what is your anti terrorist masterplan ?

[the truth]

If you were thrust into the role of leader of the EU or the USA, what would you do?

[Ammi]

...extreme shows no reason by it's definition and is so hard to 'anti', as that's like saying that it's possible to erase hate, which of course it isn't...counter hate with more hate and killings and it will just create more and more.../don't counter it and it will flow freely, so.../just really don't know truth, there is no effective fight with extremism because extremism doesn't want a fight..it ony wants to hate and it will, whatever action...

[Mystic Mock]

Threaten to blow up Mosques if they try and do anymore terrorism, and if that doesn't work then kill their friends and family.

Strict? Yes, borderline evil? Yes, but it's for the greater good and at the end of the day it would still mean that more lives would be saved under my plan than it would be under this corrupt lot.

[Glenn.]

Wipe the lot out with nuclear bombs. Execute the ones that have gained access to our country.

[rubymoo]

My daughter was talking about terrorism this morning, she said that when Syria gets bombed hopefully it will stop, i answered that it will never stop, they attack us, so we attack back, we kill their people and they kill our people, it's a deep seated hatred that no one understands, do they want us to abide by their way of life, or do they hate our way of life, is it about religion or is it political???

I thank whoever that i'm not a leader in the EU or USA because i would not want blood on my hands, i've always been a big believer of talking things over, but i don't think that will work here, so the alternative is what is happening, bombs, then more bombs and even more bombs, but at what cost....

[bots]

I would attempt to win the hearts and minds of the people that are subject to constant terror in Syria, Iraq, Libya and so on. That means showing them compassion and understanding. Assisting them to stand up against those wishing to terrorise them. Do that and the terrorists lose their breeding ground. Simplistic answer I know, but it is a starting point, and provides the correct environment to move forward from.

[arista]

If you were thrust into the role of leader of the EU or the USA, what would you do?


If USA
Build the Wall
secure borders.


If EU
Secure Borders
and use even more cameres

[arista]

My daughter was talking about terrorism this morning, she said that when Syria gets bombed hopefully it will stop, i answered that it will never stop, they attack us, so we attack back, we kill their people and they kill our people, it's a deep seated hatred that no one understands, do they want us to abide by their way of life, or do they hate our way of life, is it about religion or is it political???

I thank whoever that i'm not a leader in the EU or USA because i would not want blood on my hands, i've always been a big believer of talking things over, but i don't think that will work here, so the alternative is what is happening, bombs, then more bombs and even more bombs, but at what cost....


You Are Most Wise

[user104658]

Invest heavily in time travel, travel back in time, and proceed to not arm, fund and create them in the first place.

Failing that, I would stop cosying up at champagne dinners with the oil kingpins and middle eastern royalty that fund ISIS supply lines. That might be a start.

[lostalex]

I think there needs to be more education, including school education and programs, and tv commercials radio commercials educating people that Islam is a lie, and we should do everything we can to educate muslims that their entire religion is a lie. It's unacceptable that we keep pretending that their religion has nothing to do with terrorism.

Also we need to kill all Islamists by any means necessary.

The US was way too lenient after 9/11. we spent way too much money and resources trying to help muslim countries instead of just focusing on killing the islamists. we shouldn't have wasted so much time and money and lives on trying to build hospitals and roads and schools that the islamists just ended up destroying. That was never our job.

[bots]

I think there needs to be more education, including school education and programs, and tv commercials radio commercials educating people that Islam is a lie, and we should do everything we can to educate muslims that their entire religion is a lie.

Also we need to kill all Islamists by any means necessary.

The US was way too lenient after 9/11. we spent way too much money and resources trying to help muslim countries instead of just focusing on killing the islamists. we shouldn't have wasted so much time and money and lives on trying to build hospitals and roads and schools. That was never our job.

Isn't it a bit of a waste to educate them just to kill them later. Are you aware how many in the world follow the Muslim faith? Why should their religion be singled out and outlawed over other religions. Why should a religion be outlawed because a tiny percentage that follow that religion are terrorist nutters? Following that logic, the Catholic religion should have been outlawed due to the IRA

[lostalex]

Isn't it a bit of a waste to educate them just to kill them later. Are you aware how many in the world follow the Muslim faith? Why should their religion be singled out and outlawed over other religions. Why should a religion be outlawed because a tiny percentage that follow that religion are terrorist nutters?

no, because most muslims, just like most people of any religion, don't really think about the religion, it's just something their parents force them to do as kids. the problem is the people who actually believe in the nonsense. the problem is when everyone else is pretending they believe in it, a small minority thinks it's real. they need to be told it's not actually real, it's more about tradition, and it's not really real.

I have no problem with muslims who just consider themselves muslim because they like the traditions, the problem is the people who think the whole thing is real, and their religion and their god is actually real.

[Mystic Mock]

no, because most muslims, just like most people of any religion, don't really think about the religion, it's just something their parents force them to do as kids. the problem is the people who actually believe in the nonsense. the problem is when everyone else is pretending they believe in it, a small minority thinks it's real. they need to be told it's not actually real, it's more about tradition, and it's not really real.

I get what you're trying to say, but if we banned one Religion it would be expected that we ban all of the Religions.

[lostalex]

i feel like christians are told all the time that the religion isn't real, and most christians i know have no problem saying they don't believe in all of the bible, and they even openly question god and the bible. but they still consider themselves christians, and they can just enjoy the traditions of the religion without feeling like they have to follow every word. i don't feel like muslims get as much real criticism, because it's politically incorrect to challenge muslim views, and society is even scared to challenge it directly because they are scared of terrorism, like the mohammed cartoons..

I'm not saying we should ban the religion, i'm just saying we need more open criticism of the religion just like christianity is so openly criticized.

[arista]

I think there needs to be more education, including school education and programs, and tv commercials radio commercials educating people that Islam is a lie, and we should do everything we can to educate muslims that their entire religion is a lie. It's unacceptable that we keep pretending that their religion has nothing to do with terrorism.

Also we need to kill all Islamists by any means necessary.

The US was way too lenient after 9/11. we spent way too much money and resources trying to help muslim countries instead of just focusing on killing the islamists. we shouldn't have wasted so much time and money and lives on trying to build hospitals and roads and schools that the islamists just ended up destroying. That was never our job.


kill all Islamists

You mean Extreme Islamists ?

[lostalex]

kill all Islamists

You mean Extreme Islamists ?

No, i mean all Islamists.

Islamists are people who believe that all governments should adhere to Islamic law. (that means they think i should be put to death for being gay)

[Ammi]

Invest heavily in time travel, travel back in time, and proceed to not arm, fund and create them in the first place.

Failing that, I would stop cosying up at champagne dinners with the oil kingpins and middle eastern royalty that fund ISIS supply lines. That might be a start.

....yeah, I'm with you with the time travel bit and prevent etc...and I don't disagree necessarily with the champagne dinners etc, either..but the problem with that is, wouldn't it also isolate us in a way that closing borders would..I mean every country would have to agree to it also and they never would...

[bots]

No, i mean all Islamists.

Islamists are people who believe that all governments should adhere to Islamic law. (that means they think i should be put to death for being gay)

So your are advocating mass genocide in a similar fashion to Hitler?

[lostalex]

So your are advocating mass genocide in a similar fashion to Hitler?

it's not genocide. no one is born an islamist. it's a choice to believe in that ideology. but yes, i would like to see that hateful ideology completely eradicated from the world. just like i would like to see all nazis irradiated from the world.

[arista]

No, i mean all Islamists.

Islamists are people who believe that all governments should adhere to Islamic law. (that means they think i should be put to death for being gay)


But thats in many Nations , even Russia.

Islamic Law in Saudi Arabia
has Feck all to do with you.
With with Respect.

[lostalex]

But thats in many Nations , even Russia.

Islamic Law in Saudi Arabia
has Feck all to do with you.
With with Respect.

actually it does when saudis fly planes into my buildings trying to kill me.
with all due respect.

[arista]

actually it does when saudis fly planes into my buildings trying to kill me.
with all due respect.

http://www.leadingtowar.com/LTW.images/client_supplied_images/miscellaneous/MohamedAttaVisa.jpg
Yes Atta
he was permitted to learn to Fly in Florida
before 9/11

Shocking

[Denver]

Threaten to blow up Mosques if they try and do anymore terrorism, and if that doesn't work then kill their friends and family.

Strict? Yes, borderline evil? Yes, but it's for the greater good and at the end of the day it would still mean that more lives would be saved under my plan than it would be under this corrupt lot.

Disguisting you would kill millions of innocent Muslims for what!

