[MTVN]

Those 17 dead are at least owed our understanding, our appreciation that the rise of Islamic extremist groups is an incredibly complex phenomenon and - like it or not - Western foreign policy is a part of that phenomenon. Western involvement in the Middle East and the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan are a part of this story. As Robert Fisk was writing the other day, the bloody history of French-Algerian relations are a part of this story. Pretending it isn't will get us nowhere. Claiming that its tantamount to victim blaming to try and analyse the context behind these attacks will get us nowhere.

To quote from that article by Fisk:

Maybe all newspaper and television reports should carry a “history corner”, a little reminder that nothing – absolutely zilch – happens without a past. Massacres, bloodletting, fury, sorrow, police hunts (“widening” or “narrowing” as sub-editors wish) take the headlines. Always it’s the “who” and the “how” – but rarely the “why”. Take the crime against humanity in Paris this week – the words “atrocity” and “barbarity” somehow diminish the savagery of this act – and its immediate aftermath.

We know the victims: journalists, cartoonists, cops. And how they were killed. Masked gunmen, Kalashnikov automatic rifles, ruthless, almost professional nonchalance. And the answer to “why” was helpfully supplied by the murderers. They wanted to avenge “the Prophet” for Charlie Hebdo’s irreverent and (for Muslims) highly offensive cartoons. And of course, we must all repeat the rubric: nothing – nothing ever – could justify these cruel acts of mass murder. And no, the killers cannot call on history to justify their crimes.

But there’s an important context that somehow got left out of the story this week, the “history corner” that many Frenchmen as well as Algerians prefer to ignore: the bloody 1954-62 struggle of an entire people for freedom against a brutal imperial regime, a prolonged war which remains the foundational quarrel of Arabs and French to this day.

So yes, nothing can justify these attacks. There is not a shred of responsibility that the cartoonists need to take for the way that they were gunned down in cold blood. ISIS and Al Qaeda are murdering scum who deserve no sympathy. No one has sought to deny any of that. But let us not allow it to wilfully blind ourselves to the wider picture, a picture that is far bigger than three gunmen and some offensive cartoons. Let us not allow it to prevent us from trying to comprehend the true extent of the threat, it's character, it's motivation and it's background. Otherwise we will never be able to confront it, otherwise we will just feed the perpetual cycle of violence.

Edit - was posting the same time as TS above - I share his sentiments

[user104658]

Originally Posted by MTVN

So yes, nothing can justify these attacks. There is not a shred of responsibility that the cartoonists need to take for the way that they were gunned down in cold blood. ISIS and Al Qaeda are murdering scum who deserve no sympathy. No one has sought to deny any of that. But let us not allow it to wilfully blind ourselves to the wider picture

I've said this quite a few times over the last few days but, apparently, it's still being a sympathiser.

I guess I look at it as being like this but on a grander scale: The majority of notable psychopathic serial killers have seriously messed up backstories. Yes, they are monsters. Yes, they are unfathomably dangerous, yes they have killed innocent people and destroyed other innocent lives in the process and yes, they should almost always be put down like dogs for it because they are indeed "unfixable monsters". But does that mean that we should entirely ignore their backgrounds - childhoods filled with extreme abuse (often sexual, usually at the hands of their own parents) that broke and twisted them into what they became. Does that inspire sympathy? In some, maybe. For me, not really. They became what they became. Regardless: it should NEVER be ignored, because understanding and acknowledging what CREATES monsters is what will allow us to stop them from being created in the first place. Countless books have been written on the psychologies of these people. And it has positively impacted how we care for and protect young people.

There is absolutely no point in wiping terrorists from the face of the planet whilst failing completely to acknowledge what the circumstances were that created such hatred in the first place. We have to examine it and acknowledge the past to ensure that history stops repeating itself. What baffles me, is the number of people in threads like this who would cry "none of that matters a jot!" and ignore it completely in favour of unbridled rage and revenge. Baffles me, but doesn't surprise me.

[kirklancaster]

Originally Posted by MTVN

Those 17 dead are at least owed our understanding, our appreciation that the rise of Islamic extremist groups is an incredibly complex phenomenon and - like it or not - Western foreign policy is a part of that phenomenon. Western involvement in the Middle East and the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan are a part of this story. As Robert Fisk was writing the other day, the bloody history of French-Algerian relations are a part of this story. Pretending it isn't will get us nowhere. Claiming that its tantamount to victim blaming to try and analyse the context behind these attacks will get us nowhere.

To quote from that article by Fisk:



So yes, nothing can justify these attacks. There is not a shred of responsibility that the cartoonists need to take for the way that they were gunned down in cold blood. ISIS and Al Qaeda are murdering scum who deserve no sympathy. No one has sought to deny any of that. But let us not allow it to wilfully blind ourselves to the wider picture, a picture that is far bigger than three gunmen and some offensive cartoons. Let us not allow it to prevent us from trying to comprehend the true extent of the threat, it's character, it's motivation and it's background. Otherwise we will never be able to confront it, otherwise we will just feed the perpetual cycle of violence.

Edit - was posting the same time as TS above - I share his sentiments

No, sorry MTVN - you are posting from a totally different perspective from T.S and certain others, though T.S does keep changing his stance.

I agree with most of what you say and I genuinely respect your passion and belief in what you are saying - it is patent.

[Kizzy]

Originally Posted by kirklancaster

No, sorry MTVN - you are posting from a totally different perspective from T.S and certain others, though T.S does keep changing his stance.

I agree with most of what you say and I genuinely respect your passion and belief in what you are saying - it is patent.

Stick to your own perspective and let others figure out where they stand on theirs maybe?
I happen to agree with MTVN as it is a much more honest and pragmatic view than many, the age of denial and belligerence is over.

[kirklancaster]

Originally Posted by Kizzy

Stick to your own perspective and let others figure out where they stand on theirs maybe?
I happen to agree with MTVN as it is a much more honest and pragmatic view than many, the age of denial and belligerence is over.

Are you telling me that I cannot have an opinion on another poster's perspective?

Don't even try giving me orders.

[Kizzy]

Originally Posted by kirklancaster

Are you telling me that I cannot have an opinion on another poster's perspective?

Don't even try giving me orders.

Are you ordering me not to give you orders?..

[user104658]

Originally Posted by kirklancaster

No, sorry MTVN - you are posting from a totally different perspective from T.S and certain others, though T.S does keep changing his stance.

Not entirely sure what qualifies you to decide which perspective someone else is posting from... but anyhoo...

Whilst my posts may at times be "babbling" (I prefer "rambling", personally) and a couple of the things I say may appear to be contradictory, e.g. trying to understand the perspective of Muslim communities and what turns people to terrorism whilst similtaneously not giving a **** if they're wiped out in nuclear hellfire, this is only because I often post a "train of thought" rather than a focused and referenced thesis. Ultimately, this is a chat forum and not an academic discussion. My exact thoughts and opinions on many issues are not 100% nailed down and do occasionally alter slightly, and don't have the quality of steely obstinance that yours appear to (perhaps that comes with age?), but I do feel comfortable in assuring you that my "stance" on this issue, broadly, has not "changed" at all.