The Relevence of Clinton or Sanders in USA Policies.....a personal POV

From "Brexit", if we didn't know beforehand, it's no longer as Bill Clinton would say, "It's the economy, stupid" not anything else that will drive the voters. Folk are now more interested in their share of the economic benefits that the elites seem to control. Also, when jobs are exported to the Far East, workers suffer. Then when the world is aflame with thousands of terror attacks each month, folk look inwards to protect their own! Yes, societies are becoming insecure and that feeds the right wingers everywhere.

As to democracy, Sanders and Trump are, to me different sides of the same anti-establishment coin. There is really little basis for Hilary supporters to welcome Sanders' supporters except their anathema to Trump. But in fact Trumpism is an attack on globalization, loss of America work jobs and the failure of the rising stock market to lift the boats of the middle class and factory workers!

Hilary is an elitist. She likes a gentle touch. Don't actually send troops, just throw a hand Grenade into Libya, (where Gadalfi cooperated and gave up WMD and terror training camps)! In one stroke, of leading from behind, she turned the place to a behemoth "Home Depot" for advanced munitions with ISIS at the cash registers. It's a free market - if you bring the hard cash! Arms now flow to Hamas, Al Qaeda, Syrian Rebels, The PLO, and anyone else who wants to blow things up!

What a lot of damage we've released! This is more important than exactly when we abolish the death penalty in the USA or get a decent minimal wage! I'd rather see dealing with Assad and massive investment in jobs in the USA. Everything else will fall into place!

I do not care much about domestic policies since we are very strong and resilient. We have a strong judiciary, free press and economy. But the crises we face are two: export of worker's jobs to support globalization, (benefitting rich families and multinational companies) and failure to crush the terrorists and Assad regime and allies who cause this fragmentation and tribalism! However, with Europe so anemic and Russia supporting the Syrian murderer of Sunnis, this bloodbath and production of floods of refugees continues and grows! To date, we have done nothing signicant to crush the terrorism that plagues the world! A great portion of the this carnage has ensued from a minority Alawite sect of the Shia barbarically bombing their countrymen back to the Stone Age.

So, do the names "Hilary" or "Sanders" really bring hope of solutions?

Asher

Hi, Asher,

Asher Kelman said:

But in fact Trumpism is an attack on globalization, loss of America work jobs and the failure of the rising stock market to lift the boats of the middle class and factory workers!

Click to expand...

I disagree. That is the "cover story" behind Trumpism, what it says on the front of the oatmeal box.

Actual Trumpism itself is just boorishness. Donald Trump is openly what the Republican party is less-openly: mean in spirit, and uncivil in operation.

And the movement behind Trump's unparalleled success in the Republican primary is half support for the rather noble principles of the Trump cover story, and half support for actual Trumpism, the latter being the same sort of support that "evil" professional wrestlers get.

There are many illnesses in American society, not the least of which is that, as mechanization made American workers more productive, our industrial paradigm did not adjust so that all Americans would share in the benefits of that.

Sadly, it is not popular to speak of that, for such discussions being to mind Communism as it is perhaps the most famous economic paradigm that allegedly sought to solve that problem. So we must not speak of that very basic problem, and the need to solve it, lest we be thought to be advocating Communism.


But I increasingly digress.

In any case, while a solution to that problem is desperately needed, Donald Trump cannot be - would not be - its champion, nor its deliverer.

Could Bernie Sanders be its champion? Sure. Can he be its deliverer? I don't think so.

He was a good fellow once, and will likely be again once this presidential campaign is over.

Best regards,

Doug

Well then, Doug, you have Trump figured out and likely as not you are correct. Still, someone better give Hillary a quick course on responsibility. We disrupt tribal societies and leave the villains to kill at will ........ while we ponder which of 75 flavors of low fat yoghurt to taste first!

The scale of murder defies her smiles. She needs to come up with a strong interventionist policy to stop Assad, kick Putin's planes out of the Syrian sky and obliterate Isis. With that, Europe and America can heal itself.

It is so conceited to talk of domestic needs when we are responsible for so much of the mass killings and millions of sad desperate displaced Sunnis and Azeris and Kurds!

