Australia starts to grow a set, every western country should man up as well

[bobgeese]

The point of my idea is to offer an olive branch and hopefully get some them to give up instead of continuing to fight. Every person who accepts is one less terrorist out there. Letting them live is a small price to pay if it gets some of them to surrender. Sometimes its easier to deal with them than hunt them down, and vice versa

Couple honest questions for you.


Do you understand the religious motivation of these terrorists? This includes The Mahdi and their end of times theology.


Second, if you do, what's makes you think they won't just accept the olive branch in order to get back into the country and martyr themselves at the first opportunity?


Lastly, what olive branch did they offer those whom they raped, beheaded, burned alive, etc?

 

[Ruprecht]

To me you mean as it stands that's highly unlikely, this whole thread is about changing the way things are done now. This is done the same way it always has been done, effort and standing up.

Tomorrow I'll be going into a few of the local liberal candidates and having my say, to use a tactic out of our vocal minorities tactics. If I present my argument well and they remember it next time they talk to their party leaders they'll remember my voice and message they will start to do my work for me, I'll be flat out telling them I was voting labour but this is starting to make me change my mind and than I'll add in @Squish II argument that if we absolutely can't stop them they need to be imprisoned for a very long time. I'll than plant the seed that why isn't this being used to reject citizenship altogether or apply for a new law that in certain circumstances a Australian born citizen could be denied re entry into Australia due to certain conditions.

This still gives the person options such as they can apply to another embassy for protection or refugee status or they can go back and finish the job they started, die for their cause.

I am posting this so other Aussies that give a fuck consider the same, as our western cousins in the UK definitely should. Every rubbish post from clowns like @Trotsky just makes an average person go mmmm. Change in a democratic society happens with support and the more people that emphasises or even sympathises with this ideal brings it closer to actuality, this is exactly how we got aboriginal, women, workplace and gay rights.

Most people are sheep and will disregard what they actually believe if they think others don't agree. This method lets people know that they aren't alone and others feel as they do. I feel you leave the country for acts of terrorism you forfeit your right to call Australia home, others do as well and I know this because I talk about it to as many people I can

Almost all of the knee-jerk "anti-terrorism" legislation we've got over the last few decades has been nothing but political theatre.
Terrorism is in the news, politicians have to "do something", so we get yet another stupid addition to the hyper legislative anti-terrorism hysteria.
Additions that are, at best, redundant and at worst an assault on our civil rights.
Aside from the definition of terrorism itself, about the only laws that were sensible and likely to be effective were the ones allowing the freezing or seizure of funding being sent to terrorist groups.
Deporting criminals has little to nothing to do with terrorism, and in actual effect is more representative of our changing relationship with New Zealand (we already had extremely restrictive migration laws in regards to other countries).

Yes, most people are "sheep", and terrorism works on them.

 

[Seaside]

Ok mate its 9am and schools in, get back to class otherwise you'll be in trouble.

I notice you haven't answered my question, where are you from? I'd go a step further and ask what culture you identify with as well. People with your attitude legitimately crack me up.

Probably a no identity American or west european

 

[Squish II]

Couple honest questions for you.


Do you understand the religious motivation of these terrorists? This includes The Mahdi and their end of times theology.


Second, if you do, what's makes you think they won't just accept the olive branch in order to get back into the country and martyr themselves at the first opportunity?


Lastly, what olive branch did they offer those whom they raped, beheaded, burned alive, etc?

Yes people who come to join ISIS from outside the middle east are known to be more extremist. Lots of these same people come to realize its not all its cracked up to be and want out, hence wanting to return back to their home countries instead of continuing to fight in Iraq/Syria. Some want to return so they can perform an attack in their home country, some just want to get home as weird as it sounds. I believe that people overrate the whole end of times aspect of Isis ideology

Isis fighters also surrender quite a bit these days now that they are losing. Their religious motivation gets weaker and weaker with each battle lost.

I admit I'm not sure how the process of fighters returning to their home countries works. How many of the hundreds of returnees have martyred themselves at the first opportunity? The ones who surrender aren't exactly going to be out in society. I follow the Syrian conflict and many Isis fighters and extremist rebels are jailed. They aren't martyring themselves at the first opportunity. They just sit there in prison. 99% of the stories regarding prisons are about the government torturing prisoners, not prisoner violence.

