Is America "at war" with radical Islam?
The partisan argument between the left and the right on President Trump's immigration ban boils down to whether people see it as a ban on terrorism or a ban on Islam. The one question each of us need to answer before choosing a side appears to be whether we are or are not at war with radical Islam. FDR put people of Japanese origin in camps during WWII and there are comparisons being made to that time in history with the current scenario - are they the same? Regardless of where you stand on Trump's EO, what are your thoughts on the question?
They are at war with everyone else, from secular Muslims to other Islamic sects to non-Muslims.
Ralph, I have to agree with Tamara. Radical Islam is at war with any country who does not share their religious beliefs. We are well aware that Obama ignored this threat to a large degree, and saw no problem with importing thousands of refugees into this country with little or no vetting in the process.
The question now is if anything Trump can do to stop this threat will be too little too late after 8 years of Obama's policies.
It is interesting to me how a temporary stay on immigrants from 7 countries with known terrorist ties can be construed as a total ban on Muslims. It is not and was never intended to be a total ban on Muslims.
It will be interesting to see how this plays out in the days to come.
It's being blown up by the left as they try to keep painting President Trump as some kind of hate-filled monster, instead of using common-sense
Of course it is. Every move that Trump makes puts more tarnish on King Obama's crown. By now at least a few liberals should be ready to admit Obama did a terrible job as our President. But I doubt they ever will.
Mike: they won't admit it because in their frame of reference Obummer did a wonderful job. He helped ensure that so many downtrodden people in America got their "rights"; he helped ensure peace by an agreement with Iran, provided more freebies, etc.
Most refugees, under the Obama administration, went through an extreme vetting process that took 3-6 months. Little or no vetting? Where do you get your information?
Crankalicious: Obummer was bringing in Syrian refugees with little vetting. How do we know this? Because those who testified in Congress told us that there was little they could do to vette most of those refugees.
FYI Obama after finishing the bill to remove troops in Iraq (Bush first vetoed) resuming troops 2014 to find and relinquish ISIL which nobody seems to talk about even though they're known for beheading troops and others on video, in US also
Isn't it interesting that this ban listed 7 countries that Trump has had no business dealings with, yet did not ban any countries where he had done business. I don't think the chosen list was due to radical Islam or USA satiety, but Trump's business
America is at war with radical Islam. The travel ban is legit constitutionally, but it blows the minds of those on the left because they've gone off the edge with their nicey nice, politically correct agenda. 15-20 years ago I wouldn't have believed that the US could be what it is today, but here we are. And I believe it will get worse - much worse.
Hxprof, Exactly what do you mean, What is the US today, and what will get worse. Just asking.
We're a political and cultural mess. There wouldn't be such a powerful left wing if we were still sound.
Hxprof Where in the Constitution does it permit this ban? A President cannot make religious preferences unless they pose a public threat as in communicable diseases. Alien & Sedition Act 1798 suspending visas is only OK if at war with count
Charlu: It's a national security issue, not religious preference. All of the countries except Iran are unstable, & MORE likely to be countries of origin for terrorists - that's it .
The liberals want to make it a religious issue. If it were that we would have banned all of the Muslim countries not just 7 of them.
Over 50,000 people die every year due to drug overdoses (over half opiates drs Rx for $ incentives from drug companies) that's more than heart attacks, guns, car accidents ) 15,500 deaths gangs Let's ban those that might come in Big issue no Corp $
The United States government does not own the earth, nor does it own this continent. It is immoral to ban anyone based on fictional borders drawn by a squatter nation.
Wrench - You'll convince few, if any, here on Hubpages of your agenda. Like it or not, the US is a nation (a troubled one, yes) - & we DO indeed possess the land of the 50 states. The borders are real, the authority is real. Get over it.
A thief and a murderer have a certain authority, albeit an illegitimate and immoral authority. A man who thinks like a peasant will remain as such. But a man who thinks like a king will never live in exile.
Trump only banned countries that he had no business interests in. It wasn't about countries that actually posed a threat. If he had business in a country, that country was not banned. Do you feel more safe knowing your president put his business 1st?
