ISIS Bans Math and Social Studies For Children

mpicpp sends this news from CNN: In swaths of Syria now controlled by ISIS, children can no longer study math or social studies. Sports are out of the question. And students will be banned from learning about elections and democracy. Instead, they'll be subjected to the teachings of the radical Islamist group. And any teacher who dares to break the rules "will be punished." ISIS revealed its new educational demands in fliers posted on billboards and on street poles. The Sunni militant group has captured a slew of Syrian and Iraqi cities in recent months as it tries to establish a caliphate, or Islamic state, spanning Sunni parts of both countries. Books cannot include any reference to evolution. And teachers must say that the laws of physics and chemistry "are due to Allah's rules and laws." Update: 09/18 16:26 GMT by S : CNN has pulled the story over "concerns about the interpretation of the information provided." They promise to update it when they get the facts straight.

Comments

they will defeat themselves

[schlachter]

This certainly will make it difficult for them to pose a long term threat to anyone. A society that doesn't allow math won't last long.

Re:they will defeat themselves

[TheCarp]

Well as a closed system maybe but, if your "society" is being propped up via funding and arms, and you have no need to actually produce anything yourself or even produce engineers at all, then it isn't as much of a problem.

That said, what would really make it tough for them is a lack of opposition. Their tactics tend to be very self defeating when the larger powers don't overreact and get drawn into conflict with them.

If we let them provoke us though, then they will likely feed off that and use our involvement to deflect criticism away from their own otherwise self-defeating brutality.

Re:they will defeat themselves

[i kan reed]

I don't know. Violent anti-intellectualism has a tendency to create shitty, miserable societies, but has more than enough historical precedent at lasting at least a few generations at some points in some societies' histories. Ancient China had bouts of it, so did Rome, and neither crashed as a direct result.

(It's obvious and you don't need to point out that ancient societies aren't modern societies, and the requirements for both are different). I'm just contesting the universality of the specific claim "A society that doesn't allow math won't last long."

Re: they will defeat themselves

[O('_')O_Bush]

"Won't last long"

On the decades to hundreds of years scale, sure. Their policy will probably work for their (short) foreseeable future.

Re:they will defeat themselves

[DarkOx]

Which is exactly why we should 'STOP' fighting them. If we want to see an end to militant Islam we ought to let ISIS have their run of things for a while. I am sure after a couple decades of ISIS rule the only holy war any Muslim will ever sign up to fight again will be against these 12th century throw backs!

Re:they will defeat themselves

[Drethon]

Even better, let them take over a couple of states for a while. Once they destroy the population the threat will be neutralized.

Re:they will defeat themselves

[cellocgw]

A society that doesn't allow math won't last long.

But on the bright side, they won't know how long they lasted.

Re:they will defeat themselves

[BravoZuluM]

I'd love to let them have the run of things for a while, except they insist on flying planes into our buildings and beheading children. No, I think the only option is to go in and kill every last one of them, like the vermin infestation that they are.

Re: they will defeat themselves

[Blue Stone]

Here, let me pour some gasoline over your strawman and strike a match.

When have people from Africa appeared at the borders of any country "cap-in-hand [...] demanding their 'rights'"?

People do try to escape violent, torturing, oppressive, corrupt murderous regimes though. We call them asylum seekers; fleeing to escape persecution from their fucked-up governments. Maybe that's what you're thinking of? Or maybe knee-jerk xenophobia is more your cup of tea?

Re:they will defeat themselves

[Shortguy881]

Oddly enough, everything you said also applies to the United States.

Re:they will defeat themselves

[meta-monkey]

We can't trade with such people. Hell, if they don't even allow math we can't even keep ledgers. So they would still blame western governments for imposing sanctions.

To be honest, it seems like the best solution, is, as you say, stop fighting them. All we ever wind up doing is accidentally killing a bunch of civilians and breeding more jihadis. You guys want a caliphate? Fine. Knock yourselves out. We'll be over here with our blackjack and hookers.

The only problem is we still need their damn oil. Please, Elon Musk, save us from dependence on these assholes' oil. The sooner we can find a replacement for middle eastern oil and/or their oil runs out, the better.

Re:they will defeat themselves

[Scottingham]

For every one you kill two will take their place. Your philosophy breeds terrorism instead of extinguishing it.

How has that approach been working out for Israel? Thought so.

Re:they will defeat themselves

[mrchaotica]

if your "society" is being propped up via funding and arms, and you have no need to actually produce anything yourself or even produce engineers at all, then it isn't as much of a problem.

Math isn't just used by engineers; it's also needed to operate pretty much any business -- even low-tech ones. Even a damn goat-herder needs to be able to multiply, assuming he wants to be able to sell X goats for $Y each, and end up with the correct number of $ afterwards!

Re:they will defeat themselves

[cyberchondriac]

That said, what would really make it tough for them is a lack of opposition. Their tactics tend to be very self defeating when the larger powers don't overreact and get drawn into conflict with them.

Not from any evidence I've ever seen. No larger power had given them any attention for the past year, and their numbers, financial resources, and power swelled unchecked; they only become a greater threat with time. You cannot ignore them and make them go away, it doesn't work like that. One defector stated their long term goals include taking over the mideast, followed by Europe, and eventually, the entire globe. That obviously can't happen because they've ignorantly shunned the sciences, but it could take a whole 'nother generation or two before that lack of knowledge really takes its toll (if they're left unchecked in the meantime).
Granted, however, that this war will be lose-lose, because no matter what the western powers do, they will be decried in every form imaginable. But there is no choice. There is no logic where such a fanatical religion has taken root.

Re:they will defeat themselves

[mrchaotica]

...these 12th century throw backs!

You might want to re-think that characterization, since these ISIS fools are pretty much the polar opposite of 12th century Arabs! In fact, they're much more similar to medieval Europeans, or modern Republicans.

Re:they will defeat themselves

[TheCarp]

I take it your "evidence" is watching the news:
http://belfercenter.ksg.harvar...

The key variable for FTO success is a tactical one: target selection. Terrorist groups whose attacks on civilian targets outnumber attacks on military targets do not tend to achieve their policy objectives, regardless of their nature. Contrary to the prevailing view that terrorism is an effective means of political coercion, the universe of cases suggests that, first, contemporary terrorist groups rarely achieve their policy objectives and, second, the poor success rate is inherent to the tactic of terrorism itself.

Re:they will defeat themselves

[mandark1967]

Shut up, dude.

I'm getting ready to corner the market on goats and you're gonna blow my plans to hell!

Re:they will defeat themselves

[PvtVoid]

For every one you kill two will take their place. Your philosophy breeds terrorism instead of extinguishing it.

Which is a total win-win:

- We'll have a thriving Defense Industry in the US, and lots of corporate fat-cats will get rich.
- We'll have lots of military employment opportunities for young impoverished rural Americans. The ones that survive can be shunted off into sub-standard medical and psychiatric care, and will end up homeless or dead in a cost-effective way.
- We'll make sure the corrupt, dissolute fucktards in charge of Saudi Arabia and Bahrain and Kuwait are so scared of the creations of their own madrassas that they don't dare interrupt our oil supply.
- There will be a cheap and easy path to election for bigoted, paranoid demagogues to get elected with rancid Islamophobic propaganda.

I mean, what's not to like?

Re: they will defeat themselves

[TheGavster]

The goat herder shall receive payment for his goats as Allah decrees.

Re:they will defeat themselves

[mrchaotica]

For the Arabs, the middle ages were great!

Well, at least until the Crusaders showed up and took all the Arabs' discoveries so they could jump-start the Renaissance....

Re:they will defeat themselves

[JasonGoatcher]

Actually, that's wrong. There's a difference between having faith in the actual God and pushing an agenda that you want God to support.

God is the same yesterday, today and forever. Unfortunately, His worshippers like to attach labels to Him that aren't warranted.

Re:they will defeat themselves

[stdarg]

That is ignorant. The Islamic Golden Age coincides with Islamic expansion and the taking over of established, advanced cultures. Did you even read the Wikipedia article you linked?