She has the capability to do what is needed but she is focusing on defense and has no vision!

I feel for the Muslims who through no fault of their own are now homeless. We have to re-engineer Syria and Iraq to be their safe home. Obama and Hillary's lackluster and toothless military policies, (following the Bush I'll-conceived disruption of the Iraq-Iran balance of power), has directly lead to the global terror and suffering we now observe. In fact, indirectly, via Merkel's open arms to the Syrian refugees, this paved the way to Brexit and ultimately even the breakup of the European experience as we have come to know it! If we deal with the issues at it's source in Syria and Iraq, on the ground, for sure, Trumpism is irrelevant and Europe will not feel threatened with loss of identity!

Asher

Asher Kelman said:

We have to re-engineer Syria and Iraq to be their safe home.

Click to expand...

Isn't it surprising that when the US of America want to reengineer a country, that country has either oil or a strategic Russian military base? Syria has both.

Not that I am a fan of Bashar al-Assad, mind you. But there are quite a few countries where the population suffers as much as in present Syria. And Syria was relatively peaceful before the US of America decided to meddle, BTW.

Hi, Asher,

Asher Kelman said:

Well then, Doug, you have Trump figured out and likely as not you are correct. Still, someone better give Hillary a quick course on responsibility.

Click to expand...

Maybe so. You gonna take that on? Can you and Siri do PowerPoint presentations on your i-thing?

. . . She needs to come up with a strong interventionist policy to stop Assad, kick Putin's planes out of the Syrian sky and obliterate Isis.

Click to expand...

And, in her spare time, figger out how to keep Americans from murdering Americans at a great rate. And obliterate Fox News, one of the greatest threats to our nation.

Best regards,

Doug

Doug Kerr said:

Hi, Asher,



Maybe so. You gonna take that on? Can you and Siri do PowerPoint presentations on your i-thing?


And, in her spare time, figger out how to keep Americans from murdering Americans at a great rate. And obliterate Fox News, one of the greatest threats to our nation.

Best regards,

Doug

Click to expand...

Fox News, LOL?

Their purpose is simply to get women presenters with great figures and long legs for their cameras to coast over! It's entertainment, that's all!

?

Jerome Marot said:

Isn't it surprising that when the US of America want to reengineer a country, that country has either oil or a strategic Russian military base? Syria has both.

Not that I am a fan of Bashar al-Assad, mind you. But there are quite a few countries where the population suffers as much as in present Syria. And Syria was relatively peaceful before the US of America decided to meddle, BTW.

Click to expand...

Jerome,

Glad you are no fan of Assad! His father surrounded a rebellious city and gassed and shelled the population to submission. His son is hardly different. I try to be aware of terror against civilians and I can't see that any population has suffered so much, with such a high daily incidence of terror bombings and poison gas that is clearly against Sunnis and various non-Alawite/Shia minorities, a clear act of barbaric racism. Except perhaps for The genocides in Darfur, Rwanda and Cambodia's killing fields, no where else, not even the Taliban in Afghanistan has been so cruel and criminal!

The initiation of hostilities was not due to any US "meddling" that I know of, but rather a consequence of an "awakening" as examples by the "Arab Spring", where Sunnis in Syria wanted to have a greater representation and some chance of of recognition that Sunnis were a majority in a country but powerless.

For sure, with Quatar and other gulf states financially backed the Islamic insurgents, no matter how extreme! With the collapse of Libya, freeze on weapon systems to combatants broke down!

........Now to oil and Russia!

The port of Tarsus in Syria has been receptive to Russian vessels in one way or another for a decade or more. That in itself is just a thorn in the flesh but no more.

As to oil, the goo is no longer a rare commodity, LOL. We have more than we need and export. In fact I would love the USA to give Europe free or a lower priced natural gas to boost local industries, especially for poorer countries. We do not need oil from Syria! In fact, right now on the USA, renewable energy is fast becoming respectable for public policy for economic reasons!

I just feel that Europe and the USA have a responsibility, not just to offer such our to refuges, but also to use all the necessary collective might to stop the turmoil.

Asher

I apologize for my rant, but I am astonished at the attention to local news here in the USA and little will to demand coherent foreign policy that addresses today's ongoing human disasters. In Europe, perhaps it is different.

