Abu Muqawama: Post
Abu Muqawama retains its autonomy and the views and beliefs expressed within the blog do not reflect those of CNAS. Abu Muqawama retains the right to delete comments that include words that incite violence; are predatory, hateful, or intended to intimidate or harass; or degrade people on the basis of gender, race, class, ethnicity, national origin, religion, sexual orientation, or disability. In summary, don't be a jerk.
Pakistani analysis on extremism, its causes and solutions
Yesterday, I attended a conference on counter radicalisation strategies organised by the Pak Institute of Peace Studeis (PIPS) and the United States Institute for Peace (USIP). I'm pasting my notes here because I think many readers working on the region and Pakistan in particular will find them useful. But at the same time, for the general reader, it provides a rare opportunity to see what professional analysts with an intimate knowledge of context and history as well as the advantage of local language knowledge make of current situation.
PIPS is a fantastic organistation. Unfortunately, I don't think the Pakistani government has the capacity to take on what they have to say. Counter Radicalisation Strategies conference
Hosted by Pak Institute for Peace Studies (PIPS) and US Institute for Peace (USIP)
Amir Rana, director of PIPS:
Radicalising factors in Pakistan are:
1. Inequality - contributing
2. Religion - catalyst
3. Politics - major factor
4. State of mind - contributing factor
5. Socio-cultural - transformational
Radicalisation amongst Pakistan's societal groups:
1. Lower income - poor governance, religious networks = Talibanisation
2. Middle Income - political and ideological radical tendencies, informal educational institutions = sympathy for Talibanisation, sectarianism etc.
3. Upper income - isolation from rest of society (also common in Muslim/Pakistani diaspora) results in identity crisis. This is shared with diaspora communities. The catalyst is the religious-extremist environment. This manifestation is very different form the other two groups.
The general manifestations of growing extremism and radicalisation are:
1. The Islamisation of Pakistan
2. Militancy in AfPak.
Catalysts:
Globally networked organisations eg. Hizb ut Tahrir and al Huda.
It's clear from opinion polls such as Pew etc, the common man is against manifestations of militancy. Support for al Qaeda's methods is very low. In Pakistan it support for al-Qaeda and/or suicide bombing comes in at about 10%-15%. In the rest of the Islamic world you'll find up to 85% support for such measures.
Support for terror is low, so why is there much extremism in Pakistan? Because extremist networks are a major driver. There are literally hundreds of groups that are sectarian, anti democracy etc. If you include large and small groups, we are talking about 600 distinct entities. This is transforming small level of support into a high level of actual violence.
Saba Nur, PIPS researcher:
Topic: women
Gradually, the role of women in extremism is growing. There have been cases of women trained for suicide bombings.
Women have very limited access to religious knowledge (mostly parents)
When asked about religion; most women said scholars had an important role to play in public life.
A high percentage of women though that sectarianism was important to "keep Islam pure".
Wahjat Ali, PIPS researcher and journalist:
Topic: Emerging trends in Radicalisation in Pakistan
There is a need for counter narratives to take on the extremism narrative.
"The fight against extremism will be fought in the craggy mountains of Waziristan but it will be won in the newsrooms."
Dr Shabana Feyaz, asst. Professor of Defence Studies at Quaid e Azam university.
Extremism in Pakistan is a mixed bag. It's anti US, anti Jewish, anti capaitalist, ethnic, sectarian etc.
There needs to be a state societal partnership. The ideology of extremism needs to be challenged educationally and socially.
Military force is necessary but it can't lead. We need a more wholeistic approach.
The state should be an engine of transformation. The government needs to work on the rule of law and governance.
We need a new societal contract between the rulers and the ruled.
We have to engage the youth. We have a huge youth bulge. A huge percentage of the population is between 15 and 35 years of age. There needs to be a qualitative shift in education from primary to university level.
Women need to be engaged to wean brothers, sons etc away from extremist ideas. Women are often on the receiving end of extremist practice because they are often seen as the symbols of collective religiosity.