[Denver]

I'm disgusted by all the hate for Muslims in this thread thinking all Muslims should die.

Terrorist do not follow the Quran and kill just as many of there own as they do the west and when people stop tarnishing all Muslims with the same brush then we can all get rid of these extremists.

The west proclaim to accept everyone all I see is the exact opposite.

[waterhog]

I'm disgusted by all the hate for Muslims in this thread thinking all Muslims should die.

Terrorist do not follow the Quran and kill just as many of there own as they do the west and when people stop tarnishing all Muslims with the same brush then we can all get rid of these extremists.

The west proclaim to accept everyone all I see is the exact opposite.

adam just like to correct you - Muslims do not kill - it is against Islam so to call a terrorist a Muslim is wrong.

[Denver]

adam just like to correct you - Muslims do not kill - it is against Islam so to call a terrorist a Muslim is wrong.

Yes I agree they just claim to support it yet go totally against it

[arista]

Alex is thinking back to 9/11

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/6/65/September_11_Photo_Montage.jpg/250px-September_11_Photo_Montage.jpg

[Livia]

Close the borders as a short term measure until we can rally ourselves. Then work with the UN on bringing in our quota of GENUINE refugees from Syria, families first... young men, who make up the vast majority of migrants , entering without going via the UN, way waaaaay down the line.

Arrest and/or deport all known terrorists and sympathisers immediately. Today.

Include the Muslim community in what's going on, make it clear that we do not hold them responsible for people who are making a mockery of their faith and killing their brothers and sisters.

Give the security services the powers they need to keep us safe.

Stop all cuts on the military and the emergency services and increase their budget.

Reintroduce the death penalty for convicted terrorists.

[DemolitionRed]

The US was way too lenient after 9/11. we spent way too much money and resources trying to help muslim countries instead of just focusing on killing the islamists. we shouldn't have wasted so much time and money and lives on trying to build hospitals and roads and schools that the islamists just ended up destroying. That was never our job.

9/11 brought about US/NATO war in Iraq. We didn't go into Iraq to build hospitals and roads, we went in to obliterate it. The spoils of war nearly always includes deals to rebuild. Afghanistan wasn't re-built out of our generosity; it was done to boost a western economy and take back some of the money used during its long war campaign.

[DemolitionRed]

I would stop holding Washington's hand every time it decided to invade somewhere in the Middle East. There have been many wars we want no part of because there's little gain in getting involved but when it comes to oil/uranium rich deserts, we always want to join in with getting our hands dirty.

If terrorism from the Middle East is going to stop, we have to put an end to invading their lands because its our invasions that are the very bedrock of everything we are seeing unfold today in the West.

[Livia]

I would stop holding Washington's hand every time it decided to invade somewhere in the Middle East. There have been many wars we want no part of because there's little gain in getting involved but when it comes to oil/uranium rich deserts, we always want to join in with getting our hands dirty.

If terrorism from the Middle East is going to stop, we have to put an end to invading their lands because its our invasions that are the very bedrock of everything we are seeing unfold today in the West.

Claiming we're holding Washington's hand is a little disingenuous, we are allies... and we're not alone. Do you know how many countries are involved in the Syrian conflict? We are not alone with the USA, many other countries are involved including Islamic countries like Jordan and Saudi.

Saying we should remove ourselves from any conflict in the Middle East is like claiming the terrorists have a point. Also, we import only a fraction of our oil from the Middle East so claiming we "dirty our hands" because of it is simply not correct.

[lostalex]

9/11 brought about US/NATO war in Iraq. We didn't go into Iraq to build hospitals and roads, we went in to obliterate it. The spoils of war nearly always includes deals to rebuild. Afghanistan wasn't re-built out of our generosity; it was done to boost a western economy and take back some of the money used during its long war campaign.

That's total bull**** dude. we defeated the Iraqi army and toppled the government after just 3 weeks. we stayed there for 10 years because we tried to help them rebuild. Invading Iraq wasn't the mistake, staying and trying to help was the mistake.

If it were up to me we(the US) would have left after that first month after we defeated Iraq.

We won the war in just 1 month. why did we stay??

[lostalex]

adam just like to correct you - Muslims do not kill - it is against Islam so to call a terrorist a Muslim is wrong.

that's like saying a husband promises to be loyal to his wife on his wedding day, therefore any man that cheats on his wife is not a husband, even though he is married...

it makes no sense.

[DemolitionRed]

Claiming we're holding Washington's hand is a little disingenuous, we are allies... and we're not alone. Do you know how many countries are involved in the Syrian conflict? We are not alone with the USA, many other countries are involved including Islamic countries like Jordan and Saudi.

Saying we should remove ourselves from any conflict in the Middle East is like claiming the terrorists have a point. Also, we import only a fraction of our oil from the Middle East so claiming we "dirty our hands" because of it is simply not correct.

Do you agree we should of gone to war in Iraq?
Do you believe what's happening now isn't a result of our intervention in Iraq? and do you believe that our partnership with NATO has brought about what is now happening in the West?

To understand what is happening in Europe today, we need to understand the full story and how it unfolded. History didn't start in July 2005 with the London bombings and neither did it start on Friday the 13th in France. If we don't look at the reasons behind these terrorist atrocities then how the hell do we plan a peaceful future for our children?

And lets get one thing straight, I make no excuse for the terrorists as you tried to imply, but I understand the reasons behind the terrorism. They are not doing this because we have some asset they want are they? its not an invasion is it?

[DemolitionRed]

That's total bull**** dude. we defeated the Iraqi army and toppled the government after just 3 weeks. we stayed there for 10 years because we tried to help them rebuild. Invading Iraq wasn't the mistake, staying and trying to help was the mistake.

If it were up to me we(the US) would have left after that first month after we defeated Iraq.

We won the war in just 1 month. why did we stay??

Sorry, I meant to say Afghanistan (9/11) not Iraq.

We stayed 10 years in Iraq because like with all occupations after war, we wanted to ensure our version of leadership was properly installed. As for the money that was made from the re-build, it was massive. America got something like 85% of the contracts for re-building which boosted their employment levels and ensured tax revenue came directly back into Americas purse.

Its a procedure that was set out during the closure of the second world war. As the Americans, Russians and British closed in on the Germans, they paused the attack so they could work out and divide the spoils of war.

[lostalex]

Sorry, I meant to say Afghanistan (9/11) not Iraq.

We stayed 10 years in Iraq because like with all occupations after war, we wanted to ensure our version of leadership was properly installed. As for the money that was made from the re-build, it was massive. America got something like 85% of the contracts for re-building which boosted their employment levels and ensured tax revenue came directly back into Americas purse.

Its a procedure that was set out during the closure of the second world war. As the Americans, Russians and British closed in on the Germans, they paused the attack so they could work out and divide the spoils of war.

yea, and it basically got split down the middle, and the american side of things did a pretty good job of letting it's "spoils of war" be free democracies that flourished.. while the russian "spoils" of war countries got controlled and basically lived under the same oppression they would have under the nazis. actually they were probably even worse off under the russians than they would have been under the nazis.

[bots]

Do you agree we should of gone to war in Iraq?
Do you believe what's happening now isn't a result of our intervention in Iraq? and do you believe that our partnership with NATO has brought about what is now happening in the West?

To understand what is happening in Europe today, we need to understand the full story and how it unfolded. History didn't start in July 2005 with the London bombings and neither did it start on Friday the 13th in France. If we don't look at the reasons behind these terrorist atrocities then how the hell do we plan a peaceful future for our children?

And lets get one thing straight, I make no excuse for the terrorists as you tried to imply, but I understand the reasons behind the terrorism. They are not doing this because we have some asset they want are they? its not an invasion is it?

The thing is that not all of these issues can be attributed to our intervention in Iraq or anywhere else. These countries were ruled by brutal dictators that kept the population in line through kidnap, torture and mass murder. Thats all these people have known for generations. So when no-one is there to keep the fear, its replaced by others taking their place. That is the true result of what we have today. It stems from generations of abuse of the population in those countries.

Its easy to blame the USA and the UK, but the world was a **** place in those countries long before we intervened.

[Ammi]

The thing is that not all of these issues can be attributed to our intervention in Iraq or anywhere else. These countries were ruled by brutal dictators that kept the population in line through kidnap, torture and mass murder. Thats all these people have known for generations. So when no-one is there to keep the fear, its replaced by others taking their place. That is the true result of what we have today. It stems from generations of abuse of the population in those countries.

Its easy to blame the USA and the UK, but the world was a **** place in those countries long before we intervened.

..another good post, bitontheslide...