Oh, unless you actually consider Islamic holy war to be a good thing. In that case carry on, but your characterization of ISIS as "the polar opposite of 12th century Arabs" is incorrect. You should be cheering them on, they are marching down the exact same path as expansionist Muslim armies of the past that you seem to esteem so highly.

Re: they will defeat themselves

[Sarius64]

I can tell you haven't been to Europe lately.

Re:they will defeat themselves

[PvtVoid]

Has Israel ever resorted to actual genocide/mass expulsions of the population?

Um.

Yes?

Re:they will defeat themselves

[njnnja]

I'm sure the children^H^H^H^H^H^H^Hsons of the ruling class are getting plenty of instruction in disciplines of military value. They will be able to buy weapons from more advanced nations with money obtained from oil sales and ransoms. It is only the ruled who will be kept ignorant so that they are easier to control. Therefore it is likely that they will last a great while, unless a greater military force (most likely external) finds it in its own best interest to overthrow them.

Re:they will defeat themselves

[TubeSteak]

I'd love to let them have the run of things for a while, except they insist on flying planes into our buildings and beheading children.

With that logic, we should go to war with our ally Saudi Arabia as well.
Saudi nationals have flown more planes into buildings than ISIS.
The Saudi Government has beheaded more people than ISIS.
(Though ISIS seems to be trying to catch up)

No, I think the only option is to go in and kill every last one of them, like the vermin infestation that they are.

The language of dehumanization is ugly.
I'm glad that Western governments have abandoned it as a propaganda tool.
I can only hope that some of the less evolved citizens of the West will abandon it as well.

Re: they will defeat themselves

[cyberchondriac]

You're a moron if you think "whitey" wrote that book. You don't know history, period. That stuff is the legacy of the cradle of civilization, from Egypt to Assyria, Babylon, Persia, etc... Mankind has been doing all that since he was able to wield a club, and probably sooner than that.

Re: they will defeat themselves

[klek]

Hey! Let's just ignore history, colonization, the ongoing impacts of the RC Church, and the niggling fact of who developed guns first.
Also, "third world countries" have plenty of culture, they are just not listening to Vivaldi and sipping tea with their pinkies extended.

Careful, your entitlement, ignorance, and racism are showing...

Re: they will defeat themselves

[mjtaylor24601]

"asylum seekers"

You mean, greedy Third World swine with nothing to contribute, who think that they're "entitled" to live in a rich country because Whitey is rich and they are poor?

As opposed to the greedy First World swine with nothing to contribute who think they're "entitled" to live in a rich country because of who's uterus they happened to be expelled from?

Aren't sweeping generalizations fun!

Re:they will defeat themselves

[Anonymous Coward]

There's a difference between having faith in the actual God and pushing an agenda that you want God to support.

Hear hear! It's like I'm always telling others, Ares has his own agenda, completely separate from whatever agendas you wish to push in His name.

Ares is the actual God to which you were referring, yes? I mean, it's completely obvious to me that He is the one and only God, but since others seem to have different ideas about just who or what God is, I just wanted to make absolutely certain you too were referring to the actual God (and are not simply falling prey to that which you are speaking out against).

Re:they will defeat themselves

[Archangel Michael]

You underestimate the power of radical ideologies. While what they appear to be doing is self defeating, it really isn't. It draws in those people who need an identity. People said similar things about Nazi's (yeah I just Godwined the conversation). The one thing Nazi's had, that ISIS doesn't is government. But in today's age, being nebulous, decentralized is an asset, like Hydra (cut off one head two more takes its place). We killed off OBL, but he wasn't really running things when we did, and Taliban and Al Qaeda still remain. And even if they didn't, the people in those organizations just change their name, and regroup. This is the same tactic used by most counter culture politics.

The only effective tactic we have at this time is to target and kill the leadership, until the organization crumbles from lack of leaders. We don't need a standing army to do this, just Letters of Marque.

Re: they will defeat themselves

[benjfowler]

Plenty of ex-colonies are doing just fine. Plenty of shit countries are awash with guns. And there are places that do just fine even with the influence of the RC church -- I know some Irish and Catalans that'd like to have a word with you.

Your sneering attitude to Western culture marks _you_ out as the bigot. Not all cultures are made equal. And I don't care if you think I'm racist (if anything, you're outed yourself as a cultural Marxist). Name-calling your opponents doesn't change reality -- it all boils down to culture, and there's nothing to gain from denying that some cultures are simply better at fostering human wellbeing than others, and you're a fool if you think otherwise.

Re:they will defeat themselves

[Anonymous Coward]

Oddly enough, everything you said also applies to the United States.

No kidding.

Some US states are more or less doing this now ... what with passing laws which say "science" education must include a discussion that Intelligent Design is actual science, and that sex education must be abstinence only.

America has just as much of a problem of religious idiots trying to define reality as ISIS does.

The difference being, Americans like to think they're better than everybody else, and one of your major political parties is also involved.

So, it's your choice between totalitarian idiots, or democratically elected totalitarian idiots.

Make no mistake about it, America is descending into the exact same kind of crap, and if you don't fix it, in a few decades you'll be really fucked.

Drooling fucking morons.

Re:they will defeat themselves

[Princeofcups]

That obviously can't happen because they've ignorantly shunned the sciences, but it could take a whole 'nother generation or two before that lack of knowledge really takes its toll (if they're left unchecked in the meantime).

No silly rabbit. The people they rule are not allowed to have any learning. This is nothing more than a return to society a couple hundred years ago. The leaders will still have "western style" educations. That's how they stay in control.

Re:they will defeat themselves

[SuricouRaven]

They are playing a rather dangerous game. Remember that the US or Europe could squish them with ease, militarily - if we had to, it wouldn't be hard to nuke the whole region. There are only two reasons this isn't being done: It'd be expensive, and it's mean very large numbers of civilian deaths which would be politically problematic. This situation persists only because they aren't a major threat: The moment they actually become a danger to the continued existance of the US or any major European power they'd be crushed without regard to how much it costs or how many people would die. Remember that as recently as WWII even the allies - the 'good guys' - considered carpet-bombing cities to be perfectly justifiable. During the cold war the US has missiles poised to kill tens of millions at a moment's notice, if they ever needed to.

ISIS can only survive so long as they are powerful enough to dominate the region, but not powerful enough to invoke an unrestrained defensive action from the western powers. Like North Korea: The crazed dictator can brag all he wants about his military supremacy, but he doesn't have it, and that makes him too expensive to invade. if NK ever managed to actually detonate a nuclear bomb even China wouldn't hestitate to march in and take over. I think they'd be glad of the excuse, really.

Re:they will defeat themselves

[DarkOx]

Do you really think if expended even 1/4 the amount of resources we invest in the middle east on controlling our boards they'd have the slightest chance of being able to pull off another attack like that?

I don't.

We could be opening every shipping container unloading , inspecting every truck, doing background checks on every inbound traveler, before admitting them and probably save tons in both blood and treasure. It would be far more effective at controlling the risk and threat of terror.

I'll admit I bought into the "we have to fight them over there..." rhetoric when Bush fed us those lines too. I know better know. I think Obama is probably the worst president of this nation has had post WWII and am still glad we did not elect McCain.

We also need to "get real" about the seriousness of the problem. 9/11 was shocking but it was a one time event they have not been able to repeat. Its hard to say for sure with all the crazy government secrecy but the evidence that is out there suggests it has not been the security apparatus that has prevented a repeat but rather the extremists own inability develop the assets here will the skill sets required to execute a successful attack. Statistically you about as likely to die falling out of bed as you are from some kind of terrorism connected event.

Considering just the lives we have "invested" in this fight we could suffer at least more several 9/11s before it will have made any kind of economic sense.

Considering the dollars, I can't find many good numbers because its hard to separate the economic costs associated with the attack from the costs we incurred in our war runup/execution. I'd be they could crash lots of jets into lots of towers with all the economic knockon effects there in before it come close though to the wealth we have thrown away in the middle east.

