This is a serious question. I'm not trying to start a polarized debate. I only want to understand why the unbelievably horrible death of Jordanian pilot Moaz al-Kasasbeh made so many people in politics suddenly decide to take hard stands about fundamentalist Islam.
What was it about his death that was so different than the 130 school kids killed in Pakistan or the 13 boys beheaded for watching soccer on television or alleged gay men being thrown from buildings? What about the women and girls being raped? What about the taking of children, male and female, from parents -- daughters to be sold off as sex slaves and brides -- boys to be trained to kill.
The only conspicuous thing about the death of the pilot seems to be that King Abdullah II spoke up and declared the Hashemite army is out for revenge. I hate to be the one to have to break the news to everyone but what King Abdullah said and what he intends to do are not the same thing. He'll send his bombers to kill a couple hundred ISISites, tear up some of their trucks, blow up some ammo and then he'll be done. That's "their way." If you don't believe it, try to find any recent news on any continuing Pakistani offensive on their Taliban since the slaughter of those school kids.
I've been in close touch with a Jordanian engineering student for about a year now. He says at least a third of the people he knows support ISIS. He doubts Abdullah will ever pit his ground forces against ISIS and run the risk of being forced to retreat. Once the people see Abdullah showing weakness they'll turn against him and support the stronger force. That's been a part of culture in the middle east since before Mohammed and Allah came along. They will always switch allegiances at the first sign of weakness simply in order to be on the winning side and survive.
Anyways, I'd like to get some insight on what people think made the death of Moaz al-Kasasbeh so compelling that even many US liberals sound like they are quoting me when they talk about ISIS now.
When I talk about torture in regards to ISIS, I don't mean a single incident that makes the news on one day, I mean ongoing torture, perhaps to extract money. Like "Today we cut off his little finger, but if you don't give us $1 million, we'll poke out one of his eyes, and we'll do this on video for the whole world to see." And this could go on and on with the ransom getting higher until someone pays it or the subject is dead. They could do it over a matter of days or weeks.
They are still FAR from being as depraved as they could possibly be. For one thing, they have yet to behead a child on video.
what damned part of the 2nd sentence in the Op was too friggin complex for you to comprehend?
I'm sick and tired of smart asses throwing US politics into issues where they have no direct relationship to the focus of a conversation.
All I wanted was a discussion about what caused the changes I brought up. If you want to bring up something else, scroll to the top of the page and click "ADD +"
Virgil...you clearly said:
I only want to understand why the unbelievably horrible death of Jordanian pilot Moaz al-Kasasbeh made so many people in politics suddenly decide to take hard stands about fundamentalist Islam.
Part of what Gallup is saying here is that politicians haven't really taken a hard stand on fundamental Islam. Some politicians have said a few stern things about ISIS (which some politicians have been doing for quite a while) or have said they don't like what happened...but that doesn't equal taking a hard stand against it. It's mostly rhetoric.
I'd rather die by beheading than by fire, for sure. I haven't watched any execution vids, but heard reporters say this one's particularly gruesome for the victim. No worse than burning people alive with tire collars (I forgot what they're called), except this is more like a video scripted and produced intentionally for greatest impact on a world audience. It's the 911 technique that gets us to wave flags and scream "never forget" and go off and do crazy shit, like destroying a government, killing off 100k of the country's Muslims, creating a power vacuum for jihadists to fill.
The strategy works, right?
The burning tire method of death by fire is called "necklacing."
While beheading is gruesome, as soon as the carotid artery is cut, the brain will go into shock in seconds and effectively die (in terms of consciousness) in 10's of seconds. So, while it's horrific to watch, it's probably less painful objectionable than some of the recent botched chemical executions being done in the US by the various states.
So lets change the method of executing prisoner by beheading them. I'm really against the death penalty because of the chance that we actually execute an innocent man in which case we have.
I believe the answer is is that it was video taped and we all saw some or all of it. We didn't see the rapes of young girls and women or the be headings of young men and boys so it isn't as real as this was. It is only my opinion. I think it is all horrible.
And the sad thing is, they will probably think of even more outrageous ways to shock us.