20 dead, hundreds injured as explosions hit Sri Lankan churches and hotels

What @MGB ROADSTER is most likely saying is he' asking Muslims to stay in their own countries and kill their own if they must... if I read him correctly.

 

The suspicion is that the explosions are from jihadist returnees from Syria, and some locals that might be inspired by them.

But the ones they're killing are Christians. What if they were Jewish would he say the same? I don't think people should be differentiated.

 

Let's hear 10 positive things from Christianity

 

I don't really care about nonsense international law, if you want it enforced then invade and enforce it.

I just think the Israel angle is pretty far down the list of possible justifications. It's an attack against the wrong target, 3000 miles from Israel, with no statement letting us know it's over Israel.

You are the first ive seen suggest this cause, if that is their justification then theyve failed pretty miserably at their propaganda of the deed.

General jihad is still most likely imo. Nothing specific. Retaliation for Burma is another possibility, though youd think theyd bother to go to nearby Burma for that.

 

True.
Thank you !

 

Tamils. Probably operating with backing from fundamentalists in Pakistan ... the same buggers who did the terrorist raid in Bombay.

 

Perhaps, but it was the British who imported Tamils from India during their colonization of Ceylon.

 

No such thing as 'radical islam'. It's Islam and there is only one Quran. It's just a matter if Muslims fully follow through with what they are taught.

 

In other words...

"Some people did something."

 

Which is why they tend to transform countries they invade into countries where they can do have a place.

 

Let's take one step back and look at it again. Moslem fundamentalists feel their back is against the wall and if their hands are tied "at home" then they see no other option than to take the fight anywhere they can make a big splash.

By the way, the U.S. is raping any nation with oil who will not play ball, plus are eager to destroy anything communist, socialist, Russian. What is the difference between the U.S. invading (anywhere in the world) with impunity and Moslems striking (anywhere in the world) against non-Moslem targets .... particularly in nations with a Moslem population as Sri Lanka? ANSWER: Very little difference if any.

 

Muslims should look at their own history of colonization. They colonized the entire Middle East, Spain, North Africa, parts of India. Now they are gaining a "foothold" in western countries in an attempt to change and dominate westerners. Look at China today. They are colonizing in every corner of the world. Colonization is only bad if the white man is doing it though.

 

What does distance have to with it? Have you looked at the map of the world and noticed the distance between the US and the Middle East? Yet the U.S. has committed some of the worst atrocities in history there. According to your theory, the U.S wouldn't even consider illegally invading another nation "so far away".

 

​

I read that it's not Tamils since many are Christians. More than likely it's jihadists returning from Syria and/or locals influenced by them. As I stated, attacking on Christian holidays is an Islamic calling card.​

EU Parliament President Calls Sri Lanka Attacks Genocide Against Christians. The attacks were against 3 Catholic Churches.

Some of the terrorists were suicide bombers. The only reason the jihadists are willing to kill themselves, is because their families are usually compensated for the loss of their son. I know this goes against our current sentiments, but the only way they could be stopped then would be to have their families suffer the consequences of their actions rather than benefitting from it.

I believe this is what Kadyrov of Chechnya did, and the world was freaking out about it, but isn't it better than having innocents killed?

 

Exactly your position like theirs is Might is Right. The only reason you have this position is because you have the Might. Having the Might you believe you can exert any kind of cruelty towards any people and get away with it. Some people would argue we have been in a world war for a very long time but this attitude that nothing matters but brute force will create a brute force world, for as long as there is a world.

What? Have you not been keeping up with the news? Do you not know what is going on in the ME. Even the Saud's, Israel's best friend got miffed at the idea that the US deemed itself due to Might is Right to say who should have what in the ME. Now I do not know any personal reason that Sri Lanka Muslims could have against Sri Lanka Christians but if you know, if you have a reason that you believe is more plausible then at least give it. If you don't and are ignorant of what is going on in the ME and as you have presented not one reason never mind the list you claim exists, what you say is worth nothing. We do know that extremist Muslims are not desperately keen on Westerners. I am suggesting that is going to get a lot worse and I am saying that the reason for that is your belief in Might is Right. We even invaded Iraq after our intelligence said that though there were no Islam terrorists there at the time not only would such an attack be likely to bring them there, it would probably bring Islamic Terrorism to the UK...and then they cry. One could say, it was planned. You believe with Might is Right you can kill who you want and take their land but then people of this orientation squeal when they fight back - which is not pretty but we act inhumanely to them whenever we are acting from the attitude of might is right which you say is yours.

sorry noticed you are now claiming general jihad is the reason. I have said in my first reply to this thread why this looks different and the OP also suggested that. You ignore that.

 

The top two for me:
1. They don't engage in suicide bombing
2. They were tolerant enough to allow secular democracy to germinate and flourish in their societies.

There is a reason that Muslim countries don't have nice things while many Christian countries do. Another word for Islamophobia.... intolerance for the intolerant.

 

Actually the Muhammedan conquest of India was one of the bloodiest in history, but let's not talk about the atrocities committed by Muslims. In fact they have a long history of committing atrocities in the name of Allah. As part of their conquest they decimated holy places and shrines, killed the "Kaffir, took millions of slaves, and looted the land.

 

Muslims also kill other Muslims all the time.

 

I know many conservatives and none of them want to be in the Middle East. We are in the Middle East because Saudi Arabia want us there as well as monied elites. My perspective would be to completely disengage from the Middle East. No commerce with them, no trade with them, no immigrants from them. Let them have the civilization they want as long as it is completely remote from my civilization.

 

That's because it's much easier, all about access and need. Some believers are true muslims and some are not. Well, paradise is over crowded soon, better find new habits.

 

Interesting how this isn't receiving the same attention in the West as the Christchurch attack simply because it is an attack outside the West.

 

Much easier than what?

 

Going long distances and start killing. If you have some enemies closer, no need to take plane first.

 

I'll start:

(1) Notre Dame

 

China is not colonizing, it's conducting trade. The West colonized, but if it didn't, the humane Christian laws that are now part of every nation in the world - even the Islamic ones, wouldn't exist. I mean come on, it's time we looked at things in a more positive aspect. There's a reason there's an AD and BC.

As for Islam, it took over and forced conversion throughout the Middle East and N. Africa. Those lands were all part of the Eastern Roman Empire, (Byzantine). When Christians couldn't worship at their holy sites, the Emperor asked the Pope to help free the lands and he called a Crusade. It benefited Europe for it's civilizing aspect at the time. They were quite barbaric.

It was this contact with the educated Greek world that civilized Europe, as it did the Arabs when they came in contact with it.