Clearing the Eye said:
Seriously, who would want to strap C4 to them selves after seeing her?
On a more serious note, Wouldn't it make more sense to say... DoS attack their recruiting websites? Or completely take them down via their web host?
State Department Proposes "Trolling" Web-Based Islamic Extremists
- Thread starter Hevva
- Start date
Seriously, who would want to strap C4 to them selves after seeing her?
On a more serious note, Wouldn't it make more sense to say... DoS attack their recruiting websites? Or completely take them down via their web host?
sigh...Clearing the Eye said:
This is getting embarrassing man, please stop? You acting like a snarky asshole is completely uncalled for(you really need to lighten up, I extended the olive branch and everything, and instead you're having a sulk...), I see I've hurt your feelings quite badly, I am sorry for that. I was being light hearted and joking around, trying to be nice to you, pointing out why what you said sounded silly but also saying that's ok and we all do it sometimes.
I see however that you're not interested in remaining civil and good humoured so i doubt I'll reply to any comments you leave after this.
----
Maybe read magpie's post(above), he seems to get it. anyway:
Why are you jumping to the wild conclusion that I am a member of this program?
More importantly, where do you get off badmouthing volunteers who are trying to help the less fortunate?
Are volunteers at charity drives idiots too then? I mean, if an entire country like the US can't give enough charity to save all of the homeless and starving people in the world, then all these smaller charities should just not even bother, right?
It isn't about foreigners walking out into places and telling people what to think or abandon their lives, it's about educating/supporting local Islamic youth(who may not support terrorism but don't quite know how to defend their views in light of the claims extremists put forward) so that they in turn can use this knowledge to help disarm the brooding of their fellows who might otherwise fall into the traps laid by jihadist recruiters/supporters.
That is most certainly NOT a stupid idea at all, and even if you don't think it will work you still made yourself sound silly with such an over-reaction.
Stuff like rebutting jihadist claims that their religion justifies the killing of innocents by pointing out to them exactly where the Qur'an says that is most certainly NOT ok, so that they in turn can point it out to to their peers and not fall for the baiting of terrorist supporters is an amiable pursuit, and while some may not listen others might. This is directed at reasoning with people who are still on the fence, cutting out some of the potential support base for this extremism to expand to by opening some islamic peoples eyes to the manipulation they're being subjected to.
You don't learn about these sort of things if no one ever tells you. 'Knowledge is power' and so on.
Don't go condemning a whole group based on the actions/attitudes (not even that, your own assumptions of their attitude/actions) of a select few.
Why are you jumping to the wild conclusion that I am a member of this program?
More importantly, where do you get off badmouthing volunteers who are trying to help the less fortunate?
Are volunteers at charity drives idiots too then? I mean, if an entire country like the US can't give enough charity to save all of the homeless and starving people in the world, then all these smaller charities should just not even bother, right?
It isn't about foreigners walking out into places and telling people what to think or abandon their lives, it's about educating/supporting local Islamic youth(who may not support terrorism but don't quite know how to defend their views in light of the claims extremists put forward) so that they in turn can use this knowledge to help disarm the brooding of their fellows who might otherwise fall into the traps laid by jihadist recruiters/supporters.
That is most certainly NOT a stupid idea at all, and even if you don't think it will work you still made yourself sound silly with such an over-reaction.
Stuff like rebutting jihadist claims that their religion justifies the killing of innocents by pointing out to them exactly where the Qur'an says that is most certainly NOT ok, so that they in turn can point it out to to their peers and not fall for the baiting of terrorist supporters is an amiable pursuit, and while some may not listen others might. This is directed at reasoning with people who are still on the fence, cutting out some of the potential support base for this extremism to expand to by opening some islamic peoples eyes to the manipulation they're being subjected to.
You don't learn about these sort of things if no one ever tells you. 'Knowledge is power' and so on.
Don't go condemning a whole group based on the actions/attitudes (not even that, your own assumptions of their attitude/actions) of a select few.
---
As for that last bit, it's pretty straight forward, solve media said 'falling pianos' as the verification code, I was talking about karam in my post. If you need extra explanation I can give it(though only if you stop being so grumpy) but it seems self explainatory.... (you know what karama is right?)
Your limp insults and (attempted) jabs do little to lend wit to your bumbling comments. Word to the wise: if you're going to pretend to be friendly and to sound witty, do so without the gleeful, aloof and painfully obvious attitude. Out and out saying what you mean would suffice. Don't worry, I'm not going to run and cry if you drop the mask and doing so would do wonders for your intellectual appearance. I know I've better things to do than read through any more of it and I'd hope you would, too.Some_weirdGuy said:
Yes, but the point isn't necessarily to destroy hardcore fundamentalists. It's to dissuade their followers. Radical movements, especially jihadic terrorist groups, NEED recruits. When their missions are generally one way affairs, the best way to fight terrorism is to encourage people not to be terrorists. Hence this. Also, as a volunteer movement, it doesn't actually cost anything.Clearing the Eye said:
You did read the article, right? Their asking mostly for muslims to participate. It's not about demonising muslims, it's about utilising moderates to dissuade people from doing something crazy. And it's got nothing to do with killing them. And nothing to do with making muslims be associated with terrorism. What nuttery is this?
