What are the Islamist gullibles now to say?

[ghundal]

CIA says release of Osama bin Laden's photo likely - CNN.com

This is really starting to become a circus show. Im suprised at how stupid people actually are.

Obviously, now they don't have the body because they threw it in the sea.

there is no body.

[faye]

they've warned that it is in a terrible state, hence unrecognisable, i bet.

[khushal]

they've warned that it is in a terrible state, hence unrecognisable, i bet.

Saddam's sons were also unrecognizable but they displayed them like trophies so why not the same this time.

[BarakzaiAbdali]

When Osama's killing in Abbotabad was announced, there were some who either (1) called it another drama by the USA or (2) said that ISI allowed US to target Osama for strategic gains.

Now only fools will believe a state would allow another state to target one of the most notorious fugitive (whether one agree or not but the global image of the person) of history on its soil and cause itself huge embarrassment and problem not only at home but also in the international arena.

As for the drama part, not only Taleban but also ISI have accepted that Osama has been killed.

What are the Islamist to say now?

Foremost, does it not require deep soul-searching on the part of Islamists? The injustice in the international system notwithstanding, isn't it a fact that the only thing that can restore the honour of Muslims is a focuss on human and societal development, democracy, transformation, reformation, and becoming resourceful?

The unfortunate thing is, these people have made the heritic act of suicidal bombing as a part of Jehad and my opinion is, it is going to saty and to be used mercilessly in the inter-sectarian violence between Muslims in future until collectively rejected by Muslim scholars. Imagine, Deobandis killing Shias, Wahabis killing Barilvis, etc. with suicide bombing by calling them infidels etc.

Shouldn't we think what damage has it caused to us?

A part of what you say is correct, but it is buried deep within multiple fallacies and base assumptions. The key phrase that even Mr. Bin Ladin himself was a proponent of was:

"isn't it a fact that the only thing that can restore the honour of Muslims is a focuss on human and societal development, democracy, transformation, reformation, and becoming resourceful?"

The issue here is what you gloss over:

1. There are powerbrokers and the the client states, Pakistan being one of the latter. In my discussions with colleagues I have made it a point to note that Mr. Bin Ladin's first declaration of war is a rather simple document with multiple cogent points within it. His contentions agree that the Muslim nations being an abysmal state of mental lethargy.

2. President Mubarak and President Ben Ali are two prime examples of what you are asking folks to accept and then to go on their way transforming, reforming, and becoming resoureful. If the core of the apple is diseased my friend, how do you expect that sort of progress? It is not simply that these people wanted their states to progress into functional nation states on par with the Western Powers with an equal degree of freedom for all. Instead, they were inept, corrupt, and on the payroll of powers that utilized them for their own ends as the expense of the will of the people.

3. When you implement a hegemonistic empire model where each nation state has an installed Herod above it, you are bound to get a group of individuals that challenge the status quo violently. That action, of rising up, is a timeless act that is not reserved to Mr. Bin Ladin. As I noted, a great number of individuals, throughout history, from Hannibal Barca, to Tecumseh, to Metacom, to Wallace, to DeBruce, to Omar Mukhtar, and now to Osama Bin Ladin are personifications of this action of the human spirit.

4. So then, you have two groups... those that seek personal gain and stability for the short term (which is what you are a proponent of) as the expense of freedom of the state at all levels. You attempt to link this innate response to fascism (yet the leaders you wish they would swear fealty to are despots), abusive to women (yet the despots permit this to sustain themselves as well), and non functional in the modern economy (the tyrants have also driven their country into economic dependency).

5. Regarding suicide bombing, the writings of the deceased in question in no way comment on the issue. However, as I have stated, it appeared that in the situation where the battle was being fought symmetrically or at least near symmetrically, these folks utilized targeted approaches. However, the new face of war is satellites that can visualize quarters from space, infrared thermal imaging, remote drones etc. Geurilla warriors have had to rely on far less to make up for the gap. This act, for example, was also utilized initially, by the guerrillas fighting Batista in Cuba until Russian arms came through. Scalping and striking terror into the colonialists was another measure utilized by American Indian Insurgents when their tribes were threatened by Western guns.

My question to you, is what alternatives to you offer for violent resisters? Can you drone equip them? It is not that any Islamists on here appear to be promoting low resolution weaponry (IED, etc), but rather that they are making due with minimal resources.

