What ISIS Really Wants

  • Thread starter Thread starter Bubba_Switzler
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
B

Bubba_Switzler

Guest
But Muslims who call the Islamic State un-Islamic are typically, as the Princeton scholar Bernard Haykel, the leading expert on the group’s theology, told me, “embarrassed and politically correct, with a cotton-candy view of their own religion” that neglects “what their religion has historically and legally required.” Many denials of the Islamic State’s religious nature, he said, are rooted in an “interfaith-Christian-nonsense tradition.”
Click to expand...
theatlantic.com/features/archive/2015/02/what-isis-really-wants/384980/
 
Bubba_Switzler said:
Many denials of the Islamic State’s religious nature, he said, are rooted in an “interfaith-Christian-nonsense tradition.”
Click to expand...
That may well be the most important statement that many of us will read today. Or all week.
 
Bubba_Switzler said:
theatlantic.com/features/archive/2015/02/what-isis-really-wants/384980/
Click to expand...
As I see it, ISIS wants power; it is NOT representative of Islam, either Shia or Sunni, but is masquerading as the true Muslim faith. The organization has killed as many, if not more, Muslims as Christians, and equally despises Jews. They are expanding their murderous jihad financially and militarily as they cut across more countries. Their beheading of twenty-one Egyptian Coptic Christians is but the latest illustration of their utter barbarism, more typical of the Dark Ages than the modern era. The big question for the U.S. is whether we get involved with a Middle East coalition in a boots-on-the-ground effort to stop them, since no country is immune to their organizational expansion or lone-cell sympathizers.
 
meltzerboy said:
As I see it, ISIS wants power; it is NOT representative of Islam, either Shia or Sunni, but is masquerading as the true Muslim faith.
Click to expand...
Just out of curiosity, what leads you to believe this? (Read the article before you answer.)
The organization has killed as many, if not more, Muslims as Christians, and equally despises Jews. They are expanding their murderous jihad financially and militarily as they cut across more countries. Their beheading of twenty-one Egyptian Coptic Christians is but the latest illustration of their utter barbarism, more typical of the Dark Ages than the modern era. The big question for the U.S. is whether we get involved with a Middle East coalition in a boots-on-the-ground effort to stop them, since no country is immune to their organizational expansion or lone-cell sympathizers.
Click to expand...
Yeah, they are bad news alright. But Obama says they are not an existential threat to the US. Do you know something that he doesn’t?
 
meltzerboy said:
As I see it, ISIS wants power; it is NOT representative of Islam, either Shia or Sunni, but is masquerading as the true Muslim faith. The organization has killed as many, if not more, Muslims as Christians, and equally despises Jews. They are expanding their murderous jihad financially and militarily as they cut across more countries. Their beheading of twenty-one Egyptian Coptic Christians is but the latest illustration of their utter barbarism, more typical of the Dark Ages than the modern era. The big question for the U.S. is whether we get involved with a Middle East coalition in a boots-on-the-ground effort to stop them, since no country is immune to their organizational expansion or lone-cell sympathizers.
Click to expand...
From the article:

As if there is such a thing as ‘Islam’! It’s what Muslims do, and how they interpret their texts.” Those texts are shared by all Sunni Muslims, not just the Islamic State. “And these guys have just as much legitimacy as anyone else.”

All Muslims acknowledge that Muhammad’s earliest conquests were not tidy affairs, and that the laws of war passed down in the Koran and in the narrations of the Prophet’s rule were calibrated to fit a turbulent and violent time. In Haykel’s estimation, the fighters of the Islamic State are authentic throwbacks to early Islam and are faithfully reproducing its norms of war. This behavior includes a number of practices that modern Muslims tend to prefer not to acknowledge as integral to their sacred texts. “Slavery, crucifixion, and beheadings are not something that freakish [jihadists] are cherry-picking from the medieval tradition,” Haykel said. Islamic State fighters “are smack in the middle of the medieval tradition and are bringing it wholesale into the present day.”
 
TEPO said:
From the article:

As if there is such a thing as ‘Islam’! It’s what Muslims do, and how they interpret their texts.” Those texts are shared by all Sunni Muslims, not just the Islamic State. “And these guys have just as much legitimacy as anyone else.”

All Muslims acknowledge that Muhammad’s earliest conquests were not tidy affairs, and that the laws of war passed down in the Koran and in the narrations of the Prophet’s rule were calibrated to fit a turbulent and violent time. In Haykel’s estimation, the fighters of the Islamic State are authentic throwbacks to early Islam and are faithfully reproducing its norms of war. This behavior includes a number of practices that modern Muslims tend to prefer not to acknowledge as integral to their sacred texts. “Slavery, crucifixion, and beheadings are not something that freakish [jihadists] are cherry-picking from the medieval tradition,” Haykel said. Islamic State fighters “are smack in the middle of the medieval tradition and are bringing it wholesale into the present day.”
Click to expand...
Nevertheless, there is no Muslim “pope” who can tell these people that what they’re doing is wrong. They may be cherry-picking texts, but the texts are, in fact, there to be cherry-picked, and the only people who can tell them that they are wrong and make it stick are people with bigger guns.
 