It won't feed any "hype machine" and the point, which you don't seem to grasp, is to encourage those who would consider such courses of action, that it's not the way to go. I think their biggest problem will be the admins of sites.
Actually, demoralise in the strategic sense is more about shaking the conviction in a cause. So this is demoralising. It's not just "You can't win" or "We're the best", it can simply be "Your cause isn't worthwhile" or "We're not really enemies".mfeff said:
As long as the people involved don't say they are on forums, your argument holds no water.
It's a volunteer movement. They have to advertise to get volunteers. Duh.
It's a volunteer movement, and the organisation of such is much less a waste of time and resources than mass murdering Afghanis.
To those saying it's about hate or sinking to their level-reread the article and not the headline. They're proposing using reason and logic, some satire, and quotes from the Qur-ran, and are trying to recruit Muslim volunteers. It's not hate, and to think so shows deliberate ignorance.
Christian extremists are mostly in Africa, so using the internet wouldn't be of much help there. Aren't many other types of militant extremists out there right now.Allthingsspectacular said:
Don't get me wrong, because I absolutely love this idea and think it'll work great, but I feel like this system won't work for many of the new recruits in Afghanistan/etc, who are only joining to help feed their families or to push us invaders out of their land. The Taliban, believe it or not, are a huge source of money and relief in the worst-of-the-worst Middle Eastern countries.MetalMagpie said:
It'll definitely help in the more modernized Middle Eastern countries and in Western countries, though.
Nah, not really that sure, but I can't think off-hand of any other *militant* extremists...Allthingsspectacular said:
Wiccan suicide bombers? I guess there are some Irish extremists, completely forgot about that.
I already responded to a similar comment by another user. So I am just going to copy and paste that here:Loonyyy said:
In all fairness I did "get" what he was talking about. Your correction is a pretty good one.
I knee-jerked considering the concept of asymmetrical warfare or full spectrum warfare includes disinformation and propaganda. His use of the term demoralize and undermine are, for better of for worse, shoplifted from a western military vernacular.
The implication is that the enemy/moral agent is "at present" quantified with high morale and high positional framing (psychologically hygienic).
I inferred that logic, humor, satire, and Islamic philosophy where being associated with "disinformation" and "propaganda".
That is coming from having of surmised the response of the core group, that some form of their system is illogical. Though it is perfectly rational "as agency" to hold to false beliefs, as with any dogma the extreme sides tend to bend contrary information through the use of persuasion and psychological intimidation to subvert the conflicting data. It's perhaps a form of cognitive dissonance.
A cursory examination of many cults have shown that break downs in information tend to enhance the fervor of the cult rather than subvert it. Coupled with a strong military presence in these countries, the notion that reason would engender passivity for a "freedom fighter" fighting for his very "soul" and that of his country is a long shot at best. The unfortunate aspect of this is that both sides in this contest have very strong elements of dichotomy in their respective approaches. I suspect it will simply cause a negative feedback loop.
I think my other problem is that this type of warfare is not anything new, and especially not anything new in this particular series of conflicts. Give it a couple days and Al Jazeera will be running a special on it, the web sites will have fancy graphics espousing about it... and bam... there ya go.
As an aside if peace is really what anyone wanted... the military presence would be removed, the corporate military would be removed, Guantanamo Bay would be emptied out... and a series of apologies and I'm Sorry would be forthcoming.
It's a tough sell to try to even suggest that people who have had dump truck loads of bombs delivered on top of them for years by the most sophisticated war machine ever conceived would be convinced at the "error" of their ways reflecting on the disproportionate response of said opponent. An emotionally vested opponent is, well... vested. I figure good or bad, right or wrong, rational or irrational... many of these young men and women are just looking for a little pay back. The war that never ends.
I will add that it is likely this has already been going on for some time now, it's just "now" being released.
Well that's just great. What I said is a provisional hypothesis, not a theory. It's my guess, and my opinion. Thanks for hitting me with a denying of the antecedent fallacy. Nice job.
Volunteers don't get paid. Multilingual people who are capable of socratically debating the in's and out of Hadith will be paid. If there is no background check or incentive for the "agent" your just as likely to get a double agent as a red white and blue patriot as a result.
Likely, they have already "been" paid for some time. Like a lot of black projects the public hears about them years after the inception. Likely this program will stay in place and be expanded to any "supposed" media outlet that has espoused anti-american sentiment... YouTube... twitter... you name it. Projects like this rarely just "go away".
Reducing any opponent to a caricature on your T-Shirt shows deliberate ignorance.
Where is all this coming from?
"It's not about hate... recruitment to toss Plato at some folks... it's not hate... that shows ignorance".
Argument from repetition, undistributed middle of the concerns raised, which is just denying the antecedent... nice job... I rarely get two propositional fallacies in the same post. Good work.
As far as I am concerned it's simply an expansion of information gathering and disinformation dissemination to identify those who use social media to organize. Once the identities of the targets are discovered... you get paid a visit from R2D2 and a hellfire missile... which pretty much seems to end the debate.
Did you read the OP?Patrick_and_the_ricks said:
The idea is to use logic and reasoning to dismantle the extremists arguments. They aren't bombing their boards with memes and trollfaces.
To be fair, both the program name and the article headline are misleading.Patrick_and_the_ricks said:
