*** Official Politics Shitposting Thread ***

[Jack Sawyer]

Why do they have to DO something?

Isn't enough to say "that ideology explicitly states its intention to purge my culture from the face of the earth based on nothing more than my disinterest in converting to their religion"

Very interesting how you put it.

Here:

“The missiles that kill us, American-made. The planes that kill us, American-made. The tanks … American-made. You are saying to me, where is America? America is the whole thing.”

US-made bomb kills 40 school children

Does this mean every American is a bad person? Should the whole group be purged from the face of the earth based on nothing more than what a portion of said group are responsible for?

His point is WRONG. You absolutely can hold the group responsible.

Very interesting right there. Remember that point. Let's continue

There are three kinds of muslims
A) the kind that bomb civilians
B) The kind that don't bomb civilians but think it's fine if someone else does
C) The kind that don't bomb civilians because they think it's wrong every single time.

No, the main kinds are: Sunni, Sh'ia and Kharjite.

The problem is Wahhabism. An ultraconservative, austere, fundamentalist, puritanical Islamic reform movement.

The further problem is the alliance of the Wahabbis (who do not like to be called that) to USA's Middle Eestern BFFs, the house of Saud.

And another problem was US/UK intervention intervention on behalf of their companies (capitalism, so get the govt to do your dirty work, hell yeah) in Iran in '53, overthrowing Mossadegh (who wanted to make the countries' natural resources a public good, much like in Norway today) and installing a puppet. A puppet who turned that country from an open and relatively progressive state to a "DEATH TO AMERICA" chanting state.

This in turn fueled a surge of nationalism which culminated in '79. The US-iran relations are fucked to this day.

But, the events in '79 in Iran also challenged Saudi Wahhabism in a number of ways on a number of fronts. It was a revolution of Shia, not Sunni, Islam and Wahhabism held that Shia were not truly Muslims. Nonetheless, its massive popularity in Iran and its overthrow of a pro-American secular monarchy generated enormous enthusiasm among pious Sunni, not just Shia Muslims around the world.

Khomeiny then preached that monarchy was against Islam and America was Islam's enemy, and called for the overthrow of Al-Saud family. This lead to Saudi Arabia – a kingdom allied with America – to "redouble their efforts to counter Iran and spread Wahhabism around the world", and reversed any moves by Saudi leaders to distance itself from Wahhabism or "soften" its ideology.

Remember 9/11? 15/19 hijackers were Saudis.

And yet the retaliation was to attack Afghanistan, and Iraq. Then Libya, then Syria, then Yemen.

I hold group B responsible for group A's actions. By tolerating bad actors, they enable their behavior. And that's how I feel it's appropriate to hold the entire group responsible for the actions of group A

Let's follow this logic. So, by enabling the Military Industrial Complex in destroying the whole Yemeni civilization by not giving a fuck that it's actually happening, should you Banana be held responsible as well?