Maybe it comes down to this, we need to be able to have discourse between our tribal and nationalistic groups without massacres.

Considering that Muslims, Christians, Jews and others of faith have such lofty ideas and ideals, it is the major failure of the 21st Ventury that all our "progress" is held hostage to primitive imperatives!

This is where we need leadership.

What happens to domestic Us policy is not trivial but far overshadowed by the existential risks we face with non state militias and US and European policies that are anemic!

Asher

Asher Kelman said:

The initiation of hostilities was not due to any US "meddling" that I know of, but rather a consequence of an "awakening" as examples by the "Arab Spring"

Click to expand...

All recent "arab spring awakenings" (and also the events in Ukraine) bear the mark of US interference.

The port of Tarsus in Syria has been receptive to Russian vessels in one way or another for a decade or more.

Click to expand...

Tartus is of utmost strategic importance to Russia. Dismissing it as "receptive to Russian vessels" is ignoring the facts.

As to oil, the goo is no longer a rare commodity, LOL. We have more than we need and export.

Click to expand...

Not for long.

Really, Asher, I may side with Doug on that case and start to believe that you are watching Fox News.

I do not dismiss the benefits of Tartus to Putin, just that after all the math is done, the balance of power is not altered.

Arab Spring in the Mahgreb was not a USA meddling, but home grown.

Fox News? You have to be joking! No educated person I know takes it seriously. However it's great entertainment!

My news is mostly BBC, The Guardian, Le Monde, Debka and Haaretz as well as Saudi and Palestininian news sources.

Asher

Jerome Marot said:

All recent "arab spring awakenings" (and also the events in Ukraine) bear the mark of US interference.

Click to expand...

This concept is US interference is hard to match to Putin grabbing Ukrainian territory and sending soldiers disguised as volunteers and missiles to shoot down jetliners.

So how does the US get the blame?

Actually the opposite is true.

I happen to know the US military emissaries who essentially refused all requests for assistance from the Ukraine. This was a really cruel refusal and to my mind unconscionable.

So perhaps there are other facts I do no know which makes your point. I am not an expert on Ukraine but have not seen the USA as part of the etiology of the Russians gobbling up territory at the Ukraine's expense...... And this is only the very beginning.

Still, it pales in comparison to the wrongs in Syria and Iraq! There, US fingerprints are real!

Asher

Asher Kelman said:

Jerome,

Glad you are no fan of Assad! His father surrounded a rebellious city and gassed and shelled the population to submission. His son is hardly different. I try to be aware of terror against civilians and I can't see that any population has suffered so much, with such a high daily incidence of terror bombings and poison gas that is clearly against Sunnis and various non-Alawite/Shia minorities, a clear act of barbaric racism. Except perhaps for The genocides in Darfur, Rwanda and Cambodia's killing fields, no where else, not even the Taliban in Afghanistan has been so cruel and criminal!

The initiation of hostilities was not due to any US "meddling" that I know of, but rather a consequence of an "awakening" as examples by the "Arab Spring", where Sunnis in Syria wanted to have a greater representation and some chance of of recognition that Sunnis were a majority in a country but powerless.

For sure, with Quatar and other gulf states financially backed the Islamic insurgents, no matter how extreme! With the collapse of Libya, freeze on weapon systems to combatants broke down!

........Now to oil and Russia!

The port of Tarsus in Syria has been receptive to Russian vessels in one way or another for a decade or more. That in itself is just a thorn in the flesh but no more.

As to oil, the goo is no longer a rare commodity, LOL. We have more than we need and export. In fact I would love the USA to give Europe free or a lower priced natural gas to boost local industries, especially for poorer countries. We do not need oil from Syria! In fact, right now on the USA, renewable energy is fast becoming respectable for public policy for economic reasons!

I just feel that Europe and the USA have a responsibility, not just to offer such our to refuges, but also to use all the necessary collective might to stop the turmoil.

Asher

Click to expand...

