Loonyyy said:
mfeff said:
Shahed Amanullah, a senior technology advisor to the State Department, the Viral Peace nicely-troll-an-extremist program will aim to disrupt the virtual spaces most frequently occupied by would-be terrorists and Islamic extremists. Amanullah wants to train young Muslims from across the Islamic world to use "logic, humor, satire, [and] religious arguments, not just to confront [extremists], but to undermine and demoralize them" on forums, Facebook, and Twitter.
Since when did employing logic, humor, satire [and] religious arguments undermine and demoralize anyone? What an asshole.
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".
I already responded to a similar comment by another user. So I am just going to copy and paste that here:
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.
As long as the people involved don't say they are on forums, your argument holds no water.
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.
It's a volunteer movement. They have to advertise to get volunteers. Duh.
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".
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.
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.