Re:they will defeat themselves

[Lumpy]

Actually technically he is right if we kill them all very fast.

nuke 80% of the middle east, full on carpet bomb every square mile with overlapping bursts and you will not have 2 more spring up. you will actually wipe them all out for good and not have any problems with middle eastern terrorisim.

The problem is surviving the 60 year nuclear winter afterwards.

Re:they will defeat themselves

[itzly]

All you need to take over Europe are enough wombs.

Re:they will defeat themselves

[meta-monkey]

I do, I absolutely do. But what's the US going to do? Re-invade Iraq?

At least maybe this time it would be easier to get a "coalition of the willing." Maybe an international effort that included other Arab nations would make for a more stable country. But seriously, we go in, invade, innocent people die anyway, and a power vacuum is left for even worse motherfuckers to rise up.

It doesn't seem like you can win peace with bombs.

Re:they will defeat themselves

[Grishnakh]

They won't destroy the population, they'll just subjugate it. That's what authoritarian regimes do. Stalin killed millions of people in his great purge during and after WWII, but it's not like the Soviet Union suddenly collapsed due to lack of people. And the Soviet Union lasted for many decades.

What works in dealing with these things is to wall them off and ignore them, and arming neighboring regions to create a buffer zone.

Re:they will defeat themselves

[Grishnakh]

Is arming locals really that bad an idea though? Our problem in the past was that we picked religious zealots as our allies and armed them, while ignoring the not-so-religious ones we could have supported. Here with ISIS, we could arm the Kurds and support them; the Kurds are not terribly religious (not too different from your typical Sunday Christians here in the US), and are willing to fight ISIS, but we don't want to support them too much because we don't want them demanding their own state, because that works against our interest in keeping the region destabilized. If we stopped working towards keeping the region unstable, and instead helped out groups like the Kurds who want independence, which would make the whole region far more stable, groups like ISIS would die out.

Re:they will defeat themselves

[Minwee]

People said similar things about Nazi's (yeah I just Godwined the conversation).

Not only that, you misused an apostrophe at the same time. I think the entire Internet just imploded.

Re:they will defeat themselves

[Anonymous Coward]

There's a difference alright, but it's irrelevant. If you dedicate a big portion of your time to faith instead of science, your science won't be good. The christian societies have had their quarrels with science, but in the end a lot of science was done nevertheless. Muslim societies used to be at the forefront of science and technology. Giving that up has made them dependent, not just because they are more easily dominated, but also because they lack the knowledge to control their own fate.

The battle against science is always on, everywhere. When science loses, things go down the drain really fast. Fundamentalist Christianity isn't just a nuisance. Things like teaching creationism are severe threats to this society. The pursuit of knowledge is essential.

Re:they will defeat themselves

[Solandri]

That said, what would really make it tough for them is a lack of opposition. Their tactics tend to be very self defeating when the larger powers don't overreact and get drawn into conflict with them.

Normally that'd be the case. Their policies cripple their own society while competing societies flourish, until they eventually consign themselves to irrelevance.

However, they're simply executing anyone who opposes them. For their tactic to be self-defeating, there has to be a competing society in the first place. People in the West tend to assume that the only way to "win" (in the democratic sense) is to convince people of the merits of your philosophy and get them to support you until you have a political majority. However, there's another way - simply exterminate those who oppose you, which is what ISIS is doing. Both strategies result in you having the support of the majority of the (remaining) population.

Not opposing them now is going to mean the overwhelming majority of survivors in the region will subscribe to their philosophy. Even if you defeat them later and install a democracy, they're just going to vote for something close to ISIS again because everyone who would've voted differently is dead.. This is one of those cases where failing to stop them quickly is going to result in decades if not a century or more of problems down the road.

Re: they will defeat themselves

[benjfowler]

The last time people from 'rich' countries moved en masse to 'poor' countries, it was decried as colonialism, and rightly so.

(I suppose the fact that Western colonies full of actual Westerners thrive everywhere they go is awfully inconvenient for the 'blame-white-people-first' crowd. Contrast the Pakistani, Bangladeshi, Nigerian, Turkish, Moroccan colonies in Europe, which are invariably dysfunctional and dirt-poor, despite massive amounts of welfare spending.)

Re:they will defeat themselves

[dskoll]

I don't believe that killing terrorist breeds terrorism. Eventually, even the dumbest of the dumb will realize that it doesn't pay.

In the short term, the only effective answer to ISIS is to kill them.

Re:they will defeat themselves

[amicusNYCL]

No, I think the only option is to go in and kill every last one of them, like the vermin infestation that they are.

Congratulations, you thought of the same strategy as them.

Re:they will defeat themselves

[beernutz]

Labels like "Him" and "His"?

Re:they will defeat themselves

[CheshireDragon]

Apparently you don't know what happened in the Arabic world back in the 1100s. They were amazing with math and science. Leaders of the world in that matter. Then came a long Al Ghazali and turned all of that on its head. Now look at the Arabic world. Still looks like they live in the 12th century.

Re:they will defeat themselves

[Scottingham]

You never kill only terrorists. For every innocent person/woman/child that gets killed....(see above)

Re:they will defeat themselves

[Mysticalfruit]

I think you're mistaken here... Odin is clearly the one true God. Not one of your false Greek or christian gods.

Re:they will defeat themselves

[Scottingham]

Calling Palestine Israel's neighbor is like calling the inmates in the prison down the road my neighbors. Palestinians are in a walled-in open-air jail. Israel certainly can and do make sure they are the more powerful of the two.

Re:they will defeat themselves

[Kjella]

if NK ever managed to actually detonate a nuclear bomb even China wouldn't hestitate to march in and take over. I think they'd be glad of the excuse, really.

FYI, North Korea has made three underground nuclear detonations in 2006, 2009 and 2013. Very few doubt that they now got a few nukes in the kiloton range - basically 1940s tech - and the means to deliver them to Seoul - a mere 35 miles away from the NK border. China doesn't care. They got a loyal ally, they could crush him at any moment and it'd only create hostility between Koreans and Chinese. And the country is not worth the trouble. I guess if China ever went on the offensive they'd gobble up NK - and probably SK too - but only if they're on the warpath anyway.

Re:they will defeat themselves

[jythie]

You are a little out of date, Odin was downgraded during the pantheonic reorganization. Unfortunately due to a clerical error the one true God is now a central park squirrel named Skippy.

Re:they will defeat themselves

[butalearner]

The only problem is we still need their damn oil. Please, Elon Musk, save us from dependence on these assholes' oil. The sooner we can find a replacement for middle eastern oil and/or their oil runs out, the better.

Just to give some numbers, here is where we (the U.S.) got our oil in 2013:

U.S.: 2,720 million barrels
Canada: 1,147 million barrels
Saudi Arabia: 485 million barrels (OPEC)
Mexico: 335 million barrels
Venezuela: 294 million barrels (OPEC)
Russia: 168 million barrels
Columbia: 142 million barrels
Iraq: 124 million barrels (OPEC)
Kuwait: 119 million barrels (OPEC)
Nigeria: 103 million barrels (OPEC)
Ecuador: 86 million barrels (OPEC)
Angola: 79 million barrels (OPEC)
Brazil: 55 million barrels
U.K.: 54 million barrels
Other OPEC: 67 million barrels
Other non-OPEC: 338 million barrels

Ignoring the type of oil (pretty sure we're exporting natural gas like a fiend right now due to fracking), we need to cut 21% to get away from OPEC altogether, or 12% just to get away from the Middle East. In the U.S., 47% of oil goes to gasoline, 20% to diesel and other fuel oil, 13% to liquefied petroleum gases like propane and such, and 8% for jet fuel. All this info is from eia.gov, by the way.

So it while it is still an enormous problem, it's not insurmountable. In fact, it's inevitable. We won't go cold turkey, but we will almost certainly keep chipping away at that deficit with continued efficiency improvements on cars and other vehicles, growing emphasis placed on fuel efficiency, and continued improvements in domestic oil production and refining. Ideally the cleaner improvements will come fast enough that we don't have to rely on the latter, but it'll happen sooner or later.