[Kizzy]

That's a very colonialist attitude Bitontheslide, admonishing ourselves due them being seen as uncivilised savages is odd.

[bots]

That's a very colonialist attitude Bitontheslide, admonishing ourselves due them being seen as uncivilised savages is odd.

its not a coloniast attitude. I'm stating exactly how those countries were a few short years ago. Are you disputing that reality? If you are I suggest you do some research

[Kizzy]

its not a coloniast attitude. I'm stating exactly how those countries were a few short years ago. Are you disputing that reality? If you are I suggest you do some research

Many countries have governmental issues... doesn't mean anyone can storm on in does it?
Do some research on how that goes down.

[Marsh.]

Threaten to blow up Mosques if they try and do anymore terrorism, and if that doesn't work then kill their friends and family.

:think:

[Livia]

The thing is that not all of these issues can be attributed to our intervention in Iraq or anywhere else. These countries were ruled by brutal dictators that kept the population in line through kidnap, torture and mass murder. Thats all these people have known for generations. So when no-one is there to keep the fear, its replaced by others taking their place. That is the true result of what we have today. It stems from generations of abuse of the population in those countries.

Its easy to blame the USA and the UK, but the world was a **** place in those countries long before we intervened.

Great post.

[DemolitionRed]

The thing is that not all of these issues can be attributed to our intervention in Iraq or anywhere else. These countries were ruled by brutal dictators that kept the population in line through kidnap, torture and mass murder. Thats all these people have known for generations. So when no-one is there to keep the fear, its replaced by others taking their place. That is the true result of what we have today. It stems from generations of abuse of the population in those countries.

Its easy to blame the USA and the UK, but the world was a **** place in those countries long before we intervened.

That begs the question, why didn't we go into Cambodia when Pol Pot was on his mass genocide mission? Why aren't we getting involved with the Ituri conflict, the Kivu conflict or the internal conflict in Myanmar? Sudan and Mexico are two of the worlds most deadly countries because of corrupt governments but we don't seem to worry about them.

I fully understand the interference from the West (mainly America) for removing the Persian Shah and replacing him with Ruhollah Khomeini. We get involved where it suits us financially and never it seems, on moral grounds.

How can we turn our backs on some murderous dictators whilst waging war on others?

[JoshBB]

Threaten to blow up Mosques if they try and do anymore terrorism, and if that doesn't work then kill their friends and family.

Strict? Yes, borderline evil? Yes, but it's for the greater good and at the end of the day it would still mean that more lives would be saved under my plan than it would be under this corrupt lot.

Is this a serious post?? You do realise that ISIS blow up mosques regularly.. right?

[Dollface]

Do you agree we should of gone to war in Iraq?
Do you believe what's happening now isn't a result of our intervention in Iraq? and do you believe that our partnership with NATO has brought about what is now happening in the West?

To understand what is happening in Europe today, we need to understand the full story and how it unfolded. History didn't start in July 2005 with the London bombings and neither did it start on Friday the 13th in France. If we don't look at the reasons behind these terrorist atrocities then how the hell do we plan a peaceful future for our children?

And lets get one thing straight, I make no excuse for the terrorists as you tried to imply, but I understand the reasons behind the terrorism. They are not doing this because we have some asset they want are they? its not an invasion is it?

Understanding them and basically saying that they have a reason for their actions is (imo) making excuses for them.. There's no "reason" for killing innocent people that have nothing to do with what's going on in the middle east.

[Ammi]

..there is no reason with extremists or with their actions, which are only hate... their only aim is to kill, strike terror into and to control the fears and lives of the people they hate...

[Kizzy]

That begs the question, why didn't we go into Cambodia when Pol Pot was on his mass genocide mission? Why aren't we getting involved with the Ituri conflict, the Kivu conflict or the internal conflict in Myanmar? Sudan and Mexico are two of the worlds most deadly countries because of corrupt governments but we don't seem to worry about them.

I fully understand the interference from the West (mainly America) for removing the Persian Shah and replacing him with Ruhollah Khomeini. We get involved where it suits us financially and never it seems, on moral grounds.

How can we turn our backs on some murderous dictators whilst waging war on others?

:clap1: :clap1: :clap1:

[DemolitionRed]

Understanding them and basically saying that they have a reason for their actions is (imo) making excuses for them.. There's no "reason" for killing innocent people that have nothing to do with what's going on in the middle east.

Of course there is NO reason for killing innocent people and there is NO excuse either but why do YOU think they are doing this? This isn't one mad man going on a killing spree, if it were, we would just put this down to insanity. These are groups of people that meet up, plan and then carry out those plans. What reason could these people possibly have? Perhaps you don't think it matters but if we are ever going to find a solution to stopping these killing sprees, the reasons behind why they happen matter very much.

[bots]

That begs the question, why didn't we go into Cambodia when Pol Pot was on his mass genocide mission? Why aren't we getting involved with the Ituri conflict, the Kivu conflict or the internal conflict in Myanmar? Sudan and Mexico are two of the worlds most deadly countries because of corrupt governments but we don't seem to worry about them.

I fully understand the interference from the West (mainly America) for removing the Persian Shah and replacing him with Ruhollah Khomeini. We get involved where it suits us financially and never it seems, on moral grounds.

How can we turn our backs on some murderous dictators whilst waging war on others?

That's irrelevant to my point. You were advocating that it was the west that caused these problems by their invasion of Iraq, I was simply pointing out that these counties have behaved in the same way for many many years, long before we took action there

[JoshBB]

Understanding them and basically saying that they have a reason for their actions is (imo) making excuses for them.. There's no "reason" for killing innocent people that have nothing to do with what's going on in the middle east.

To solve a conflict, the most important thing is to try and understand what their reasoning is so that you can combat that and hopefully resolve the issue. For ISIS, they have a very extreme ideology that everyone must bide by their salafi jihadist religion without any compromise.. and so there isn't really much to negotiate.. it's clear the most important thing we must do is prevent radicalisation and stop people turning to ISIS.

Many people who have joined recently quote that they believe 'the west' is bombing their homes and hospitals. ISIS has taken the mistakes of our governments and made out that they were made in malicious intent, and so if we were to drop more bombs indiscriminately in the region I really don't believe it would help to prevent people turning there.

Also what doesn't help is the anti-immigrant sentiment in our country right now. People in dangerous syrian war-zones have ultimately three options: they can join isis, attempt to cross the water into europe, or they can be killed. And I don't think anyone wants the third option, so what we really need to do is be taking more refugees to prevent ISIS getting hold of more fighters and supporters.

This might be poorly written but I hope the point gets across nonetheless. We need to deradicalise, and even better prevent it happening in the first place. The answer is not to drop more bombs, and definitely not to just ignore the syrian civilians.

[Dollface]

Of course there is NO reason for killing innocent people and there is NO excuse either but why do YOU think they are doing this? This isn't one mad man going on a killing spree, if it were, we would just put this down to insanity. These are groups of people that meet up, plan and then carry out those plans. What reason could these people possibly have? Perhaps you don't think it matters but if we are ever going to find a solution to stopping these killing sprees, the reasons behind why they happen matter very much.

I think they're just evil people wanting to cause death. They don't just target the west, they murder people in their own countries too. Surely, if their reasons were "well their soldiers killed some of us so we're going to kill some of them" they would target a government building or something, not a concert full of innocent teenagers.

[MTVN]

I do think Western foreign policy is a part of the narrative: I don't think many would deny that it's largely been a disaster in the last decade. On the other hand there are obviously the internal issues like people have talked about and its clear that a lot of these countries have been melting pots of religious, ethnic and political tension for decades that have been waiting to boil over. That's clearly the case in Syria. As of now though the only force capable of defeating IS in the country is the Syrian army. Assad might be a brutal dictator but he can't be removed without the Syrian state crumbling so he needs to be a part of the political settlement, though obviously it can never go back to business as usual. Although the West won't like to admit it, the Russian strikes have already been far more successful in pushing back IS than Western ones have because the US refuses to target IS in areas where they're fighting the Syrian army, in case it looks like they're supporting Assad. There should be a coordinated effort from the US and Russia and we should obviously be a part of that as well. Its crazy that we're bombing IS in Iraq and then are unable to in Syria even though the border between the two countries now means absolutely nothing.

[Dollface]

To solve a conflict, the most important thing is to try and understand what their reasoning is so that you can combat that and hopefully resolve the issue. For ISIS, they have a very extreme ideology that everyone must bide by their salafi jihadist religion without any compromise.. and so there isn't really much to negotiate.. it's clear the most important thing we must do is prevent radicalisation and stop people turning to ISIS.