Moeed Yusuf: United States Institute for Peace
We tend to believe Pakistan's problems are external. Why is there this inclination to refuse to do anything until outside problems are dealt with.
There is a core message: A Western conspiracy aimed at destroying Pakistan is radicalising the whole country.
The Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan, when they first appeared, said they weren't against the Pakistani state, only that they were against the United States and government's role in US foreign policy.
This was picked up by the media and gained popular appeal.
If you see the problem as only US driven (Afghanistan etc) then what happens? The Taliban come to attack Pakistani cities, Pakistan does nothing. There is no talk of de radicalisation or counter extremism.
Does it matter how it started? The change has to come from within. The solutions reside in-house.
The coming issues for Pakistan are: Need to increase the economy by about 5% a year just to employ young people entering the work force.
The option of sending the spare workforce abroad is no longer there (to a greater degree)
Urbanisation is rising and the urban poor are the main recruiting ground for extremists
There is easy access to militants.
In essence; if you believe the extremist narrative and want to get involved and fight, then you will be able to find people to facilitate you.
Imtiaz Gul, journalist and researcher:
The rule of law and governance is a major driver.
Ijaz Haider, scholar and journalist.
The government's interventions so far has only been the use of conventional force. There is no counter radicalisation or counter extremism.
Previously, the government relied on Barelvis to counter extremist thought and this led to Baraelvis being killed. Pursuing this further could lead to violence between the two groups.
An overall societal effort is needed. Not rely on coopting one group or individual.
Pakistan is a country of many communities and religions. Even if people say they are Muslim, people follow vastly different interpretations of the faith.
Sharia is like a unicorn. No one knows what it exactly entails.
The problem is beyond the specific ideology of extremism. It's about society in general. For eg, seminary students mishear a religious leader referring to Christians and think local Christians have defamed the Quran, and then lynch them. This is a societal problem.
Extremism in a wider sense is a gangrene is Pakistan.
Tariq Rehman:
Former army guy and now an educationalist:
Anything from the government is not trusted. This is a trust deficit issue. When TTP said they didn't kill Benazir, people believed them rather than the government of Musharraf.
Why not use educational tools (books and processes) to instil the values of coexistance and not extremism
Sherry Rehman
PPP MP and former minister of information
We are aware of what's happening. There needs to be a look at integration of the state's actions. Interagency coordination is a challenge.
We need to have a look at governance. There is a lack of governance.
Even a commitment from all political parties against terrorism is not easy. There are always ambiguities and exceptions. We need interagency coordination.
We have huge gaps in policy execution. Civil service reform hasn't happened for a long time. It's been talked about but hasn't happened.
Governments don't plan for the next 40 years, it's true. This is because they are worried about the coming year.
"You should be able to hold a government accountable without threatening he premise of democracy."
"We have to remember that we (Pakistan) was complicit in the policy that brought terrorism home."
Suras 8 and 9, is your
Suras 8 and 9, is your problem. The last suras of the Koran, supercedes the early lovy dovy ones.
The U.S. Institute of Peace
The U.S. Institute of Peace - now, where can I find that? Right across from the Ministry of Truth, down the road from the Ministry of Love? CPA Bremmer contracts in Iraq? Credibility problems...
"In coordination with CPA’s Office of National Security, the Institute has already organized training for dozens of senior Iraqi diplomats, military, and police officials at the National Defense University focused on negotiation, consensus, and team-building skills. Over a two-year period, the Institute plans to train approximately 750 senior Iraqi officials. The Institute is also organizing training workshops for developing Iraqi leaders at the provincial level, with an emphasis on conflict management skills and coalition building with pragmatic, problem-solving workshops focused on intergroup issues. Additionally, interviews were conducted to capture the lessons learned by key U.S. personnel as they return from Iraq. This project aims to debrief civilian and military personnel who have worked on a range of reconstruction projects."
Instituted in the early 1980s, overseen by the Joint Chiefs of Staff - come on... Well, okay, I dug up some good work by them from spring 2004:
Will Iraqis consider the interim government legitimate?
