Islamic Insurgency in the Philippines
- Thread starter Untitled.
- Start date
Users who are viewing this thread
Lord Burgess1
conflicts between Jihadist rebel groups and the Philippine government and its supporters. Although the rebel organizations themselves existed prior to the 1960s, the insurgency itself began in 1969
Why the interest?
Anyway, as far as I can recall, the largest Islamic rebel group is the Moro National Liberation Front (MNLF), it's a legitimate rebel group (i.e. recognized by the government) that doesn't engage in acts of terrorism. In fact, AFAIK it's made some headway, being able to establish the Autonomous Region of Muslim Mindanao, which as the name states is an autonomous region with its own mini-government.
Some time in the 70's to 80's, a splinter group called the Moro Islamic Liberation Front (MILF, hehe) was formed. It took a more radical approach to securing Islamist interests and there are currently skirmishes against them.
The largest actual terrorist group in the Philippines is another MNLF splinter, the Abu Sayyaf. It has ties to Al Qaeda and is infamous for having kidnapped quite a few white folk already. They're being dealt with, and already some of their top leaders have been KIA.
Also, AFAIK the only active Filipino off-topic folk are myself and Lord Leoric of Wercheg
Anyway, as far as I can recall, the largest Islamic rebel group is the Moro National Liberation Front (MNLF), it's a legitimate rebel group (i.e. recognized by the government) that doesn't engage in acts of terrorism. In fact, AFAIK it's made some headway, being able to establish the Autonomous Region of Muslim Mindanao, which as the name states is an autonomous region with its own mini-government.
Some time in the 70's to 80's, a splinter group called the Moro Islamic Liberation Front (MILF, hehe) was formed. It took a more radical approach to securing Islamist interests and there are currently skirmishes against them.
The largest actual terrorist group in the Philippines is another MNLF splinter, the Abu Sayyaf. It has ties to Al Qaeda and is infamous for having kidnapped quite a few white folk already. They're being dealt with, and already some of their top leaders have been KIA.
Also, AFAIK the only active Filipino off-topic folk are myself and Lord Leoric of Wercheg
I was under the impression that cookie related Huscarl was from there as well.
Then again, you lot all look the same...
Then again, you lot all look the same...
Cookie Eating Huskarl
Marquis
I'm not
I'm sure Moss can change that.
Aight, sorry. Didn't really want to pull this off-topic.
Aight, sorry. Didn't really want to pull this off-topic.
Rifleman
Knight
It's kind of the same as with any other extremist Islam group. Rhetoric about "Death to the West/Democracy/Equality/Freedoms", kidnapping and blowing up random people to try and bully governments into getting their way, attempting to force state religions of Islam. It's all just founded on hatred and disguised as religious zeal for the lower echelons. Terrorists are kind of like children in their mentality; "If I make big noises and wave my hands people will pay attention to me!" The only problem being their big noises are explosions and their hands have knives in them. They're smart and tactically proficient (unfortunately...), but only in combat.
They do attack Islamic countries too you know.
The Terrorists are the equivelent of the Modern KKK/Lambs of Christ/ Concerned Christians.
They don't just want to install a knew a religion, but extreme conservative viewpoints of Islam, such as Salafism.
Though those are just some the sunni terrorists. >.>
Blagh, it's alot more complicated than most talking heads say it is, full of regional/tribal conflicts, the effects of regional poverty and the suppression of religion by dictators and 'elected' officials.
The Terrorists are the equivelent of the Modern KKK/Lambs of Christ/ Concerned Christians.
They don't just want to install a knew a religion, but extreme conservative viewpoints of Islam, such as Salafism.
Though those are just some the sunni terrorists. >.>
Blagh, it's alot more complicated than most talking heads say it is, full of regional/tribal conflicts, the effects of regional poverty and the suppression of religion by dictators and 'elected' officials.
Schemer
Rifleman said:
"Death to the West/Democracy/Equality/Freedoms" is more of a political ideology. Has nothing to do with religion, and I'm sure you can find <1% of western religions who are insane too. Most terrorist paramilitary organisations terrorise almost exclusively the Middle East.
I would argue that it's founded on bat**** crazy megalomaniacs with a bunch of proletariats and bourgeoisie willing to work for them. Crime (usually) pays really well, else why get into something really dangerous? I don't think that think that it's so black and white as propaganda of both sides always says during wars.
Paramilitary organisations are usually really bad, but I do think there are legitimate people who are forced to work for them whether it be by threats of death, coercion, propaganda, or pay and "retirement plans." The US government probably agreed at some point, hence things like Operation Paperclip and MKULTRA.
WikiLeaks is also considered a terrorist organisation by the US, and every big credit card company has blocked donations. You can, however, still donate to the charity of the Ku Klux Klan (as silly as that is). If "terrorist" was a lot less broad, I think that bad organisations like Al-Qaeda could be taken out a lot faster. Anti-terrorism should not apply to everyone, their mother, and their dog because they've associated with a "threat to national security" as dangerous and full of military dictators such as WikiLeaks.
Kobrag said:
I agree. A lot of Middle Eastern terrorist groups, to me, feel like they just want to go back thousands of years culturally and in human rights. Why did we evolve out of Cro-Magnon? Why did history happen if the Bronze Age and Middle Age are looked at as just a thing of the past and nothing else? Why have societies risen, fell, and shown what works and what does not only for us to repeat it? Why would any of this matter if everyone wanted to go back to a blank slate and pretend nothing ever happened? He who does not know his history is condemned to repeat it.
FrisianDude
Archduke
I disagree. There is no why to all those things except that people tried to make their lives as nice as possible. History did not happen so we can learn from it; we can learn from it, but it's not there for it. And I never liked the rhetoric of that last sentence, if only because I like picking nits; you can't repeat anything in history, at most you can re-enact it; things will still be wildly different in the details.Schemer said:
History just is, just like we.
Just general interest. And also the fact that I should talk about this conflict for 45-60 minutes in front of 40 people. Most of my sources are horribly outdated and they usually culminate into either "The awesome American army of awesomeness was so awesome that it came here, killed a lot of people and made us free" or "The awesome *insert random muslim group* of awesomeness was so awesome that they hijacked people 'n' **** and made us free".Tuckles said:
I'd rather just know what a regular local thinks of all this.
I, too, thought that Cookie Eating Huskarl was from the Philippines. Then again, I've never been to either Malaysia or the Philippines and the only difference known to me is geographical.
