A Muslim Europe is coming?

[nickdnz]

No. Extremisim refers to drawing beliefs from a doctrine that cannot be directly inferred or interpreted from that doctrine. What these jihadists are doing is completely supported by the Qu'ran, Hadith etc. We really need to have an honest discussion about Islamic beliefs and how they are impacting on society, rather than saying - "oh we bomb them, they retaliate; it's just a few bad apples" etc etc

Nope. Extremism is holding extreme or fanatic political views or religious zealotry. You made that definition up.

I doubt you have read an English translation of the Qu'ran. But it is written as poetry; and like any religious text is up to interpretation. I can pull plenty of versus from the bible which support all kinds of horrific acts. I'm sure all Christian cultures are beakons of tolerance.

 

[profitius]

No. Extremisim refers to drawing beliefs from a doctrine that cannot be directly inferred or interpreted from that doctrine. What these jihadists are doing is completely supported by the Qu'ran, Hadith etc. We really need to have an honest discussion about Islamic beliefs and how they are impacting on society, rather than saying - "oh we bomb them, they retaliate; it's just a few bad apples" etc etc

Thats good though. Multiculturism enriches society. Sure, some neighbourhoods are no go areas for white people, christmas is banned in public areas and white people are being denied places in jobs and education because of racial quotas etc but they're all good things because us whites just are not worth it. Bringing in these ISIS men is good for our self esteem because we've shown the world how nice we are and right some of our previous wrongs like slavery, because only white people ever had slaves. So bring them in I say. I've no room in my house but Jimmy over there has a few spare rooms so he can take some. They're ALL lovely innocent people who are not here for the money at all so why not open the boarders.

 

[Bavarius]

Thats good though. Multiculturism enriches society. Sure, some neighbourhoods are no go areas for white people, christmas is banned in public areas and white people are being denied places in jobs and education because of racial quotas etc but they're all good things because us whites just are not worth it. Bringing in these ISIS men is good for our self esteem because we've shown the world how nice we are and right some of our previous wrongs like slavery, because only white people ever had slaves. So bring them in I say. I've no room in my house but Jimmy over there has a few spare rooms so he can take some. They're ALL lovely innocent people who are not here for the money at all so why not open the boarders.

That's how it is.

 

[Colombia]

If you really believe that Islam is about killing, murder and violence then why are we all still here? 1.57 billion Muslims in the world - if they're all being brought up to massacre the innocent, then why is it an incredibly tiny minority that actually are?

Be clear I did not say I did, I understand that it is not. However, what I am saying is that the errant perception will remain in the UK as long as British Muslims continue to carry out atrocities at home and abroad.

If people want that perception to change, target the source of the perception - starting at home - with the British Muslim extremists. That's what needs to be fixed, not a pair of newspapers in a free society.

 

[Peat]

Be clear I did not say I did, I understand that it is not. However, what I am saying is that the errant perception will remain in the UK as long as British Muslims continue to carry out atrocities at home and abroad.

If people want that perception to change, target the source of the perception - starting at home - with the British Muslim extremists. That's what needs to be fixed, not a pair of newspapers in a free society.

So you think the people telling us about what's going in the papers have nothing to do with the perception being created?

 

[Colombia]

So you think the people telling us about what's going in the papers have nothing to do with the perception being created?

Correct, what creates the perception is people being slaughtered on our television screens in the name of Islam. Whether it's the towers falling crushing thousands in the centre of New York, airliners being bombed, underground subway systems in London blown up, trains in Madrid, British Muslims beheading others abroad, and young concert goers being massacred in Paris.

That's where the perception is emanating from, and the source of that is what needs to be addressed, not what's written in a few articles in the free press in Western society. The papers could say nothing at all about Islam, and people would still carry the same perception because to their minds the atrocities speak for themselves.

 

[Peat]

Correct, what creates the perception is people being slaughtered on our television screens in the name of Islam. Whether it's the towers falling crushing thousands in the centre of New York, airliners being bombed, underground subway systems in London blown up, trains in Madrid, British Muslims beheading others abroad, and young concert goers being massacred in Paris.

That's where the perception is emanating from, and the source of that is what needs to be addressed, not what's written in a few articles in the free press in Western society. The papers could say nothing at all about Islam, and people would still carry the same perception because to their minds the atrocities speak for themselves.

So you don't think the weight of attention they are given as compared to other groups that kill far more people needlessly has anything to do with the situation?

And people will just look what's going on and automatically say "This is everything to do with Islam and nothing to do with nothing else" without any prompting?

 

[Cruz_del_Sur]

No. Extremisim refers to drawing beliefs from a doctrine that cannot be directly inferred or interpreted from that doctrine. What these jihadists are doing is completely supported by the Qu'ran, Hadith etc.

Unless you post a picture, i refuse to believe you can make such a statement with a straight face.

