Terrorist Attack in Manchester (Read MOD WARNING in OP Updated 24/05/2017))

Danzy

A light hearted aside but there used be a proverb in the Arabic World that you should never be friends with the British, that way they couldn't betray you.

Given repeated historical example, a wise maxim.

BoatMad

ilkhanid wrote: »

Are you soft ? I doubt he knows anything about the Middle East or it's history. All he knows is the poison that his IS friends poured into his ears. Britain didn't have a "bombing campaign" against the Middle East a century ago. There were hardly any bombers in existence then. Britain was engaged in a military campaign against the Turks who ruled the region, In fact the Arabs supported the British. Not that he knew that (or you either, for that matter.)

In reality the exact mechanism for his " radicalisation " is somewhat irrelevant, but to ignore the overall geo-political situation and its effects on driving radicalisation is equally ridiculous

No life experience? All they have to do is read a newspaper. Anyway, I have no confidence in their supposed ignorance or innocence. Some of them were actually in Syria, or Iraq or other Jihadi-controlled areas. I have no doubt that there they learned to kill, they saw women being abused, people being beheaded. So, forget the sob story. They learned to be stone-cold killers. I'm as impressed by this "our people" narrative as I would be by a Nazi whinging about Hamburg or Dresden, Those attacks were true too, but the Nazis were...no, the word hypocrites doesn't even begin to plumb the depths of their insincerity.

Again, its a very simplistic situation to regard IS or Nazis as just insane terrorists. They are a " politically " inspired " cause " like many other " terror" groups.
Of course Joe Public, who is not interested in examine the issues ( and such examination might dig up nasty home truths ) , simply resorts to calling everyone insane terrorists ( in part it allows the authorities to dehumanise the terrorists and hence justify action against them that they wont consider against their one citizens )

They don't just want to be dominant. They want to destroy or enslave everybody else. The only thing differentiating them from the Nazis is that they don't have the military machine.

Any reading of German history will show you it was much more nuanced and complex then simply words like " destroy " or enslave

And equally the history and aims of IS are equally complex , based on circumstance and consistent with the issues that Sunnis find them selves in

ilkhanid

neverever1 wrote: »

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraqi_revolt_against_the_British

I'm still not wrong. Pedantic I may be, but you said "a hundred years" ago.
Both episodes are part of history. But you think only one counts.

sjb25 wrote: »

Special delivery
http://www.breakingnews.ie/world/raf-say-rsquolove-from-manchesterrsquo-message-on-bomb-destined-for-isis-targets-is-real-791247.html

Good. I hope it ends up in Abu Baghdadi's arse.

BoatMad wrote: »

Again, its a very simplistic situation to regard IS or Nazis as just insane terrorists. They are a " politically " inspired " cause " like many other " terror" groups.
Of course Joe Public, who is not interested in examine the issues ( and such examination might dig up nasty home truths ) , simply resorts to calling everyone insane terrorists ( in part it allows the authorities to dehumanise the terrorists and hence justify action against them that they wont consider against their one citizens )

I know they're not insane and I didn't call them that-as you well know. But then neither were the Nazis...and they were politically-inspired too. I called them stone-cold killers, that enslave young women, murder the old women and commit genocide against minorities. Tell me which part of that description is wrong. I have no problem dehumanising IS, they have proved that they are amongst the very worst that humanity has to offer along with the other sorry examples from this or the last century.

BoatMad wrote: »

Any reading of German history will show you it was much more nuanced and complex then simply words like " destroy " or enslave
And equally the history and aims of IS are equally complex , based on circumstance and consistent with the issues that Sunnis find them selves in

This BS sounds very much like the preamble to attempting to tell me that the Nazis were misunderstood, and if so,then you can take a hike-to be blunt. If you are going to tell me that the Nazis didn't "destroy" or "enslave" entire categories of human beings and intend worse, then you're a denier, plain and simple. I've read more books on the Third Reich than you've had restaurant dinners.

Danzy

The Mosque this man attended has had speakers that advocated murdering Jews, raping and beating wives, murdering people who leave Islam, murdering gays, murdering adulterers, murdering those who believe in more than one God.