Of course they didn't offer any olive branch, but at the same time we can't prove what crimes returnees are guilty of. The point of offering it is to get more of them to surrender in exchange for their lives. Its a trade.

 

[bobgeese]

Yes people who come to join ISIS from outside the middle east are known to be more extremist. Lots of these same people come to realize its not all its cracked up to be and want out, hence wanting to return back to their home countries instead of continuing to fight in Iraq/Syria. Some want to return so they can perform an attack in their home country, some just want to get home as weird as it sounds. I believe that people overrate the whole end of times aspect of Isis ideology

Isis fighters also surrender quite a bit these days now that they are losing. Their religious motivation gets weaker and weaker with each battle lost.

I admit I'm not sure how the process of fighters returning to their home countries works. How many of the hundreds of returnees have martyred themselves at the first opportunity? The ones who surrender aren't exactly going to be out in society. I follow the Syrian conflict and many Isis fighters and extremist rebels are jailed. They aren't martyring themselves at the first opportunity. They just sit there in prison. 99% of the stories regarding prisons are about the government torturing prisoners, not prisoner violence.

Of course they didn't offer any olive branch, but at the same time we can't prove what crimes returnees are guilty of. The point of offering it is to get more of them to surrender in exchange for their lives. Its a trade.

With regard to your first paragraph,

How do you tell the difference between the true believers?
Let's take a look at the San benidino attack in California. A couple, left their newborn baby behind, in order to slaughter people that had just thrown a baby shower for them? The only reasonable answer, is that they believe once they martyr themselves, they will rise with the return of the Mahdi, and join him in conquering the world in the name of Islam. Why would these people leave behind their families? Their country, etc?


Your third paragraph. They are guilty of treason. They are guilty of murder, or accessory to murder, war crimes, etc etc.

We also need to show the next generation of want to be terrorists, there will be no mercy shown. If you choose this life, you're giving up your own.

 

[Squish II]

With regard to your first paragraph,

How do you tell the difference between the true believers?
Let's take a look at the San benidino attack in California. A couple, left their newborn baby behind, in order to slaughter people that had just thrown a baby shower for them? The only reasonable answer, is that they believe once they martyr themselves, they will rise with the return of the Mahdi, and join him in conquering the world in the name of Islam. Why would these people leave behind their families? Their country, etc?


Your third paragraph. They are guilty of treason. They are guilty of murder, or accessory to murder, war crimes, etc etc.

We also need to show the next generation of want to be terrorists, there will be no mercy shown. If you choose this life, you're giving up your own.

That couple honestly sounds more like complete mental nutcases who used religion to help justify the act, and would be nutcases without it anyways.

About why people would leave behind everything, there is a blocked documentary about volunteer Al Nusra suicide bombers. You saw the guys struggle with their choice. Some of them volunteered in spite of the pain it caused them and their families, choosing martyrdom. A Saudi guy felt he just had to run away from his family to fight jihad in Syria, but when he has a failed attempt and lives he really doesn't seem that upset. A young guy believed that when he committed suicide he would get his virgins in heaven. They had different reasons for justifying, but also doubting their choice, so I disagree that the only reasonable answer is that they whole heartedly believe in the return of the Mahdi thing. There is a lot more going on underneath the surface. Even when people are brainwashed they will have different beliefs. The large majority of the 'true believers' would martyr themselves in Syria or Iraq which would help the Caliphate much more than doing it in another country at this point.

You are right about what they are guilty about. I disagree about no mercy, extreme violence etc as a deterrent though. Think about what sort of people commit these sort of acts. Most of them are obviously not all up there mentally, and commit crimes not because they aren't scare of the punishment, but because in their delusion they think they won't be caught. Extreme violence imo is something that lets most people pat themselves on the back about when its a mostly superficial effect.

 

[bobgeese]

That couple honestly sounds more like complete mental nutcases who used religion to help justify the act, and would be nutcases without it anyways.

About why people would leave behind everything, there is a blocked documentary about volunteer Al Nusra suicide bombers. You saw the guys struggle with their choice. Some of them volunteered in spite of the pain it caused them and their families, choosing martyrdom. A Saudi guy felt he just had to run away from his family to fight jihad in Syria, but when he has a failed attempt and lives he really doesn't seem that upset. A young guy believed that when he committed suicide he would get his virgins in heaven. They had different reasons for justifying, but also doubting their choice, so I disagree that the only reasonable answer is that they whole heartedly believe in the return of the Mahdi thing. There is a lot more going on underneath the surface. Even when people are brainwashed they will have different beliefs. The large majority of the 'true believers' would martyr themselves in Syria or Iraq which would help the Caliphate much more than doing it in another country at this point.