Many people who have joined recently quote that they believe 'the west' is bombing their homes and hospitals. ISIS has taken the mistakes of our governments and made out that they were made in malicious intent, and so if we were to drop more bombs indiscriminately in the region I really don't believe it would help to prevent people turning there.

Also what doesn't help is the anti-immigrant sentiment in our country right now. People in dangerous syrian war-zones have ultimately three options: they can join isis, attempt to cross the water into europe, or they can be killed. And I don't think anyone wants the third option, so what we really need to do is be taking more refugees to prevent ISIS getting hold of more fighters and supporters.

This might be poorly written but I hope the point gets across nonetheless. We need to deradicalise, and even better prevent it happening in the first place. The answer is not to drop more bombs, and definitely not to just ignore the syrian civilians.

That's my point. I've seem many posts on various sites basically saying that the west are to blame because if it wasn't for our governments and soldiers, ISIS wouldn't have a reason to do this. But that's just bull**** in my opinion.

[DemolitionRed]

That's irrelevant to my point. You were advocating that it was the west that caused these problems by their invasion of Iraq, I was simply pointing out that these counties have behaved in the same way for many many years, long before we took action there

But why didn't we leave them to it?
We didn't have a problem with Islamic terror groups in Europe before we got involved.

[DemolitionRed]

I think they're just evil people wanting to cause death. They don't just target the west, they murder people in their own countries too. Surely, if their reasons were "well their soldiers killed some of us so we're going to kill some of them" they would target a government building or something, not a concert full of innocent teenagers.

Yes, they are evil people and no, they don't just target the west. On the 12th of November, the day before the French attacks, two suicide bombers killed 43 people and wounded 239 more in the Lebanese capital in an ISIS-propagated murder. It got little news coverage because it was Muslims killing Muslims.

Truth is, the fundamental principles of Islam have been hijacked by extremists but if we try to defeat these radicalised monsters with militarily action we don't defeat the ideas intellectually, then the ideas will re-emerge which will only bring more mayhem to the West.

[the truth]

Close the borders as a short term measure until we can rally ourselves. Then work with the UN on bringing in our quota of GENUINE refugees from Syria, families first... young men, who make up the vast majority of migrants , entering without going via the UN, way waaaaay down the line.

Arrest and/or deport all known terrorists and sympathisers immediately. Today.

Include the Muslim community in what's going on, make it clear that we do not hold them responsible for people who are making a mockery of their faith and killing their brothers and sisters.

Give the security services the powers they need to keep us safe.

Stop all cuts on the military and the emergency services and increase their budget.

Reintroduce the death penalty for convicted terrorists.

Best reply so far imo
selling weapons to insane people is also an issue that is being ignored yet again

TODAY IT WAS CONFIRMED SOME OF THESE PARIS BOMBERS HAD FAKE PASSPORTS MADE IN SYRIA AND FOUND AT THE SCENE OF THE MASS MURDERS. PASSPORT CONTROL IN FRANCE ADMIT THAT WITH OPEN BORDERS AND MASS REFUGEE ARRIVALS. THAT THEY SIMPLY CANOT CHECK ALL PASSPORTS

in Short here, Farage was 100% right and all the left wing pro EU liberals were 100% wrong....open borders are an absolute disaster and imo its the left who have used them wrongly to call the right racists for being against open borders.

[the truth]

Yes, they are evil people and no, they don't just target the west. On the 12th of November, the day before the French attacks, two suicide bombers killed 43 people and wounded 239 more in the Lebanese capital in an ISIS-propagated murder. It got little news coverage because it was Muslims killing Muslims.

Truth is, the fundamental principles of Islam have been hijacked by extremists but if we try to defeat these radicalised monsters with militarily action we don't defeat the ideas intellectually, then the ideas will re-emerge which will only bring more mayhem to the West.

but the do gooders on the left have banned us having a full and frank debate about it....anyone who actually issues a genuine opinion is shouted down as a racist. the left have basically destroyed our freedom of speech , which is yet another horrific legacy of war monger blairs evil government

[Kizzy]

Nobody is interested in any talking unless it includes throwing bombs around and closing borders, which for me is both undiplomatic and reactionary.

Is there a link for the passport info please?

[DemolitionRed]

but the do gooders on the left have banned us having a full and frank debate about it....anyone who actually issues a genuine opinion is shouted down as a racist. the left have basically destroyed our freedom of speech , which is yet another horrific legacy of war monger blairs evil government

You mean on here?

[bots]

Nobody is interested in any talking unless it includes throwing bombs around and closing borders, which for me is both undiplomatic and reactionary.

Is there a link for the passport info please?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/blogs-trending-34835005

[JoshBB]

That's my point. I've seem many posts on various sites basically saying that the west are to blame because if it wasn't for our governments and soldiers, ISIS wouldn't have a reason to do this. But that's just bull**** in my opinion.

It's not our entire fault.. I agree with you. People who say that we are most likely feel angry towards the foreign policy but took their anger a bit too far to the point where it's just misplaced.

I remember reading somewhere that Al-Qaeda were originally trained to fight Russia but they became too powerful and we tried taking them out, they retaliated with 9/11.. sounds believable but the legitimacy of that story I have no idea because I don't know a lot of middle-eastern politics prior to 9/11 really.

[Drew.]

bring back the bunkers

[Kizzy]

Best reply so far imo
selling weapons to insane people is also an issue that is being ignored yet again

TODAY IT WAS CONFIRMED SOME OF THESE PARIS BOMBERS HAD FAKE PASSPORTS MADE IN SYRIA AND FOUND AT THE SCENE OF THE MASS MURDERS. PASSPORT CONTROL IN FRANCE ADMIT THAT WITH OPEN BORDERS AND MASS REFUGEE ARRIVALS. THAT THEY SIMPLY CANOT CHECK ALL PASSPORTS

in Short here, Farage was 100% right and all the left wing pro EU liberals were 100% wrong....open borders are an absolute disaster and imo its the left who have used them wrongly to call the right racists for being against open borders.

Hmmm...

'Some British Muslims are “conflicted in their loyalties” between the UK way of life and what some elements within their faith are telling them, Nigel Farage has said in a speech.

In an incendiary intervention in the wake of the Paris terror attacks, the Ukip leader said there must be a battle for hearts and minds within the Muslim population.

Farage said there was “a problem with some of the Muslim community in this country” and that research suggested that British Muslims experienced a “tremendous conflict and a split of loyalties”.

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/nov/16/nigel-farage-accuse-british-muslims-conflicting-loyalties

[Kizzy]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/blogs-trending-34835005

What's it made of titanium?

[the truth]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/blogs-the-papers-34824774

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-34150408

http://www.middleeasteye.net/news/syrian-passports-found-scene-paris-attacks-fakes-made-turkey-police-520642631

http://www.wsj.com/articles/paris-stadium-attacker-entered-europe-via-greece-1447698583

Paris Stadium Attacker Got to Europe Using Fake Syrian Passport

Man apparently posed as refugee, entered through Greek island of Leros

ATHENS—Mystery deepened over a Paris attacker who traveled to Europe via Greece and the Balkans, after French officials said Monday that the Syrian passport he had used was indeed a fake.

Authorities in France and Greece have said that fingerprints taken from the remains of a suicide bomber outside France’s national sports stadium, the Stade de France, match the prints of a man who entered Europe via the Aegean island of Leros on Oct. 3.






U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry calls the war against ISIS a "battle between civilization itself and barbarism," in comments outside the U.S. embassy in Paris during an unannounced visit Monday. Photo: Getty
.
Police on Leros registered the man under the identity in the passport he showed them: Ahmad AlMohammad, 25, from Syria. The same passport was found near the man’s body outside the stadium on Friday night.

Whoever the man was, he posed as one of the many refugees fleeing Syria’s war—including the violence of Islamic State—to enter Europe through its lightly controlled frontier in the Aegean Sea.



More

A Thriving Black Market for Fake Syrian Passports
Migrant Children Carry Hopes of Their Families
EU Migrant Distribution Will Spread Terrorism, Hungary’s Prime Minister Says
.
Greek authorities on islands such as Leros, Lesbos and Chios have confronted thousands of arrivals every day in recent months as refugees and other migrants make the short sea crossing from Turkey in inflatable boats. Short of staff and equipment, Greek police carry out only a simple procedure that involves taking people’s data and fingerprints, and sometimes asking them a few questions, before giving them permission to travel onward, deeper into Europe.

