[Closed] "Muslim" terrorists attack French magazine in Paris

Not to arrest and detain in the first place, but rather to disappear them as quietly as possible.
It is not nice, but if we are being pragmatic and want to live in a world where we can all, irrespective of race, religion, gender, sexual orientation, go about our lives

I want to live in a world where people aren't "disappeared" without trial.

Hurray for the 'moderates' eh?

Nah, it's "Hurray for people who need feeble excuses to rant and make crass generalisations on internet forums."

Not to arrest and detain in the first place, but rather to disappear them as quietly as possible.

Ah the Jean Charles de Menezes approach

Digga what you are suggesting is truly terrifying. What we need to fight fascism is to be more fascist? How many innocent people would it be ok to kill to carry out your 'wet work'. You sick ****er.

It's pretty obvious that this kind of moronic reaction is exactly what the terrorists want too.

It's going to take a long ol' time to disappear all these guys. I hope we're prepared for the non-linear nature of another "war" for another generation.

binners - Member
So not really a condemnation at all then? Hurray for the 'moderates' eh?

Not a view I personally subscribe to - I believe the reality is vastly more complex - but nonetheless, there can be no two ways; people either live in the West by our laws, or otherwise leave or stay and should be made to face the consequences of their words and actions.

digga

Not to arrest and detain in the first place, but rather to disappear them as quietly as possible.

It is not nice, but if we are being pragmatic and want to live in a world where we can all, irrespective of race, religion, gender, sexual orientation, go about our lives without the need to be armed (a frightening though, not least because of many people's ineptitude with vehicles which 'only' travel at tens of miles per hour) or worried about random attacks, someone has to do the wet work on our behalf.

That's retarded I'm afraid. When you "disappear" them all, what do you think their friends, their families, their communities will do?

grum - Member
Digga what you are suggesting is truly terrifying. What we need to fight fascism is to be more fascist? How many innocent people would it be ok to kill to carry out your 'wet work'. You sick ****.

It's pretty obvious that this kind of moronic reaction is exactly what the terrorists want too

The world is not all nice, woolly and co-operative. I hope none of us ever has to experience what those victims in Paris yesterday went through, but it is fairly clear that current means are ineffective in preventing a tiny minority of lunatics from oppressing the peaceful majority.

.....then went on to basically say, in not so many words,

So he didn't actually say it then, and you're putting words into his mouth.

people either live in the West by our laws

Yeah, damn right. And if they don't, we'll go to their countries and kill 'em all...when the chips are down, we don't care about no laws.

jimjam - Member

That's retarded I'm afraid. When you "disappear" them all, what do you think their friends, their families, their communities will do?

Anyone would think there are millions of extremists (if this is the case, then surely even more drastic action is required?) but in fact there are relatively few.

Do you think we can reason with and rehabilitate them? Has this worked so far?

a key factor in their decision to declare peace.

😆

Yeah, we beat 'em...we beat 'em good man. Stupid RaRas...we didn't have to concede no political ground or accept that nearly half the population of a country might actually be needing a bit of determination in how it's run. We even let another country have a say FFS. Yeah man. We beat them proper good. We was awesomez.

To correct my bad link above
http://www.onislam.net/english/shariah/special-coverage/481653-paris-attack-charlie-hebdo-terrorist-cartoon.html

people either live in the West by our laws

Our laws, like not torturing people and executing those suspected of crimes. You're an idiot, frankly - but a scary idiot.

Do you think we can reason with and rehabilitate them?

We can try, but we'll have to start a little closer to home.

Has this worked so far?

No, I don't think so. We skipped the reasoning bit.

Fighting terror with terror (and that is what "disappearances" are) makes us worse than them.

So he didn't actually say it then, and you're putting words into his mouth.

Watch it yourself. Its on BBC iplayer. [url= http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b04xtl0r/newsnight-07012015 ]Here you go[/url]. I just summarised. There were more words involved, but thats what he was saying.

It was like when that expenses fraud Tory MP did her famous 6 second non-apology in parliament last year. Where she had to apologise, but actually didn't.

It was literally' I know I have to condemn violence, so I will go through the motions of that......', but then couldn't help himself, and went on with a thinly veiled justification for it all. Like I said, to summarise.... that if you insult Islam, then this is what happens. So if you don't want this type of thing to happen, then don't insult Islam

And this is the 'moderate' view, is it?

As condemnation goes, it wasn't one.

As a defence of freedom of speech, It most definitely wasn't one.

Feel free to keep wringing your hands though.....

bencooper - Member
Fighting terror with terror (and that is what "disappearances" are) makes us worse than them.

grum - Member
Our laws, like not torturing people and executing those suspected of crimes. You're an idiot, frankly - but a scary idiot.

Feel free to keep wringing your hands though.....

Feel free to keep ranting.

Have you recommended the nuclear option yet?

Its hardly ranting, is it Bravissimo? I'm merely pointing out that this self-proclaimed, supposed 'moderate' viewpoint didn't look like any definition of 'moderate' that I'd recognise.

Because it basically ended up justifying violence in circumstances deemed to be offensive to one particular group of peoples beliefs, by those people. Theres a word for that. Its fascism.