The usual response from ideologues is that such approaches are Islamically abbhorent. However, this is not the case with a rather a rather simple example and question:

Two nations, a nonMuslim and Muslim nation declare war on eachother. Let us say that both are armed equally. Both will utilize aerial campaigns to target eachother's industrial and economic hubs as well as military installations. This was true of the initial Japanese and American skirmishes. Within these centers of population, there will be elderly folks, women, and children. The majority of the Salafist literature appears to be logically correct in the argument that were one to misapply the Prophet's dictum that: no women, no children, and not even the palm tree trunk are to be cut, then one would hamstring Muslims from ever being able to fight any war ever. Its an absurd contention that people with low resolution weaponry must simply sit aside.

A simple historical proof to counter the claim of the 12 year old bomber is the American Civil Warrior's own utilization of children warriors before their industrialization moved their conscription standards forward:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Clem

John C Clem was a 12 year old that served in the Union forces against the Southern Confederacy.

Just as the official standards within the Islamic literature views child conscription as repugnant and something against the rules of war... so too did the standards of the union army recommend against conscription. However, with the paucity of resources under Lincoln, many regiment leaders looked the other way.

The bottom line Toramana is that you simply dismiss the lack of balance and criminal intents of the hoisted system, yet you focus and hone in on what you view as criticisms of the Islamic Freedom Fighters.

Yet each and every criticism you level, for those of that know history, and have read up on how battles were fought and won, falls short of the mark.

[faye]

so now, as a physician, you are justifying using a 12 year old as a suicide bomber b.a.?

[BarakzaiAbdali]

so now, as a physician, you are justifying using a 12 year old as a suicide bomber b.a.?

No Faye, you misunderstood me. I am pointing out that human nature, whether in love, war, anger, etc is just that, human nature. I am pointing out that critics of these folks have some historical explaining to do as America's own colonial and civil war history show this not acceptable act being utilized.

I guess Faye, what I am saying, is that in an ideal world, people would avoid wars, and make diplomacy first. Yet, the world is not that. I am pointing out that if a Mexican Base were built in America, specifically in Alabama, and you gave them massive arms to attempt a clamp down, on say, Alabama, you would get a situation were an insurgency would develop. The Alabamans love their guns. Folks down south their get their first .22 as a 12 year old to this day. My friends were shooting small game at a very early age. It is not inconcievable that in a war setting, where the southerners outgunned, that they would rely on such tactics again.

It appears to be an aspect of human nature that I do not endorse. However, I demand that critics be fair and balanced. The attempt here is to show that the islamists are brutal, uncivilized animals with no real qualm except that Britany Spears might infect all Muslim women with her snake dancing techniques. In reality, these are generally poor decrepit people that are standing on their last leg and fighting a massive superpower. As a scientist and as a physician, and as a student of human nature, I cannot help but understand why they utilize the means that they do. As I stated, give them the same weaponry and let the sides fight it out and I am sure you will see a complete change in strategy. However, until the insurgents are able to fight with more than their Korean era weaponry, then they will likely continue to have to utilize balancing against assymetry.

Hope that answers your question: bottom line, no I do not endorse it... but I understand it.

[faye]

in all of your and michael schuerers comments, it is never mentioned that while this debauchery continues in afghanistan, the more the whole country and it's people and future generations are being polluted and damaged by the depleted uranium etc which is being rained on afghanistan AND the military fighting there. you seem to want to encourage the afghans to continue fighting but there is no winning this war when this genocide is being performed there.

[BarakzaiAbdali]

in all of your and michael schuerers comments, it is never mentioned that while this debauchery continues in afghanistan, the more the whole country and it's people and future generations are being polluted and damaged by the depleted uranium etc which is being rained on afghanistan AND the military fighting there. you seem to want to encourage the afghans to continue fighting but there is no winning this war when this genocide is being performed there.

No, I am not encouraging or discouraging. Instead Faye, I am saying that I understand those that fight. I refuse to malign them. If they decide they do not want to fight, more power to them. Its their right to do so.

Take a look at the American Indian genocide. The Americans now praise Tecumseh (the Native American version of Osama Bin Ladin) and remember him as a warrior that they subdued, but a warrior nontheless.

His people were being genocided every day and in every way. In fact, the remnants of the American Indians are on reservations. Baygham and others attempt to claim that they Indians are living it up on Casinos etc and are better off. Thats pure unadulterated BS.

The American Indians were non Muslims, but my point to you Faye, is that I understand why they did what they did. They fought against occupation to their last best men because they veiwed it as such.

Shall I spit on their memory and say that they were dumb and could have "lived it up?" I cannot.