I think it is called economic terrorism? Hillary will put 70,000 boots on the ground if elected. Oil was in abundance back in the day when you could spend a barrel of oil and punch a hole in Oklahoma or Texas and get 50 in return. However the days of cheap conventional oil have long since past. It just so happens that the Arabs want to build a gas pipeline to expand their market into Europe from Qatar. The only problem is that it has to go through Syria and since this would really effect the Russians market you can see where this can cause problems. This war has been in the making for a long time. But if you want to make some money forget oil and invest in some defense contractor stocks or some thorium reactors will be big in the future but the Chinese will control that. BTW I think the war in Iraq did accomplish its goals by breaking the back of OPEC. I think everyone should have the right to practise their religion without infringing on the rights of others and war should be illegal. Hillarie's foreign policy resume?“Her so-called foreign policy ‘experience’ has been to support every war demanded by the US deep security state run by the military and the CIA.” As for Sanders he is a radical aging hippie that can't be taken seriously and could be bought cheap.
Just my two pennies.



James

Asher Kelman said:

I do not dismiss the benefits of Tartus to Putin, just that after all the math is done, the balance of power is not altered.

Click to expand...

Tartus is essential to the presence of Russia in the Mediterranean. They won't let it go.

Arab Spring in the Mahgreb was not a USA meddling, but home grown.

Click to expand...

Revolution are rarely, if ever, "home grown" in today's world. Sure, there was severe discontent but this discontent needs to be focussed and organised to produce more than sporadic riots.

Fox News? You have to be joking! No educated person I know takes it seriously. However it's great entertainment!

Click to expand...

Under the guise of entertainment, it seeks to rot the brain of its viewers. I would be more careful if I were you.

Asher Kelman said:

This concept is US interference is hard to match to Putin grabbing Ukrainian territory and sending soldiers disguised as volunteers and missiles to shoot down jetliners.

Click to expand...

That is not exactly what first happened. First there was an elected president: Yanukovych. Then there were some underground manipulations which lead to the events of Euromaidan and saw various US politicians visit Kiev, including one named Hillary Clinton and, I am sorry to say, quite a few European politicians as well with promises impossible to meet. Wikileaks has quite a few documents on the subject incriminating the US administration and various US "think tanks" like the "Center for Strategic and International Studies". Now, as is usual in these matters, we have a nebulous of shady politicians claiming legitimacy, including a sizeable proportion of Neo-Nazis (Svoboda). Note that there are historical links between Nazi Germany and Ukraine (at the time Nazi Germany was understood to be a saviour against the old Russian enemy...), but is that an excuse to use these groups as our allies? I don't think so.

Of course Russia is also to blame for the next course of events, I am not denying that (although nobody believes any more that they were involved in the jetliner shot down).

I happen to know the US military emissaries who essentially refused all requests for assistance from the Ukraine. This was a really cruel refusal and to my mind unconscionable.

Click to expand...

Well... yes. It is a war by proxy and the USA will not take the risk of an open conflict next to the Russian border.

Still, it pales in comparison to the wrongs in Syria and Iraq! There, US fingerprints are real!

Click to expand...

Indeed they are.

Coming back to photography: I have a project for you. What about spending the summer in North Dakota? I am fairly confident that there is a fabulous documentary to be made on the collapse of the shale gas industry.

James Lemon said:

some thorium reactors will be big in the future

Click to expand...

The only full scale Thorium reactor was the THTR-300 active in 1989. It was a complete disaster and still cannot be decommissioned due to radioactivity. Of course, the main problem was that is was a pebble bed reactor, but I would advise caution before investing massively in new fission processes.

Jerome Marot said:

The only full scale Thorium reactor was the THTR-300 active in 1989. It was a complete disaster and still cannot be decommissioned due to radioactivity. Of course, the main problem was that is was a pebble bed reactor, but I would advise caution before investing massively in new fission processes.

Click to expand...

It will replace nuclear and be the way of the future. Go long and buy low!

James

In my later life (that is, roughly since the beginning of my teen years) the US has had several very costly "lessons" as to the US' need to, and ability to, mold the working of distant parts of the world to suit the US' "ideals" (perhaps in the guise of protecting somebody against something).

One took place in a little country few here had ever heard of, Korea.

Another took place in another little country even fewer here had ever heard of, Vietnam.