None of that is based on what Britain or America have done in the Middle East. I personally feel that any Soldier who goes in to another's country to occupy it can't complain when after a while the locals start to educate them.

I could not condemn any one, no matter how much I dislike their politics or beliefs for taking on those who occupy their country.

If that never happened, they'd still be screaming out for the murder of gays and apostates, killing all jews and adulterers, 1400+ years of that tend to get ingrained.

neverever1

ilkhanid wrote: »

I'm still not wrong. Pedantic I may be, but you said "a hundred years" ago.
Both episodes are part of history. But you think only one counts.




Good. I hope it ends up in Abu Baghdadi's arse.

You are wrong, you said Britain didn't have a bombing campaign against Iraq a century ago. They did. Britain attempted to divide up land that wasn't theirs with disastrous results, it's a familiar story and this one still hasn't come to an end either.

wakka12

wonderfullife wrote: »

There's a difference worth noting between "the teachings" of a religion and "how it is being taught" (in schools/churches).

The Bible has dozens of passages advocating murder. I've no doubt the Quran has dozens too.

It's facetious to say if a Christian man stones a blasphemous wife to death that it's consistent with the "teachings" of Christianity.

It's merely consistent with the text of the document.

If Catholic priests were preaching every weekend that we should stone wives who commit adultery, then yes we'd have a serious problem with the way the religion is being taught.

Islam, in the overwhelming majority of mosques worldwide, is being taught in a peaceful way. The mosques that have Radical Preachers calling for death to the west are few and far between in Europe.



The "mentally ill" part of the lone-wolf defence was used just fine for Breivik, Lubitz, Robert Dear etc.

"The psychiatric disorders that might have driven Breivik to kill" is an actual headline from the Indo:

http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/health-and-families/features/the-psychiatric-disorders-that-might-have-made-anders-breivik-into-a-mass-murderer-a7402126.html

"Mental illness made Germanwings co-pilot a victim along with his passengers" another pearler of a headline from the LA Times:

http://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-sapolsky-lubitz-germanwings-depression-20150402-story.html

"Killer Derrick Bird was bitter, resentful and depressed, psychologist tells Inquest"

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/killer-derrick-bird-was-bitter-resentful-117897

Not everyone who mass-murders is mentally ill but the media only gives a crap about someones mental health if they are a white mass-murderer.

Contrast that to the Nice Truck Terrorist, Mohamed Lahouaiej-Bouhlel. You won't find a single Op-Ed in any western media publication discussing his mental health. You won't find a single mainstream article publicly trying to diminish his acts by his mental health.

Whether you want to admit it or not, people only give a monkeys about someones mental-illness if they are a white dude who goes on a rampage killing dozens.



Case in point ^.

White and Christian - mental hospital

http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/robert-dear-colorado-planned-parenthood-shooter-deemed-mentally-incompetent-n572431

Brown and Muslim - death penalty.

http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/boston-bombing-trial/date-set-tsarnaevs-official-death-sentence-boston-bombing-n366016

All of this feeds into the terrorists hands. The more the West treats Muslims differently to non-Muslims, the more it propagates the idea that it's a war between civilizations, that they are "beneath us".

Simply not true
Mentall illness was a huge part of the discussion about Omar Mateen

BoatMad

I know they're not insane and I didn't call them that-as you know. But then neither were the Nazis...and they were politically-inspired too. I called them stone-cold killers, that enslave young women, murder the old women and commit genocide against minorities. Tell me which part of that description is wrong. I have no problem dehumanising IS, they have proved that they are amomgst the worst that humanity has to offer along with the other sorry examples from this or the last century.

one only has to pick any epoch in time, and all the " great powers" including the UK were involved in slavery, genocide, illegal conquest, child exploitation etc, The jews have been persecuted in Europe for generations for example . The Muslims have been subjected in the Middle east to the machinations of the West for generations

Danzy

I'm moving on from this thread, se ye all in another few weeks after the latest incident.

BoatMad

Danzy wrote: »

The Mosque this man attended has had speakers that advocated murdering Jews, raping and beating wives, murdering people who leave Islam, murdering gays, murdering adulterers, murdering those who believe in more than one God.