It's too early to say, but many experts are doubtful. Many say Iraqi public sentiment has turned against politicians from the IGC and, because the ICG played a prominent role filling interim government posts, Iraqis will be skeptical. "The interim government could be seen as a bogus government by the Iraqis because it was not elected and has no real legitimacy," says Ahmed S. Hashim, an expert on the Iraqi insurgency and professor of strategic studies at the U.S. Naval War College.
No legitimate government, COIN doesn't work - dipshit neocons and their wet dreams. Hence you need a legitimate Pakistani government, a clearly independent judiciary - I mean, come on, what's the current status of the legal system in Pakistan? I don't know, personally, but it must be a central issue.
Also, the floods are off the front pages, cause the corporate slobs don't like to talk about global warming, but it's going to be a major factor too. Some NATO supply lines shut down, aren't they?
Get rid of the Koran and
Get rid of the Koran and we'll rid ourselves of Islamic terrorism.
Or meet them half way and help them redact some of the violent suras that they are using to justify their crimes.
The Koran is violent.
"The U.S. Institute of Peace
"The U.S. Institute of Peace - now, where can I find that?"
Probably right across from your office, GD.
Londonstani ...holy
Londonstani ...holy crap...could you write a longer posting for us next time?
"Sharia is like a unicorn",
"Sharia is like a unicorn", that is genius! On reading it, I instantly I had an image in my mind of a bearded My Little Pony, with a little Chitrali cap stuck on at a jaunty angle, prancing through the desert.
The solutions and problems mentioned are all well established, valid positions and concerns. But how? It's easy to say Pakistan needs a new social contract between the State and those it governs (who doesn't these days?), putting it into effect, getting people to sacrifice for the greater good is a whole other matter. Does the society have the internal mechanisms to coerce/tempt politicians/citizens into doing something new? If not, are there outside models and institutions, which are trusted enough by the population, to help? The US, it seems, has actually been giving democracy/Western institutions a pretty bad name for years, and is not helping matters much with their denials and then confessions of an American presence in Pakistan. Not to let the Pakistani leadership off the hook, they are so far sunk into their Faustian deal with radicals I don't know if they can break away.
All human societies are based on saving face, but there are several built-in mechanisms in the West to allow public figures to admit wrong doing and be "forgiven." Personally, I think it is mostly self-serving b.s., but I understand the social need for it. Is there something like that, some kind of communal penance that people in power could do? In most countries- and I am assuming Pakistan isn't an exception- people in power, particularly the military leaders, might have been born to power, but they held it because they are alpha-type personalities. It ain't easy getting those sorts to change or admit wrong-doing, even in a society where getting forgiven is as easy as saying "I asked Jesus to forgive me. I have sinned."
And on the popularity of Al Q in other countries, I suspect a) ethnic factor, and b) people in those other countries aren't in direct fear of getting THEIR bazars blown up by the radicals or getting lots of Blackwater type drone attacks anytime soon. Mark that up to a little ME chicken-hawkery.
I've always noted the
I've always noted the difference between lecturers I thought had something interesting to say and those who didn't. Literally: I found myself writing down notes from the former, and struggling to maintain attention or at least not to snore while the latter were speaking. It appears from this I'm not the only one.
Some interesting thoughts here. Feyaz's comment about demographics was one that caught my attention. Counter-extremism and deradicalization of 17 year-olds is a pretty tall order. On the other hand violent extremism might be for many of these like mumps or measles, exposure to which at an early age confers immunity for life. When the younger generation in Pakistan grows up it may end up banning ownership of firearms and abolishing the army.
About that....I didn't see any notes here about the place of the security services in the Pakistani state. Obviously that place is considerable; Pakistan, or at least its leadership, has seen itself as threatened since long before the United States tool an interest in the place, and that has led to the military and intelligence service having been granted status, resources and an institutional life (apparently) more vigorous than that of Pakistan's civilian government. The sense of perpetual threat has clearly been helpful to the Pakistani security services, but Pakistan is a poor country and resources needed to do some of the things Sherry Rehman recommends aren't available as long as they are committed to the army -- which they are, and have been to some degree since Partition, and evidently will continue to be whether terrorists are blowing people up inside Pakistan or not.
