Islamic Jihadists ISIS

[Hardy]

If I'm not wrong, ISIS are butchering Christians, Yazidis, atheists and anyone else they consider "infidels" not for their nationality, but for their religion.

Yes they are and any one else friend or foe that they do not deem suitable for the COUNTRY they are trying to establish.

As I have previously pointed out they have more in common with the Khymer Rouge than anyone else. Their aim is to force their ideals on a population, this as history as shown will inevitably fail.

It's not a country as we understand it that they're trying to establish. It's a "caliphate" - a theocracy.  They are offering the choice to convert or die, not to naturalise or die. They don't have a political philosophy or an an economic ideology that I know of. Religion is what drives their actions.

[magpie seanie]

If I'm not wrong, ISIS are butchering Christians, Yazidis, atheists and anyone else they consider "infidels" not for their nationality, but for their religion.

Yes they are and any one else friend or foe that they do not deem suitable for the COUNTRY they are trying to establish.

As I have previously pointed out they have more in common with the Khymer Rouge than anyone else. Their aim is to force their ideals on a population, this as history as shown will inevitably fail.

It's not a country as we understand it that they're trying to establish. It's a "caliphate" - a theocracy.  They are offering the choice to convert or die, not to naturalise or die. They don't have a political philosophy or an an economic ideology that I know of. Religion is what drives their actions.

I agree with this. Whether it be a warped view of religion or a hijacking of it, you simply cannot say it doesn't motivate or contribute to this and many other conflicts throughout history.

[Apparently so]

Aye, this ISIS crowd seem to be complete head bangers. Does anyone like them? America, Iran, Britain, the Kurds and both sides in Syria fighting against them

Ignorant people form opinions on an entire religion just because of the likes of ISIS. Its very annoying

[lynchbhoy]

Religion is the root of all evil. These guys are vermin but I'm afraid the vermin are not restricted to one religion, I am sure you could draw up a good list of christian groups that are fighting too. The unfortunate thing is that this is the b**tard children of the west, the failed reasoning of my enemies enemy is my friend policy.

Look at Egypt. A muslim government elected in democratic elections. A military coup sponsored by the yanks and the dictators are back in power. The net result - radical Islam will flourish.

Fcuk sake Myles
You might not like or have time for religion
But I don't know of any other religion that's perpetrating such war/ethnic cleansing/ genocide etc like this 
Not since the crusades for Christianity/Catholicism! ( ok maybe a few outbursts since then)

I think it's Israel not the Jewish religion that is responsible for most of the hassle in their region!

I'd hope that this insurgency is the last actions of a religion going a bit mad before it stabilizes.
However I'm not sure who or what will stabilize it!
The decent muslim folk seem too afraid to stand up to the warmongers.

If unattested, this third world problem may arrive at our first world doorstep soon!

No- I don't have ideas on how to quell it!

Are you serious!!

Do you remember the Serbia/Bosnia war. Christians perpetrating mass murder against muslims. Lebanon, a corrupt christian minority with their Israeli allies killing muslims.

What about America invasion of Iraq and of Afghanistan. USA is a christian government, Bush a fundamentalists every bit as brain dead as the fundamentalists of Islam.

Today islamic extremists may be the agressor in most cases but I wouldnt be too quick to let the peace loving christian religion of the hook.

Ok Myles if you believe your examples good luck to you!

Bosnia/Serbia/Balkans is a tribal way ongoing for centuries. Religion is not at its root.

And bush and USA being Christian and somehow the cause of Iraq etc wars/fights/battles and not strategic oil manipulation .... Well you learn something new every day

Fecking Christians all out attacks on non Christians across the board everywhere it seems - on a par with the Islamic fundamentalists !!

[omaghjoe]

If I'm not wrong, ISIS are butchering Christians, Yazidis, atheists and anyone else they consider "infidels" not for their nationality, but for their religion.

Yes they are and any one else friend or foe that they do not deem suitable for the COUNTRY they are trying to establish.

