ayup

I don't think she's wrong, necessarily.  Education can decrease terrorism, but education alone will not do it.  You need to destroy terrorists with overwhelming force while at the same time destroying their ideas with education, drawing Mohammad, etc.

She's saying that if the average middle easterner knew what you know, the popular support for radical islam would fade away.

Because that's a political movement for uneducated peasants.

Then just the fringe lunatics would be left to deal with.


One time an US soldier reported that an arab asked him if he "had to kill a member of his family" in order to join  the US armed forces.

That's the level of knowledge these people have, they're practically like cavemen.

They are peasants with a head full or religious fundamentalism and propaganda.

Their newspapers show cartoon of jews with devil horns on their head.


So yeah, a little knowledge of the world might just help a tad, don't you think?


But you knew that already

She is an SJW shill and would whole heartedly agree with FBHO that global warming is causing terrorism.

She would be murdered the minute she set foot in her home country of Pakistan.

Actually, look at how many terrorists come from upper class or upper middle class backgrounds with at least university level education.  Pretty much the same guys who are radical Islamic terrorists today would have been Red Army Faction types in the 80s.

It hasn't been terribly long ago that the "civilized" nations engaged in practices like beheading, drawing and quartering, etc.

Different parts of the world have progressed at different rates. It may be that their societal evolution will be similar to that of the Western world, but just at a slower pace.

See, but they and we all know better than that.

This. She's kind of earned her Nobel Peace Prize. She probably wants to continue to deserve it, even with a massive target on her head.

This site's "cause" tends to be the second amendment. Her "cause" is equal access and rights to education, so it makes sense she would say something like the OP's pic/quote.

She's trying to say the world would be a better place if everyone had an opportunity to learn to read, math, physics and shit that makes things like Predator drones and Hellfire missiles possible.

Sorry, what I meant was that we need to educate them about the futility of messing with us.

Mid-20th century colonial Britain is somewhat dissimilar to early 21st century radical Islam.

It ruins the education theory



 

I happen to think that her main cause, as you mentioned: educating women, is the only way to drag the pedo-worshippers out of the dark ages. Empowering and educating women would effect drastic change on that culture.

Until then, kill every terrorist that rears his bearded head.

Correct. And that's why neither education nor guns will stop terrorism from being practiced.

People who have experience fighting the Taliban... answer me this, can the Taliban fighters in afghanistan read? We have discussed this, based on reading news articles about them not being able to, but I have my doubts.

It's like the first post has psychic powers and can always detect when to nail it....

Education for those who care...two to the chest and one to the head for those that don't.

The problem is that an education in Islam results in the exact opposite conclusion.

Gandhi was dealing with the British.

Where is Ghandi now?

stupid, liberal, feelgood nonsense

An interesting statement. I don't know if Jordan is representative of Muslim countries, but they seem to have quite a few colleges and universities. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_universities_in_Jordan

The trend in the Muslim world has been regressive as they have gained knowledge of the world. Pictures of the region from the '70s show a secular elite. Advancement in knowledge of their religion and the outside world has radicalized the Arab street and forced the elite to at least act Islamic.

"Malala Yousafzai  born 12 July 1997)[2][3] is a Pakistani activist for female education and the youngest-ever Nobel Prize laureate.[4] She is known mainly for human rights advocacy for education and for women in her native Swat Valley in the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa province of northwest Pakistan, where the local Taliban had at times banned girls from attending school. Yousafzai's advocacy has since grown into an international movement.

Her family runs a chain of schools in the region. In early 2009, when she was 11–12, Yousafzai wrote a blog under a pseudonym for the BBC detailing her life under Taliban occupation, their attempts to take control of the valley, and her views on promoting education for girls in the Swat Valley. The following summer, journalist Adam B. Ellick made a New York Times documentary[3] about her life as the Pakistani military intervened in the region. Yousafzai rose in prominence, giving interviews in print and on television, and she was nominated for the International Children's Peace Prize by South African activist Desmond Tutu.