The conspiracy against Pakistan, incidentally, has set things up so that issues like this are occasionally discussed but never acted upon. This is how Pakistan's army is kept strong while Pakistan is made weaker, and how preparations to lose another war to India can continue while Pakistanis are massacred in their cities by Taliban terrorists.
http://learningupwardlovingou
http://learningupwardlovingoutward.blogspot.com/2010/03/taken-based-on-t...
In 1988, while traveling with schoolmates in Southeast Asia, kidnappers pulled Bill Hillar’s 17-year old daughter off a train and forced her into the sex industry. Despite an exhaustive, multi-country search, her father, a Special Forces Colonel, was unable to save his daughter from the fate that ultimately took her life. The recent movie "Taken," with Liam Neeson is partially based on Bill Hillar’s personal story.
Pakistan: Flood Disrupts
Pakistan: Flood Disrupts NATO Movements
August 4, 2010 1002 GMT
"The supply to NATO forces battling against the Taliban in Afghanistan was affected due to heavy downpours and severe floods across Pakistan, The Nation reported Aug. 4. More than 5,000 oil tankers and trucks were stuck in Dera Ismail Khan, Zhob and Qila Saifullah as the roads washed away due to heavy floods. The chairman of the Pakistan Oil Tankers Association said the supply of oil and other goods would be shut down for five more days due to flooding. The Pakistani government permitted the allied forces to use ports and some of its air bases."
Terrain?
It is pertinent to mention here that Pakistani government has permitted the allied forces to use both ports besides using some of its air bases and every day 200 to 250 trucks enter Afghanistan through Torkham and Chaman.
Source: The Nation website, Islamabad, in English 04 Aug 10
My offices... ha, that's funny. Yes, here at the Ministry of Plenty, things are better... wanna buy a power plant? Ten year loan at 20% interest, your economy is gonna boom, you'll be able to repay it no problem. Default? Ah, that's the Ministry of Peace's Department... but we can usually work something out. Oil leases are acceptable in exchange for debts, don't forget - as are water rights. Terms? Well - as in Scarface, what else?
blah blah blah. stupid
blah blah blah.
stupid maftoons.
none of this will work until you stop beating basil's car.
al-Islam is not going away.
you have to learn to be opportunistic and subversive, to work with al-Islam instead of against it.
bricolage the islamic substrate.
PEW: Some of the most interesting results relate to attitudes toward religion, law, and society. According to the findings, "Pakistani Muslims overwhelmingly welcome Islamic influence over their country's politics. Nearly nine-in-ten (88 percent) of those who see Islam playing a large role say that is a good thing." Moreover, many Muslims in Pakistan say there is a struggle between groups that want to modernize their country and Islamic fundamentalists (44 percent), and of those who see a struggle, most identify with the modernizers (61 percent). At the same time though, a solid majority of Pakistanis polled said they would favor making gender segregation in the workplace a law in the country (85 percent), as well as punishments like whippings and cutting off of hands for crimes like theft and robbery (82 percent), and stoning people who commit adultery (82 percent).
@Rabia, Please define what
@Rabia,
Please define what you mean by "maftoon".
Dr Google advises me it means "charmed". I think you may have a different definition?
I'll eat your hairy, pus
I'll eat your hairy, pus filled maftoon, Rabi'a and your knees will shake, then you'll convert back to Americanism. Daisy dukes, bikini on top, with hijab.
that is kinda right....it
that is kinda right....it means a muslim pithed by western culture chauvinism......
it a contextual insult.....the analogy is like kapos to jews and uncle toms to blacks and gungas to browns.
Pardon, Pepe, a minor
Pardon, Pepe, a minor correction.
i wax, i have a minor in dance.