Re:they will defeat themselves

[argStyopa]

You link one paper from Harvard on "why terrorism doesn't work".
I'll refute that by pointing to:
1) 8 guys sneaking onto planes with boxcutters and crashing them into buildings is terrorism
2) 15000 psychos taking over chunks of country with astonishing brutality is not terrorism (as referenced in that paper), and 'thousands of psychos taking crap over' HAS worked* repeatedly through human history; from the "Barbarian invasions" of Roman times, to the Huns, the Mongols)

*maybe not in the longest scales, but certainly enough to enmiserate a generation or three.

Re:they will defeat themselves

[Kjella]

I think you need to distinguish between terrorism and reign of terror. Hit-and-run bombings like the IRA or ETA rarely succeed in people giving in to terror. Taking actual control of areas, waving the flags and killing off all that oppose you has a much better historical record, ask anyone from Pol Pot to Hitler and Lenin and Mao. In case you haven't noticed, they're using their brutal savagery primarily to quell resistance and internal dissent. The story they're selling is that they're too fucking crazy to pick a fight with and so far they seem more than willing to put that reputation to the test and post it on YouTube.

I mean, would you like to be in a resistance movement inside IS territory? Do they care that they can't find you? Heck no, they'll just round up a few civilians and shoot them in retaliation for your sabotage/assassination/sedition. Far more civilized occupants have used that tactic, all those millions of people they control are in practice hostages. You're fighting an enemy willing to overreact to any provocation, give them a push and you won't get a shove back they'll beat you to a bloody pulp. And given their history so far, I don't think they have a problem with human shields. You can not excise them without massive civilian casualties. Sadly I give them much better odds than you predict.

Re:they will defeat themselves

[stdarg]

Every country has border controls. Your argument makes as much sense as calling Mexico a "walled-in open-air jail" because they aren't allowed to freely come to the US.

Israel has a right to control its border, especially when its neighbors harbor and support terrorist groups.

Re:they will defeat themselves

[tinkerghost]

You are a little out of date, Odin was downgraded during the pantheonic reorganization. Unfortunately due to a clerical error the one true God is now a central park squirrel named Skippy.

Foamy - his name is Foamy the Squirel

Re:they will defeat themselves

[TangoMargarine]

Back before the Politically Correct Brigade flooded into everything, you might recall that we used to use male conjugations to refer to ambiguous gender entities in English.

Re: they will defeat themselves

[Anonymous Coward]

As a European (living in NA) I get exactly what he says. Over "here" we look at that religious crap the US is doing in some states with regards to the government/education as total BS. I mean, imagine an openly atheist president of the US!? Unthinkable for most Americans. As a European atheist I'd love that.

In my country I've heard some immigrants speak with their children on the playground. they brought home bad marks because they wouldn't answer science questions with the currently best known explanation for some phenomenon as learned in clsss but answered that god made it so. The parent told their children that the teacher was dumb and didn't know anything and should not be trusted. And they certainly weren't ISIS level. They were actually pretty nice people (until I heard that...)

Now this was a Koran example but in the US I can totally see how some parent might tell their child to listen on Sunday and forget about what was said in Monday's biology and history classes on evolution. I can't see how they'd forbid math though.

Re:they will defeat themselves

[log0n]

No, AC is right. The degrees of US/ISIS ideologies 'wrongness' doesn't really matter, it's the fact that they are both rationalizing the acceptance of wrong. One will just have a much shorter time plummeting than the other.

Science can't hold a candle to someone who can't, or won't, appreciate critical thinking. Faith and religion beheads it.

Re:they will defeat themselves

[davydagger]

there is a gross disproportion of scale between US conservatives and the Muslim Brotherhood, and the MB, and Al-Qaeda, and Al-Qaeda and ISIS.

Re:they will defeat themselves

[bbsalem]

True enough, for now. The radicals are going to wake the giant, who doesn't want to put boots on the ground against them, maybe the other Arab states will see the threat as too close to home and go in and clean the radicals out. If not, the U.S. has engineering not according to the fundie Islam which can easily decimate ISIL.. And we can make life very hard for them without putting our people on the ground. We could do a Putin on them and mention that we could use nuclear weapons on them, and even if we don't do that we could theoretically make large parts of Eastern Syria and Western Iraq uninhabital for decades. We should have done this in Eastern Afghanistan to the Pashtoon homeland where most of the Taliban insurgants who have fought us there come from. So, we have placed ourselves at a temporary disadvantage because of poor leadership from Obama; he had failed on the international stage too, but we don't have to continue in that vein and because we allow for creative solutions to problems that religious fundies don't use, we can defeat them. After all it could be said that Hitler lost his war because he didn't believe in science, especially Jewish science, and we developed the bomb because of the threat that he might get it; he didn't, and it was because of his racist and religious beliefs. In similar fashion if it came to direct conflict with ISIL we could clobber them with a engineering hammer, either a high energy or particle beam or just unloading our nuclear waste in the middle of the Syrian dessert. We could cook them man by man or en-mass if we have to. We are playing nice-nice trying to pick off individual terrorists with drones and avoiding taking out innocents with them, we don't have to continue with that restraint. So these guys in their Islamic state are going to under estimate us, and we in turn are going to learn how to be leaders and why sometimes it takes a hammer to drive a nail home.

By the way this mess started when American and European businessmen set out to steal the wealth of the Middle East by dividing the factions that exist there. Evey nation that was devised by the Western Powers after WWI in 1921 at the end of the Ottoman Empire was conceived by Brittan and France and later the U.S. as a way to allow for Western businesses to steal from the region or to set up puppet states, the Monarchies of the modern states, including Iraq and Egypt, that allow for foreign companies to garner resources at minimal benefit to the population. we did this by splitting religious sects and ethnicities that have considerable hatred for one another. That is how WE created bin Lauden, who was radicalized by contact with Western businessmen. We sowed dragon's teeth for profits, and we pay the price in terrorism. It looks like Crusades to Islam and even though moderates don't blame us as much, it is rich soil for anyone with a grudge. The point is that if you do not forget history, you can see why these threats arrise, and now it is out of hand and we have to get nasty to address it. We are paying for bad leadership in the past. We are paying for the two Bushes and Clinton using Oil politics to drive our policy in the area. We are paying for how we were set up for 9-11 by ignoring the hatred we had come to invite, because we placed corporation profits and our oil supply above human dignity. About the best thing that could happen in the post-peak-oil era is to find an energy source, invent fusion, that depreciates the value of the oil reserves in the world, but especially those under Iran and Iraq. Then we can gracefully back out of the region. Until then, our options become increasingly distasteful.

Anti-math and anti-science ...

[damn_registrars]

... sounds like the GOP in the US.

Yeah, I know that slashdot's overwhelming conservative majority will mod this comment down into oblivion in retaliation, but that doesn't make it untrue.

Re: Anti-math and anti-science ...

[O('_')O_Bush]

PSH, more than a little exaggeration. If they banned math, how would they know how to evade taxes?

Re:Anti-math and anti-science ...

[Anonymous Coward]

That's because it's fundamentally the same thing which motivates both: Religious Fundamentalism.

Let us not forget that there's nothing inherent to either Christianity or Islam when it comes to fundamentalism. Christianity generated the Crusades, after all...

Re:Anti-math and anti-science ...

[i kan reed]

1. As a liberal-as-fuck liberalite, libby lib, there is no malevolent conservative slashdot majority. This exists in your head and in your head alone. I post my totally correct liberal positions all the time, and only get modded down when I overly challenge people on specific subjects like misogyny.
2. While anti-intellectualism is a hallmark of the modern republican party, don't they don't even remotely compare in severity to paramilitary mostly uneducated third world anti-intellectuals.
3. Whether you're modded down or not, your statement is untrue on its own merits.

Re:Anti-math and anti-science ...

[manu144x]

Christianity generated the crusades? Did you like attend a history class ever?

I do not condone the behaviour of some dumb idiots in the army who started killing any people who they didn't like and used the crusades as an excuse for their personal profit, but the crusades were primarily caused by something very similar to ISIS.