Upon his arrival in Leros, the Paris assailant was checked against police databases under his Syrian identity, Greek officials say. Nothing was found. Police on Leros didn’t spot that the passport was fake. A black market in Syrian passports has sprung up in Turkey as migrants try to gain the easiest possible entry into Europe, which has treated Syrian war refugees as more deserving of shelter in European Union countries than many other nationalities.

Greek authorities say the man using the name Ahmad AlMohammad took a ferry to the port of Piraeus, arriving on Oct. 8, before traveling north through the Balkans. Greece’s migration ministry said on Sunday that the man later reached Croatia. But after that, the trail appears to go cold. Officials in Austria, Germany, Italy and Hungary say they have no information about any man using that name entering their territory.

Adding further confusion, Serbia’s government has said a man by the same name entered its territory at the Presevo border crossing with Macedonia on Oct. 7—a date when Greek authorities say he was on a ferry.

Neither country’s authorities could explain the inconsistency. But Serbian media reported that another man carrying a passport with the same name and other details was arrested in the country on Saturday. Serbian authorities haven’t confirmed or denied those reports, which raised the possibility that multiple forged Syrian passports using the same name have been circulating.

All that is clear is that the man who landed in Greece got as far as Paris.

[Northern Monkey]

Best reply so far imo
selling weapons to insane people is also an issue that is being ignored yet again

TODAY IT WAS CONFIRMED SOME OF THESE PARIS BOMBERS HAD FAKE PASSPORTS MADE IN SYRIA AND FOUND AT THE SCENE OF THE MASS MURDERS. PASSPORT CONTROL IN FRANCE ADMIT THAT WITH OPEN BORDERS AND MASS REFUGEE ARRIVALS. THAT THEY SIMPLY CANOT CHECK ALL PASSPORTS

in Short here, Farage was 100% right and all the left wing pro EU liberals were 100% wrong....open borders are an absolute disaster and imo its the left who have used them wrongly to call the right racists for being against open borders.

:clap1: :clap1:

[Northern Monkey]

We know that a percentage of these muslims ARE terrorists.What kind of madness is it to open the flood gates to more of them?
The EU is a disaster and each country needs to start taking responsibility for its own security and not be dictated to by the dangerous EU dictators.The EU is a shambles.
These muslims need to be going to the many muslim countries in the area where they will integrate a hell of a lot better.Let them bomb the crap out of each other if that's what they want to do.Not us.

[Cherie]

We have a whole lot of home grown terrorist so I don't think closing our borders is the magic answer, the mastermind for the French attack was born in Belgium fgs, we need tighter controls though

[bots]

ISIS want us to close our borders to the Syrian people. That gives them a captive population that they can continue to terrorise. Clearly the biggest check should be for the use of bogus passports. Anyone that fits into the high risk profile should either be refused entry or subject to further verification before entry is permitted. It may take longer to process those coming in, but so be it.

[Cherie]

ISIS want us to close our borders to the Syrian people. That gives them a captive population that they can continue to terrorise. Clearly the biggest check should be for the use of bogus passports. Anyone that fits into the high risk profile should either be refused entry or subject to further verification before entry is permitted. It may take longer to process those coming in, but so be it.

:clap1:

[Ammi]

..I think that, whatever we do, whatever measures we take and whatever is put into place...as happened in Paris, we can't cover for every eventuality and if it's not this planned attack or that planned attack, then one planned attack at some point will not be thwarted, no matter how great our intelligence services are and I do believe they are...I understand also, some people's fears because of their children, I think we all feel that, it would be impossible not to but for me, my greatest fear with my own children would be that they lived their lives any differently and felt restricted in doing things that they wanted to do or became frightened to do them because of any potential possibilities....

[Cherie]

..I think that, whatever we do, whatever measures we take and whatever is put into place...as happened in Paris, we can't cover for every eventuality and if it's not this planned attack or that planned attack, then one planned attack at some point will not be thwarted, no matter how great our intelligence services are and I do believe they are...I understand also, some people's fears because of their children, I think we all feel that, it would be impossible not to but for me, my greatest fear with my own children would be that they lived their lives any differently and felt restricted in doing things that they wanted to do or became frightened to do them because of any potential possibilities....

I doubt that will happen, in the initial aftermath of any terrorist attack people feel naturally cautious, but life goes on, we could be affected by any number of things in our life time, ill heath, accidents, terrorism is just one more and it has always been there, it's nothing new, no matter how much the media try to whip up a story that "life has changed forever". New York being a case in point

[Kizzy]

That is the overarching message from the French too, that they will not allow their freedom and their liberty to be affected by terrorism.

[the truth]

the Russian plane shot down was a terrorist act, confirmed today
as for these borders, open borders across all of Europe is INSANE. Close them NOW. then take further steps to keep weeding out these people across europ. closed borders is not the answer or the solution, but its part of the solution and it makes it far far harder for them to move from place to place , with fake passports and going into hiding etc

[Ninastar]

I would make stricter policies about who enters our country, I'd give intelligence more power to act quickly, I'd ask other places of the world (US/UK/France/Russia/Germany etc) to help out a full scale invasion of taking out ISIS in all the countries they are known to kill/train/breed in.

[the truth]

I would make stricter policies about who enters our country, I'd give intelligence more power to act quickly, I'd ask other places of the world (US/UK/France/Russia/Germany etc) to help out a full scale invasion of taking out ISIS in all the countries they are known to kill/train/breed in.


yes indeed fine answers. I think your suggestions here have more chance of reducing these horrific attacks than bombing Syria. But how do we and the EU stop or even stall the free movement across borders ? when you say stricter what does that mean and how can it be applied? Perhaps more staff across all EU checkpoints is a start. The thought that lots of fake passports were strewn around the dead bodies in Paris makes my stomach turn. That must be stopped period and every single person must be vetted thoroughly. If they are remotely dodgy or if their passport cannot be verified they are NOT getting in

[Mystic Mock]

Is this a serious post?? You do realise that ISIS blow up mosques regularly.. right?

Actually no I did not.:laugh:

I would implement the latter plan then as I bet they don't kill their friends and family for a living, the thing is that we can't just take a diplomatic approach with ISIS like you can with countries like Saudi Arabia and Russia, we need to take drastic action to stop them from carrying on terrorising the West, and it might also hopefully teach them a lesson to not do it to their own people too as the Civilians in those countries might use the same threats.

Another idea that could be implemented is that any ISIS owned area has all of their food supplies destroyed, and maybe potentially some water supplies if they carry on blowing people up in the West.

[Mystic Mock]

That's irrelevant to my point. You were advocating that it was the west that caused these problems by their invasion of Iraq, I was simply pointing out that these counties have behaved in the same way for many many years, long before we took action there

As horrible as this sounds it was an internal problem within those countries, why did us and America have to get involved? It may sound selfish but I think that it's up to the people in these countries to stand up to these leaders than having interference from foreign countries getting involved.

So are we responsible for ISIS starting up and finding it easier to conquer Iraq after also hunting down the Syrian leader? Yes we are.

[bots]

As horrible as this sounds it was an internal problem within those countries, why did us and America have to get involved? It may sound selfish but I think that it's up to the people in these countries to stand up to these leaders than having interference from foreign countries getting involved.

So are we responsible for ISIS starting up and finding it easier to conquer Iraq after also hunting down the Syrian leader? Yes we are.

We get involved when it threatens our own national security.

[kirklancaster]

I would stop holding Washington's hand every time it decided to invade somewhere in the Middle East. There have been many wars we want no part of because there's little gain in getting involved but when it comes to oil/uranium rich deserts, we always want to join in with getting our hands dirty.

If terrorism from the Middle East is going to stop, we have to put an end to invading their lands because its our invasions that are the very bedrock of everything we are seeing unfold today in the West.

This is woefully incorrect Red.

What is the very bedrock of what we are seeing unfold in the West today is a century old agenda by a not so little faction called the Muslim Brotherhood.

Yes - The 'West' has committed more than one 'faux pas' in its meddling in the Middle East, and yes we have been duplicitous - none more so than with the Israel matter - but this is no more than one of many contributary factors and is certainly not THE cause of the appalling horrors which are shedding innocent blood and creating such misery in the West (and in the Middle East and elsewhere).

I will be glad when some British stop trying to blame us for all the world's ills and trying to get us to self-flagellate and wear hair shirts.

[Kizzy]

This is woefully incorrect Red.

What is the very bedrock of what we are seeing unfold in the West today is a century old agenda by a not so little faction called the Muslim Brotherhood.