As I have previously pointed out they have more in common with the Khymer Rouge than anyone else. Their aim is to force their ideals on a population, this as history as shown will inevitably fail.

It's not a country as we understand it that they're trying to establish. It's a "caliphate" - a theocracy.  They are offering the choice to convert or die, not to naturalise or die. They don't have a political philosophy or an an economic ideology that I know of. Religion is what drives their actions.

I agree with this. Whether it be a warped view of religion or a hijacking of it, you simply cannot say it doesn't motivate or contribute to this and many other conflicts throughout history.

I can see where you guys are coming from and no doubt ISIS members would agree with you also ;-).

Firstly there are many different types of countries: monarchies, autocracies, they all have one thing in common nationalism and a democracy or caliphate is no different, what they all no have in common is nationalism. That somehow one ethnic group is better than another.

No matter about all this dramatic talk of a caliphate, ISIS is comprised of mainly young Sunni Arabs who are trying to establish their own state because democracy in Iraq and dictatorship in Syria has left them alienated from power. A Sunni Arab state is the driving force behind this group, they have backed this up with a philosophy of religion in an attempt to justify their actions. But of course their actions are completely contradictory to the teachings of their religion. 

Using Religion to attempt justify your actions does not make religion the cause of war.

One thing I am sure we are agreed on is that ISIS are a bunch of maniacs who are doomed to implode.

[Ulick]

ISIS are undoubtedly a brutal bunch but what is worrying is the unquestioning willingness you all have to accept every story about them that emerges on LiveLeak and the western press. It is certain that a significant proportion of their stories, pictures and videos are fake and distributed to further the aims of the big western powers. For example, this 'convert or die' thing has been repeated so many times it's now unquestionably accepted as true. However according to those journalists actually in the area it's really that a tax has been imposed on non-Muslims, something like the Church of Ireland tithe which Catholics used to pay here in the 19th century. Unfair yes but a long way from 'convert or die'. Decapitating babies? No evidence so far. Then there's the genocide of those 50k people on top of the mountain which helped deflect so much attention from Gaza, well on the news this morning the Brits and Yanks have called off their rescue mission because well there weren't as many people as they thought and those that are there aren't in quite the dire straits as had been thought. Indeed...

[dowling]

Very well put Ulick.

[haveaharp]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-28814633

So are we to believe this or not ?

[trileacman]

I like the Kurds, not too different from ourselves. Suffered under the yoke of many regimes and suffered terrible atrocities but didn't take up violence wholesale to settle the scores. So I would have faith in what they reported, always seemed like good enough people down the years.

[seafoid]

I'd love to know more about the links between the Saudis and ISIS.
Forced conversions to Islam have no place in the 21st century, not even in the desert.
But as long as the petrol is required over here Saudi can do what it likes. 

[Aoise]

Despite the continued portrayal in the Western media, Muslims are not total barbarians and religion is not the root of all evil. In fact most Muslims are peace loving affable people and religion is actual the soul of civilisation and the  real reason why we are able to live together and advance society in relative harmony.

ISIS are not representative of Islam in any way and they're proclamation to reestablish a caliphate is laughable and utter nonsense. Their uncompromising radicalism is more representative of the Third Reich or the Khymer Rouge.  The Muslim caliphates of the Ottoman and Moorish empires that they refer to were civilisations that lasted and thrived for centuries based on principles of harmony and inclusion,  that lead to a cohesive society were people from various backgrounds were able to live as relative equals and thus giving full contribution to society. Christians, Jews, Muslims & a few other groups besides all lived together peacefully. If you've ever been to Cordoba or Granada in Spain and you will be able to see the magnificence of Moorish architecture.

