So, Who Else Is A Terrorist Sympathiser?

[Alan]

Military action is there to try and stop threats. Some of the Paris terrorists had been back and forth to Syria. Al Qaeda is a shadow of itself as it's been systematically targeted. Daesh pops up and is attractive as it is winning at moment and has infrastructure and money to build on the death cult that AQ stopped being able to do. The bombing will not solve the problem. It's a case of killing some bad guys before they kill us.

Long term it's the muslim community that needs to tackle this. Muslims are the majority of people killed by fellow Muslims. So that's scholars and intellectuals battling the extremists. That will take a long time and I believe this will not be solved in my lifetime. It's a problem in UK too with some communities totally withdrawn from normal UK society. Rossy you are in the Netherlands and there is a big ideological problem there between Dutch liberal values and extremist Islamic ideology.

Some say it's western meddling that has caused this. If so then we all pull out. Stop movement and let Islamic ideology fight each other until one wins. We can't do that as the globalised world means radicals can influence angry men lacking in confidence to commit evil. I don't agree with the argument of the post-9/11 actions causing this. Yes the Iraq invasion was a up and I never supported it as (selfishly) Saddam was an evil murderous tyrant but no threat to my way of life. This extremism has been building for centuries. Pakistan encouraged it in 1970's, Saudi Arabia has been exporting it via the type of mosques it builds worldwide. It fills power vacuums be it Somalia, Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria or the poverty areas in Paris. The Sunni v Shia battle has been ongoing since 100 years after Islam was founded and within Sunni we have that tiny set who believe murder and repression is the way to paradise. I can't understand that thinking but I know it's a clear threat to me and my family be it at home or on holiday.

[antidote]

Military action is there to try and stop threats. Some of the Paris terrorists had been back and forth to Syria. Al Qaeda is a shadow of itself as it's been systematically targeted. Daesh pops up and is attractive as it is winning at moment and has infrastructure and money to build on the death cult that AQ stopped being able to do. The bombing will not solve the problem. It's a case of killing some bad guys before they kill us.

Long term it's the muslim community that needs to tackle this. Muslims are the majority of people killed by fellow Muslims. So that's scholars and intellectuals battling the extremists. That will take a long time and I believe this will not be solved in my lifetime. It's a problem in UK too with some communities totally withdrawn from normal UK society. Rossy you are in the Netherlands and there is a big ideological problem there between Dutch liberal values and extremist Islamic ideology.

Some say it's western meddling that has caused this. If so then we all pull out. Stop movement and let Islamic ideology fight each other until one wins. We can't do that as the globalised world means radicals can influence angry men lacking in confidence to commit evil. I don't agree with the argument of the post-9/11 actions causing this. Yes the Iraq invasion was a ###### up and I never supported it as (selfishly) Saddam was an evil murderous tyrant but no threat to my way of life. This extremism has been building for centuries. Pakistan encouraged it in 1970's, Saudi Arabia has been exporting it via the type of mosques it builds worldwide. It fills power vacuums be it Somalia, Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria or the poverty areas in Paris. The Sunni v Shia battle has been ongoing since 100 years after Islam was founded and within Sunni we have that tiny set who believe murder and repression is the way to paradise. I can't understand that thinking but I know it's a clear threat to me and my family be it at home or on holiday.

Alan, the attacks on Paris were a result of France's involvement in air attacks and westminster's decision is more likely to lead to an attack on UK people who are home or on holiday.

The UK government is only trying to be the big man on the international stage, simple as that.

[Fermer]

Military action is there to try and stop threats. Some of the Paris terrorists had been back and forth to Syria. Al Qaeda is a shadow of itself as it's been systematically targeted. Daesh pops up and is attractive as it is winning at moment and has infrastructure and money to build on the death cult that AQ stopped being able to do. The bombing will not solve the problem. It's a case of killing some bad guys before they kill us.

Long term it's the muslim community that needs to tackle this. Muslims are the majority of people killed by fellow Muslims. So that's scholars and intellectuals battling the extremists. That will take a long time and I believe this will not be solved in my lifetime. It's a problem in UK too with some communities totally withdrawn from normal UK society. Rossy you are in the Netherlands and there is a big ideological problem there between Dutch liberal values and extremist Islamic ideology.