 

[valley commando]

Thats good though. Multiculturism enriches society. Sure, some neighbourhoods are no go areas for white people, christmas is banned in public areas and white people are being denied places in jobs and education because of racial quotas etc but they're all good things because us whites just are not worth it. Bringing in these ISIS men is good for our self esteem because we've shown the world how nice we are and right some of our previous wrongs like slavery, because only white people ever had slaves. So bring them in I say. I've no room in my house but Jimmy over there has a few spare rooms so he can take some. They're ALL lovely innocent people who are not here for the money at all so why not open the boarders.

Excellent post, I love your wit.

- - - Updated - - -

Be clear I did not say I did, I understand that it is not. However, what I am saying is that the errant perception will remain in the UK as long as British Muslims continue to carry out atrocities at home and abroad.

If people want that perception to change, target the source of the perception - starting at home - with the British Muslim extremists. That's what needs to be fixed, not a pair of newspapers in a free society.

I'm glad there are some realists out there, good post mate

- - - Updated - - -

So you think the people telling us about what's going in the papers have nothing to do with the perception being created?

Correct the facts reported in the papers, together with the horrific visual images shown on our TV screens give us the facts which gives us a perspection which is in fact the truth.
Others, yourself included seem to think it's all a massive conspiracy theory exaggerated for political reasons and like Jeremy 'the nut job' Corbyn would sit back and wait until it's to late to resolve.

- - - Updated - - -

Unless you post a picture, i refuse to believe you can make such a statement with a straight face.

I think Luke's had a few to many Bushmills, he'll be Okay tomorrow after he's slept it off and had a decent fry up.

 

[Peat]

Correct the facts reported in the papers, together with the horrific visual images shown on our TV screens give us the facts which gives us a perspection which is in fact the truth.
Others, yourself included seem to think it's all a massive conspiracy theory exaggerated for political reasons and like Jeremy 'the nut job' Corbyn would sit back and wait until it's to late to resolve.

Please don't put words in my mouth or try to misrepresent my views.

 

[Rich Taff]

I've skipped over everything since the first page, so will just put in my comment and leave.

Carlos, I can see what you're asking. It won't happen, but due to the ridiculous 'human rights' act (that was put in place to stop things like genocide on the scale of the Nazis and Yugoslavian 'ethnic cleansing', but has been used by morale-free parasitic lawyers to protect 'filth' from being prosecuted/deported etc) there is a serious problem.

There's nothing wrong with the actual religion of Islam, it preaches peace. However, there are, unfortunately, more than just a few who have a warped view of what the Koran preaches.

There's definitely a tension though, and something needs to be done. I am sure that this will eventually find an equilibrium, and the fanatics who use religion as an excuse to commit atrocities, will be brought to justice eventually (or vapourised like the sick 'jihadi john')

 

[valley commando]

Please don't put words in my mouth or try to misrepresent my views.

Irony mate.

 

[sixesauldman]

Ye boys should come to Kilkee here in Co. Clare. Fishing off cliffs you'll get the best mackerel. And nearby in Doonbeg is where the biggest bass seem to be in Ireland. Most are roughly 13lbs and up as far as 17lbs

17lb is a huge bass MM, I fish for Salmon/seatrout on the Blackwater and Waterville don't have many Muslims round here but some fine under age props hailing from Phillipenes , great lads nice families, my brother in law is Coptic Christian though, Egyptian heritage, sound out if a bit counter shy..

 

[valley commando]

Let's see if Corbyn has any common sense Free vote means he does, denying a free vote shows he's an idiot.

I honestly think Corbyn would be happier if all the women in the UK were to wear burkas.

 

[ncurd]

Let's see if Corbyn has any common sense Free vote means he does, denying a free vote shows he's an idiot.

I honestly think Corbyn would be happier if all the women in the UK were to wear burkas.

Not sure who idiot is here is after the end of your statement. Please don't comment if you have nothing of worth to say outside of your normal bigoted ********.

Honestly Corbyn is up **** creek without a paddle on this one, polls suggest 75% of the labour membership don't want to bomb Syria and he was elected by those people by quite a overwhelming majority. He also looks a bit of a fool if he supports bombings after so many years being part of the stop the war coalition. On the other hand he has a huge amount of rebelling MP's who are just ready to pounce at any misstep from what is perceived as the "common sense" approach.

Honestly I support the destruction of ISIS but we don't seam to have a plan post that and that's what led to them being able to sprout up in the first place. So yeah I don't support the government currently but that's mainly from us not learning from past mistakes.

 

[Peat]

Honestly I support the destruction of ISIS but we don't seam to have a plan post that and that's what led to them being able to sprout up in the first place. So yeah I don't support the government currently but that's mainly from us not learning from past mistakes.

I was of that opinion but am increasingly unsure whether it's a worthwhile objection.