Islam started taking over more and more, slaughtering and robbing villages wherever they could. It took 400 years of farcry to the pope to do something about the islams who were killing everyone who wasn't islamic when the final drop was the conquering of Jerusalem, when they finally decided to take action. Get your facts straight. Yes, I agree there were people among those soldiers/generals who used it as an excuse for their own purposes (aka get rich quick) but believe me, if we won't do something about these ISIS people, they will not stop until they reach the borders of the western world, and by then it will be too late.

Just one of the many sources stating that the crusades were just a reponse, a reaction to Islam agression. http://gatesofvienna.blogspot....

Re:Anti-math and anti-science ...

[the eric conspiracy]

Obviously not the Abbasid Caliphate that funded the Baghdad House of Wisdom, home of Muhammed ibn musa al Kwarizmi.

(the words algorithm and algebra are taken from his name and the titles of books he wrote).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

It's sickening to see these nutters rejecting the thought and culture that once lead the civilizations of the middle east to a true Golden Age.

Now all we can do is hope that there will somehow be an Islamic Enlightenment. Perhaps in reaction to ISIS? It's hard to see it happening though.

Re:Anti-math and anti-science ...

[Anonymous Coward]

but that doesn't make it untrue.

No, it being untrue is what makes it untrue.

Remind me again which party is pushing "new math" and repeatedly thinks it can spend more than it makes by creating money out of nothing?

Let me guess, you're one of the people who thinks that religious freedom and supporting life is "anti-science." So I suppose you've got me there.

Although it isn't the GOP that wants to rush head-long and destroy our economy based on half-sciences and disputed findings instead of waiting for actual conclusive evidence...

too wrong; didn't read

Re: Anti-math and anti-science ...

[Fwipp]

Slashdot isn't conservative so much as it is libertarian. Which is basically conservatism that wants to maintain the quo socially, (except with fewer rules for them to follow, because freedom) instead of returning to the 1950's. Which is why you still see the misogynists and racists pop out on any thread that mentions women or anyone who's not white.

They share tenets with conservatives, mostly financially, but hate the way mainstream conservatives act (on account of GOP hypocrisy and their regressive social values).

Re: Anti-math and anti-science ...

[mrlinux11]

They will all die out in one generation, if they do not teach them how to multiply :)

Re:Anti-math and anti-science ...

[Shortguy881]

Don't forget about English. We are not allowed to learn that as well, apparently.

Re:Anti-math and anti-science ...

[Anonymous Coward]

4. Regardless of its other content, any poster that says "I'm gonna get modded down for TELLLIN' IT LIKE IT IS, MAN!" deserves all the downmods they get, and they know it.

Re: Anti-math and anti-science ...

[Anonymous Coward]

Which is basically conservatism that wants to maintain the quo socially

Thanks for confirming you know nothing about libertarianism.

Libertarians tend to be quite liberal socially - get government out of banning abortions, get government out of licensing marriages, get government out of the business of spying on citizens. These are all quite clearly outlined in the libertarian party's platform. Most of their policies stem from the fundamental precept that government is not the solution to all problems, and government should stay out of the business of solving problems unless there is a pressing need for protection of somebody's individual rights - e.g., most libertarians will agree that a police force and court systems are necessary to provide people redress when their rights are infringed upon by another.

This often leads them to the conclusion that government spending needs to be dramatically reduced, because government itself is too big, and has insinuated itself into too many areas of our lives.

Libertarians are NOT about "maintaining the social status quo" - if you had to describe them in terms of conservative and liberal, the most accurate description would be "socially quite liberal, generally fiscally conservative."

They share tenets with conservatives (government is too big, and should be reduced in size), and liberals (government needs to get out of the personal affairs of its citizens to the largest extent possible, and let them just live their lives and do their thing, regardless of whether they're straight, gay, bi, trans, black, white, yellow, red, christian, muslim, jewish, atheist, or anything else.

Re:Anti-math and anti-science ...

[clarkkent09]

Let us not forget that there's nothing inherent to either Christianity or Islam when it comes to fundamentalism. Christianity generated the Crusades, after all...

I think that's an example of cultural relativism that is as dangerous to the West as the people who are anti-math or anti-science. It is part of the deluded unscientific mythology of the left just as intelligent design is on the right.

There are obvious differences between Christianity and Islam that make Christianity able to coexist with a modern secular state while Islam is showing all over the world that it can't. For example Sharia is a comprehensive legal framework that observant Muslims are supposed to put above the secular laws (you know the ones brought about by a democratic process). There is no such thing in Christianity.

Also, Jesus mythology beats Muhammad mythology hands down as an example to follow (regardless of how much if any of it is true). Jesus' teachings were generally peaceful and kind and never attempted to spread Christianity by force, preferring to suffer himself instead. Muhammad slaughtered and enslaved thousands, explicitly permitted murder, stealing and lying (as long as directed against non-Muslims), kept 13 wives, including a 9 year old one, in addition to sex slaves.

Yes, there are obvious differences in the implementation at the present time which can possibly change: can you imagine the Pope leading a frenzied crowd in the St. Peters square in chants of "death to infidels" the way legitimate Muslim leaders do, rather than urging them to love and respect their neighbor? But there are also many doctrinal differences that make Islam more dangerous which is why in literally every place in the world where Islam is in contact with another civilization there is conflict. Just look at the map.

Re:Anti-math and anti-science ...

[operagost]

The problem with your oversimplification is that the holy book of Christianity encourages pacifism, while the holy book of Islam encourages the subjugation of unbelievers.

Re:Anti-math and anti-science ...

[hondo77]

...can you imagine the Pope leading a frenzied crowd in the St. Peters square in chants of "death to infidels" the way legitimate Muslim leaders do...

So, what you're saying is that nobody expects the Spanish Inquisition?

Re:Anti-math and anti-science ...

[stdarg]

The so-called Golden Age of Islam was still marked by harsh caliphate rule and Islamic expansion. Your example of al-Kwarizmi is someone in an area that had been taken over by the Muslims for 150 years. Do you think DURING the conflict that resulted in Muslim rule there was a lot of stability and promotion of the arts? That's the stage ISIS sees themselves at.

Re: Anti-math and anti-science ...

[halivar]

Libertarians often take the same positions conservatives do, but are much more dogmatic about it, which is why libertarians hate conservatives so much, whom they see as unprincipled. I, myself, dislike dogmatic philosophies, so some might call me a RINO or something. Yes, I generally want smaller government; no, I don't want to shut down the police or fire department. So, I figure I can be a pariah to at least 80% of Slashdot readership.

Re:Anti-math and anti-science ...

[stdarg]

You do realize that "gates of Vienna" is a reference to the Islamic expansion into Europe which was only halted at... Vienna?

Seriously the lack of education about Islamic history is astounding. It's an important religion and culture and you'd think people in this day and age would at least know the basics, like what the crusades were about!

Re:Anti-math and anti-science ...

[WrongMonkey]

final drop was the conquering of Jerusalem

You need to check your own history. Muslims had ruled Jerusalem for 400 years before the First Crusade. It was a prosperous city of Muslims, Christians and Jews.

The Crusades stand as one of the great atrocities of European history. The massacre of Jerusalem. Documented cannibalism at Antioch. The betrayal and sacking of Constantinople. And they accomplished NOTHING. All of the Crusader states fell in less than two hundred years.

Re:Anti-math and anti-science ...

[marsu_k]

I know what it references. I also know the blog.

Re:Anti-math and anti-science ...

[cyberchondriac]

Finally, somebody gets it. I'm so sick and tired of hearing people bring up the Crusades as though the Muslims/Moors that swept through the mideast and southern Europe did it with an olive branch, and were poor, peaceful victims. Funny how the history there always seems to begin at the year 1095, and ignores the previous 400 years of islamic conquest.

Re:Anti-math and anti-science ...

[Rob Riggs]

You do realize that "gates of Vienna" is a reference to the Islamic expansion into Europe which was only halted at... Vienna?

If you want to know why people are a bit dismissive of the OP's post, please read this critique of the website the OP linked to. Trust me when I say that you don't want to get your history lessons from that site.

