I'm pretty sure Trump didn't. This looks like a Mattis/Kelly pick.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Trump's Natl Sec Advisor is "not on board" using the term 'radical Islamic terrorism'
- Thread starter Meus Renaissance
- Start date
- Status
I'm pretty sure Trump didn't. This looks like a Mattis/Kelly pick.
CrocMother
Banned
I mean Trump offered him a job he literally couldn't refuse. He has no reason to hold back his views. He's not a Trump stooge.
It's such a great choice. And if Trump sacks him, it will make him look weak. It's a win/win.
BlackGhost
Banned
never liked the phrase, glad someone is denouncing it.
YourMaster
Member
How so? Islam, like any religion, is what any member wants it to be. If you call yourself a Muslim, you are. It makes just as much sense to call non-violent Muslims 'Un-Islamic' than the opposite.
And the defining characteristic of IS is that they try to create a state based on their islamic believes. That a small part of their methods to accomplishing this goal is terrorism is true, but simply calling them 'terrorist' is simplifying the matter to the extreme.
They partake in many horrors that do not have 'terror' as a goal, to understand their recruitment - including in western nations - and the way they treat others in their territory can only be understood by realizing the ideology behind it.
At the same time it makes it impossible to negotiate with them, or pacify them by partly giving them what they want. This is with non-religious terrorism the most effective strategy,.... look at Ireland or Spain for example. The core of terrorism is scaring people in giving you what you want, the core of IS is to conquer the world and found an empire based on their version of Islam.
I think Islamist is the proper term, though I'm not sure the American public in general hear the distinction.
davepoobond
you can't put a price on sparks
Steve isn't going to like that
BlastProcessing
Member
starchild excalibur
Member
I've never been upset with Obama not wanting to refer to it as radical Islamic terrorism, but at the same time I've never been opposed to the phrase itself. I suppose that's because I put the emphasis on "radical." I don't see ISIS as representing the thoughts or actions of the vast majority of Muslims, and therefore I don't agree with the or support the biases and assumptions some people make about those who subscribe to the religion. At the same time there's no denying that members of ISIS identify as Muslim. You can argue that they're not adhering to the teachings of the religion and I'd agree, but their relationship and self-identification with that religion is a large part of who they are.
I don't think the main issue is with the phrase "radical Islamic terrorism," but with the idiots that conflate that phrase with anyone who is Muslim. And so, from this perspective I can empathize and understand those who'd rather not use it even if I don't hate the phrase itself.
That being said, I'd like to see some of these guys start using phrases like "radical white terrorism" when referring to fuckers like Dylan Roof, but I doubt that'll ever happen.
I don't think the main issue is with the phrase "radical Islamic terrorism," but with the idiots that conflate that phrase with anyone who is Muslim. And so, from this perspective I can empathize and understand those who'd rather not use it even if I don't hate the phrase itself.
That being said, I'd like to see some of these guys start using phrases like "radical white terrorism" when referring to fuckers like Dylan Roof, but I doubt that'll ever happen.
There are a few reasons the phrase is a poor choice of words. It links the words "Islam" and "terror," makes them inextricable. It attempts to create another level of "terrorism"regular terrorism isn't enough to describe these guys, because they are Islamic terrorists. This in effect transforms "Islamic" into a modifier that makes the phrase more chilling and pernicious, and this connotation then infects "Islamic" in casual use.
Pai Pai Master
Banned
Good, someone gets it.
If you're even unwilling to call these homegrown killers "radical white supremacist terrorists", the categorizing of brown terrorists that way is even more unfair to Muslims.
If you're even unwilling to call these homegrown killers "radical white supremacist terrorists", the categorizing of brown terrorists that way is even more unfair to Muslims.
Meus Renaissance
Member
It is probably worth mentioning the group that place emphasis on the term are the same group that would address the President as Barack Hussein Obama, with the added enunciation of the middle name; it was a dog whistle, a pretty overt one at that.
radios shipping overview
Member
Does Trump vet anybody? Or does he just shake their hand and then ask guests at Mar-a-Lago what they think?
What I mean to say is that this guy sounds like his head is on straight.
What I mean to say is that this guy sounds like his head is on straight.
smokeymicpot
Beat EviLore at pool.
No he does not.
rokkerkory
Member
Good on McMaster
Electric Eye
Banned
Trump had no idea who McMaster was until the day he announced him I mean the guy had what looked like a Wikipedia printout of him in his hand just so he wouldn't fuck up the announcement. I would be ok for a McMaster coup.
SirClinksAlot
Member
Nobody else wanted this job so he had to pick someone who couldn't actually turn him down.
ImaLemming
Member
Um, do you mean "Trump doesn't vet anyone" or "McMaster doesn't sound like he has his head on straight?" I'm sure you meant the former, but it's a bit ambiguous there.
Except for the part where Trump surrounds himself with sycophants and the first 3 or four people he offered the job aligned more with his viewpoints. McMaster was a last ditch choice. Literally last week he had someone on the NSC fired for complaining that they weren't being asked for advice enough.
Yes, that's why Trump is not a strong leader. He doesn't like dissenting views which is why McMasters days are numbered.
👍
He's going to get fired isn't he?
The best! Tremendous!
He's going to get fired isn't he?
He's not choosing someone that won't help further his agenda because of bipartisanship, but because some waiter told him he's a smart guy.
The best! Tremendous!
Ah the low low bar we have in Trumpland.
But no Trump doesn't know shit about anybody or do any research.
He is totally getting fired. In an earlier thread I made a prediction it would happen by September or October once Trump started telling the military to start planning for the invasion of Iran and McMaster tells him it's a bad idea.
This guy is the extreme outlier in Trump's administration. The rest are ball licking sycophants and opportunists.
trump hasn't even read art of the deal
Ploid 3.0
Member
It's hard not to look like something when you are that something.
ftfy
SolidSnakex
Member
I don't know how Trump went from picking Flynn to then wanting Harward, who didn't accept, and finally ended up with McMaster. Those two seem like outstanding picks, even two that Democrats may have chose for the role. It really seems like the Trump admin had no backup plans if their initial horrible picks fell through.
triplestation
Member
thats the point though, you think trump says that unconsciously?
'islamic' is the key word here
'islamic' is the key word here
Kite
Member
In the thread about McMaster being named to the Dir of NCS, a few posters linked to talks he has given. McMaster is a legit scholar and warrior.
- Status