's rebuild was that you had a citizen ship that was tired of war, had a feeling of betrayal by their government and just wanted to get on with their life and they were willing to accept an occupation government to reach that end.

My gut is that there are so many factions and groups in the Middle East that an Occupation and rebuild would never ever work.

[longsuffering]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

I don't think it would work, what helped the Marshall plan in Europe, and the rebuilding of Japan and the acceleration of Korea's rebuild was that you had a citizen ship that was tired of war, had a feeling of betrayal by their government and just wanted to get on with their life and they were willing to accept an occupation government to reach that end.

My gut is that there are so many factions and groups in the Middle East that an Occupation and rebuild would never ever work.

Agree 100%. Too many 'interests' to agree on anything and impractical for the US or an alliance to implement as an caretaker occupying force.

[afc wimbledon]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

I don't think it would work, what helped the Marshall plan in Europe, and the rebuilding of Japan and the acceleration of Korea's rebuild was that you had a citizen ship that was tired of war, had a feeling of betrayal by their government and just wanted to get on with their life and they were willing to accept an occupation government to reach that end.

My gut is that there are so many factions and groups in the Middle East that an Occupation and rebuild would never ever work.

In Germany you had a citizenship that was democratic for a century before Hitler, he was the aberration therefore returning to democracy was a return to normal.

In Japan the population was obedient to the Emperor as a god, he threw in his lot with McArthur and the US, it would be the equivalent of fighting ISIS with Mohamed on our side.

In both cases we killed millions and millions of them first, bombed their countries into oblivion, in comparison the middle east has been virtually untouched (and I recognise that may sound insensitive but none the less nothing that has happened anywhere in the middle east comes close to the destruction we wrecked upon both Germany and Japan)

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by afc wimbledon

In Germany you had a citizenship that was democratic for a century before Hitler, he was the aberration therefore returning to democracy was a return to normal.

In Japan the population was obedient to the Emperor as a god, he threw in his lot with McArthur and the US, it would be the equivalent of fighting ISIS with Mohamed on our side.

In both cases we killed millions and millions of them first, bombed their countries into oblivion, in comparison the middle east has been virtually untouched (and I recognise that may sound insensitive but none the less nothing that has happened anywhere in the middle east comes close to the destruction we wrecked upon both Germany and Japan)

I see where you are going with this. We need to bomb them more, right?

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by longsuffering

True to a point.

However, let's not forget that the US essentially rebuilt Japanese industry and their society while occupying the country after the end of the war.

S. Korea also benefitted from generous foreign aid from Japan and the USA.

We should also mention how Europe after WW2 was rebuilt on the back of the Marshall Plan.

I don't have the faintest idea how it could be done but the idealist in me thinks a Marshall Plan for the Middle East is an interesting albeit impractical idea.

It's worth remembering that Germany and Japan were major powers before WW2, and in fact Japan had a short-lived empire of her own.

There's a kind of narcissism underlying the belief that for the last three centuries the fate of nations the world over has been wholly determined by the caprices of the West. No Western power aided Japan's rise to pre-eminence in SE Asia. They adopted Western systems, industrialized, and expanded on their own. After they were bombed to ruins it was their own social systems - the same ones that made them the most productive country in the region before the war - that built an extraordinarily innovative and productive nation out of the ruins. It's not as though the U.S. could have arbitrarily chosen Cambodia to turn into a global powerhouse of commerce and industry.

As much as its taboo to bring up among those who see only structuralism behind the fates of peoples, there are clearly cultural elements at play as well. Some social systems and values are better at generating innovation, enterprise, and prosperity than others.

[afc wimbledon]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

I see where you are going with this. We need to bomb them more, right?

well from a practical point of view yes, if we had utterly depopulated most of sunni Iraq crushed the Taliban with the full might of US force, wiped out every village in the tribal areas with endless carpet bombing, starvation to force them in to the towns, let Pakistan and Saudi know they were next unless they started executing their 'militants', closing down the mosques and religious schools, sending the cia in to blow up offending mosques, the death toll would have been millions and completely inhuman and unacceptable morally but it would have worked.

The americans have always been victims of their belief in a righteous war than doesn't cost many lives, didn't work in Vietnam, wont work anywhere else

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by afc wimbledon

blah blah bla...but it would have worked.

...blah blah bla

I like the cut of your jib!

[peter12]

Originally Posted by afc wimbledon

In Germany you had a citizenship that was democratic for a century before Hitler, he was the aberration therefore returning to democracy was a return to normal.

In Japan the population was obedient to the Emperor as a god, he threw in his lot with McArthur and the US, it would be the equivalent of fighting ISIS with Mohamed on our side.

In both cases we killed millions and millions of them first, bombed their countries into oblivion, in comparison the middle east has been virtually untouched (and I recognise that may sound insensitive but none the less nothing that has happened anywhere in the middle east comes close to the destruction we wrecked upon both Germany and Japan)

Not really.

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by afc wimbledon

well from a practical point of view yes, if we had utterly depopulated most of sunni Iraq crushed the Taliban with the full might of US force, wiped out every village in the tribal areas with endless carpet bombing, starvation to force them in to the towns, let Pakistan and Saudi know they were next unless they started executing their 'militants', closing down the mosques and religious schools, sending the cia in to blow up offending mosques, the death toll would have been millions and completely inhuman and unacceptable morally but it would have worked.

The americans have always been victims of their belief in a righteous war than doesn't cost many lives, didn't work in Vietnam, wont work anywhere else

Well that and the fact that all of that would've violated numerous international laws.

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by peter12

Not really.

Yeah, I'm not exactly an expert on German history but weren't they largely a collection of feudal lands?

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by rubecube

Well that and the fact that all of that would've violated numerous international laws.

I think that if your that ruthless though and powerful enough to be willing to do something like that, its pretty likely that you're not going to recognize international law anyways.

[peter12]

Originally Posted by rubecube

Yeah, I'm not exactly an expert on German history but weren't they largely a collection of feudal lands?

Ruled by an absolute monarch, and an extremely powerful, cohesive group of aristocrats. Not to mention the extreme political power of the Prussian general military staff, and the deeply impregnated German militarism that had its roots going back to the Napoleonic Wars.

No, Germany was spoiling for a fight for a very long time.

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by peter12

Ruled by an absolute monarch, and an extremely powerful, cohesive group of aristocrats. Not to mention the extreme political power of the Prussian general military staff, and the deeply impregnated German militarism that had its roots going back to the Napoleonic Wars.

No, Germany was spoiling for a fight for a very long time.

Even before Hitler came along they still considered themselves to be ubermen.