You are right about what they are guilty about. I disagree about no mercy, extreme violence etc as a deterrent though. Think about what sort of people commit these sort of acts. Most of them are obviously not all up there mentally, and commit crimes not because they aren't scare of the punishment, but because in their delusion they think they won't be caught. Extreme violence imo is something that lets most people pat themselves on the back about when its a mostly superficial effect.

First off, I appreciate the reasonable back and forth.


That couple, sounds like textbook religiously driven radical Islamic Terrorists.


By your own admission, these people are not all there, what could possibly be the motivation to burden the finances of countries by keeping alive these treasonous monsters?

 

[Squish II]

First off, I appreciate the reasonable back and forth.


That couple, sounds like textbook religiously driven radical Islamic Terrorists.


By your own admission, these people are not all there, what could possibly be the motivation to burden the finances of countries by keeping alive these treasonous monsters?

Same, I don't believe that your opinions are unreasonable. They are a perfectly normal response to whats going on these days. I'm reading more about that couple and yeah you're right. They are pretty damn high up my radical scale though. Killing people over a fucking Christmas party. One thing I noticed was that they had plans for their child to be taken care of by someone. That's the same thing that one of the suicide bombers from the documentary did.

I'm not saying spare everyone, I'm saying that if people surrender with the deal that they are allowed to live then they should not be killed. I advocate accepting surrendering returnees because the more people surrender the less people need to die to stop the rest. Or we could refuse surrenders in the hope that we can kill more, but more will die that way on both sides. A few prisoners is more than worth it if it saves lives. And like I say, returnees who surrender are no longer in a position to inflict any more violence upon society once they are imprisoned.

 

[Burning Hammer]

You sound like you need a gun to make you feel like a big man.

Ah yes, questioning my manhood because I am not afraid of a gun. Makes a lot of sense that not being a coward of an object makes you a lesser man.

 

[PEDS Help me Post]

Ah yes, questioning my manhood because I am not afraid of a gun. Makes a lot of sense that not being a coward of an object makes you a lesser man.

But you are afraid of a gun.... that's why you have one, isn't it?

 

[HIMBOB]

Your ancestors were thieves.

Thieves > slave owners.

 

[mon]

Why not kill them? What should the punishment be for the countless rapes, murders, and acts of treason on their own countries?


Kill them, nothing of value will be lost.

Australia doesn't have capital punishment and it'll be a lot harder to get that in than to see an amendment to what we have.

 

[HIMBOB]

It's so weird how morons always equate "growing balls" or being manly with doing things that are reflexive and stupid without considering all the information. Also, why is the "be a man" crowd always pissing their pants in fear of other people, and afraid that men of different colors are going to beat them in competition for women?

It's almost like people who take great pride in their sex aren't super smart and are really insecure.

Bravo sir!!!



Was going to do a thread on this.

Basically was is so much stupid shit considered manly. Is it purely from advertising of stupid shit?

 

[mon]

Almost all of the knee-jerk "anti-terrorism" legislation we've got over the last few decades has been nothing but political theater.
Terrorism is in the news, politicians have to "do something", so we get yet another stupid addition to the hyper legislative anti-terrorism hysteria.
Additions that are, at best, redundant and at worst an assault on our civil rights.
Aside from the definition of terrorism itself, about the only laws that were sensible and likely to be effective were the ones allowing the freezing or seizure of funding being sent to terrorist groups.
Deporting criminals has little to nothing to do with terrorism, and in actual effect is more representative of our changing relationship with New Zealand (we already had extremely restrictive migration laws in regards to other countries).

Yes, most people are "sheep", and terrorism works on them.

Lol subtle dig? I respect a man more if they say what they mean as it shows you have the spine to stand by what you're saying.

A truly ludicrous statement in regards to kneejerk reactions as almost every introduction of a new law starts exactly in that manner. 15 years later might imply that it turned out to be the right thing for our countries security and safety and like any good tool its purpose can be varied and used for another purpose.

So you are saying you were and still are against Australias gun laws after the Port Auther shooting?
After all it effectively cut civil rights more than most. You most definitely must be against our governments spying on us even though it's enabled us to effectively neuter every major plot so far?

