Inqui
Pro Bowler
Those wars are more sectarian and they happen in a surprisingly broad part of the world - and even that ignores broader power interests where religion's just an excuse for a proxy war between big regional powers. The golden rule is to not be a minority in a lot of those parts including the Middle East, Africa and Asia (which has nothing to do with Islam because those things come from all kinds of sects. If you want to pull up a seat I can talk about how the worst offenders in recent years have quietly been Buddhists). And all of that stuff is horrible and there aren't really any true solutions that don't take generations for those countries. Twenty years ago one could have made the same claims you're making about Islam about the Irish. And look how well those complaints would have aged.I don't remember you ever doing that but I could be wrong and I hate white supremacy just as much as you. If you don't believe religious war goes on in mainly muslim countries then so be it.
But once you've stated the fact that there's a lot of sectarian violence in a lot of poor and unstable parts of the world, the question becomes what follows that train of thought. If you're implying there's a civilisational struggle between Islam and the west then you and I are going to have a lot of problems because you're sharing company with some genuinely nasty people who've forgotten the ideas that made the west what it is today.
Islamist terrorism and white nationalist terrorism are opposite and codependent sides of the same coin. They hate each other but they need each other and they fuel each other and they have similar intrinsic motivations. The correct response from western governments to Islamist terrorism is simply surveillance and stopping as many attacks before they happen as possible so that it remains nothing more than a lethal nuisance. Even in the worst recent years for Islamist terrorism, governments had more success stories than failures and sure enough the rate of terror attacks has dwindled to near zero. Governments are waking up to white nationalist terrorism being just as big a threat and as such there'll be more resources dedicated to shutting that stuff down in the future, but from a social standpoint in western countries the big difference is that white nationalist terrorism is home-grown and is legitimised by general anti-Islamic sentiment. That's why I'm responding here in the first place - I've got no interest in repeating the shitfest that happened last time you brought up Muslims but I'm simply pointing out that the shooting didn't happen in a vacuum and even if you don't explicitly support the shooting itself it takes a critical mass of Islamophobic sentiments for these terrorists to feel like their society is under attack. Basically the message I'd have for anyone is to not treat Muslims as any kind of special case - don't assume they're more inherently violent just because of regional unrest or that their religion is a factor worth mentioning when deciding whether someone's a security threat and so on.