HyprOx Where do U get this we own the U.S.? People from all over this world OWN property in this country. I mean Trumps parents or his wife weren't born here and I'm not sure where your ancestors are from Did you take a history class I hope?
I think most Americans have a tough time wrapping their heads around the idea of a "Holy War" or religious extremism/devotion.
Ayatollah Khomeini: “Those who know nothing of Islam pretend that Islam counsels against war . . . I spit upon those foolish souls who make such a claim . . . A religion without war is a crippled religion. It is war that purifies the earth.”
Ayatollah Khalkali, put it even more bluntly: “Those who are against killing have no place in Islam.”
The Islamic Jihad has cells throughout the Middle Eastern countries and in Europe as well. These groups generally act on their own initiative without coordination. All of these groups share a fundamentalist Islamic ideology which espouses holy war against the infidels, and which is under the powerful influence of Iran. The Iranian regime and the Islamic Jihad groups collaborate closely at times. Some groups not only receive aid and guidance from Iran but also enjoy generous support from other Arab and Islamic countries. They also cooperate extensively with diverse Palestinian organizations.
They have been at war with the U.S. (the great satan) and Israel, since the 1970s after establishing themselves firmly in Iran, a gift from the Carter Administration that just keeps on giving.
We have never really committed to being at war with them. And now, the U.S. is no longer in a position to go to war with them directly, as Iran has the support of both Russia and China, and many years ago China made it clear that to invade Iran would be considered the equivalent of declaring war on China.
As for here in the U.S. we are losing the war to them here as well, the organization that has ties leading directly back to Iran, controls/owns 90% of all Mosques in America. Through various factions, such as the Muslim Brotherhood (of which Obama had no less than 6 in high ranking positions in his Administration) they have directed American politics and policy for years.
In short... if we are at war with radical Islam, we as a nation have been getting our behinds handed to us. We maybe have won some battles, but we are losing the war... because we are not really fighting the war. Accommodation is essentially capitulation... check out Sweden and that is essentially a fast forward to the direction our current policies towards refugees would lead us.
Why doesn't the ban include Turkey, Saudi Arabia, and the Phillipines? I have no problem with a temporary ban or even a complete ban on immigration, but let's target all the appropriate countries.
Those other countries are stable, and not on the sanctions list. This was not a big deal, the media, and the left made it a big deal. Ask yourself why Obama did it and no one complained, but Trump does it and its a 'Muslim ban'.
Fantastic answer! Most Americans have their head in the sand. They just don't get it. They'd have to experience a beheading on their front lawn to understand. By then, it would be too late. I pray it isn't already too late...
Judge Robart I guess is having no part of this so the ban is lifted and now not even Syrian refugees are ban. It's back to standard procedures I guess everyone will have to wait on Trumps appeal. WOW
I'm sure you would also have gotten "Best Answer" at Stormfront too. Good job Ken.
Says Ronnie... the person that wants America to fail and Americans (all non-Native types) to suffer horrible ends. Your comments are always filled with hate, you are a Native-American Racist/bigot.
Not "Native American" Ken. My heritage is Aniyunwiya and German.Since I do not favor oppression of minorities I can't be a racist. U don't hate, rapists, thieves, and murderers? Good! Now you can go to heaven.
There is no question that America is at war with radical Islam. Radical Islamic terrorists are a serious threat to our security and prosperity. Anybody who would target innocent people should be removed from the face of the Earth. Here's the problem: this is a guerrilla war and America does not fight such wars well. We like wars where we know where the enemy is and we apply overwhelming force to the problem. Because these terrorists are embedded in communities, it is very hard to root them out. It's not as simple as dropping a bomb on them or sending in troops. There appear to be two ways to approach the problem: 1. take the long view and develop policies and approaches that root them out over time (and kill them when necessary) and starve them of resources and 2) Apply the label of terrorist to all followers of Islam and restrict their movements and rights so that the bad apples among them don't get out.