On the afternoon of October 9, 2012, Yousafzai boarded her school bus in the northwest Pakistani district of Swat. A gunman asked for her by name, then pointed a pistol at her and fired three shots. One bullet hit the left side of Yousafzai's forehead, travelled under her skin through the length of her face, and then went into her shoulder.[5] In the days immediately following the attack, she remained unconscious and in critical condition, but later her condition improved enough for her to be sent to the Queen Elizabeth Hospital in Birmingham, England, for intensive rehabilitation. On 12 October, a group of 50 Islamic clerics in Pakistan issued a fatwa against those who tried to kill her, but the Taliban reiterated their intent to kill Yousafzai and her father, Ziauddin Yousafzai. The assassination attempt sparked a national and international outpouring of support for Yousafzai. Deutsche Welle wrote in January 2013 that Yousafzai may have become "the most famous teenager in the world."[6] United Nations Special Envoy for Global Education Gordon Brown launched a UN petition in Yousafzai's name, demanding that all children worldwide be in school by the end of 2015; it helped lead to the ratification of Pakistan's first Right to Education Bill.[7]"

ABC news Pakistan's Swat Valley: 'The Land of The Terrorists'

A Swat valley peasant girl who resisted the Taliban by pushing to educate girls and she got shot in the face for her troubles. What an ignorant liberal, right?

She's the one that got attacked because she wanted an education right? Got a Nobel Prize for it and all that jazz?  IF that is her then she probably said it because it seems to be her thing to talk about education in the stone age world.

Where the fuck was all that western civilization during WWII? Last I checked that between the time Cicero wrote his crap and Locke wrote his stuff, Europeans managed to become the most warlike people on the planet and started the bloodiest wars in human history.

Europe hasn't fought a major war since WWII, that wasn't because they became enlightened. It was because one country, the US, prevented them from fighting each other.

Buy them books and they eat the teacher.

there are a lot of educated terrorists too...

hell we have them in our country as university professors

Yes. She's not trying to tackle world issues. She just wants ignorant assholes to not shoot other people in the face because they promote education for young girls.

Jordan is not perhaps a representative example.

Egypt has American University. Pictures of the graduating class since the 70s show an increasingly female class who have dressed more and more Islamic.

The trend seems to be towards Islamism as the Muslim areas gain in education. The Arab world has been going through a reformation of sorts but the results are very different then the Christian version.

Reminds me of that scene from Homeland:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ct3BsyF64gM

(sorry, embed fail)

I think this.  If muzzies are more worldly, they might be less likely to Aloha Snackbar themselves all over the pavement.

Might be true for the black feet who infest the Mideast and Europe but there are quite a few highly educated, worldly RoPers who take up the call to jihad.

Sometimes education has to happen ballistically.

Nobody ever claimed we will have Utopia, nor will we ever.
But as a whole, western thinkers try to move the ball further down the field in regards to science, philosophy, liberty, prosperity and peace.

Islamic "thinkers" seemingly just devise new ways to kill people.

This wasn't so much because they became warlike as much as their capacity for war. Primitives are consistently more warlike than the civilized. The civilized have more capability to kill, however.

The Japanese were more warlike then we were in the '40s and we killed many more of them. The same applies between the Palestinians and IDF more recently.



Western Europe was pacifist post WW2. We were not holding West Germany, France and Britian back from war, we were facing off the Red Army.

For that matter, part of what led up to WW2 was the hold pacifism had taken in Britian and France post WW1.

The same place we're all going to be, sooner or later.

Radicalism can be espoused by people with doctorates

I would say the upswing in Islamic violence had come about along with more knowledge in the region.

Increased stuudy of their religion combined with greater knowledge of the outside world is driving terrorism. The problem will get worse before it gets better.

You described the teachings of Plato, Cicero and Locke and tried to assume that modern Europeans are civilized because of that stuff. Europeans are probably the most vicious and warlike people that have ever lived, they dominated the world not because they were into law and order but because their armies were better and their navies controlled the seas. Their kingdoms were based on greed, subjugation, straight up mass murder, and oppression. Why do you think the USA was founded? Because a bunch of colonists were bored and wanted to try something new? It was because Europeans were as fucked up as they come.