"that is kinda right....it
"that is kinda right....it means a muslim pithed by western culture chauvinism......
it a contextual insult.....the analogy is like kapos to jews and uncle toms to blacks and gungas to browns"
CNAS retains the right to delete comments that include words that incite violence; are predatory, hateful, or intended to intimidate or harass; or degrade people on the basis of gender, race, class, ethnicity, national origin, religion, sexual orientation, or disability. In summary, don't be a jerk.
@CNAS subhanallah......I'M
@CNAS
subhanallah......I'M the jerk here?
lawl.
londonstani......here's how
londonstani......here's how its done.
Was Dr. Ghamidi at your conference?
rabia, how do the israelis
rabia, how do the israelis pay you
pardon i worked on Obama's
pardon i worked on Obama's campaign.
you war pimps are working for the Israelis.
America is Israel's bitch.
Rabid Rabia - is someone
Rabid Rabia - is someone (like Newt Gingrich & The Republican PR Machine) trying to convince everyone that "Sharia Law is coming to the U.S." or some such thing? "Shariah is our enemy" says Newt, and of course this requires some Shariah bogeypeople.
Paranoid xenophobic hysteria at its finest - damn, it was so much easier when the Commies - backed up by the friggin' Soviet Union and thousands of nukes - were the enemy, wasn't it? A bunch of rabid terrorists, financed by Saudi petrodollars or not, just doesn't have the same kind of weight in Congressional budget appropriations. I mean, have you tried selling the line that Al Qaeda might obtain a ballistic missile, so we need a mega-billion dollar missile defense system to protect Poland? It's a hard sell...
Isn't it, Rabia?
"you have to learn to be
"you have to learn to be opportunistic and subversive, to work with al-Islam instead of against it."
Yes. Please deploy to the Hijaz and explain to them the Al-Islam that allows waxing, dancing, fucking the cute Arab boy in class, getting abortions, women speaking on politics, or taking math classes.
Get back to us on that one.
lawl. you forget......ahm an
lawl.
you forget......ahm an american grrl.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HR8Ia6vyV5Q
Yes, we can tell by duh
Yes, we can tell by duh spell'in.
Although I thought you reverted to Islam. Wouldn't that make your nationality Muslim? Muslim is Muslim....
Wouldn't that make your
Wouldn't that make your nationality Muslim?
are u retarded?
ahm an amerimuslimah..... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HR8Ia6vyV5Q
lawl. me an bobby jindal...anchor babies an muslim reverts FTW!
"I'M the jerk here?" Yes.
"I'M the jerk here?"
Yes. Two thirds of your posts consist of calling people "retards" or other insults.
Then you wonder why you get the same treatment.
Stop flaming, stop trolling, make your substantive points.
Another important factor
Another important factor that might constrain the USA's ability to focus any more resources on the Muslim world
is the growing tension in the South China Sea.
well......ok. instead of
well......ok.
instead of calling people retarded, i will just politely point out that they are two-digits?
that is one of my substantive points-- conservatives have been biomemetically selected for anti-science, anti-education, anti-intellectual xenophobes for 50 years....they dont have the substrate to understand my arguments...and it is frustrating...but......
didnt you actually object to this statement? the definition of maftoon?
"that is kinda right....it means a muslim pithed by western culture chauvinism......
it a contextual insult.....the analogy is like kapos to jews and uncle toms to blacks and gungas to browns"
you see......that is a
you see......that is a substantive point....Amil's conference muslims all seem like up-front maftoons to me.
That's not a substantive
That's not a substantive point, it's an ad hominem.
If you can't understand the distinction, perhaps that is not an indication of their mental capacity.
If we stop invading the
If we stop invading the world and inviting the world, the worst of our problems will continue to be black and latino thugs. Unfortunately, we keep importing Somalis, Bosnians, etc... who are not only street thugs (that the regular police can deal with) but also have dreams of Caliphates dancing in their heads.
