Lt. Richard Collins III; murdered by Alt-Right terrorist...

[Meh Gerbil]

how much do you think it would take to become a world wide threat? A small war torn country called Germany did it in the 1930s. You don't think a middle east country who sponsors terrorists and has nuclear bombs can?

No, I don't think Iran could ever make a decent run at menacing the entire world.
They flat out don't have the resources - I doubt their military could last the night in Detroit.

[Meh Gerbil]

You would have to ask the experts, but I suspect that it has to do with the possible development of nuclear weapons and their overt hatred of the west. Calling for the destruction of the Great Satan (the US) and the little Satan (Israel). I take them at their word - that if they could do it they would.

I think they hate the west because we keeping messing around with them.
I think our 'experts' are paid to manufacture threats to keep the military industrial complex going.

[One Bad Pig]

I don't appreciate you smearing the reputations of good people.
For example, Saudi Arabia is very concerned about human rights and welfare.
I know this because they donated $10 million to the Clinton Foundation.

Source: https://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/21/u...rity.html?_r=0

Saudi Arabia even backs important women's groups - and I know this is a good group because Ivanka backs it:
Source: http://www.theroot.com/coincidence-d...bia-1795438298

So, you judgmental person, when you've given $10 million to the Clinton Foundation then you can talk about your human rights records.
All these people trying to help the poor and you just drag them down.

This might have a smidgeon of force if Starlight actually liked Hillary even a little bit. To say that he prefers her over Trump is damning her with (very) faint praise.

[Sparko]

No, I don't think Iran could ever make a decent run at menacing the entire world.
They flat out don't have the resources - I doubt their military could last the night in Detroit.

They don't need a military to invade anything. They have terrorists who are already here. And they have nuclear bombs. do the math. The next suicide bomber could be nuclear.

[Meh Gerbil]

They don't need a military to invade anything. They have terrorists who are already here. And they have nuclear bombs. do the math. The next suicide bomber could be nuclear.

Let's say the next suicide bomber is nuclear.
What do you think happens to the entire country of Iran?

[Sparko]

Let's say the next suicide bomber is nuclear.
What do you think happens to the entire country of Iran?

First we would have to prove they did it. Then once we did, we would invade them, depose whoever is in charge, then we would give them lots of money, then leave and allow ISIS to move in and take over and start all over again.

[seer]

I think they hate the west because we keeping messing around with them.
I think our 'experts' are paid to manufacture threats to keep the military industrial complex going.

Keep messing around? Who drove planes into the World Trade Center? You may not like in but we are in a war for civilization. No less than fighting Nazism or international Communism. Islam wants the world - and not just radical Islam. And it is because of our military industrial complex that most of Asia, Europe and a good part of the rest of the world is free today from Nazism, Communism, and Japanese Imperialism.

[Meh Gerbil]

Keep messing around? Who drove planes into the World Trade Center? You may not like in but we are in a war for civilization. No less than fighting Nazism or international Communism. Islam wants the world - and not just radical Islam. And it is because of our military industrial complex that most of Asia, Europe and a good part of the rest of the world is free today from Nazism, Communism, and Japanese Imperialism.

Last year more black men were shot by other black men in Chicago than died from terrorism across the entire USA.
Either these terrorists really suck at their jobs or there just isn't that many of them.

[seer]

Last year more black men were shot by other black men in Chicago than died from terrorism across the entire USA.
Either these terrorists really suck at their jobs or there just isn't that many of them.

That is not the point. Islam is growing in power and influence, just look at the demographic changes in Europe. In 50-75 years they will take the Continent by sheer numbers without firing a shot. Just because they are not in a position to move today doesn't mean the world is not their aim. Just read their literature and speeches.

[guacamole]

I'm not sure what your point is.

This looks like a targeted attack by a racist scumbag against a black man and is nothing like the random killings perpetrated by Muslim terrorists which are designed to inflict maximum casualties, such as the recent bombing in Manchester.

