Whats wrong with using terrorism to advance an agenda?

Question

A very sigificant number of Muslims worldwide genuinely believe they have a God given duty to establish God's Islamic-state by any means at their disposal. Is their methodology inherently wrong, by some standard of natural law? If so, name that law and how you know it exists.

In the final analysis, there is no absolute natural standard, the real issue is "whats in the best interests of humanity as a whole". Objecting to Islamic terrorism in and of itself merely plays into their rationale. If you say "terrorism is wrong" they respond with "you are bombing, this is terror".

The real problem with terrorism is not that its demonstrably "wrong" but that its so successful and availble to anyone, which thus threatens the free-state. Islamic-states or other totalitarian regimes have lmuch less fear and expenditures related to terror because their systems insulate them from this methodolgy.

Theres no way to stop terror, only the community that uses it...which we havent the backbone to

Answer 1

I don't care if it's wrong or who thinks it's wrong. Just expect retribution if you f*** up my community.

Answer 2

Islamic state is like an oxymoron.
Because in Islam, the buying and selling of land is done on a personal level and no land in general belongs to anyone but God.

Thus if a man says I want a muslim state, theyre going against the teachings.

This is an interesting matter of debate and has been around for a long time.

I can only conclude that muslims who want an islamic state actually want islamic laws being practiced by the local government. This would make their religious duties easy to perform and I understand that.

But theres also something called the obedience of rulers in Islam.

Even if theyre not muslim, we are ordered to be obedient to our rulers so we may avoid creating chaos in the land.

Very few people actually adhere to this anymore.

The way I see it fit, a muslim man needs to consider all aspects of his life, his duty to himself as human, his duty to mankind and all living beings and then his duty towards God.

You will not advance if you take out any one of these duties and use the rest for your own self serving motives.

People need to wakeup and teach proper moral codes.

Answer 3

I think Sherman's march to the sea (civil war) would qualify as terrorism, and of course the bombing of Nagasaki.

Answer 4

TERRORISM is an undefined term. Polilticians have so buchered it, that I have no idea what meaning you intend.

Until you define it, your statement is meaningless drivel.

Please define the term, then I'll edit my reply.

--- I just noticed you are also confusing "terrorism" with "terror".
Terrorism is the issue.
Terror is an emotion.
Don't get them confused, it makes you look ignorant.

Answer 5

it hurts and kills everyone causing a new world war