Both had an enormous cost in terms of treasure, even more so in human lives. And the latter "adventure" nearly destroyed this country without a single round being fired here by the "enemy".

We learned precious little from these enormously costly and misbegotten adventures.

These have of course since been joined by other adventures, different in the circumstances and details, but really alike overall. And alike in what he have learned from them.

"How's that working for ya, US?"


Sherman characterized the nature of the thing.

Patton (in that attribution) characterized our problem with it.

As to the attribution from Eisenhower, res ipsa loquitur.

Best regards,

Doug

James Lemon said:

It will replace nuclear and be the way of the future. Go long and buy low!

Click to expand...

Thorium reactors only advantage is the relative availability of their fuel. They produce as much fissile material and are as risky as Uranium reactors. Moreover, since they are inherently breeding reactors, they produce weapon-grade Uranium.

Jerome Marot said:

Thorium reactors only advantage is the relative availability of their fuel. They produce as much fissile material and are as risky as Uranium reactors. Moreover, since they are inherently breeding reactors, they produce weapon-grade Uranium.

Click to expand...

Hi Jerome

According to some information that I have read thorium has many benefits over nuclear. I can't see any of it being a good idea but The thorium fuel cycle does produce fissile material, U-233, which theoretically could be used in a bomb. But thorium would not be a very practical route to making a weapon, especially with LFTR technology. Not only would the proliferator have to steal the fissile U-233 as hot liquid from inside the reactor; they’d also be exposed to an extremely dangerous isotope, U-232, unless they had a robot to carry out the task. However I feel that the conversation is getting off track from the original question posed by the OP (original poster).

James

Hi, James,

James Lemon said:

Hi Jerome

According to some information that I have read thorium has many benefits over nuclear.

Click to expand...

I don't understand. I had thought that thorium reactors (I guess that is what you mean by "thorium" - "thorium" is after all just an element) were a type of nuclear reactor.

Best regards,

Doug

Doug Kerr said:

Hi, James,



I don't understand. I had thought that thorium reactors (I guess that is what you mean by "thorium" - "thorium" is after all just an element) were a type of nuclear reactor.

Best regards,

Doug

Click to expand...

Hello Doug

Ideas for using thorium have been around since the 1960s, and by 1973 there were proposals for serious, concerted research in the US. But that program fizzled to a halt only a few years later. Why? The answer is nuclear weapons. The 1960s and ’70s were the height of the Cold War and weaponization was the driving force for all nuclear research. Any nuclear research that did not support the US nuclear arsenal was simply not given priority.

China has announced that its researchers will produce a fully functional thorium reactor within the next 10 years. India, with one of the largest thorium reserves on the planet but not much uranium, is also charging ahead. Indian researchers are planning to have a prototype thorium reactor operational early next year, though the reactor’s output will be only about a quarter of the output of a typical new nuclear plant in the west. Norway is currently in the midst of a four-year test of using thorium fuel rods in existing nuclear reactors.

Other nations with active thorium research programs include the United Kingdom, Canada, Germany, Japan, and Israel. They are considered safer and with far less waist.

James

Interesting response to the Turkey homicide bombers.

Trump simplistically says it's a "very bad thing" and Hillary says "we must cooperate with our allies".

The first response is childish with no depth or crafting of substance and the second is "ignore the torpedos and full steam ahead!"

It's heartbreaking that we have no effective response yet.

Where are the brains of the Western and Muslim worlds? Both grasped logic and insight into cause and effect hundreds of years ago yet we do not act in concert and we are repeatedly failing to work to our highest ideals and capabilities.

Arabic culture that spawned the transmission of Greek logic and philosophy to enrich Weatern thought and scholarship appears by all intents to be about either maintaining power and wealth or spreading cruel fanaticism. Why can't we use the hard won mental tools to create solutions?

What is it that makes a significant section of Muslim society attracted to Caliphate and anihilation of all opposition. What would it take to divert recruits away from the path of nihilism and suicide vests in the name of jihad?

Perhaps this is the question that none of us, including Bernie or Hillary have a clue on beginning to answer!

Asher

Asher Kelman said:

Interesting response to the Turkey homicide bombers.

Trump simplistically says it's a "very bad thing" and Hillary says "we must cooperate with our allies".