If our country decided to restrict all muslims from entering, half of our problems would be solved. Let them goat fuck each other, not our problem.
an indication of their
an indication of their mental capacity.?
it is a substantive point
http://shams.talkislam.info/2010/07/23/four-reasons-the-emergent-iq-gap-...
now tell me 90% of the comments here aren't racist.
Previously, the government
Previously, the government relied on Barelvis to counter extremist thought and this led to Baraelvis being killed. Pursuing this further could lead to violence between the two groups.
maftoon
rather obvious.....50 years
rather obvious.....50 years of race-baiting resulted in a race gap between parties, 50 years of IQ baiting has resulted in an IQ gap.
Rabia: 90% of your comments
Rabia: 90% of your comments here are racist, yes, in how you talk about whites etc.
Linking to another site to attempt to prove a point is a non-sequeter regarding this one.
Either you know that, in which case you're being disingenuous, or you don't, in which case you may want to reflect on talking about other people's mental capacities.
This is the posting policy
This is the posting policy on this site:
"CNAS retains the right to delete comments that include words that incite violence; are predatory, hateful, or intended to intimidate or harass; or degrade people on the basis of gender, race, class, ethnicity, national origin, religion, sexual orientation, or disability. In summary, don't be a jerk."
Rabia, you repeatedly and conciously violate all these things.
You think that these violations are the substance of your points. They're simply violations, however. If you don't have anything of actual merit to add, you may want to consider some other forum for expressing them.
I'm the most brilliantest
I'm the most brilliantest person on this site!
They just can't handle my awesomesauce. Sometimes they embargo my comments because they're so 1337!
Truesay!
It can't possibly be that the server doesn't always update immediately and I'm too dim to understand that.
have the other commenters
have the other commenters been cautioned? or just me?
but fyi , playing table top with human muslim sects is quite revolting.
Previously, the government relied on Barelvis to counter extremist thought and this led to Baraelvis being killed. Pursuing this further could lead to violence between the two groups.
CNAS at 12:19 P.M. The SOLE
CNAS at 12:19 P.M.
The SOLE problem with Rabi'a's comments is that they are repetitive. From the moment she first started commenting here the drunken teenagers who hang out here (which you apparently have no problem with) have tried to run her off with a stream of sexually violent language, such as Pepe de la Cruz at 11:49 A.M.: I'll eat your hairy, pus filled maftoon, Rabi'a and your knees will shake, then you'll convert back to Americanism. Daisy dukes, bikini on top, with hijab."
Certainly calling someone a "retard" or "ignorant" or a "maftoon" is a violation of the blog's comment policy. However, such insults are mild compared to those of the drunken teenagers.
The SOLE problem with
The SOLE problem with Rabi'a's comments is that they are repetitive.
but no one will engage my arguments..... they just contine with lies and spin.
i called the conference muslims maftoons because no real muslims will lissen to them...their polices are useless
Rabi'a at 3:16 P.M. "but no
Rabi'a at 3:16 P.M. "but no one will engage my arguments..... "
You and I had a respectful conversation, not argument, in the comment thread of "The trials and tribulations of a general in Afghanistan" of July 12th.
Thank you again for your answers and time.
ah'm hunting Rabbits
ah'm hunting Rabbits ...
"instead of calling people retarded, i will just politely point out that they are two-digits? <=is it our spelling?
"that is one of my substantive points-- conservatives have been biomemetically selected for anti-science, anti-education, anti-intellectual xenophobes for 50 years" <= "biomemetically?" Does that perhaps mean biologically themed??
Is it possible we just don't agree? Is it possible people don't want to be ruled by elites no matter where they went to school? Muslims don't get to call other xenophobes, BTW.
"....they dont have the substrate to understand my argument" <= Which seems to be that we are congenitally retarded, which is why we can't glean your brilliance.
You don't argue. You emote, romance an Islam that doesn't exist and never did, and tell us we're doomed to lose, so we should just give up. Oh, and I forgot - work with Islam (?to subvert it?). When we don't agree, you tell us we're retarded.