The point is to discuss whether or not the alt-right shares some commonalities with terrorist movements. So far it looks like:

1. On line radicalization (the killer in this case was a part of some "Alt-Reich" Facebook page).
2. Which leads to a lone wolf attack.
3. We have on-line ideologues, not dissimilar to the kinds of recruitment and preaching efforts of Imams trying to foment more attacks.

Given that terrorism can be a loose grouping, is there any good reason, other than body-count, not to call these terrorist attacks?

fwiw,
guacamole

[seer]

The point is to discuss whether or not the alt-right shares some commonalities with terrorist movements. So far it looks like:

1. On line radicalization (the killer in this case was a part of some "Alt-Reich" Facebook page).
2. Which leads to a lone wolf attack.
3. We have on-line ideologues, not dissimilar to the kinds of recruitment and preaching efforts of Imams trying to foment more attacks.

Given that terrorism can be a loose grouping, is there any good reason, other than body-count, not to call these terrorist attacks?

fwiw,
guacamole

Since when is the Alt-Reich part of the Alt-Right?

[guacamole]

Indeed, how completely sad you're still smarting from that savage beating I gave you in the other thread so you now resort to poorly thought out smear campaigns.

Right. The only savage beating you delivered in that thread was to your own reputation given that you:

1. believe the Gospels preach a racist Jesus Christ.
2. believe that the story of Babel supports a segregationist God.

I have no idea why you want to keep reminding people what you believe.

Why would they call some drunk murdering a guy who wouldn't move out of his way a terrorist?

If you want to have a discussion about it, see my reasoning to Mt. Man above.

FYI white supremacists and neonazis mostly hate the alt right.

Which is one again why you want to ride in here and white knight the alt-right again?

fwiw,
guacamole

[Mountain Man]

The point is to discuss whether or not the alt-right shares some commonalities with terrorist movements. So far it looks like:

1. On line radicalization (the killer in this case was a part of some "Alt-Reich" Facebook page).
2. Which leads to a lone wolf attack.
3. We have on-line ideologues, not dissimilar to the kinds of recruitment and preaching efforts of Imams trying to foment more attacks.

Given that terrorism can be a loose grouping, is there any good reason, other than body-count, not to call these terrorist attacks?

OK, so Darth Executor is right, you're an idiot.

Of course when you say "alt-right", what you really mean is "conservative Republicans".

Frankly, I'm still not convinced that "alt-right" is even a thing.

[guacamole]

He just wants to say something nasty against the "alt-right." Conservatives actually...

Seer,

If I wanted to criticize mainstream conservatives, I would do so plainly. I clearly have not shown any timidity in doing so when I think conservatives are wrong. This is about the alt-right, which is not synonymous with the conservative movement. I want to "say something nasty against the 'alt-right'" because I think it's useful to shine a light on darkness. Do you agree that the alt-right and main-stream conservativism are different? Or have you totally gone over to the other side and become another alt-right apologete? Just trying to understand where you stand.

fwiw,
guacamole

[guacamole]

OK, so Darth Executor is right, you're an idiot.

Of course when you say "alt-right", what you really mean is "conservative Republicans".

Frankly, I'm still not convinced that "alt-right" is even a thing.

So I discuss in earnest with, and you choose the side of insult. Gotcha. Again, as I said to Seer, if I wanted to criticize "conservative Republicans" I would do so directly. I have done so in the past. If I wanted criticize you directly, as I have done so in the past, I would have lumped you into it.

You insistence that the "alt-right" isn't a thing is irrational. It's a collective name for the far-right fringe of the conservative movement that focuses on racial politics to the extent of other causes. You can find numerous alt-right message boards. If you like, I can send you to some that I've read in the past. But something tells me that you've decided to throw your lot in with on-line political partisans who believe that critic of any conservatives is a critique of all conservatives.

fwiw,
guacamole