The first response is childish with no depth or crafting of substance and the second is "ignore the torpedos and full steam ahead!"

It's heartbreaking that we have no effective response yet.

Where are the brains of the Western and Muslim worlds? Both grasped logic and insight into cause and effect hundreds of years ago yet we do not act in concert and we are repeatedly failing to work to our highest ideals and capabilities.

Arabic culture that spawned the transmission of Greek logic and philosophy to enrich Weatern thought and scholarship appears by all intents to be about either maintaining power and wealth or spreading cruel fanaticism. Why can't we use the hard won mental tools to create solutions?

What is it that makes a significant section of Muslim society attracted to Caliphate and anihilation of all opposition. What would it take to divert recruits away from the path of nihilism and suicide vests in the name of jihad?

Perhaps this is the question that none of us, including Bernie or Hillary have a clue on beginning to answer!

Asher

Click to expand...

I think that these types of attacks are driven more by psychological problems than ideology—which hints at a solution

Until suicide attackers are widely seen for the desperate, traumatized, and mentally ill people they really are—instead of “psychologically normal” altruists—America will continue to suffer Islamic mass shooters who seek glory and heavenly rewards through death.

James Lemon said:

I think that these types of attacks are driven more by psychological problems than ideology—which hints at a solution

Until suicide attackers are widely seen for the desperate, traumatized, and mentally ill people they really are—instead of “psychologically normal” altruists—America will continue to suffer Islamic mass shooters who seek glory and heavenly rewards through death.

Click to expand...

James,

Your insight needs some justification. Where is you evidence for denying fundamental belief systems, the allure of Jihad and the glory of an Islamic Caliphate for true believers?

Then, if you can make your case that this is merely the action of sick folk, what is your recommended plan of response?

Asher

Asher Kelman said:

James,

Your insight needs some justification. Where is you evidence for denying fundamental belief systems, the allure of Jihad and the glory of an Islamic Caliphate for true believers?

Then, if you can make your case that this is merely the action of sick folk, what is your recommended plan of response?

Asher

Click to expand...

Asher

"Unfortunately, “martyrdom” has become a dangerous loophole: it is the only way Islamic suicide attackers believe they can guarantee their own death, and yet go to heaven instead of hell. In the Middle East and Asia, they typically commit suicide bombings. In the United States, they tend to use firearms instead of bombs, and plan on dying via “suicide by cop.” In both cases, these attack methods help disguise their suicidal motives. It is commonly claimed that they do not want to die, they just care more about harming the enemy than they do about their own survival".


"The key to deterring Islamic suicide attackers—both in the United States and around the world—is to expose their suicidal motives and close the “martyrdom” loophole."

James

If the ideology is loopy, is it reasonable to suggest the followers of such ideology are also loopy?
Religious beliefs and ideology are inseparable. In the minds of loonies they become the same thing.
In the minds of those who kill others in the name of ideology they need a name to identify with, something untouchable, something that lives on when the ideologist dies, something to look forward to after death, a savior. Religion is as good as any. Fanciful and dangerous ideology fits well with fanciful and dangerous beliefs such as religion.
If there is a solution then it is bound in the psychology of us all. Find out what it is that brings people to believe in a deity and all it entails and what brings a person to impose this ideology and all it entails in the minds of such people and we might be on every way to a solution.
Good luck with that.

Tom dinning said:

If the ideology is loopy, is it reasonable to suggest the followers of such ideology are also loopy?
Religious beliefs and ideology are inseparable. In the minds of loonies they become the same thing.
In the minds of those who kill others in the name of ideology they need a name to identify with, something untouchable, something that lives on when the ideologist dies, something to look forward to after death, a savior. Religion is as good as any. Fanciful and dangerous ideology fits well with fanciful and dangerous beliefs such as religion.
If there is a solution then it is bound in the psychology of us all. Find out what it is that brings people to believe in a deity and all it entails and what brings a person to impose this ideology and all it entails in the minds of such people and we might be on every way to a solution.
Good luck with that.

Click to expand...

Exactly!

