Support for ISIS in Muslim World is 7%

Source? Or did you just make that up?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Given that it represents a popular desire, I don't think so. (Not to say he would actually do it - but he is saying it to garner support from like minded people.)

On Debate.org, the question "should America nuke the Middle East" got an 80% "yes" result. A microcosm of the country to be sure, but these people are out there - and politicians want votes, so they pander to them.

Some replies on that debate:

Blow them away
I place American lives higher than Muslim lives they took the fight to us by bombing civilians. If our positions were reversed they would not hesitate to blow us away. FACT: 90 percent of Muslims support suicide bombings. I say the crusaders had it right the first time, if only those brave knights had the arsenal we had today!

Yes, they are a threat to humanity's progress
Incest, pedophilia, murder of men, women, and children, and radical fudementalism are rampant in the Middle East region. In order for humanity to advance, these brainwashed lunatics should be wiped out. Any innocent non radicals should escape as soon as possible. A majority of them are savage followers of the pedophile Mohammed.

Nothing to lose
I lived over there for 3 years, mostly desert, there is nothing to lose.

ISIS is hiding behind women and children.
There is no way to avoid collateral damage with a cowardly enemy who hides behind women and children, even using them as human bombs to do their killing. The only solution is to wipe out entire concentrations of ISIS militants, even if it means some innocents will die along with them.

Should America nuke the middle east
Yes a lot of people will die.. But either those people who are good need to fight and get rid of the violent people or I am sorry..Its been going on for to long..30 nukes should do it...Get it over with and pretend it never happened like we will do...But of course make sure we can still get oil from parts over there...

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

YouGov Poll, Nov 30 - Dec 3, 2015 1000 respondents

Question: Do you think that it is ever justifiable to use violence to prevent abortions?
Yes 3% (9.6 million Americans)

Question: Do you think that using violence to stop abortion providers is:
Morally acceptable? Yes 4% (12.8 million Americans)

Question: Do you think that the recent killings at the Planned Parenthood in Colorado do or do not count as an act of terrorism?
Do count as an act of terrorism 52%

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

=>Notes the big difference between "thinking" about it and actually doing it.

 

Read this post somewhere: "Maybe if they just took out the holy sites of Islam, the Muslim world would start praying to a "real" Universal God instead of praying to idolized "black rocks" and locations." ~ anon
The reason I posted the above provocation:

Is to reinforce the notion that whilst the West is feeling threatened by radical Islam it must be remembered that Islam as a sustainable religion is incredibly vulnerable. No Mecca (Kaaba) means no Islam. No Black stone means no Islam. Islam has at it's weakest link the spiritual devotion to location/object premised values. ( For example: Mecca and Medina in Saudi Arabia)
I am sure some Muslim people are well aware that their whole religion could be turned upside down by some anonymous and overwhelming action against the holy sites.

 

If IS (DAESH) or other Islamic fundies are reading this thread they need to take into serious account the potentials they are playing with.
I am sure there is a significant percentage of very capable and funded people (all anonymous and independent of national identity ) on this planet that are seriously thinking about "it".

And.. I do not think the Saudi anti terrorist security systems are that good... to be honest..
Maybe IS (Daesh) should start thinking about defending Mecca instead of playing torture games in their Syrian, Iraqi sandpit pseudo caliphate.

 

That's a typically Christian response. Muslims would retort that they aren't the ones confusing Jesus with God. Jesus was a prophet, not God incarnate, in their view. Islam doesn't try to divide the unity of God into three. In my opinion they have a point, if we want to take monotheism and the unity of god seriously.

The ancient Romans thought that way. No Jerusalem, no Judaism. So their legions captured Jerusalem around the year 130 in the Second Jewish War and banished the Jews from the city. I'm sure that publicly executing Jesus was expected to end the dangerous claims that he was the messiah. Things obviously didn't work out the way the Romans hoped in either case.

If somebody nuked Mecca and Medina, Islam wouldn't disappear. You would just have a billion totally pissed off Muslims on your hands.

Right now, violent jihadism is still a minority thing in Islam.

But... if the West destroyed their holy cities and sites, I think that most Muslims would rise up. You would have blood in the streets everywhere Muslims and non-Muslims live in contact.

