Would giving a violent people their own country make them peaceful?

[Nakura Chambers]

If the Islamic State, Boko Haram, Hamas and other groups had their way and the populations that they purport to represent were granted their own states, would they be peaceful countries?

[Independent voter]

I thought this was going to be about US gangbangers.

[Merope]

Uhhhhh no? Radicalized Islam (or anything else) cannot, by nature, be peaceful.

[THE Bigzoman]

If the Islamic State, Boko Haram, Hamas and other groups had their way and the populations that they purport to represent were granted their own states, would they be peaceful countries?

I'm inclined to say that they would try to expand their aggression to non islamic followers. They don't seem like the type to keep to themselves even if they had the resources to do so.

[Gothicshark]

I voted "No", however it depends on time-frame.

For instance, every modern Nation was shaped by Violence and War, and today most nations are peaceful.

[Zoaric]

I'm inclined to say that they would try to expand their aggression to non islamic followers. They don't seem like the type to keep to themselves even if they had the resources to do so.

My thoughts as well.

[Polyxo]

I think we need to stop looking at Islam like there's no predictable thing about it, and radicals can just pop up anywhere. Western literacy in the difference between sects is minimal. There are kinds of Islam that never have produced, and never will produce a radical/terrorist/violent militant. There are also sects that produce many militants, and those that aren't militant are sympathetic to it. What would be much more productive is stop treating the largely benign types of Islam like they're one step from being a sworn enemy at all times, and start treating them like we're equally interested in protecting them from virulent sects of Islam that treat them with the same "join or die" perspective that they treat everyone else.

[Techno-Druid]

This goes against my idea of genetically modifying ape police officers and soldiers!

[Deleted]

Absolutely not, they themselves for the most part outright state that the end to their goals is pretty much world domination (as in a world spanning Kalifat) as much as that sounds like some Bond villains agenda it sets a clear and predictable way they're going to behave. If you budge they will just push all that much harder the next time since they already succeeded once before.

[Rukh]

It never has in the past. But on other hand, giving nonviolent people their own country doesn't make them peaceful either.

[Velaniz]

Of course a country would be nothing but completely peaceful if you filled it with the most barbaric and violent people imaginable from all corners of the world, OP.

[takolin]

You mean like how the UK sent all their convicts to Australia?

[dextersmith]

They'd just want more "easily obtainable" land and encourage others to be violent too.

[ToastedBread]

It depends on whom we define "violent" people as. I had a good conversation with a co-worker recently, and he shared a very interesting view about militant groups and acts of "terrorism" that have happened in the past century (circa WWI and after). Most, if not all, of the groups and individuals involved in such acts of violence have a common trait, that of displacement from and loss of their homeland and national identity. Think Al-Qaeda, Hamas, IRA, etc. So, if this loss is dealt with by giving them a place to belong, who knows, it might just solve the issue of them using violence.

[Sole-Warrior]

I consider beheadings, chopping off limbs of criminals violent, give them their own country they will continue those activities.

[Venant]

Did Europeans leaving Europe, genociding native americans and founding the United States of America make them peaceful?

In their own propaganda maybe....

If your culture / religion has the urge to show others that your way of belief is the way to the light, your own country is not enough

Well when you put it that way, you make it sound like the United States falls into the 'violent people' category

[Deleted]

No, you need to deal a crushing defeat and then help them rebuild.
The important thing here is that you don't exploit them while doing it.

[Uselessrouge]

i would just put them all in one place and nuke them

[Venant]

I consider beheadings, chopping off limbs of criminals violent, give them their own country they will continue those activities.

Air strikes are violence, as is invading other countries, killing hundreds of thousands of people, and claiming that a bunch of guys in pickup trucks are an existential threat to a nation with a military budget of almost a trillion dollars and enough nuclear weapons to blow the planet up 100 times over.

[Claborn]

Most of the Middle East and other Eastern countries didn't exist until after WW2.. so technically they already had their own countries.