Well Madam, indeed I may be. However you're crazy, and I'll still be stable in the morning.
Rabia's sockpuppets are on
Rabia's sockpuppets are on the case to defend her against truth again!
"The SOLE problem with
"The SOLE problem with Rabi'a's comments is that they are repetitive. From the moment she first started commenting here"
Most of the good commentatos, such as Col. Gentile, left, as Rabia's trolling and flaming caused the place to degenerate.
As for "teenager" - you must not actually read Rabia if you think *others* here are the ones that write like teenagers.
"but no one will engage my arguments....."
Streams of epithets, sneering, and unsupported assertions, and conclusions that do not logically follow from their premises (Of the sort "Mormonism, as the most recent incarnation of Monotheism, is therefore the most progressive and inclusive form of Monotheism"), aren't arguments.
Trolling is not an argument. It's trolling. But all trolls, when called on their trolling, inevitably excuse their own behavior by claiming others don't engage their arguments, which are really non-arguments anyhow.
Yes, there are a handful of exceptions where Rabia hasn't behaved badly. The only thing that proves is that she doesn't have to be a troll if she doesn't want to. But she wants to troll, it reinforces her self-perception. And, the more she trolls, the more decent people leave, and the more the comments descend into the gutter overall, because like attracts like. It's typical of unmoderated or barely-moderated forums.
Look....Visitor.... how
Look....Visitor.... how would i know? you all look the same to me.
i will repeat this one more time.
1. we are engaged in an unjust, unwinnable, and immoral war in Afghanistan.
2. the reason we are there is that George Bush did not understand that when muslims are empowered to vote democratically, they will vote for Islamic government. The Bush Doctrine, of nation-building implanting western style democracy was doomed to fail because of the fact that muslims like Islam. Probably Bush's advisors realized this, but preferred to exploit a wartime economy and a wartime electorate for their own reasons.
3. COIN is just the Bush Doctrine scaled down to village size, so it is doomed to fail also.
4. COIN exploits some parts of SNT, but ignores other parts.
5. Trying to westernize Islam, or "reform" Islam to make it more like judeochristianity, will never work. The muslims at Amil's conference will be regarded by the ummah as maftoons, a sort of uncle toms.
6. The reason we elected an intellectualy incurious, stubborn and highly religious president is that the past 50 years of memetic evolution in conservative leadership have selected for anti-intellectualism, anti-science and anti-higher education candidates, and forced a dogmatic religious conviction on the candidates. Sarah Palin and George Bush are exemplars of the end product of memetic selection in conservative leadership.
7. Wikileaks gives a critical mass of data that substantiates the premise that we are losing, and that the war in Afghanistan is unwinnable.
We cannot win hearts and minds with conversion by the sword.
And I have worked behind the doors and taken both brands of polys.
The Wikileaks documents and videos represent a failure of our security protocols.
And of our mission. As an analyst Manning took an oath to protect classified data....but as a moral homo sapiens sapiens he became a leaker....he wasn't paid by Assange...he gifted the data to the world.
Don't you wonder why?
Troll 729 i have commented
Troll 729
i have commented and visited this forum because of my interest in the biological basis of behavior and Social Network Theory principles embodied in COIN.
Since McC got fired/resigned and I began questioning the efficacy of COIN I have been repeatedly attacked for my gender, my religion, my age, and my political orientation.
Islam is the latest and most evolved of the three major Abrahamic faiths. This is not disputable....IPOF...i have never seen ANYONE but razib khan dispute it. :)
Catholics, Mormons, and Protestants are all offshoots of christianity, ie professing belief in the Christ.
and i will apolo to whomever
and i will apolo to whomever i called a retard when he avowed my reversion to al-Islam revoked my american citizenship.
i mistakenly thought freedom of religion was an american principle that was well understood.
i lost my temper.
one more thing....every
one more thing....every single comment i have made since i started questioning COIN at the time of McC and the rolling stone, has been greeted with profanity, sexual and religious slurs, offers of rape and sodomy, interspersed with sneering history scoldings from old white christian guys.