Yes - The 'West' has committed more than one 'faux pas' in its meddling in the Middle East, and yes we have been duplicitous - none more so than with the Israel matter - but this is no more than one of many contributary factors and is certainly not THE cause of the appalling horrors which are shedding innocent blood and creating such misery in the West (and in the Middle East and elsewhere).

I will be glad when some British stop trying to blame us for all the world's ills and trying to get us to self-flagellate and wear hair shirts.

What does this mean? This theory is not unheard of that our involvement in the middle eastern conflicts have exacerbated situations you say so yourself...
DR suggests this is the reason for the surge in numbers and advancement of ISIS that is woeful but not incorrect.

[kirklancaster]

What does this mean? This theory is not unheard of that our involvement in the middle eastern conflicts have exacerbated situations you say so yourself...
DR suggests this is the reason for the surge in numbers and advancement of ISIS that is woeful but not incorrect.


What does this mean?

Again? I really don't know what to suggest to you to render it easier for you to understansd my posts. Perhaps Nightclasses in English Comprehension?

"This theory is not unheard of that our involvement in the middle eastern conflicts have exacerbated situations you say so yourself..."

Yes - I do "say so myself" so doesn't that render this part of your response superfluous? So why write it?

"DR suggests this is the reason for the surge in numbers and advancement of ISIS that is woeful but not incorrect."


I am confused as to the actual meaning of what you are trying to say above, because the sentence does not make sense. Sorry.

[Niamh.]

omg can you all just speak about the topic, it's not that heard to not discuss eachother, is it?

[the truth]

2 more of them killed today in a massive paris stand off

[DemolitionRed]

yes indeed fine answers. I think your suggestions here have more chance of reducing these horrific attacks than bombing Syria. But how do we and the EU stop or even stall the free movement across borders ? when you say stricter what does that mean and how can it be applied? Perhaps more staff across all EU checkpoints is a start. The thought that lots of fake passports were strewn around the dead bodies in Paris makes my stomach turn. That must be stopped period and every single person must be vetted thoroughly. If they are remotely dodgy or if their passport cannot be verified they are NOT getting in

We have to be careful not to jump to conclusions about these passports. They have already discovered that one of the suspects, who's passport they found, was one of the injured and an innocent bystander http://english.ahram.org.eg/NewsContent/1/64/166657/Egypt/Politics-/Egyptian-passport-found-at-Paris-stadium-belongs-t.aspx. Not all of the dead have been identified yet and it could well be that the Syrian passport belongs to a dead bystander rather than a terrorist.

There's a few more questions here and ones that is being scrutinised by investigative journalists. 1. Why would a terrorist remember to take his passport along on a death mission? and 2. How did a fake passport survive the blast that destroyed all other evidence? Its far more likely to of survived on someone who was standing close to the blast.

Another thing we need to understand and the thing that I find more worrying is, the majority of these terrorists were home grown, so why are we giving one, possibly two terrorists we suspect came in as refugees, so much attention?

[the truth]

We have to be careful not to jump to conclusions about these passports. They have already discovered that one of the suspects, who's passport they found, was one of the injured and an innocent bystander http://english.ahram.org.eg/NewsContent/1/64/166657/Egypt/Politics-/Egyptian-passport-found-at-Paris-stadium-belongs-t.aspx. Not all of the dead have been identified yet and it could well be that the Syrian passport belongs to a dead bystander rather than a terrorist.

There's a few more questions here and ones that is being scrutinised by investigative journalists. 1. Why would a terrorist remember to take his passport along on a death mission? and 2. How did a fake passport survive the blast that destroyed all other evidence? Its far more likely to of survived on someone who was standing close to the blast.

Another thing we need to understand and the thing that I find more worrying is, the majority of these terrorists were home grown, so why are we giving one, possibly two terrorists we suspect came in as refugees, so much attention?

passport control have admitted they cannot check each and every immigrant.....worse of all it makes it impossible to catch these people when they can hop across endless borders. this is exactly how ira bombers kept escaping northern Ireland, ask any solider who worked there

[lostalex]

maybe we should just kill them with kindness. that seems to be what many here are advocating.

[the truth]

hunt them down and patrol and close the borders, that's far more preferable and more likely to succeed than blowing up a whole country from 10,000 feet

[DemolitionRed]

maybe we should just kill them with kindness. that seems to be what many here are advocating.

I don't think anyone is suggesting we kill anyone with kindness. I looked back through this thread and couldn't find what you were suggesting? Some people, myself included, have suggested that getting more involved with the Syrian bombing won't work and will just create IS to grow in numbers and that more bombing campaigns will make this country less secure to terrorism.

I'm sure you have heard of 'MAD' It stands for 'Mutually Assured Destruction'

I punch you. you punch me.
I stab you. you stab me
I kill you. your friend kills me.
my friends kill your friends. your friends relatives kill my friends relatives
my country evaporates your country. your country evaporates mine

[user104658]

I think we all know who the REAL terrorists are.

... It's whoever messed up the quoting system in this thread! Terrorising my eyes and brain with confusion, you heinous bastards. Who said what? Will we ever know?? Not without scrolling back through the thread, and that's an affront to my western liberty.


On the topic of the thread, I have anew anti-terrorist masterplan!

My plan is to just roll with the punches and slowly shake my head at the sorry state if things, until either the world ends, or I die, and otherwise cease giving a crap about any of it.

Let's face it, the world is screwed. We (collectively, humanity) went seriously wrong somewhere and broke the damn thing in a thousand different ways. In the not too distant future it's going to crumple like a soggy cardboard box. Nothing we can do about that, not much point worrying about it. I'm holding out hope that I'll get to creak my way through existence before it gets too bad, but otherwise, I think I'm just going to sit back and observe, in between gaming and watching crappy TV. I mean seriously. Let's face it. This whole ISIS thing is becoming like a stuck record. It's frankly getting ****ing boring.

[Niamh.]

OMG I know right TS :fist: Sort it out ffs

ETA : I mean about the quoting btw

[Kizzy]

Existentialists need to think about why they're here! Not why others don't want them here or how to stay here! :fist:

[user104658]

OMG I know right TS :fist: Sort it out ffs

ETA : I mean about the quoting btw
Yes, I am a man of many talents but I think bringing an end to terrorism is probably beyond my ability. Although to be fair, I haven't actually tried...

To Syria! Away!

[user104658]

Existentialists need to think about why they're here! Not why others don't want them here or how to stay here! :fist:
I'm an extinctionist so I get to just muse over the fact that we're all doomed, when it might happen, and in how many different ways.

[Niamh.]

Yes, I am a man of many talents but I think bringing an end to terrorism is probably beyond my ability. Although to be fair, I haven't actually tried...

To Syria! Away!

I reckon you'd sort it out no bother tbh TS

[Kizzy]

'The founder of Islam - Muhammud himself - carried out Jihad 1400 years ago, incorporated it into the Quran, where it is mentioned over 160 times (in my version of the Qran it is) and it has been an intrinsic part of Islam ever since, and virtually solely responsible for its unparalleled spread across the globe.'

Thinking about this, if this were true how have we in the west lived cheek by jowl with Muslim communities for centuries?

As I said on another thread all ancient texts have questionable content which doesn't gel with our civilised modern perception of religion and or morality.

'Everything has an appointed season, and there is a time for every matter under the heaven.
A time to give birth and a time to die; a time to plant and a time to uproot that which is planted.
A time to kill and a time to heal; a time to break and a time to build.
A time to weep and a time to laugh; a time of wailing and a time of dancing.
A time to cast stones and a time to gather stones; a time to embrace and a time to refrain from embracing.
A time to seek and a time to lose; a time to keep and a time to cast away.
A time to rend and a time to sew; a time to be silent and a time to speak.
A time to love and a time to hate; a time for war and a time for peace.'

[bots]

'The founder of Islam - Muhammud himself - carried out Jihad 1400 years ago, incorporated it into the Quran, where it is mentioned over 160 times (in my version of the Qran it is) and it has been an intrinsic part of Islam ever since, and virtually solely responsible for its unparalleled spread across the globe.'

Thinking about this, if this were true how have we in the west lived cheek by jowl with Muslim communities for centuries?

As I said on another thread all ancient texts have questionable content which doesn't gel with our civilised modern perception of religion and or morality.

'Everything has an appointed season, and there is a time for every matter under the heaven.
A time to give birth and a time to die; a time to plant and a time to uproot that which is planted.
A time to kill and a time to heal; a time to break and a time to build.
A time to weep and a time to laugh; a time of wailing and a time of dancing.
A time to cast stones and a time to gather stones; a time to embrace and a time to refrain from embracing.
A time to seek and a time to lose; a time to keep and a time to cast away.
A time to rend and a time to sew; a time to be silent and a time to speak.
A time to love and a time to hate; a time for war and a time for peace.'