I prefer the first approach. The problem with the second approach is that this terrorism is rooted in poverty, a problem that the rich governments of many of these people need to be held responsible for. We need to hold Saudi Arabia accountable. Their government is rolling in money and their people are suffering. We cannot tolerate this sort of behavior just because we regard them as allies. The more the wealth of these nations is concentrated at the top, the worse things are going to get. We also need to reject religious fundamentalism in all its forms and recognize that religious fundamentalism, no matter its source, is bad.
Iran and Saudi approve of what is going on, in fact, they are funding it. Islam is being spread throughout Europe and America, and ultimately, it will topple those countries small (like Sweden) ones first, then the larger ones. Its well planned out
Ken where are you getting all this information and where can I confirm your facts?
That would take a lot more space than I have here... try google search, tons and tons of ways to verify this info. IE- Saudi Prince Alwaleed bin Talal a senior member of the Saudi monarchy, pledges $32 billion to advance the islamization of America
I did your research and found he donated his entire net worth 32 billion to philanthropy following Bill and Melinda Gates. His biggest charity was for the empowerment of women, youth, & quoting Bill "A commitment without boundaries" chk &
HAH... like the $20 million to Harvard University to create a Sharia law studies program... His billions will finance Islamist pressure groups who exist to force Western civilization to yield to Islamic no-go zones, Shariah courts and blasphemy laws.
The "War" is really about dealing with the mentally ill people in the world. Terrorists tend to be mentally ill. One who advocates violence is mentally ill. Use mental health warrants and Local Police for arrests.
Funny Harvard states it was developed with support from the Klein Center and the Berkman and Luce Foundation to disclose & inform the public critically analyze them and relate change for women, children, and animal rights etc in the Muslim Wo
Ken, your comment relates to my comment how exactly?
they call us the infidel dogs of occident
they need to take a break of islam and their god
or die for him
I think it's more a case of America being No 1 on the hit list of radical Islam, because the US is the current big brother of the world. Even if America doesn't go after them, they will still attack America, because they view the big brother as their biggest threat. So it's more a case of a war of defense or retaliation.
America needs to understand that Islam is an entirely different ideology. It is not just a religion. It is a way of life. The Koran and Hadith dictate the way Muslims should lead their lives, from women covering their heads to having their genitals cut off to stoning and honor killing your daughter if she dates a Jew or Christian
It is NOT COMPATIBLE with our government, our constitution, or our way of life.So why would we not be very careful when allowing people from Islamic states to enter our country.
We better be at war with this, because they sure are at war with our culture. They say so too!
Right - they are at war with us regardless of our stance
Well maybe if we didn't go into their country, (after Obama got Bin Laden & brought troops home) trying to change everything they believe in. I mean different church denominations have very different beliefs but we don't kill or crucify them
Radical or not, America is constantly at war with someone. America's crusade against Radical Islam jumpstarted post 911. Who were the pepetrators -19 Saudi man. Finances cames from as far and remote as Pakistan. Both US allies and for obvious reasons none made it to the 'banned in America' list but mostly 'banged by America' nations made to the list.
Now these radical islamist who can chop humans like vegetables or even blow themselves for their so called jihaad are always politically protected as long as they are useful. Can a stupid ban really act as a deterrent for them, its anybody's guess!!!
From my studies thus far, there seems to be two problems on the side of America: this country as a whole is misinformed about what "Islam" is and what "radical Islamic terrorism" is. They are not at all mutually exclusive, and should be researched. The issue is most of the uneducated populous wish to have their information handed to them, rather than gathering from reliable sources themselves. They are the sheep of this country.
Islam, like all other religions, does not promote peace or war. War exists in every religious text you pick up, and even in Hinduism, it is encouraged to reach a peaceful end (see: Bhagavad Gita). Islamic terrorism, encouraged by the ayatollah and backed by terrorist groups like Al-Shabab, Al Qaeda, etc, is a falsified and modified version of Islam, a hate-filled version that tarnishes the true message of Islam.
I believe we are at war with our uneducated masses. They only further the hatred we have towards good Muslims.