Re:Anti-math and anti-science ...

[the eric conspiracy]

ISIS is fighting in an area already under Muslim rule. It has nothing to do with Islamic expansion and everything to do with war between sects.

Re:Anti-math and anti-science ...

[halivar]

I gotta pick a nit with this. The Christian Dark Ages were NOT a period of scientific and cultural regression. Far from it, we now know that society advanced pretty linearly from the beginning of the Dark Ages on through the Renaissance. What makes it "dark" is that for the longest time we simply didn't know a whole lot about it; it was a lost period in history. Modern scholarship has largely debunked the traditional, mythical view of the so-called "Dark" Ages.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/D...

Re:Anti-math and anti-science ...

[SuricouRaven]

Neither if which matters, because few believers actually do what their holy book says. They do what they want, then look to their holy book to justify it.

Re:Anti-math and anti-science ...

[halivar]

I stopped reading after the first one. Jesus is quoting the priests' law and calling them hypocrites. So obviously the creator didn't read the passages he/she cited, either.

Re:Anti-math and anti-science ...

[swillden]

There are obvious differences between Christianity and Islam that make Christianity able to coexist with a modern secular state while Islam is showing all over the world that it can't.

This is only because Christianity has changed. Christianity as it was during the era of the crusades, and for hundreds of years after them, not only could not coexist with a secular government, it couldn't even coexist with an ostensibly Christian government which espoused a slightly different form of Christianity.

Note that I'm not bashing Christianity here... I am a Christian. But let's not whitewash the history of Christianity.

can you imagine the Pope leading a frenzied crowd in the St. Peters square in chants of "death to infidels"

Well, historically, the Pope doesn't lead chants. Instead he just issues orders to root out and forcibly "convert" infidels via torture, to save their souls. Of course, popes haven't done that for centuries because it has become unacceptable to Christians.

Re:Anti-math and anti-science ...

[geekoid]

Nope.

  Jesus replied, “And why do you, by your traditions, violate the direct commandments of God? 4 For instance, God says, ‘Honor your father and mother,’[a] and ‘Anyone who speaks disrespectfully of father or mother must be put to death.’[b] 5 But you say it is all right for people to say to their parents, ‘Sorry, I can’t help you. For I have vowed to give to God what I would have given to you.’ 6 In this way, you say they don’t need to honor their parents.[c] And so you cancel the word of God for the sake of your own tradition.

He is calling them hypocrites becasue they found a way around killing kids for not respecting their parents.
Think about that.

Because you seem simple:
He was calling them hypocrites for NOT KILLING CHILDREN.

Actually against Islam

[Firethorn]

Okay, I'm not a Muslim, nor am I an expert. I've been over in majority Islamic countries a few times though and had a few 'cultural appreciation' lessons.

Isis is violating a good amount of Islamic teachings with this ban.

Though I can't see how they're still allowed to teach chemistry(even if they have to say it's due to Allah's rules and law) if they're not allowed to teach math, so it might be an error in the article. Math may have been de-emphasized against teaching their propaganda.

Re:Actually against Islam

[gnasher719]

Isis is violating a good amount of Islamic teachings with this ban.

Considering that they are not Muslims but f***ing bastards, that doesn't come unexpected. I mean they are so bad that Al'Quaeda calls them barbaric.

Re:Actually against Islam

[tylikcat]

Certainly, when you look at the role of Islamic scholars in developing, say, Algebra, it seems like a pretty awful departure from some aspects of history. Of course, history is full of many things, and the Qoran is full of many things, and can be used to justify many things. (You can, for instance, make a pretty solid argument that the Qoran is a lot more progressive with regard to women's rights than other monotheistic religious texts... but certainly this hasn't been playing out in implementation this century, so much. Of course, I seem to recall some arguments that the rules regarding inheritance laid down in the Qoran necissitated the devlopment of algebra as well, though my own reading is that you can only stretch that argument so far.)

Re:Actually against Islam

[TheCarp]

> I mean they are so bad that Al'Quaeda calls them barbaric.

This is an important point. Now I am not expert but, even I have seen stories, old stories, from back when the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan were new, even back then there was intelligence chatter showing internal divides within Al Queda, even debates as to whether their own terrorist strategies are even effective in the first place.

and there really is some evidence that they are not, and the more barbaric they are, the less effective they are. In fact, if I remember right, this isn't even the first group Al Queda has thusly criticized.

US is next?

[guruevi]

This is what happens when you let the religious right run a country. Doesn't matter whether they're Islamic, Christian or something else.

Re:US is next?

[sinij]

Exactly. Opposing scientific principle and results, be it climate science, evolution, or math are all different degrees of the same folly.

Re:US is next?

[Agares]

Being religious does not make you anti-science.

Re:US is next?

[pr0t0]

Yes, it certainly sucks that a very ignorant but very vocal minority can cast a dark shadow upon a vast but comparatively silent majority. If you don't like the preconceived notions that are hung upon the religious (as perceived by the non-religious), you may want to encourage like-minded individuals to speak up on matters of science and scientific literacy. Right now the media is controlling the message that this is a two-sided debate, mostly because that's an easier sell. But it's also due to the fact that there is a HUGE contingent of people of faith who recognize a place for science in their lives, but are cowering in the corner. ISIS uses threats of violence to get the masses to bow to their whim. It's not a sword, so what is the far-right hanging over your head?

We all get and deserve the world we make.

Re:US is next?

[Agares]

As I said being religious does not mean anti-science. Furthermore I give a lot of things in science a lot of thought, and truthfully I can't say any of them go against what I believe. Religion is an explanation of why I am here and where I will go so to speak. Whereas science is basically just something that explains the world around us. The two do not have to contradict one another.

Re:US is next?

[halivar]

This sounds about right. But modern fundamentalist Christianity is not very similar to medieval Christianity.

Of course they do

[Lucas123]

When people learn critical thinking skills, they tend to automatically dismiss ignorant, hate-centered dogmas.

Re:Of course they do

[u38cg]

So why are so many terrorists engineers?

Re:Of course they do

[phantomfive]

A google search for "terrorists are engineers" turns up a heap of relevant links, but here is one in particular from the IEEE.

My hypothesis is that working as an engineer in Pakistan (for example) is one of the most miserable jobs you can have, with horrible managers and only somewhat better pay to compensate. Having seen how it is, I would rather work as a farmer than an engineer in that situation, it's more satisfying and enjoyable.

Re:Of course they do

[Keyboard Rage]

Another reason may be that some types of personalities often found in engineering and science are sensitive to social engineering tactics involving strong ideological messages, because they are ignorant, or rather, naive about how parts of the world actually work due to a combination of lesser social skills, lack of personal introspection, insecurity about such things, and a tendency to be very focused on a particular subject while not paying enough attention to the whole picture.

And this is news?

[LWATCDR]

First of all is anyone shocked by this? Really people you think this is news? I mean next you tell me that Sun is hot.
Second this needs to be put under the politics category.

I hide Politics on Slashdot so I do not have too see this kind of story.
It is not that I am not interested in political news, the reason is that the quality of comments and editing on anything political on Slashdot is so bad.

If you disagree on the quality that is fine but Slashdot let's the users hide categories for a reason. Helpful hint editors while it does not apply to this story if the word Republican or Democrat are in the title it is politics.

Cue the Bozos

[CohibaVancouver]

Cue the bozos, who, due to Slashdot hivemind, are now required to post "So, exactly like the USA!"

...and no, I'm not American.

Re:Cue the Bozos

[CohibaVancouver]

The problem is that when the Bozos say that the USA is as bad as (or worse than) North Korea or a region suffering under ISIS or the Taliban, you belittle the suffering that those people are genuinely experiencing.

Could the USA do better? Absolutely, much, much better - But don't insult some teacher or blogger living in fear of torture or death in Syria by suggesting some teacher or blogger at West Beverly High is her peer.

Re:Cue the Bozos

[Prien715]

Cue the bozos, who, due to Slashdot hivemind, are now required to post "So, exactly like the USA!"

Would you like your unnecessary transvaginal ultrasound with or without lube? Or maybe your textbooks without without evolution?