DaveBj said:
Nevertheless, there is no Muslim “pope” who can tell these people that what they’re doing is wrong. They may be cherry-picking texts, but the texts are, in fact, there to be cherry-picked, and the only people who can tell them that they are wrong and make it stick are people with bigger guns.
Click to expand...
They’re not cherry picking at all. ISIS is true Islam. Its orthodox.
 
DaveBj said:
Nevertheless, there is no Muslim “pope” who can tell these people that what they’re doing is wrong. They may be cherry-picking texts, but the texts are, in fact, there to be cherry-picked, and the only people who can tell them that they are wrong and make it stick are people with bigger guns.
Click to expand...
There is no pope, but there are major schools that carry with them much authority. That is why President Sisi made a point of talking about reform from one of these major schools.
It is not as if it changed any of the teachings or attitudes of the school of course. It akes more than a local politician to do that.
 
meltzerboy said:
As I see it, ISIS wants power; it is NOT representative of Islam, either Shia or Sunni, but is masquerading as the true Muslim faith. The organization has killed as many, if not more, Muslims as Christians, and equally despises Jews. They are expanding their murderous jihad financially and militarily as they cut across more countries. Their beheading of twenty-one Egyptian Coptic Christians is but the latest illustration of their utter barbarism, more typical of the Dark Ages than the modern era. The big question for the U.S. is whether we get involved with a Middle East coalition in a boots-on-the-ground effort to stop them, since no country is immune to their organizational expansion or lone-cell sympathizers.
Click to expand...
I recall William F. Buckley’s comment that “…the Anglican church is so eclectic that no one, from the Pope to Mao tse Tung can assert with any certitude that he is NOT an Anglican…”

Without meaning any offense to Anglicans in saying that, Islam is so varied that it’s almost impossible to speak generally about Islam and its adherents. The ISIS types cannot be excluded as adherents to Islam any more than can the Ayatollah Khameni or Zuhdi Jasser.

It’s a terrible shame that Obama abandoned Iraq despite the pleas of his own military advisers, the Sunni, the Shia and the Kurds. Having done it, the question now is what does anyone do about it.

It is impossible for me to believe even the best-intentioned of Middle Eastern Arab leaders are up to the job of taking on ISIS by themselves. They have their own ISIS-types in their own populations to worry about.

And without the U.S. the rest of the west will do nothing.

The truly amazing things about the current situation are a) that ISIS is actually relatively weak in a modern sense, and b) they have firmly ensconced themselves in a “cauldron” they can’t leave, drawing in ever more of their number. Imagine for a moment the number of militants that could be caught in that cauldron if attacked from all sides. It could set radical Islam back for decades. Even the faithless Turks would probably not provide ISIS with a safe haven.

But nothing effective can or will happen until 2017. And more’s the pity.
 
The good talker bad leader dilemma has exceeded its usefulness. 🤷 Its probably good he’s not doing much, because all he does, doesn’t help and cost lives. We need to find a transparent leader and get ready down the road for war. Unless you think everything is alright or you want to live in the intentional projected fear.
 
Bubba_Switzler said:
Just out of curiosity, what leads you to believe this? (Read the article before you answer.)

Yeah, they are bad news alright. But Obama says they are not an existential threat to the US. Do you know something that he doesn’t?
Click to expand...
Well, if you are talking about President Obama, it is quite possible that Meltzerboy knows a lot more than Mr. Obama, regarding this subject. 😃
 
Ridgerunner said:
I recall William F. Buckley’s comment that “…the Anglican church is so eclectic that no one, from the Pope to Mao tse Tung can assert with any certitude that he is NOT an Anglican…”

Without meaning any offense to Anglicans in saying that, Islam is so varied that it’s almost impossible to speak generally about Islam and its adherents. The ISIS types cannot be excluded as adherents to Islam any more than can the Ayatollah Khameni or Zuhdi Jasser.

It’s a terrible shame that Obama abandoned Iraq despite the pleas of his own military advisers, the Sunni, the Shia and the Kurds. Having done it, the question now is what does anyone do about it.

It is impossible for me to believe even the best-intentioned of Middle Eastern Arab leaders are up to the job of taking on ISIS by themselves. They have their own ISIS-types in their own populations to worry about.

And without the U.S. the rest of the west will do nothing.

The truly amazing things about the current situation are a) that ISIS is actually relatively weak in a modern sense, and b) they have firmly ensconced themselves in a “cauldron” they can’t leave, drawing in ever more of their number. Imagine for a moment the number of militants that could be caught in that cauldron if attacked from all sides. It could set radical Islam back for decades. Even the faithless Turks would probably not provide ISIS with a safe haven.