In my ideal world would 3 other Australians from this thread will do similar to what I'm going to do, walk into a few liberal MP's offices and have them remember the conversation. I'm glad you responded as it made me realise I need to do the labour MP's as well.

As for your dig, I actually agree with terrorism being used to herd the sheep. The thing is the againsts like yourself bleat just as loudly as the red neck bogans but are more dishonest about it, at least they know what they are.

 

[mon]

Probably a no identity American or west european

I pay out the yanks but in all honesty most of the time I'm not serious, same as nz, Australia and poms. I'll give the American posters their due, right or wrong they defend their principles which shows character. Same as you mate, I've taken the piss out of you but there's no malice as you stick to your guns.

 

[mon]

Bravo sir!!!



Was going to do a thread on this.

Basically was is so much stupid shit considered manly. Is it purely from advertising of stupid shit?

I replied multiple times to @Trotsky asking for multiple answers and still have no reply. When he offered an olive leaf I took it because that's who I am but you're more than welcome to read the thread and take over from his statements if you like, do you agree with all his posts ? Are you against reducing battle hardened, trained terrorists being allowed back into Australia?

The title is the only part that has the "manly" implication in it. The content speaks for itself and the last two questions I've asked in the previous paragraph would help me decide which category I should put you in.

 

[Trotsky]

I replied multiple times to @Trotsky asking for multiple answers and still have no reply. When he offered an olive leaf I took it because that's who I am but you're more than welcome to read the thread and take over from his statements if you like, do you agree with all his posts ? Are you against reducing battle hardened, trained terrorists being allowed back into Australia?

The title is the only part that has the "manly" implication in it. The content speaks for itself and the last two questions I've asked in the previous paragraph would help me decide which category I should put you in.

I rescind my posts, having suddenly grown a pair.

 

[bobgeese]

Australia doesn't have capital punishment and it'll be a lot harder to get that in than to see an amendment to what we have.

Didn't know that. It's a shame.

 

[aus101]

Yep then they would have lost out on:
Western Medicine
Farming/Sanatation
Engineering
Science and Technology
Western people always improve a land after they settle, but hey who doesn't wanna dance around and get killed by a mosquito?

Not only that but only a few thousand lived in the Sydney region. The majority of the population is in Sydney and Melbourne so it's not like we have kicked them out of all their lands and they have nowhere. Plently of "dry areas" they can go to experience non western life.

 

[Ruprecht]

Lol subtle dig? I respect a man more if they say what they mean as it shows you have the spine to stand by what you're saying.

A truly ludicrous statement in regards to kneejerk reactions as almost every introduction of a new law starts exactly in that manner. 15 years later might imply that it turned out to be the right thing for our countries security and safety and like any good tool its purpose can be varied and used for another purpose.

So you are saying you were and still are against Australias gun laws after the Port Auther shooting?
After all it effected cut civil rights more than most. You most definitely must be against our governments spying on us even though it's enabled us to effectively neuter every major plot so far?

In my ideal world would 3 other Australians from this thread will do similar to what I'm going to do, walk into a few liberal MP's offices and have them remember the conversation. I'm glad you responded as it made me realise I need to do the labour MP's as well.

As for your dig, I actually agree with terrorism being used to herd the sheep. The thing is the againsts like yourself bleat just as loudly as the red neck bogans but are more dishonest about it, at least they know what they are.

Yes, I think the majority of the '96 legislation was knee-jerk nonsense. Especially the restriction on pump-action shotguns, while continuing to allow pump-action rifles and lever action shotguns without restriction.
Ignorant and ineffective nonsense.

The ASIO legislation was also a knee-jerk attack on civil rights. Unfortunately without a legislative or constitutional bill of rights, our civil rights are extremely vulnerable. The state legislation attacking civil rights through controls orders as "bikie laws" in imitation of our "anti-terrorism" laws are a prime example. While we imitated the UK with their control orders, we haven't imitated their reevaluation of the laws effectiveness (they repealed them as overreaching in regards to their bill of rights).

The sheer number of anti-terror laws introduced (one every couple of months since 9/11) is a pants pissing, over reaction to the actual threat we've faced. We need effective legislation, not political theatre catering to the loud bleating of ignorant sheep (in MP offices or otherwise).
The exact opposite of "growing a pair".