I am one of those uneducated... could you inform me of which country Islam has been exported to, and remained a peaceful minority? Not including recent nations such as America and much of Europe that are only in recent years seeing a large migration
Ken-We're not fighting a religion that at its core does not promote heedless violence. We are fighting biased religious leaders in middle eastern nations whose interpretation benefit themselves. Christianity is certainly not peaceful either, at all.
But Christians don't read a book that teaches hate and death like the Koran does
Ralph-it's a pity you haven't read the Quran, you seem to have the wrong book. The Bible actually has more violence than any religious book. A verse from the Quran states "anyone who kills one person is equal to him killing a whole nation."
Ralph, What book were Christians reading when they enslaved the African race for nearly 400 years on this continent, committed genocide against the Indigenous, and nuked Hiroshima and Nagasaki?
The Koran has 109 verses calling Muslims to commit murder or violence on non-believers - the bible has 4 examples of the same type. I'm personally not part of either religion nor am I a fan of their methodologies
Ralph I completely respect that. But regardless of the number of verses, that doesn't mean they need to be taken literally. Almost all religious texts speak in the form of metaphors and parables.
Sarah said "We are fighting biased religious leaders" Yes... that is the key, religious leaders... who also happen to be the leaders of Saudi and Iran... and who are funding these terrorists and the expansion of Islam throughout Europe and America.
My biggest issue is not with the need to ban certain individuals entering a country. Many countries do that. My issue with the ban was the unthoughtout, rushed manner in which it was made, which resulted in confusion, people facing arrest at airports who were simply 'in the air' when the ban was made etc. I think the manner in which the ban was made was a reflection of poor leadership ability. It also was made under the illusion that such a rushed and poorly put together ban somehow 'made America safer'. What it did do was cause anger, and play into the hands of those who hate America. If anything it fed those who recruit terrorists with more amo to recruit them. If the ban had been done wisely, properly put together and not caused mass instantaneous chaos... yes, there would have been those who opposed it and got upset, but I don think believe it would have caused the level of outcry that it did. The fact is that the problem has been going on for years, the need to do a quick and sudden freeze was more a panicked response than a wise one. If there was a need to stop immigration quickly, the intelligent thing would have been to freeze new visas being approved, but honour the ones already approved, honour the green cards and people who were already USA residents and honour the entrance of people already inflight. Put a freeze on new things. The chaos it caused families who had been planning holidays to USA, yet one spouse was from one of those countries etc was ridiculous. Things that people already had planned...flights booked (for which they may not have received refunds for suddenly not being able to travel), visas already approved and in order etc should all have been honoured right from the start.
Why do you care about non-citizens more than Americans? Trump was doing what the people who voted for him wanted I suspect
Implementation was poor - some folks were inconvenienced; it happens.
Isn't it interesting that this ban targeted countries that Trumps business interests have no dealings with, yet put no such ban on countries where he has had business dealings. I don't think USA safety had anything to do with the chosen countries
I see you're able to repeat a leftist talking point. How about an original opinion? Maybe you should read my hub on the 7 countries and you'll understand the risk to our nation.
Enjoy U R right, however when you're bringing in over 5,000 Syrian refugees in 2 mths offering them things even our citizens can't get from seniors to the lower income it's just not fair. Like paying corporations half salary for 90 days 2 train
Ralph, before you throw unfounded accusations, let me make it clear. I lean more toward republican. I'm not 'leftish'. It's easy to brush off an argument by just claiming it's left. So, did your hub examine any other countries or just the 7?
Looks like the far greater risk to our country is the treasonous behavior of the Trump administration and the risk to national security it's created.
Crank... did you ever stop to consider, that a guy who ran on cleaning out the swamp, and blasting the media for lying, just might run into some resistance? There is no more corrupt+criminal a place on earth than D.C. and they are out to destroy him
Do you care that it appears that Michael Flynn committed treason, Donald Trump knew about it, and saw no reason to fire him after finding out? It obviously needs to be investigated thoroughly. Oh, but her emails!
Clinton is finished, Obama is finished, and come 2018 the people will vote what they believe... not what the media tells them to believe. Those days of the media ruling the masses are over.
The media is quickly fading into the sunset - they had better decide to start reporting real news again or be out of a job. The bitter squabbling about tiny political details is a worn out practice.
