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

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.

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.

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.

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.

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

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/NewsCont...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

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

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

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

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.

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

ETA : I mean about the quoting btw

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

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'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.

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

'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:

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

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/qu...3-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.