None of that is based on what Britain or America have done in the Middle East. I personally feel that any Soldier who goes in to another's country to occupy it can't complain when after a while the locals start to educate them.

I could not condemn any one, no matter how much I dislike their politics or beliefs for taking on those who occupy their country.

If that never happened, they'd still be screaming out for the murder of gays and apostates, killing all jews and adulterers, 1400+ years of that tend to get ingrained.

No, this is junk science and false truths

you need to look at the effects of radicalisation. The wests involvement in the ME, dividing populations, misleading , invasion, indiscriminate military action, taking sides that suited their outcome and a general " the end justified the means" approach has lead to whole sections being radicalised against the West

why then are you surprised when they ( a section of the Muslim world ) try and strike back with only the weapons they have

BoatMad

Danzy wrote: »

I'm moving on from this thread, se ye all in another few weeks after the latest incident.

sadly all this will keep going until we get all the participants to sit around a table

ilkhanid

neverever1 wrote: »

You are wrong, you said Britain didn't have a bombing campaign against Iraq a century ago. They did. Britain attempted to divide up land that wasn't theirs with disastrous results, it's a familiar story and this one still hasn't come to an end either.

It may be that you live in a rarefied strata, but this is 2017. not 2021.

Danzy wrote: »

I could not condemn any one, no matter how much I dislike their politics or beliefs for taking on those who occupy their country
If that never happened, they'd still be screaming out for the murder of gays and apostates, killing all jews and adulterers, 1400+ years of that tend to get ingrained.

Many of the tribesmen insurgents that fought against the Americans ened up fighting alongside them. The Shia in the South fought the British as hard as anyone, but they have moved on, which goes to show the pragmatism of Shia radicals, as oposed to Sunnis.

sjb25

BoatMad wrote: »

sadly all this will keep going until we get all the participants to sit around a table

Whhaaat you think for one second you would get Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi around a table for a CHAT

BoatMad

sjb25 wrote: »

Whhaaat you think for one second you would get Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi around a table for a CHAT

Ultimately him or his successor will have to do it

rather like our friends in the North , your comments would have been the same in the 80s

A solution will have to found, you cannot solve this with military force or terrorism , ultimately everyone will have to sit down and trash out a solution

neverever1

ilkhanid wrote: »

It may be that you live in a rarefied strata, but this is 2017. not 2021.

You've been caught out not having a clue what you're talking about and you're not taking it well.

ilkhanid

neverever1 wrote: »

You've been caught out not having a clue what you're talking about and you're not taking it well.

You caught nothing, you don't know one year of history from the next. I was precise, you are a waffler.

BoatMad wrote: »

No, this is junk science and false truths
you need to look at the effects of radicalisation. The wests involvement in the ME, dividing populations, misleading , invasion, indiscriminate military action, taking sides that suited their outcome and a general " the end justified the means" approach has lead to whole sections being radicalised against the West
why then are you surprised when they ( a section of the Muslim world ) try and strike back with only the weapons they have

Explain to me Boatie, what purpose is being served by striking "back" (as if they ever did anything to them) at Yazidis, Shias, Assyrian Christians, Ismaelis, Ugandans, Nigerian Christians, Swiss tourists, Algerian farmers, Malian shrines, Turkish and Moroccan Jews, Ugandans, Kenyans, Somalian policemen, citizens of Burkino Faso and Sierra Leone, UN officials, Japanese travellers, Filipino townspeople, Indians, Bangladeshi secularists, Pakistani schoolkids, Iraqi gays, Afghan mayors and teachers etc etc etc etc etc...the list just keeps getting longer. As for the rest of your drivel, you're just repeating Nevermore's schtick.
You remind me a little of those "high-minded" leftists that, back in the day, attempted to justify Stalinism by upcasting the West's shortcomings..but I see it's actually Nazi-ism that you want to whitewash.