Humans are very susceptible to permanent infestation with religious ideas. These are not bound by reason and can lead folk to great love and kindness and equally to mass murder. All in the name of righteousness! However, it is naive to consider that they are nuts. They just live in an alternative, but internally self-consultant universe.

We can call them "troubled" or "psychologically sick", but they are not. Jihadist are no different from devout Christians. They merely have a different ideology. However, because their set of "givens" and facts are so different, we make the mistake of calling them "deranged".

If an Islamic Jihadist is by definition "deranged" then so is the Pope and the Archbishop of Canterbury, The Dalai Lama and the Chief Rabbi of the U.K.

Asher

Asher Kelman said:

Exactly!

Humans are very susceptible to permanent infestation with religious ideas. These are not bound by reason and can lead folk to great love and kindness and equally to mass murder. All in the name of righteousness! However, it is naive to consider that they are nuts. They just live in an alternative, but internally self-consultant universe.

We can call them "troubled" or "psychologically sick", but they are not. Jihadist are no different from devout Christians. They merely have a different ideology. However, because their set of "givens" and facts are so different, we make the mistake of calling them "deranged".

If an Islamic Jihadist is by definition "deranged" then so is the Pope and the Archbishop of Canterbury!

Asher

Click to expand...

Asher

The thing of it is that I don't know of any Popes or Archbishops committing mass homicides by strapping bombs to themselves.

James

James Lemon said:

Asher

The thing of it is that I don't know of any Popes or Archbishops committing mass homicides by strapping bombs to themselves. Political and social theories are weak.

James

Click to expand...

James,

They do not need to be so negative as they are already the elitist in charge!

OTOH, ISIS is more like an insurgent movement!

Asher

Asher Kelman said:

James,

They do not need to be so negative as they are already the elitist in charge!

OTOH, ISIS is more like an insurgent movement!

Asher

Click to expand...

Asher

Suicide terrorism is not new, nor is it necessarily a religious phenomenon. The problem, however, has escalated in the last decade.

James

Asher Kelman said:

Exactly!

Humans are very susceptible to permanent infestation with religious ideas. These are not bound by reason and can lead folk to great love and kindness and equally to mass murder. All in the name of righteousness! However, it is naive to consider that they are nuts. They just live in an alternative, but internally self-consultant universe.

We can call them "troubled" or "psychologically sick", but they are not. Jihadist are no different from devout Christians. They merely have a different ideology. However, because their set of "givens" and facts are so different, we make the mistake of calling them "deranged".

If an Islamic Jihadist is by definition "deranged" then so is the Pope and the Archbishop of Canterbury, The Dalai Lama and the Chief Rabbi of the U.K.

Asher

Click to expand...

I understand there are more politically correct terms to describe such behaviour, Ash, but it still seems appropriate to refer to such radicals as NUTTERS.
Nutters are persons who claim to have a greater insight into the ways of the world beyond science, logic or rational thinking and behaviour. They come in various forms: loonies, crackpots, idiots, .....
'Troubled' is a bit soft. I'm troubled from time to time but my ideology and character doesn't take me out to the local airport and bomb the shite out of arrivals from Disneyland just because I'm 'troubled'.
Deranged is getting close.
I know of many people who are deeply religious and with that strongly ideological. They seem to go hand in hand when in the one place but can act separately in individuals.
There is a special set of circumstances that come together to produce a terrorist or terrorist group. It does seem, on the data, that religion of one sort or another plays a significant part in those circumstances.
I might dare to say you don't have to be a follower of Islam to be a radical terrorist but it helps.
Much the same as Christians, especially catholics, who seemed to think that their religion might give them guidance through the ordeal of raping young children in their care. Or denying appropriate medical attention to people because there would be a better life after death, or taking over a countryand enslaving the masses so that their souls might be saved.
There is an overpowering perception with idealists and religious people that they are RIGHT.
Yes, that's it! They are righteous!
In Australia we would probably use such a word to describe an nutter or loony.
We would call him/her a RIGHTEOUS PRICK!
As for James claim for christians to avoid the bombing/ suicide thing, thats probably true. But that may well be as a result of their ideology and religion, and not because of their good nature. Christians seem more into bumming little boys and persecuting cultures; with the archbishops and popes leading the way with their blessing.