Some say it's western meddling that has caused this. If so then we all pull out. Stop movement and let Islamic ideology fight each other until one wins. We can't do that as the globalised world means radicals can influence angry men lacking in confidence to commit evil. I don't agree with the argument of the post-9/11 actions causing this. Yes the Iraq invasion was a ###### up and I never supported it as (selfishly) Saddam was an evil murderous tyrant but no threat to my way of life. This extremism has been building for centuries. Pakistan encouraged it in 1970's, Saudi Arabia has been exporting it via the type of mosques it builds worldwide. It fills power vacuums be it Somalia, Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria or the poverty areas in Paris. The Sunni v Shia battle has been ongoing since 100 years after Islam was founded and within Sunni we have that tiny set who believe murder and repression is the way to paradise. I can't understand that thinking but I know it's a clear threat to me and my family be it at home or on holiday.

Excellent post Alan. David Cameron doesnt do walking away. Well it is Friday morning

[antidote]

Then I wouldn't be able to type.

I'm not thinking this will solve everything but at the moment we (coalition of western and middle Easter countries) are bombing Daesh (everyone now using that word) in Iraq and the vote is moving the targets to include inside Syria for the RAF.

Hopefully it will take out some threats external and also jihadis who have travelled from UK before they travel back. It hampers their movement and damages supply lines.

Civilians are already being killed mostly by fellow Muslims. How to solve Syria long term? F knows. It's not just about Syria though as the fundamentalist form of Islam needs to be defeated. There has been much grandstanding from politicians over Syria but no other details. Some bangers on here mentioned the referendum! It's not always about Scotland. David Davis Conservative MP voted against for example.

To me either we try and stop the attacks before they reach us or we just close ourselves from the whole region including no refugees, no aid close the borders and I can't see that happening and personally don't agree with it.

There is already an estimated 350 jihadists returned to the uk from Syria, a bit late now.

Are we going to use air strikes on them?

[exile]

David Cameron doesnt do walking away.

David Cameron lacks personal courage. He wouldn't debate in the referendum. He chickened out of most of the TV debates.

Even in everyday press conferences he has a habit of walking away from difficult questions from journalists.

He is happy to bomb poor countries from a great height, without putting himself or anyone near him at any risk.

He will walk away. He has said he will quit before the next election.

He will very likely walk off into the sunset, leaving the mess of Syria for others to sort out.

[Glasgowmancity]

Can you explain exactly why you need to prefix civilian with normal. What other civilians are there. Just for us slow of thinking people.

I'm struggling with that one too.

Andy answers the question for the slow of thinking below

Civilian normally means non forces. Normal I would expect means a civilian that is not bearing arms.

The attacks in France were carried out by French people.

Who were trained in Syria

[ParisInAKilt]

Who said they were trained in Syria?

[hoodster]

Some say it's western meddling that has caused this. If so then we all pull out. Stop movement and let Islamic ideology fight each other until one wins. We can't do that as the globalised world means radicals can influence angry men lacking in confidence to commit evil.

We also can't do that as the world's energy security depends on a stable middle east, we cannot allow Iran to march into Saudi Arabia for example and hold the world to ransom so we are committed to having a military presence/strategic alliances in the region.

[antidote]

Who said they were trained in Syria?

To be fair there is a lot of evidence out there to suggest that they were.

https://www.intellihub.com/charlie-hebdo-killers-armed-trained-syria-terrorism-made-france/

http://www.activistpost.com/2015/01/charlie-hebdo-killers-armed-and-trained.html

There's a lot more.

[Glasgowmancity]

Who said they were trained in Syria?

There seemed to be a lot of reports about it at the time.

[Scunnered]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/Jeremy_Corbyn/12032154/jeremy-corbyn-syria-air-strikes-jihadist-warning.html

If there happens to be an attack in the UK, the media will be screaming "IT'S GOT NOTHING TO DO WITH OUR BOMBS!!! JEREMY DID IT!!!".

[antidote]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/Jeremy_Corbyn/12032154/jeremy-corbyn-syria-air-strikes-jihadist-warning.html

If there happens to be an attack in the UK, the media will be screaming "IT'S GOT NOTHING TO DO WITH OUR BOMBS!!! JEREMY DID IT!!!".

So true, but I'm sure the SNP will get most of the blame.