"But where are they now?" I hear you ask! Well the Moors gradually got more exclusive to non Muslims which ultimately lead to their demise. The Ottomans had a similar long term slide more to do with the fragmented nature of their empire but the nail in their coffin was the rise of nationalism. The British and French empires spread the notion of nationalism throughout the Middle East basically based on the principle that all people and cultures need their own fatherland in which to exist and thrive properly. It was of course nonsense as all these people had been living and thriving together for centuries. However it struck a cord and lead to the Arab Uprising in WW1 and the ultimate downfall of the Ottoman Empire.

Ironically enough for the British and French the sowing of this seed lead to the disintegration of their own empires very shortly afterwards

Lebanon is the perfect example of how nationalism doesn't work all those people in Lebanon Jews, Shias, Sunnis, Druze & Maronites lived together in relative peace and prosperity for centuries, cue nationislm and some people within each groups start to believe that Lebanon is their country and a brutal civil war breaks out where these people begin to butcher their neighbours. The idea of nationalism also lead to the notion that Jews required a homeland which lead to the them taking over what the Palestians reckoned was their homeland and the subsequent conflict there.

Also Saudi Arabia is often cited as a country where Islam is practiced in its truest form using the laws that were handed straight down from the beginning of Islam. This is utter tosh. 90years ago 90%of Saudi Arabians lived a nomadic lifestyle and their current laws of keeping women hidden and swift brutal justice has more to do with the brutal neccesity of living in such a way. To compare them to the standard of a western liberal democracy which has been a settled society refining its rules laws for thousands of years is ludicrous. 

You only have to look our own conflict to see what that it the idea of belonging to a homeland that caused conflict not religion.
The idea of nationalism is deeply ingrained in Western culture that we refuse to look at the problems it causes as we take it for granted its just the way it is.

The assault from the media to place the world's problems on religion is incorrect and fails to recognise the role that  religion plays in society. Religion gives us principles and even a way of thinking that will allow us to live fuller lives in which will allow us to grow and our neighbours to grow as individuals and as a society. Even those who say they have no religion in the West are actually living to the Principles of Christianity. When I look at people who I know who are living closest to the principles of Christianity they are the happiest and best loved people I know.

So don't roll out the fashionable "Its all religions fault" when there is conflict in the world because it just ain't the case!

Excellent post but I do think religion does get hijacked by other agendas, including nationalism. Often the idea of a homeland or nation breaks down on religious lines so while religion is possibly not the initial cause it is certainly part of the equation.

Actually nationalism is the idea of a homeland for an ethnicity not a religion.

Ethnicity is basically a group of people that are linked through culture, race, religion and customs. You can blame all of these things instead of nationalism. But nationalism in some form or another is actually the root cause of most conflicts in the World outside of Africa.

Most religions promote peace, harmony, love of thy neighbour, inclusion mercy, understanding, forgiveness, not exactly war inciting traits. I think it would be fair to say if most people followed their religion truly there would be alot less conflict in the world.

Nationalism is basically saying that for your ethnicity to survive and thrive it needs a homeland to do so which is of course not true.

I would disagree, I would say that Nationalism has been used and manipulated to cause conflicts that are always to the benefit of the oppressor or economic benefactor in the main.  We really do need to learn from what happened in our own country as all other conflicts are not necessarily different.  Human traits don't normally deviate from protection and self/family defence unless its for personal wealth or power and control.  One usually has superiority over another and this is where the vulnerabilities of religion and nationalism come into play - they're easily manipulated and used to cause difference and division - the main tool of the oppressor or benefactor.  Every conflict usually has an economic benefit for one party.  I would argue it is this factor that causes conflicts, Nationalism and religion are just the tools used as the means to an end.

The Irish conflict was portrayed as religious and nationalistic, but this was manna from heaven for those who sought economic gain and power and control.  Empire building and power/greed was the cause, Nationalism was its scapegoat!