Seriously unless you guys have actually visited all these countries and spoken with thousands in all different areas NO ONE PERSON gets any info without media. Lynch taking the hit now but Trump is in Putins pocket both in my opinion pyschopaths
Ken, Ralph - so your conclusion is the media is lying about Flynn's involvement with Russia and it doesn't matter? You simply don't believe any of this to be true?
I really don't care if we ban Islam. The way I see it all Islam is bad and will eventually lead to war. They have not intention of not taking over the world. And, before one of you calls me a racist Christian radical. I am atheist and Islam doesn't have a race it's a religion and yes I am prejudice against that religion as well as some others because they are all creeps.
It is no secret that Islam is a religion which encourages violence. The discussion which everyone seems to be running away from is the role that Islam plays in aiding terrorism. There will only be clarity when people decide to talk about this.
Muslims are a divided lot. Their division is spilling over to rest of us and dividing the world.
Very true, the war between left and right, blue and red. It's all about party loyalty these days, not right and wrong
Profound and yet so accessible - nice comment Matt
I think we should declare war on radical Christian terrorism instead:
http://whatmattersnews.com/us-news/real … e-massacre
Eventually, competitive geopolitical terrorism will achieve the same characteristics of geopolitical oil. The business of terrorism will result in government bribes and third-party nations that require a carefully conceived logistical procedure of who should dominate the region. Exercising control over third-party nations will be a significant challenge to maintain global order. Certain businesses and countries rely on oil as the standard medium of exchange. With low oil prices and the abundance of oil, it becomes a dog-eat-dog world whereby the moral standard of the global order is jeopardized.The ban on Islam makes no sense.Islam does not tolerate the killing of innocent people.They would rather die.
Yes! We are absolutely at war with radical Islam and the sooner that the left admits this, the better! The nature of Islam actually (in my mind) makes the Muslim population even more susceptible to committing acts of terror - their religious leaders are telling them to! The truth is that of all the international terror attacks that occur in the world, more than 90% are committed by groups claiming to profess holy war for Islam.
About a year ago a statistic surfaced that "according to the FBI about 94% of terrorists attacks in the United States are committed by Muslims." This was a manipulative tactic meant to derail conversation about terrorism. The statistic refers to the FBI's definition of terrorism, which includes non-assault hate crimes such as vandalization or bomb threats; and it also uses the tricky wording "domestic terror attacks" and "in the United States." Those phrases are meant to throw people off because they don't include international acts of terror - terror that actually hurts and kills people. The United States has relatively few terror attacks and even fewer Muslims: in fact at less than 1% of the population of the United States, accounting for 6% of the total attacks is actually kind of a large percentage for the Muslim population.
I'm not saying that all Muslims are terrorists, but I do think that we are being severely misled into blindly opening our doors to an enemy that openly talks about its plans to destroy western civilization. The statistics don't lie and emotional politics don't change facts. What I'm saying is available on wikipedia.org or in any newspaper regardless of political persuasion. The events happen. The perpetrators are known. This isn't racism, it's noticing a pattern. Islam, as it is being practiced now, is not conducive to western secular civilization in any way - nor does it want to be.
The U.S. has been dropping more bombs and killing more innocent people since Hiroshima and Nagasaki than any other country in the world. Of course, you are not a racist. We all believe you. Of course we do.
The problem is the LEADERs of the religion... louis Farrakhan preaches anti-white, anti-western civ rhetoric... Ayatollah Khomeini and the royal family of Saudi preach a harsher intolerance, these leaders push for militant extremists and actions.
@Ronnie that's not the point. The point is that there are NGO's and people who believe that they need to kill other people and that Gd demands it of them. They are the foremost threat to modern civilization and they must be stopped.Ayaan Hirsi Ali
Ken, I have often wondered why people continue to lie when their lies can be so easily exposed these days via the internet. Farrakhan is not anti-white. He's pro-black. He speaks the truth about America, which is a legacy of evil.