And you never said a word, CNAS.
so i get it.
"Islam is the latest and
"Islam is the latest and most evolved of the three major Abrahamic faiths. This is not disputable...."
A lot of people have disputed it here.
DFtT is right: It doesn't necessarily follow that because something is the "latest" it is therefore "the most evolved." It's illogical to assume it is.
As an affirmative argument, it's not up to other people to disprove your assertion. It's up to you to convince them.
Also, people are not likely to agree with your definitions of what constitutes "the most progressive" or "the most inclusive," because they are based on unsupported assumptions and tautological definitions and arbitrary exclusions.
Note this in your own comment: on the one hand, Islam is one of the Abrahamic faiths - that is, an offshoot of the others. On the other hand, you dismiss the "more recent" nature of Mormonism, Protestantism, etc because they are offshoots.
In short: Almost all of your arguments are based on logical fallacies. Whenever anyone does try to discuss them with you, you simply re-assert the flawed arguments in Lipton-tea-bag form, and insult people. Very inclusive of you, btw. If you're a living example of the inclusiveness of Islam, you fail to demonstrate and indeed disprove your own assertion with every post. Expressing contempt towards others who are not like you, which is de rigur in your comments, being the exact opposite of inclusiveness.
But perhaps the fault isn't with Islam. Maybe you're just a bad Muslim. More of a wannabe, perhaps, humored in the circles you run in. It would thus be improper to conclude on the basis of the remarkably poor example you set that you are representative of Islam. But no more improper than your flawed assertions regarding it.
Rabi'a, Islam is the latest
Rabi'a,
Islam is the latest and most evolved of the three major Abrahamic faiths.
I don't see why it should be either, so I agree with Razib.
You are confusing evolution (i.e. adaptation) with progress.
My objection is that Islam evolved in a different culture and context,
so at most, it is only likely to be better-adapted for that culture.
It could still be the case that Christianity is the appropriate form of Abrahamic religion
for the West and its culture.
Also modern Christianity has continued to evolve in situ.
So you can't tell a-priori who is now ahead on a direct comparison.
In other words today, we are not talking about later and better, since both still exist.
but rather separate branches, evolving more or less independently, in different environments.
This does not rule out the possibility that Islam might be progressive
compared to the pre-Islamic religions, in the societies that adopted it.
But a deeper objection might be:
How do you answer the objection that 3 times zero is still zero?
What if all forms of Abrahamic monotheism today are maladaptive.
In the modern world, we might be better going secular.
Our real competitors are not underdeveloped Abrahamics,
but rather, rapidly-modernizing Asian seculars.
"sneering history scoldings
"sneering history scoldings from old white christian guys."
1) You don't know their age, you just assume.
2) Half of them are atheists; you don't know their faith, you just assume.
3) You don't know their race, which probably isn't different from yours (it's a good bet you're white yourself, but only a bet), you just characterize them. Negatively - so much for inclusiveness (Non-Seq totally has you pegged).
4) If you're so much better and so much more intelligent than others, you shouldn't be losing your temper. You behave no better, indeed you troll deliberately (if it's not deliberate, wow, not very smart), then act all put-out and shocked at the result.
Your posts are almost always written in a sneer (contempt was the right word, Non-Seq), you claim no-one engages you, but here you effectively admit they do here. You just don't like being contradicted, and so you react with dismissive sneer. Your replies to those are always in this vein. You're behaving both hypocritically and passive-aggressively. Neither are very admirable traits, yet you're constantly putting on a holier-than-thou, better-than-you pretense.
It's probable you really have self-esteem and self-confidence problems. Otherwise you wouldn't have to constantly assert you're smart and everyone else is dumb. You'd just prove it and let your writing speak for itself. Only people with real issues have to constantly make a point of how everyone else is dumb compared with them. But this isn't really the venue to work them out.
How about just posting civilly yourself and proving by your deeds that you are actually better? Nah...
Add your comment