Also, as another example, I am not a Shiite Muslim, but I can understand the Ayatollah Khomeini and Hizbollah's drive to repel invaders and tyrants on their heads. They chose to stand and to fight. Norman Finkelstein once famously stated about Hizbollah "I cant criticize those that choose to die standing on their fight instead of on their knees."

I am not going to sit here and to case aspersions either, onthose farmers and rural folks that decide they want to stay out of the conflict and just be survivalists. If they view the war as unwinnable and do so, thats their choice.

However, the urban effeminate elite that ran away from a very winnable war, the USSR war, and now wants to rule Afghanistan after running away into exile.... they are worthy of scorn, because they are parasites.

[faye]

genocide of the indians was not the same as the way they are doing it now. have you researched about the du issue in iraq and afghanistan, and the illnesses and child deformities of american returned soldiers yet?
yeah, like i am the kind of person to object to people defending themselves against invaders, please.....
before i knew about this du issue, i would not have given advice about afghans fighting or not fighting but now that i have this information i would advise that some way to reach an agreement and peace HAS to be taken, AS SOON AS POSSIBLE.
not patting people on the back for using kids as fodder.

[BarakzaiAbdali]

genocide of the indians was not the same as the way they are doing it now. have you researched about the du issue in iraq and afghanistan, and the illnesses and child deformities of american returned soldiers yet?
yeah, like i am the kind of person to object to people defending themselves against invaders, please.....
before i knew about this du issue, i would not have given advice about afghans fighting or not fighting but now that i have this information i would advise that some way to reach an agreement and peace HAS to be taken, AS SOON AS POSSIBLE.
not patting people on the back for using kids as fodder.

I wasnt accusing you of anything. I was answering your question about my above posts. Regarding the DU issue, I dont disagree. However, that still doesnt overcome the human drive to fight to the death against an invader. The US is also burning lots of military trash, etc, and not helping the environment out locally.

Take as another example the Gaul warrior Vercingetorix. He fought an insurgency against Caeser that nearly destroyed Caeser's career. In the end, he refused to stop fighting and it ended up destroying the Gauls and leading to wide spread atrocities done by the Romans. However, the Gallic Tribes were intent on resisting.

That is really my point in all this. There are generally two motivators for humans: the drive to survive and the drive to sustain one's identity independent of hegemony. In some people the former wins out and others the latter does.

In the case of the Afghan, history shows he or she does not want hegemony and foreign unIslamic invaders on his soil. He will likely take Vercingetorix's route as opposed to cedeing an inch of his honor or land to occupation.

[faye]

you did ask a question in the previous post.
the more they fight the longer these occupiers will stay and keep wrecking the country. they will stay, one way or another anyway but without the continuation of this genocide. if the afghans knew what is being done to them they might try a different tack.
personally i am absolutely outraged that this genocide is occuring and i don't understand why anybody on here seems interested or outraged themselves. this is the 3rd time i have mentioned it and another member told me they also mentioned it, months ago but got argued against.
the point is...now, what is happening now and we have the education to see what is being done. it is people like yourself and other educated people like that dr who wrote the book 'afghanistan after democracy' that need to be informing the people of afghanistan.

[Toramana]

I don't think this is true...Afghan society is not something trapped in the past as some people are trying to make us believe... They also love the same peace and secure life that others have abandoned Afghanistan for....Moreover, people have become tired of war and want peace...Actually, regional and extra-regional players are using some fringe factions mostly Islamist fanatics in the Afghan society for their geopolitics....

But faye, I agree with you...In order to get rid of foreign presence, you have to provide an alternative solution...World cannot simply leave you alone until you guarantee not to destablise the international system...And obviously, Islamist fanaticism is neither a solution nor acceptable to others that live with you in the same world and are affected by your decisions...

[faye]

islamist fanaticism is nothing compared to the fanatacism of those that send the american military around the world, as their hegemony puppets. it's just that the latter control the media as well.

[Toramana]

islamist fanaticism is nothing compared to the fanatacism of those that send the american military around the world, as their hegemony puppets. it's just that the latter control the media as well.

Hahahahaaa...faye, I want neither...I will be the most happy person to regain the traditional balance of my native culture and my autonomy...As for America, I sometimes think why on earth one would like to have so much power...I mean beyond certain limits, ambition for power and wealth is irrationality...

[faye]

yes, when i heard obama,say, 'we are ready to lead!', i vomitted, hahah. why can't they be happy to work along side the rest of the world. it reminds me of a manic, violent, teenage male, covering up an inferiority complex.
but basically i believe it to be in the hands of the zionists who are taking advantage of that weak trait.