With western civilization, all of those fields you mention are a double edge sword. With science came increases in weapons technology, to better kill our fellow man (like splitting the atom). With philosophy came such wonderful ideologies as communism, eugenics, and national socialism. With prosperity came colonialism and imperialism, and crony capitalism. Peace was only established once the great powers of Europe literally destroyed themselves in the Napoleonic War and then again after WWI and WWII, leaving them without the foreign holdings, money, or population to ever contemplate such warfare again.

Yeah. Education is the only way to combat terrorism long term. The number of people with PhDs wanting terrorism is in the gross minority. They generally are the leaders and using the ideology for power. And just because one has knowledge in one area, doesn't mean they have knowledge in others.  

First you need the jobs, then you get the khakis, THEN you get the chicks.

FIFY

The capacity of Europeans to wage war has rested with the superior culture they develped. They were not more warlike. The Japanese of the 1930s and the Muslims of Sudan in the 1880s were more warlike.

The pen is mightier than the sword.


But, that doesn't mean you never have need of a sword.

It depends what you mean by "education".

The main education we need to provide them is to make it clear that spreading Islam by Jihad results in a timely death.

We need to provide the West with an education that values Western culture. As it is we are teaching our children that our society isn't worth fighting for.

We killed more of the Japanese because western civilization proved once again to be better at killing people than simpler cultures, even ones that somewhat embraced western ideologies.

France and Britain lost a significant portion of the male population in WWI, especially those with the "best genes", which would be classified in the US as 1-A draft material (brains and brawn). They didn't want to repeat it, especially since they were content with the ending of the first war. Germany faced similar issues with losses, but their defeat in WWI, their denial over its cause and instance of a "betrayal" by their leaders and a cabal of jews, and subsequent economic woes were enough of a catalyst to make them forget the losses they suffered 1914-1918 and do it all over again, looking to dominate Europe, west and east.

Europeans aren't pacifist today because they have suddenly become enlightened, its because they know the cost of war, its now ingrained into their very civilization. All of the countries left WWII with a major net loss, not just in population but in infrastructure destroyed and money lost. Accept for the US and USSR both of which managed to come out in decent enough military and economic condition to fill the power vacuum when Europe "quit" the empire game. They couldn't have repeated such a war, WWIII would have wiped them out and they knew it (which is why it never started), they have since gone out of their way to teach their children that war is never the answer, ever ever ever. That's a relatively new concept for Europeans to embrace, a lesson called WWII changed everything.

Which has historical event has a more significance on the modern world? The Moorish invasion of France in the 9th century? Or the European powers divvying up the Middle East after WWI ended with the Sykes–Picot Agreement?

Everyone loves bringing up Muslim expansion all the way back in the 7th century, but how many people acknowledge that places like Syria and Iraq are fucked up today not because of something that happened 1500 years ago but because of poor decisions made by the power elite of England and France in the age where most of our grandfathers were still alive?

Yep



 

You think its a coicindence that Europeans suddenly controlled most of the world? "Oops, I accidentally beat the Raj in India and control that country. Whoops, just forced the opium trade in China through military campaigns. Damn it, I accidentally invaded Afghanistan three times. Shit, I accidentally sent in dozens of red coat regiments into Natal for a land grab. My bad."

Rome conquered everything not just because it had a successful civilization, but mostly because their military was better than the tribal armies Gauls, or the Spaniards, or the North Africans. Its no different than European history, which is a story of what happens when a superior warlike people are unleashed on the world.

* Note, My opinion of historical Europeans is neutral. But one thing you cannot say about Europeans accept for the present day, is that they weren't incredibly warlike, war loving, people. Americans too. "Civilize them with a Krag."

Well, you can't kill an idea, so killing terrorists really is the only way to stop terrorism.

However, that being said, if we educate them about what we do to terrorists . . .

successful civilization and better military tend to go hand-in-hand

I like imperialism personally, it promotes human advancement through the dominance of superior people