Unless you can point out to me where the exception clause is in our constitution that only applies to that one group of people, who, in certain circumstances, are now entirely justified in killing people

digga

Read up on the formation of ISIS. Then also read up on the intelligence infiltration and operations against the IRA - a key factor in their decision to declare peace.

Please, do educate us on how covert operations and shoot to kill policies by the SAS and security forces defeated the IRA. While you're at it could you balance or weigh up the success of these operations and the handful IRA volunteers killed vs the massive propaganda coup and recruitment drive it gave the IRA. Trying to defeat terrorists with terror tactics just doesn't work I'm afraid, you just do the recruiters work for them, and you radicalise otherwise moderate people.

digga
Same as usual. they would not know who, where, how why. Calling cards won't be left.

You sound like a 15 year old who's read too many Andy McNabb books. Wet work your arse. "They would not know" but some tosser on the internet knows all about it. You are deluded or trolling. Which is it.

Good straw man - no, I don't think terrorists should be free to run around killing innocent people. But I don't think "disappearing" people is the way to solve the problem.

And stop using that euphemism - you're talking about kidnapping a person, executing them and burying them in an unmarked grave without trial.

Who decides who gets disappeared? Do you completely trust the government and security services to make these kinds of decisions?

You are deluded or trolling. Which is it.

Tbh, I assumed trolling, But then he got a bit upset with grum...so maybe deluded. 😯

bencooper - Member
Who decides who gets disappeared? Do you completely trust the government and security services to make these kinds of decisions?

I repeatedly asked what other people suggest might be the solution, how we can weed out (or at least weaken) the terrorist minority from the midst of western society and no one has provided a single solitary suggestion. Just criticism of my own opinion.

Failing to act now essentially condemns many more innocents to become collateral damage of a failed strategy.

That you don't agree with me does not bother me and I am happy to debate, but turning your disagreement into an ad hominem attack is puerile. Try better or, perhaps make a constructive suggestion as to the way forward you see fit.

I've already dealt with the gaping logical and moral fallacies in your arguments - so I think I'm free to give my opinion too.

The way forward I would see is to broadly carry on as are, but put an end to illegal wars in Muslim countries, kidnapping and torture of suspects, and put pressure on to create a fair and workable solution for Israel and Palestine. I suspect we'd see a huge decline in support for Islamic terrorism.

Perhaps also international sanctions against Saudi Arabia, who are the main funders/promoters of worldwide terrorism. Except they are such wonderful customers of our weapons so it's pretty unlikely.

Tragic as these events are, the vast majority of people in the west are almost entirely unaffected by terrorism (unlike those in some of the countries we've invaded/made worse) so why do some think we need a step change in how we deal with it? Sadly there will always be some nutters who manage to achieve their aims. As I already posted many of the terrorist attacks in the US have been carried out by white supremacists/right wing nutters. I don't recall anyone suggesting executing them en masse.

So a society where anyone can be "disappeared" by the security services is better than a society where random nutcases can occasionally kill people?

Actually, we'd just end up with both.

@Grum - Or we could just stop buying their oil until they helped bring around radical changes in Middle Eastern society, at which point we would be happy to trade with them again.

s I already posted many of the terrorist attacks in the US have been carried out by white supremacists/right wing nutters. I don't recall anyone suggesting executing them en masse

Not forgetting Breivik.

Binners - whereabouts roughly in Newsnight is the bit you're on about? 'Hand-wringing' is a bit of a meaningless insult usually thrown around when people don't really have an argument BTW.

FWIW I'm fully in favour of freedom of speech with no exceptions and no cartoon could ever justify violence - I still don't think racist cartoons are cool though. Freedom of speech does include the freedom to be a dick but just because you can....

Disappearing people? Murder squads? Argentine Junta anyone? Be very careful what you wish for people. Once you go down this road there's no turning back.

@grum
Agree with most of what you said there. The tactics and strategies deployed by 'us', the West have been poor, wrong (IMHO illegal on many counts) and a highly effective tool for extremist recruiters.

As I've already said, the mass detention tactic was a failure of epic proportions - to which the rise of ISIS is attributable.

I think we need to be careful about offering potential 'excuses' for extremism, although again agree that situations such as Palestine are hugely unhelpful.

The tricky bit though, is how do we deal with the extremists in situ? The ones who are here, very often born here, who hold the radical, terrorist views on which they wish to act? I really don't see any effective means - that the timeframe of outcomes from the above changes in foreign policy would be sufficiently rapid to prevent many hundreds more deaths from random attacks.

Freedom of speech does include the freedom to be a dick but just because you can....

Thats exactly what it means. As this forum is ample testament too 😉

There are no exceptions. Its all or nothing. And when one group tries, by use of violence, to insert an exception, for their benefit, then they need to be told in no uncertain terms to do one!

The tricky bit though, is how do we deal with the extremists in situ? The ones who are here, very often born here, who hold the radical, terrorist views on which they wish to act?

So your solution for these disaffected young men isn't to wonder why they've got teh views they do, and try to counter that kind of extremism, your solution is to take them away from their families and execute them?