Richard Hillman

BoatMad wrote: »

Ultimately him or his successor will have to do it

rather like our friends in the North , your comments would have been the same in the 80s

A solution will have to found, you cannot solve this with military force or terrorism , ultimately everyone will have to sit down and trash out a solution

Yes you can. I really wish people would stop thinking that we are bringing our A Game. Would could obliterate them within a couple of days. We could flatten the entire middle East in a weekend. We are being really, really, really nice to them.

kopite386

All 22 victims have been id and named, and all missing are accounted for
Ashley Taylor the last person missing has been found alive in hospital, the death toll stands at 22 now but there are around 20 people in hospital with critical life threatening injuries which means the death toll might rise.

neverever1

ilkhanid wrote: »

You caught nothing, you don't know one year of history from the next. I was precise, you are a waffler.

I've shown that Britain has played a major role in the mayhem and destruction now felt in the Middle East and felt for decades. You claimed that the British never bombed the Middle East and the Arabs supported the British!
You are still denying any impact Britain had and has on Middle Eastern affairs and the attacks now experienced in Europe, yet even the link you provided shows their negative impact!

Overheal

Richard Hillman wrote: »

Yes you can. I really wish people would stop thinking that we are bringing our A Game. Would could obliterate them within a couple of days. We could flatten the entire middle East in a weekend. We are being really, really, really nice to them.

Well that's certainly a measured response. Do you know what Mutually Assured Destruction is?

neverever1

Richard Hillman wrote: »

Yes you can. I really wish people would stop thinking that we are bringing our A Game. Would could obliterate them within a couple of days. We could flatten the entire middle East in a weekend. We are being really, really, really nice to them.

This is the flip side of the same coin. Isis et al. on one side, British/American imperialists on the other.

Richard Hillman

Overheal wrote: »

Well that's certainly a measured response. Do you know what Mutually Assured Destruction is?

I'm not saying that's what we should do. I just think people are really underestimating how powerful ourselves in Europe are. People are ready to surrender and "talk to them". We are infinity times stronger than them.

ilkhanid

neverever1 wrote: »

I've shown that Britain has played a major role in the mayhem and destruction now felt in the Middle East and felt for decades. You claimed that the British never bombed the Middle East and the Arabs supported the British!
You are still denying any impact Britain had and has on Middle Eastern affairs and the attacks now experienced in Europe, yet even the link you provided shows their negative impact!

No, I claimed that the British didn't bomb the Arabs in 1917, during the war,and that the Arabs supported the British against the Turks. And I was right. The subsequent revolt doesn't negate that fact
I never denied tha fact that Britain and France made a right royal cock-up of the region after the war, that they made unsustainable promises that couldn't be fulfilled for selfish short=term ends. But I don't claim that this is the ultimate explanation for Manchester. The Arabs had independent countries for years and made a bags of it. They have to take responsibility for their failures, their corruption and tribalism.

BoatMad wrote: »

sadly all this will keep going until we get all the participants to sit around a table

To talk about what?

We want a Caliphate. Shias and Kurds must leave never to return. Slavery must return. No TV, no music, no films,Yazidis must die, Homosexuals must die, Women must know thie place. Law must be based on the Koran,Christians must pay the tax....A short conference, indeed,
Tell me. Did the Tutsis treat with the Interhamwe? Did the Vietnamese talk ith the Khmer Rouge? IS will end as they ended.

kopite386

I don't know if people have seen this but I thought I'd share it here. At a vigil in Manchester a woman started to sing Don't Look Back in Anger and then the crowd joined in. I just wanted to share as I thought it was a beautiful sentimental thing amongst all the sadness. It brought tears to my eyes watching this.

https://twitter.com/MeanwhileinCana/status/867711867967479808

BoatMad

Richard Hillman wrote: »

Yes you can. I really wish people would stop thinking that we are bringing our A Game. Would could obliterate them within a couple of days. We could flatten the entire middle East in a weekend. We are being really, really, really nice to them.