It's very easy indeed to find out the truth, plenty of his 'sermons' are on youtube for anyone to watch/listen to... so I will let them be the judge to the truth of my statement.
"Manifest Destiny" is the colonizers justification 4 all atrocities. The racist can only see men like Washington and Jefferson as Founding Fathers, when in truth they were rapists, murderers, and thieves. A racist has no capacity 4 the truth.
It would be great if you could separate those who wish to commit violent acts, from those who don't. I know plenty of peaceful people of the Muslim faith. Ban people associated with terrorist groups, not an entire religion.
JOC You are so right Labels make everyone susceptible to criticism. It's like saying all cops are dirty, Catholics priests child molesters, etc. Thanks for a great comment.
I think that all religions should be open to criticism though @charlu
They are, after all, only ideas.
My thoughts on the question is that President Trump did not just wake up one morning to place a ban on this group of people. Any one who loves the truth will agree with me that the people banned have already banned themselves when they choose to keep silence, while their actors of different groups, destroyed the lives of innocent people. Just for the fun of it like the posters above.
The arrival of Trump is the beginning of the real fight/ against terrorism.if perhaps you think you are not at war with them, they are with you.
In response to Elizabeth - I think we live in a globalized world where different cultures will inevitably cross paths and become mixed. Someone or something who is different from what we commonly know does not mean they are bad. I think all religions in general are meant to be peaceful but some people who misuse or misinterpret it will tarnish the faith. Its the same as the incident with Catholicism, where the faith is good, but there were many incidents of priests molesting children. We should learn to embrace other people and cultures. Sometimes I think we just fear things that we do not understand.
From the Muslim friends that I have, they all believe Islam is not supposed to be radicalized in the manner we see today. We should not be generalizing their religion as something bad without adequate understanding.
Another thought is what happen to freedom of expression / speech that is suppose to be very important in America? If someone wants to express their faith by covering up - what difference is that from someone who wants to have a lot of tattoos on their body to express their personalities?
Globalization exists, learn to cope with various religions. At their core, they are all the same. All Prophets are from One Source, thus One.
Police need to see the faces of Muslim women for ID.
The "War" is against Mental Illness.
by JOC 5 years ago
Why are conservatives so intent on pissing off a whole religion that has like three billion members instead of singling out the extremist groups that have resorted to terrorism as their primary offensive strategy?
by G. Diane Nelson Trotter 7 years ago
What is the benefit of saying "radical extremist" as opposed to "Islamic extremist?"Is it less offense to Muslims to hear "extremist" instead of "Islamic terrorist?" Does debate over what to call it add fuel to the fire?
by Writer Fox 7 years ago
Obama has declared open war on ISIS/ISIL."We will conduct a systematic campaign of airstrikes against these terrorists," Obama said from the White House. "I will not hesitate to take action against ISIL [Islamic State] in Syria, as well as Iraq. This is a core principle of my...
by Quilligrapher 6 years ago
Irrational religious bigots are found everywhere, including here on Hubpages. So, I thought it would be nice, for a change, to invite comments about the positive contributions made to the American tapestry by fellow Americans that are also Muslims. If you served in the military, you probably served...
by TMMason 11 years ago
This should not be allowed in the U.S.. it is unexceptable.Building the American Islamic Caliphate, One Enclave at a Time http://www.islamist-watch.org/It seems almost unthinkable, but Islamist groups are, as we speak, hard at work creating Muslim states-within-states in the U.S....
by LoliHey 5 years ago
Will not saying the name "Radical Islam" really keep us safe?Obama says that saying the name "Radical Islam" won't make a difference. Well, if it won't make a difference, why not just say the name? The mentality here is that if we call it what it is (Islamic...
Copyright © 2022 Maven Media Brands, LLC and respective content providers on this website. HubPages® is a registered trademark of Maven Coalition, Inc. Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners. Maven Media Brands, LLC and respective content providers to this website may receive compensation for some links to products and services on this website.
|HubPages Device ID||This is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.|
|Login||This is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.|
|HubPages Traffic Pixel||This is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.|
|Remarketing Pixels||We may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.|
|Conversion Tracking Pixels||We may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.|