 

Christians do not require holy sites as part of their worship. ( they do not even need a Church building ) If Christian sites were destroyed Christianity would grieve their loss but remain essentially unaffected.

However, Islam requires daily devotion towards Mecca 2 to 5 times a day. the loss of the holy sites (completely) would be devastating to Islam

Christians as well as Jews do not need a focus other than the universe (or self) for their prayers.

Fundamental Muslims require a material focus for their prayers.

but who to blame? Nuclear arms material may be forbidden to developing countries etc however there are terribly capable non-religious people whom I am sure could get it together (nuclear or other wise) quite easily if pushed in that direction. Quite capable of acting anonymously and outside the International community paradigm.

Whom could they blame? USA, Germany, France, Russia, Iceland... etc...? or a group of anonymous individuals who have no national or religious allegiance with a trillion USA dollar budget.

** people other than Muslims can fly planes into buildings or the French alps for that matter ( re: German wings tragedy)

It is a belief that is evangelistic as well. It seeks to promote Islam and as seen by Daesh behavior offering only death/enslavement as an alternative.

the destruction of the holy sites may not be from the WEST it may be from a marginalized Sunni group that have heavy hearts from loosing their relatives to the brutality of Daesh. The strikes may also come from independent wealthy internationals of unknown nationality or persuasion out of sheer frustration that their significant economic welfare is being threatened by the behavior of Daesh.

Who to blame other than Daesh?
No doubt the first reaction would be to blame the West but as Bart Simpson of the sitcom said once "I didn't do it" and well the question remains..did he?

 

The thing to consider is that if you review world opinion over the last 5 years or so, tolerance of Islam generally is becoming less.
(Example: A certain tower building person running for high office appears to be seriously scared of Islam.)
People do not like living in fear ( especially the top end of a global town) and will ultimately resolve to eradicate it's source. (human nature 101)
It is inevitable that if Daesh continues as it has, Islam, as a legitimate religion, will be seriously degraded as a result and the most obvious way to do that would be, if so inclined, to take out the holy sites.

 

Exactly. Which is why "I support Daesh" is nothing like "I plan to blow things up."

 

Not so sure of this... most moderate/liberal Muslims that I know of, who live a long distance away from the Middle East do not adhere to the prayer routines and pray where ever and when ever they wish to.

In fact I'll ask some of my Muslim friends today how they would react if the holy sites were removed from the world map.

 

Critically the most important strategy that Daesh employs against the West is "fear of the unknown" in that we do not know where or when they might strike next. Let us not forget that the same applies to Islam generally. They do not know how the fear Daesh is generating is affecting people nor do they know when or where the victims of that fear may strike back.

 

The troubling thing is that Daesh have absolutely no control on what happens as a reaction to it's call for Muslims to rise up... thus Islam generally becomes the target...IMO

 

I can now easily say that those polls are totally baseless! I am a practicing muslim, living in Turkey and I have quite a good network of connections among different Islamic groups in this country and I dare say close to 99% of Practicing muslims in Turkey do not understand how a group claiming to be practicing Islam can so freely shed innocent bloods. The mostr widely believed theory here (and as far as I know in many other muslim countries) is that Daesh is a tool created for certain purpose by powerful establishments. If you look at how the events unfolded in Syria till the advent of Daesh, you may find a point in why we muslims think so...

 

So you say it is close to 99% and the polls says it is 92%, that certainly does not seem 'baseless' to me. I think if we add the error in your estimate and the error bars of the poll you basically agree with each other!

 

On an almost humorous note:
To aid in demonstrating my earlier thoughts concerning the possibility of anonymous international reactions to Daesh ( due to economic interruptions) that may involve a wider Muslim community collateral damage:

Encrypted e-mail sent to Daesh Leadership from Mexican drug lord.

"El Chapo — real name Joaquin Guzman, leader of the Sinaloa Cartel — is not incensed at ISIS being a vile, bloodthirsty death cult. Instead, the renegade drug lord is angry that ISIS destroyed one of his drug shipments somewhere in the Middle East."

http://nypost.com/2015/12/10/el-chapo-tells-isis-his-men-will-destroy-them/