How does that prevent the next generation of young men growing up feeling they aren't connected to society?

Do you only target brown people who download dodgy videos from the internet, or do you also execute white people who say something a bit racist on Facebook?

digga

As I've already said, the mass detention tactic was a failure of epic proportions - to which the rise of ISIS is attributable.

No. The illegal invasion of Iraq, based on lies an misinformation is the event to which the rise of ISIS is attributable. Long before "Operation Iraqi Freedom" Commentators and critics of the war had predicted that the removal of Saddam, the destruction of the country's infrastructure, the slaughter of it's citizens and the inevitable withdrawal by British and American forces would have a destabilizing effect on the country and the middle east, and would create opportunities for groups such as ISIS to flourish. How could they possibly have known 🙄

Guy on the BBC news right now making some good points about what he termed 'medieval blasphemy taboos' being discussed and modified to suit modern times, claiming Muslims need to accept that folk will poke fun at religions the world over, just as they themselves make fun of other religions.

His first point is the way forward for change and I actually believe it will be the way it all pans out. How long it takes is anyone's guess...

bencooper - Member
So your solution for these disaffected young men isn't to wonder why they've got teh views they do, and try to counter that kind of extremism, your solution is to take them away from their families and execute them?

How does that prevent the next generation of young men growing up feeling they aren't connected to society?

Do you only target brown people who download dodgy videos from the internet, or do you also execute white people who say something a bit racist on Facebook?

As for how or why I think things need to be done, the parallel with the intelligence and military operations which led to the end of the IRA are a basis:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/timelines/z2wyvcw

However, you have still neatly avoided an actual proposal, deciding only to offer criticism.

jimjam - Member
No. The illegal invasion of Iraq, based on lies an misinformation is the event to which the rise of ISIS is attributable.

Said by just about any 'muslim' on any radio phone in in response to yet another terrorist atrocity....

"I condemn these attacks BUT...".

I thought Newsnight was excellent last night. The leader of the Council of Muslims was very chilling, his "deunciation" was lame in the extreme.

@Northwind ISIS and Shia / Sunni sectarian violence is killing far more Muslims than is the West. The policeman executed on the ground was an Arab. To describe the West's action in the Middle East as anti-Muslim is nonsense, we've heard many justifications from politically motivated regime change to oil. It is only those who the West is acting against that try and claim the action is anti Muslim in order to stoke up further violence.

The quotation from the Arch Bishop in Raqqa is very telling, our liberal Western values are inconsistent with those against which we are fighting.

There has been another gun battle in Paris this morning

digga

Here you go: http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/dec/11/-sp-isis-the-inside-story

Jesus wept. Yes, I understand ISIS members met in prison. In an American prison. In Iraq.

digga
As for how or why I think things need to be done, the parallel with the intelligence and military operations which led to the end of the IRA are a basis:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/timelines/z2wyvcw

Unsurprisingly, your knowledge of Northern Ireland can be summed up by little more than a few bullet points.

It is only those who the West is acting against that try and claim the action is anti Muslim in order to stoke up further violence.

Yeah, we're just sticking up for ourselves.

The quotation from the Arch Bishop in Raqqa is very telling, our liberal Western values are inconsistent with those against which we are fighting.

Liberal western values like not illegally invading countries, not kidnapping people, not torturing people, and not summarily executing people?

As for how or why I think things need to be done, the parallel with the intelligence and military operations which led to the end of the IRA are a basis:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/timelines/z2wyvcw

If you think the IRA is gone you are naive.

That timeline doesn't consider the years of history that went before it.

The IRA were not "defeated". They didn't "win" but they never "lost" either.

As the Catholic population increases and the Loyalist decreases, it is only a matter of time before NI becomes part of Eire.

Besides, the IRA only wanted a United Ireland and did not say they wanted to overthrow the whole of Western Civilization, unlike Al Qaeda, ISIS etc. To compare them is not really realistic.

It's a very fragile religion which cannot accept a little criticism and satire, which Islam (or at least many of its followers) does not seem to be able to do.

I thought Newsnight was excellent last night. The leader of the Council of Muslims was very chilling, his "deunciation" was lame in the extreme.

Exactly what I've been saying, and getting slagged off for pointing out Jambalaya. It wasn't a condemnation at all. Far from it. Quite the reverse. It was a justification for violence by drawing a line in the sand, and saying you cross this by insulting the prophet, and anythings fair game after that.

And this from an organisation that markets itself as the 'moderate' face of Islam in this country. Chilling indeed!

Steve Bells point was interesting. Asking if as a religion, are they really that insecure?

@Northwind ISIS and Shia / Sunni sectarian violence is killing far more Muslims than is the West.

And who unleashed that sectarian violence in Iraq? Was it a major problem during Saddam's reign?

There is a clear responsibility under international law for invading/occupying powers to protect the civilian population - we totally failed. It's on us - legally and morally.

Binners - you should probably worry when you are agreeing with jambalaya on politics (not watched the clip yet so I'm reserving judgement - I just find phrased like ' not in so many words' a giant red flag')