But nothing effective can or will happen until 2017. And more’s the pity.
Click to expand...
Well, I did not say that the members of ISIS were not Muslims, but I believe they are adherents to the tenets of Islam in the same way that Westboro Church Baptists are adherents to the tenets of Christianity. Neither group is representative of the ideals of their faith but instead distort those ideals to their own ends. Further, if Islam is varied, as you state, what about Christianity? Quakers, JW’s, Christian Scientists, Seventh-Day Adventists, and Mormons all consider themselves Christians, some even the only true Christians.

I stand by my statement that ISIS is masquerading as the true practitioners of Islam, but it is really power that they crave, as do all the political and military forces of evil throughout history, including Hitler and Stalin. Cloaking that craving for power under the guise of religion is merely a clever ruse on their part in order to recruit more alienated and ignorant followers.

And, for the record, I can categorically state that I am NOT Anglican. LOL
 
Bubba_Switzler said:
Just out of curiosity, what leads you to believe this? (Read the article before you answer.)
Click to expand...
Maybe because the author of the article isn’t arguing that ISIS’s version of Islam is the “real” Islam; but instead is arguing that ISIS’s version of Islam is Islamic (this to counter the arguments put forth that it is un-Islamic).
 
oldcatholicguy said:
Maybe because the author of the article isn’t arguing that ISIS’s version of Islam is the “real” Islam; but instead is arguing that ISIS’s version of Islam is Islamic (this to counter the arguments put forth that it is un-Islamic).
Click to expand...
Right, which is to say that it is, at a minimum, within the sphere of Islam and not, as meltzerboy said, masquerading as Islam.
meltzerboy said:
Well, I did not say that the members of ISIS were not Muslims, but I believe they are adherents to the tenets of Islam in the same way that Westboro Church Baptists are adherents to the tenets of Christianity. Neither group is representative of the ideals of their faith but instead distort those ideals to their own ends. Further, if Islam is varied, as you state, what about Christianity? Quakers, JW’s, Christian Scientists, Seventh-Day Adventists, and Mormons all consider themselves Christians, some even the only true Christians.
Click to expand...
Let’s look at the possibilities:
  1. Perhaps ISIS is not really Islamic. You seem not to be arguing for this though others have claimed that ISIS has nothing to do with Islam.
  2. They could be just one Islamic variaint among others, no more or less representive than any others. But if this was your position why claim that they were masquerading?
  3. They might be the most genuine variant of Islam. They certainly believes this of themselves but then so do pretty much all faiths. The article suggests that they have more support among Muslims than our politicians have so far allowed in public discussion. I assume you are not claiming this.
I stand by my statement that ISIS is masquerading as the true practitioners of Islam, but it is really power that they crave, as do all the political and military forces of evil throughout history, including Hitler and Stalin. Cloaking that craving for power under the guise of religion is merely a clever ruse on their part in order to recruit more alienated and ignorant followers.
Click to expand...
  1. Perhaps you are merely taking issue with their claim to be the most genuine Muslims but that would be a very unintersting claim unless you are claiming some special knowledge of who is or is not the most genuine.
Do you know more about Islam than Caliph Ibrahim?
 
Bubba_Switzler said:
Right, which is to say that it is, at a minimum, within the sphere of Islam and not, as meltzerboy said, masquerading as Islam.

Let’s look at the possibilities:
  1. Perhaps ISIS is not really Islamic. You seem not to be arguing for this though others have claimed that ISIS has nothing to do with Islam.
  2. They could be just one Islamic variaint among others, no more or less representive than any others. But if this was your position why claim that they were masquerading?
  3. They might be the most genuine variant of Islam. They certainly believes this of themselves but then so do pretty much all faiths. The article suggests that they have more support among Muslims than our politicians have so far allowed in public discussion. I assume you are not claiming this.
Click to expand...
I stand by my statement that ISIS is masquerading as the true practitioners of Islam, but it is really power that they crave, as do all the political and military forces of evil throughout history, including Hitler and Stalin. Cloaking that craving for power under the guise of religion is merely a clever ruse on their part in order to recruit more alienated and ignorant followers.
4) Perhaps you are merely taking issue with their claim to be the most genuine Muslims but that would be a very unintersting claim unless you are claiming some special knowledge of who is or is not the most genuine.

Do you know more about Islam than Caliph Ibrahim?

I’m pretty sure there is more involved in being declared Caliph than declaring yourself Caliph.

Edit- I have no clue what I did to screw up the quoting thing.
 
oldcatholicguy said:
I’m pretty sure there is more involved in being declared Caliph than declaring yourself Caliph.
Click to expand...
What if there is not? What if naked power determines who is Caliph, as the article suggests, just as an election by the Cardinals determines who is pope?
 
Bubba_Switzler said:
What if there is not? What if naked power determines who is Caliph, as the article suggests, just as an election by the Cardinals determines who is pope?
Click to expand...
There is criteria for being deemed a Caliph. The leader of ISIS hasn’t met those used by Sunni Islam (Shia Islam has different criteria).
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top