Terror Attack: 130 Dead in Paris

[Idaho]

So let us stop here. Rather tan agonise over what we've done in the past, which we can't do squat to correct, as our every action is considered wrong in some way or other, we should just raise our borders to the Muslim world, which is where most of the trouble comes from. What they do in their world is their business, and none of ours. If anyone then chooses to become part of that world, let them; just don't allow them back. I was raised a liberal, and in most respects I remain one, and I opposed the attack on Iraq. But I'm tired of (far right) Muslims taking offence at our every action, and bleeding heart liberals telling me to be guilty about things I had nothing to do with. I enjoy the many cultures that London contains, and I wouldn't want to homogenise it. But there are some positions that are antithetical to the liberal world that I love. Islamism is one.

All I see here is emotional response. Why do you give a crap what right wing Muslims get offended by? And who is asking you to feel guilty?

Look at the situation rationally. What are it's causes? Then start to work out what needs to be done. The same knee jerk responses are coming out from the same mouths. Insanity is doing the same thing again and again while expecting different results.

[Pannonian]

All I see here is emotional response. Why do you give a crap what right wing Muslims get offended by? And who is asking you to feel guilty?

Look at the situation rationally. What are it's causes? Then start to work out what needs to be done. The same knee jerk responses are coming out from the same mouths. Insanity is doing the same thing again and again while expecting different results.

The causes are radicalised Muslims, often homegrown, but usually passing through radicalisation centres in Pakistan or other places abroad. Once they get to this stage, there is no re-assimilation possible. So cut the trouble at the stage where they get to be radicalised abroad, and cut the sources of radicalisation at home by restricting what can be preached here, mainly by restricting who can preach here.

As for why I should give a crap what right wing Muslims get offended by, it's because it's the trigger by which already radicalised Muslims find the excuse to perform or plan their latest atrocity. There is no rhyme and reason to cutting the sources of offence for such, because it's already got to the stage where they're looking for an excuse, any excuse, to perform their act. Bleeding heart liberals point to what we do or don't do abroad as why we should feel guilty about provoking such actions, but there is no escaping the route down which these idiots have already decided to go. Whatever we do or don't do, is pointed to as evidence of our guilt, both by these radicalised Muslims (and their allies abroad), and the bleeding heart liberals at home. As such, these arguments are practically irrelevant. They do nothing to stop these acts. The only way to stop them is to stop the radicalisation process in the first place, or to keep their adherents from coming here.

[Idaho]

Do you suppose that it is realistically possible to conduct a widespread war across a large area of the globe, while keeping your own local corner of the world free from any war like events?

[Pannonian]

Do you suppose that it is realistically possible to conduct a widespread war across a large area of the globe, while keeping your own local corner of the world free from any war like events?

I'd prefer us not to conduct any war at all. I was against the Iraq war, as I stated above. I was against intervention in Syria. I am against intervention in Ukraine. And everywhere else where people are appealing to our sense of "right". The Iraqis, Syrians, and everyone else can do as they like in their patch of the world; I care not. And in return, I wish that they would not trouble us with their issues; I care not. Do something, as in Iraq, and the west is criticised for doing something. Do nothing, as in Syria, and the west is criticised for doing nothing. I favour doing nothing, and blocking their nationals from entering our land, as at least that would be cheaper and would get the same result of them hating us.

[Idaho]

I think you're being emotional and resorting to absolutes.

You are seeing everything in terms of us and them. Neither of which are remotely simple and cohesive groups. The majority of "them" have no interest whatsoever in "us". They get on with their lives.

Warzones generate these groups. Mujahaddin were generated by the Russian afghan war. Taleban by the subsequent civil war. AQ from a mix of the two plus Saudi political oppression. Mahdi army and IS by the Iraq war. Now the Syrian war creates and proliferated more.

Guns, training, propaganda, grievance. Those are the soil and growing conditions for terror attacks. The simplest way to generate all is to create Warzones.

[Husar]

Is it really any surprise that they are targeting Paris?
They blew up a plane with 224 Russians and people asked "Will Putin become more barbarian now?"
Now they killed 150 people in Paris and all of Facebook is changing profile pictures and crying "We are not affected at all".
If I were a terrorist, I'd plan my next attack in Paris to see all the people I hate cry...

[Montmorency]

Is it really any surprise that they are targeting Paris?
They blew up a plane with 224 Russians and people asked "Will Putin become more barbarian now?"
Now they killed 150 people in Paris and all of Facebook is changing profile pictures and crying "We are not affected at all".
If I were a terrorist, I'd plan my next attack in Paris to see all the people I hate cry...

They should target Berlin so that Merkel can use the incident to take on certain emergency powers...

[Montmorency]

Guns, training, propaganda, grievance. Those are the soil and growing conditions for terror attacks. The simplest way to generate all is to create Warzones.

The irony, and the core of the problem, is that the West does not have a monopoly on war.

Strike is correct to call Islamism a "contagion". At this point there is nothing we can do other than to let the violence run its course.

The point is that you can't impose peace. Peace is the will of the people. You have to ACCEPT peace.

[Kagemusha]

The irony, and the core of the problem, is that the West does not have a monopoly on war.

Strike is correct to call Islamism a "contagion". At this point there is nothing we can do other than to let the violence run its course.

The point is that you can't impose peace. Peace is the will of the people. You have to ACCEPT peace.

Let the violence run its course? Isis are saying that they want to decapitate Obama at the white house, besides using pre puberty girls as sex slaves, burning people alive as witches, chopping off hands for use of cellphones and using ten year old child soldiers as executioners in the videos and you think that they are like ill behaving children whom be nice once again after they have had their fun?

[Pannonian]

I think you're being emotional and resorting to absolutes.

You are seeing everything in terms of us and them. Neither of which are remotely simple and cohesive groups. The majority of "them" have no interest whatsoever in "us". They get on with their lives.

Warzones generate these groups. Mujahaddin were generated by the Russian afghan war. Taleban by the subsequent civil war. AQ from a mix of the two plus Saudi political oppression. Mahdi army and IS by the Iraq war. Now the Syrian war creates and proliferated more.

Guns, training, propaganda, grievance. Those are the soil and growing conditions for terror attacks. The simplest way to generate all is to create Warzones.

We've had multiple homegrown groups who've not been involved in any war, but who began radicalisation with extremist preachers here, before completing their extremist education in Pakistan and other radicalisation centres. Some of them gravitate to warzones. Others seek to create a warzone here. Their supposed grievances include things where we did something, and sometimes they include things where we didn't do anything. These grievances are merely the excuse for what they do. What they aim to do is create a headline. They get their desire to create a headline from their radicalisation. If we try to address one grievance, they merely point to the reverse as what we should have done instead, or point to something else as justification for what they do. They're just excuses. Radicalisation is the reason.