It is extremely clear that Islamic Terrorists are an extreme threat to the entire world...I this thread however I wish to explore opinions of United States citizens. So, what should we do?
We will have this problem until we outlaw all religions and disabuse everyone of the myths of heaven and hell.
We should respond with appropriate force to murderers and terrorists. We should not extend that force to targeting anyone sharing the same skin color, family, belief, or ethnicity of someone who is a murderer or terrorist. Deal with the actual threat to people living in peace. Don't let prejudice distract you or cause you to become a threat to people living in peace.
If a billion people believe something and a fraction of one percent do something bad with it why should anything be done
Recognize that Wahhabism and radical Islam is a nation without borders that has openly declared war on the United States and counter declare war. Invoke NATO. Go to war back against Wahhabism and radical Islam. Destroy their government centers (mosques) and their military commanders (Imans). We face a greater risk of mass destruction and death than we ever did from Germany and Japan in WWII, ... and unlike Germany and Japan the Nation of Islam HAS militarily invaded and attacked within the continental United States by both air and ground forces. The fact that they don't wear uniforms or have a formal boundary does not change that they are a war with us. The time is short while we could still win this war. With inaction this will change and we will have no option but to capitulate. This happens as soon as they have nuclear and/or militarized biological contagious disease weapons. That was NOT a poll option. My "other" vote is "Declare military war against Wahhabism and radical Islamic in real, intense military terms."
Not an Islam problem but a problem of Religion requiring social morals for free. We are simply not holy and not moral enough to establish our own, Commune of Heaven on Earth. We have Google Translate now.
About Islam? Nothing. Religion as such isn't a problem and our 1st Amendment protects the right to exercise it. About jihad? That depends. ISIS probably should be fought until they are eliminated but who among our leaders wants to do this? Trump maybe? Who else?
1 terrorism only using a rifle shot over 100 people. His was not a sophisticated attack. But, do the math. 1% of a billion is 1,000,000. What is 1,000,000 times 100? Is that level of math within you understanding. 19 killed over 3000 on 9-11. The math for that figured times 1,000,000 is the total genocide of 100% of all people in the United States. And everyone in Western and Eastern Europe too. So what is your answer to your own question?
What a bunch of crap. Stalin, Hitler and Mao were not motivated by religion. Secular governments have been the greatest mass murderers of all. Nor bring up Native Americans as your counter point. They were treated and considered literally as animals by the western secular governments. This only ended when the Catholic Pope declared they are humans with souls, therefore could not be exterminated or treated as animals under Catholic doctrine. Until then, entire indigenous populations of the Americas were 100% exterminated and are since extinct. ONLY secular governments have undertaken outright exterminations of human populations.
Should we target Islam or target terrorists? Should we just bomb Islamic centers because we sure bomb terrorists centers?
Your math has an error. One percent is not a fraction of a percent. Per year, more American's are struck by lightening than killed by terrorists. ... and way more die from heart disease or drunk drivers. Seems like the religions that allow bacon burgers and alcohol are racking up the greater death toll.
We should do far more than just bomb. Ground forces. Track them down. If they surrender put them in internment camps. If they can be proven to have advocated attacks against the USA - and did so not wearing a uniform - they do not have protection under the Geneva Convention. Yes, destroy, including bombing, Wahhabi mosques and any others that advocate attacking the USA. They are the government and military recruiting centers of the enemy.
My math on your number is exactly correct. Everyone dies. Therefore, in your logic, all murder is irrelevant, right? But proceed. Tell me how many innocent people have to be MURDERED before anything should be done? Give a number. I already asked this. 10,000 more? 100,000 more? A million? Do we wait until they have weapons of mass destruction to give them a fair counter-counter-attack? Burgers and alcohol don't murder people.
Yeah it does. Here's even a far left source that is highly sympathetic to Muslims of the direct link between Wahhabism and ISIS. You Can’t Understand ISIS If You Don’t Know the History of Wahhabism in Saudi Arabia http://www.huffingtonpost.com/alastair-crooke/isis-wahhabism-saudi-arabia_b_5717157.html
Not specifically, no. However, with a formal declaration of war it would be no different than if Japan or Germany put women and children at their military bases and in their government centers. If an enemy uses their own people militarily as human shields it is then the enemy that killed them. Throughout world history (except the USA recently) militaries never stopped their advance or attack because the enemy put up a wall of their own civilians as a defense. If the enemy puts their women and children under bombs, it is the enemy that killed them. Such is war. Nor did I say "all mosques."
There are over 100 casualties, not just the 50 murdered. The media likes to declare that even if a person is left physically or crippled for life and horrific pain and suffering, they just don't count if they don't die. This was actually initiated by Bush in Gulf War 1 - the change the definition of "casualty" to ONLY those who die to falsely minimize American loses.
My question was do we attack Islam or terrorists? If we attack Islam the mosques especially during prayers are a prime target. Yes or no?
Ya, all your suggestions are horrible. You can't legally discriminate against anyone, and how the (*)(*)(*)(*) is a sign going to stop a person from harming anyone? It's unconstitutional to deport Muslims, or shut down mosques.
A fraction of a percent is not 1%. Math based on the assumption the two are equal, is incorrect. And I provided you with no number. We do things to prevent innocent people from being killed before even one dies. It's just not the thing you want done. What we do will never prevent all crime. The only way to insure that no one chooses unlawful actions it to insure that no one can choose their actions. The only way to insure no drunk driver kills someone is to remove the freedom to drink or to drive.