There are some very ignorant people in this country -- as anyone who's visited a WalMart (at least in the south...but that's why I've lived the majority of my life) can attest. You should be glad you don't have to deal with them.

I've never understood this...

[tekrat]

They don't want the kids to learn science or even mention things like evolution... Is their religion on such shaky grounds that it can't stand up to some critical thinking?

Why not then have chemistry class where two potentially explosive chemicals are mixed and the teacher tells the students "Don't worry, if your heart is pure and Allah is with you, it will not explode!"

As Dr. Tyson says -- science is true whether you believe it or not. The explosion will happen no matter what you think of Allah.

Allah doesn't protect *anyone* from a bomb or a bullet. So, what exactly is the point of learning about him/it, instead of learning math, which is actually a useful subject?

The moment you ban teaching something, it's usually because it's pretty easy to prove what bullshit your particular religion is, whether it be Christian or Muslim.

Texas Republicans don't seem to be any better, BTW.

Re:I've never understood this...

[Opportunist]

Any religion is afraid of science.

Religion is about faith.
Science is about doubt.

It's fairly easy to see why one is anathema of the other.

Re:I've never understood this...

[jeffmflanagan]

>They don't want the kids to learn science or even mention things like evolution...
>Is their religion on such shaky grounds that it can't stand up to some critical thinking?

Name one religion than isn't on shaky ground and can stand up to critical thinking. Religion is way past its sell-by date, and is obviously pure fantasy.

Texas must be pissed...

[Vitriol Angst]

They stole the Texas curriculum plans and implemented them.
I can't wait for the new educational ISIS program to show all students making 110% scores.

Re:WTF?

[alexander_686]

It is a little unexpected.

Islam, but obviously not this particular splinter, has a long and glorious history of cultivating math and science. Specifically, they invented some aspects of linear algebra to solve inheritance issue – the Koran is very specific on how much the various wives and children get.

and won't be allowed to last long

[jd.schmidt]

Many people in the mid east are actually pretty proud of their history in math and put a high value in it. ISIS is in on the way out already if they try this, if not every parent, MANY parents will now see ISIS for how backwards they really are.

Re:The Truth about ISIS

[manu144x]

Tell that to the thousands of girls kidnapped from their homes to serve the isis warriors sexually:

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/w...

I LOVE READING PROPAGANDA

[Jeremiah Cornelius]

It's so much EASIER than THINKING!

Re:I LOVE READING PROPAGANDA

[Shortguy881]

If I understand your comment correctly, you just want the thought behind my statement.

First in regards to:

Well as a closed system maybe but, if your "society" is being propped up via funding and arms, and you have no need to actually produce anything yourself or even produce engineers at all, then it isn't as much of a problem.

The US spends over half a trillion dollars on the DOD a year. For decades, we have moved away from producing goods to a service providing nation. Granted, this is starting to improve a bit but it's nothing to celebrate, yet.

That said, what would really make it tough for them is a lack of opposition. Their tactics tend to be very self defeating when the larger powers don't overreact and get drawn into conflict with them.

If we let them provoke us though, then they will likely feed off that and use our involvement to deflect criticism away from their own otherwise self-defeating brutality.

The US government has been doing this for decades as well. Every few years we find a new enemy, rally cry and release the hounds of war.

If you want me to do all the work for you and provide specific examples of the above, let me know. There are many.

Re:I LOVE READING PROPAGANDA

[lgw]

For decades, we have moved away from producing goods to a service providing nation. Granted, this is starting to improve a bit but it's nothing to celebrate, yet.

The manufacturing capacity of the US has never dropped decade-over-decade. The manufacturing jobs are all gone, never coming back, but automated manufacturing has been replacing people gradually over the years. Because the economy has grown so much since WWII (recent extended downturn non-withstanding), we've also exported a lot of manufacturing (now coming back as the robots keep getting better), and grown into a primarily service-oriented economy, on top of that consistent manufacturing capability.

The US government has been doing this for decades as well. Every few years we find a new enemy, rally cry and release the hounds of war.

Like most nations in history since the first clan grew large enough to be considered a nation? It's worth remembering that almost every historical nation that doesn't exist today was conquered. The appearance of strength is all-important to continued peace. We've certainly made our share of mistakes as a nation, but there is a legitimate reason to project force around the world even though we're not interested in conquest ourselves: deterrence is morally better than fighting and winning.

Re:I LOVE READING PROPAGANDA

[Shortguy881]

In 1953 the percentage of GDP from manufacturing was 28%. In 2012 it was at 12%. I'd call that a drop.

In the last decade we have sent troops into Afghanistan, Libya, Syria and Iraq. What real threat do any of these nations pose? Additionally, the way those conflicts unfolded wont be a deterrent to anyone. Besides, most of those conflicts are a result of us getting involved there previously. One of the best example of our meddling is what we did to Germany after WWI. It wasn't entirely the US' doing but we definitely played a part. Ultimately "those who do not learn from there mistakes are doomed to repeat them."

Re:I LOVE READING PROPAGANDA

[jythie]

In 1953 the percentage of GDP from manufacturing was 28%. In 2012 it was at 12%. I'd call that a drop.

Between 1953 and 2012 the GDP has gone up by about 600% (adjusted for inflation), so that is still a net increase in manufacturing by a significant margin, just not as large of an increase as other sectors.

Re:I LOVE READING PROPAGANDA

[nedlohs]

In 1953 the percentage of GDP from manufacturing was 28%. In 2012 it was at 12%. I'd call that a drop.

Then you're an idiot. Since 28% of 2.54 trillion is significantly smaller than 12% of 15.43 trillion. So the opposite of a drop.

And no "The manufacturing capacity of the US has never dropped decade-over-decade" could never be referring to as a percentage of GDP, capacity is the raw amount and some other amount increasing doesn't matter in the slightest.

Re:I LOVE READING PROPAGANDA

[lgw]

In 1953 the percentage of GDP from manufacturing was 28%. In 2012 it was at 12%. I'd call that a drop.

Were you really confused by this, or are you just trolling now?
In 1953 US GDP was ~$2.5 T in 2009 dollars. Today it's ~$16T in 2009 dollars.

Can you see now that US manufacturing has grown significantly? The rest of the economy just grew faster, shifting our focus over the years. Much the same happened with farming before that. Technology is neat that way.

What real threat do any of these nations pose?

Again, appearance of strength is important. People who are a threat seeing the US as weak and starting a war would be a catastrophe from any moral perspective. We do get judged, like it or not, by whether minor player can shake their fists at us without consequence. Was is a surprise to you that Russia is getting froggy again (occasionally hopping across its borders) over the past decade?

Geopolitics aside, some would say that a strong man who sees a horrific crime that he has the strength to stop has the moral responsibility to do so. ISIS has conquered territory by force of arms - do we want to allow that sort of thing to be acceptable on the world stage again? The way ISIS is treating their conquered subjects is horrific and appalling, and we should probably put a stop to it.

Re:I LOVE READING PROPAGANDA

[Shortguy881]

The net increase in dollars generated by manufacturing isn't a relevant statistic for the argument being made. As a percentage of GDP shows that the sector has indeed shrunk compared to other industries in the US.

Re:I LOVE READING PROPAGANDA

[toejam13]

Geopolitics aside, some would say that a strong man who sees a horrific crime that he has the strength to stop has the moral responsibility to do so. ISIS has conquered territory by force of arms - do we want to allow that sort of thing to be acceptable on the world stage again? The way ISIS is treating their conquered subjects is horrific and appalling, and we should probably put a stop to it.

Some would also suggest that the current instability within the Near and Middle East is the result of European colonial powers drawing national borders in such a way to cause instability and invoke inter-racial and inter-religious tension.

Perhaps the better solution is to withdraw from the area and let the regional powers work the issue themselves. If that means a century of warfare, not unlike what Europe experienced after the Protestant Reformation, then so be it.