This isn't like Iraq or Libya, where'd be about to tear a stable albeit brutal country into anarchy. Syria is already in anarchy. We probably could make it worse but the possibility of doing so seems small and diminishing; the probability of at least removing one military threat to the region and world in general seems good.

Also, it's not really up to the UK to have a plan. It's up to the Syrian and Middle Eastern powers to have a plan, up to the US and Russians... us? We're not in charge here.

The debate on this subject has all been very over-grandiose. It's not whether the UK starts a war and whether we choose to forge peace or unleash anarchy. Other people have made and will make those choices; it's merely whether we add another few bombs to an ongoing process and show solidarity at potential risk to ourselves. I suppose you can argue about whether we're best placed to make diplomatic efforts towards a post-Civil War peace from inside or outside the tent but that's about it.

 

[ncurd]

Fair point I think whilst it's not up to us what happens we needs to be at the table encouraging a solution beyond dropping a few more bombs. Asking the questions at the table rather than just merely sitting at whilst Russia and the USA compare dick sizes.

Sadly I'm not sure what leverage we can enact if any.

 

[McTallshort]

Fair point I think whilst it's not up to us what happens we needs to be at the table encouraging a solution beyond dropping a few more bombs. Asking the questions at the table rather than just merely sitting at whilst Russia and the USA compare dick sizes.

Sadly I'm not sure what leverage we can enact if any.

Who do we sit down with?

You have ISIS who are supported via the backdoor by anyone wanting cheap oil and they want to keep ISIS in place (China and Turkey)

Then there is Assad who is backed by Russia, Iran and Hamas so looks the most secure but the west think he's a beastly little man.

Then you have the other groups kind of backed by the west and will probably be crushed like a bug once Assad and his allies have crushed ISIS.

The lesson we need to learn from our years in the middle east is not to try and undermine the likes of Assad with stupid right on crap like Arab springs and just leave the nasty men in place, as long as we can get drilling contracts and trade sales from them, who cares how they run their country.

 

[j'nuh]

Above all, a UN mandate for the airstrikes must be obtained first.

But even then, I am opposed to them, for four main reasons:

1. Cost. An airstrike doesn't come cheap; they can cost £1m a time. More dependent on the types of missiles fired. (http://news.sky.com/story/1342768/how-much-will-airstrikes-on-is-cost-taxpayer) For the same money, you'll save many more lives by investing all of it in the NHS instead. It is doubly frustrating that the Tories bang on about austerity and "tough decisions", and suddenly there is wiggle room left in the budget for these military actions.

2. Intel. What structure do we have in place for guaranteeing targets are not civilians, and there is no risk of collateral damage?

3. Stabilisation. What effect will it have on the regional politics? A key difference in Iraq is that the UK are carrying out airstrikes after being asked by the Iraqi government. As far as I understand, the same is not true in Syria.

4. Difference. Will it make enough of a difference? ISIS/other terrorist groups use suicide bombers because they are expendable. If they weren't expendable, they would be bombers rather than suicide bombers. Slightly thinning the ranks of ISIS's suicide bomb squads causes little structural damage to ISIS. Chances to take out key figures would be more of interest to me.

It's also a good time to bring up the arms trade. "Defence" organisations make a killing on supplying arms to Saudi Arabia and other similar countries, who not only use these arms to repress their own citizens, but have also been found to be supplying ISIS with these arms. If we are serious about tackling terrorism, then arms trading with Saudi Arabia and other similar countries has to be outlawed.

 

[Peat]

It seems a lot of your objections are based on operational competence, j'nuh - if someone you trusted informed you that 95% of all air strikes would hit ISIS command and logistical elements with a minimum of collateral damage (there will never be no risk of collateral damage here), would you change your mind? Not that I'm saying that's what going to happen - I don't know enough about the operational competence of everything involved - but as a hypothetical what's if.

I do know they'll be sending in Special Forces both to pinpoint targets and to target leaders though; that's been loudly broadcast. I don't know to what extent they'll be trying to bomb command targets in cities though.

Question - how much collateral damage do you think there'll be in the continuing Civil War if we are not providing the fire support? The USAF reckon their smart bombs are accurate to withim 13m. I forget the exact distance a British artillery shell is allowed to land off of its target and still be deemed accurate, but it's greater than that - and British artillery reckons to be more accurate than required. If the Peshmerga or other such forces attempt to re-take a town, they will fire artillery (or heavier) into it.

I am most sympathetic with the question of cost - but we have already been spending very large sums of money on our international 'obligations' for some time. This is nothing new and very few people against air strikes in Syria have said anything about the international development budget, which I don't see as being any different; a probable complete and utter waste of money that nevertheless still somehow seems cheaper than doing nothing.

edit: J'nuh -


"The UN Security Council tonight [21st November] voted unanimously for a resolution calling on all member states that can do so to take military action against Isis in Iraq and Syria."

http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/uk/2015/11/un-resolution-brings-uk-air-strikes-syria-closer - is that enough of a UN Mandate?