[rossiewanderer]

ISIS are undoubtedly a brutal bunch but what is worrying is the unquestioning willingness you all have to accept every story about them that emerges on LiveLeak and the western press. It is certain that a significant proportion of their stories, pictures and videos are fake and distributed to further the aims of the big western powers. For example, this 'convert or die' thing has been repeated so many times it's now unquestionably accepted as true. However according to those journalists actually in the area it's really that a tax has been imposed on non-Muslims, something like the Church of Ireland tithe which Catholics used to pay here in the 19th century. Unfair yes but a long way from 'convert or die'. Decapitating babies? No evidence so far. Then there's the genocide of those 50k people on top of the mountain which helped deflect so much attention from Gaza, well on the news this morning the Brits and Yanks have called off their rescue mission because well there weren't as many people as they thought and those that are there aren't in quite the dire straits as had been thought. Indeed...

"Then there's the genocide of those 50k people on top of the mountain which helped deflect so much attention from Gaza, " What a charming comment about woman, children and civilians being killed.

I hope you find your evidence when you wake up.

[omaghjoe]

Despite the continued portrayal in the Western media, Muslims are not total barbarians and religion is not the root of all evil. In fact most Muslims are peace loving affable people and religion is actual the soul of civilisation and the  real reason why we are able to live together and advance society in relative harmony.

ISIS are not representative of Islam in any way and they're proclamation to reestablish a caliphate is laughable and utter nonsense. Their uncompromising radicalism is more representative of the Third Reich or the Khymer Rouge.  The Muslim caliphates of the Ottoman and Moorish empires that they refer to were civilisations that lasted and thrived for centuries based on principles of harmony and inclusion,  that lead to a cohesive society were people from various backgrounds were able to live as relative equals and thus giving full contribution to society. Christians, Jews, Muslims & a few other groups besides all lived together peacefully. If you've ever been to Cordoba or Granada in Spain and you will be able to see the magnificence of Moorish architecture.

"But where are they now?" I hear you ask! Well the Moors gradually got more exclusive to non Muslims which ultimately lead to their demise. The Ottomans had a similar long term slide more to do with the fragmented nature of their empire but the nail in their coffin was the rise of nationalism. The British and French empires spread the notion of nationalism throughout the Middle East basically based on the principle that all people and cultures need their own fatherland in which to exist and thrive properly. It was of course nonsense as all these people had been living and thriving together for centuries. However it struck a cord and lead to the Arab Uprising in WW1 and the ultimate downfall of the Ottoman Empire.

Ironically enough for the British and French the sowing of this seed lead to the disintegration of their own empires very shortly afterwards

Lebanon is the perfect example of how nationalism doesn't work all those people in Lebanon Jews, Shias, Sunnis, Druze & Maronites lived together in relative peace and prosperity for centuries, cue nationislm and some people within each groups start to believe that Lebanon is their country and a brutal civil war breaks out where these people begin to butcher their neighbours. The idea of nationalism also lead to the notion that Jews required a homeland which lead to the them taking over what the Palestians reckoned was their homeland and the subsequent conflict there.

Also Saudi Arabia is often cited as a country where Islam is practiced in its truest form using the laws that were handed straight down from the beginning of Islam. This is utter tosh. 90years ago 90%of Saudi Arabians lived a nomadic lifestyle and their current laws of keeping women hidden and swift brutal justice has more to do with the brutal neccesity of living in such a way. To compare them to the standard of a western liberal democracy which has been a settled society refining its rules laws for thousands of years is ludicrous. 

You only have to look our own conflict to see what that it the idea of belonging to a homeland that caused conflict not religion.
The idea of nationalism is deeply ingrained in Western culture that we refuse to look at the problems it causes as we take it for granted its just the way it is.

The assault from the media to place the world's problems on religion is incorrect and fails to recognise the role that  religion plays in society. Religion gives us principles and even a way of thinking that will allow us to live fuller lives in which will allow us to grow and our neighbours to grow as individuals and as a society. Even those who say they have no religion in the West are actually living to the Principles of Christianity. When I look at people who I know who are living closest to the principles of Christianity they are the happiest and best loved people I know.