Sure, such a conflict would result in a spike in the price of oil. But last time oil went above $160/bbl, we saw factories in North America being brought out of mothball, a renewed interest in alternative fuels (methane, nuclear, solar, wind), higher urban growth, an increase in the use of transit and a decrease in the use of petroleum derived fertilizers. Our economy and environment actually benefit in many ways when oil gets expensive.

Re:I LOVE READING PROPAGANDA

[diamondmagic]

GDP measures the growth of the economy as a whole, over time, within a particular geographical area.

If you say that share of GDP of a certain industry to nationwide GDP has changed from 28% to 12%, but overall GDP grew 600% (or whatever), then mathematically, said industry grew -- it wasn't #1 in growth, but it still grew.

Nor does manufacturing need to be #1. The service sector can grow without sucking up other industry's resources, so naturally the GDP-share of other industry is going to shrink.

These are well-defined terms in economics. You're just being obtuse.

Re:I LOVE READING PROPAGANDA

[sabbede]

Given that the root causes can not be addressed (we aren't time travelers), and that allowing the situation to play out as you propose will necessarily result in the deaths of millions, it would be unacceptably inhumane to do so.

We have to deal with the situation at hand. Bemoaning its causes is unproductive. We have the capability to change the outcome of the current situation so as to prevent a century of secular infighting and the countless deaths that will result.

Re:Algebra

[PvtVoid]

Guess it's time to rename Algebra (al-jebr in Arabic) since they don't seem to want to be associated with that anymore.

I know: Freedom Numbers!

In fact, I think we should all boycott Arabic numerals, including the zero. Go back to good old Roman numerals, like we had before the creeping influence of Islam and Sharia Law. That'll show 'em.

Re:Cartoon villians

[DocSavage64109]

When your choices are to either join them and get your own kidnapped sex slave, or don't join them and get shot, the choice is rather easy. Actually, after reading about the hundreds of people they have shot, there seem to be a lot of people in Iraq with a lot of integrity.

Wow......

[Dega704]

These guys are starting to make the Third Reich look sane and well adjusted.

Ironic, isn't it

[sgunhouse]

The name Algebra originally comes from Arabic, and likewise we owe the number zero to them. Fact is, they taught us the math of the ancient Greeks. And now they don't want it?

Re:Ironic, isn't it

[IMightB]

I believe we also owe our entire numbering system to them and the Indians. Otherwise we'd writing out numbers with Roman Numerals.

Re:terrorist math

[Opportunist]

About 3000/1000.

And some shrapnel.

Is that a serious question?

[Sycraft-fu]

Because if it is, you need to pull your head out of your ass and go and do some extremely basic, cursory, research on the situation in the US. There are for sure some loud fundy Christian that like to whine about science, evolution in particular. However they have had little and less success in pushing their agenda and the US remains a powerful center of scientific research.

Trying to equate the US to ISIS is beyond stupid.

Reminds me of Pol Pot in Cambodia

[Anonymous Coward]

I still shake my head over what happened in Cambodia after the Vietnam war. its one of the reason why I was against going into Iraq in the first places. it seems like real craziness can emerge out of the chaos when US pulls out of some places after a major conflict. its also interesting that there is no expertise in the state department or anywhere in the government about what happened in Cambodia after Vietnam. I think the US was so sick and tired of SE Asia after Vietnam, they purposely ignored what was going on.

So...

[TheBilgeRat]

Are they completely forgetting that the original Islamic caliphate was the most scientific state of its day?

Re:Why math?

[Opportunist]

Because ISIS doesn't give half a shit more about the Koran than the average politician over here does about the Bible. It's a tool to keep them in power and keep the sheep following them.

Why do you think people in the Middle East would be different from people in other parts of the world?

Re:Why math?

[stdarg]

No. Almost no original mathematics was developed in Islamic countries. There was some, but the vast majority was simply transmitted by Arabic/Muslim scholars from earlier Greek, Egyptian, Babylonian, etc sources.

Arabic numerals were developed in India and were called Hindu numerals. The reason we call them Arabic is we learned about them from a book written in Arabic, not because they were invented in Arabia.

Re:Why math?

[Charliemopps]

I could understand (from radical fundamentalist point of view) other bans, but why math? Even Koran (I think?) has writings on commerce (math), tithe (math) and so on.

For most people that view the Koran or the Bible in the most extreme and literal ways, it's generally held that your entire life should be dedicated to serving God. You're supposed to spend your entire life reading the Bible/Koran and serving God. All other activities should be in support of that mission. i.e. you need to be able to read to be able to read the bible so English is ok. Any activity that is not in direct service of God is considered sinful. I suspect that in most rural Iraqi villages the only subjects were Math, social studies and English. So basically they're telling everyone that if they teach anything but the Koran they're getting flogged.

Re:Why math?

[SuricouRaven]

I suspect it might be a translation issue. But to know that we need the oppinion of someone who speaks whatever language the announcement was in, presumably Arabic. Banning math makes no sense, but it might be perhaps banning certain types of math, or preparing for a yet-to-be-finished Islamic Mathematics cirriculum that downplays the role of western mathematicians.

Languages can be tricky. Another Islamist group, widely (Though unofficially) called Boko Haram, literally translates as 'Counterfeits are prohibited' - but it actually means something closer to 'Western education is unislamic.' A translation that wouldn't be at all obvious unless you are familiar with the region's history, and knew that 'Boko' might mean counterfeit or fake, but could also be a contraction for 'ilimin boko' or 'fake education' - a phrase used to describe British schools created when the country was formerly part of the British Empire.

not for long

[tacokill]

The only problem is we still need their damn oil.
Not so fast. Perhaps you have read about the recent energy boom in America? If you haven't you should read up. We are rapidly approaching a point where we don't need to import crude oil from anyone and we're actually talking about exporting it.

Early islamic society did well in math/science

[Anonymous Coward]

No, a society without science or with a strong dominance of faith over science is doomed. That's basically what happened to the Islamic world, albeit less drastically.

That depends on the faith. Some faiths, including some islamic believers, believe that science explains the mechanics of God's universe, and that the holy books only explain God's motivations and intentions.The former the "how", the later the "why", two mutually exclusive areas. You might note that early islamic society did quite well in math and science. Their scientific legacy is quite prominent in modern math and science.

Don't confuse the more ancient tribal and pagan customs and beliefs of the people in the region with islam. The former is often falsely attributed to islam. Islam, like christianity, did not completely displace nor eradicate some of the old tribal/pagan stuff. Some, but not all, of the crazier stuff comes from the tribal/pagan days.

Re:Early islamic society did well in math/science

[smaddox]

Don't confuse the more ancient tribal and pagan customs and beliefs of the people in the region with islam. The former is often falsely attributed to islam. Islam, like christianity, did not completely displace nor eradicate some of the old tribal/pagan stuff. Some, but not all, of the crazier stuff comes from the tribal/pagan days.

This seems a bit like a No True Scotsman fallacy. As far as I understand, ISIS is simply implementing their interpretation of the Koran. If that's not Islam, what is? That interpretation just happens to be atrocious to people and societies that value individual freedom.

Re:Some of that sounds awfully familiar

[DNS-and-BIND]

Nice try, however it is the Left that has allied with the Islamists. The GOP is violently allergic to Islamism.

"Over the past year, multiple international conferences have featured leaders of the anti-global left and Islamist groups working together. Go to any anti-war or anti-globalization demonstration in the West and chances are you will see the flags of Hezbollah and Hamas waved by people wearing Che Guevara T-shirts. And at some of these meetings, members of such radical Islamist groups as the Muslim Brotherhood, Hamas, and Hezbollah have enjoyed starring roles."

Whooh...the injection of facts is surely inconvenient. Ouch!

Who would want to return to the Dark Ages?

[dixonpete]

I'm thinking these guys don't care much for studying history either.

That's dumb

[davidwr]

You need math to aim your artillery.

CNN retracted

[manu0601]

From TFA:

Editor's note: An earlier version of this story contained reporting about ISIS and education. CNN has concerns about the interpretation of the information provided and we will update the story when we can verify what is happening.

The original story smelled odd: why would they have anything against maths? Banning history courses make sense when you perform propaganda, but maths?