I thought that was an original by Cat Stevens ... :fist:

[Kizzy]

I thought that was an original by Cat Stevens ... :fist:

No, you were bopping the night away to king Solomon.

[DemolitionRed]

'The founder of Islam - Muhammud himself - carried out Jihad 1400 years ago, incorporated it into the Quran, where it is mentioned over 160 times (in my version of the Qran it is) and it has been an intrinsic part of Islam ever since, and virtually solely responsible for its unparalleled spread across the globe.'

Thinking about this, if this were true how have we in the west lived cheek by jowl with Muslim communities for centuries?

As I said on another thread all ancient texts have questionable content which doesn't gel with our civilised modern perception of religion and or morality.

'Everything has an appointed season, and there is a time for every matter under the heaven.
A time to give birth and a time to die; a time to plant and a time to uproot that which is planted.
A time to kill and a time to heal; a time to break and a time to build.
A time to weep and a time to laugh; a time of wailing and a time of dancing.
A time to cast stones and a time to gather stones; a time to embrace and a time to refrain from embracing.
A time to seek and a time to lose; a time to keep and a time to cast away.
A time to rend and a time to sew; a time to be silent and a time to speak.
A time to love and a time to hate; a time for war and a time for peace.'

The Quran has been misrepresented throughout its history and so has the bible.
We will always get cafeteria Christians and Muslims picking out verses to support their cause or biaseses.

The Old and New Testament talk about killing and war and so does the Quran
http://www.gotquestions.org/war-Bible.html
http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/quran/023-violence.htm
and because these scriptures were written a long time ago, it leaves it all a bit open ended. These two books are frayed around the edges but they are still used to determine who lives and who dies.

[Kizzy]

Kizzy;8298637] "Apologists... That is a very interesting word, it for me anyway denigrates anyone who attempts to see the issue from all angles."

For you, the word 'Apologist' might do so - that is hardly surprising to me - but I USE the word in its CORRECT meaning; to define 'anyone who defends the actions of 'something' which is controversial' and when I deliberately precede the word 'Apologist' with the word 'Terrorist', then my use of the term 'Terrorist Apologist' means EXACTLY what I intend it to mean - ANYONE WHO DEFENDS TERRORISM'.

A 'Terrorist Apologist' means exactly that, and does NOT mean 'anyone who attempts to see the issue from all angles'.

Not in my logical, rational world anyway.

"'such is the cost of war' is not an adequate response to the severity of the reality of war it simplifies the horror of it, and the ramifications following any military involvement."

As everyone on here knows - I am no disciple of brevity, because, by definition, 'Serious Debates' cannot usually be satisfactorily addressed by a few 'sound bites' or copy-pasta.

However, there are occasions when it is simply not feasible to extend already lengthy posts or response posts by expounding side points or incidental issues of which - one assumes - the reader already has at least cursory knowledge.

So to accuse me of not 'giving an adequate response' etc in my comment on the 'side' issue of war, is frankly mere disingenuous deflection and 'straw clutching'

"It's not stupidity personified to question whether the west inadvertently made a bad situation worse due to said involvement, in a rational, logical world that's what people do they look at all the variables."

With respect, you are once again deliberately and dishonestly misrepresenting what I said, because I DID NOT state what you claim I stated above, I ACTUALLY clearly stated:(That our intervention in) "Iraq was WRONG. Blair and Bush were WRONG, but they are but contributary factors and to claim that any mistakes which the WEST makes is RESPONSIBLE for ISIS or any other type of terrorism is stupidity personified."

What I actually said is so very easily verified on here by anyone who wishes to check and it bears NO resemblance to your ridiculous claim of what I said. But hey, I am finally getting used to your misrepresentations as a cover to obscure the fact you have no real argument - as tiresome as it is.

"There are in your analogies a consequence, had the girl and the lady been better prepared or taken an alternative route the outcome would have perhaps been different for them... Why is it so wrong to suggest that in reference to our naked streaking across Afghanistan or spilling our cash all over Syria?"

Again you illustrate by your confused and confusing text above, that you simply DO NOT UNDERSTAND what has been said, because the WHOLE point of my analogies which you allude to, is that; while both the young girl and the old woman can be said to have CONTRIBUTED to the terrible outcomes by their "ERROR OF JUDGEMENTS" - NEITHER CAN BE ACCUSED OF CAUSING THOSE OUTCOMES, and it is wrong to accuse them of such instead of laying the REAL blame were it so obviously belongs -- AT THE FEET OF THE EVIL PERPETRATORS.

Which is the same as in RED blaming the WEST instead of the evil twisted terrorist butchers.

In my logical, rational world anyway.

Now I am no more personally attacking you than you have me. I am merely responding, once again, to a response of yours to a post of mine which was NOT directed to you - a post in which you once again misrepresent and distort the truth of what I said.

It is futile to discuss if we do not start from a premise of truth.

- ANYONE WHO DEFENDS TERRORISM'.

And yet nobody has....

[Kizzy]

OFFS:

I write:

'The founder of Islam - Muhammud himself - carried out Jihad 1400 years ago, incorporated it into the Quran, where it is mentioned over 160 times (in my version of the Qran it is) and it has been an intrinsic part of Islam ever since, and virtually solely responsible for its unparalleled spread across the globe.'

To which your response is:

"Thinking about this, if this were true how have we in the west lived cheek by jowl with Muslim communities for centuries?"


Are you REALLY being SERIOUS? "if this were true"???????????????

Why don't you research and learn your subject matter before continuously dissing and contadicting with, and sniping at, the perfectably legitimate well-intentioned posts of those members who do know their subject matter?

OF COURSE IT'S TRUE.

As for the rest of your post - What the hell does it mean?


I live next to Bradford, as have my family for generations.... how then have we never been the target of any jihad?
I'm not dissing you, I'm asking for an explanation, the rest of my post was scripture.
It's Muhammad btw.

[user104658]

How can ANYONE misrepresent the fact that Muhammud INITIATED JIHAD, incorporated it into the QRAN, and that MUSLIMS carried it out for 1400 years?

Are you DENYING EVERY SINGLE COPY of the QURAN itself?

Are you denying the HISTORICAL RECORDS of MUSLIMS themselves?

This is yet more sad deflection, and I for one would be pleased if you merely addressed my post. It was you after all who said you would welcome anyone debating with you.
To play devil's abracadabra... Perhaps people can "misrepresent" that fact in exactly the same way that members of every other religion misrepresent, reinterpret, or outright deny large chunks of their holy texts which are just as out there bat**** bonkers?

You know, like the Christians who want to pretend that it's suddenly OK to be gay or that we shouldn't kill adulterers, or that there aren't countless examples of God being petty, vengeful and violent, etc., or that there hasn't been oceans of blood spilled in the name of Christianity, When it's all quite clearly written there in black and white? :shrug:

Not that I'm actually defending the Quran here or any other aspect of Islam or any other religion... I'm just saying, there's this hilarious hypocrisy afoot here in the West when people bleat "look! Look what it says in this evil Muslim book!!" and insist upon taking every word literally, whilst at the same time insisting blue-in-the-face that their own violent little book is "open to interpretation" :joker:

[Niamh.]

To play devil's abracadabra... Perhaps people can "misrepresent" that fact in exactly the same way that members of every other religion misrepresent, reinterpret, or outright deny large chunks of their holy texts which are just as out there bat**** bonkers?

You know, like the Christians who want to pretend that it's suddenly OK to be gay or that we shouldn't kill adulterers, or that there aren't countless examples of God being petty, vengeful and violent, etc., or that there hasn't been oceans of blood spilled in the name of Christianity, When it's all quite clearly written there in black and white? :shrug:

Not that I'm actually defending the Quran here or any other aspect of Islam or any other religion... I'm just saying, there's this hilarious hypocrisy afoot here in the West when people bleat "look! Look what it says in this evil Muslim book!!" and insist upon taking every word literally, whilst at the same time insisting blue-in-the-face that their own violent little book is "open to interpretation" :joker:

:worship:

[Kizzy]

To play devil's abracadabra... Perhaps people can "misrepresent" that fact in exactly the same way that members of every other religion misrepresent, reinterpret, or outright deny large chunks of their holy texts which are just as out there bat**** bonkers?