So don't roll out the fashionable "Its all religions fault" when there is conflict in the world because it just ain't the case!

Excellent post but I do think religion does get hijacked by other agendas, including nationalism. Often the idea of a homeland or nation breaks down on religious lines so while religion is possibly not the initial cause it is certainly part of the equation.

Actually nationalism is the idea of a homeland for an ethnicity not a religion.

Ethnicity is basically a group of people that are linked through culture, race, religion and customs. You can blame all of these things instead of nationalism. But nationalism in some form or another is actually the root cause of most conflicts in the World outside of Africa.

Most religions promote peace, harmony, love of thy neighbour, inclusion mercy, understanding, forgiveness, not exactly war inciting traits. I think it would be fair to say if most people followed their religion truly there would be alot less conflict in the world.

Nationalism is basically saying that for your ethnicity to survive and thrive it needs a homeland to do so which is of course not true.

I would disagree, I would say that Nationalism has been used and manipulated to cause conflicts that are always to the benefit of the oppressor or economic benefactor in the main.  We really do need to learn from what happened in our own country as all other conflicts are not necessarily different.  Human traits don't normally deviate from protection and self/family defence unless its for personal wealth or power and control.  One usually has superiority over another and this is where the vulnerabilities of religion and nationalism come into play - they're easily manipulated and used to cause difference and division - the main tool of the oppressor or benefactor.  Every conflict usually has an economic benefit for one party.  I would argue it is this factor that causes conflicts, Nationalism and religion are just the tools used as the means to an end.

The Irish conflict was portrayed as religious and nationalistic, but this was manna from heaven for those who sought economic gain and power and control.  Empire building and power/greed was the cause, Nationalism was its scapegoat!

Hi Aoise

In modern terms Empire building is just a form of nationalism got out of control. I agree that most conflict has economic benefit for one side or the other but the fact that there are sides in the first place battling it out with the intention of a nation state. Take the Balkans as an example no real strong economic benefit for anyone to split but they split anyway.

I have been following the Scottish Independence debate quite closely and one topic that has come up for discussion is the idea of nationalism and that Scottish people's identity and culturedo not necessarily need their own state to survive and thrive. So I started asking myself the same question about Ireland, Irish culture and way of life is thriving at the moment in the North, maybe even more so than in the South. What is the actual need to be part of the South?

Ok so I can hear the die hards labeling me now as traitor or whatever just by merely asking that question. But ask yourself the question about a nation state, why do we need one?. The idea of modern Irish nationalism was born out the oppression of our religion and culture if that risk of suppression of of your way of life is gone, do you actually need an ethnic nation state? Or at least what is the up to date reason for having one?

Now while I accept that it is the political nature of the world at the moment to have a nation state, but the question in an increasingly connected world how much more division can we take? and where will it lead us to?  And what are our alternatives?

[haveaharp]

Despite the continued portrayal in the Western media, Muslims are not total barbarians and religion is not the root of all evil. In fact most Muslims are peace loving affable people and religion is actual the soul of civilisation and the  real reason why we are able to live together and advance society in relative harmony.

ISIS are not representative of Islam in any way and they're proclamation to reestablish a caliphate is laughable and utter nonsense. Their uncompromising radicalism is more representative of the Third Reich or the Khymer Rouge.  The Muslim caliphates of the Ottoman and Moorish empires that they refer to were civilisations that lasted and thrived for centuries based on principles of harmony and inclusion,  that lead to a cohesive society were people from various backgrounds were able to live as relative equals and thus giving full contribution to society. Christians, Jews, Muslims & a few other groups besides all lived together peacefully. If you've ever been to Cordoba or Granada in Spain and you will be able to see the magnificence of Moorish architecture.