[Scunnered]

So true, but I'm sure the SNP will get most of the blame.

The media would pass by an opportunity to attack the leader of the opposition, to attack an irrelevant party at Westminster? Righty oh.

[antidote]

The media would pass by an opportunity to attack the leader of the opposition, to attack an irrelevant party at Westminster? Righty oh.

There was me thinking you were a red tory supporter, now you call them irrelevant.

[Scunnered]

There was me thinking you were a red tory supporter, now you call them irrelevant.

[phart]

aye but who were they trained by? About 10 different factions in Syria."trained in syria" means nothing in the context of dropping bombs when you have a dozen factions.

we got bombed

yeah tragic

who by?

French folk

oh

trained in syria though

lets bomb syria.

this will solve our problems.

[Mox]

Prior to 7/7, was there ever an 'Islamic terrorist attack' on Britain?

[antidote]

Prior to 7/7, was there ever an 'Islamic terrorist attack' on Britain?

Prior to the Iraq war?

[phart]

Prior to 7/7, was there ever an 'Islamic terrorist attack' on Britain?

Iranian embassy, shooting of Yvonne Fletcher. Hard to categorise it as "islamic terrorist attack"

[Flora MaDonald]

Iranian embassy, shooting of Yvonne Fletcher. Hard to categorise it as "islamic terrorist attack"

[aaid]

Alan, the attacks on Paris were a result of France's involvement in air attacks and westminster's decision is more likely to lead to an attack on UK people who are home or on holiday.

The UK government is only trying to be the big man on the international stage, simple as that.

I'd say the attacks in France probably had a lot more to do with the way that the Arab minority has been treated by the French government since Algeria.

Agree with your second point.

[Mox]

Iranian embassy, shooting of Yvonne Fletcher. Hard to categorise it as "islamic terrorist attack"

I've heard of that, too young to remember it.

In fact just reading that someone has been arrested for that in the last few weeks.

Edited December 4, 2015 by Mox

[DonnyTJS]

Iranian embassy, shooting of Yvonne Fletcher. Hard to categorise it as "islamic terrorist attack"

It's interesting, isn't it?

Back in the '70s there was no shortage of 'terrorist' attacks stemming from the Middle East (Black September - Munich et al - numerous sky-jackings), but all this was explicitly secular. Saddam, and Assad's dad (from memory), were Ba'athists - an avowedly secular, political movement. I seem to recall Gadaffi also espousing secular politics and only much later draping himself in 'Islamic' trappings.

The US setting up military bases in the 'holy land' of Saudi following Saddam's invasion of Kuwait brought religion into the geo-political mess, but there are so many historical factors that play their part - and geological: oil, along with the 1948 founding of modern Israel, is fundamental to it all.

Edited December 4, 2015 by DonnyTJS

[phart]

It's interesting, isn't it?

Back in the '70s there was no shortage of 'terrorist' attacks stemming from the Middle East (Black September - Munich et al - numerous sky-jackings), but all this was explicitly secular. Saddam, and Assad's dad (from memory), were Ba'athists - an avowedly secular, political movement. I seem to recall Gadaffi also espousing secular politics and only much later draping himself in 'Islamic' trappings.

The US setting up military bases in the 'holy land' of Saudi following Saddam's invasion of Kuwait brought religion into the geo-political mess, but there are so many historical factors that play their part - and geological: oil, along with the 1948 founding of modern Israel, is fundamental to it all.

It certainly is. The two other big factors that reach further back, the switch from coal to oil for modern Navies and the splitting of the Ottoman Empire.

Excellent point though Donny, had never thought of it exactly like that myself, but doing so now, as you say very interesting

[DonnyTJS]

It certainly is. The two other big factors that reach further back, the switch from coal to oil for modern Navies and the splitting of the Ottoman Empire.

Yep, certainly.

It's also noticeable that most of those '70s attacks emerged from what was effectively a non-state (and one with a large Christian population), Palestine. Assad snr, Saddam, Gaddafi, Mubarak and his predecessors were essentially dictators, suppressing any Islamic militancy in their own territories. The overthrow of the Shah in Iran was explicitly Islamic (though Shi'ite) but non-Arab and so didn't have much effect on the Palestinian issue - and was immediately swamped by Saddam's invasion anyway.

Edited December 4, 2015 by DonnyTJS