You know, like the Christians who want to pretend that it's suddenly OK to be gay or that we shouldn't kill adulterers, or that there aren't countless examples of God being petty, vengeful and violent, etc., or that there hasn't been oceans of blood spilled in the name of Christianity, When it's all quite clearly written there in black and white? :shrug:

Not that I'm actually defending the Quran here or any other aspect of Islam or any other religion... I'm just saying, there's this hilarious hypocrisy afoot here in the West when people bleat "look! Look what it says in this evil Muslim book!!" and insist upon taking every word literally, whilst at the same time insisting blue-in-the-face that their own violent little book is "open to interpretation" :joker:

Good luck, been trying to hammer that point home for days :laugh:

[Niamh.]

Closed for cleaning....yet again people just can't stop discussing eachother instead of the topic of the thread

[Niamh.]

That's the second time I've had to clean this thread, next time I close it I'm not reopening it

[Cherie]

To play devil's abracadabra... Perhaps people can "misrepresent" that fact in exactly the same way that members of every other religion misrepresent, reinterpret, or outright deny large chunks of their holy texts which are just as out there bat**** bonkers?

You know, like the Christians who want to pretend that it's suddenly OK to be gay or that we shouldn't kill adulterers, or that there aren't countless examples of God being petty, vengeful and violent, etc., or that there hasn't been oceans of blood spilled in the name of Christianity, When it's all quite clearly written there in black and white? :shrug:

Not that I'm actually defending the Quran here or any other aspect of Islam or any other religion... I'm just saying, there's this hilarious hypocrisy afoot here in the West when people bleat "look! Look what it says in this evil Muslim book!!" and insist upon taking every word literally, whilst at the same time insisting blue-in-the-face that their own violent little book is "open to interpretation" :joker:

:clap1:

[kirklancaster]

To play devil's abracadabra... Perhaps people can "misrepresent" that fact in exactly the same way that members of every other religion misrepresent, reinterpret, or outright deny large chunks of their holy texts which are just as out there bat**** bonkers?

You know, like the Christians who want to pretend that it's suddenly OK to be gay or that we shouldn't kill adulterers, or that there aren't countless examples of God being petty, vengeful and violent, etc., or that there hasn't been oceans of blood spilled in the name of Christianity, When it's all quite clearly written there in black and white? :shrug:

Not that I'm actually defending the Quran here or any other aspect of Islam or any other religion... I'm just saying, there's this hilarious hypocrisy afoot here in the West when people bleat "look! Look what it says in this evil Muslim book!!" and insist upon taking every word literally, whilst at the same time insisting blue-in-the-face that their own violent little book is "open to interpretation" :joker:

The question of violence within the Holy Books of all religions in general has NOTHING whatsover to do with the subjects under 'debate' (Lol ) on this thread - which is specifically Islamic terrorism and Jihad - and if you want to debate Christianity or the contents of the Judeo Christian bible, why don't you start a seperate thread and I will gladly contribute to it.

We have, however, debated/discussed/argued the above subjects several times on other threads but I am willing to retread that path if you like.



The violence in the 3,500 year old Old Testament is 'close ended' violence which is 'of its time' and 'era specific'.

Where today are there any 'Amorites' or 'Perizites' for Christians or Jews to go out and slay?

The Quran, however contains over 160 commands for its followers to go out and behead and slay, in addition to other commands to abduct and sell into slavery.

Whilst there have been, and still are, inhuman extremists who claim to be 'Christian', just as there have always been, and still are, inhuman extremists who are atheists, in light of the terrible atrocities being perpetrated over most of the globe by inhuman extremists who claim to be Muslim, it is absolutely ridiculous and infantile to jocularly suggest that any person of other faiths who condemn it or even discuss it, are hypocrites.

[the truth]

The new testament is a whole world away from the old and this is where Jesus came in to bring us some much needed enlightenment. However The wrathful side of God you mention is present in the old testament. The commandments in the Bible there are all about honour and love, not slaying masses of people.

[DemolitionRed]

The new testament is a whole world away from the old and this is where Jesus came in to bring us some much needed enlightenment. However The wrathful side of God you mention is present in the old testament. The commandments in the Bible there are all about honour and love, not slaying masses of people.

Throughout history, both Christians and Muslims have brought about great wars and massacres in the name of religion. The New Testament doesn't get off scot free; the the Catholics sent Buddhists to the death camps during and after the Vietnam war, I don't remember how many were murdered but I know it was over a million. It wasn't so long ago a dictator singled out and murdered six million Jews in the name of Christianity. Although Hitler himself despised religion, religion is what he used to turn his country against the Jews.
http://www.catholiceducation.org/en/controversy/common-misconceptions/was-hitler-a-christian.html

Let it be said, I condemn no religion. People spend their lives studying and living their faiths in peaceful harmony with their everyday life. Others take certain scriptures and twist them until they are only recognizable by their own evil congregation.

Just as some people should never touch alcohol, some should never touch religion.

[Anaesthesia]

Throughout history, both Christians and Muslims have brought about great wars and massacres in the name of religion.

Let it be said, I condemn no religion. People spend their lives studying and living their faiths in peaceful harmony with their everyday life. Others take certain scriptures and twist them until they are only recognizable by their own evil congregation.

Just as some people should never touch alcohol, some should never touch religion.

Sorry to cut your post Red, because I thought it was great. Likewise, although mostly a watcher myself, I have seen people on here with wonderfully brilliant ideas and opinions; young or old, black or white; this religion or that religion, left or right...everyone is welcome here, this forum I mean. Even when you all get ****ty with each other ;)

My point is, we are all one people against these subhumans: My masterplan would be for everyone, differences put aside, to unite against this THING, bring in the refugees with proven security, the genuine muslims are already against IS. Show your humanity to people who want nothing more than to dissociate themselves from these who claim their acions are for Islam. The huge ISIS thing is territory control and psychological warfare... the Paris / Baghdad / Turkey / Insert next country / attacks create a climate of fear.

Take a look, we are all one side against ISIS. The sooner we start working with that recognition, the sooner we (meaning, the entire rest of the non-IS world) can blast the fckin hell out of ISIS occupied territory (let's take out Boko Harum too) and deal with what's left by our own means.

Just let the poor bast***s who are trying to get out for genuine reasons, get out. And, as is frequently said, families first.

[Anaesthesia]

I'm obviously no hippie...but look at this picture below in light of the beautiful father / son interview in the Paris attacks thread; les fleurs et les bougies..sont pour nous proteger [sic]
http://i66.tinypic.com/hsopkx.jpg

[Kizzy]

The question of violence within the Holy Books of all religions in general has NOTHING whatsover to do with the subjects under 'debate' (Lol ) on this thread - which is specifically Islamic terrorism and Jihad - and if you want to debate Christianity or the contents of the Judeo Christian bible, why don't you start a seperate thread and I will gladly contribute to it.

We have, however, debated/discussed/argued the above subjects several times on other threads but I am willing to retread that path if you like.



The violence in the 3,500 year old Old Testament is 'close ended' violence which is 'of its time' and 'era specific'.

Where today are there any 'Amorites' or 'Perizites' for Christians or Jews to go out and slay?

The Quran, however contains over 160 commands for its followers to go out and behead and slay, in addition to other commands to abduct and sell into slavery.

Whilst there have been, and still are, inhuman extremists who claim to be 'Christian', just as there have always been, and still are, inhuman extremists who are atheists, in light of the terrible atrocities being perpetrated over most of the globe by inhuman extremists who claim to be Muslim, it is absolutely ridiculous and infantile to jocularly suggest that any person of other faiths who condemn it or even discuss it, are hypocrites.

The subject of the thread is how you would deal with terrorism if you were leader of the US or EU... Nothing to do with Islam or Jihad :shrug:

[empire]

well we have two paths to follow, one, we go for the left wing policy of pandering to religious extremist nutters with diversity, and enforce religious tolarance laws that make sure you can't fight back with your words, or we go the other path of protecting your country, and also are values and culture identity, and make sure that are patriotism keeps are citizens alive, we need a tough right party that will put their countries citizens first and safe, no more softy softy red pro terroist talk, its time we threw out people who hate the west and don't want to be part of are culture, first lets kick out the extremist preachers, who suck of the tax payers money,

[Anaesthesia]

well we have two paths to follow, one, we go for the left wing policy of pandering to religious extremist nutters with diversity, and enforce religious tolarance laws that make sure you can't fight back with your words, or we go the other path of protecting your country, and also are values and culture identity, and make sure that are patriotism keeps are citizens alive, we need a tough right party that will put their countries citizens first and safe, no more softy softy red pro terroist talk, its time we threw out people who hate the west and don't want to be part of are culture, first lets kick out the extremist preachers, who suck of the tax payers money,

No we don't have only two paths, and insular thinking will never achieve anything.