"But where are they now?" I hear you ask! Well the Moors gradually got more exclusive to non Muslims which ultimately lead to their demise. The Ottomans had a similar long term slide more to do with the fragmented nature of their empire but the nail in their coffin was the rise of nationalism. The British and French empires spread the notion of nationalism throughout the Middle East basically based on the principle that all people and cultures need their own fatherland in which to exist and thrive properly. It was of course nonsense as all these people had been living and thriving together for centuries. However it struck a cord and lead to the Arab Uprising in WW1 and the ultimate downfall of the Ottoman Empire.

Ironically enough for the British and French the sowing of this seed lead to the disintegration of their own empires very shortly afterwards

Lebanon is the perfect example of how nationalism doesn't work all those people in Lebanon Jews, Shias, Sunnis, Druze & Maronites lived together in relative peace and prosperity for centuries, cue nationislm and some people within each groups start to believe that Lebanon is their country and a brutal civil war breaks out where these people begin to butcher their neighbours. The idea of nationalism also lead to the notion that Jews required a homeland which lead to the them taking over what the Palestians reckoned was their homeland and the subsequent conflict there.

Also Saudi Arabia is often cited as a country where Islam is practiced in its truest form using the laws that were handed straight down from the beginning of Islam. This is utter tosh. 90years ago 90%of Saudi Arabians lived a nomadic lifestyle and their current laws of keeping women hidden and swift brutal justice has more to do with the brutal neccesity of living in such a way. To compare them to the standard of a western liberal democracy which has been a settled society refining its rules laws for thousands of years is ludicrous. 

You only have to look our own conflict to see what that it the idea of belonging to a homeland that caused conflict not religion.
The idea of nationalism is deeply ingrained in Western culture that we refuse to look at the problems it causes as we take it for granted its just the way it is.

The assault from the media to place the world's problems on religion is incorrect and fails to recognise the role that  religion plays in society. Religion gives us principles and even a way of thinking that will allow us to live fuller lives in which will allow us to grow and our neighbours to grow as individuals and as a society. Even those who say they have no religion in the West are actually living to the Principles of Christianity. When I look at people who I know who are living closest to the principles of Christianity they are the happiest and best loved people I know.

So don't roll out the fashionable "Its all religions fault" when there is conflict in the world because it just ain't the case!

Excellent post but I do think religion does get hijacked by other agendas, including nationalism. Often the idea of a homeland or nation breaks down on religious lines so while religion is possibly not the initial cause it is certainly part of the equation.

Actually nationalism is the idea of a homeland for an ethnicity not a religion.

Ethnicity is basically a group of people that are linked through culture, race, religion and customs. You can blame all of these things instead of nationalism. But nationalism in some form or another is actually the root cause of most conflicts in the World outside of Africa.

Most religions promote peace, harmony, love of thy neighbour, inclusion mercy, understanding, forgiveness, not exactly war inciting traits. I think it would be fair to say if most people followed their religion truly there would be alot less conflict in the world.

Nationalism is basically saying that for your ethnicity to survive and thrive it needs a homeland to do so which is of course not true.

I would disagree, I would say that Nationalism has been used and manipulated to cause conflicts that are always to the benefit of the oppressor or economic benefactor in the main.  We really do need to learn from what happened in our own country as all other conflicts are not necessarily different.  Human traits don't normally deviate from protection and self/family defence unless its for personal wealth or power and control.  One usually has superiority over another and this is where the vulnerabilities of religion and nationalism come into play - they're easily manipulated and used to cause difference and division - the main tool of the oppressor or benefactor.  Every conflict usually has an economic benefit for one party.  I would argue it is this factor that causes conflicts, Nationalism and religion are just the tools used as the means to an end.

The Irish conflict was portrayed as religious and nationalistic, but this was manna from heaven for those who sought economic gain and power and control.  Empire building and power/greed was the cause, Nationalism was its scapegoat!

What is the actual need to be part of the South?

So we can make the South Irish again.

[Hardy]

Let's not be English, French or German any more. Let's be European. No, not European, let's be men. Let's be humanity. All we have to do is get rid of one last piece of egocentricity - patriotism.
– Victor Hugo.