Oh dear,

are you saying that the (evil ) act of killing 22 people in Manchester , would justify wiping billons of innocent Muslims from the planet

not too mention , undoubtably causing a nuclear WW3 and massive casualties in the West as A result

Thats why I have said we cannot solve this with military action , no mor then any " conflict " has ever actually been solved by military action

The alternative is a complete occupation of all the Middle East by western troops , the establishment of colonial governments and the suppression of radicals, We might get a generation out of that until it re-exploded,

The West of course actually hasn't the resources to do that

We are on our A game, and its failing spectacularly

BoatMad

during the war,and that the Arabs supported the British against the Turks.

to be of course essentially double crossed by said same British

wakka12

ilkhanid wrote: »

You caught nothing, you don't know one year of history from the next. I was precise, you are a waffler.


Explain to me Boatie, what purpose is being served by striking "back" (as if they ever did anything to them) at Yazidis, Shias, Assyrian Christians, Ismaelis, Ugandans, Nigerian Christians, Swiss tourists, Algerian farmers, Malian shrines, Turkish and Moroccan Jews, Ugandans, Kenyans, Somalian policemen, citizens of Burkino Faso and Sierra Leone, UN officials, Japanese travellers, Filipino townspeople, Indians, Bangladeshi secularists, Pakistani schoolkids, Iraqi gays, Afghan mayors and teachers etc etc etc etc etc...the list just keeps getting longer. As for the rest of your drivel, you're just repeating Nevermore's schtick.
You remind me a little of those "high-minded" leftists that, back in the day, attempted to justify Stalinism by upcasting the West's shortcomings..but I see it's actually Nazi-ism that you want to whitewash.

This. The mental gymnastics some posters will go through to blame anything and everything but islam is simply astounding
Certain ideologies breed violence.We call out said ideologies if they are guilty of motivating people to commit violent acts. Why do you think islam is immune from this?

ilkhanid

BoatMad wrote: »

Tats why I have said we cannot solve this with military action , no mor then any " conflict " has ever actually been solved by military action

I can think of a score off the top of my hat.

There will be no occupation, no nuclear war. IS will be crushed like all their antecedents from the Khajarites to the Almohads

BoatMad wrote: »

to be of course essentially double crossed by said same British

True, and shameful.

neverever1

ilkhanid wrote: »

No, I claimed that the British didn't bomb the Arabs in 1917, during the war,and that the Arabs supported the British against the Turks. And I was right. The subsequent revolt doesn't negate that fact
I never denied tha fact that Britain and France made a right royal cock-up of the region after the war, that they made unsustainable promises that couldn't be fulfilled for selfish short=term ends. But I don't claim that this is the ultimate explanation for Manchester. The Arabs had independent countries for years and made a bags of it. They have to take responsibility for their failures, their corruption and tribalism.

No, you said the British didn't bomb them and there was barely any bombers at that time. You were caught out bluffing.
This attempted carve up for their own gain added with further bombing campaigns etc has had a major hand to play in attacks that have been suffered in Europe.
The victims families in Manchester should be angry at the perpetrators but also angry at their own government!

BoatMad

I can think of a score off the top of my hat.

There will be no occupation, no nuclear war. IS will be crushed like all their antecedents from the Khajarites to the Almohads

The issues behind the rise of IS, will remain , and IS V2.0 will simply arise, rather like IRA and PIRA. The conflict between Iran and SA will continue to militarise the conflict and the position of Iraqi Sunnis will ensure another IS

military actions leads to " wack a mole " policy , but the mole always comes back

NO political situation has been solved by military action . Historically the solution was to follow it with colonisation and even that merely bought less then 100 years of questionable stability

Nowadays the west has neither the will NOR the resources to engage in large scale colonisation , its logistics and armed forces are not set up for long and involved conflicts. Hence the mess of largely US involvement

The situation can only be solved by dialogue and compromise and the removal of military threat. Thats the lesson from conflicts all around the globe

jackofalltrades

BoatMad wrote: »

The situation can only be solved by dialogue and compromise and the removal of military threat. Thats the lesson from conflicts all around the globe

I can just imagine it now:

The West: Can we come to some kind of agreement to stop the violence?
ISIS: We will not stop until you have been wiped out and we rule the entire world
The West: What if we stop the bombings?
ISIS: DEATH TO ALL INFIDELS!!!!!!!!!!!!

No they won't stop until everyone in the world is living in an Islamic Caliphate.
These people can't be reasoned or compromised with.